Posts: 4234
Threads: 42
Joined: June 7, 2011
Reputation:
33
RE: the god created science argument
September 20, 2011 at 10:53 pm
(This post was last modified: September 20, 2011 at 10:54 pm by Epimethean.)
" ... but the point is that He doesn't need to openly demonstrate His power to reach people. The number of Christians in the world speak to that."
Are the 8,000,000 cancer patients in the world also evidence of his power in reaching people? If so, we need to chemo the fucker out of this universe. You love citing numbers that can mean nothing except circumstance: Stupid exists and grows. It can be cured, but not by any tool religion offers. Science is the cure.
Trying to update my sig ...
Posts: 377
Threads: 4
Joined: September 16, 2011
Reputation:
3
RE: the god created science argument
September 21, 2011 at 3:04 am
Posts: 377
Threads: 4
Joined: September 16, 2011
Reputation:
3
RE: the god created science argument
September 21, 2011 at 6:11 am
(This post was last modified: September 21, 2011 at 6:25 am by lucent.)
I consider God to be a self-evident truth, which can be proven by reason alone; it is axiomatic. As far as physical evidence, once it is established that God exists, the entire creation is evidence for the existence of God. There is no lack of evidence. Logic necessitates a first cause. Ontologically, our thought of a perfect Creator necessitates His existence. There is the argument from morality, the argument from design, the cosmological argument..etc. From there, we can identify who God is.
You can make certain presumptions for argumentation so we don't have to tediously examine the same topics over and over again. So, set your terms as to what you are going to argue and I will provide a counter argument.
(September 19, 2011 at 12:15 pm)Rhythm Wrote: It doesn't matter what you hypothesize, and as long as all you have is an opinion you have no grounds to dismiss similar flights of fancy from others who happen to disagree. In other words, you don't get to decide the grounds or terms of an argument that you put forward. I can make up any god I like at will, but having a discussion over what this god did, does, or desires, without first providing any evidence that said god exists is infantile. Without something to consider, we're talking Santa Claus, Unicorns, Teapots, and Garden Faeries. There's a word for any "test" like this, false positive.
You're defining things in a way that suits your argument without providing any justification for your definitions. It's common, it's bullshit, that's apologetics. Propose the deists god and we'll just have to wait until we can see the beginning of the beginning, but as long as you put forward a theistic god, that interacts with the world, you're making a claim to the material, and with claims like that, it's evidence or gtfo. That modern christians seem to know so little about their own theology that they fail to realize that their religion is grounded on "evidence" in the first place, and that there was no distinction between the natural and the supernatural worlds to the founders minds is utterly lost on them. We know too much to believe in these fairy tales as told and so we try to beat them out against the anvil of that knowledge and make them fit. They don't. They're relics. God isn't shy, people just aren't as gullible as before. Billions of people are neither lying nor correct, they are mislead. But hey, don't let me steal your dichotomy away from you, there isn't much left to christianity without them.
You could say it was probably pretty stupid to test something you had a hunch could burn off the entire atmosphere, but that's what they did in 1945 when they tested the atomic bomb. Luckily for us, science wasn't wrong that day.
Science, has created enough weapons to destroy this world 2000 times over, and the only thing atheists can hope for is that cooler heads prevail. History has shown this is inevitably not the case. I'll give you a doomsday scenerio:
It is true that technology is getting expodentially more powerful, cheaper to produce, and more widely available. According to this, it is inevitable that eventually a doomsday weapon will be created that anyone in the world could replicate in their own homes, in secret, and use it to set off a chain reaction that triggers world war 3.
Now the religious belief that science can save us is called scientism. Science is a philosophical discipline based on the epistimological belief that knowledge only comes from sensory experience, ie, empiricism. This is the faith that our five senses are enough to determine the nature of reality. It fails to note the nature of our contextual experiences, or impressions. Neither can it quantify an impression. The interpretation of scientific data is philosophical, and a scientific theory cannot actual prove anything. So, to base your complete faith in science I would say is fairly misguided.
(September 20, 2011 at 10:53 pm)Epimethean Wrote: " ... but the point is that He doesn't need to openly demonstrate His power to reach people. The number of Christians in the world speak to that."
