Evidence for God from Science

neo-x wrote:

DannyM on Sat Nov 19, 2011 4:37 pm

neo-x wrote:
It baffles me when someone says "I decide what goodness is"

Yep, there's that standard ...

It's like, I decide who my father is.... .....

neo-x wrote:

DannyM on Sat Nov 19, 2011 4:37 pm

neo-x wrote:
It baffles me when someone says "I decide what goodness is"

Yep, there's that standard ...

It's like, I decide who my father is.... .....

Very apt comparison. You cannot derive an ought from an is, you cannot get objective morality from a collection of random particles. If anyone said that a computer was good or evil for its actions or a plant or the sun for rising and falling, he'd be ridiculed. And yet assuming atheism, we're no more or less than any collection of atoms whether it be a plant or a computer or anything. Of course the problem is that the existence of moral laws seems basic and obvious. Its a problem for the atheist for sure, I'm glad I'm not one.

KenV wrote: Right... but how what reason would I have for adopting an ideology that doesn't make sense to me subjectively? There is no logical reason to adopt a believe when it doesn't make sense to you. My train of thought could certainly be wrong, but there are plenty of faiths out there that would land me in hot water with other faiths depending on the faith. Simply put, for someone to adopt something it has to make sense to them, if it doesn't make sense to them it is asinine for them to adopt it.

You may be interested in reading this:
http://www.gotquestions.org/correct-religion.html

DannyM wrote:

neo-x wrote:Prove, how I am wrong, without smuggling in objective morality, Ken.

He can't

It may be just a hunch, but I kinda believe that we won't be hearing from KenV on this board anymore (I'd like to be wrong though)... But I mean, he hasn't logged in for nearly 48 hours.

Is 18 posts a highscore for newcoming atheists around here?

Reactionary wrote:

DannyM wrote:

neo-x wrote:Prove, how I am wrong, without smuggling in objective morality, Ken.

He can't

It may be just a hunch, but I kinda believe that we won't be hearing from KenV on this board anymore (I'd like to be wrong though)... But I mean, he hasn't logged in for nearly 48 hours.

Is 18 posts a highscore for newcoming atheists around here?

I've seen higher ... but off the top of my head i can only count them on one hand

Fair play to Ken, he remained calm and level-headed overall, which is to be commended. And of course, he could be back for some more knowledge from the Brothers

narnia4 wrote:Very apt comparison. You cannot derive an ought from an is, you cannot get objective morality from a collection of random particles. If anyone said that a computer was good or evil for its actions or a plant or the sun for rising and falling, he'd be ridiculed. And yet assuming atheism, we're no more or less than any collection of atoms whether it be a plant or a computer or anything. Of course the problem is that the existence of moral laws seems basic and obvious. Its a problem for the atheist for sure, I'm glad I'm not one.

I know, the whole argument is counter-intuitive, so it must be difficult even for them to fathom the position they’re arguing for.

DannyM wrote:

Reactionary wrote:t may be just a hunch, but I kinda believe that we won't be hearing from KenV on this board anymore (I'd like to be wrong though)... But I mean, he hasn't logged in for nearly 48 hours.

Is 18 posts a highscore for newcoming atheists around here?

I've seen higher ... but off the top of my head i can only count them on one hand

Fair play to Ken, he remained calm and level-headed overall, which is to be commended. And of course, he could be back for some more knowledge from the Brothers

Of course. I hope these discussions at least made him rethink his beliefs.

KenV is welcome back...

of course he is, we dont want anyone to leave, especially if he is trying to learn more. I hope he comes back and answer the questions posted to him.

I think kristoffer has the highest post count for an athiest / agnostic

Murray wrote:I think kristoffer has the highest post count for an athiest / agnostic

Yeah, but he was a bit of a circus, wasn't he?

Highest post count for an atheist would be BGoodForGoodSake at 2059 I think. He was more active in the past. I see he checked in 2 days ago though.

oh wow, I didn't think any atheist got to the ultimate member section.

And why are there so many 0 and 1 post accounts? there's like 3 pages of them

There's a lot of bots and spammers that come by and create accounts that never post. Some atheists come by and hit and run leaving an insult or attack and we don't approve their comments. Atheists and other faiths are able to post and converse here as long as they operate in the scope of our Board Purpose and Discussion Guidelines.

Reactionary wrote:

DannyM wrote:

neo-x wrote:Prove, how I am wrong, without smuggling in objective morality, Ken.

He can't

It may be just a hunch, but I kinda believe that we won't be hearing from KenV on this board anymore (I'd like to be wrong though)... But I mean, he hasn't logged in for nearly 48 hours.

Is 18 posts a highscore for newcoming atheists around here?

Awww, Reactionary, you know how much I like you, but let's be fair to him. He did remain very respectful and was coming here for answers. We need to pray for souls like his -- he's searching and the devil will be pulling at him more and more now that he's found us.

Edit: and I have no idea why my edit was a totally new post O.o sorry about that (as you'll see on the next page)