Evidence for God from Science

B. W. wrote:

Neha wrote:

I actually see so much of how I used to be by their arguments and comments posted here that I actually feel sorry for them. The pride is incredible and the open minded closededness is astounding. We once lived that way.

What pride are you talking about B.W, or what closed mindedness? Where have I posted something which says so?

In almost all you write - its tone is there. Please don't take offense as none is intended. I was once as blind as you on this very matter.

Tell, if all is mere happenstance and human life is reduced to mere chemical reactions invigorated by environmental factors alone - would not that cheapen life?

What would that kind of philosophy seek to justify?
-
-
-

You say I am blind and you say I should not be offended either? Would you like if I called you delusional and also asm you not to take offense? Please consider what you are saying to me.

Secondly, there is no tone applied by me which you talk about, sure i disagree but how does that translates to pride is something you may want to elaborate on. I have no idea.

Thirdly, human life is organic and chemical based. I don't see how it chrapens it, its very unique.

Neha wrote:

B. W. wrote:

Neha wrote:

I actually see so much of how I used to be by their arguments and comments posted here that I actually feel sorry for them. The pride is incredible and the open minded closededness is astounding. We once lived that way.

What pride are you talking about B.W, or what closed mindedness? Where have I posted something which says so?

In almost all you write - its tone is there. Please don't take offense as none is intended. I was once as blind as you on this very matter.

Tell, if all is mere happenstance and human life is reduced to mere chemical reactions invigorated by environmental factors alone - would not that cheapen life?

What would that kind of philosophy seek to justify?
-
-
-

You say I am blind and you say I should not be offended either? Would you like if I called you delusional and also asm you not to take offense? Please consider what you are saying to me.

Secondly, there is no tone applied by me which you talk about, sure i disagree but how does that translates to pride is something you may want to elaborate on. I have no idea.

Thirdly, human life is organic and chemical based. I don't see how it chrapens it, its very unique.

Please look at the words you just wrote

One Good example of what I meant...

Again, please no offense intended on my part towards you...
-
-
-

B. W. wrote:

Neha wrote:

B. W. wrote:

Neha wrote:

I actually see so much of how I used to be by their arguments and comments posted here that I actually feel sorry for them. The pride is incredible and the open minded closededness is astounding. We once lived that way.

What pride are you talking about B.W, or what closed mindedness? Where have I posted something which says so?

In almost all you write - its tone is there. Please don't take offense as none is intended. I was once as blind as you on this very matter.

Tell, if all is mere happenstance and human life is reduced to mere chemical reactions invigorated by environmental factors alone - would not that cheapen life?

What would that kind of philosophy seek to justify?
-
-
-

You say I am blind and you say I should not be offended either? Would you like if I called you delusional and also asm you not to take offense? Please consider what you are saying to me.

Secondly, there is no tone applied by me which you talk about, sure i disagree but how does that translates to pride is something you may want to elaborate on. I have no idea.

Thirdly, human life is organic and chemical based. I don't see how it chrapens it, its very unique.

Please look at the words you just wrote

One Good example of what I meant...

Again, please no offense intended on my part towards you...
-
-
-

Same here, b.w but its not civil to call people blind you know. That was my point.

Neha wrote:Same here, b.w but its not civil to call people blind you know. That was my point.

I once was blind so I can say it without malice...to those who are as I once was...

So have you gave thought to the two questions I asked?

Tell, if all is mere happenstance and human life is reduced to mere chemical reactions invigorated by environmental factors alone - would not that cheapen life?

What would that kind of philosophy seek to justify?
-
-
-

B. W. wrote:

Neha wrote:Same here, b.w but its not civil to call people blind you know. That was my point.

I once was blind so I can say it without malice...to those who are as I once was...

So have you gave thought to the two questions I asked?

Tell, if all is mere happenstance and human life is reduced to mere chemical reactions invigorated by environmental factors alone - would not that cheapen life?

What would that kind of philosophy seek to justify?
-
-
-

Malice is not the point. Calling people like this when they disagree with you is. For example, just reverse it and I could say the same, I was blind once and not now, would you feel justified then by how am I characterizing you? You won't.

I already answered you above, I don't think it cheapens anything.

Neha wrote:

B. W. wrote:

Neha wrote:Same here, b.w but its not civil to call people blind you know. That was my point.

