If God were real, you wouldn’t need a book

[IBDaMann]

Baptisted Catholic, made a Saint by Catholics, High Priest Melchizedek !

You don't even know what is wrong with what you just wrote.

Catholics assert that Mary's pregnancy with Jesus was miraculous, directly from God, etc. Because Mary was chosen by God for this role, Catholics assert that Mary is blessed and favored, that Mary has a special place in heaven, and that she should be treated with solemn respect.

There is no "perpetual virginity" in that narrative.

 

[IBDaMann]

Sure does.

Nope. Something tells me that you are about to make another ZenMode error.

If I claim that water is five parts hydrogen and 23 parts oxygen, science would prove me wrong.

You omitted crucial information.

Are you presuming the standard science standard model, about which you are simply mistaken ... or are you speaking in religious terms that were hijacked by your religion, e.g. global climate?

There are many claims made by religion that science proves wrong in a similar way.

Nope. We have to remember that you don't know what science is.

There is no plexiglass sphere surrounding the Earth that has windows or gates that open to let in the sky rain.

Your babbling pivot here is discussing empirical evidence and observation, not science. If only you were to learn what science is, you would greatly decrease your daily confusion load.

The earth is not 6,000 years old.

You don't know this. Nobody does.

The organs in a human body can't return to functionality after being deprived of oxygen and blood for 3 days.

Certainly not without a religious miracle.

 

[ZenMode]

Nope. Something tells me that you are about to make another ZenMode error.


You omitted crucial information.

No I didn't.

Are you presuming the standard science standard model, about which you are simply mistaken ...

No. There isn't a different science because you believe in a sky wizard.

or are you speaking in religious terms that were hijacked by your religion, e.g. global climate?

Again, the Bible makes claims that science proves to be wrong.

Nope. We have to remember that you don't know what science is.

Deflection.

Your babbling pivot here is discussing empirical evidence and observation, not science. If only you were to learn what science is, you would greatly decrease your daily confusion load.

My "babbling" is a description of the Earth's atmosphere according to the Bible.

You don't know this. Nobody does

You sound like a typical Christian.

Certainly not without a religious miracle.

Lol.

 

[IBDaMann]

No I didn't.

Yes, you did. Completely omitted. You have to do better.

No. There isn't a different science because you believe in a sky wizard.

There you go again, equating religion with science. You have to do better.

Again, the Bible makes claims that science proves to be wrong.

Let's see some more ZenMode errors. What are you claiming that science proves "wrong" about the Bible?

Deflection.

Deflection. Pivot. You are a grown adult and you don't even know what science is, relegating you to saying stupid things.

My "babbling" is a description of the Earth's atmosphere according to the Bible.

What science are you claiming has anything to do with any of this? This should be good because you don't even know what science is .

You sound like a typical Christian.

Is my religious devotion to Christianity bothering you?

Lol.

Yep. Absolutely.

 

[Cypress]

Our lack of understanding doesn't mean we have to come up with silly stories.

It's not about a lack of understanding.

It's about logic.

The rational cannot come from the irrational, something can't come from nothing, and order and lawful organization cannot come from chance and chaos.

^ That's a real logical conundrum.

Science doesn't answer philosophical questions, and you can't use the dodge that "someday" science will have all the answers to life, the universe, and everything. That is as much a faith based belief as religion.

I'm not glorifying it. I'm saying science > religion.

I believe I've seen you write or insinuate that science will basically be able to ultimately answer any and every question we have about life, the universe, and everything.

That's putting science on a pedestal, and treating it exactly like a faith-based religion.

Science is just a method that gives us accurate predictions of the motion and exchange of matter and energy. It tells us nothing about philosophical questions.

 

[Cypress]

The Universe is not organized!!

Matter, space, energy, and time are organized by conforming to universal rational mathematical principles.

No atheist like you has ever given an adequate explanation for how a mathematically rational, lawfully organized, and finely tuned cosmos is caused by chance and purely inanimate physical reasons. It defies logic.

 

[ZenMode]

Yes, you did. Completely omitted. You have to do better.

