Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-27-2009, 11:25 AM
 
Location: East Coast U.S.
1,513 posts, read 1,621,147 times
Reputation: 106

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by AxisMundi View Post
Who says anything MUST have a "cause"?
The law of causality (which I did not invent) states that every effect has a cause.

An effect is observable.

Have you observed God? Is God and effect?

Quote:
Originally Posted by AxisMundi View Post
Evolution addresses complexity quite nicely, thank you.
There have been very eminent professing atheist/agnostic scientists that would beg to differ.

Fred Hoyle stated that the odds of life appearing 'by chance' would be comparable to the odds of a wind storm blowing through a junk yard and creating a Boeing 747 jumbo jet.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AxisMundi View Post
The Creationist/ID ideal of irreducible complexity has been shot down plenty of times.
...for example:

Quote:
Originally Posted by AxisMundi View Post
Abiogenesis, a different matter, has several viable theories, none of which require a creator deity, nor does the lack of a concrete Scientific Law prove a creator deity.
There are any number of so called "viable theories" being tossed about. So what?

Judging from posts on this forum, so called 'Abiogenesis' is presented as nothing more than a rehash of spontaneous generation. Nothing new...just the same old 'any explanation but God' argument.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AxisMundi View Post
Morality is indeed subjective, and cannot be used to prove a creator deity any more then scripture can when one considers how moral set differ between cultures/religions, and even within cultures/religions over time.
Can anything be proved?

The moral argument simply adds to the overall soundness of a reasonable argument for the existence of God.

Moral relativity is neither logical nor reasonable. If morality is relative, there really is no morality. As one poster recently remarked: "it's all in our mind."

Last edited by tigetmax24; 09-27-2009 at 11:28 AM.. Reason: Change 'to' to 'for' Change 'or' to 'nor'
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-27-2009, 12:06 PM
 
Location: Valencia, Spain
16,155 posts, read 12,821,127 times
Reputation: 2879
Quote:
Originally Posted by tigetmax24 View Post

Fred Hoyle stated that the odds of life appearing 'by chance' would be comparable to the odds of a wind storm blowing through a junk yard and creating a Boeing 747 jumbo jet.
Fred Hoyle also thinks the Earth was once covered in water 5 miles deep!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2009, 12:20 PM
 
Location: East Coast U.S.
1,513 posts, read 1,621,147 times
Reputation: 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rafius View Post
Fred Hoyle also thinks the Earth was once covered in water 5 miles deep!!
"Fred Hoyle also thinks..."

Are you suggesting that Fred is still alive?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2009, 12:50 PM
 
4,474 posts, read 5,404,259 times
Reputation: 732
Quote:
Originally Posted by tigetmax24 View Post
The law of causality (which I did not invent) states that every effect has a cause.

An effect is observable.

Have you observed God? Is God and effect?
The Law of Causality cannot be used to prove a creator deity, sorry. One would have to prove the existance of said creator deity first in order to prove that said deity was the cause in the first place.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tigetmax24 View Post
There have been very eminent professing atheist/agnostic scientists that would beg to differ.

Fred Hoyle stated that the odds of life appearing 'by chance' would be comparable to the odds of a wind storm blowing through a junk yard and creating a Boeing 747 jumbo jet.
Firstly, Agnostics cannot be counted for proof, as an Agnsotic, by definition, believes in deity. Second, please feel more than free to list those "Athiest scientists" supporting Creationism/ID.

By the time Hoyle hopped on the Deity Bus he was no longer an Athiest, so you can erase him from your list. Hoyle was also educated at Emmanuel College, an institution started by a Puritian, Sir Walter Mildmay, to educate Protestant preachers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tigetmax24 View Post
...for example:

YouTube - Ken Miller on Intelligent Design

Quote:
Originally Posted by tigetmax24 View Post
There are any number of so called "viable theories" being tossed about. So what?

Judging from posts on this forum, so called 'Abiogenesis' is presented as nothing more than a rehash of spontaneous generation. Nothing new...just the same old 'any explanation but God' argument.
Life on this planet is based on two of the most abundant substances in the Universe, carbon and water. Amino Acids, the building blocks of protiens, are also abundant as well.

When the ONLY basis for a creator diety is an ancient manuscript proven self-contradictory, and whose every myth and miracle attributed to said deity disproven as well, "any evidence but God" applies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tigetmax24 View Post
Can anything be proved?

