Prove there's a god.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#622639 May 9, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
I hate no one.
Try again.
Funny, you said that "homosexuals are forcing ..." you to "accept" them, that's nothing but a catch phrase from many hate speeches, and ignores all the facts and logic. Thus, if it's not hate, you are really stupid.

“I speak my mind”

Since: Sep 10

It hurts to bite my tongue

#622640 May 9, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>Oh my goodness. For the fiftieth time, yes, I agree, their faith does not matter *until they allow it to matter.* Yes, if they follow the scientific method, their faith is not important. That's the point - apologists do not follow the scientific method. They start with a conclusion first. That's not how it's done. If their conclusion is "goddidit" and they search for evidence to support this claim while ignoring contradictory evidence, their faith informed their science, and they are not scientists.
Again, would you value the "research" of a devout muslim regarding the divinity of jesus? Would it mean anything to you, no matter how well he "followed" the scientific method? His research doesn't matter if it is in service of a foregone conclusion. Same with "creation scientists."
That's your opinion! Prove they conduct their science with a conclusion at the forefront. Unless they say they did...you don't get to decide that.

On Muslims, yes, I would value their opinion. why do think I read through all this foolishness. Outside of the shallow-minded posters...I've learned a great deal. I'm very objective and welcome information from people who believe differently than I do. Only idiots refuse to hear information that doesn't support their own opinion.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#622641 May 9, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
No dude, the reverse *example* is.
<quoted text>
An I out there campaigning to stop a gay marriage? No.
Am I out there trying to teach your kids that God is good and atheists are evil and stupid? No.
Am I out there plastering banners on buses saying "There probably is a God"? No.
Am I out there trying to remove your atheist symbols from graveyards? No.
Am I out there telling your daughter she cannot have an abortion? No.
What the F_CK are you talking about?!??!
Your words prior to this say otherwise.
Bartholomew Oglethorpe

United States

#622642 May 9, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
So you think God is a piece of cardboard popping out of a book?
Dude....
Ok here, lets teach little baby kids about mom & mom. Because you think it's healthy and natural...
http://www.amazon.com/Mom-Mum-are-Getting-Mar...
"This is a wonderful book that teaches young kids the alphabet while incorporating gay and lesbian tendencies."
WTF?
Two nurturing parents is superior to suicide by centurion and global genocide.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#622643 May 9, 2013
timn17 wrote:
They start with the premise the god made everything, and they look for evidence to support it. That's backwards.
timn17 wrote:
Premise is not a strong enough word. Should be conclusion. Also of note, they ignore all evidence that contradicts their conclusion.
Ooooooh! A timn argument.

My money's on timn...
Bartholomew Oglethorpe

United States

#622644 May 9, 2013
Truth signed in wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't prove anything....
True. Still waiting for proof of a specific god. You did confirm that presuppositional apologetics are not science.

“I speak my mind”

Since: Sep 10

It hurts to bite my tongue

#622645 May 9, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Quick question: What data and for what?
Any scientific data...if an expert scientist uses the scientific method for any research...it doesn't matter what their personal beliefs are...they are still scientists.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#622646 May 9, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>I don't know if you are stupid, or if you do this on purpose.
This is what I don't understand about you freethinkers, you freethought your way to:

"Take a quick stroll through a lunatic asylum.

Every single one of 'em is just as convinced as you are."

...and when asked to provide evidence for your assertion, you call me stupid.

O_o

How is it that you've come to know what "Every single one of 'em" is convinced of?

Why is it that when a theist makes a claim - EVIDENCE IS NEEDED!

But when you freethinking atheists make a claim, it's just supposed to be accepted as fact?

So either you're making shit up and know it.

OR

You know what you're talking about and can provide informed evidence.

Which is it?

“I speak my mind”

Since: Sep 10

It hurts to bite my tongue

#622647 May 9, 2013
Bartholomew Oglethorpe wrote:
<quoted text>Where is the scientific data for supernatural entities. I'll wait.
spirituality and science don't mix. There will never be scientific proof of God.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#622648 May 9, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>Therefore, jesus.
So you can't answer, either?

Funny how nobody can answer what Koder called "basic biology".

Imagine that.

“Truth is beyond wavelength ”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#622649 May 9, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>"Intentionally " being the operative word here. Maybe your position is intentionally vague, and maybe you intentionally refine it to the point of absurdity (telling me I have to go back to the dawn of consciousness), but I still don't whimper and call names like a child when responding to you.
There you go misrepresenting me again. Whatever. So, I suppose it's ok to just skip the part where 'molecules became aware of themselves all of a sudden' and just assume that consciousness is caused by molecules?

What causes a molecule? Some particles? What causes particles? Some energy? What causes energy? What *is* energy? I'll tell ya. It's *something* that is a property of motion. What is 'motion'? That's real specific, huh? Yea we can tell a lot from that, huh?

