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.
I'm giving you the dictionary definition of faith.
Faith literally means belief without evidence.
Perhaps you haven't ever thought about it too hard, but that is literally what faith means.
If you had evidence of god, there would be no faith.
I'm giving you the dictionary definition of faith.
Faith literally means belief without evidence.
Perhaps you haven't ever thought about it too hard, but that is literally what faith means.
If you had evidence of god, there would be no faith.
Thanks for your post. There is no point in debating the evidence of God with someone whose mind is closed to the possibility of God. And the Holy Spirit is not a card, but a fact and experience of those in a relationship with God.
Thanks for your response. There is indeed no point in you debating wit someone whose mind is closed to the possibility of God. I don't. I just need more than 'a possibility' to make me give the claim credence. And the Holy Spirit is not a card. Nor a fact. It IS an 'experience, but illusory. It is a myth and a delusion. The playing of it as an argument is (metaphorically) a "Card".
Quote:
So tell me why mathematics can describe so much in life and the way things work in the universe? Tell me why DNA is actually written code that determines how a life form is designed? This is not the stuff of random chance. Two examples of evidence. The sort that the skeptic will say it must be anything but God. Sorry, but “I don’t know, but it can’t be God” is not very convincing.
I'm not going to claim that I cn answer your question about mathematics. I do have an idea that DNA - like matter - has evolved to do what it does. What worked, became stable. What did not, ceased to be. 2 Billion years of biochemicals reacting in a warm sea - a natural laboratory - and eventually something was able to replicate itself. That was just the start before you got early DNA. This is an explanation that doesn't need a designer.
Now you explain to me, if life was designed by a god, why is there evidence that two major extinctions were needed to give mammals a chance to become dominant?
Dismissal of this evidence out of hand will not do.
As the result of working the steps in alcoholics anonymous i experienced conscious contact with the spiritual entity that religion calls God.
As you admit, its your opinion.
You can experience god but you will not pay the price of admission, I have never met an atheist who is willing to lose face to save their azz.
In the end one of the two must go.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonesg
Yes it is.
Most people in religion have never had a direct personal experience with god, they just believe
That's blind faith.
I experienced god.
My faith is experiential.i wonder why atheists try to teach anything about spirituality, you cannot give what you do not possess.
Just as a river cannot flow higher than its own headwater, a person cannot guide beyond their own spiritual experience.
Yet you guys assume you can.
First off, I am not an Atheist.
Here is perhaps an example of what I am trying to say. And again, this is my understanding and it's my opinion.
Say two people are locked in a room, none has gone out. And both know they will be let out.
One person believes that it's day outside, the other says, since you don't have an evidence, it's night outside.
Both don't "know" what's out side? day or night?
They would've known ONLY if they had gone out of the room, see what it's like outside and THEN claim, "I know", it's day outside or "I Know" it's night outside.
And when you say "I experienced God" then you open up an infinite amount of possibilities. What you call "experiencing God" could mean hallucination to someone else, or your experiencing God could mean insanity or absolutely nothing to others.
I doubt that many won't even understand what you call "experiencing God", if you tried to define what it's like?
However, if you want to believe in God and experience God in whichever way that fulfills your heart, is your right and your path. No one should stop you.
I see you have faith in twains quips.
He was brilliant for sure.
"I think the goodness, the justice, and the mercy of God are manifested in His works: I perceive that they are manifested toward me in this life; the logical conclusion is that they will be manifested toward me in the life to come, if there should be one."
That's one of his? So he was a God -believer but not a believer is religion? I can respect that, though I beg to differ.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonesg
As the result of working the steps in alcoholics anonymous i experienced conscious contact with the spiritual entity that religion calls God.
As you admit, its your opinion.
You can experience god but you will not pay the price of admission, I have never met an atheist who is willing to lose face to save their azz.
In the end one of the two must go.
I have rarely if ever come across a religious apologist who would ever admit he was wrong even if thus saving his face meant discrediting the case for religion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonesg
Yes it is.
Most people in religion have never had a direct personal experience with god, they just believe
That's blind faith.
I experienced god.
My faith is experiential.i wonder why atheists try to teach anything about spirituality, you cannot give what you do not possess.
Just as a river cannot flow higher than its own headwater, a person cannot guide beyond their own spiritual experience.
Yet you guys assume you can.
That's like arguing that a doctor cannot cur a disease without having had it themselves. Do you know what the term "Fallacious" means?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonesg
There's more than ample evidence in science.
Just because you are in denial isn't theists problem.
An excellent but amusing speaker. But his arguments are unsound. You can explain the meaning we assign to symbols in terms of the human mind assigning meanings that we agree. It isn't difficult. Just because this biochemist and reductionist couldn't think of an answer (assuming the story is true) doesn't mean that there isn't one.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 05-22-2018 at 10:22 PM..
Here is perhaps an example of what I am trying to say. And again, this is my understanding and it's my opinion.
Say two people are locked in a room, none has gone out. And both know they will be let out.
One person believes that it's day outside, the other says, since you don't have an evidence, it's night outside.
Both don't "know" what's out side? day or night?
They would've known ONLY if they had gone out of the room, see what it's like outside and THEN claim, "I know", it's day outside or "I Know" it's night outside.
And when you say "I experienced God" then you open up an infinite amount of possibilities. What you call "experiencing God" could mean hallucination to someone else, or your experiencing God could mean insanity or absolutely nothing to others.
I doubt that many won't even understand what you call "experiencing God", if you tried to define what it's like?
However, if you want to believe in God and experience God in whichever way that fulfills your heart, is your right and your path. No one should stop you.
There you go, chum. As soon as you ask any awkward questions you are "An atheist" and therefore to be dismissed out of hand. You'll at least get a fair debate from an atheist.
Thanks for your response. There is indeed no point in you debating wit someone whose mind is closed to the possibility of God. I don't. I just need more than 'a possibility' to make me give the claim credence. And the Holy Spirit is not a card. Nor a fact. It IS an 'experience, but illusory. It is a myth and a delusion. The playing of it as an argument is (metaphorically) a "Card".
I'm not going to claim that I cn answer your question about mathematics. I do have an idea that DNA - like matter - has evolved to do what it does. What worked, became stable. What did not, ceased to be. 2 Billion years of biochemicals reacting in a warm sea - a natural laboratory - and eventually something was able to replicate itself. That was just the start before you got early DNA. This is an explanation that doesn't need a designer.
Now you explain to me, if life was designed by a god, why is there evidence that two major extinctions were needed to give mammals a chance to become dominant?
Dismissal of this evidence out of hand will not do.
I don’t see why two major extinctions to allow mammals to become dominant would disprove God. But the fact remains that DNA is code. Can you cite any examples of code occurring by chance?
There you go, chum. As soon as you ask any awkward questions you are "An atheist" and therefore to be dismissed out of hand. You'll at least get a fair debate from an atheist.
That’s a funny statement considering the track record on this board. You yourself called me delusional when I spoke of the Holy Spirit. That is not debate.
Last edited by Mr5150; 05-23-2018 at 10:40 AM..
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.
As soon as you ask any awkward questions you are "An atheist" and therefore to be dismissed out of hand. You'll at least get a fair debate from an atheist.
