Belief in existence of God scientific. Denial - unscientific

[theStudent]

The length of the thread, in the link below, is largely due to repeated questions.on the contained information. The following is open for debate.
Belief in the existence of God is scientific. Denial - unscientific.

For those who disagree with the above, please state why, and/or provide evidence for the following:

• God does not exist.
• God exists only in the mind of the believer.
• Miracles do not happen.
• The Bible is a book of myths.

[Divine Insight]

My argument holds more "water" than you can imagine.

Everything you say to support it is false and illogical.

First, I am saying that you cannot apply mathematics to the situation of God and the Bible. Otherwise your logic doesn't stand. The numbers show that.

I'm not applying mathematics to the situation of a God. All I have done is demonstrate how logic itself can be used to prove a negative via proof by contradiction. The mathematical example I gave was just an example of logic in action. I in no way applied mathematics to the situation of a God. Clearly you are not understanding the depth of the situation here.

Secondly, the law of contradiction is the second law of thought - law of non-contradiction which says, A cannot be, and yet not be. If something exists, it can't not exist.
So I don't see how you arrive at A not existing with you personal idea.

What you have just said here is absolutely meaningless. You haven't show that your A (i.e. your God) exists, therefore you can't conclude that your God cannot exist.

You aren't even remotely using logic. To the contrary you are demonstrating a total inability to even understand logic.

Thirdly, the fact that so many people believe in a god, wheter it be Allah, Buddha, or who, suggests that a god/gods must exist.

Sorry, but the idea that many people believe in something does not suggest that it must be true. Many people believed in many false things throughout history that have since been shown to be false.

So once again you are saying extremely illogical things and proclaiming them to be logical thus proving that you don't understand logic at all.

Hence, according to the first law of thought - the law of identity - A is A, and the third law of thought - the law of excluded middle says, A must either be, or not be, the conclusion must be God exists.

And your reasoning here would be sufficient for any professor of logic to flunk you from their logic class. You don't seem to realize that your faulty argument above could apply to anything. Just replace the term "God" with the term "Zeus" and you have made an argument that Zeus must exist.

Or even insert "The Flying Spaghetti Monster, that would work equally well. The fallacy of your so-called logic is crystal clear.

Last but not least, you are again mistaken, because Christians use the most logic, in fact the only logical, and sensible conclusion.
They logically and sensibly reason:
When crossing a barren desert, if you came to a beautiful house, well equipped in every way and stocked with food, would you believe that it got there by some chance explosion?
Of course not! You would realize that someone with considerable wisdom built it.

And now all you have done is expose your complete ignorance of evolution and how the natural processes of the universe work. If there were a way for houses stocked with food to naturally evolve then you wouldn't be surprised to find one. But clearly houses don't evolve. So you analogy is grossly at fault. So faulty that one could even suggest that it is less than an honest analogy. The only salvation for honesty in this scenario would be to appeal to absolute ignorance of how the natural laws and processes of the universe actually work.

Well, scientists have not found life on any of the planets of our solar system except the earth; available evidence indicates that the others are barren.
Concerning planet earth, the book The Earth says,

the wonder of the universe, a unique sphere.

(New York, 1963, Arthur Beiser, p. 10)
It is at just the right distance from the sun for human life, and it moves at just the right speed to be held in orbit.
The atmosphere, of a kind found only around the earth, is made up of just the right proportion of gases to sustain life.
Marvelously, light from the sun, carbon dioxide from the air, and water and minerals from fertile soil combine to produce food for earth’s inhabitants.

Your augment here is a "God of the Gaps" argument. We don't even yet know for sure whether other life will be found in our very own solar system. We can't even rule it out on Mars yet. And even if we don't find life on other planets in our solar system that is no reason to jump to a conclusion that some magical being had to have purposefully created life on earth anyway. So your argument doesn't support the conclusion that you are demanding in any case.

Again, bad logical reasoning.

Did it all come about as a result of some uncontrolled explosion in space?
Science News admits:

It seems as if such particular and precise conditions could hardly have arisen at random.

(August 24 and 31, 1974, p. 124)
The logic presented in the Bible is reasonable.

Of course, every house is constructed by someone, but he that constructed all things is God.

Someone with considerable wisdom was responsible for the livable planet.

You are jumping to unwarranted conclusions. Just because something may not have been "random" doesn't automatically imply that it had to have been consciously thought out by a sentient being. So your conclusion is unwarranted.

