Debate Unlimited Forum :: View topic

Debate Unlimited Forum

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

Question for Theists.
Goto page 1, 2, 3 ... 14, 15, 16 Next

Debate Unlimited Forum Index -> Atheism

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

Spaz
Experienced Mass Debater

Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 2025
Location: Brantford, Canada

Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 8:07 pm Post subject: Question for Theists.

I know there's one or two theists around here. My question is as follows: If everyone who has a particular religion insists that they are the right religion, and for the most part your religion is determined by your parents religion, and your parents religion for the most part is determined by geographical area, then why is any religion the correct one? Tell me: Why are you correct and everybody else wrong?

LeftHook
eight-letter nobody

Joined: 30 Jul 2005
Posts: 7612
Location: Houston, Tx

Posted: Sat May 15, 2010 12:29 am Post subject:

"Because God speaks to me personally, not dream-like but as livid as if someone were speaking to me face to face." Oh wait, you never hear that.

Jenni
Nietzschean Superwoman

Joined: 26 May 2008
Posts: 3975
Location: Mississippi

Posted: Sat May 15, 2010 4:54 am Post subject:

I know theists, especially my mom, who would say they aren't wrong. All the gods are really just the same, that there are many paths to the same place. She was never truly horrified until I made the leap from pagan to atheist. In fact, to this day she will ask me to do spells for her or read her cards. As long as you believe something, you're fine. We've had many conversations where I try to explain but how can you call yourself a christian if you don't believe the bible and all. But it doesn't matter to her, as long as you try to do good and believe in god- some god- your ok.

Joe
Experienced Mass Debater

Joined: 20 Nov 2005
Posts: 580

Posted: Sat May 15, 2010 10:39 pm Post subject:

Jenni wrote:

I know theists, especially my mom, who would say they aren't wrong. All the gods are really just the same, that there are many paths to the same place. She was never truly horrified until I made the leap from pagan to atheist. In fact, to this day she will ask me to do spells for her or read her cards. As long as you believe something, you're fine. We've had many conversations where I try to explain but how can you call yourself a christian if you don't believe the bible and all. But it doesn't matter to her, as long as you try to do good and believe in god- some god- your ok.

It always vexed me that people insist that you believe in something. I'd rather know how something works than believe that something works. Isn't that more meaningful?

Jenni
Nietzschean Superwoman

Joined: 26 May 2008
Posts: 3975
Location: Mississippi

Posted: Sun May 16, 2010 2:55 am Post subject:

Joe wrote:

Jenni wrote:

It always vexed me that people insist that you believe in something. I'd rather know how something works than believe that something works. Isn't that more meaningful?

I always thought it was about having a moral compass, something bigger than yourself to guide you. That didn't work for me though because from the beginning (as early as third grade, probably sooner) I have always had to do what I thought was right. Now that I'm older I understand I put no other gods before me, but back when I was little I just knew some things I could live with and some I couldn't. There was never a moral compass higher than me, so the mindset didn't work. But I think that's what they think, judging by what people who think like that have said to me.

G. Whiz
Ms. Debater

Joined: 11 Jun 2008
Posts: 3010
Location: California

Posted: Sun May 16, 2010 3:49 am Post subject:

I'm disappointed. Not one theist has stepped up to the challenge.

angelobrazil
Mass Debater

Joined: 13 Nov 2007
Posts: 194

Posted: Tue Jul 13, 2010 6:36 pm Post subject: Re: Question for Theists.

Spaz wrote:

I know there's one or two theists around here.

My question is as follows:

If everyone who has a particular religion insists that they are the right religion, and for the most part your religion is determined by your parents religion, and your parents religion for the most part is determined by geographical area, then why is any religion the correct one?

Tell me:

Why are you correct and everybody else wrong?

from my virtual library :

http://elshamah.heavenforum.com/bible-christianity-f6/why-is-christianity-the-only-true-religion-t278.htm#957

When one turns to Christianity with Judaism as its forerunner, many things stand out by way of comparison. The first is a strict monotheism. Jehovah God is the Creator and the sustainer of the universe, of life and of all things. This is in striking contrast to a gross polytheism found in the majority of religions, Islam being an exception. Only in the Judaeo-Christian religion does one find a logical, sensible, and reasonable explanation of the creation. The accounts of creation found in other that the Genesis record are written on a low mythological plane with a sordid conception of deity. At times the gods plot and fight against one another.

