Evidence for God from Science

PaulSacramento wrote:No one lives in a bubble and everything we believe in or choose not to believe, affects our view on everything else to one degree or another.

One can not disassociate something like theism or atheism from how they view the world.

Not entirely, but then, do you believe in nessie? How much does annessism affect your view of the world?

Do you not feel that the existence of god is the central concept of all reality?

Audie wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:No one lives in a bubble and everything we believe in or choose not to believe, affects our view on everything else to one degree or another.

One can not disassociate something like theism or atheism from how they view the world.

Not entirely, but then, do you believe in nessie? How much does annessism affect your view of the world?

Do you not feel that the existence of god is the central concept of all reality?

I believe in the possibility of nessie.

The existence of God is reality. He isexistence.

Re the cats discussing the cat food god. Now you know why the cheshire cat is always grinning.

And, many people are much like the supposed cats discussing catfood - as they don't CARE if there is a cat food god AS LONG AS the cat food keeps arriving in their bowls - AND on-time.

Storyteller wrote:

Audie wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:No one lives in a bubble and everything we believe in or choose not to believe, affects our view on everything else to one degree or another.

One can not disassociate something like theism or atheism from how they view the world.

Not entirely, but then, do you believe in nessie? How much does annessism affect your view of the world?

Do you not feel that the existence of god is the central concept of all reality?

I believe in the possibility of nessie.

The existence of God is reality. He isexistence.

Re the cats discussing the cat food god. Now you know why the cheshire cat is always grinning.

Id move it a notch. I believe in the possibility of god, nessie is no more likely than batboy, which aint much.

Storyteller wrote:

Audie wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:No one lives in a bubble and everything we believe in or choose not to believe, affects our view on everything else to one degree or another.

One can not disassociate something like theism or atheism from how they view the world.

Not entirely, but then, do you believe in nessie? How much does annessism affect your view of the world?

Do you not feel that the existence of god is the central concept of all reality?

I believe in the possibility of nessie.

The existence of God is reality. He isexistence.

Re the cats discussing the cat food god. Now you know why the cheshire cat is always grinning.

Id move it a notch. I believe in the possibility of god, nessie is no more likely than batboy, which aint much.

Philip wrote:And, many people are much like the supposed cats discussing catfood - as they don't CARE if there is a cat food god AS LONG AS the cat food keeps arriving in their bowls - AND on-time.

Trying to settle the matter of catfood or god-coz-nothing- from- nothing and so forth, it evidently amuses some and convinces others. Not me.

Audie wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:

Kenny wrote:

zacchaeus wrote:Audie,

Lay out what it is you believe, your worldview... Why, how'd you draw your conclusions?

Whatever her worldview is, it is important for you to recognize that it is not an atheist worldview, but rather just her worldview.

Ken

A red tinted glass, may be just glass, but that doesn't mean it's also not red tinted.

The word is tinge, and I aint the one with a tinge.

Do you believe that Zimbabwean Kickball is the most fascinating and important human activity?

If not, does that mean you have aZimbabwean Kickballist tinted glasses?

Poor analogy. They may at least play kick ball in Africa. Your religion is all from the realm of fantasy.

Perhaps I had the intention of tint, Ms. Smarty Pants?

The idea being not solid red, but tinted to a certain degree.
You have a deep red tint. I've had many discussions with you. You can't lie to me about it.
The red tinge is Atheism, and you are tinted quite highly with such.
It's not a solid red, but rather tinted.

And this is also what you see the world through.

On the other hand, you could say I'm tinted deeply blue with my Christian beliefs.
And again, that I see the world through such. I'm sure you have no problems there, except maybe you'd assign a pooey-brown tinge of sorts, eh?

To the person who says they have no colour, they are blinded to their bias.

Storyteller wrote:

Audie wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:No one lives in a bubble and everything we believe in or choose not to believe, affects our view on everything else to one degree or another.

One can not disassociate something like theism or atheism from how they view the world.

Not entirely, but then, do you believe in nessie? How much does annessism affect your view of the world?

Do you not feel that the existence of god is the central concept of all reality?

I believe in the possibility of nessie.

The existence of God is reality. He isexistence.