Logically, the evidence lends to the fact that God exists.
So it would seem, to the contrary, your argument is an empty well.

Even if a supreme being does exist there is no good reason to believe that it would be an immature self-glorifying egotist as the Bible describes. Why should supreme being be jealous, wrathful, ignorant, and have all manner of faulty personally traits that we consider to be unpleasant even in humans?

Furthermore, the Bible has passed the test of Primary and Secondary Source Verification.
Factual evidence that God exists.

The Bible describes a God who is extremely selfish, totally self-centered, jealous, egoistical, vengeful, even hateful.

There is absolutely no rational reason to believe that even if a supreme being exists that it would be anything at all like the fictitious man-made God of ancient barbaric Hebrew folklore.

So once again, your ideas of "logical thinking" are not even remotely logical.

If there exists an all-intelligent supreme being the Biblical account of God would be the very first thing we could easily rule out.

[Clownboat]

[Replying to post 134 by Clownboat]

Word, .. He created the universe from His Word, .. that's what I see and understand from the Bible.

Readers, does it make any sense to claim that a god concept can create universes with words, but when it comes to killing off an entire planet (save 8) for example, he uses a flood for which there is no evidence for?

Universes with words, but gotta get rid of the sin from Adam and Eve, gotta have me some blood shed.

Well, I think that TECHNICALLY, when we drown, there isn't necessarily any bloodshed.

Therefore, God exists.

I know you understood what was typed, so this is not leveled at you.
To clarify, the first scenario is the Noah's flood scenario. No bloodshed.

The 2nd I referenced is in regards to the death of a demigod on a wooden stake. That is where the bloodshed came into the equation.

Therefore, gods don't exist?

[Clownboat]

[Replying to post 120 by help3434]

Thank you.

My point had to do with what was required to be considered a Christian in the Bible, as outlined by Christ.
It was through Jesus that Christianity was formed, whether he was on earth or heaven.
Jesus taught the way that led to Christianity, and it was through him that Christianity was formed, as the scripture you quoted reveals..
So Jesus was very much involved in the Christianity of the Bible.

You seems so sure of yourself, which is odd to me.
I'm curious, but can you point to any evidence outside of your religious promotional material that evidences that Jesus was a real living person at one time?

I'm not saying that Jesus did not exist. IMO, the stories are told based off of a real person most likely. I'm just wondering if you even knew that there is no evidence for a Jesus character outside of your promotional material. The very material that you would be using to make claims that a Jesus guy was involved in the Christian religion.

Also, perhaps you do have something outside of the material that promotes said religion. If so, I would like to examine it.

[theStudent]

[Replying to post 121 by benchwarmer]

This sounds like "Do as I say, not as I do".

It also sounds like you are admitting that God is breaking His own rule, but since He is the 'life giver' He is free to be a 'life taker' as well. Convenient.

In what way does it sound like "Do as I say, not as I do"?
In what way does it sound like I am admitting that God is breaking His own rule?

]Yes I disagree. Love and patience would be preserving all who did not deserve 'just punishment'. Not simply wiping everyone out. Surely an all powerful God can come up with a better solution (and a more believable one at that).To be clear I don't believe the story at all, but I was simply arguing based on what is written in the Bible. You asked for examples where Gods rules are broken by God. I gave them. You are now 'apologizing' to try and explain what's plainly written doesn't mean what it says, it means what you think it means.

He did not wipe everyone out.
Tell me your alternative solution.
I could also argue that you are just seeking to find a fault to justify a turning away benchwarmer. In the same way that people try to find fault with righteous people in order to justify their immoral lifestyle.

Your belief is noted. I'm simply pointing to what's written in the book and showing that it's open to interpretation. It's hardly clear.

Our words are open do inerpretation. So what?
Does it mean our words are not what we say, or mean?

I called it that because that is the 'usual' title of that commandment. I'm happy to concede that I named my example incorrectly and let the scripture passages stand on their own conflicting each other.

I think you missed my point. Does God not own everything according to your belief? If so, how can God's chosen people ever steal?

I don't think there is anything hard about understanding what stealing is.
Stealing is taking withut permission, what does not belong to you, but belongs to someone else.

As far as evicting, how was that accomplished? Did they receive letters saying their rent was past due and they need to move out? I'm pretty sure some 'justified killing' was involved in the 'eviction' thereby actually breaking two laws at once. The hole just gets deeper...