I once was blind so I can say it without malice...to those who are as I once was...

So have you gave thought to the two questions I asked?

Tell, if all is mere happenstance and human life is reduced to mere chemical reactions invigorated by environmental factors alone - would not that cheapen life?

What would that kind of philosophy seek to justify?
-
-
-

Malice is not the point. Calling people like this when they disagree with you is. For example, just reverse it and I could say the same, I was blind once and not now, would you feel justified then by how am I characterizing you? You won't.

I already answered you above, I don't think it cheapens anything.

Listen to your tone - rather sharp...

Two common tactics often used, which I once used, was to feign that I was an offended victim being beat up and the other I used was to was Pit the oppositions own standards against themselves - make them live up to them. (Rules for Radicals) I see that in your responses here as do others. So, kindly, be aware of this, folks are wise here and deal with these stratagems often.

...and no you did not answer the questions...as it does not explain how it does not cheapen anything... what evidence do you have to make this statement?
-
-
-

Neha, you say you were once a Christian in this thread, in order to gain authority on these matters. And you've asked "where have I said that". Yet you've said previously:

Neha wrote:
I am an atheist because I have never seen anything which hints a God, I haven't felt what you have had, so either God loves you more or he doesn't exist. And if he does he doesn't want me to know him. He won't allow me to be the doubting thomas. How unfair!

Neha wrote: For me atheism is very natural, even as a child I was not totally sold on biblical stories.

And that was just a quick look back at some of the things I've seen you post about. I think I replied to one of those statements.

How can you say these things and not be one of the "Christians" turned atheist that I commented on. You have said yourself you're not unlike them. I am not convinced you have been a Christian in your past, just raised in a Christian home. This is extremely common. I fear for my own sister's salvation. I rarely see her though, as we live far apart, so I can't be sure where she is at with God. Picking up the phone to preach to her isn't exactly effective

Care to answer some direct questions so we can understand your position better?

1. Have you read the whole Bible?
2. Have you asked God to help you understand it?
3. What Bible stories do you find hard to believe? and why?
4. What is your honest intention for being on these forums? (it's ok if you just want to argue a few delusional Christians for a while, but if you want to know God, that would be nice too)
5. Do you want to be a Christian or an Atheist?

Honest answers, no judgement.

Kurieuo wrote:Further, I've been around enough Christians to know that what I have phenomenally experienced of God's presence, looks to be very similar to others.

Poindexter sincerely assures you that aliens have abducted and probed him. Poindexter knows others who are also sincere and sure of their remarkably similar abductions and probes. How would you evaluate their testimony? How would Poindexter, let's say a non-religious person, evaluate your Christian testimony about God's presence?

I'm not asking who is correct. Assume I already know that Poindexter is incapable of understanding the evidence around him, and that you are correct. I'm asking how you and Poindexter might evaluate each other's extraordinary testimony.

B. W. wrote:

Neha wrote:

B. W. wrote:

Neha wrote:Same here, b.w but its not civil to call people blind you know. That was my point.

I once was blind so I can say it without malice...to those who are as I once was...

So have you gave thought to the two questions I asked?

Tell, if all is mere happenstance and human life is reduced to mere chemical reactions invigorated by environmental factors alone - would not that cheapen life?

What would that kind of philosophy seek to justify?
-
-
-

Malice is not the point. Calling people like this when they disagree with you is. For example, just reverse it and I could say the same, I was blind once and not now, would you feel justified then by how am I characterizing you? You won't.

I already answered you above, I don't think it cheapens anything.

Listen to your tone - rather sharp...

Two common tactics often used, which I once used, was to feign that I was an offended victim being beat up and the other I used was to was Pit the oppositions own standards against themselves - make them live up to them. (Rules for Radicals) I see that in your responses here as do others. So, kindly, be aware of this, folks are wise here and deal with these stratagems often.

...and no you did not answer the questions...as it does not explain how it does not cheapen anything... what evidence do you have to make this statement?
-
-
-

B.W when someone calls you coward and dishonest, calling them out on it is not feigning to be a victim. I would rather be proven wrong.

Secondly, I expect asking jac to live upto a standard is not a jab in malice either when someone dismisses you with i am just better tone, I had to ask him whether this strategy ever worked with nonbelievers. Please take some time reading his posts. especially when his signature reads, 'truth without love is brutality'. Because I have made no argument and dismissed you simply because you are a Christian. Should not i enjoy the same courtesy?