Only in Christianity do we find a prophetic message heralding one who is to be sent out from God as man's deliverer and Savior; the only begotten Son, designated God with us and known as prophet, priest, king, wonderful, counsel-or, mighty God, everlasting Father, prince of peace. (Read Isaiah 9:6; Matthew 1:21-23; Hebrews 3:1). This prophetic story has its setting in Jewish history centuries before the birth of Christ. Moses told how God would raise up a prophet to whom the people should listen. Deuteronomy 18:15. Micah said he would be born in Bethlehem - Micah 5:2. The entire 53rd Chapter of Isaiah describes him as God's suffering servant, sent out from the Lord to redeem mankind from sins. Joseph was told, "And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus: for he shall save his people from their sins." Matthew 1:21. This puts Christianity into a category all to itself.

andkon
It's not a VOW of chastity...

Joined: 04 Aug 2005
Posts: 21666
Location: Turn around

Posted: Tue Jul 13, 2010 7:40 pm Post subject: Re: Question for Theists.

angelobrazil wrote:

When one turns to Christianity with Judaism as its forerunner, many things stand out by way of comparison. The first is a strict monotheism. Jehovah God is the Creator and the sustainer of the universe, of life and of all things. This is in striking contrast to a gross polytheism found in the majority of religions, Islam being an exception. Only in the Judaeo-Christian religion does one find a logical, sensible, and reasonable explanation of the creation. The accounts of creation found in other that the Genesis record are written on a low mythological plane with a sordid conception of deity. At times the gods plot and fight against one another.

So what is "logical, sensible, and reasonable" about creating hundreds of billions of galaxies? Did God create unnecessary things? If not, what purpose do they serve?

angelobrazil wrote:

Only in Christianity do we find a prophetic message heralding one who is to be sent out from God as man's deliverer and Savior;

Not quite: there were other people who claimed to be the Messiah.

angelobrazil wrote:

the only begotten Son, designated God with us and known as prophet, priest, king, wonderful, counsel-or, mighty God, everlasting Father, prince of peace. (Read Isaiah 9:6; Matthew 1:21-23; Hebrews 3:1). This prophetic story has its setting in Jewish history centuries before the birth of Christ. Moses told how God would raise up a prophet to whom the people should listen. Deuteronomy 18:15. Micah said he would be born in Bethlehem - Micah 5:2. The entire 53rd Chapter of Isaiah describes him as God's suffering servant, sent out from the Lord to redeem mankind from sins. Joseph was told, "And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus: for he shall save his people from their sins." Matthew 1:21. This puts Christianity into a category all to itself.

Funny how most of the Jews at the time did not believe Jesus to be the Messiah. I guess pagans knew Jewish prophecies better, no?

angelobrazil
Mass Debater

Joined: 13 Nov 2007
Posts: 194

Posted: Tue Jul 13, 2010 8:29 pm Post subject: Re: Question for Theists.

andkon wrote:

So what is "logical, sensible, and reasonable" about creating hundreds of billions of galaxies? Did God create unnecessary things? If not, what purpose do they serve?

http://elshamah.heavenforum.com/astronomy-cosmology-and-god-f15/why-is-our-universe-so-large-t249.htm