What are you talkng about?
Who evicted whom?
I used an example of a landlord to make the point that as owner, the landlord decides who occupy his property.
Concerning God, he has that same right, and regarding the inhabitants of the land, God said he was going to clense the land not only of those engaging in unclean practices, but also those opposed to his people.
He also promised his people the land that belonged to their forefathers - Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
I believe you know these things are in the Bible.

Besides, if there are so many immoral things that God did, as you claim you can show, why not bring the strongest one.
If I seem unreasonable, after you try to prove your argument is sound.
Write me off as being just plain stubborn.
How does that sound?

It sound a fair challenge to me.

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 142 by Clownboat]

Well, I think that TECHNICALLY, when we drown, there isn't necessarily any bloodshed.

Therefore, God exists.

To clarify, the first scenario is the Noah's flood scenario. No bloodshed.

The 2nd I referenced is in regards to the death of a demigod on a wooden stake. That is where the bloodshed came into the equation.

Therefore, gods don't exist?

Yep, you proved it !

Now, tell that to theStudent, and let's move on.

[theStudent]

[Replying to post 122 by arian]

As I always say, "The proof is in the pudding."
Jesus said, "Wisdm is proved righteous, by all its children."
So I say, give them the time they need.
If it's even the next kazillion years, just give them that time to unravel that 75% of unknown.

I mean, who knows what they will discover.
As we have been seeing, the universe is full of surprises.

[theStudent]

[Replying to post 124 by arian]

This is the problem when people don't know God, any created thing can become their god and that's where distrust of God comes in.

When I read this, the first thought that came to my mind was Romans 1:20-23
But it does highlight the truthfulness of verse 19.

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 144 by theStudent]

I used an example of a landlord to make the point that as owner, the landlord decides who occupy his property.
Concerning God, he has that same right, and regarding the inhabitants of the land, God said he was going to clense the land not only of those engaging in unclean practices, but also those opposed to his people.
He also promised his people the land that belonged to their forefathers - Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

Do landlords generally have the right to kill people who are on their property?

Let's say that in real life, John Smith says to me "You can live in my country house a year from now". He promises to me. Great! I won't have to spend my time looking for a new place to live.
However, when I go to move in a year from now, I find out there's people already living there. I ask John Smith what gives. Didn't he protect his house, do anything at all to ensure no-one could break in?
"Oh they were already there long before I promised the place to you" he says.
Wait what?
"Oh, you still want the place? Here, take this gun. Kill them all. Man, woman and child. Show no mercy. I promised this house to you".

So ts, let me get this straight. The Canaanites were already living in the Promised Land when God made the promise. God did NOTHING to prevent the Canaanites from moving in, which would be a far more BENIGN solution than letting them move in and having them killed off later. When the chosen people moved in later, they were given carte blanche to kill the indigenous population.

Again, my views on religion are proven true. Any and all behaviours can be excused as long as someone like you says "God said so".

[Clownboat]

He did not wipe everyone out.
Tell me your alternative solution.

Assuming, like the Bible god, that I was powerless to stop humans from getting so bad, I would have made them all sterile except for Noah's family. One generation and the problem is solved. No need to murder all the kitties.

I could also argue that you are just seeking to find a fault to justify a turning away benchwarmer. In the same way that people try to find fault with righteous people in order to justify their immoral lifestyle.

This does not compute. What I see is good and bad people. However, non religious good people are good because it is the right thing to be. No immoral lifestyle needs to be justified.
Ironically, it is religious people that are good because they want some reward or they want to avoid their gods wrath. Would they even be moral if not for their god concept? Many here claim that they wouldn't be. 1213 says it is the only reason that he knows as to why murder is wrong.

Besides, if there are so many immoral things that God did, as you claim you can show, why not bring the strongest one.

Hmm, where to start.
Numbers 31:17 â–º
Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, [18] but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

Perhaps you thought it was just the Muslims that have this fixation on virgin girls?

Imagine for a moment that you were a shaman that had everyone believing in your ancestor god or what have you. You could claim that their ancestors want them to take the land that belongs to one of their neighbors.

Might be a tough sell perhaps, but what if you tell them that not only do your ancestor gods want you to take their land, but they also want you to take their virgins to be sex slaves? It's almost like awarding virgins for them in a heaven, but better because they get their virgins right after they finish murdering all the boys and non virgin girls.

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 124 by arian]

This is the problem when people don't know God, any created thing can become their god and that's where distrust of God comes in.

When I read this, the first thought that came to my mind was Romans 1:20-23
But it does highlight the truthfulness of verse 19.

What part of that is science?

It sounds like a sermon to me.