The moral argument simply adds to the overall soundness of a reasonable argument for the existence of God.

Moral relativity is neither logical nor reasonable. If morality is relative, there really is no morality. As one poster recently remarked: "it's all in our mind."
Certainly things can be proven. The sun came up this morning.

And morals are indeed "in the mind", so to speak. Morals are merely the limitations on activities decided upon by a consensus of a community.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2009, 01:15 PM
 
2,964 posts, read 5,439,400 times
Reputation: 3867
Quote:
Originally Posted by AxisMundi View Post
When the ONLY basis for a creator diety is an ancient manuscript proven self-contradictory, and whose every myth and miracle attributed to said deity disproven as well, "any evidence but God" applies.
Wait...the Bible again. Aren't we talking about classical arguments? Who keeps bringing up the Bible?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2009, 01:26 PM
 
1,310 posts, read 3,044,882 times
Reputation: 589
'The Law of Causality cannot be used to prove a creator deity, sorry. One would have to prove the existance of said creator deity first in order to prove that said deity was the cause in the first place.

REPLY: As an atheist who assuredly says that 'there is no God' ... youd have to be God yourself and be able to look in every place of the Cosmos and have infinite knowledge of everything in order for your statement to be absolutely correct. !

Lastly, it already HAS been historically proven that Jesus Christ IS Diety thru his eye witness physical ressurection from the dead (over 500 witnesses) which was forecasted hundreds of years prior and therefore anything he says is absolutely true about himself INCLUDING his claim to be the actual infinite Creator. An Infinite Creator is needed to bring into existence something finite from nothing because he has to be ABOVE what he creates like a Painter is to his painting.

Its all right there in recorded historical documents both from Christian Writers and NON Christian Historians. Have you taken the time to research it ? Do you want to ? Is there any reason why someone would not want to , and any reason why someone would not want an infinitely holy , moral, personal Creator to exist ? Can you think of any reasons ?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2009, 02:22 PM
 
Location: Valencia, Spain
16,155 posts, read 12,821,127 times
Reputation: 2879
Quote:
Originally Posted by RVlover View Post
As an atheist who assuredly says that 'there is no God' ... youd have to be God yourself and be able to look in every place of the Cosmos and have infinite knowledge of everything in order for your statement to be absolutely correct. !
The same would apply to you when you make the claim that your god is the only god that exists.

Quote:
Lastly, it already HAS been historically proven that Jesus Christ IS Diety thru his eye witness physical ressurection from the dead (over 500 witnesses) which was forecasted hundreds of years prior and therefore anything he says is absolutely true about himself INCLUDING his claim to be the actual infinite Creator.
Claims unsupported by evidence.


Quote:
Its all right there in recorded historical documents both from Christian Writers and NON Christian Historians.
Produce the non-christian documents.

Quote:
Have you taken the time to research it ? Do you want to ?
Yes I have. Over 40 years actually.

Quote:
Is there any reason why someone would not want to , and any reason why someone would not want an infinitely holy , moral, personal Creator to exist ? Can you think of any reasons ?
Nope, can't think of a single reason why anyone wouldn't want eternal life in the arms of a loving deity but most logical, rational people like atheists can't accept something as true simply because we want it to be true. That is the domain of theists.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2009, 02:28 PM
 
Location: East Coast U.S.
1,513 posts, read 1,621,147 times
Reputation: 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by AxisMundi View Post
The Law of Causality cannot be used to prove a creator deity, sorry. One would have to prove the existance of said creator deity first in order to prove that said deity was the cause in the first place.
You like to keep throwing the word "proof" and "prove" around - why don't you try proving the impossibility that a deity exists.

The old "proof" knife cuts in both directions.

I'm simply asking you and your buds to lay out rational, logical and reasonable alternatives to the classical arguments. Instead of direct answers to the questions all I ever get is what amounts to endless quibbling over word definitions or any number of 'deflections' to distract from the main point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AxisMundi View Post
Firstly, Agnostics cannot be counted for proof, as an Agnsotic, by definition, believes in deity. Second, please feel more than free to list those "Athiest scientists" supporting Creationism/ID.
My point still stands. Perhaps you have information on Hoyle that I'm not aware of. He most certainly never claimed to be a Christian or theistic in his world view. In other words, he was most certainly one of 'your' guys.

There was also this guy named Francis Crick. He apparently happened to agree with Hoyle concerning the impossible odds involved in a 'chance' beginning of life out of a 'primordial' soup.