The tremendous timespans involved in biological evolution offer a new perspective on the question 'why is our Universe so big?' The emergence of human life here on Earth has taken 4.5 billion years. Even before our Sun and its planets could form, earlier stars must have transmuted pristine hydrogen into carbon, oxygen and the other atoms of the periodic table. This has taken about ten billion years. The size of the observable Universe is, roughly, the distance travelled by light since the Big Bang, and so the present visible Universe must be around ten billion light-years across.
The galaxy pair NGC 6872 and IC 4970 indicate the vastness of the Universe. Light from the bright foreground star has taken a few centuries to reach us; the light from the galaxies has been travelling for 300 million years. The Universe must be this big - as measured by the cosmic number N - to give intelligent life time to evolve. In addition, the cosmic numbers omega and Q must have just the right values for galaxies to form at all.
This is a startling conclusion. The very hugeness of our Universe, which seems at first to signify how unimportant we are in the cosmic scheme, is actually entailed by our existence! This is not to say that there couldn't have been a smaller universe, only that we could not have existed in it. The expanse of cosmic space is not an extravagant superiority; it's a consequence of the prolonged chain of events, extending back before our Solar System formed, that preceded our arrival on the scene.
This may seem a regression to an ancient 'anthropocentric' perspective - something that was shattered by Copernicus's revelation that the Earth moves around the Sun rather than vice versa. But we shouldn't take Copernican modesty (some-times called the 'principle of mediocrity') too far. Creatures like us require special conditions to have evolved, so our perspective is bound to be in some sense atypical. The vastness of our universe shouldn't surprise us, even though we may still seek a deeper explanation for its distinctive features.

andkon wrote:

Not quite: there were other people who claimed to be the Messiah.

Sure. But only Jesus was from the line of King David, and fullfilled the old testament profecies.

http://elshamah.heavenforum.com/bible-christianity-f6/why-is-jesus-christ-the-only-true-messiah-t280.htm#963

In addition, only one line is traced from the beginning to the end of the biblical history, the line of King David. The Scriptures reveal every name before David (Adam to David) and every name after David (David to Zerubbabel). Since the Messiah was to be of the house of David, this can also be labeled as the messianic line.

For Jesus to have fulfilled all 48 of
the prophecies would be a 1 in a
1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,
000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,
000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000
chance. (That's a 1 with 117 zeros behind it).
The well-known scientist, Peter Stoner, in an article from the 1963 issue of Science magazine says, "The estimated number of electrons in the entire known universe is about the same number as one man being able to fulfill those prophecies. Can anyone still say it was an accident?."

angelobrazil wrote:

Funny how most of the Jews at the time did not believe Jesus to be the Messiah. I guess pagans knew Jewish prophecies better, no?

http://elshamah.heavenforum.com/bible-christianity-f6/why-most-of-the-jews-at-the-time-did-not-believe-jesus-to-be-the-messiah-t281.htm#966

The Jews rejected Jesus because He failed, in their eyes, to do what they expected their Messiah to do—destroy evil and all their enemies and establish an eternal kingdom with Israel as the preeminent nation in the world. The prophecies in Isaiah and Psalm 22 described a suffering Messiah who would be persecuted and killed, but they chose to focus instead on those prophecies that discussed His glorious victories, not His crucifixion.

The commentaries in the Talmud, written before the onset of Christianity, clearly discuss the Messianic prophecies of Isaiah 53 and Psalm 22 and puzzle over how these would be fulfilled with the glorious setting up of the Kingdom of the Messiah. After the Church used these prophecies to prove the claims of Christ, the Jews took the position that the prophecies did not refer to the Messiah, but to Israel or some other person.

The Jews believed that the Messiah, the prophet which Moses spoke about, would come and deliver them from Roman bondage and set up a kingdom where they would be the rulers. Two of the disciples, James and John, even asked to sit at Jesus' right and left in His Kingdom when He came into His glory. The people of Jerusalem also thought He would deliver them. They shouted praises to God for the mighty works they had seen Jesus do, and called out "Hosanna, save us" when he rode into Jerusalem on a donkey (Matthew 21:9). They treated Him like a conquering king. Then when He allowed Himself to be arrested, tried and crucified on a cursed cross, the people stopped believing that He was the promised prophet. They rejected their Messiah (Matthew 27:22).

Note that Paul tells the Church that the spiritual blindness of Israel is a "mystery" that had not previously been revealed (Romans chapters 9-11). For thousands of years Israel had been the one nation that looked to God while the Gentile nations generally rejected the light and chose to live in spiritual darkness. Israel and her inspired prophets revealed monotheism—one God who was personally interested in mankind's destiny of heaven or hell, the path to salvation, the written Word with the Ten Commandments. Yet Israel rejected her prophesied Messiah, and the promises of the kingdom of heaven were postponed. A veil of spiritual blindness fell upon the eyes of the Jews who previously were the most spiritually discerning people. As Paul explained, this hardening in part of Israel led to the blessing of the Gentiles who would believe in Jesus and accept Him as Lord and Savior.

