'Seeking' God

[lucent]

'The reason I say this is that many atheists will claim the existence of God is not probable. I am noting that it is at least a 50 percent probability to start with. When you factor in all of the other evidence it is much higher, and to me a virtual certainty. Atheism, for all its boasting, has no way to lower that percentage. There is no argument for why atheism is true and correct.'

Sorry, that bs. The physics community used to have a large number of Diests. It doesn't now.

Atheism is correct because you cannot prove god, there is no proof. None. Zippo. If there was a hint of proof all of science and all atheist would be Diests.

No, there aren't many deists, but there are quite a number of theists. In fact a recent poll states that 40 percent of physicists, biologists and mathematicians believe in a God who answers prayers.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/23/nation...nted=print

Looks like quite a number of physicists feel there is some proof after all.

[5thHorseman]

3% in uk.

---

And if they were Pakistani they would be Muslims not Christian.

---

I also reckon they are lying. It's a fucking big gap between Deism and Theism.

---

Also they don't offer proof either, do they?

It's also a bit taboo in America to be in a position of authority and not have religion.

[lucent]

molehile

Shell B, you're making a mountain out of a molehole, and I haven't lied about anything. I don't see why this point is important enough to you to endlessly examine every possible angle just so you can emerge from it in the right. Let's examine what you said again, since you've conflated everything:

"Oh my fucking god. You are literally batshit nuts, aren't you?

A statement of shock and disbelief (and contempt)

"You think that people who believe other than you talk to demons?"

"You have "seen" demonic possession?"

These two statements were clearly both equally included under your umbrella of shock and disbelief.

Fact #1, to believe that demons are behind any false religion or belief system is a mainstream Christian belief. It is also all over the bible.

Fact #2, you were shocked that I believed this

It doesn't matter what your friends did or didn't tell you. You obviously weren't aware Christians believed this, and didn't know the bible said this. Therefore, you did single me out for this belief.

---

3% in uk.

---

And if they were Pakistani they would be Muslims not Christian.

---

I also reckon they are lying. It's a fucking big gap between Deism and Theism.

---

Also they don't offer proof either, do they?

It's also a bit taboo in America to be in a position of authority and not have religion.

I know I just rocked your world, so I understand why you need to invent excuses..but scientists don't get any points over here for believing in God..so saying they're lying is ridiculous. The ones who are vocal about it are libel to be shut out of tenure and grant money, if anything. Why don't you just accept the obvious truth that they have sincere beliefs? Yes, even the high priests of atheism believe in the Almighty..

[5thHorseman]

I'm sure many have sincere beliefs. But they remain, beliefs. Not facts.

'I know I just rocked your world'

Not quite, I'm well aware that more scientist in America believe. It's quite obvious when so much of the country is religious. Nevertheless in America it's not exactly socially acceptable to not be a Christian in some states.

'40 percent of physicists, biologists and mathematicians.'

Compared to the general population that's just about half. Surprise, highly intelligent people less likely to believe in a god.

---

'so I understand why you need to invent excuses.'

Hmm. Like your inability to show proofs. 'god will show himself if you seek him.'

[Captain Scarlet]

When you remove all other considerations, there are only two possible answers to the question, "was the universe deliberately created?". That's 50/50.

Only according to you lucent and you have offered no reasoning nor evidence and as such your claims can be dismissed.

It's a logical proof, perhaps you're familiar with logic? 95 percent chance is a number pulled out of hat, there is no basis for that figure, and the illogic of being arising from non being shouldn't even have to be mentioned. Math has demonstrated all sorts of theories that weren't actually true, and this particular one is contridictory to reason.

Not as familiar with it as you lucent, given the strawmans you have erected, the bare assertions and appeal to belief, ignorance and incredulity. It's a mathematical proof and your argument that godidit has nothing at all to commend it, other than a gigantic appeal to incredulity: "I can't imagine how it could be any other way..therefore godidit". Please advance your reasoning or evidence we are all ears.

Either you have an eternal first cause, or an infinite regress of causes. Since time space matter and energy had an absolute beginning, the cause must be timeless, immaterial and transcendent.

The big bang certainly does not underwrite the universe having an absolute beginning and WLC et al deliberately misrepresents this in the Kalam. No one knows what happened before Planck time and to try to pretend you do, does not add force to your case. Its a bifurcation fallacy to present such a case. The universe may be eternal, or may asymptote to a beginning but never reach one, or some other 'start' that we can't comprehend yet. However you just rush in there saying the universe has a beginning and godidit; not terribly convincing. In addition to assert that everything that begins to exist is caused is a compositional error when applied to the universe as a whole. WLC then over overreaches himself (as you have done) stating that the cause must be timeless, immaterial transcendent (oh and you missed one personal). He gives his reasoning but he really can't bridge the gap between a cause and a god without resorting to bare assertion and non cognitivism. However he should be applauded for a very creditable attempt and sophisticated argument for the existence of a god. It is a well thought out but ultimately flawed argument.

The question isn't what is information, because we already know what information is, and where it comes from. The question is, does DNA fit into any known categories of things that contains information?...snip

Since DNA qualifies as both a code and a language...snip

You brought information up not me. Retract that line of argument by all means, its embarrassing. Seeing as you again want to argue from incredulity, that despite that vast amount of research proving you wrong (one presumes by bigoted scientists) can you 1) advance one well grounded argument from Intelligent Design (the eye, blood clotting cascade and bacterial flagellum have already been bunked btw), then 2) explain why that has superior explanatory power to natural selection or even the Lemarkian perspective as to why evolution occurred and 3) as science has a practical application given it's predictive qualities (yes evolution does too) name one practical application of the Intelligent Design conjecture.

