Prove God Exists - Act Three

[Perfection]

Oh, no, I think you should answer the question. You and I are at the same observational point when manna falls from the sky. It fully supplies our daily nutritional requirements. Despite the best possible preservation techniques we have available, this manna rots and is consumed by worms, even in tightly sealed containers, just as the priests say it will every night. This happens on a daily basis for forty years as we wander through the wilderness following the path shown us by a pillar of smoke during the day, which transforms to a pillar of flame at night. To what do you attribute this event?

Exaggeration

With no other factors to consider, I'd agree with you. But the Bible exists. As we have gone over in some detail in an older thread, the Bible book of Genesis, supposedly authored by a 'Palestinian goatherd' (Moses) managed to get every detail of Creation right that it recorded, even those that pre-dated man, and even life. Are we then, to assume that Moses, a 'Palestinian goatherd', managed to conjure up one lucky guess after another starting with the Big Bangs and ending with the arrival of man? Luck like that IS a miracle.

Not really, "Let there be light" does not neccesarily implicate big bang theory, much of genesis is out of order the arrival of man is a given, I mean honestly, it would be silly if it didn't. The fact that you can stretch it to make it fit does not mean it matches exactly, there is no miracalous correspondance.

Pack animals with non-mortal injuries lick each others' wounds. Pack animals with mortal injuries crawl off to die. Explain.

I allready explained that earlier

You've seen humans eat live catfish?

I've seen them eating it while it's head was still alive, does that count, or does that make them not animals, if I go eat a fish live, then can we be animals?

As a matter of fact, yes I would.

Even if it's 5 polar bears and you have no weapon? I highly doubt it, you say you would just to prove me wrong, but you wouldn't.

The only human ever to conduct a war of extermination against another group of humans, Adolf Hitler, is the most reviled human in history. His name is synonymous with evil. He is often referred to as 'inhuman', as if the traits he displayed were not those of a human. Seems to me like violence of that level is not a human thing.

Actually, most of the extermination you speak of is one species versus another, and until recently humans have had little qualms about exterminating many species. Additionally Hitler was not the only one to conduct a war of extermination, ever here about Rewanda?

It can take a wolf pack hours to bring down a bear.

They'd kill it quickly if they could, but those things are massive and hard to get at!

Actually, martial artists learn to strike vital areas to incapacitate or kill instantly, without resorting to crippling a human and striking them to see where it hurts the most while they are unable to fight back.

Martial artists, not cavemen, also, trying that on a bear isn't going to work.

What? That's what they do in prison!

:So are pacifists and conscientious objectors real humans? What about Vegans? War protestors?

Of course they're human! The point is animals run the whole spectrum of brutality, from gentle fuzzy bunnies to brutal wolves and stuff. Humans fall well within that range. So there is no philosophical arguement that states that humans aren't animals because of thier level of brutality.

 

[Perfection]

God's existence alone does not explain everything. This is why people have this whole big world and universe to research and understand. My point is simply It exists, and it is a creator. Whether you believe in God or not, there is no denying reality, interest, and science.

You want to show how god is reality. You want to show there needs to be a creator. You made the statement that god exists, back it up!

 

[BassDude726]

Adolf Hitler is considered the most evil human ever, but wrongly so I think. Don't get me wrong, he completely sucked, but there was worse. Stalin for example: starved 20 million Ukranians to death because they were "dissidents". Not quite the gas chamber, but killing is killing.

 

[Perfection]

It really doesn't matter who was eviliest. They all were pretty evil.

 

[Garbarsardar.jr]

Since no religious person is around I decided to give it a go, and see how things are in the other side.This thread, obvious to anyone who keeps track of Prfcts machinations, started as a spam multiplier, and thanks to the wonderfull audience is doing very well.Personally I tripled my post count and enjoyed wonderfull times of atheist and believer bashing, although I have to admit that believers have fallen beyond my expectation. Are they getting smarter? I very much doubt it.Merely tired, and apart from some entairtaining attempts at arithmology and free association lately nothing much happens.
So for the following posts I will be the devil's (how inapropriate) advocate, for God.
Why the premise is silly
God and proof have as much relation as Saddam and Al Qaida. The further you move away from proof, the easier it is to discover God and vice versa. Great scientists are either atheists, or become atheists on the way and in only a few cases they revert to a believer status at a later age, when they feel that death is approaching and science has not provided them with an answer.And chances are it will never will.
Believers are never scientific-and why should they be.They can merely be systematic as Ignatio Logyola, Thomas Aquinates and St.Augustine but scientific? There is no reason for that.God does not require proof. Because if he did who could seriously argue that ALL was created by a superthing which then worked in a very meticulous and systematic way to remove every trace of his existence from his creation?
And still they come
So, why these believers are here? Are they here to preach? Some of them some times yes.Rarely, I would think so.
No, they are here to prove. Because deep down in their minds they are not true believers.If they were they would never try to prove the existence of something that does not require proof.
Just think of it for a moment. Those people are blessed (no pun intended) with the most convenient, easy, and bulletproof explanation to questions that for the rest of us range from the mildly intriguing to the deeply disturbing.
God did it and that's that. No agonising small steps of increasing frustration in the scientific and philosiphical ladder for them.And still they come.
The rest of us have to deal some times with the assumptions that probably there is no purpose, probably there is no cause, probably life evolved in such a way in the Universe that we'll never meet anything else, or simply we won't notice, probably we'll nevr get off this planet, probably the ratio of using up the resources to the speed of scientific progress creates a gap that we'll neber overcame, and that very probably as it is the case for 4.000 years during our collective lifetimes we'll learn absolutely jack**** about all that.
Are we very similar to each other?
Probably.Small ants crawling in the infinity of CFC desert.Small mazochistic ants.Believers who need a leap of science and atheists who need a leap of faith. Oh yes my fellow atheists.We do need a leap of faith.Quantum theory needed a leap of faith.Dark matter needs several.Strange matter and hyperchordes a very big one. We could both rely on our respective conveniences keep our own and shut the **** up. But no. The ones have to prove something for which proof is incomplete and the others defend that for which proof is unnecessary.
Anyway, I hope I entairtained you, or for the insomniacs out there made somehow things easier for tonight...