Two thousand years after He came to the nation of Israel as their Messiah, Jews still (for the most part) reject Jesus Christ. Many Jews today (some say at least half of all living Jews) identify themselves as Jewish but prefer to remain “secular.” They identify with no particular Jewish movement and have no understanding or affiliation with any Jewish biblical roots. The concept of Messiah as expressed in the Hebrew Scriptures or Judaism’s “13 Principles of Faith” is foreign to most Jews today.

But one concept is generally held as universal: Jews must have nothing to do with Jesus! Most Jews today perceive the last 2000 years of historical Jewish persecution to be at the hands of so-called “Christians.” From the Crusades, to the Inquisition, to the pogroms in Europe, to Hitler’s holocaust—Jews ultimately believe that they are being held responsible for the death of Jesus Christ and are being persecuted for that reason. They, therefore, reject Him today for this reason and for the other historical reasons mentioned above.

The good news is that many Jews are turning to Christ today. The God of Israel has always been faithful to keep a “remnant” of believing Jews to Himself. In the United States alone, some estimates say that there are over 100,000 Jewish believers in Jesus, and the numbers are growing all the time.

[/url]

Last edited by angelobrazil on Tue Jul 13, 2010 9:22 pm; edited 1 time in total

LeftHook
eight-letter nobody

Joined: 30 Jul 2005
Posts: 7612
Location: Houston, Tx

Posted: Tue Jul 13, 2010 8:33 pm Post subject:

Could God spare some time from being Magnificent and Wonderful and All-Everything to teach you how to properly attribute sources and use quotes?

angelobrazil
Mass Debater

Joined: 13 Nov 2007
Posts: 194

Posted: Tue Jul 13, 2010 9:23 pm Post subject:

LeftHook wrote:

Could God spare some time from being Magnificent and Wonderful and All-Everything to teach you how to properly attribute sources and use quotes?

better now ?

Beau Tochs
Massive Member

Joined: 14 Jan 2007
Posts: 3687
Location: Virginia US

Posted: Tue Jul 13, 2010 9:32 pm Post subject: Re: Question for Theists.

angelobrazil swiping stuff from a website wrote:

The Jews rejected Jesus because He failed, in their eyes, to do what they expected their Messiah to do—destroy evil and all their enemies and establish an eternal kingdom with Israel as the preeminent nation in the world. The prophecies in Isaiah and Psalm 22 described a suffering Messiah who would be persecuted and killed, but they chose to focus instead on those prophecies that discussed His glorious victories, not His crucifixion.

You're full of shit. The Jews reject Jesus as their Messiah because he didn't fulfill all of the criteria for being their Messiah:

1. He must be Jewish
2. He must be from the Tribe of Judah
3. He must be a direct male descendant of King David through his son Solomon
4. He must gather all the Jewish people from exile and return them to Israel
5. He must rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem
6. He will rule at a time of world-wide peace
7. He will rule at a time when all people will come to acknowledge and serve the one true God
8. There will be no more famine
9. The Jews will be sought out for spiritual guidance
10. All weapons will be destroyed
11. The Nile will run dry
12. The trees of Israel will yield their fruit each month

Jesus only fulfilled one of these - he was Jewish. None of that other shit happened.

angelobrazil swiping stuff from a website wrote:

The commentaries in the Talmud, written before the onset of Christianity, clearly discuss the Messianic prophecies of Isaiah 53 and Psalm 22 and puzzle over how these would be fulfilled with the glorious setting up of the Kingdom of the Messiah. After the Church used these prophecies to prove the claims of Christ, the Jews took the position that the prophecies did not refer to the Messiah, but to Israel or some other person.

See above. If Jesus were the Messiah, lots of other things would have happened too. They haven't happened.

angelobrazil swiping stuff from a website wrote:

The Jews believed that the Messiah, the prophet which Moses spoke about, would come and deliver them from Roman bondage and set up a kingdom where they would be the rulers. Two of the disciples, James and John, even asked to sit at Jesus' right and left in His Kingdom when He came into His glory. The people of Jerusalem also thought He would deliver them. They shouted praises to God for the mighty works they had seen Jesus do, and called out "Hosanna, save us" when he rode into Jerusalem on a donkey (Matthew 21:9). They treated Him like a conquering king. Then when He allowed Himself to be arrested, tried and crucified on a cursed cross, the people stopped believing that He was the promised prophet. They rejected their Messiah (Matthew 27:22).

