Evidence for God from Science

abelcainsbrother wrote:Kenny, what stuff in our world did not come into being?

Perhaps Energy?
Perhaps Matter?
Perhaps Dark Energy?
Perhaps Dark Matter?

What stuff in our world DID come into being?

Ken

PaulSacramento wrote:

Audie wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:Everything we believe in involves a CHOICE to believe in it.
Atheism is a choice.
It is a choice to NOT believe the evidence for God and TO BELIEVE the evidence that no god exists.

That may be the bright line that distinguishes "believers' from other people.

"Choosing" to believe. Deciding what to believe.

I dont doubt that some-the believers- can just decide to believe something, and then believe it.

Doesn't work that way for me. No more than I can do the White Queen thing and believe 6 impossible things before breakfast.

So you are saying that YOU have NO choice in what you believe?

No; I don’t believe I have a choice in what I believe. I may be able to an extent choose the direction of what I believe, but in order to believe I must be convinced first; belief is not a choice. For me, belief happens after reason and logic demands it; never before.

Example; If Bill Gates offered you a billion dollars to believe you could fly like a bird, do you believe you could choose to believe it? I think not. You might be able to pretend you believe, you might even be able to convince everybody around you that you believe this; but at the end of the day you would know you were lying.
Now perhaps you can control the direction of what you believe; if you were say…. a political conservative, you could choose to ignore political conservative ideas and focus on listening to liberal and progressive ideas, and over time perhaps sone of those progressive and liberal ideas might start to make sense to you, and eventually liberal ideas may begin to make more sense to you than your previous ideas, but even attempting to control the direction of belief this way has its limits; it only works on things that are believable.
This is how it works for me, and this is how I believe it works for everybody else.

In the context of this conversation, I am no more able to choose to believe what is required to be Christian, than you can choose to believe you can fly like a bird.

Does this make sense to you? If not, please explain.

Ken

Of course we all choose to believe what we believe.

Anyone who says differently makes no sense.

I choose to believe God exists.

Kenny chooses to believe God doesn't exist.

My choosing to believe God exists, doesn't make God exist, just like Kenny choosing to believe God doesn't exist, doesn't mean that God doesn't exist, just because Kenny believes He doesn't exist.

And just because someone chooses to believe he can fly like a bird, that doesn't mean he can.

RickD wrote:Of course we all choose to believe what we believe.

Anyone who says differently makes no sense.

I choose to believe God exists.

Kenny chooses to believe God doesn't exist.

My choosing to believe God exists, doesn't make God exist, just like Kenny choosing to believe God doesn't exist, doesn't mean that God doesn't exist, just because Kenny believes He doesn't exist.

And just because someone chooses to believe he can fly like a bird, that doesn't mean he can.

Can what ? Certainly he can think he is gifted with flight, some do believe such things. Others believe the gold books of j smith.

It is that distinction I spoke of; "believers", those who go about believing things, and, the rest of us.

Believers say they can choose, to believe and evidently they do. Obviously they do. And to a believer,
that makes perfect sense. Jumping out of an airplane makes sense to a parachuter.

You think as you think. I think as I do. The special gift or unfortunate deficiecy, whichever it is,
is not mine.

You speak only for those on your side of that line.

(Ha. I got in "is is" and a rhyme, without even trying)

RickD wrote:Of course we all choose to believe what we believe.

Anyone who says differently makes no sense.

I choose to believe God exists.

Kenny chooses to believe God doesn't exist.

My choosing to believe God exists, doesn't make God exist, just like Kenny choosing to believe God doesn't exist, doesn't mean that God doesn't exist, just because Kenny believes He doesn't exist.

And just because someone chooses to believe he can fly like a bird, that doesn't mean he can.

What do you think of the point I made?

Ken

Kenny wrote:

Danieltwotwenty wrote:

Kenny wrote:

Danieltwotwenty wrote:

Kenny wrote: Okay; so if people with no concept of God are not Atheist, what are they?