Yea, unconscious molecules can become aware of themselves. You're a crackpot.
Bartholomew Oglethorpe

United States

#622650 May 9, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
In God We (Christians) Trust.
Don't like it? Don't use cash.
Render unto Ceaser what is Ceaser's. You Allah Athiests are so insecure you had to hijack the cash against the rules of your immoral guidebook. Weird.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#622651 May 9, 2013
Truth signed in wrote:
<quoted text>
It would be impossible for you or I to know if they had a preconceived agenda. I know many Christians who believe God used evolution as a means of creation. I'm not entirely against the idea myself. AGAIN...scientific data presented as the result of using the scientific method is science...regardless of what the scientist believes and regardless of whether it falls in line with what you or I believe. It may not be factual and may later be disproven..but that doesn't mean the researcher isn't a scientist. You can't make that determination...only the scientist can.
Absolutely not impossible. If a scientist is trying to prove that god exists by "disproving" good science, they have an agenda. If they start with a conclusion, they are not a scientist. The scientific method does not start with a conclusion. Why do you think "intelligent design" is not considered science?
Bartholomew Oglethorpe

United States

#622652 May 9, 2013
Truth signed in wrote:
<quoted text>
Any scientific data...if an expert scientist uses the scientific method for any research...it doesn't matter what their personal beliefs are...they are still scientists.
Right. But you need to look up the word presuppositional. And, point to the scientific evidence for supernatural entities. When you do, go take the JREF Million Dollar Challenge. I'll wait.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#622653 May 9, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
No dude, the reverse *example* is.
<quoted text>
An I out there campaigning to stop a gay marriage? No.
Am I out there trying to teach your kids that God is good and atheists are evil and stupid? No.
Am I out there plastering banners on buses saying "There probably is a God"? No.
Am I out there trying to remove your atheist symbols from graveyards? No.
Am I out there telling your daughter she cannot have an abortion? No.
What the F_CK are you talking about?!??!
I forgot. You christians are sooo persecuted. Sorry for opening that wound back up.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#622654 May 9, 2013
Bartholomew Oglethorpe wrote:
<quoted text>Those two things are not analogous. You are guilty of an equivocation fallacy. Studies have shown that the more virulent the anti-homosexual, the more likely the individual is repressing strong homosexual feelings. No such studies exist for beliefs. Sexual desires and beliefs are not analogous. Nice try, though.
Oh.

Because Bart says so?

HA HA !!!

It don't work that way, dude.

Just because a person talks about homosexuality does not imply that they're homosexual - no more than a person talking about anti-theism makes them a theist.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#622655 May 9, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
No, but some of your "brothers in anti Christ" are trying to remove crosses and force homosexuality down my kid's throats.
Is that any better?
No one is "forcing" homosexuality down your kid's throats. That's like saying that when we gave black people equal rights back in the day, we were "forcing blackness" down the throats of all non blacks.

The cross thing is up for courts to decide. If it violates the law, it should go. If it doesn't, I don't care.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#622656 May 9, 2013
Bartholomew Oglethorpe wrote:
<quoted text>Once again, beliefs and desires are not analogous. You are smart enough to know this but duplicitous enough to pretend not to.
Sure they are, it's called folk philosophy.

Just because Bart says something is true does not mean it is...

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#622657 May 9, 2013
Truth signed in wrote:
<quoted text>
That's your opinion! Prove they conduct their science with a conclusion at the forefront. Unless they say they did...you don't get to decide that.
On Muslims, yes, I would value their opinion. why do think I read through all this foolishness. Outside of the shallow-minded posters...I've learned a great deal. I'm very objective and welcome information from people who believe differently than I do. Only idiots refuse to hear information that doesn't support their own opinion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C reation_science

The whole point of creation science is to prove the bible is correct and that god made everything. This means they start with a conclusion.

This isn't about just conversing with people who believe differently than you. My question was, specifically, would you value the research of a muslim on the specific question of jesus's divinity. His conclusion is set in stone from the beginning, so I have no clue why you would value his "research."

“Truth is beyond wavelength ”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#622658 May 9, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>I did not say it possibly can't, I have no way of knowing that, I am only pointing out the flaw in *your* logic. You suggested that we don't remember our sense of being while asleep simply because we can't record it, and I showed you that a sense of being can persist without a working hippocampus. That's it. So if our sense of being does seem to disappear while we sleep, and we clearly do have the ability to form memories (in the form of dreams), why should our sense of being only appear in short, garbled spurts throughout the night? A man without a hippocampus can self report on his sense of being, but ours just goes away for 8 hrs a night? Shouldn't we pop into our dreams fully lucid?
What does an inert hippocampus have to do with the possibility that the sense of being can always exist? If molecules are aware of themselves then why would they turn off? How can they turn it off? That's why I'm saying it is only our memory (recording device) that gets turned off.

You are assuming that our sense of being is part of our sensory faculties. Like, how can you assume that our sense of being only appears in spurts? You would have to know that our sense of being is no longer present when we 'sleep without dreaming', and you admitted you can't know that.

A dream is an 'event'. Therefore a memory of it is formed. The sense of being may not be an 'event' and therefore does not create a memory and therefore we may have it while we sleep without dreaming. Your hippocampus BS doesn't make any sense.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 50 min Clearwater 87,840
Where can i buy ecstasy in dundee?? ASAP (Feb '13) 1 hr DundeeDank 2
Profitional massage for girl in Sohar (oman) (Jan '15) 2 hr Funny life 33
The Future of Politics in America 2 hr Scaritual 134
Secular Humanism VS Christianity 2 hr Scaritual 12
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 3 hr AussieBobby 284,458
Queen Cleopatra was clearly Black. White people... (Aug '10) 3 hr gundee123 1,212
Christians cannot debate with ATHEISTS 7 hr lightbeamrider 437
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 8 hr kent 665,093
More from around the web