Evidence for God from Science

Squible wrote:And to be fair, Kenny I find you respectful and kind.

I must say these are qualities that make you grow on people despite our differences.

Squible wrote: Now you raised altruism, I agree that It may be true that certain animals which belong to groups and that behave altruistically will have some survival advantage. However, moral beliefs are not required in order to produce such behavior. It seems evident that there are many species of animals that are naturally inclined to help others of their species, and do not have moral beliefs.

You also denied your position was a "faith" based position by saying "As one can see it in various stages, its a reasonable thing to think, no faith needed.".
Interesting. It's reasonable to think that, yet you do not have absolute evidence for your own position, to then say it is not a "faith" based position. Not one doubt huh? No leap at all in trusting that position? Interesting.. that..

Ironically, I think its also reasonable to conclude that God exists as one sees it in various stages.

And I am honest enough to admit there's a level of uncertainty with any position. Then again the Christian definition of faith doesn't have the same meaning as used before. The Greek being pistis meaning trust or reliability, in that we can trust God.

As for the reality of moral existence it seems that you do not understand the ontological, I tried explaining it with illustrations but without success.

I see you are still looking at the tap.  As such I see all of your examples are put in terms of the tap being the cause/source. You see the perfect explanation you accepted in an earlier exchange where morality exists because it gives an advantage is no different to saying that the water exists because it gives the tap an advantage by keeping the hole clear, sounds perfect but the reality is the water doesn't come from the tap now does it?

I also notice you went off to argue against design, by uncharitably using the worst case you could in order to prove your point. It's easy to attack a straw man Audie and jump up an down claiming victory. How about you get the best case scenarios from academia and attack them instead.

How are you not being dogmatic when you continue to attack philosophy in the way you are? By claiming philosopher's don't go outside their field. Audie

believe given what I know and understand from a cumulative set of arguments that it is more plausible that God exists then its negation. Then again I also I have my personal experience to draw from as well like my prayer life and the day I came to know Christ. And the day I came to know Christ and the following two weeks was an intense alteration of how I saw reality as if my eyes were opened from a deep sleep or that I was blind to this new reality. It has stayed that way ever since. You can put up all the intellectual barriers you want but ultimately I believe it is a spiritual, moral and relational issue.

Anyway, I have better things to do. I feel like I am wasting my time sharing this. Since, I think you will come back mocking it by tearing it apart with glib rhetorical devices, rather then actually thinking on it.

It also seems you are not prepared to at least think upon the tap illustration given the response you gave.

Kurieuo wrote:

RickD wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:

RickD wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:
I feel for you. People here are not your enemy, nor you Audie.
Really, I never understand those self-professing Atheists who believe in nothing coming here to dog Christians.
What's the point? It doesn't follow, unless you religiously believe in no god -- or should I say the god of self?

K,

Could you clear this up for us? It seems to come across as an attack against Audie or Ken. And knowing you, it wasn't meant that way.

Thanks

Point out in what ways this was attacking?

Not sure, but Audie took it that way.

I see. Well... I did not intend it that way.

I did say some harsher comments out of frustration that were removed within a minute of posting. Perhaps she caught them?
I'm not sure discussions like this can be had without there being some heat.

I do not see that "people here" are their enemy, and by that I mean us Christians.
If we asked just about any Christian here, I'm sure they'd want the very best for Kenny and Min.
It's just our beliefs grain so against each other -- this fact often gets buried.

And "I feel" for them, because what I believe I see as seriously true -- not just a debate for a "who's right" and "who's wrong" which clouds the truth of the matter in smoke.
The veil is so thick on many who are not Christian and that pains and frustrates me. Especially when the grace is so amazing. And most of us were blind once too.
I just want to help them see, but I know I can't. And they just think me crazy or deluded. I'll tolerate that back if they can tolerate that I think they're blinded.

Finally, I just don't get why Atheists come to the board and start defending their beliefs and attacking ours.
Logically, as I see it, an Atheist shouldn't care either way about God's existence. And yet, they frequent forums like these.
God doesn't exist, just be done with it and move on. Obviously, there is some inner need they're trying to meet by being here.

