Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This one is easy from a god-believing prospective.
He is the one granting the intelligence for these new scientific methods to be discovered and successful
Must be he's just gotten tired of hearing all the "let's see him restore lost limbs" jibes.
If they believe that, believers should thank all us atheists for putting out the challenge!
This one is easy from a god-believing prospective.
He is the one granting the intelligence for these new scientific methods to be discovered and successful
Must be he's just gotten tired of hearing all the "let's see him restore lost limbs" jibes.
Yep, God made doctors and scientists because he is too tired and old to do that stuff on his own anymore.
The old "god does not regrow lost limbs" Argument is inching closer to "god can't but science can" Now, we can regrow the muscle. We have been regrowing tendons and cartilage for years already. Next, nerves and with stem cell therapy, one day, in the future, an entire foot or hand.
It cannot be done. God cannot do it.
Some will say that god can do it but chooses not to. Well, I disagree with that.
first off, I had a hard time editing for brevity, so I gave up.
second off, your post is filled with human ego, and I find the rationalizations simplistic, and even based in a clear misunderstanding of the difference between the natures of science and God. To put it simply, science deals with the discovery and exploration of the physical universe - the "how" if you will. Faith deals with who we are and our place i the universe - the "why", if you will.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LargeKingCat
If god were real, he would want everyone to know and to acknowledge his power and his reality. Proof of this is in the Bible and other books, claimed to be inspired or authored by him. Read them, and see a god with an ego greater than the combined Hollywood actors and actresses from 1922 to 2013. This is a god that has such an ego, he sends out 5 commandments first dealing with worship of him before telling people how to treat each other. This is a god that cannot stand to be shown up, or undermined. This god, demands no one to be worshiped before him, and he will flood the world and kill almost everyone, or stop the sun in the sky to give one army time to kill another army just to prove himself.
SO if he were capable of limb regrowth, he would have done it just to say "See I can do it now grovel at mine holy footsies"
Really? Says who? You? Since you claim yourself as an unbeliever, I am going to assume you have never really contemplated the nature of God. You, rather, have treated various interpretations of God as literal, and then attacked those interpretations as "proof" that there is no God. This is a false path.
Quod erat demonstratum est! Did it ever occur to you that God has revealed Himself to us in stages, depending upon our own ability to comprehend. Do you talk to a three year old the same way you talk to a 7 year old? A 12 year old? and adult? Did it ever occur to you that maybe God has been in the same position vis a vis us puny humans? Of course not. Folks like you choose to take something out of the bible, treat is as revealed truth, and then attack that revealed truth as proof that there is no God, a circular logic at its worst.
Amazing us of false logic. If you were capable of robbing a bank, you would have done so, but since you haven't robbed a bank, that is proof you dont exist!
Quote:
Originally Posted by LargeKingCat
But he cannot do it, less his ego would have forced him to. He could not stand the fact that anyone challenges his ability, and his ego would force him to prove himself. That is the way of the egotists. And the attention seekers...those who demand worship and grovelling.
And his ego is well documented and definite. The fact that he has never stepped in and miraculously regrown tissue is because he cannot.
SO what good is a god that cannot ?
So ... you have say that all these attributes of God are true, then state that this proves there is no God. Is there another possibility? Perhaps that we do not know the true nature of God and therefore we puny humans are not qualified to attribute anything whatsoever to Him?
Quote:
Originally Posted by LargeKingCat
OR......he does not because he is not real. Think about that. For as little as we humans know about perfection, the god of the bible sure is imperfect. Even by our standards. He is egotistical, bigoted, prone to uncontrolled violence and rage.....all the characteristics of one who is enrolled in the penal system. Why would an imperfect god rise to a level of power, omnipotence and immortality? (Even though immortality is against the laws of physics in many ways, but moving on...) SO HOW would such a being survive and exist?
OR He does not do as some people claim and interfere directly into our affairs. After all, if there is free will, then how can God interfere. Not to mention that mythical being Satan, who, according to some, has free reign to interfere all the time.?
God inspires, He does not require. I sincerely believe that we humans have made many mistakes over the millennia, and that God has inspired us to transcend above those mistakes. I'm not going to defend medieval European Christianity, but there is no defense. But I do believe that God inspired us into the reformation (which we humans screwed up royally because we are inherently prone to error) and then inspired the enlightenment, and eventually science and modern medicine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LargeKingCat
It would seem more likely that there is no evidence of this egotistical being, except in the imaginations of those who insist on his reality. They do this through religions, through wars and through ignorance. It would seem that this god is the epitome of human fear, human desperation and human imagination. This god has all the markings of a pharaoh, a Caesar or an Emperor, a warlord perhaps even....power hungry, selfish, egotistical ....the only reference for a leader that someone in the bronze age would know or understand. Not one that revels himself in any way as Omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent, but as purely egotistical, fearful and incapable.
