Evidence for God from Science

@jilay:

Lets's see. The creator creates a paradise. Creates man to dwell and tend to it. In essence, to rule over it. The restriction, the ONLY restriction, is do not touch this one thing. Everything else is yours, just don't go there. Well, IMO, this sets up a necesarry dynamic in the relationship.

I think i might have said something along these lines. Something like god did it to get the whole thing rolling.

you've made it pretty clear that you think man should be made without the capacity to fail, or sin.

No, just in a better enviorment.Since he wants this free will thing predisposing them to do good wouldn't count. So iam going with that it was left subject to chance

Yet, this is totally illogical, because that is NOT a man. It is, well, not a thing at all.

How so?
would it not be capable of emotions and love? Is that not what god is?

You've offered no real alternative.

Anything is real(possible) with god no?

I already said, is to see if you are sincere, or antagonistic.

so sorry i thought that said agnostic. But no iam not here to pester. I guess i tangled with too many people at once and got really confused. I eventually found contradictions in what iam saying.

Well, IMO, this sets up a necesarry dynamic in the relationship.

I can't argue against that, it's your opinion.

Wrong. You wouldn't even be here to consider it.

And?

How can something be better? Account for it. Prove it man.

With this it helped me understand what you were talking about in another post. Saying something like the only way i can definitely say something is better is for it to have objective value first.

All you are saying is that the cosmos would be better without YOU.

It just might be O.O

Is torturing puppies for pleasure right or wrong? If the majority of a people prefer torturing puppies for pleasure, is it then morally right?

No it isn't IMO hence the subjective part.

@monica

But that's what atheists do best, Neo They think they're so critical but the moment they open their mouths about this topic, they only prove how little they know.

1.Not an atheist, said that in the first post
2.I don't while i assume alot i will admit it is out of ignorance which is why i am trying so hard, i want no doubt.
3."they open their mouths about this topic, they only prove how little they know."
Right back cha ;D

By the way, Sailor, you never responded to my post either.

sorry iam juggling so much that i loose track XD


@all: Ok i think i ultimately get it(did i not already say that?),with a combination of realizing errors in what i have been trying to argue against i conclude the following

If god wants this whole free will, suffering make us bond shtick. The by all means tornadoes are the way to go.
And from what i have gathered from jlay's last post the tree was to set it all in motion.

And since this is how god wants to do it... and it isn't logically contradictory(mostly, i say that because iam still processing it) then by all means go for it. Iam just going to sit here and disagree full heatedly... And on what basis?.... My opinion. I don't believe in ANY of it, i just took it seriously for the sake of understanding the reasons behind it. I guess i was blinded with disagreement that i almost ended up in a logical gymnastics trying to make sense of it all XD. But please just don't give bad examples like the match one. They are no where near the same thing, not even metaphorically,they were close but were missing 2 key things. No good parent(the the typical sense of the word) would KNOW that something really bad would happen to their kid and let it.

And iam sorry if i offended anyone, iam just a little jocular and aggressively passionate. I mean no harm. But thanks, i couldn't disagree with it MORE,but hey. I came to know why and i know now XD

sailornaruto39 wrote:... Iam just going to sit here and disagree full heatedly... And on what basis?.... My opinion ...

Way to have a logically consistent position, sailor. Just keep on plugging those ears of yours, reason be damned.

Byblos wrote:

sailornaruto39 wrote:... Iam just going to sit here and disagree full heatedly... And on what basis?.... My opinion ...

Way to have a logically consistent position, sailor. Just keep on plugging those ears of yours, reason be damned.

...
I love you too.If you did not hear me i have excepted most of the reasons postulated. I even admitted to myself that i have made errors.
Yes i lacked consistency,but instead of trying to make up things to make them sees sensible i fixed them. Isn't that what all this is about? Man learning from stuff?
You know the whole deal about suffering being something to learn from?
sheesh

sailornaruto39 wrote:

Byblos wrote:

sailornaruto39 wrote:... Iam just going to sit here and disagree full heatedly... And on what basis?.... My opinion ...

Way to have a logically consistent position, sailor. Just keep on plugging those ears of yours, reason be damned.

...
I love you too.If you did not hear me i have excepted most of the reasons postulated. I even admitted to myself that i have made errors.
Yes i lacked consistency,but i fixed. Isn't that what all this is about? Man learning from stuff?

And yet you still maintain your fool-heartedly disagreement, solely on the basis of your unsubstantiated opinion. What would you call that other than stubbornness wrapped in ignorance?

If you expect us to show love by blindly agreeing with you then you've come to the wrong place. But make no mistake about it, this is NOT being done out of malice.