I'm doing fine.

There you go again, equating religion with science. You have to do better.

I'm not equating. I'm saying that the Bible makes claims that science shows to be incorrect.

Let's see some more ZenMode errors. What are you claiming that science proves "wrong" about the Bible?

Already provided examples.

Deflection. Pivot. You are a grown adult and you don't even know what science is, relegating you to saying stupid things.

The only stupid things are the the claims the Bible makes that we now know to be wrong.
- The earth is not enclosed in a plexiglass enclosure, there's no windows/gates that open to let in rain from the sky rivers
- The Earth isn't 6,000 years old.
- The human body can't be brought back to life after being without oxygen/blood for 3 days
- People don't build cruise ships by hand, collect all of the world's mammals and sale around for months together.

I could list many more.

What science are you claiming has anything to do with any of this? This should be good because you don't even know what science is .

I know what science is.

Is my religious devotion to Christianity bothering you?

Not at all.

 

[ZenMode]

It's not about a lack of understanding.

It's about logic.

The rational cannot come from the irrational, something can't come from nothing, and order and lawful organization cannot come from chance and chaos.

^ That's a real logical conundrum.

Yes, this continues to be God of the Gaps.

Science can't explain where everything came from, it seems really complicated, yet organized and we can't explain why, so it must be a deity.

Science doesn't answer philosophical questions, and you can't use the dodge that "someday" science will have all the answers to life, the universe, and everything. That is as much a faith based belief as religion.

People don't generally invoke science for philosophical questions like right/wrong, moral/immoral. There also isn't a need for a deity to discuss philosophical questions.

I believe I've seen you write or insinuate that science will basically be able to ultimately answer any and every question we have about life, the universe, and everything.

Not necessarily every question about life, but it'll be close and certainly never be proven wrong by a biblical claim.

That's putting science on a pedestal, and treating it exactly like a faith-based religion.

Science is just a method that gives us accurate predictions of the motion and exchange of matter and energy. It tells us nothing about philosophical questions.

We're getting off track. The Bible makes a number of claims that directly contradict what we know as a result not scientific advancements. There are some things that science can't answer and that ever-decreasing list is, as it was for thousands of years, explained by deities.

 

[Ross Dolan]

No I didn't.

No. There isn't a different science because you believe in a sky wizard.

Again, the Bible makes claims that science proves to be wrong.

Deflection.

My "babbling" is a description of the Earth's atmosphere according to the Bible.

You sound like a typical Christian.

Lol.

So do many atheists.

Keep arguing from an atheistic perspective if you want, Zen...but it will never be a winner, because the atheistic guesses are every bit as much blind guesses as are theistic guesses.

The best argument non-theists can make are agnostic ones. Saying, "I do not know the true nature of the REALITY of existence" IS NOT A GUESS. It is simply a statement of fact. Saying, "Since I cannot find unambiguous evidence in either direction, I prefer not to make a blind guess" IS NOT A GUESS. It is simply a statement of preference.

 

[Into the Night]

Sure does. If I claim that water is five parts hydrogen and 23 parts oxygen, science would prove me wrong.

Science is not a proof. If you want to deny chemistry as part of your word games, it won't work.

There are many claims made by religion that science proves wrong in a similar way.

Science is not a proof. Circular argument fallacy (fundamentalism).

There is no plexiglass sphere surrounding the Earth that has windows or gates that open to let in the sky rain.

No one said there was (except you).

The earth is not 6,000 years old.

The age of Earth is unknown.

The organs in a human body can't return to functionality after being deprived of oxygen and blood for 3 days.

Irrelevance fallacy. YARP

 

[Into the Night]

I know it's not a dome and you know it's not a dome.

You are now locked in another paradox. First you say it's a dome, then you say it's not. You cannot argue both sides of a paradox. It's irrational.

What we know to be true is different than what the Bible claims.

You are still locked in this paradox. The Bible does not describe any 'dome' nor any plexiglass.

Your word games aren't going to work now anymore than they ever have.