Nonsense. The Jews never believed that a blood sacrifice could forgive sins, and they rejected the idea that God would require a human sacrifice for sin because he hated human sacrifices. So the reason Jesus was "rejected" was because he went against everything the Jews believed.

angelobrazil swiping stuff from a website wrote:

But one concept is generally held as universal: Jews must have nothing to do with Jesus! Most Jews today perceive the last 2000 years of historical Jewish persecution to be at the hands of so-called “Christians.” From the Crusades, to the Inquisition, to the pogroms in Europe, to Hitler’s holocaust—Jews ultimately believe that they are being held responsible for the death of Jesus Christ and are being persecuted for that reason. They, therefore, reject Him today for this reason and for the other historical reasons mentioned above.

What utter horseshit. I've given you the real reasons why Jesus is rejected by Jews - stop making shit up.

angelobrazil swiping stuff from a website wrote:

The good news is that many Jews are turning to Christ today. The God of Israel has always been faithful to keep a “remnant” of believing Jews to Himself. In the United States alone, some estimates say that there are over 100,000 Jewish believers in Jesus, and the numbers are growing all the time.

Wow! That means the stories of Jesus MUST be true!

andkon
It's not a VOW of chastity...

Joined: 04 Aug 2005
Posts: 21666
Location: Turn around

Posted: Tue Jul 13, 2010 11:49 pm Post subject: Re: Question for Theists.

angelobrazil wrote:

andkon wrote:

So what is "logical, sensible, and reasonable" about creating hundreds of billions of galaxies? Did God create unnecessary things? If not, what purpose do they serve?

http://elshamah.heavenforum.com/astronomy-cosmology-and-god-f15/why-is-our-universe-so-large-t249.htm

When you start writing on your own, I'll start writing on my own. Debate Unlimited, not Linkdump Unlimited.

LeftHook
eight-letter nobody

Joined: 30 Jul 2005
Posts: 7612
Location: Houston, Tx

Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2010 2:56 am Post subject:

angelobrazil wrote:

LeftHook wrote:

Could God spare some time from being Magnificent and Wonderful and All-Everything to teach you how to properly attribute sources and use quotes?

better now ?

Closer...I see you tried but see the "[/url]" at the end of your post? It's just kind of hanging there, isn't it? It tells you something isn't right.

andkon
It's not a VOW of chastity...

Joined: 04 Aug 2005
Posts: 21666
Location: Turn around

Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2010 3:07 am Post subject:

A slash earl?

Wolverine
Experienced Mass Debater

Joined: 16 Mar 2006
Posts: 4774
Location: Germany

Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2010 9:34 am Post subject: Re: Question for Theists.

angelobrazil wrote:

The galaxy pair NGC 6872 and IC 4970 indicate the vastness of the Universe. ... This is not to say that there couldn't have been a smaller universe, only that we could not have existed in it.

You mean if the galaxies NGC 6872 and IC 4970 had not existed, we could not have evolved?

angelobrazil wrote:

The well-known scientist, Peter Stoner, in an article from the 1963 issue of Science magazine says, "The estimated number of electrons in the entire known universe is about the same number as one man being able to fulfill those prophecies. Can anyone still say it was an accident?."

No, you can still say it is a scam. Not even a sophisticated one.
Tell us how many of the 48 prophecies we can check today, with scientific methods, without believing the blabla of the Bible and the Christians?
Just as an example: How can we check where Jesus was born? Who his parents were? Whether teenage Jesus and 30 year old Jesus were the same person? That any mircale was done?
Without a look into the bible, which is cultist propaganda, how can we tell?

The same goes for the prophecies, can you tell us when and how often the old testament has been changed in history? You know, people just taking an old source, about to rot away, writing a new one, and including some creative writing, maybe including a prophecy or two about things that had come to pass in the meantime? Alll science can prove that after 100 CE, 70 years after Jesus died, people stopped messing around with the texts. Before that, anyone creating a written piece of text was at total liberty to include or exclude whatever they seemed useful for cultist purposes, and various differences that exist prove that people did use that liberty.