Let's get a positive mood going

Byblos wrote:

sailornaruto39 wrote:

Byblos wrote:

sailornaruto39 wrote:... Iam just going to sit here and disagree full heatedly... And on what basis?.... My opinion ...

Way to have a logically consistent position, sailor. Just keep on plugging those ears of yours, reason be damned.

...
I love you too.If you did not hear me i have excepted most of the reasons postulated. I even admitted to myself that i have made errors.
Yes i lacked consistency,but i fixed. Isn't that what all this is about? Man learning from stuff?

And yet you still maintain your fool-heartedly disagreement, solely on the basis of your unsubstantiated opinion. What would you call that other than stubbornness wrapped in ignorance?

uhh... doy? It is an opinion. I would have preferred it completely differently. Which is why i dis agree. This is all ice cream to me, some guy(god) like vanillia for x reason, and his x make be the reason why i dislike it. Hence me not agreeing with the whole things.
Problem?
Take it up with my secretary, you can call her and 1-800 THAT IS WHAT SUBJECTIVE MEANS. Or log on to IF THAT IS MY BLOODY OPINION THAT I WANT SOMETHING ELSE TO CAUSE SOMETHING ELSE THEN'LL FREAKING DO IT(want it).com
Don't hate on the caps

sailornaruto39 wrote:

Byblos wrote:

sailornaruto39 wrote:

Byblos wrote:

sailornaruto39 wrote:... Iam just going to sit here and disagree full heatedly... And on what basis?.... My opinion ...

Way to have a logically consistent position, sailor. Just keep on plugging those ears of yours, reason be damned.

...
I love you too.If you did not hear me i have excepted most of the reasons postulated. I even admitted to myself that i have made errors.
Yes i lacked consistency,but i fixed. Isn't that what all this is about? Man learning from stuff?

And yet you still maintain your fool-heartedly disagreement, solely on the basis of your unsubstantiated opinion. What would you call that other than stubbornness wrapped in ignorance?

uhh... doy? It is an opinion. I would have preferred it completely differently. Which is why i dis agree. This is all ice cream to me, some guy(god) like vanillia for x reason, and his x make be the reason why i dislike it. Hence me not agreeing with the whole things.
Problem?
Take it up with my secretary, you can call her and 1-800 THAT IS WHAT SUBJECTIVE MEANS. Or log on to IF THAT IS MY BLOODY OPINION THAT I WANT SOMETHING ELSE TO CAUSE SOMETHING ELSE THEN'LL FREAKING DO IT(want it).com
Don't hate on the caps

Murray wrote:Let's get a positive mood going

that was what i was trying to do. I honestly seriously saw how i wasn't making any sense based on the criteria i initially proposed. So like an honest person i admitted to it.

sailornaruto39 wrote:

Byblos wrote:

sailornaruto39 wrote:

Byblos wrote:

sailornaruto39 wrote:... Iam just going to sit here and disagree full heatedly... And on what basis?.... My opinion ...

Way to have a logically consistent position, sailor. Just keep on plugging those ears of yours, reason be damned.

...
I love you too.If you did not hear me i have excepted most of the reasons postulated. I even admitted to myself that i have made errors.
Yes i lacked consistency,but i fixed. Isn't that what all this is about? Man learning from stuff?

And yet you still maintain your fool-heartedly disagreement, solely on the basis of your unsubstantiated opinion. What would you call that other than stubbornness wrapped in ignorance?

uhh... doy? It is an opinion. I would have preferred it completely differently. Which is why i dis agree. This is all ice cream to me, some guy(god) like vanillia for x reason, and his x make be the reason why i dislike it. Hence me not agreeing with the whole things.
Problem?
Take it up with my secretary, you can call her and 1-800 THAT IS WHAT SUBJECTIVE MEANS. Or log on to IF THAT IS MY BLOODY OPINION THAT I WANT SOMETHING ELSE TO CAUSE SOMETHING ELSE THEN'LL FREAKING DO IT(want it).com
Don't hate on the caps

Which is fine Sailor, you are certainly entitled to your opinion, however groundless and misguided it is. Just don't have an issue either when it's identified as such.

groudless? misguided?
How so? it is what i want. It needs no other ground or guidance. Do you tell that to people who like certain ice cream flavors?
Im called ignorant alot, and while it irks me alot of the times it is true, what especially irks me are the unfounded.

sailornaruto39 wrote:groudless? misguided?
How so? it is what i want. It needs no other ground or guidance. Do you tell that to people who like certain ice cream flavors?
Im called ignorant alot, and while it irks me alot of the times it is true, what especially irks me are the unfounded.