I have no secret agenda or tactic. And I don't appreciate several of you repeating it over and over. I challenged a member to justify the insults he was making. Just because I am an atheist, does that mean I will always be wrong?

If you can give me evidence of how its cheapened I will then follow up with how its not. As I said before I don't accept its cheapened to begin with. How can I give you evidence of something that hasn't happened?

And by the way, before you think this is another tactic, I assure you there is none. I write this with a calm mind.

I think life is cheap in the atheist context, because nothing matters at all. If there is no God and everything is a fluke, then murder, theft, rape, lying, etc are all ok. If I kill my wife, what's the big deal?

Neha, Please give evidence why you responded ... to the questions below

Neha wrote:I don't think it cheapens anything.

Tell, if all is mere happenstance and human life is reduced to mere chemical reactions invigorated by environmental factors alone - would not that cheapen life?

What would that kind of philosophy seek to justify?


You gave opinions, not facts. A true person whom believes science alone believes in facts presented by evidence. What evidence do you have to support your claims so far?
-
-
-

B. W. wrote:Neha, Please give evidence why you responded ... to the questions below

Neha wrote:I don't think it cheapens anything.

Tell, if all is mere happenstance and human life is reduced to mere chemical reactions invigorated by environmental factors alone - would not that cheapen life?

What would that kind of philosophy seek to justify?


You gave opinions, not facts. A true person whom believes science alone believes in facts presented by evidence. What evidence do you have to support your claims so far?
-
-
-

because you didn't give me a fact either, just your opinion, and I gave you mine. You say it cheapens life, I say it doesn't. How can I give you evidence for this? It will be like asking you to give me evidence that jesus didn't rise from the dead. As far as you are concerned this has never happened so can you give me evidence of something that hasn't happened according to you?

I'd agree with you Neha. How about a subjective discussion then. Do you think there's anything wrong if I kill my wife tonight.

Also, if my 5 questions previously posed are not something you'd like to answer on the forum, I am genuinely interested if you feel comfortable PMing me. If not, I understand they are personal questions.

ryanbouma wrote:I'd agree with you Neha. How about a subjective discussion then. Do you think there's anything wrong if I kill my wife tonight.

Also, if my 5 questions previously posed are not something you'd like to answer on the forum, I am genuinely interested if you feel comfortable PMing me. If not, I understand they are personal questions.

I am typing a response to your earlier questions Ryan, hang on.

Ryan,
Its very simple, its like what you may have felt too. No one i know, understandsthe bible to the dot. History, prophecy, allegory, poetry, there are parts you may never understand as they may have been originally intended to. Of course there are parts which are easily understood as well, but my point is that even when I didn't get stories from the bible, I did believe them for a while. With time I struggled more. For example I used to think that punishing everyone because tge first couple disobeyed was unnecessary. Why would God do that? But I believed it for some time anyway because I could not find any reason to object. The same is with Noah, or the canannite wars. Some things I understood some I didn't. Genesis and evolution hardly mix. I didn't sleep a Christian and woke up an atheist you know. It takes time.

As to your questions:
1.I have read the bible completely about 20 times, Fwiw, this is not the full count though because I have read multiple books in there many times.

2.I did, I do understand it, even if I disagree with some of it.

3. Because some stories are just contradictory to the character of God. Take the canannite wars for instance. Now I understand that in battle men had to go, I get that... but women and children too? This is completely opposite to the god in the new testament. Its almost a uturn. Or take the story of noah, yec claims a global flood and plenty of oec consider it a local flood. Scientifically I side witb oec's but the problem is, the bible seems to imply a global flood in the theological sebse. Infact its mentioned by Christ in the same way. About the finality of the end times. And further more there are glaring problems like, why didn't the people just move? Why did it take so many years building the ark, when all noah and his family could have done was to move 50 miles south? Same with animals and birds, why save them on an ark to begin with. This is too much work in a local flood scenario.
These are just a few.

4.I have not called you delusional, I hope you can see that. I like to interact. Plus, I am not anti-theist, I am not totally closed to the possibility of a God.

5. I want to be correct, I accept what makes sense and try to go with it to logical conclusions. Being atheist or Christian is not something which I have predetermined goals to be.