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

[Freddy Figbottom]

Yes, it IS evidence that the God of Abraham exists.

... but it IS evidence that the Earth is flat.

Continued chanting summarily dismissed.

not good evidence.

 

[gmark77]

Why don't you go fuck yourself, instead.


Continue to wait. Hold your breath until you turn blue. Kick your heels at the floor.

Mommy may hug you and make you feel better.

Then...maybe you will be able to play nicely with others.

Yup. I knew it. Thanks for proving that you don't understand the topic.

 

[Freddy Figbottom]

Given your views on what is relevant evidence, and what it means, there is literally no reason to have a discussion with you. By your logic, anything that anyone believes to be true is actually worth considering, no matter how insane it is or how much evidence exists to the contrary.

You are the ideal target for religion.

that's just so crazy it just might work.

 

[IBDaMann]

There are really only three explanations for the existence of the universe:

I notice that you are saying that there are three, and not that there are only two.

1) The universe is infinitely old, and does not require creation

OK, and you expressed this possibility quite coherently.

(this idea can be dismissed on the basis of logic and science).

Nope. This idea must be listed, just as you did.

2) Matter and energy came into existence from nothing, because of inanimate physical causes (this idea is incoherent and violates physical laws of conservation).

Let's consider this for a moment.

3) Some immaterial and purposeful agency or force outside the spacetime parameters of the universe [who came into existence from nothing, because of inanimate physical causes (this idea is incoherent and violates physical laws of conservation) ] is responsible for it's origination and it's lawful mathematical organization.

FTFY. So why did you list this if you knew if you weren't even considering it due to lacking coherency?

 

[Freddy Figbottom]

Electrons change "levels" within an atom as energy increass and decreases. I'm just telling you how things work.

they talk in probabilties because everything is basically random, you dumb skeezz.

 

[Ross Dolan]

I don't believe any... not one... of the gods that man has made up in his mind exist or ever existed.

I also do not believe any of the gods that man has made up in his mind exist or ever existed.

If they were made up...no sane person would

The problem comes with deciding which were made up...and which were not.

Me, I do not know which are which...or if any are...and acknowledge it.

With YOU...you do not know either, but you do not acknowledge it.

Why is that?

The idea of a "creator" deity/extraterrestrial force of some kind is much more ambiguous. Given that there's no reason to believe that any of the man-made gods is even real, belief or disbelief in an ultimate 'creator', that has never made itself known,

Not sure what you mean there. Can you reword that to make it less ambiguous.

I think it is absolutely more likely that there are no gods.. at least none of the gods in the man-written storybooks.

Why did you add that last part?

Why not just say that you do not know?

You do not even know if the gods of the human written variety do not exist. They may...but the humans, being fuck-ups...just screwed the stories up.

I do not know...and acknowledge that I do not know.

You also do not know...but cannot acknowledge that.

I'll answer my own questions. You tell me where you disagree with my answers.

1) Do you "believe" there are no gods?

Nope.

2) Do you "believe" it is more likely that there are no gods than that there is at least one?

Nope.

See how easy that was...and no bullshit.

I'll even ask myself two more questions:

1) Do you "believe" there is at least one god?

Nope.

2) Do you "believe" it is more likely that there is at least one god than that there are none?

Nope.

Also easy.

Give it some thought. Tell me what you disagree with.

 

[Ross Dolan]

Yup. I knew it. Thanks for proving that you don't understand the topic.

Whatever.

Ummm...you are a major league dick head. Gotta give you that.

 

[IBDaMann]

Given your views on what is relevant evidence,

What are his views on "relevant evidence"? Can you quote him or can you only mischaracterize?

there is literally no reason to have a discussion with you.

So it's @gfm7175's fault that you don't know what you are talking about. I see. I notice that you are still blaming everyone else for your inability to participate in a conversation at the adult's table.

By your logic,

Now you are asking everyone to believe that you somehow understand logic. Dismissed.

 

[gfm7175]

How is it evidence?

It is information that supports the veracity of Christianity. Over two BILLION people in the world today self-identify as a Christian. Why would so many people throughout history call themselves Christians if Christianity was nothing more than complete hooey?

There are also some estimates that over 70 million Christians have been martyred over the last couple of millennia... Why would so many Christians be willing to die for their faith (or get killed because of their faith) if their faith was nothing more than complete hooey?

