Evidence for God from Science

RickD wrote: ↑Sat Jul 13, 2019 8:33 pm

Kenny wrote: ↑Sat Jul 13, 2019 12:17 pm

RickD wrote: ↑Sat Jul 13, 2019 8:49 am Kenny,

I think I understand your question, and there's confusion with ACB's answer.

You asked:

What do you mean when you say "no evidence that atheism is true or right?

I think he means that there's no evidence that God doesn't exist. Which isn't even controversial, since you admitted that you don't have any evidence.

The God of the Bible is described in a way that makes it impossible to disprove. I can't even disprove the existence of Santa Clause; does that mean I can't be skeptical? IMO the inability to disprove something has never been a reason to believe it

RickD wrote: ↑Sat Jul 13, 2019 8:49 amAnd how you aren't understanding how you are sawing off the very branch that you're standing on, is beyond me.

Perhaps you can explain it to me.

And as you write this, you are still oblivious to the fact that as a materialist, you must rely on evidence, because that's all you've got. Proof of God's existence is swept under the rug, and ignored, because it's not empirical evidence. Yet you hold to atheism, without any evidence that God doesn't exist.

Your entire worldview is based on faulty reasoning.

Atheism is not something you hold on to, it's the default position; it's what you fall back onto when what you were holding on to disappears.

Kenny wrote: ↑Sat Jul 13, 2019 8:54 pm

RickD wrote: ↑Sat Jul 13, 2019 8:33 pm

Kenny wrote: ↑Sat Jul 13, 2019 12:17 pm

RickD wrote: ↑Sat Jul 13, 2019 8:49 am Kenny,

I think I understand your question, and there's confusion with ACB's answer.

You asked:

What do you mean when you say "no evidence that atheism is true or right?

I think he means that there's no evidence that God doesn't exist. Which isn't even controversial, since you admitted that you don't have any evidence.

The God of the Bible is described in a way that makes it impossible to disprove. I can't even disprove the existence of Santa Clause; does that mean I can't be skeptical? IMO the inability to disprove something has never been a reason to believe it

RickD wrote: ↑Sat Jul 13, 2019 8:49 amAnd how you aren't understanding how you are sawing off the very branch that you're standing on, is beyond me.

Perhaps you can explain it to me.

And as you write this, you are still oblivious to the fact that as a materialist, you must rely on evidence, because that's all you've got. Proof of God's existence is swept under the rug, and ignored, because it's not empirical evidence. Yet you hold to atheism, without any evidence that God doesn't exist.

Your entire worldview is based on faulty reasoning.

Atheism is not something you hold on to, it's the default position; it's what you fall back onto when what you were holding on to disappears.

Nobody is believing any of what you're saying. I don't even think you really believe it, but you're too stubborn to let go.

Kenny wrote: ↑Sat Jul 13, 2019 11:56 am

Storyteller wrote: ↑Sat Jul 13, 2019 3:01 am That life is created by already existing life sources. Trace it back Ken.

Okay I gotcha. The idea that matter has always existed is something I’ve mentioned many times before that makes sense to me. The idea that the cell is one of many substances of matter that has always existed, is a discussion that has lead to countless “face palms” from RickyD, Philip, and countless others I’ve discussed with on this forum.

Why does it make sense to you?

(Sorry if any of my posts come across as obtuse or whatever, im just trying to make sure i understand your thoughts Ken)

Kenny wrote: ↑Sat Jul 13, 2019 8:54 pm

RickD wrote: ↑Sat Jul 13, 2019 8:33 pm

Kenny wrote: ↑Sat Jul 13, 2019 12:17 pm

RickD wrote: ↑Sat Jul 13, 2019 8:49 am Kenny,

I think I understand your question, and there's confusion with ACB's answer.

You asked:

What do you mean when you say "no evidence that atheism is true or right?

I think he means that there's no evidence that God doesn't exist. Which isn't even controversial, since you admitted that you don't have any evidence.

The God of the Bible is described in a way that makes it impossible to disprove. I can't even disprove the existence of Santa Clause; does that mean I can't be skeptical? IMO the inability to disprove something has never been a reason to believe it

RickD wrote: ↑Sat Jul 13, 2019 8:49 amAnd how you aren't understanding how you are sawing off the very branch that you're standing on, is beyond me.

Perhaps you can explain it to me.

And as you write this, you are still oblivious to the fact that as a materialist, you must rely on evidence, because that's all you've got. Proof of God's existence is swept under the rug, and ignored, because it's not empirical evidence. Yet you hold to atheism, without any evidence that God doesn't exist.