 

[Perfection]

S
Why the premise is silly
God and proof have as much relation as Saddam and Al Qaida. The further you move away from proof, the easier it is to discover God and vice versa. Great scientists are either atheists, or become atheists on the way and in only a few cases they revert to a believer status at a later age, when they feel that death is approaching and science has not provided them with an answer.And chances are it will never will.
Believers are never scientific-and why should they be.They can merely be systematic as Ignatio Logyola, Thomas Aquinates and St.Augustine but scientific? There is no reason for that.God does not require proof. Because if he did who could seriously argue that ALL was created by a superthing which then worked in a very meticulous and systematic way to remove every trace of his existence from his creation?

This is simply false, many great scientists were believers, however all of the modern ones had the good sense not to mix religion and science.

 

[Blasphemous]

Perfection, while I agree to your reservation, I would say rather that nobody in the cutting edge of scientific fields such as Biology and Physics, and anything else that ends up reaching out deep into space, or searching far, far back in time. People on the cutting edge of these fields are slowly sketching answers to the toughest questions. They wouldn't bother if they'd think they already knew [that it's "cuz of gawd"], and once they're onto something, they won't need any deity to explain their mysteries anymore.

 

[Perfection]

Well, no, people on the cutting edge can very well have religious faith. The difference is they recognize the illogical nature and that it has no bearing in science. It often appears that they don't have faith as it is not expressed in thier papers, however that's because they understand that scientific papers are meant to provide logical reasons for thier arguement and not philosophical.

When you mix religion and science the results are usually crackpotish. It leads to absurdities like Omega Point Theory, Creationism and anti-evolutionism.

 

[Sims2789]

That's odd. No one has closed this thread yet.

 

[King Alexander]

Well, I'll also play Devil's advocate hired by God. Here we go...

Non-believers: you DO actually know that you have in fact many similarities in your evolution "thingy" with what is written in the Bible. e.g.:
Man(Adam) was created by dirt; non-believers also claim that Man was created by dirt, which(in a short and simple interpretation) was a lava, which was cosmic dust and/or a part from a star(that's why Earth was created), and so on....
The difference is that believers have all that ready and served in their "plate", where non-believers striving their brain in order to reach for the same results.

There, I said it. Now let's hear what non-believers have to say!!!!!!!!!!!!!!(you know, deep inside you, that, in the end, you'll be burned in hell eternally!!!!).

 

[cgannon64]

Once you recognize Genesis as a creation story and full of symbolism, its not incompatible with evolution in the least.

 

[Blasphemous]

Once you recognize Genesis as a creation story and full of symbolism, its not incompatible with evolution in the least.

Symbolism is handy in that sense... As long as you stay vague enough, you leave room for adapting interpretations... The creation stories may have some similarities to evolution, but all in all these similarities come from the fact that man is a rational creature (including the people who wrote the Bible), and that Evolution is a rational theory.
Anyway, if they knew about evolution, how come apes weren't mentioned (iirc)?
Perhaps because there aren't many apes around here?
(Not to even mention Dinosaurs.)

 

[Perfection]

Once you recognize Genesis as a creation story and full of symbolism, its not incompatible with evolution in the least.

Correct, but then you cannot say it predicts it, as FL2 did.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Gadzooks!! I go away for two weeks you guys add 300 posts. Do you know what a chore it is to read all those and catch up? I hope I didn't miss any conclusive evidence either way.

 

[Sims2789]

^You didn't.

 

[Sims2789]

There is a finite amount of energy in the Universe, so how can God exist and have infinite power?

 

[Free Enterprise]

There is a finite amount of energy in the Universe, so how can God exist and have infinite power?

What exactly do you mean by this? It does not seem that this really is any problem.

 

[Birdjaguar]

There is a finite amount of energy in the Universe, so how can God exist and have infinite power?

You are limiting god to the universe. By definition, any infinite god is beyond the finiteness of the physical world. If your god is finite, then he/she /it would be limited and most definitely a 'lesser" god.

 

[King Alexander]

There is a finite amount of energy in the Universe, so how can God exist and have infinite power?

1) Maybe he takes more power from the stars/galaxies/black holes.
2) Maybe he cheats, using the Civ3Edit.
3) Maybe he takes the extra energy he needs from his followers.

Why do you say that there is a finite amount of energy in the universe? I can guess how you see it, but one supernova can give a "little" extra energy boost!

 

[Perfection]

Why do you say that there is a finite amount of energy in the universe? I can guess how you see it, but one supernova can give a "little" extra energy boost!

Um supernovas don't produce energy, they only change it from one form to another un a quite spectacular fashion.

Gadzooks!! I go away for two weeks you guys add 300 posts. Do you know what a chore it is to read all those and catch up? I hope I didn't miss any conclusive evidence either way.

WOOOO!!! Post #9000!