There does not need to be evidence, because faith is not science, and science is not faith (although there are many today who think that science is the be all and end all of human existences, and should and does answer the question of why.
Pretty interesting theory, why would the immune system not do that with fat, liver, rib-bone, etc?
Don't know, I just read it in a quasi-fiction novel by James Rollins called Amazonia...He weaves genuine science, religion and history around a fictitious plot and characters and then puts a section at the end detailing what was fact and what was fiction in the events of the novel along with links to where onr can read more on the topics of the factual events...In onenovel he utilized m-state matter as a catalyst...I can't remember what I read on the topic regrowth of limbs, the story had something to do with an isolated tribe in the Amazon that was able to regrow different body parts using sap from some ancient tree and then after the limb was regrown they had to eat the fruit from the tree to keep the effects of the sap in check...the factual part of that is that science is studying starfish to figure out what it is that causes the regrowth of a lost arm and, if memory serves, maybe in another 40 or 50 years we'll see human limbs being regrown...
first off, I had a hard time editing for brevity, so I gave up.
second off, your post is filled with human ego, and I find the rationalizations simplistic, and even based in a clear misunderstanding of the difference between the natures of science and God. To put it simply, science deals with the discovery and exploration of the physical universe - the "how" if you will. Faith deals with who we are and our place i the universe - the "why", if you will.
Really? Says who? You? Since you claim yourself as an unbeliever, I am going to assume you have never really contemplated the nature of God. You, rather, have treated various interpretations of God as literal, and then attacked those interpretations as "proof" that there is no God. This is a false path.
Quod erat demonstratum est! Did it ever occur to you that God has revealed Himself to us in stages, depending upon our own ability to comprehend. Do you talk to a three year old the same way you talk to a 7 year old? A 12 year old? and adult? Did it ever occur to you that maybe God has been in the same position vis a vis us puny humans? Of course not. Folks like you choose to take something out of the bible, treat is as revealed truth, and then attack that revealed truth as proof that there is no God, a circular logic at its worst.
Amazing us of false logic. If you were capable of robbing a bank, you would have done so, but since you haven't robbed a bank, that is proof you dont exist!
So ... you have say that all these attributes of God are true, then state that this proves there is no God. Is there another possibility? Perhaps that we do not know the true nature of God and therefore we puny humans are not qualified to attribute anything whatsoever to Him?
OR He does not do as some people claim and interfere directly into our affairs. After all, if there is free will, then how can God interfere. Not to mention that mythical being Satan, who, according to some, has free reign to interfere all the time.?
God inspires, He does not require. I sincerely believe that we humans have made many mistakes over the millennia, and that God has inspired us to transcend above those mistakes. I'm not going to defend medieval European Christianity, but there is no defense. But I do believe that God inspired us into the reformation (which we humans screwed up royally because we are inherently prone to error) and then inspired the enlightenment, and eventually science and modern medicine.
There does not need to be evidence, because faith is not science, and science is not faith (although there are many today who think that science is the be all and end all of human existences, and should and does answer the question of why.
"Perhaps"? I thought you were certain!
Man, I'm totally buyin'. God "reveals himself in stages." He used to travel the Palestinian countryside in a pillar of fire, talking out loud and smiting unbelievers, but now he acts invisible, because folks living 3,000 years ago couldn't comprehend the invisible, inactive, inert God of today. That makes sense.
And I really like this: "Perhaps ... we do not know the true nature of God and therefore we puny humans are not qualified to attribute anything whatsoever to Him?" I mean, if that's not convenient, what is? First of all, I don't know God's "nature," and second of all, because I don't know God's nature, I can't know ANYTHING about Him. Where I come from, we call this the old invisible pink unicorn trick. It also works with leprechauns, unicorns and the O.J. Simpson trial.
And here's another great point : "After all, if there is free will, then how can God interfere?" First of all, I can't know God's nature, so investigating matters of religious philosophy, like the question of free will, is impossible. Seems pretty strange that we'd keep discussing it, but okay. Second of all, it sure keeps being convenient for God. He used to interface directly with the material world but stopped, (at right about the same time that humankind developed the means and methods to investigate miracle claims), because he "reveals himself in stages." Third of all, free will is amazing, because it pretty much keeps God from doing anything important ever. You can violently rape a nun in front of fifty terrified school children, and God's gunna honor your free will over and above hers and the childrens'. Again, it's so convenient to be God. You pretty much just stay out of anything that ever happens, because hey, free will.
