- This topic is empty.
- Posts
You could also take on a debate where you defend the bible against accusations that it advocates for witchcraft.
Stuart
Quote (t8 @ Nov. 14 2012,19:39) Quote (TimothyVI @ Nov. 14 2012,00:11) Quote (t8 @ Nov. 13 2012,20:32) See, now you can understand how foolish you look to some because you believe it is all just magic. No explanation needed.
See, now you can understand how foolish you look to some because you believe that God came about by just magic. No explanation needed.Tim
Ahh but Tim, you are lacking because something has to be eternal in order for anything to exist. I say it is a consciousness, what do you say it is.I would really love to here what you say it is, so I want to challenge you to a debate on this very subject.
The subject is, “How did the universe come to exist”.
I will obviously argue that a creator did it and you will argue against a creator and support your view with other possible options.
Is this a yes?
Or no because you are not brave enough to debate in public this subject to the depth it deserves.
Hi T8,
I merely pointed out that your accusation works both ways.
Sorry that you were unable to see that.If as you say, something had to be eternal in order for anything to exist, then it could just as easily have been that the universe was eternal in another form.
There is nothing to debate because both options are merely speculations on our parts. You can't prove it was God, and I can't prove that it always existed.
Tim
Glad to here that you admit that you can't disprove the existence of God.
However, I would like to press this issue further because I have much to debate regarding the eternal universe or eternal something that is the universe at the moment which I take it that you will be arguing for.This could be the subject of our debate to differentiate with Stu's debate.
Quote (t8 @ Nov. 15 2012,07:34) Glad to here that you admit that you can't disprove the existence of God.
However, I would like to press this issue further because I have much to debate regarding the eternal universe or eternal something that is the universe at the moment which I take it that you will be arguing for.This could be the subject of our debate to differentiate with Stu's debate.
I really feel like it isn't anyone's job to disprove the existence of God.It seems that it should be more upon someone who makes a claim to prove their claim.
Proving that God could exist is different than proving that he doesn't exist.
We really don't know a lot a out the universe. The universe we see might just be part of, a very small part of the Universe. Or, put another way, our universe might be one univers among a multiverse. What was before the big boom, are just guesses.
Saying that there must have been someone or something eternal to cause the big kaboom is hard to prove. Maybe the universe has gone through an infinity of big bangs and crunches, with certain forces being responsible. But then, you ask: who created these forces? And then, the other person will nquestioningly ask: who created God? Then you say: no one. Then they say: then no one created these forces either.
I don't think there is any way at the present to logically prove that there MUST be a creator, without creating logical inconsistencies.
Quote (david @ Nov. 15 2012,12:33) I really feel like it isn't anyone's job to disprove the existence of God. It seems that it should be more upon someone who makes a claim to prove their claim.
Incorrect david.Because saying there is no God is also saying that everything came from nothing, or that something has always existed, but that something is not God. I would certainly like to see the proof or at least some logic as to why.
Further, when a person confidently makes a claim that there is no God, or if they ridicule others for believing in God, then I think such people should front up their evidence so that they or myself can learn something.
And we already know that either they have nothing but bias, hate, ridicule, or they actually have something to base their belief which I think would be interesting to know about. It would be advantageous to at least one of the persons whichever way this goes.
Further, if a renown scientist believed or made a claim that there was no life on any other planet outside Earth, I am sure that other scientists would want to see some proof or logical thinking as to why they make that claim. Just because it is a negative claim doesn't exempt them from saying why. And you can turn any negative claim into a positive one. In this case, you say, prove why Earth is the only place to have life.
I believe your statement is a typical Atheist cop-out and find it weird that you think this behaviour is okay. Do you not care about people enough to challenge them david. Do you think we should let people be, even if they are heading for a cliff.
Quote (david @ Nov. 15 2012,12:33) I don't think there is any way at the present to logically prove that there MUST be a creator, without creating logical inconsistencies.