Your entire worldview is based on faulty reasoning.

Atheism is not something you hold on to, it's the default position; it's what you fall back onto when what you were holding on to disappears.

Depends on why what you were holding on to disappears.

RickD wrote: ↑Sun Jul 14, 2019 4:43 am

Kenny wrote: ↑Sat Jul 13, 2019 8:54 pm

RickD wrote: ↑Sat Jul 13, 2019 8:33 pm

Kenny wrote: ↑Sat Jul 13, 2019 12:17 pm

RickD wrote: ↑Sat Jul 13, 2019 8:49 am Kenny,

I think I understand your question, and there's confusion with ACB's answer.

You asked:

I think he means that there's no evidence that God doesn't exist. Which isn't even controversial, since you admitted that you don't have any evidence.

The God of the Bible is described in a way that makes it impossible to disprove. I can't even disprove the existence of Santa Clause; does that mean I can't be skeptical? IMO the inability to disprove something has never been a reason to believe it

RickD wrote: ↑Sat Jul 13, 2019 8:49 amAnd how you aren't understanding how you are sawing off the very branch that you're standing on, is beyond me.

Perhaps you can explain it to me.

And as you write this, you are still oblivious to the fact that as a materialist, you must rely on evidence, because that's all you've got. Proof of God's existence is swept under the rug, and ignored, because it's not empirical evidence. Yet you hold to atheism, without any evidence that God doesn't exist.

Your entire worldview is based on faulty reasoning.

Atheism is not something you hold on to, it's the default position; it's what you fall back onto when what you were holding on to disappears.

Nobody is believing any of what you're saying. I don't even think you really believe it, but you're too stubborn to let go.

Atheism is to reject what someone tells you concerning a specific issue. Do you agree?

Storyteller wrote: ↑Sun Jul 14, 2019 5:08 am

Kenny wrote: ↑Sat Jul 13, 2019 11:56 am

Storyteller wrote: ↑Sat Jul 13, 2019 3:01 am That life is created by already existing life sources. Trace it back Ken.

Okay I gotcha. The idea that matter has always existed is something I’ve mentioned many times before that makes sense to me. The idea that the cell is one of many substances of matter that has always existed, is a discussion that has lead to countless “face palms” from RickyD, Philip, and countless others I’ve discussed with on this forum.

Why does it make sense to you?

(Sorry if any of my posts come across as obtuse or whatever, im just trying to make sure i understand your thoughts Ken)

Why does the idea that material had to have existed eternally make sense to me? Because the idea that something can come from nothing does not make sense, and material is all that we know that exists.
Why does the idea that the cell may have been one of the many substances of matter that existed eternally? Because to me it makes more sense than the idea that life derived from metals, ceramics, or some other type of material.

Storyteller wrote: ↑Sun Jul 14, 2019 5:10 am

Kenny wrote: ↑Sat Jul 13, 2019 8:54 pm

RickD wrote: ↑Sat Jul 13, 2019 8:33 pm

Kenny wrote: ↑Sat Jul 13, 2019 12:17 pm

RickD wrote: ↑Sat Jul 13, 2019 8:49 am Kenny,

I think I understand your question, and there's confusion with ACB's answer.

You asked:

I think he means that there's no evidence that God doesn't exist. Which isn't even controversial, since you admitted that you don't have any evidence.

The God of the Bible is described in a way that makes it impossible to disprove. I can't even disprove the existence of Santa Clause; does that mean I can't be skeptical? IMO the inability to disprove something has never been a reason to believe it

RickD wrote: ↑Sat Jul 13, 2019 8:49 amAnd how you aren't understanding how you are sawing off the very branch that you're standing on, is beyond me.

Perhaps you can explain it to me.

And as you write this, you are still oblivious to the fact that as a materialist, you must rely on evidence, because that's all you've got. Proof of God's existence is swept under the rug, and ignored, because it's not empirical evidence. Yet you hold to atheism, without any evidence that God doesn't exist.

Your entire worldview is based on faulty reasoning.

Atheism is not something you hold on to, it's the default position; it's what you fall back onto when what you were holding on to disappears.

Depends on why what you were holding on to disappears.

As I’ve said many times before, everything I believe is always up for question, and can be altered and/or discarded upon new found information or evidence.
The reason what I was holding on to disappeared was due a desire to seek the truth, which lead to research, which lead to new found information and evidence, which lead to me altering and/or discarding everything I believed to be true concerning theism, thus I default to Atheism.