This is an argument? This is you stating your personal beliefs as fact and offering conclusions based on those beliefs which are not supported by a logically coherent argument. Please give me something to work with.

Let's not be dishonest Lucent I clearly said in my response that I have given this in another thread, in a response to you. Don't try and score silly points by grandstanding "oh your just asserting that". It's silly school playground stuff not fitting of a debate. So I'll re-present it for you:
1 There are three attributes of existents, these being:
A Primary Attributes
B Secondary Attributes
C Relational Attributes.
2 B as well as C are dependent upon and must be related to an existant’s A in order to be considered meaningful.
3 The term “God” has positively identified B (omni qualities) but lacks a positively identified A.
4 Because of this, the term “God” holds no justified A, B, or C. (From 2)
5 However, an attribute-less term (a term lacking A, B, and C) is meaningless.
6 Therefore, the term “God” is meaningless. (From 3, 4, 5)

Your premise that supernatural effects can only be deduced by humans without unlimited knowledge is false. Limited beings can deduce such effects by information given to them by the Creator.

Your rejoinder just begs the question and then also appeals to belief. It is therefore a faulty response, but you would know that given your knowledge of logic, wouldn't you?

Premise one is false, Divine Creation does not assume any such thing. Divine Creation is instantaneous and timeless.

It's a bare assertion fallacy to respond as such. Plus and perhaps worse still you are advocating a whole new form of causation. You have already advanced the argument that the Universe has a cause above, now your saying it's timeless and instantaneous. As you will be aware all causation requires time in that an effect is always has an antecedent cause. So now you need to sketch out for us how this new 'causation' model works. Again all ears, make your argument. At the moment your rejoinder fails.

[The Grand Nudger]

Fact, the existence of the christian god is nowhere near 50/50. Even in the hypothetical its a fraction of a percent. Of course, here, in reality it is 0%. My reality is much more bland than yours, full of demons and magic and gods. I get jealous about that sometimes. Then I remember how much of a flaming loon I'd have to be to buy into this stuff.

[Zen Badger]

'The reason I say this is that many atheists will claim the existence of God is not probable. I am noting that it is at least a 50 percent probability to start with. When you factor in all of the other evidence it is much higher, and to me a virtual certainty. Atheism, for all its boasting, has no way to lower that percentage. There is no argument for why atheism is true and correct.'

Sorry, that bs. The physics community used to have a large number of Diests. It doesn't now.

Atheism is correct because you cannot prove god, there is no proof. None. Zippo. If there was a hint of proof all of science and all atheist would be Diests.

No, there aren't many deists, but there are quite a number of theists. In fact a recent poll states that 40 percent of physicists, biologists and mathematicians believe in a God who answers prayers.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/23/nation...nted=print

Looks like quite a number of physicists feel there is some proof after all.

They might believe in god but that doesn't stop them still rejecting the creation fairytale. And I quote from your own article....

As scientists compare human genes with those of other mammals, tiny worms, even bacteria, the similarities "are absolutely compelling," Dr. Collins said. "If Darwin had tried to imagine a way to prove his theory, he could not have come up with something better, except maybe a time machine. Asking somebody to reject all of that in order to prove that they really do love God - what a horrible choice."

[salty]

Clearly his personal experience of his pet god trumps my personal experience with it, because he's the one making the claim about it and the Universe revolves around him alone, therefore everyone else's personal experiences are satanic unless they happen to agree with his. I've just read that sentence back and it appears to make grammatical sense.

It really depends on what happened in your personal experience whether it's holy or satanic. If you were involved in the worship of idols, that's considered a satanic experience because God declares that he is living and by worshipping idols you worship Satan. If you were in your car hoping that God would hear your desperate prayer, you were involved in a holy experience because God declares that he will never leave us, never abandon us and that he hears you.

Lucent's claims are firmly biblical, all the way down to the demon possession and the devil pulling the strings on people like puppets. Anyone who cannot find a small sliver of truth in what Lucent claims IS being deceived because Lucent isn't making other people's experiences void, instead he's asking if you are really seekers of truth or if general opinion is enough to convince you? This is something that Christians have to think about too, just as he mentioned there are tons of Christians out there that are captive to false doctrines, worshipping the devil, because general opinion said it was right, they never did the research for themselves. So that is his challenge to anyone that is seeking God.

If you really want the truth are you willing to go against the tide, even for a moment, in case the truth is literally buried in what you consider "enemy territory"?

[frankiej]

First of all, I don't understand much of what you said, Salty... It made little sense...

But, I would like to add that if I thought God and Satan existed, then I would gladly worship Satan over God. God is an prick.
Satan pretty much just called God out on his arseholey ways.

[salty]

The issue isn't a particular group of people. Satan has deceived the whole world, and there are many in the church today who follow false doctrines. The church is becoming utterly apostate. So, I am not excluding anyone from this equation.

Except yourself, of course. You clearly know the truth, but everyone else is being deceived. Do you truly not see your arrogance, or do you just enjoy believing you're better than everyone else?

Lucent is not alone in his beliefs and he's not being arrogant, nor preaching that he's superior. It may seem like he's doing that because he's tactfully and assertively defending the gospel of Jesus Christ, but not once has he declared himself above you or anyone. Lucent is a sinner just like me, like you and everybody else. Lucent is saying that he has experienced the transforming power of Jesus Christ in his life and wants to help anyone that desires God to seek God, like he did. His experiences are valid, like yours and filled with the essence of who he is and where his foundation for disbelief AND belief began. I think Lucent is doing an excellent job of making the claims of the Bible of Jesus, clear! It is very hard to convey the understanding that overcomes people when they believe that God is real and the Bible is true. Anyone can have this understanding, all they have to do is be willing to believe and it will become clear to them too.