Hence my question, "What's the point?" In other words, why are they here?
I really like Audie being here mind you, and I did enjoy my own exchanges with Kenny where I took a more laid back approach, but I'm nonetheless perplexed.
Unless they so "religiously" believe in their non-belief that they can't stand the thought of something other. But, then we're told over and over that it's not really a belief.

Finally, the "god of self" is essentially what I see Atheism boils down to.
For example, it is interesting that Kenny roots "morality" in humanity.
In what "he" identifies as the prime value -- to live peacefully with one another. "God of self".
If God does not exist, then given our evolutionary supremacy we really are the gods of the world.
So...

Hope that clarifies my meaning.

As for my earlier comments in that same post, I think I'm entitled to call a discussion as I see it.
I can't help the way I feel on that there. I just really don't think a lot of what Squible offered was countered.
Just lots of smoke and mirrors. But, such is the blindness that I see in them, just like the delusion they perhaps see in me.

Finally, the "god of self" is essentially what I see Atheism boils down to.

self-professing Atheists who believe in nothing

Audie wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:I see. Well... I did not intend it that way.

I did say some harsher comments out of frustration that were removed within a minute of posting. Perhaps she caught them?
I'm not sure discussions like this can be had without there being some heat.

I do not see that "people here" are their enemy, and by that I mean us Christians.
If we asked just about any Christian here, I'm sure they'd want the very best for Kenny and Min.
It's just our beliefs grain so against each other -- this fact often gets buried.

And "I feel" for them, because what I believe I see as seriously true -- not just a debate for a "who's right" and "who's wrong" which clouds the truth of the matter in smoke.
The veil is so thick on many who are not Christian and that pains and frustrates me. Especially when the grace is so amazing. And most of us were blind once too.
I just want to help them see, but I know I can't. And they just think me crazy or deluded. I'll tolerate that back if they can tolerate that I think they're blinded.

Finally, I just don't get why Atheists come to the board and start defending their beliefs and attacking ours.
Logically, as I see it, an Atheist shouldn't care either way about God's existence. And yet, they frequent forums like these.
God doesn't exist, just be done with it and move on. Obviously, there is some inner need they're trying to meet by being here.

Hence my question, "What's the point?" In other words, why are they here?
I really like Audie being here mind you, and I did enjoy my own exchanges with Kenny where I took a more laid back approach, but I'm nonetheless perplexed.
Unless they so "religiously" believe in their non-belief that they can't stand the thought of something other. But, then we're told over and over that it's not really a belief.

Finally, the "god of self" is essentially what I see Atheism boils down to.
For example, it is interesting that Kenny roots "morality" in humanity.
In what "he" identifies as the prime value -- to live peacefully with one another. "God of self".
If God does not exist, then given our evolutionary supremacy we really are the gods of the world.
So...

Hope that clarifies my meaning.

As for my earlier comments in that same post, I think I'm entitled to call a discussion as I see it.
I can't help the way I feel on that there. I just really don't think a lot of what Squible offered was countered.
Just lots of smoke and mirrors. But, such is the blindness that I see in them, just like the delusion they perhaps see in me.

...

Finally, the "god of self" is essentially what I see Atheism boils down to.

This is a rather different statement than saying what is. Which do you mean, a declarative statement of how things are, or just your opinion?

Audie wrote:But either way, it is a failure to comprehend how someone could really just not think the way you do. I remember years ago the first time I heard someone say, "I dont think anyone is really an atheist, in their heart". I was so surprised, I could show you right where I was standing. Till then, I thought that nobody in their heart could really believe in god! You may still not a-gotten that little epiph.

Audie wrote:I never have thought of an adequate way to illustrate this, but try this..
"Everyone believes in something, has some god"

or

"Everyone has some sport, cheers for some team"

Not really.

As for this...

self-professing Atheists who believe in nothing

Seriously? Is this what you really think?

Tell me it isnt true.

Kurieuo wrote:I don't really want to respond Audie, but since you ask of me I'll do my best to respond kindly.

Audie wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:I see. Well... I did not intend it that way.

I did say some harsher comments out of frustration that were removed within a minute of posting. Perhaps she caught them?
I'm not sure discussions like this can be had without there being some heat.