Kenny wrote: ↑Sun Jul 14, 2019 6:41 am

RickD wrote: ↑Sun Jul 14, 2019 4:43 am

Kenny wrote: ↑Sat Jul 13, 2019 8:54 pm

RickD wrote: ↑Sat Jul 13, 2019 8:33 pm

Kenny wrote: ↑Sat Jul 13, 2019 12:17 pm
The God of the Bible is described in a way that makes it impossible to disprove. I can't even disprove the existence of Santa Clause; does that mean I can't be skeptical? IMO the inability to disprove something has never been a reason to believe it


Perhaps you can explain it to me.

And as you write this, you are still oblivious to the fact that as a materialist, you must rely on evidence, because that's all you've got. Proof of God's existence is swept under the rug, and ignored, because it's not empirical evidence. Yet you hold to atheism, without any evidence that God doesn't exist.

Your entire worldview is based on faulty reasoning.

Atheism is not something you hold on to, it's the default position; it's what you fall back onto when what you were holding on to disappears.

Nobody is believing any of what you're saying. I don't even think you really believe it, but you're too stubborn to let go.

Atheism is to reject what someone tells you concerning a specific issue. Do you agree?

In as small much as theism is just a rejection of the belief that there is no God.

For the 100th time....

Theism=Belief that a creator, sustainer, eternal, etc., God exists.

Atheism=Belief that a creator, sustainer, eternal, etc., God doesn't exist.

It's as simple as that.

By denying the definition of atheism, you're just sticking your head in the sand, and refusing to deal with realities that are unpleasant to you.

RickD wrote: ↑Sun Jul 14, 2019 7:23 am

Kenny wrote: ↑Sun Jul 14, 2019 6:41 am

RickD wrote: ↑Sun Jul 14, 2019 4:43 am

Kenny wrote: ↑Sat Jul 13, 2019 8:54 pm

RickD wrote: ↑Sat Jul 13, 2019 8:33 pm
And as you write this, you are still oblivious to the fact that as a materialist, you must rely on evidence, because that's all you've got. Proof of God's existence is swept under the rug, and ignored, because it's not empirical evidence. Yet you hold to atheism, without any evidence that God doesn't exist.

Your entire worldview is based on faulty reasoning.

Atheism is not something you hold on to, it's the default position; it's what you fall back onto when what you were holding on to disappears.

Nobody is believing any of what you're saying. I don't even think you really believe it, but you're too stubborn to let go.

Atheism is to reject what someone tells you concerning a specific issue. Do you agree?

In as small much as theism is just a rejection of the belief that there is no God.

For the 100th time....

Theism=Belief that a creator, sustainer, eternal, etc., God exists.

Atheism=Belief that a creator, sustainer, eternal, etc., God doesn't exist.

It's as simple as that.

By denying the definition of atheism, you're just sticking your head in the sand, and refusing to deal with realities that are unpleasant to you.

Going by your definition; to deny/reject the existence of something is not holding onto something, to deny/reject is to default to the original position.

Kenny wrote:
Going by your definition; to deny/reject the existence of something is not holding onto something, to deny/reject is to default to the original position.

First,

It's not my definition. It's the dictionary definition.

Second, atheism isn't a default position.

We have two positions here. One is a belief in the existence of God. The other is a belief that God doesn't exist.

I don't see how you can still deny that atheism is a belief.

You simply refuse to have an honest conversation.

Until you decide to be honest, I'm not going to engage you further.

I'm not wasting my time any longer, on someone who refuses to have an honest discussion.

RickD wrote: ↑Sun Jul 14, 2019 9:30 am

Kenny wrote:
Going by your definition; to deny/reject the existence of something is not holding onto something, to deny/reject is to default to the original position.

First,

It's not my definition. It's the dictionary definition.

Second, atheism isn't a default position.

We have two positions here. One is a belief in the existence of God. The other is a belief that God doesn't exist.

I don't see how you can still deny that atheism is a belief.

You simply refuse to have an honest conversation.

Until you decide to be honest, I'm not going to engage you further.

I'm not wasting my time any longer, on someone who refuses to have an honest discussion.

If we make the leap that believing something does not exist is a belief position, what other belief positions might one have?

*The belief Santa doesn’t exist
*The belief the world is not flat?
*The belief poiuytrewq is not a word
*The belief asdfghjkl is not a word
*The belief that I am not 10 feet tall

Really?? Are you going to claim that those are all belief positions?
To claim “X” is true is the belief position
To not believe “X” is true, to doubt the claim that “X” is true, to be skeptical is the default position not a belief position.