You can't blame your word games on anybody else, Automaton.

Holes were drilled in skulls to release demons.

Brain surgery is not 'releasing demons'.

Science proves any number of claims in the Bible to be wrong. Your word games don't change that.

Science is not a proof. Circular argument fallacy (fundamentalism). Inversion fallacy.

There is and it has been explained multiple times.

Repetition fallacy.

Any number of claims made by the Bible have been proven wrong by science.

Science is not a proof. Circular argument fallacy (fundamentalism).

For reasons that are obvious, you are avoiding addressing those In favor of playing word games.

Inversion fallacy.

YARP. No argument presented.

 

[Into the Night]

Yes, this continues to be God of the Gaps.

Buzzword fallacy. Repetition fallacy.

Science can't explain where everything came from, it seems really complicated, yet organized and we can't explain why, so it must be a deity.

Science has no theory about any past unobserved event. There is no 'gap'. Buzzword fallacy. Science is not religion.

People don't generally invoke science for philosophical questions like right/wrong, moral/immoral.

Science is not religion.

There also isn't a need for a deity to discuss philosophical questions.

Philosophy is not a religion.

Not necessarily every question about life, but it'll be close and certainly never be proven wrong by a biblical claim.

Random words. No apparent coherency.

We're getting off track.

You were never ON track.

The Bible makes a number of claims that directly contradict what we know as a result not scientific advancements.

No theory of science conflicts with anything in the Bible, Automaton.
Science isn't 'advancements'.

There are some things that science can't answer and that ever-decreasing list is, as it was for thousands of years, explained by deities.

Science is not religion. You are still locked in this paradox. Repetition fallacy.

No argument presented.

 

[Into the Night]

So do many atheists.

Atheism is not the Church of No God. Atheism is not a religion.

Keep arguing from an atheistic perspective if you want, Zen...

He is not an atheist. He is a religious fundamentalist.

but it will never be a winner, because the atheistic guesses are every bit as much blind guesses as are theistic guesses.

He is not an atheist. He is a religious fundamentalist.

The best argument non-theists can make are agnostic ones.

Atheists are not agnostics.

Saying, "I do not know the true nature of the REALITY of existence" IS NOT A GUESS.

Buzzword fallacy. Go learn what 'real' means and how it's defined. 'Real' is not defined by religion or science.

It is simply a statement of fact. Saying, "Since I cannot find unambiguous evidence in either direction, I prefer not to make a blind guess" IS NOT A GUESS. It is simply a statement of preference.

Go learn what 'fact' means and how it's defined. Attempt to negate a negative fallacy (reversing the antecedent).

 

[Into the Night]

You don't even know what is wrong with what you just wrote.

Exactly. Apparently, her religion is to throw out buzzwords.

Catholics assert that Mary's pregnancy with Jesus was miraculous, directly from God, etc. Because Mary was chosen by God for this role, Catholics assert that Mary is blessed and favored, that Mary has a special place in heaven, and that she should be treated with solemn respect.

Some try to worship her, but this is wrong. The should be worshiping God and Jesus Christ.

There is no "perpetual virginity" in that narrative.

True.

 

[Into the Night]

No I didn't.

Lie.

No. There isn't a different science because you believe in a sky wizard.

What is a 'Sky Wizard'? The only one claiming a 'sky wizard' is YOU.

Again, the Bible makes claims that science proves to be wrong.

Science is not a proof. Circular argument fallacy (fundamentalism).

Deflection.

Inversion fallacy.

My "babbling" is a description of the Earth's atmosphere according to the Bible.

The Bible does not describe a plexiglass dome or a dome of any kind.

You sound like a typical Christian.

Lol.

He isn't. He is an atheist.
I am a Christian.

 

[IBDaMann]

I'm doing fine.

Nope. You are tipping your king.

I'm not equating.

You are. You shift the semantics of the word "science" between science and religion, as convenient.

Already provided examples.

... and your king is tipped.

- The earth is not enclosed in a plexiglass enclosure,

KJV makes no mention of plexiglass. You are babbling.