So, you who believe in maths and all that, which is more likely, that 48 prophecies came true, or that 48 prophecies or events were fabricated to fit together?

angelobrazil wrote:

The Jews rejected Jesus because He failed, in their eyes, to do what they expected their Messiah to do....

So even though Jesus fulfilled all of the prophecies, the changes being one in a gazillion, the Jews still believed it was an accident? Or did they believe it was a scam?

angelobrazil wrote:

The good news is that many Jews are turning to Christ today.

And why would that be good news?

angelobrazil
Mass Debater

Joined: 13 Nov 2007
Posts: 194

Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2010 11:02 pm Post subject: Re: Question for Theists.

Wolverine wrote:

angelobrazil wrote:

The galaxy pair NGC 6872 and IC 4970 indicate the vastness of the Universe. ... This is not to say that there couldn't have been a smaller universe, only that we could not have existed in it.

You mean if the galaxies NGC 6872 and IC 4970 had not existed, we could not have evolved?

No, they just indicate the vastness of the Universe, as stated.

Quote:

there is plenty of evidence through the scriptures. But it will in the end be a matter of faith.

Quote:

The same goes for the prophecies, can you tell us when and how often the old testament has been changed in history?

you can check it by yourself :

http://codexsinaiticus.org/en/

we have also the qumran rolls, with the jesaja book complete, and these rolls with carbon 14 dated ~ 100 bC.

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Perspectives/Default.aspx?id=387754

The significance of the Dead Sea Scrolls should never be underestimated. They answer one of the most critical questions of life: How do we know the Bible we have today has been passed down to us accurately -- and is its message trustworthy?

Until these texts became available, the oldest Hebrew Old Testament text in existence dated back to A.D. 800. No original manuscripts of the Bible exist today, so the next best thing is to go back to the oldest copies that would be closest to the originals. The Dead Sea Scrolls allow for that because they are 800-1,000 years older than previously known manuscripts.

What the Dead Sea Scroll manuscripts clearly demonstrate is that through about a thousand years there was essentially no significant alteration in the text. The scribes who transcribed the text of the Bible were so meticulous – they had such high standards of accuracy, counting every word and every letter of every word, dotting each "i" and crossing each "t", so to speak – that one may be absolutely certain the Old Testament text available to scholars today is in essence the same as the originals. The Dead Sea Scrolls are an incontrovertible archaeological confirmation that this is the case.

Beau Tochs
Massive Member

Joined: 14 Jan 2007
Posts: 3687
Location: Virginia US

Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2010 11:41 pm Post subject: Re: Question for Theists.

angelobrazil wrote:

What the Dead Sea Scroll manuscripts clearly demonstrate is that through about a thousand years there was essentially no significant alteration in the text. The scribes who transcribed the text of the Bible were so meticulous – they had such high standards of accuracy, counting every word and every letter of every word, dotting each "i" and crossing each "t", so to speak – that one may be absolutely certain the Old Testament text available to scholars today is in essence the same as the originals. The Dead Sea Scrolls are an incontrovertible archaeological confirmation that this is the case.

Who gives a flying fuck about the Dead Sea Scrolls? They are simply recordings of ancient nonsense written by ancient storytellers. It's fairytale screeds filled with tall tales about talking burning bushes, talking donkeys, cockatrices, satyrs, leviathans, zombies, the dead coming back to life, and other assorted silliness that grownups and people not living a deluded fantasy readily dismiss as bullshit. The scrolls could be 20,000 years old for all anyone cares, they still contain nothing more than fragments of well-preserved tribal bullshit.

The god described on those fragments is still nothing more than a silly tribal story. If you want to impress me, have Yahweh appear before mankind in an unambiguous way. Dried-out papyrus found in some old clay jars doesn't do much to get my attention, or make me believe that the nonsense is real.

angelobrazil
Mass Debater

Joined: 13 Nov 2007
Posts: 194

Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2010 11:53 pm Post subject: Re: Question for Theists.

