Evidence for God from Science

Hi friends,

I've used the excellent arguments on this forum and the site to contend against the idea that we religious folk NEED to believe in a God to keep us in line morally speaking.
See the quote below:

If you don't require God to find meaning then why do you find it so hard to believe that I (or anyone) wouldn't be able to find meaning in life without God? I simply was going off your constant assertion that life is meaningless and pointless without God, if that's not the case then why do you continuously say that?
I just wanted to make the point that the purpose of God, from day one, was to have a universal daddy figure with a proper punishment to keep people in line. Some people probably DO need God for this very reason, perhaps they would be less moral without the fear of hell looming on the horizon, I dunno, but regardless that's all God is.

or how about

morality is a biological and evolutionary aspect of ours (and other animals) nature to allow us to work, live, and prosper together as a society in a dangerous world with limited resources.

Then I was given this link, which I find funny since it's so dated (and when I tried using dated material, I was denounced!)

http://evolution-of-religion.com/wp-con ... ealism.pdf

to explain that primates have morality and altruism, but again, problem lies in determining whether it's just a mechanical behaviour.

I know I've answered these assertions a million times over, but it keeps being repeated. I'm annoyed and losing patience.

Am I correct to deduce that once again, atheists don't have the proper concept of morality or objectivity in the context it needs to be in? Every time I try to tackle one of the key elements of an argument, something else comes out of left field and I spend even more time trying to figure out where the idea came from, how to fix it, etc. Everything they say is so fricken loaded, it's almost impossible to get to the bottom of things and start fresh from square one. It's annoying. Help! I'm going to lose my mind with this nonsense. I don't know how you all do it.

Keep loving them. If you need advice on which apologetics you should look into I would suggest....

William Lane Craig
John Lennox
Norman Geisler

You can find very good apologetics at the ARC
http://www.arcapologetics.org/

Books, articles, DVDs and all that good stuff can be found there.

I know I've answered these assertions a million times over, but it keeps being repeated. I'm annoyed and losing patience.

I agree, the notion is frustrating, but remember, thats the best you can expect from most of them, so don't answer questions that are just irrelevant or stupid or annoying tricks. Tell them that if they really plan to discuss something seriously, better get their homework done or else there is no point in talking. By the way I can assure you that most will not even consider all the sincerity and hard work done by you to answer their baby questions. If you see lack of sincerity in a topic, leave it, saves your mind and time. Show them love but don't let it blind you of obvious mischief or elephant hurDlings (pink ones ) and then just give it a rest and take it one by one. Thats the best I can suggest for now

StMonica,

Ask yourself "Why am I interacting with these specific people?" " What do I hope to achieve?" If you're getting frustrated this much, then maybe you should step back, and ask God, if this is really what you are supposed to be doing.

There are certain things that spiritually discerned people cannot understand. The meaning of existence they know, is all they know. They cannot understand any spiritual meaning to life. Not all atheists are completely spiritually blind, but many are.

neo-x wrote:

Show them love but don't let it blind you of obvious mischief or elephant hurDlings (pink ones ) and then just give it a rest and take it one by one. Thats the best I can suggest for now

hahahah thanks Neo, that's a good point. The most annoying part is that they say they've done sooooooooooooooooooooooooooo much research but clearly, it's not even that thorough! It just makes me

Rick, I've definitely wondered that. But it seems like I'm stuck in this situation for the time being even after stepping back for a while. I don't think the one I'm dealing with now is spiritually blind, but definitely emotionally dumb and quite thick (not stupid, just STUBBORN). Even when I'm confident in my information, no matter how clear I am about it, something always negative happens. Perhaps I'm too close to the person to do this properly. I wish they'd come here and contest all of you, at least I'd feel like they might learn something from all of you

StMonicaGuideMe wrote:

neo-x wrote:

Show them love but don't let it blind you of obvious mischief or elephant hurDlings (pink ones ) and then just give it a rest and take it one by one. Thats the best I can suggest for now

hahahah thanks Neo, that's a good point. The most annoying part is that they say they've done sooooooooooooooooooooooooooo much research but clearly, it's not even that thorough! It just makes me

Rick, I've definitely wondered that. But it seems like I'm stuck in this situation for the time being even after stepping back for a while. I don't think the one I'm dealing with now is spiritually blind, but definitely emotionally dumb and quite thick (not stupid, just STUBBORN). Even when I'm confident in my information, no matter how clear I am about it, something always negative happens. Perhaps I'm too close to the person to do this properly. I wish they'd come here and contest all of you, at least I'd feel like they might learn something from all of you

Yes, sometimes our being too close, does play a part. Why don't you play dumb, and say you really don't know the answer to their question? Then, Voila! I think I may know someone with the answer. Enter, GodAndScience.org.

Haha, I've tried that, and it apparently infuriates them even more! (can't win I suppose). What's even worse is that this person used to be a Christian, so now I think a whole new aspect is involved; intentional disillusionment.

They said they've been on here and that the majority of us are "lying, quote mining immoral people who are abusing our positions of authority to influence the naive".

LOL I know. I know. I was laughing for a long time, too.

StMonicaGuideMe wrote:Haha, I've tried that, and it apparently infuriates them even more! (can't win I suppose). What's even worse is that this person used to be a Christian, so now I think a whole new aspect is involved; intentional disillusionment.

They said they've been on here and that the majority of us are "lying, quote mining immoral people who are abusing our positions of authority to influence the naive".

LOL I know. I know. I was laughing for a long time, too.

Lol, why don't they come on here and enlighten us then (unless of course, they are naive enough to be influenced by our positions of influence that is ).

When an otherwise rational, intelligent person responds to reasoned arguments irrationally, it's a pretty good indicator that the primary barrier to belief isn't intellectual. Regardless of how much this person rationalizes her/her unbelief, deep down the reason they don't believe is because they don't want to believe.

I agree with you, Protector, 100%. Christianity is just too "heavy" for a lot of people to accept. It requires too much self-sacrifice and being that pesky thing...oh what's it called....oh ya, humble