- The Earth isn't 6,000 years old.

Nowhere in the Bible is any age of the earth specified.

- The human body can't be brought back to life after being without oxygen/blood for 3 days

... without a religious miracle. Correct. Already stipulated. You were going to prove that no religious miracles have ever occurred.

- People don't build cruise ships by hand, collect all of the world's mammals and sale around for months together.

Yeah, that only happened once, and immediately fell from popularity. Hence, we just don't do that anymore. It was a good thought, though. Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

I could list many more.

You can't list "more" until you actually list at least one valid one.

I know what science is.

Obviously not. Not at all.

 

[Into the Night]

It's not about a lack of understanding.

Yes it is. He does not understand science, logic, mathematics, or philosophy.

It's about logic.

You don't understand logic either.

The rational cannot come from the irrational, something can't come from nothing, and order and lawful organization cannot come from chance and chaos.

Buzzword fallacies. The Universe is unorganized. Order can indeed come from chaos. This happens anytime someone builds a product such as a car or computer.

^ That's a real logical conundrum.

Denial of logic. You are still locked in your paradox.

Science doesn't answer philosophical questions,

This part is correct.

and you can't use the dodge that "someday" science will have all the answers to life, the universe, and everything.

Science isn't 'answers'.

That is as much a faith based belief as religion.

No, it's just a denial of science.

I believe I've seen you write or insinuate that science will basically be able to ultimately answer any and every question we have about life, the universe, and everything.

Not science. Not possible.

That's putting science on a pedestal, and treating it exactly like a faith-based religion.

Science is not a religion. He denies science just as you do.

Science is just a method that gives us accurate predictions of the motion and exchange of matter and energy. It tells us nothing about philosophical questions.

Science is not a method. Science does not predict. It is an open functional system. A theory of science MUST be transcribed into a closed functional system such as mathematics to gain the power of prediction. Such a transcription and the resulting equation is called a 'law'.

The presence of a 'law' of science does not prove a theory True.

 

[Into the Night]

Matter, space, energy, and time are organized by conforming to universal rational mathematical principles.

No atheist like you has ever given an adequate explanation for how a mathematically rational, lawfully organized, and finely tuned cosmos is caused by chance and purely inanimate physical reasons. It defies logic.

Random equations mean nothing. YARP.

The Universe is unorganized.

 

[Into the Night]

I'm doing fine.

Lie.

I'm not equating.

Lie.

I'm saying that the Bible makes claims that science shows to be incorrect.

Science shows no such thing. You still have no idea what science is. Circular argument fallacy (fundamentalism).

Already provided examples.

Repetition fallacy.

The only stupid things are the the claims the Bible makes that we now know to be wrong.

Illiteracy: Plurality used for singular.
Logic errors: Synthesis. Circular argument fallacy (fundamentalism).

- The earth is not enclosed in a plexiglass enclosure, there's no windows/gates that open to let in rain from the sky rivers

The Bible never describes any such thing. Synthesis.

- The Earth isn't 6,000 years old.

The age of the Earth is unknown. The Bible doesn't describe it either. Omniscience fallacy.

- The human body can't be brought back to life after being without oxygen/blood for 3 days

Omniscience fallacy.

- People don't build cruise ships by hand, collect all of the world's mammals and sale around for months together.

No need. No worldwide flooding anymore.
I assume you are trying to discuss Noah and the Ark.

No one said this was the only ark, or that others in the world escape the Flood in a different way.

If you look at the cultures in the world, they generally have a Great Flood story and how their tribe survived it.

I could list many more.

You are only listing your own fiction.

I know what science is.

Lie.

Not at all.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

 

[Margot]

You don't even know what is wrong with what you just wrote.

Catholics assert that Mary's pregnancy with Jesus was miraculous, directly from God, etc. Because Mary was chosen by God for this role, Catholics assert that Mary is blessed and favored, that Mary has a special place in heaven, and that she should be treated with solemn respect.

There is no "perpetual virginity" in that narrative.

Catholics have been claiming "perpetual virgin" for centuries