Beau Tochs wrote:

. Dried-out papyrus found in some old clay jars doesn't do much to get my attention, or make me believe that the nonsense is real.

So what alternative do you suggest as explanation for our existence , if not a intelligent designer, which is far superior to us in power and intelligence ?

Beau Tochs
Massive Member

Joined: 14 Jan 2007
Posts: 3687
Location: Virginia US

Posted: Thu Jul 15, 2010 12:00 am Post subject: Re: Question for Theists.

angelobrazil wrote:

So what alternative do you suggest as explanation for our existence , if not a intelligent designer, which is far superior to us in power and intelligence ?

Is an "intelligent designer" the only idea you're able to accept? Where is your proof that such a designer exists? When I see proof for an all-powerful entity, I'll start believing that. But he'll have to talk to me directly, and not write things down using ancient ghost writers who had sheep shit between their toes and who didn't speak my language.

Right now, I think the explanations modern science is trying to provide make much more sense than having "faith" in superstitious nonsense.

angelobrazil
Mass Debater

Joined: 13 Nov 2007
Posts: 194

Posted: Thu Jul 15, 2010 1:21 am Post subject: Re: Question for Theists.

Beau Tochs wrote:

Is an "intelligent designer" the only idea you're able to accept?

Its the most rational one, in my view.

Beau Tochs wrote:

Where is your proof that such a designer exists?

I think the right question should be : what is the best explanation for our existence ?

- for me, its God.

Quote:

When I see proof for an all-powerful entity, I'll start believing that.

In this case, you will never believe. But i think the creator was quit smart in the sense, that
he gave enough shadow to the ones, that would not want to believe, and so not recognize through creation the existence of God. On the other hand, the ones with a open heart, he gave enough light, so that they could through creation recognize that there must be a creator.

As a example, i can present you six reasons, why i believe God exists:

http://www.everystudent.com/features/isthere.html

Quote:

Right now, I think the explanations modern science is trying to provide make much more sense than having "faith" in superstitious nonsense.

Guess what ? modern science has discovered many things, that let deduce rationally, that God, or a intelligent designer, or a creator, makes much more sense, than atheism.

Namely to mention a few :

1. The creation of the universe. It had a beginning, with the Big Bang. "Prior" the Big Bang, according to modern science, nothing existed. Neither time, so space and matter.
Everything that begins to exist, has a cause. The universe began to exist, and had therefore a cause.
2. The fine tuning of the universe, and our solar/earth system. There are up to date over 120 fine-tune constants known. These must be in a narrow, exact range, otherwise life on our planet could not exist.
The fine-tuning of our solar/earth system. It includes the distance from the sun to the earth, the tilt of the earth, the distance from the moon to the earth, the velocity of rotation of the earth, the atmoshpere, and many more. All of them must be in a specific range, otherwise life on earth would not exist.
3. Abiogenesis has not been a successful answer to explain the arising of the first cell, and first life on earth. Actually, it has proven, that a naturalistic explanation can be discarted.
4. DNA is a code. All known codes have a mind as origin. Therefore we can conclude that DNA was designed through a mind.

Last not least :

5. How do you explain evolution of sex ? the ability of flight ? consciousness ? the ability of speak ?
Einsteins gulf :

http://elshamah.heavenforum.com/darwin-s-theory-of-evolution-f3/how-to-explain-the-evolution-of-human-consciousness-and-self-awareness-t70.htm

On the one side, we find the real world of objects, events, and tensional spacetime relations. On the other side, we find fully abstract representations that contain information about the material world. That articulate information is abstracted first by our senses, secondarily by our bodily actions, and tertiarily by our ability to use one or more particular languages . Between the two realms we find what appears to be an uncrossable gulf.

6. How do you explain the objective existence of moral values ?

this is just to name a few. [/quote]

Jenni
Nietzschean Superwoman

Joined: 26 May 2008
Posts: 3975
Location: Mississippi

Posted: Thu Jul 15, 2010 1:29 am Post subject: Re: Question for Theists.

angelobrazil wrote:

So what alternative do you suggest as explanation for our existence

Just physics. It's just the way stuff is. Nothing isn't stable, so there had to be something. If anything the existence of something bigger than us (i.e. a creator) would better be shown by our absence, not our presence, here.

angelobrazil
Mass Debater

Joined: 13 Nov 2007
Posts: 194

Posted: Thu Jul 15, 2010 1:52 am Post subject: Re: Question for Theists.