Are the 8,000,000 cancer patients in the world also evidence of his power in reaching people? If so, we need to chemo the fucker out of this universe. You love citing numbers that can mean nothing except circumstance: Stupid exists and grows. It can be cured, but not by any tool religion offers. Science is the cure.
Posts: 12512
Threads: 202
Joined: January 3, 2010
Reputation:
107
RE: the god created science argument
September 21, 2011 at 6:27 am
And I am thinking that you are just mind fucking yourself luce...so sad 
"The Universe is run by the complex interweaving of three elements: energy, matter, and enlightened self-interest." G'Kar-B5
Posts: 312
Threads: 18
Joined: May 30, 2011
Reputation:
12
RE: the god created science argument
September 21, 2011 at 8:10 am
Quote:I consider God to be a self-evident truth, which can be proven by reason alone; it is axiomatic.
Well I don't consider it a self evident truth, but feel free to prove it. I'm interested, if you can't, does that mean you'll abandon your faith?
"Great spirits have often encountered violent opposition from weak minds."
Einstein
When I was 5 years old, my mother always told me that happiness was the key to life. When I went to school, they asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up. I wrote down happy. They told me I didn't understand the assignment. I told them they didn't understand life.
- John Lennon
Posts: 5336
Threads: 198
Joined: June 24, 2010
Reputation:
77
RE: the god created science argument
September 21, 2011 at 8:22 am
(September 21, 2011 at 3:04 am)lucent Wrote: No, they can't be easily dismissed. Dismiss this guys testimony:
700 Club.
Seriously?
Seriously?
We're done.
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
Posts: 4234
Threads: 42
Joined: June 7, 2011
Reputation:
33
RE: the god created science argument
September 21, 2011 at 8:29 am
Lucent, obviously you have yourself set on a strong belief pattern, and it works for you. Most people around here consider it nuts, completely free of substance which can compel anyone who does not fall victim to hallucinations, delusions and mass forms of hypnotism to find any merit in it. Of course, this makes you a better xtian, because it shows your faith, but here at an atheist forum, not many are thinking you're going to gain anything from such an act of imagination.
Good luck, though.
Trying to update my sig ...
Posts: 18503
Threads: 79
Joined: May 29, 2010
Reputation:
125
RE: the god created science argument
September 21, 2011 at 9:37 am
(This post was last modified: September 21, 2011 at 9:38 am by LastPoet.)
(September 21, 2011 at 8:22 am)DeistPaladin Wrote: (September 21, 2011 at 3:04 am)lucent Wrote: No, they can't be easily dismissed. Dismiss this guys testimony:
700 Club.
Seriously?
Seriously?
We're done.
I actually didn't knew that site, so I opened a new tab, then inserted the address and BAM! Pat Robertson.
Yeah, he's done, so fucking high in jesus that any attempt to reason with him is fruitless.
Posts: 5652
Threads: 133
Joined: May 10, 2011
Reputation:
69
RE: the god created science argument
September 21, 2011 at 10:13 am
Quote:I'm sorry I jumped to the conclusion that you didn't want to know God on the basis that you were mocking and denigrating Him.
We mock him in the same way that we might mock Lucius Malfoy...
It doesn't matter, because he ain't real, mate.
Posts: 4196
Threads: 60
Joined: September 8, 2011
Reputation:
30
RE: the god created science argument
September 21, 2011 at 11:32 am
(September 21, 2011 at 8:10 am)BloodyHeretic Wrote: Quote:I consider God to be a self-evident truth, which can be proven by reason alone; it is axiomatic.
Well I don't consider it a self evident truth, but feel free to prove it. I'm interested, if you can't, does that mean you'll abandon your faith?
And it certainly is not axiomatic!
You make people miserable and there's nothing they can do about it, just like god.
-- Homer Simpson
God has no place within these walls, just as facts have no place within organized religion.
-- Superintendent Chalmers
Science is like a blabbermouth who ruins a movie by telling you how it ends. There are some things we don't want to know. Important things.
-- Ned Flanders
Once something's been approved by the government, it's no longer immoral.
-- The Rev Lovejoy
|
![[Image: bloodyheretic.png]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=img849.imageshack.us%2Fimg849%2F8673%2Fbloodyheretic.png)