Hey what happened to david. Put him back okay.To whoever wrote this: Scripture strongly disagrees with your view here.
It says that the fool believes there is no God. It says that because of the obviousness of this conclusion. It talks about the universe/heavens themselves bearing witness to the creator and that men are without excuse if they do not believe in God.
Maybe your bible doesn't say that?
Quote (t8 @ Nov. 15 2012,19:39) Quote (david @ Nov. 15 2012,12:33) I really feel like it isn't anyone's job to disprove the existence of God. It seems that it should be more upon someone who makes a claim to prove their claim.
Incorrect david.
I think you will find he is right.Maybe it will take “debating” for you to learn how this works.
Stuart
Quote (t8 @ Nov. 15 2012,19:43) Quote (david @ Nov. 15 2012,12:33) I don't think there is any way at the present to logically prove that there MUST be a creator, without creating logical inconsistencies.
Hey what happened to david. Put him back okay.To whoever wrote this: Scripture strongly disagrees with your view here.
It says that the fool believes there is no God. It says that because of the obviousness of this conclusion. It talks about the universe/heavens themselves bearing witness to the creator and that men are without excuse if they do not believe in God.
Maybe your bible doesn't say that?
Does your bible use the word “prove”?Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Nov. 15 2012,20:46)
Does your bible use the word “prove”?Stuart
Hi Stuart, Yes it does:“Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.” (1Thess.5:21)
That is why I have been attempting to “Prove” to you that JEHOVAH GOD does indeed exist! (Link)
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgQuote (t8 @ Nov. 13 2012,20:32) Quote (Stu @ Nov. 11 2012,22:04) Quote (t8 @ Nov. 11 2012,18:48) God must exist because if he didn't, you wouldn't exist.
You are begging the question of the dependence of humans on gods.What was that about needing more intelligent atheists?
How about having one theist who has a basic grasp of valid logic?
Stuart
I will explain.If there is no eternal creator, and you agree that it is impossible for everything to originally come from nothing, then you have to explain how you got here. You are alive, and can create, yet somehow the original thing has none of these qualities.
See, now you can understand how foolish you look to some because you believe it is all just magic. No explanation needed.
Sometimes, what a person assumes is “nothing” is actually not nothing.Speaking of magic, a magician can make something appear from “nowhere” or “out of nothing.”
It only appears this at because the average person is lacking information, lacking scientific now ledge, lacking psychological ne'er standing. Yet, to the person viewing it, they may say: “he is using the power of demons, because I don't know how else that could possibly happen” (argumentum ad IGNORANTIAM).
Not understanding the “nothing” or perhaps “not nothing” that existed before the big boom, we can't just insert whatever explanation we want and say its logical.
We don't actually know that absolutely nothing existed before. We only now that our entire Universe (everything we know) didn't exist before.
Quote (t8 @ Nov. 15 2012,19:39) Quote (david @ Nov. 15 2012,12:33) I really feel like it isn't anyone's job to disprove the existence of God. It seems that it should be more upon someone who makes a claim to prove their claim.
Incorrect david.Because saying there is no God is also saying that everything came from nothing, or that something has always existed, but that something is not God. I would certainly like to see the proof or at least some logic as to why.
Further, when a person confidently makes a claim that there is no God, or if they ridicule others for believing in God, then I think such people should front up their evidence so that they or myself can learn something.
And we already know that either they have nothing but bias, hate, ridicule, or they actually have something to base their belief which I think would be interesting to know about. It would be advantageous to at least one of the persons whichever way this goes.
Further, if a renown scientist believed or made a claim that there was no life on any other planet outside Earth, I am sure that other scientists would want to see some proof or logical thinking as to why they make that claim. Just because it is a negative claim doesn't exempt them from saying why. And you can turn any negative claim into a positive one. In this case, you say, prove why Earth is the only place to have life.
I believe your statement is a typical Atheist cop-out and find it weird that you think this behaviour is okay. Do you not care about people enough to challenge them david. Do you think we should let people be, even if they are heading for a cliff.