And then there's Satan. He went from being a sort of ambassador of God's mandates, in the earliest biblical texts, (viz., Job), to being God's radically emboldened opposition. I mean, he got way stronger. Nowadays, he can make gay people have sex with each other, which causes the tarnishing of matrimonial sanctity and the increased frequency of tornadoes in Oklahoma. Just really, really convenient for God, because here again, he doesn't have to do much to stop this adversary of his, and he doesn't have to take any responsibility for the things his adversary does. It's like being a member of Congress, where you have a three-day work week and get to take constant vacations.
And you closed with this gem: "There does not need to be evidence, because faith is not science..." It's great, too, because not only is there no need for God to do much, there's no need for any evidence that he even exists! I mean, the entire enterprise can be totally benign, and I can believe that it's not benign by simply applying faith. This is a great deal for both me and God. He doesn't do anything, and I don't doubt anything. He's like the welfare moms downtown. They don't do anything, and I don't doubt them. I just keep handing over my money. Pass me the offering plate.
I'll be honest. I really want to sign up for this God thing. I know it looks like I only want to because my parents taught me to when I was young and impressionable, so that the actual neurons in my brain are configured to process cognitive impulses in a religious manner, making any contrary manner of thought give me a sense of cognitive dissonance, but I really, genuinely believe this stuff, on account of how much sense it makes.
Man, I'm totally buyin'. God "reveals himself in stages." He used to travel the Palestinian countryside in a pillar of fire, talking out loud and smiting unbelievers, but now he acts invisible, because folks living 3,000 years ago couldn't comprehend the invisible, inactive, inert God of today. That makes sense.
And I really like this: "Perhaps ... we do not know the true nature of God and therefore we puny humans are not qualified to attribute anything whatsoever to Him?" I mean, if that's not convenient, what is? First of all, I don't know God's "nature," and second of all, because I don't know God's nature, I can't know ANYTHING about Him. Where I come from, we call this the old invisible pink unicorn trick. It also works with leprechauns, unicorns and the O.J. Simpson trial.
And here's another great point : "After all, if there is free will, then how can God interfere?" First of all, I can't know God's nature, so investigating matters of religious philosophy, like the question of free will, is impossible. Seems pretty strange that we'd keep discussing it, but okay. Second of all, it sure keeps being convenient for God. He used to interface directly with the material world but stopped, (at right about the same time that humankind developed the means and methods to investigate miracle claims), because he "reveals himself in stages." Third of all, free will is amazing, because it pretty much keeps God from doing anything important ever. You can violently rape a nun in front of fifty terrified school children, and God's gunna honor your free will over and above hers and the childrens'. Again, it's so convenient to be God. You pretty much just stay out of anything that ever happens, because hey, free will.
And then there's Satan. He went from being a sort of ambassador of God's mandates, in the earliest biblical texts, (viz., Job), to being God's radically emboldened opposition. I mean, he got way stronger. Nowadays, he can make gay people have sex with each other, which causes the tarnishing of matrimonial sanctity and the increased frequency of tornadoes in Oklahoma. Just really, really convenient for God, because here again, he doesn't have to do much to stop this adversary of his, and he doesn't have to take any responsibility for the things his adversary does. It's like being a member of Congress, where you have a three-day work week and get to take constant vacations.
And you closed with this gem: "There does not need to be evidence, because faith is not science..." It's great, too, because not only is there no need for God to do much, there's no need for any evidence that he even exists! I mean, the entire enterprise can be totally benign, and I can believe that it's not benign by simply applying faith. This is a great deal for both me and God. He doesn't do anything, and I don't doubt anything. He's like the welfare moms downtown. They don't do anything, and I don't doubt them. I just keep handing over my money. Pass me the offering plate.
I'll be honest. I really want to sign up for this God thing. I know it looks like I only want to because my parents taught me to when I was young and impressionable, so that the actual neurons in my brain are configured to process cognitive impulses in a religious manner, making any contrary manner of thought give me a sense of cognitive dissonance, but I really, genuinely believe this stuff, on account of how much sense it makes.
And I like the free cake at church.
Yea , you are definitely one lost individual or pretend to play one on this forum.
I actually thought the explain things rather well.
Yea I don't know about the
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