Ken

They would be the same way in reference to morals, they would be amoral instead or moral or immoral. They have no concept of morality and what it entails hence they are amoral. It would be the same way with beliefs, the have no concept of God (belief) or what it is and they have no concept of atheism (disbelief) or what that is, they would have abeliefs as opposed to having beliefs. A baby or severely mentally disabled person cannot be an atheist, as they have no understanding of what it means to be atheist.

So you would call a person who does not believe in God, and makes no claim about God, an Abelief? Are you kidding me? That isn't even a word! Care to try again? Hint: Atheism is not defined as disbelief because all atheists believe in something, they just don't believe in God.

Ken

I realise I made up a word, I had to because one does not exist, mainly because we usually don't talk about babies and the severely mentally disabled as having beliefs or unbelief as they are not capable of either. The same way we don't talk about talk about babies and the severely mentally disabled as being moral or immoral. In both cases they are not capable and would be a-XXXXXXXX

A baby can no more make a decision about morals than it can about beliefs, hence a baby cannot be am atheist.

As I mentioned earlier, what about the Piraha people? They have no concept of God, they are not babies, they are not retarded, and they are not immoral. They have plenty of beliefs, and they have plenty of unbeliefs. What would you call them?

Ken

It is increasingly accepted that the isolated "primitive" tribes of the Amazon are relict populations,
post- apocalyptic if you like, refugees. The loss of culture under such conditions is inevitable.

Audie wrote:

Kenny wrote:

Danieltwotwenty wrote:

Kenny wrote:

Danieltwotwenty wrote:
They would be the same way in reference to morals, they would be amoral instead or moral or immoral. They have no concept of morality and what it entails hence they are amoral. It would be the same way with beliefs, the have no concept of God (belief) or what it is and they have no concept of atheism (disbelief) or what that is, they would have abeliefs as opposed to having beliefs. A baby or severely mentally disabled person cannot be an atheist, as they have no understanding of what it means to be atheist.

So you would call a person who does not believe in God, and makes no claim about God, an Abelief? Are you kidding me? That isn't even a word! Care to try again? Hint: Atheism is not defined as disbelief because all atheists believe in something, they just don't believe in God.

Ken

I realise I made up a word, I had to because one does not exist, mainly because we usually don't talk about babies and the severely mentally disabled as having beliefs or unbelief as they are not capable of either. The same way we don't talk about talk about babies and the severely mentally disabled as being moral or immoral. In both cases they are not capable and would be a-XXXXXXXX

A baby can no more make a decision about morals than it can about beliefs, hence a baby cannot be am atheist.

As I mentioned earlier, what about the Piraha people? They have no concept of God, they are not babies, they are not retarded, and they are not immoral. They have plenty of beliefs, and they have plenty of unbeliefs. What would you call them?

Ken

It is increasingly accepted that the isolated "primitive" tribes of the Amazon are relict populations,
posy apocalyptic if you like, refugees. The loss of culture under such conditions is inevitable.

Yeah.... and some of them are Atheists too!

K

Kenny wrote:

Audie wrote:

Kenny wrote:

Danieltwotwenty wrote:

Kenny wrote: So you would call a person who does not believe in God, and makes no claim about God, an Abelief? Are you kidding me? That isn't even a word! Care to try again? Hint: Atheism is not defined as disbelief because all atheists believe in something, they just don't believe in God.

Ken

I realise I made up a word, I had to because one does not exist, mainly because we usually don't talk about babies and the severely mentally disabled as having beliefs or unbelief as they are not capable of either. The same way we don't talk about talk about babies and the severely mentally disabled as being moral or immoral. In both cases they are not capable and would be a-XXXXXXXX

A baby can no more make a decision about morals than it can about beliefs, hence a baby cannot be am atheist.

As I mentioned earlier, what about the Piraha people? They have no concept of God, they are not babies, they are not retarded, and they are not immoral. They have plenty of beliefs, and they have plenty of unbeliefs. What would you call them?

Ken

It is increasingly accepted that the isolated "primitive" tribes of the Amazon are relict populations,
post- apocalyptic if you like, refugees. The loss of culture under such conditions is inevitable.