I do not see that "people here" are their enemy, and by that I mean us Christians.
If we asked just about any Christian here, I'm sure they'd want the very best for Kenny and Min.
It's just our beliefs grain so against each other -- this fact often gets buried.

And "I feel" for them, because what I believe I see as seriously true -- not just a debate for a "who's right" and "who's wrong" which clouds the truth of the matter in smoke.
The veil is so thick on many who are not Christian and that pains and frustrates me. Especially when the grace is so amazing. And most of us were blind once too.
I just want to help them see, but I know I can't. And they just think me crazy or deluded. I'll tolerate that back if they can tolerate that I think they're blinded.

Finally, I just don't get why Atheists come to the board and start defending their beliefs and attacking ours.
Logically, as I see it, an Atheist shouldn't care either way about God's existence. And yet, they frequent forums like these.
God doesn't exist, just be done with it and move on. Obviously, there is some inner need they're trying to meet by being here.

Hence my question, "What's the point?" In other words, why are they here?
I really like Audie being here mind you, and I did enjoy my own exchanges with Kenny where I took a more laid back approach, but I'm nonetheless perplexed.
Unless they so "religiously" believe in their non-belief that they can't stand the thought of something other. But, then we're told over and over that it's not really a belief.

Finally, the "god of self" is essentially what I see Atheism boils down to.
For example, it is interesting that Kenny roots "morality" in humanity.
In what "he" identifies as the prime value -- to live peacefully with one another. "God of self".
If God does not exist, then given our evolutionary supremacy we really are the gods of the world.
So...

Hope that clarifies my meaning.

As for my earlier comments in that same post, I think I'm entitled to call a discussion as I see it.
I can't help the way I feel on that there. I just really don't think a lot of what Squible offered was countered.
Just lots of smoke and mirrors. But, such is the blindness that I see in them, just like the delusion they perhaps see in me.

...

Finally, the "god of self" is essentially what I see Atheism boils down to.

This is a rather different statement than saying what is. Which do you mean, a declarative statement of how things are, or just your opinion?

Just my opinion.

Audie wrote:But either way, it is a failure to comprehend how someone could really just not think the way you do. I remember years ago the first time I heard someone say, "I dont think anyone is really an atheist, in their heart". I was so surprised, I could show you right where I was standing. Till then, I thought that nobody in their heart could really believe in god! You may still not a-gotten that little epiph.

Not really, it's kind of in-built into Scripture (cf. Romans 1:18+; Romans 2:14-15).
So it also kind of goes with my Christian beliefs. But, I believe it applies equally to all.
We ALL want to bury God. None of us truly seek after God. (Romans 3:11)

Told you, I'm Christian.
You may not like that, but unlike "Atheism" it kind of carries with it some other baggage.
Hope you can still accept me as a person. I definitely otherwise deeply respect you as a person.

Audie wrote:I never have thought of an adequate way to illustrate this, but try this..
"Everyone believes in something, has some god"

or

"Everyone has some sport, cheers for some team"

Not really.

As for this...

self-professing Atheists who believe in nothing

Seriously? Is this what you really think?

Tell me it isnt true.

The fuller sentence, "I never understand those self-professing Atheists who believe in nothing coming here to dog Christians."

Again, I never had you specifically in mind.
I've debated a lot of Atheists in my 12 or something years here, not to mention elsewhere.
You might be different, but trust me I know what I'm talking about. There are many Atheists who behave in this manner.

This board was overrun with them once upon a time. Probably 5 Atheist for every Christian, and not your fun-loving kind
Jac and I started the board afresh, with new rules. Some of which you've read.
And this board has been a much safer and funner environment for Christians ever since.
But, to deny my very own experiences would be to deny myself. That I can't really do.

As for yourself, I don't think you just come here to dog Christians.
Again, not all Atheists are this way. I don't see you in this light and am sorry if I implied as much.
We've had some wonderful exchanges. You just make our lives a bit more uncomfortable, but in a good challenging way!

I don't believe Atheists believe in nothing. That's my opinion. They carry other beliefs too.
Consciously they deny God, while on subconscious levels they embrace God in many ways.

Scripture supports this.
That scientific study I posted elsewhere also seems to support this.
My Christian beliefs support this.

