Let's see proof of creation (demons, Creator, Universe, creationism)

[justamere10]

Originally Posted by sanspeur

The topic is " Let's see proof of creation", not converting the heathen. To be fair though you are not the only one off topic.

I think perhaps it's past time to close this thread and conclude that there is no proof of creation.

Yes, I know what the op is but one of the nicest things about City Data in my opinion is that we don't often have moderators who micromanage, they tend to let the conversation flow as it does in real life.

My guess is that you and most other atheists came to this thread with the firm belief that there is no proof of creation. Others tell you that's because in addition to the ideas about creation posed by scientists, creation is also a major religious topic.

But you choose to accept as valid only secular methods and tools. So of course you are not going to find "proof" of creationism, secular methods and tools were never designed to probe spiritual things. It's inevitable with the limitations you place upon your search for truth that there can be only one conclusion about creationism - yours.

But why should the thread be closed? As long as board members keep posting to it I think it is serving a purpose.

[MysticPhD]

Originally Posted by kb09

First off, I'm not frustrated about anything. I just think it doesn't make any sense.

It would make more sense if you stopped lumping all believers (or all Christian believers) into one homogenous unacceptable bunch of intellectual losers and stupid idiots . . . and address what each individual you encounter ACTUALLY SAYS. Just because YOU see all theists defending the SAME BS . . . doesn't mean we are. Critical thinkers focus on the CONTENT of presentations . . . not on WHO is presenting or who they are assumed to be associated with . . . genetic fallacy.

So basically, without your Bible, then we'd have no self-control, judgement or responsibility? This argument has been debunked countless times.

which might be relevant . . . if I had made it.

That's your interpretation. And, as you know different sects (and sects within sects) of Christianity interpret the bible in completely different ways.

So what?

Until you guys can all come together and get one clear consensus on what your book means (and stick by it), please, don't hand me down your own interpretation of it.

Where is this utopia of consensus you inhabit, kb . . . sounds like a great place.

That's not true at all.

Example.
I know my parents exist and I know what they expect of me, what they want me to do, etc. But, I have developed my own judgement, morality, and motivations seperate from them. I know they are there, but that doesn't mean I obey them 100% of the time.

Knowing that a God exist does not equal strict obedience.

Again, just because we'd know God exist doesn't mean any of what you mentioned.

We have far too much evidence of the effect of absolute power on obedience . . . regardless of individual temperament . . . to accept your assertions.

People who believe God exist still do this. They don't try to figure anything out, they don't try to come to decisions on their own (let the bible decide!) and they are not self-reliant. If asked a question relating to the universe or whatever, it's "Goddunit," and if asked about their view on something they go straight to the bible.

That is the very misunderstanding and problem with the "coercion, fear of God, eternal hell" BS that is promulgated as doctrine by so many religions . . . it is self-defeating.

You're making half-assed assumptions that don't even make logical sense. Even if we knew beyond a doubt that your God existed, you'd still have people like you described and you'd still have people who figure things out on there on, make their own decisions, and are self-reliant. It's a people thing, not a knowing if God exist thing.

Actually it is a certainty of absolute power thing . . . no matter what the individuals think.

Again, that's your interpretation. And until you all can come together on what God really wants, then I'll dismiss your claims as to what God wants as I'll dismiss anyone elses claim.

I can see where that has been a workable criterion in human affairs . . . everyone must agree or else. I seek nothing from you and make no claims upon you . . . I'm simply explaining my reality as I experience it. The more we see through other eyes besides our own . . . the more discerning we can be.

Additionally, it's not so much of having all the answers, as it is proof. I can think of numerous ways (If I were God) that I can let my creation know that "Hey, I acutally do exist," and still have them ponder all the big questions. How can I (just a mere human) think of a scenario that shows God exist yet still doesn't answer all the questions? Is my human intellect greater than that of God?