So go ahead and trash Crick and then we'll just keep working our way through the list.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AxisMundi View Post
By the time Hoyle hopped on the Deity Bus he was no longer an Athiest, so you can erase him from your list. Hoyle was also educated at Emmanuel College, an institution started by a Puritian, Sir Walter Mildmay, to educate Protestant preachers.
Just about all prestigious institutions of higher learning in America started out as a Theological Seminaries. Many of Harvard's graduates went on to be Puritan Clergy.

You make a very ridiculous assertion. If you're going to trash Hoyle, why not at least make it convincing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AxisMundi View Post
Ken Miller
Are you Ken Miller in disguise? I think not.

Can you make a concise argument against irreducible complexity?

Quote:
Originally Posted by AxisMundi View Post
Life on this planet is based on two of the most abundant substances in the Universe, carbon and water. Amino Acids, the building blocks of protiens, are also abundant as well.
You're ignoring the deeper question. How did we come to have a Universe with carbon, water, Amino Acids, abundant proteins...etc, in the first place?

Quote:
Originally Posted by AxisMundi View Post
When the ONLY basis for a creator diety is an ancient manuscript proven self-contradictory, and whose every myth and miracle attributed to said deity disproven as well, "any evidence but God" applies.
Well stated in the interest of holding to your atheistic dogma.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AxisMundi View Post
Certainly things can be proven. The sun came up this morning.
I don't claim to be a philosopher and, it's quite obvious, that neither are you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AxisMundi View Post
And morals are indeed "in the mind", so to speak. Morals are merely the limitations on activities decided upon by a consensus of a community.
Yes, and the community consensus can be a consensus on anything. You're making my point. Relative morality is no morality.

Last edited by tigetmax24; 09-27-2009 at 03:37 PM.. Reason: Change 'are' to 'our'
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2009, 03:21 PM
 
4,474 posts, read 5,404,259 times
Reputation: 732
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bunjee View Post
Wait...the Bible again. Aren't we talking about classical arguments? Who keeps bringing up the Bible?
When presenting an argument, one should be able to substantiate the foundation of said argument, in this case a creator diety.

The only basis for Jehovah as a creator deity is based solely upon the bible.

As the bible is a flawed instrument to begin with, basing any arguments upon that manuscript is inherently flawed to begin with.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2009, 03:32 PM
 
4,474 posts, read 5,404,259 times
Reputation: 732
Quote:
Originally Posted by RVlover View Post
As an atheist who assuredly says that 'there is no God' ... youd have to be God yourself and be able to look in every place of the Cosmos and have infinite knowledge of everything in order for your statement to be absolutely correct. !

Lastly, it already HAS been historically proven that Jesus Christ IS Diety thru his eye witness physical ressurection from the dead (over 500 witnesses) which was forecasted hundreds of years prior and therefore anything he says is absolutely true about himself INCLUDING his claim to be the actual infinite Creator. An Infinite Creator is needed to bring into existence something finite from nothing because he has to be ABOVE what he creates like a Painter is to his painting.

Its all right there in recorded historical documents both from Christian Writers and NON Christian Historians. Have you taken the time to research it ? Do you want to ? Is there any reason why someone would not want to , and any reason why someone would not want an infinitely holy , moral, personal Creator to exist ? Can you think of any reasons ?
Firstly, I am not an Atheist. I know that would make your arguments easier, but you begin with a flawed premise right off the bat. I do not believe in any creator deities.

Secondly, ressurrection? Unsubstantiated drivel with no collaborating evidence whatsoever. Considering the highly fallable and disproven nature of scripture, it simply cannot be used as self-supporting evidence.

Thirdly, written evidence? Again, once again actually, there is NO valid evidence written during the time he is alleged to have lived. Everything even approaching actual references was written centuries after his alleged life when the religion has already been well established. By your brand of "logic" King Arthur is a historical person. Arthur was written about by several authors centuries after he supposedly lived.

Lastely, I have researched it, for many decades, starting in dusty old libraries because the Internet had yet to be implimented. What I found? Your gods are among the youngest on the planet, and your religion is made up largely of the myths, legends, and parables of far older religions, even your Christ figure. "Prophesied" Firstly, one must adhere to a linear time theory, I do not. Secondly, all that indicates is that there was a pre-existing pattern for Paul and the other dissatisfied Jews to invent a new religion around.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:40 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top