Again, I'm sorry if that offends you.
I suppose if you do want to continue talking with me, then it's something you're going to have to accept about what I believe.
But, I'm sure praying that you can look beyond that in me.

Kurieuo wrote:Cool, well now everything's all good I'll be off like a Jewish foreskin.

Kurieuo wrote:Cool, well now everything's all good I'll be off like a Jewish foreskin.

Squible wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:Cool, well now everything's all good I'll be off like a Jewish foreskin.

Eeeeeew! That's just off!

Audie wrote:

Squible wrote: Now you raised altruism, I agree that It may be true that certain animals which belong to groups and that behave altruistically will have some survival advantage. However, moral beliefs are not required in order to produce such behavior. It seems evident that there are many species of animals that are naturally inclined to help others of their species, and do not have moral beliefs.

Of course they dont have moral beliefs. My idea is just that people have the same characteristics. We are intelligent enough to be able to talk analyze, give names to what we do.

Audie wrote:

Squible wrote:You also denied your position was a "faith" based position by saying "As one can see it in various stages, its a reasonable thing to think, no faith needed.".
Interesting. It's reasonable to think that, yet you do not have absolute evidence for your own position, to then say it is not a "faith" based position. Not one doubt huh? No leap at all in trusting that position? Interesting.. that..

My training is science, and law. Neither does absolutes. This is getting into equivocation on the word faith.

Audie wrote:

Squible wrote: Ironically, I think its also reasonable to conclude that God exists as one sees it in various stages.

Conclude?

Audie wrote:

Squible wrote:As for the reality of moral existence it seems that you do not understand the ontological, I tried explaining it with illustrations but without success.

I dont have t rouble with simple basic concepts. i wanted a defintion of this term, "moral existence> which I cannot find anywhere.

Audie wrote:

Squible wrote: I see you are still looking at the tap. As such I see all of your examples are put in terms of the tap being the cause/source. You see the perfect explanation you accepted in an earlier exchange where morality exists because it gives an advantage is no different to saying that the water exists because it gives the tap an advantage by keeping the hole clear, sounds perfect but the reality is the water doesn't come from the tap now does it?

Your analogy is just inapt, and I dont do perfect. Organisms have many behaviours and responses. Amoeba move away from light. I dont see the problem in this.

Audie wrote:

Squible wrote: I also notice you went off to argue against design, by uncharitably using the worst case you could in order to prove your point. It's easy to attack a straw man Audie and jump up an down claiming victory. How about you get the best case scenarios from academia and attack them instead.

Oh heavens, no attack no s trawman and no jumping. People are attuned to looking for design. Faces in clouds. No argue against design, either. Design is everywhere.
The search for intelligent design is fine, maybe even nobel. Its been prematurely announced how many times! That is where to look for someone claiming victory.
I doubt anyone will ever find anything, but, hey, I wont get all biblical and refuse to accept something that doesnt fit my -ology.

Audie wrote:

Squible wrote: I believe given what I know and understand from a cumulative set of arguments that it is more plausible that God exists then its negation. Then again I also I have my personal experience to draw from as well like my prayer life and the day I came to know Christ. And the day I came to know Christ and the following two weeks was an intense alteration of how I saw reality as if my eyes were opened from a deep sleep or that I was blind to this new reality. It has stayed that way ever since. You can put up all the intellectual barriers you want but ultimately I believe it is a spiritual, moral and relational issue.

You speak of know, understand, and reality in ways that I cant correlate with what you said earlier of uncertainty. Prease exprain.

Regarding the barriers you speak of, I did have a mormon say more or less the same to me when I said the BoM is jsut ridiculous, how can anyone believe it.

You may be right, but you can see how I look at it, perhaps. Probably the same comments are to be made for any religion.

Squible wrote:Kenny,

I will say I am not against skepticism, since I too believe it is important.

It seems you hold to some form of materialistic skepticism (ie: empiricism). It also seems you believe objective physical laws exist and then deny objective moral values.

If you do believe that the physical laws exist, then that should tell you that there is more to reality then just the physical.

I must say I have found your position somewhat contradictory at times and quite boggling.

Anyway lets leave it at this point for now.

Cheers.