Jenni wrote:

Just physics. It's just the way stuff is. Nothing isn't stable,.

When i read something like this, the light of my BS meter turns on.

Nothing is the absence of any thing. nothing has no properties, so how could it be unstable ?

Jenni
Nietzschean Superwoman

Joined: 26 May 2008
Posts: 3975
Location: Mississippi

Posted: Thu Jul 15, 2010 2:27 am Post subject: Re: Question for Theists.

angelobrazil wrote:

Jenni wrote:

Just physics. It's just the way stuff is. Nothing isn't stable,.

When i read something like this, the light of my BS meter turns on.

Then read some physics. What I just said there comes straight from a Nobel winning physicist. His name is Frank Wilczek and if you wish to argue his theory makes no sense why don't you read some of his material first? Or maybe you have since you seem to have an opinion on it, in which case do tell. Here is the piece I am specifically quoting from although there is plenty of his work available for public consumption.

And yet, ironically your BS meter doesn't go off over zombie stories. Huh. I think I'd have my meter checked if it were me. But that's just me.

PS. there are no objective moral values to explain the existence of.

angelobrazil
Mass Debater

Joined: 13 Nov 2007
Posts: 194

Posted: Thu Jul 15, 2010 2:51 am Post subject: Re: Question for Theists.

Jenni wrote:

angelobrazil wrote:

Jenni wrote:

Just physics. It's just the way stuff is. Nothing isn't stable,.

When i read something like this, the light of my BS meter turns on.

I know the argument of quantum fluctuations. It doesnt convince me.

http://elshamah.heavenforum.com/astronomy-cosmology-and-god-f15/quantum-fluctuations-t65.htm

Quantum theory ... holds that a vacuum ... is subject to quantum uncertainties. This means that things can materialize out of the vacuum, although they tend to vanish back into it quickly... . Theoretically, anything-a dog, a house, a planet-can pop into existence by means of this quantum quirk, which physicists call a vacuum fluctuation. Probability, however, dictates that pairs of subatomic particles ... are by far the most likely creations and that they will last extremely briefly.... The spontaneous, persistent creation of something even as large as a molecule is profoundly unlikely. Nevertheless, in 1973 an assistant professor at Columbia University named Edward Tryon suggested that the entire universe might have come into existence this way.... The whole universe may be, to use [MIT physicist Alan] Guth's phrase, "a free lunch."20
I closed the magazine and tossed it on Craig's desk. "Maybe Tryon was right when he said, `I offer the modest proposal that our universe is simply one of those things which happen from time to time.' “
Craig was listening intently. "Okay, that's a good question," he replied. "These subatomic particles the article talks about are called `virtual particles.' They are theoretical entities, and it's not even clear that they actually exist as opposed to being merely theoretical constructs.
"However, there's a much more important point to be made about this. You see, these particles, if they are real, do not come out of nothing. The quantum vacuum is not what most people envision when they think of a vacuum-that is, absolutely nothing. On the contrary, it's a sea of fluctuating energy, an arena of violent activity that has a rich physical structure and can be described by physical laws. These particles are thought to originate by fluctuations of the energy in the vacuum.
"So it's not an example of something coming into being out of nothing, or something coming into being without a cause. The quantum vacuum and the energy locked up in the vacuum are the cause of these particles. And then we have to ask, well, what is the origin of the whole quantum vacuum itself? Where does it come from?"
He let that question linger before continuing. "You've simply pushed back the issue of creation. Now you've got to account for how this very active ocean of fluctuating energy came into being. Do you see what I'm saying? If quantum physical laws operate within the domain described by quantum physics, you can't legitimately use quantum physics to explain the origin of that domain itself. You need something transcendent that's beyond that domain in order to explain how the entire domain came into being. Suddenly, we're back to the origins question."

Display posts from previous:

	Debate Unlimited Forum Index -> Atheism	All times are GMT Goto page 1, 2, 3 ... 14, 15, 16 Next
Page 1 of 16

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum