Challenge to theists

Quote

It's hard to talk about the physics that allow the big bang to happen here, because you don't believe in them.

Them?  Are you personifying the various laws of physics?  Just like Ancient Polytheistic religions?

No, he isn't.

@Roundy, weren't you a deist? I thought the title of this thread was pretty clear about who this challenge was put to. The rest of your post has nothing to do with the actual challenge either.
The reason this is only for the theists, is because I think most of the people here are deist, and I don't have the time to debate with 20 different people. It would really lower the level of discussion.

@Lorddave

1st quote: I assume that was meant to be a joke.

2nd: Because it explains how the Big Bang is possible with the laws of physics that are believed by everyone expect FE's

3rd: Hypotheses based on no real evidence deserve no real attention

Aand 4th: I assume since you cut my whole post into bits and reply to each one individually you just had to make some nonsense up at the end.


Now to get this topic back on track, I'd ask everyone to please not to post, unless you have some actual evidence. Please.

@Roundy, weren't you a deist? I thought the title of this thread was pretty clear about who this challenge was put to. The rest of your post has nothing to do with the actual challenge either.
The reason this is only for the theists, is because I think most of the people here are deist, and I don't have the time to debate with 20 different people. It would really lower the level of discussion.

Coward.  I see where you're coming from.

@Lorddave

1st quote: I assume that was meant to be a joke.

It wasn't.  I was just being pedantic.  I may have done it wrong.

2nd: Because it explains how the Big Bang is possible with the laws of physics that are believed by everyone expect FE's

How do you believe in a fact?
And why would I need to be told what I already know?

3rd: Hypotheses based on no real evidence deserve no real attention

Dr. Nicholas Rush - Astrophysicist discovered it.  Feel free to google it.

Aand 4th: I assume since you cut my whole post into bits and reply to each one individually you just had to make some nonsense up at the end.

Actually no.  Believe it or not but there are people in the world who don't have the confidence in their own abilities to rely on them.  So they place their faith in a higher power and use that to get past their lack of confidence, utilizing their own internal strength but thinking it's from another source.

It's like giving an athlete water but saying it's a magic potion that'll make them better.  It's a way to remove self doubt by placing the burden of failure on something else.
[/quote]

Also, does an undeniable miracle with plainly visible results deny humanity their freedom of dis-belief? Humans have been given free will to choose to believe in God or to dis-believe in Him.

My God created the universe, it started as one made by one to progress towards one's state but by which our own state being known before Him described as the one and an image.

Cool, a thread on the Internet challenging people to submit evidence for a god, that's original and interesting.

Stars and flowers and music and people

Prove that there isn't a god/gods!  Aha, gotcha!

Also, does an undeniable miracle with plainly visible results deny humanity their freedom of dis-belief? Humans have been given free will to choose to believe in God or to dis-believe in Him.

If you choose your belief you're lying to yourself, not believing in it.

A sincerely held belief is not one you 'choose' to pick, which is one of the innumerable reasons why Pascal's Wager falls apart.

Quote from: flatbass on March 31, 2012, 04:08:53 PM

Also, does an undeniable miracle with plainly visible results deny humanity their freedom of dis-belief? Humans have been given free will to choose to believe in God or to dis-believe in Him.

If you choose your belief you're lying to yourself, not believing in it.

A sincerely held belief is not one you 'choose' to pick, which is one of the innumerable reasons why Pascal's Wager falls apart.

Are you saying that atheists that covert to Christianity don't truly believe in their new found faith?  Or vice versa?

Prove that there isn't a god/gods!  Aha, gotcha!

You can't disprove God, but I'll try to summarize the things that make God very improbable.

Firstly, the stupid design of the universe (Credits to Neil deGrasse.) Most planet orbits are unstable, less than 3% if a gas could actually make a star, most places kill life instantly, galaxy orbits bring you near a supernove, etc etc. Religious people say 'all the forces are just right for life..' Excuse me, most of the places in space will kill you instantly.

Earth: Earthquakes & volcanoes level cities and villages, tsunamis kill 200000 people, floods, tornadoes, hurricanes, lightnings, can't live on 2/3 of it's surface, freeze or starve on half of what remains, mass extinction, disease, climate shift, killer asteroids, 99% of all life that has ever lived is now extinct, inner solar system is a shooting gallery, 3-5 billion years to make multi-cellural life.

Humans: Agressive childhood lukemia, homophilia, sickle cell anemia, multi scleroris, epilepsy, Parkinsons, ALS, narrow view of electromagnetic spectrum, vision loss with age, teeth fall out, Alzheimer, prostate cancer, exhale most of oxygen we inhale, warm-blooded so must eat constantly, practically comatose for 1/3 of our lives, can't detect magnetic fields, ionizing radiation fields, Radon CO, CH4 C02. We breath, eat and drink through the same hole in our body.

Not going to other animals, I think you get the point.

So all of those things, and more point to, that there is no God, and I've failed to see any evidence that there would be one. Thank you.

Your argument is pretty shitty actually.

Unstable orbits don't become planets. The rocks that eventually for the planet would also be in an unstable orbit would it not?

Secondly, most places killing life instantly is an assumption on your part. You don't know anything beyond our small solar system and little about most of it.  For all we know, Venus could have microbe life on it. There's bacteria that live near underwater volcanic vents. There's a mold that absorbs radiation. There's bacteria that doesn't need sunlight at all and uses sulfur instead to survive.
I find your definition of life limited and almost religious.

Earth:
It is said that Earth only sucks because we sin. I don't know about that myself but the natural disasters you spoke of aren't very prevelabt on Africa and the Middle East, where humans generally started from. In fact, it wasn't until we went pretty far from our starting point that stuff began to suck. It's like complaining that the world outside of your aquarium is horrible for life. Well, that's because it's outside the aquarium. In essence, we've expanded far beyond the safe zone.

As for the rest well... You're mixing science with religious creation. Can't do that without accepting that God works slowly to us. So all those asteroids and climate changes are just God changing something.

The human body's design shouldn't surprise you either. Creationist or Evolutionist, humans still kick ass. That one hole for eating and breathing hasn't slowed us down has it?

As for diseases: population control from God.

I'm sorry but you're going to have to do better than that if you want to make God improbable.

Not only all that LD, but to say all those problems about an area creating and sustaining life and yet here we are.  Doesn't that actually argue for intelligent design The1?

Secondly, most places killing life instantly is an assumption on your part.

You go to a vacuum with no air and we'll see how long you'll live.

Earth:
It is said that Earth only sucks because we sin.

Trying to disprove proof of no God with religion does not work.

In essence, we've expanded far beyond the safe zone.

Which God gave us the ability to do obviously.

So all those asteroids and climate changes are just God changing something.

Trying to disprove proof of no God with religion does not work.

Creationist or Evolutionist, humans still kick ass. That one hole for eating and breathing hasn't slowed us down has it?

You put a human with any slightly big animal in a fight, human will get it's ass kicked. Elephants have better memory than us, many animals are faster than us, many are stronger, chimps are better at solving puzzles than our kids. etc etc.

As for diseases: population control from God.

That sure does seem to be working. Why would God make men so that he creates 50000000 semen a day, but women only 1 a month btw?

I'm sorry but you're going to have to do better than that if you want to make God improbable.

I'm sorry but you must come up with something else that just assumptions of your own.

@Waddogg, that is proof of evolution having to survive the shit design God has done, and losing 99% of all species along the way.

Quote from: The1 on March 30, 2012, 01:22:15 PM

Personal experience is not evidence

I doubt anyone was here for the creation of the universe.

Better yet, give me a list of things you would accept.

Any objective testable evidence would be acceptable.  Was doubting Thomas so terrible for asking that he see the risen Jesus before believing he had risen? They surely make it out that he was terrible for such a thing.

Question for you Wardogg, what evidence would you need in order to believe in a different god other than the christian one?  Say Zeus or Thor?

Cool, a thread on the Internet challenging people to submit evidence for a god, that's original and interesting.

Yes, it is the most interesting debate of all. Religion was our first attempt at philosophy, medicine, morality but because it was our first, it was our worst. We now have better explanations for all the things, but yet in some countries it is forbidden to even think about the progress that has been made or that denies the knowledge that these advances have in fact occurred. (Hitchens ^)

It amazes me that the people here can say with a straight face that they don't even think about the option that there is no God, but yet cannot say any evidence for one.

Quote from: Chris Spaghetti on April 05, 2012, 12:55:46 PM

Quote from: flatbass on March 31, 2012, 04:08:53 PM

Also, does an undeniable miracle with plainly visible results deny humanity their freedom of dis-belief? Humans have been given free will to choose to believe in God or to dis-believe in Him.

If you choose your belief you're lying to yourself, not believing in it.

A sincerely held belief is not one you 'choose' to pick, which is one of the innumerable reasons why Pascal's Wager falls apart.

Are you saying that atheists that covert to Christianity don't truly believe in their new found faith?  Or vice versa?

Don't be deliberately stupid. They convert because they've been given some sort of reason to believe sincerely in their position.

Not only all that LD, but to say all those problems about an area creating and sustaining life and yet here we are.  Doesn't that actually argue for intelligent design The1?

I would argue it's evolution.  We've evolved to a point that allows us to adapt our environment to suit our needs.  Sort of like how a beaver uses trees to build it's dam or birds use anything (sticks, newspaper, bits of garbage, etc...) to build nests.  We just happen to be the best at it at the moment.

You go to a vacuum with no air and we'll see how long you'll live.

You're defining that all life in the Universe is a carbon based, oxygen/Nitrogen breathing, CO2 emitting, warm blooded, soft bodied organism?

Trying to disprove proof of no God with religion does not work.

Trying to disprove proof of God with science does not work.  God is undetectable.  Therefore, how can you say what is not God's work if you can't detect God?

Which God gave us the ability to do obviously.

Perhaps.  And what if he did?  When you were a baby, your parents likely kept you in a confined space, kept you safe, and locked cabinets with dangerous chemicals. 
Do they still do that when you visit them?

Trying to disprove proof of no God with religion does not work.

Trying to disprove proof of God with science does not work.  God is undetectable.  Therefore, how can you say what is not God's work if you can't detect God?

You put a human with any slightly big animal in a fight, human will get it's ass kicked.

Not always.
http://www.orato.com/world-affairs/mauled-by-wild-leopard
(ignore the references to God).

Elephants have better memory than us, many animals are faster than us, many are stronger, chimps are better at solving puzzles than our kids. etc etc.

Physically?  Sure.
But that's irrelevant.  Put a lion in the same room with an elephant (the elephant is much bigger) and the lion dies.  Does that make the elephant better than the lion? 
Is a skunk better than a field mouse?
How do you determine that?

Now, give that same human in the room a pointy stick.  His chances of survival just went up significantly.
In fact, your line of questioning is more for intelligent design than evolution.  After all, how could we have evolved in the first place if we have no way to defend ourselves against larger prey?

That sure does seem to be working. Why would God make men so that he creates 50000000 semen a day, but women only 1 a month btw?

Genetic diversity.  That's a lot of possible combinations right there.  Per day.  It allows him to impregnate multiple women rapidly but the women then require 1 month before they can be fertile (assuming no pregnancy) then 9 months until birth, then 13 years before maturity even begins.  15 years if you want to make it a young adulthood. (see older days)  Most animals have a gestation and growth period much shorter than that. 
Let's take a lion.
100-119 days for gestation.
2-3 cubs per birth.
Hunting after 11 months.
Sexual maturity after 2 years.

Why does evolution allow a lion to exist with so few numbers but a fast procreation period and humans to exist in large numbers with a low procreation period?

I'm sorry but you must come up with something else that just assumptions of your own.

None of these assumptions are mine.  I can't take credit for any of them.



You know, I've never debated against another Atheist before.  This is rather interesting.

LordDave, are you theist, deist or agnostic? Because I find it hard to think that someone who is a christian for example could say that God is undetectable.

Just asking to get this thread back on topic, since the arguments above don't have anything related to the original challenge.

LordDave, are you theist, deist or agnostic? Because I find it hard to think that someone who is a christian for example could say that God is undetectable.

Just asking to get this thread back on topic, since the arguments above don't have anything related to the original challenge.

Well I'm ATheist so it appeared to apply to me.
Secondly, I have a personal God. 
Third, my personal god didn't create the universe.

Take your pick.

That does not make any sense at all.

1st line, you say your an atheist
2nd, you say you have a personal God=your not an atheist
3rd line, basically means your a deist

Try to make sense.

Wow, Lorddave, you're really blowing my mind here with your inability to be labeled like the rest of us sheep.

That does not make any sense at all.

1st line, you say your an atheist
2nd, you say you have a personal God=your not an atheist
3rd line, basically means your a deist

Try to make sense.

Not really.
1. True statement.
2. Yep.  A God that has no powers or abilities but I call it a God for my own personal enjoyment.  What's your point?
3. See #2.

You're the one trying to get people who believe (which requires you to lack evidence) in a God to reject that belief based on logic and reasoning.  The two are mutually exclusive. 
Do you Believe that Gravity exists?  That Germs exist?  That light can act as a wave and a particle?
Or do you have evidence that supports these claims?

A mind that calls a being void to a rock as God, is a disgrace to the human species.

Yes, there is plenty of evidence for gravity, yes obviously germs exists... and light is a particle, but again this has nothing to do with the challenge. You can go and make another thread debating those, but don't do it here.

Faith is the surrender of the mind.

A mind that calls a being void to a rock as God, is a disgrace to the human species.

Huh? 

Yes, there is plenty of evidence for gravity, yes obviously germs exists... and light is a particle, but again this has nothing to do with the challenge. You can go and make another thread debating those, but don't do it here.

And the point just flies over your head. 

I'm not questioning the evidence, I'm saying that you can't prove a belief anymore than you can believe a fact.

Faith is the surrender of the mind.

....
You're angry aren't you?  Why do you hate religion so much?
Faith is not the surrender of the mind. 

For example:
I have faith in my fiancee.

or how about this:

It was a dangerous mission but I chose private Wentworth as the scout.  He wasn't sure he could do it but I've seen his service record.
"Private" I said "I have faith in you."

Faith is absolute trust.  And that can be from anywhere.

I was talking about faith in a God. It's the end point for looking for real evidence. So many great scientists in the past have stopped their work when they have encountered a problem, and just said 'We can't explain that, that's God' The surrender of scepticism and reason.

And yes, I do in some occasions hate religion. Religious nuts at least. Who non-religious people would, in the year 500 have said "It's a healthy baby boy, what a miracle. Now find a sharp rock so we can shave a part of it's penis away" The suicide bombing community and the mutilation of genitals community are entirely faith based. Slavery is mandated by the bible, etc etc

The fact that religion is one of the leading causes of death should be enough reasoning on my behalf.

I was talking about faith in a God. It's the end point for looking for real evidence. So many great scientists in the past have stopped their work when they have encountered a problem, and just said 'We can't explain that, that's God' The surrender of scepticism and reason.

And yes, I do in some occasions hate religion. Religious nuts at least. Who non-religious people would, in the year 500 have said "It's a healthy baby boy, what a miracle. Now find a sharp rock so we can shave a part of it's penis away" The suicide bombing community and the mutilation of genitals community are entirely faith based. Slavery is mandated by the bible, etc etc

The fact that religion is one of the leading causes of cause of war add conflict throughout history should be enough reasoning on my behalf.

I was talking about faith in a God. It's the end point for looking for real evidence. So many great scientists in the past have stopped their work when they have encountered a problem, and just said 'We can't explain that, that's God' The surrender of scepticism and reason.

And yes, I do in some occasions hate religion. Religious nuts at least. Who non-religious people would, in the year 500 have said "It's a healthy baby boy, what a miracle. Now find a sharp rock so we can shave a part of it's penis away" The suicide bombing community and the mutilation of genitals community are entirely faith based. Slavery is mandated by the bible, etc etc

The fact that religion is one of the leading causes of war and conflict throughout history should be enough reasoning on my behalf.

I was talking about faith in a God. It's the end point for looking for real evidence. So many great scientists in the past have stopped their work when they have encountered a problem, and just said 'We can't explain that, that's God' The surrender of scepticism and reason.

Ummm... Can you name one with reference?  Because I don't know of any.

And yes, I do in some occasions hate religion. Religious nuts at least.

I dislike them for the same reason I dislike you: you're pushy about being right.

Who non-religious people would, in the year 500 have said "It's a healthy baby boy, what a miracle. Now find a sharp rock so we can shave a part of it's penis away"

Uhhhh... we do that now without religion. 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision

Circumcision is used therapeutically, as one of the treatment options for balanitis xerotica obliterans, phimosis, balanitis, posthitis, balanoposthitis and recurring urinary tract infections.[10][11] In addition, non-therapeutic circumcisions are commonly performed for social, cultural, religious, or prophylactic reasons.[12] Summaries of the views of professional associations of physicians include that none currently recommend routine circumcision,[13]and most recommend neither universal circumcision nor its prohibition.[14]

The suicide bombing community and the mutilation of genitals community are entirely faith based.

Cultural.  Religion was created based on culture, not the other way around.
Suicide bombings are simply using religion as a justification for an action.  You will find the same thing everywhere else: For the king.  For your country.  For freedom.  For Democracy.  For Life.  For our children. 

There's plenty to justify any action.  Religion just happens to be one.

Slavery is mandated by the bible, etc etc

Mandated?  No.  But that was normal back then.  It's like women's right to vote today: It seems perfectly normal to us but 100 years ago it wasn't.  It's all about culture.

The fact that religion is one of the leading causes of war and conflict throughout history should be enough reasoning on my behalf.

False.
The leading cause of war is greed.  Greed of a specific person with power.  Everything else is just a justification.  Regardless of what you may think, few people go to war for the sole reason of God.