“Because saying there is no God is also saying that everything came from nothing,”Not really. If someone says “God has always existed” why can't the other side say: “stuff has always existed.”
If you then say: why would anything exist when there could just as easily be nothing? The other side would say: why does God exist when it seems easier for nothing to exist?
The person making the claim, ESPECIALLY if it is an extraordinary claim, is the one that must provide the evidence. (This is how it always works on earth for logical people)
Your idea of someone say there is no god being the equivalent to saying that everything came from nothing is false.
If we are going to say that everything demands a creator, then who created God? So, it's clear that everything does not absolutely demand a creator. (For either god existed without a creator or the universe does).
Saying there is no god does not automatically mean saying that everything came from nothing. Maybe it always was. Or maybe god always was. One of them always was. And therefore did not have to “come” from anything.
Quote (t8 @ Nov. 15 2012,19:43) Quote (david @ Nov. 15 2012,12:33) I don't think there is any way at the present to logically prove that there MUST be a creator, without creating logical inconsistencies.
Hey what happened to david. Put him back okay.To whoever wrote this: Scripture strongly disagrees with your view here.
It says that the fool believes there is no God. It says that because of the obviousness of this conclusion. It talks about the universe/heavens themselves bearing witness to the creator and that men are without excuse if they do not believe in God.
Maybe your bible doesn't say that?
No. My bible says those things. Every house is constructed by someone…(I like to argue. I'm probably not who you think I am. Never was).
I was recently actually thinking about what you wrote: “the obviousness of this conclusion” that God exists. But, to so many, it of course isn't obvious. To people born in china, it isn't obvious at all, for example.
Something that someone has been taught as a child is obvious to them, because its ingrained into their brain. It's just obvious. But, to someone born in china, it's obvious that green tea tastes good. It's just obvious. (I find its an aquired taste)
Yes, the heavens bear witness.
As our understanding of the universe changes, our understanding of these verses change. When it was obvious that we were the Center of the universe, then this made it even more obvious that the heavens pointed to gods existence.
Verse
Universe.
Hmmmm.David
Quote Something that someone has been taught as a child is obvious to them, because its ingrained into their brain. It's just obvious. But, to someone born in china, it's obvious that green tea tastes good. It's just obvious. (I find its an aquired taste) it does not matter were you are born, it is what in your heart you acknowledges that their his a God, God sees in the heart of men ,their his a combination of things in your heart that take you to God ,just as it is that it is an combination of things that take you away from God ,this is why we have to resist until the end .we do not need an aquired knowledge to find God ,but we need to aquire knowledge of the true God ,
“God is not partial, but in every nation” the man that…something something….is acceptable to him.
So, it appears that china and India for example are mostly made up of people with bad hearts. My question is: why?
Quote (Ed J @ Nov. 15 2012,22:14) Quote (Stu @ Nov. 15 2012,20:46)
Does your bible use the word “prove”?Stuart
Hi Stuart, Yes it does:“Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.” (1Thess.5:21)
That is why I have been attempting to “Prove” to you that JEHOVAH GOD does indeed exist!
And failing.Stuart
Quote (charity @ Nov. 16 2012,20:08) hmmm, Its As if God created Space an Time as storage for the massive ego of man.
Hi Charity,
Nice to hear from you.God didn't make the universe big enough for the ego of man, did he?
To fulfill the ego of man he had to have God actually kill himself for them.
Tim
Quote (TimothyVI @ Nov. 16 2012,20:38) Quote (charity @ Nov. 16 2012,20:08) hmmm, Its As if God created Space an Time as storage for the massive ego of man.
Hi Charity,
Nice to hear from you.God didn't make the universe big enough for the ego of man, did he?
To fulfill the ego of man he had to have God actually kill himself for them.
Tim
I like your inflationary ego model of cosmology.In the manner of Hubble, are you postulating that the most religious humans have the egos that are expanding the fastest?
Stuart
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