Those are a couple of evidences for Christianity (with a bit of reasoning as to how one could be convinced of the veracity of Christianity).

This doesn't in any way/shape/form mean that Christianity is true, but it IS evidence for it nonetheless.

 

[ZenMode]

What are his views on "relevant evidence"? Can you quote him or can you only mischaracterize?


So it's @gfm7175's fault that you don't know what you are talking about. I see. I notice that you are still blaming everyone else for your inability to participate in a conversation at the adult's table.


Now you are asking everyone to believe that you somehow understand logic. Dismissed.

also @gfm7175

I believe that water is 2 parts oxygen and 9 parts hydrogen. The fact that I believe that is evidence that it might be true.

 

[Into the Night]

Were you always a dumb fuck?

I'm not the one trying to redefine what 'Universe' means. YOU ARE.

 

[Into the Night]

It's not random when you can predict exactly when something's going to happen.

It is random.

That's like saying it's random if you turn on your light switch and a light bulb starts to produce light.

The electrons flowing through the wires are moving randomly. The photons emitted by the light are moving randomly.

An electron is not the Universe.
The Universe is unorganized.

Go learn what 'random' means.

 

[Ross Dolan]

also @gfm7175

I believe that water is 2 parts oxygen and 9 parts hydrogen. The fact that I believe that is evidence that it might be true.

Zen, you are correct that simply because something is "believed"...does not mean it is so...no matter how many "believe" it to be so. But the fact that so many people "believe" the Christian thingy...IS evidence that it is so. It is piss poor evidence, as you attempted to illustrate, but even piss poor evidence IS EVIDENCE.

Everything that exists IS evidence that there is a GOD who created it...although it also is evidence that there are no gods and that what is...simply is because that is just the way of nature. As to the question of "Is there at least one god?"...there is no evidence that conclusively shows, "YES, there is a GOD" and there also is no evidence that conclusively shows, "NO, there are no gods."

All one can do is to make a guess...essentially a blind guess, because although there is a gazillion tons of evidence...nobody can show whether it is evidence of the existence of a GOD (gods) or of no gods.

And the nonsense that "it is more likely that there is a GOD" or "it is more likely that there are no gods" are both laughable.

Evidence is OFTEN faulty evidence; evidence is often inconclusive evidence; evidence is sometimes bullshit. Although bullshit is fairly strong evidence of the existence of a bull.

 

[Into the Night]

I said nothing about colliding. The movement of electrons, between levels, is not random.

Electrons don't move between energy levels by themselves. You can't create energy out of nothing, Void.

 

[Into the Night]

What specific opposing evidence am I denying?

RQAA

 

[Into the Night]

The evidence is either a) from ~2000 years ago or b) only evidence of you already believe in a god.

Lie. I have already provided you with evidence available TODAY, and independent of believing in any god or gods.

 

[Into the Night]

also @gfm7175

I believe that water is 2 parts oxygen and 9 parts hydrogen. The fact that I believe that is evidence that it might be true.

Redefinition fallacy. Water is defined as H2O. It has no other definition.
Water is not a religion.

Your word games won't work.

 

[gfm7175]

Given your views on what is relevant evidence,

I noticed that you added this word in front of the word 'evidence'... Your opinion ABOUT any particular evidence is irrelevant to the existence of the evidence itself.

and what it means,

Your opinion ABOUT any particular evidence is irrelevant to the existence of the evidence itself.

there is literally no reason to have a discussion with you.

So you're gonna pick up your ball and go home, eh?

By your logic, anything that anyone believes to be true is actually worth considering,

With regard to faith, anything COULD be true (and is thus worth considering). That's simply the nature of faith.

no matter how insane it is

This is your OPINION.

or how much evidence exists to the contrary.

ALL evidence, both FOR and AGAINST, is worth consideration.

You are the ideal target for religion.

What do you mean by that?

 

[Cypress]

I think it is absolutely more likely that there are no gods.. at least none of the gods in the man-written storybooks.

Why did you wait until this late in the game to limit theism to the ancient deities of antiquity and the Middle Ages?

An impersonal clock-maker god or divine spirit has been present in human religious traditions for centuries: pantheism, Spinoza's god, Deism, transcendentalism, etc. And that's primarily because humans observed design and organization in nature.

 

[gfm7175]

not good evidence.

This is subjective.