Hardly . . . but it is supposed to be "in His likeness" . . . i.e., LIKE His . . with the same characteristics . . . except for our human foibles and weaknesses (negative emotions). I suspect your solutions would fail to account for all those foibles and weaknesses.

[sanspeur]

Originally Posted by justamere10

Yes, I know what the op is but one of the nicest things about City Data in my opinion is that we don't often have moderators who micromanage, they tend to let the conversation flow as it does in real life.

You must be one of the lucky ones...I have had many posts deleted for straying from the topic

My guess is that you and most other atheists came to this thread with the firm belief that there is no proof of creation. Others tell you that's because in addition to the ideas about creation posed by scientists, creation is also a major religious topic.

Actually I started this thread because I was tired of being put on the defensive by creationists who were constantly trying to refute evolution.

But you choose to accept as valid only secular methods and tools. So of course you are not going to find "proof" of creationism, secular methods and tools were never designed to probe spiritual things. It's inevitable with the limitations you place upon your search for truth that there can be only one conclusion about creationism - yours.

Of course I knew that there is no proof of creation. One cannot prove a myth. I just wanted to open the eyes of creationists and others to that fact. Hopefully some may be more open to accepting the reality of evolution.

But why should the thread be closed? As long as board members keep posting to it I think it is serving a purpose.

What would that purpose be, if as you have agreed there is no proof of creation?

[MysticPhD]

Originally Posted by sanspeur

What would that purpose be, if as you have agreed there is no proof of creation?

Some of us have greater curiosity and interest in other views . . . besides the fact we are here at all is evidence of some kind of creation . . . isn't it?

[sanspeur]

Originally Posted by MysticPhD

Some of us have greater curiosity and interest in other views . . . besides the fact we are here at all is evidence of some kind of creation . . . isn't it?

What would that be? The creation of all the god myths perhaps?

[DrummerBoy]

If you consider yourself to be a level-headed man of science, as do I, trust me, you're never going to get any proof of Creation from hardcore fundamentalist Christian. Firstly, of course, because there is none, and the idea that the Earth is a mere 6000 years old is as absurd as the idea of a bearded, wise old lawgiver and rule-setter sitting up un Heaven and watching over us, with his boy JC sitting at his right side.
Creationists constantly fascinate amuse me with their biily goat-like denials. Listen: they trust and use science and technology all day: they wake-up in the morning to a digitial alarm clock. Then they microwave their bagle, then they go to work in an automobile, then they get on a computer and post a rant saying that the sciences of carbon dating or evolutionary biology are falsehoods!

[harhar]

Aristotle when he talks about the "unmoved mover."

The cosmological argument could be stated as follows:

1. Every finite and contingent being has a cause.
2. Nothing finite and contingent can cause itself.
3. A causal chain cannot be of infinite length.
4. Therefore, a First Cause (or something that is not an effect) must exist.

Half from wikipedia and the other from my brain.

Just substitute Jesus for "First Cause."

[MysticPhD]

Originally Posted by sanspeur

What would that be? The creation of all the god myths perhaps?

Are you stuck considering the term creation as co-equal with Creationism? Generically, the term refers to the bringing into being. Are you suggesting that nothing we currently experience as reality was "brought into being?"

[AxisMundi]

Originally Posted by MysticPhD

You may have done that . . . but I certainly haven't. Trying to prove God is a futile endeavor doomed to failure. I first met Him over 30 years ago. I was a practicing atheist mediatator seeking Nirvana. Bigeest shock of my life. We have had ongoing contact ever since in deep meditation. Unfortunately . . . it is all non-verbal. But the absence of ANY negative human emotions and the presence of an unconditional love and acceptance is unambiguous and unmistakable.

So it all boils down to what very well MAY BE self-delusions.

Gotcha.

[AxisMundi]

Originally Posted by MysticPhD

Some of us have greater curiosity and interest in other views . . . besides the fact we are here at all is evidence of some kind of creation . . . isn't it?

No.