Re the cats discussing the cat food god. Now you know why the cheshire cat is always grinning.

I'm with ST with the possibility of nessie's existence....

And you've all looked at atheism and Christianity both equally critically?

Audie: Trying to settle the matter of catfood or god-coz-nothing- from- nothing and so forth, it evidently amuses some and convinces others. Not me.

So, Audie, you are unconvinced of God's existence. Are you convinced a universe could "pop" into existence by itself, uncaused, without any intelligent source behind it? I mean, mathematically, probability-wise, the exponential improbabilities involved are beyond anything we can comprehend, beyond any known scientific cause, origin or process - so, are you also convinced of THAT being possible - or don't you care? If you DO believe in an uncaused first cause - WHY? As these are the only alternatives - a powerful entity of unfathomable intelligence and purpose vs. nothingness produced all we know. As if that something was not a great, powerful and purposeful intelligence, then randomness in some non-physical realm eventually was able to create these massively complex building blocks of all that physically exists. Really, Audie, I'm more interested in WHY you think belief in an uncaused first cause is more convincing than an actual Cause? Is that because you believe much more in the possibility of unscientific metaphysics? Because NO science can possibly buttress such a belief.

Philip wrote:

Audie: Trying to settle the matter of catfood or god-coz-nothing- from- nothing and so forth, it evidently amuses some and convinces others. Not me.

So, Audie, you are unconvinced of God's existence. Are you convinced a universe could "pop" into existence by itself, uncaused, without any intelligent source behind it? I mean, mathematically, probability-wise, the exponential improbabilities involved are beyond anything we can comprehend, beyond any known scientific cause, origin or process - so, are you also convinced of THAT being possible - or don't you care? If you DO believe in an uncaused first cause - WHY? As these are the only alternatives - a powerful entity of unfathomable intelligence and purpose vs. nothingness produced all we know. As if that something was not a great, powerful and purposeful intelligence, then randomness in some non-physical realm eventually was able to create these massively complex building blocks of all that physically exists. Really, Audie, I'm more interested in WHY you think belief in an uncaused first cause is more convincing than an actual Cause? Is that because you believe much more in the possibility of unscientific metaphysics? Because NO science can possibly buttress such a belief.

Im not into binary thinking.

Kurieuo wrote:

Audie wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:

Kenny wrote:

zacchaeus wrote:Audie,

Lay out what it is you believe, your worldview... Why, how'd you draw your conclusions?

Whatever her worldview is, it is important for you to recognize that it is not an atheist worldview, but rather just her worldview.

Ken

A red tinted glass, may be just glass, but that doesn't mean it's also not red tinted.

The word is tinge, and I aint the one with a tinge.

Do you believe that Zimbabwean Kickball is the most fascinating and important human activity?

If not, does that mean you have aZimbabwean Kickballist tinted glasses?

Poor analogy. They may at least play kick ball in Africa. Your religion is all from the realm of fantasy.

Perhaps I had the intention of tint, Ms. Smarty Pants?

The idea being not solid red, but tinted to a certain degree.
You have a deep red tint. I've had many discussions with you. You can't lie to me about it.
The red tinge is Atheism, and you are tinted quite highly with such.
It's not a solid red, but rather tinted.

And this is also what you see the world through.

On the other hand, you could say I'm tinted deeply blue with my Christian beliefs.
And again, that I see the world through such. I'm sure you have no problems there, except maybe you'd assign a pooey-brown tinge of sorts, eh?

To the person who says they have no colour, they are blinded to their bias.

So howdoes a akickballist see the world?

Depends Audie. Are they a Christian or an Audie kickballist???

Audie wrote:

RickD wrote: Did you even read the article?

The article doesn't disagree with your definition. Maybe you missed it, so here it is again, from the article:

I see. So you think the article is a dictionary.

And that was not "my" definition. It is what the dictionary (not an article) says.

You seem confused today. Perhaps some tea, and a scone?

Seriously Audie?

You said

"What a worldview is, from a Christian perspective"

The article gave the same definition as a dictionary does. It's not a Christian definition of worldview.
Do you have anything constructive to add? Because I'm supposed to be the one who adds meaningless drivel to conversations.

Probably cause y'all are related in spirit despite what Audie believes!!!