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.
Who are these people . . . certainly not atheists . . . because they go way beyond "I don't know" to "it can't be that it is God's design"
Who does, exactly? Again, you've obviously misunderstood what you've read.
Quote:
Perhaps as an advocate of the "don't know" crowd . . . you will explain HOW you get from "We don't know" to "it is just natural" in preference to "it is just God's design?"
God isn't indicated because there's no evidence, theory, predictions or explanations that come from including it. It's a lot of extra complexity for no improvement in results.
Quote:
instead of arguing the merits of your position or refuting their positions?
Ignoring the explanations doesn't make them go away.
Quote:
Again with the misrepresenting of the theist position as "Poof . . . God did it" when your purported vague "natural" explanation is no more than "Poof . . Nature did it." No need to pretend that the explanation given by atheism has set the bar any higher than that.
You want to compare the useful results of natural explanations to the results that have come from assuming god magically did it? I'll offer up modern medicine to start. Your turn. Practical results only, no fuzzy "but I feel good because of it" stuff.
(Your stats show you have posted 24 times -- may not be here on this forum)
Before you ask "how" question, you have made a presumption that there was nothing at one point, then there was something. Why do you presume such?
Three things:
1) WE presume such because either the first something came from somewhere or the first something was VERY much smaller than things are now, and it got larger in some way.
2) How does science explain going from NO life to having life?
3) The laws of motion say that resting objects have to have an OUTSIDE source to cause them to be in motion! Science is saying the phony Big Bang happened with NO outside source.
God isn't indicated because there's no evidence, theory, predictions or explanations that come from including it. It's a lot of extra complexity for no improvement in results.
Including God gives us lower complexity, not more. Without God, "nature" (which for me IS God) has to laboriously figure out what is best, taking forever to do it. The fact that nature is trying different things presumes a decision-making process and a mind, yet you say there is no evidence for God. Some people just refuse to see.
Who does, exactly? Again, you've obviously misunderstood what you've read. God isn't indicated because there's no evidence, theory, predictions or explanations that come from including it. It's a lot of extra complexity for no improvement in results.
Virtually every atheist prefers to assign the WHAT/WHO that enables science and produces all the evidence we have to an unexplainable WHAT instead of WHO with NO basis for doing so. Then they claim that all the evidence is therefore NOT of God but is of this unknown WHAT they call "Nature" . . . which is exactly the same as God. Just because you quibble and balk at all the OTHER things attributed to God by others that you see as unnecessary "complexity" does NOT eliminate the fact that we are talking about the same fundamental reality. All the debatable things remain debatable . . . but the EXISTENCE of God/"Nature" as the source of it all is NOT.
Quote:
You want to compare the useful results of natural explanations to the results that have come from assuming god magically did it? I'll offer up modern medicine to start. Your turn. Practical results only, no fuzzy "but I feel good because of it" stuff.
No I want to compare the useful results of God's design explanations to the results that have come from "natural" explanations . . . since they are the exact same thing!
Atheists can't get around the fact that we have nothing to lose by believing in God. If we are wrong, nothing will have changed. We will be as doomed as before, but if the atheists are wrong, the are doomed where, if they had believed in God, would have had a chance.
Sheesh, Pascal's wager again....That's twice in one day...I disagree with you that atheists have nothing to loose by believing....After twenty years as a Christian I know what I've gained since dropping out..I've gained lots of time, peace of mind, ( no more guilt feelings ) self respect, integrity, but most of all freedom of thought and wonder at how the world and everything on it really works.
Sheesh, Pascal's wager again....That's twice in one day...I disagree with you that atheists have nothing to loose by believing....After twenty years as a Christian I know what I've gained since dropping out..I've gained lots of time, peace of mind, ( no more guilt feelings ) self respect, integrity, but most of all freedom of thought and wonder at how the world and everything on it really works.
Pretty much the same experience here. Minimally, just omitting formalized church.
Atheists can't get around the fact that we have nothing to lose by believing in God. If we are wrong, nothing will have changed. We will be as doomed as before, but if the atheists are wrong, the are doomed where, if they had believed in God, would have had a chance.
Charles
Really depends on what you believe, there are so many thousands of different systems. Truth is most christians believe whatever is handed to them and at a very rudimentary level, based on teachings passed on to them, with minimal scholarly investigation one their own. Couple that with a profound ability to unwaveringly believe things "spiritually" that are entirely and diametrically opposed to their professional demeanor. IQ rarely seems to be related to this trait.
Sheesh, Pascal's wager again....That's twice in one day...I disagree with you that atheists have nothing to loose by believing....After twenty years as a Christian I know what I've gained since dropping out..I've gained lots of time, peace of mind, ( no more guilt feelings ) self respect, integrity, but most of all freedom of thought and wonder at how the world and everything on it really works.
Yeah, I knowwwwwww... that Blaise Pascal was a reeeeeal moron...I'm sure "Sanspeurian Theory" is held in much higher esteem.
Pascal had one of the greatest minds ever. A brilliant scientist and mathematician, as well as one of the most highly regarded philosophers of his time. I wouldn't put aaaaaaany credibility in what a fool like him said...we should listen to you...you would have so much better insight.
You guys crack me up...anybody that doesn't agree with your fringe concepts is all wrong. Not much has ever been said that was more logical than Pascal's Wager. But, of course, you guys would discredit it out of spite.
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.