Unfounded? Why, you believe in things that are founded, as in objective? I thought it was based on your subjective opinion so on that basis, yes you are ignorant. That is my subjective opinion and I'm sticking to it.

Byblos wrote:

sailornaruto39 wrote:groudless? misguided?
How so? it is what i want. It needs no other ground or guidance. Do you tell that to people who like certain ice cream flavors?
Im called ignorant alot, and while it irks me alot of the times it is true, what especially irks me are the unfounded.

Unfounded? Why, you believe in things that are founded, as in objective? I thought it was based on your subjective opinion so on that basis, yes you are ignorant. That is my subjective opinion and I'm sticking to it.

i had a feeling you'd pull that. To say something is misguided you are saying relative to the context their is something invalid there is no subejctivety there where you went, introducing logic. So what was invalid about my preference?

If i want perfect being then i will make them perfect, find the logical flaw as i showed you yours.

sailornaruto39 wrote:

Byblos wrote:

sailornaruto39 wrote:groudless? misguided?
How so? it is what i want. It needs no other ground or guidance. Do you tell that to people who like certain ice cream flavors?
Im called ignorant alot, and while it irks me alot of the times it is true, what especially irks me are the unfounded.

Unfounded? Why, you believe in things that are founded, as in objective? I thought it was based on your subjective opinion so on that basis, yes you are ignorant. That is my subjective opinion and I'm sticking to it.

i had a feeling you'd pull that. To say something is misguided you are saying relative to the context their is something invalid there is no subejctivety there where you wnet, introducing logic. So what was invalid about my preference?

You were shown where you were wrong, you so much as admitted you were wrong, then proceeded to declare you don't care you were wrong and that you knew it, you're simply sticking to your opinion. The fact that it is your preference is relevant only to you, not the truth (of what you were shown and admitted to).

sailornaruto39 wrote:If i want perfect being then i will make them perfect, find the logical flaw as i showed you yours

Wha? You did no such thing.

Byblos wrote:

sailornaruto39 wrote:

Byblos wrote:

sailornaruto39 wrote:groudless? misguided?
How so? it is what i want. It needs no other ground or guidance. Do you tell that to people who like certain ice cream flavors?
Im called ignorant alot, and while it irks me alot of the times it is true, what especially irks me are the unfounded.

Unfounded? Why, you believe in things that are founded, as in objective? I thought it was based on your subjective opinion so on that basis, yes you are ignorant. That is my subjective opinion and I'm sticking to it.

i had a feeling you'd pull that. To say something is misguided you are saying relative to the context their is something invalid there is no subejctivety there where you wnet, introducing logic. So what was invalid about my preference?

You were shown where you were wrong, you so much as admitted you were wrong, then proceeded to declare you don't care you were wrong and that you knew it, you're simply sticking to your opinion. The fact that it is your preference is relevant only to you, not the truth (of what you were shown and admitted to).

sailornaruto39 wrote:If i want perfect being then i will make them perfect, find the logical flaw as i showed you yours

Wha? You did no such thing.

what i was refering to as wrong is how i was tryingy to disprove something subjective. And that i was using contradictive arguments.Just because i now understand why someone does what they do doesn't mean i have to agree/prefer it. He wants choclate and i want vanillia.
God prefers the way he does things, i personally prefer something else. Is he wrong? I guess not, he is doing what he wants the way he wants. Am i wrong? i guess not.
EDIT: ok i think i gave the wrong explanation,sorry. To be ignorant means to lack knowledge. And you say iam ignorant of what? Let's clear that first. And i think a better word to descirbe what you detailed would have been stubborn. Because i know what good's opinion is.

it doesn't matter who planted the tree or why?

yes it does, because if it was never there we would probalbly be better off.

errr i never said that, i said the tree to me is symbolic of mans rejection of God and whether the tree existed or not is not the issue here the issue is freewill and mans missuse of that freewill. You have yet to make a logical statement of how God could have created a freewill being that will automatically reciprocate his love without negatively affecting his freewill............ and forget about the treee!!!

EDIT: ok i think i gave the wrong explanation,sorry. To be ignorant means to lack knowledge. And you say iam ignorant of what? Let's clear that first. And i think a better word to descirbe what you detailed would have been stubborn. Because i know what good's opinion is.

Im not trying to insult you here but you are ignorant of the implications of freewill and what eventualitys occur when it is implimented by God. Stubborness leads to ignorance because your heart and mind are closed to any new information, you have your presuppositions already and are not willing to think logically and objectively.