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.
OP Here. I have to say lots of words have gone under the bridge, and all sorts of esoteric arguments presented, but not one word of evidence as I see it. None.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wardendresden
Accepting something as evidence doesn't make it evidence. As Neil Tyson pointed out in the video which I think you did not watch, our own history with what people SAY, is that it is unreliable. He asked a second grader if he had ever played the game of "telephone" with his classmates (he had). And Tyson asked him what happened to the story told by the first person and the boy said, "It was completely different."
That is the answer. Yes, people have relied on eyewitness accounts. But it is equally true that we now know it to be one of the poorest, if not THE poorest, kinds of evidence that can be provided.
Besides, I do not wish to bog down my faith with "evidence" to "prove" it. Scripture itself indicates that FAITH is the only way to approach God. You and others wish to make it about "evidence."
Don't tell me you are not a fundamentalist (and there are godless fundamentalists as much as religious ones). A fundamentalist clings doggedly to their point of view regardless of how reasonable any argument appears to the contrary. You did the same thing with the "Irish" thread, clinging to the view that Ireland is nothing based solely on your perception of their economic output in the world. You failed to measure or account for their cultural impact---which has resulted in St. Patrick's Day parades throughout the United States and a number of other countries as well. In other words, you are a fundamentalist.
You are Mr. Strawman himself when it comes to argumentation. I don't try to argue with atheists/agnostics that God exists because their is no EMPIRICAL evidence to support it. The support comes from weak "eyewitness" (there was not a single REAL eyewitness who authored any of the NT) accounts. The actual writings were based on oral stories passed down--and oral stories do get altered over time--and in mythical (classic understanding, not modern) stories the details get embellished over time.
The fact that the stories resemble one another in general while differing highly in detail lends some credibility to the general message of the gospels.
As a fundamentalist you are welcome to cover your ears and close your eyes and say "Nuh-uh!" The christian ones are quite adept at it because "god" tells them to do so. It helps them maintain the atrocious view that god killed entire city-states to show his love for one group of people over another. Whereas Jesus, from what stories we have, appears to have loved everyone. Even if one accepts Jesus only as a principled philosopher, that Jesus is far more appealing in the Good News offered EVERYONE, than an unprincipled murderous higher being.
You are in love with your viewpoint. Mine has altered many times over the decades, perhaps because, as Tyson pointed out, I'm willing to stay at the drawing board rather than walk away thinking that the last answer I found was the only one needed.
You two seem to think "evidence" must be demonstrative of "proof" to be "evidence".
It doesn't. But it is "evidence", regardless.
You two seem to think "evidence" must be demonstrative of "proof" to be "evidence".
It doesn't. But it is "evidence", regardless.
I guess you are right in that regard. Let's just distinguish them by saying you have bad evidence and we're looking for good evidence. Does that make you feel better?
Evidence can either support a premise, or contradict a premise, but it must speak definitely to the premis.
I am looking for evidence that supports the premise that there is, in fact, a god, creator etc.
Got any?
Why don't you honestly look into this yourself, instead of demanding that
others who don't even know you spend hard time and effort typing at a keyboard
on some obscure message board ?
Evidence can either support a premise, or contradict a premise, but it must speak definitely to the premis.
I am looking for evidence that supports the premise that there is, in fact, a god, creator etc.
Got any?
Post #150 in this thread
Read that...then refute and rebut with logic and reason that the GOD I perceive (ALL THE MATTER/ENERGY THAT EXISTS AND HAS EXISTED) does not objectively exist.
Why don't you honestly look into this yourself, instead of demanding that
others who don't even know you spend hard time and effort typing at a keyboard
on some obscure message board ?
Has it ever occurred to you that some of us, probably all of us, have jumped through those hoops and found nothing? Those of us who have are asking for something we might not have evaluated. You can ask your God what kind of evidence can be presented that we would accept. He should know, right?
Post #150 in this thread
Read that...then refute and rebut with logic and reason that the GOD I perceive (ALL THE MATTER/ENERGY THAT EXISTS AND HAS EXISTED) does not objectively exist.
That argument has been debunked several times, including by me. But you still try to peddle it.
That argument has been debunked several times, including by me. But you still try to peddle it.
Oh, really? I must have missed that.
I only recall a plea for redacting the known, expert, FULL definition of "G-O-D" to be just Religious Deities...and a bit of other insignificant and bogus straw-grabbing type stuff.
You wanna run that logical and reasonable rebuttal past me again? I don't ever remember seeing one. But, again, I mighta missed it...though I doubt it.
Go for it.
Why don't you honestly look into this yourself, instead of demanding that
others who don't even know you spend hard time and effort typing at a keyboard
on some obscure message board ?
What makes you think I haven't. I found no evidence there, or anywhere else, for that matter.
Post #150 in this thread
Read that...then refute and rebut with logic and reason that the GOD I perceive (ALL THE MATTER/ENERGY THAT EXISTS AND HAS EXISTED) does not objectively exist.
I don't know if you think you are being "cute" or "cutting edge" or a "deep thinker", but you statement is idiotic. The car is NOT the factory, the water is NOT the well.
I all seriousness, your concept of god is as or more, ludicrous that the conventional pap you hear now.
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.