Yeah.... and some of them are Atheists too!

K

With a capital "A"?

Kenny wrote:

Audie wrote: It is increasingly accepted that the isolated "primitive" tribes of the Amazon are relict populations,
posy apocalyptic if you like, refugees. The loss of culture under such conditions is inevitable.

Yeah.... and some of them are Atheists too!

Yes, let's not forget those Pirahã people.

Kurieuo wrote:

Kenny wrote:

Audie wrote: It is increasingly accepted that the isolated "primitive" tribes of the Amazon are relict populations,
posy apocalyptic if you like, refugees. The loss of culture under such conditions is inevitable.

Yeah.... and some of them are Atheists too!

Yes, let's not forget those Pirahã people.

I mean-like totally god- they are right there!

Audie wrote:

Kenny wrote:

Audie wrote:

Kenny wrote:

Danieltwotwenty wrote:

I realise I made up a word, I had to because one does not exist, mainly because we usually don't talk about babies and the severely mentally disabled as having beliefs or unbelief as they are not capable of either. The same way we don't talk about talk about babies and the severely mentally disabled as being moral or immoral. In both cases they are not capable and would be a-XXXXXXXX

A baby can no more make a decision about morals than it can about beliefs, hence a baby cannot be am atheist.

As I mentioned earlier, what about the Piraha people? They have no concept of God, they are not babies, they are not retarded, and they are not immoral. They have plenty of beliefs, and they have plenty of unbeliefs. What would you call them?

Ken

It is increasingly accepted that the isolated "primitive" tribes of the Amazon are relict populations,
post- apocalyptic if you like, refugees. The loss of culture under such conditions is inevitable.

Yeah.... and some of them are Atheists too!

K

With a capital "A"?

Don't read too much in to it, i capitalize everything

K

Kurieuo wrote:

Kenny wrote:

Audie wrote: It is increasingly accepted that the isolated "primitive" tribes of the Amazon are relict populations,
posy apocalyptic if you like, refugees. The loss of culture under such conditions is inevitable.

Yeah.... and some of them are Atheists too!

Yes, let's not forget those Pirahã people.

With a capital "P"? Oh yeah don't read too much in to it (LOL)

K

Kenny wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:

Kenny wrote:

Audie wrote: It is increasingly accepted that the isolated "primitive" tribes of the Amazon are relict populations,
posy apocalyptic if you like, refugees. The loss of culture under such conditions is inevitable.

Yeah.... and some of them are Atheists too!

Yes, let's not forget those Pirahã people.

With a capital "P"? Oh yeah don't read too much in to it (LOL)

K

Prrhaps you could use a little nap?

Audie wrote:

Kenny wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:

Kenny wrote:

Audie wrote: It is increasingly accepted that the isolated "primitive" tribes of the Amazon are relict populations,
posy apocalyptic if you like, refugees. The loss of culture under such conditions is inevitable.

Yeah.... and some of them are Atheists too!

Yes, let's not forget those Pirahã people.

With a capital "P"? Oh yeah don't read too much in to it (LOL)

K

Prrhaps you could use a little nap?

No sense of humor huh?

Kenny wrote:

RickD wrote:Of course we all choose to believe what we believe.

Anyone who says differently makes no sense.

I choose to believe God exists.

Kenny chooses to believe God doesn't exist.

My choosing to believe God exists, doesn't make God exist, just like Kenny choosing to believe God doesn't exist, doesn't mean that God doesn't exist, just because Kenny believes He doesn't exist.

And just because someone chooses to believe he can fly like a bird, that doesn't mean he can.

What do you think of the point I made?

Ken

Are you talking about this point?

In the context of this conversation, I am no more able to choose to believe what is required to be Christian, than you can choose to believe you can fly like a bird.

I'm not sure I get the comparison. I don't choose to believe I can fly like a bird, because I don't have wings. You don't choose to believe in God, Christ, and the message of the cross, because you misunderstand first, the concept of who God is. And, that, in your mind, leads you to believe atheism is logical.