The existence of God

[Deesse23]

Nope, Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

Nothing about intellectual assent, nothing about facts. You just made shit up.

I have never understood the content of that verse.

'Substance of things hoped for'? What the hell does that even mean? How do things hoped for have a substance?

'Evidence of things not seen'? You mean, like air? or radio waves?

I dont know either, but my objection is something else: "Faith  is......evidence".

Nope, evidence is evidence. Data and facts are evidence. Faith???? Faith is some sort of belief (trying to give the most generous definition here), and beliefs are not evidence for anything else than someone holding these beliefs.

Everything else, like we have seen, is a lot of smoke screens (including made up shit, like in this case here) to cover this very apparent fact that believing things does not make them true. Period.

[Ahriman]

I have never understood the content of that verse.

'Substance of things hoped for'? What the hell does that even mean? How do things hoped for have a substance?

'Evidence of things not seen'? You mean, like air? or radio waves?

I dont know either, but my objection is something else: "Faith  is......evidence".

Nope, evidence is evidence. Data and facts are evidence. Faith???? Faith is some sort of belief (trying to give the most generous definition here), and beliefs are not evidence for anything else than someone holding these beliefs.

Everything else, like we have seen, is a lot of smoke screens (including made up shit, like in this case here) to cover this very apparent fact that believing things does not make them true. Period.

Yeah but believing things does make them true. This has been scientifically proven.

[Nay_Sayer]

I'm a Christian looking to have a friendly conversation about the existence of God. I'd like to start with one of the Teleology arguments—that God exists based on how fine-tuned the universe is for life. For instance, physical constants, like the gravitational constant and constants of the strong nuclear force, must be within a narrow range to allow for things like atom formation, hydrogen bonding, galaxy formation, etc. This looks like design. The alternative is chance, which doesn't seem adequate. In other words, naturalism cannot account for the fine-tuning of the universe, while design can easily account for it. This is not a trivial problem, or one that can be ridiculed away, since many respected scientists have pointed out how remarkably (and inexplicably) fine-tuned the universe appears. Thanks for your polite responses.

Howdy. I'd like to start with one of the Pastafarian arguments—that FSM exists based on how fine-tuned the universe is for life. For instance, physical constants, like the gravitational constant and constants of the strong nuclear force, must be within a narrow range to allow for things like atom formation, hydrogen bonding, galaxy formation, etc.

I look forward to the conversation.

RAmen

[Jehanne]

I dont know either, but my objection is something else: "Faith  is......evidence".

Nope, evidence is evidence. Data and facts are evidence. Faith???? Faith is some sort of belief (trying to give the most generous definition here), and beliefs are not evidence for anything else than someone holding these beliefs.

Everything else, like we have seen, is a lot of smoke screens (including made up shit, like in this case here) to cover this very apparent fact that believing things does not make them true. Period.

Yeah but believing things does make them true. This has been scientifically proven.

I have found my very fleeting moments of faith of having won the Lottery without ever having played to be a waste of time, and so, I quickly move on to more important things in my life.

(Still, I suppose that such is at least possible, as my birthday is next month.)

[Ahriman]

Yeah but believing things does make them true. This has been scientifically proven.

I have found my very fleeting moments of faith of having won the Lottery without ever having played to be a waste of time, and so, I quickly move on to more important things in my life.

(Still, I suppose that such is at least possible, as my birthday is next month.)

A belief is not a "fleeting moment of faith", it's a deeply held conviction.

[polymath257]

I dont know either, but my objection is something else: "Faith  is......evidence".

Nope, evidence is evidence. Data and facts are evidence. Faith???? Faith is some sort of belief (trying to give the most generous definition here), and beliefs are not evidence for anything else than someone holding these beliefs.

Everything else, like we have seen, is a lot of smoke screens (including made up shit, like in this case here) to cover this very apparent fact that believing things does not make them true. Period.

Yeah but believing things does make them true. This has been scientifically proven.

Um, no. No, it hasn't.

[Deesse23]

I dont know either, but my objection is something else: "Faith  is......evidence".

Nope, evidence is evidence. Data and facts are evidence. Faith???? Faith is some sort of belief (trying to give the most generous definition here), and beliefs are not evidence for anything else than someone holding these beliefs.

Everything else, like we have seen, is a lot of smoke screens (including made up shit, like in this case here) to cover this very apparent fact that believing things does not make them true. Period.

Yeah but believing things does make them true. This has been scientifically proven.

Are you still not banned?

[zebo-the-fat]

I dont know either, but my objection is something else: "Faith  is......evidence".

Nope, evidence is evidence. Data and facts are evidence. Faith???? Faith is some sort of belief (trying to give the most generous definition here), and beliefs are not evidence for anything else than someone holding these beliefs.

Everything else, like we have seen, is a lot of smoke screens (including made up shit, like in this case here) to cover this very apparent fact that believing things does not make them true. Period.

Yeah but believing things does make them true. This has been scientifically proven.

Where, when and how was it proven?

[Angrboda]

I can see how faith is the substance of things hoped for. Faith is what you have in the absence of empirical evidence, and in many instances is what one hopes is true, rather than what one has reason to believe is true. That kind of faith is literally an embodiment of hope, it is something made out of hope and so in a sense is the substance of a hope for something to be true.

[LadyForCamus]

I dont know either, but my objection is something else: "Faith  is......evidence".

Nope, evidence is evidence. Data and facts are evidence. Faith???? Faith is some sort of belief (trying to give the most generous definition here), and beliefs are not evidence for anything else than someone holding these beliefs.

Everything else, like we have seen, is a lot of smoke screens (including made up shit, like in this case here) to cover this very apparent fact that believing things does not make them true. Period.

Yeah but believing things does make them true. This has been scientifically proven.

Don’t you ever get bored of trolling?