against intelligent creator?

[Valjean]

an intelligent maker is a necessary conclusion.

intelligence must pre exist for intelligence to form. deny that and you deny the obvious.

Why is an intelligent maker an obvious conclusion? It is not. It's a necessary feature only in your own, imaginary reality.
"intelligence must pre exist for intelligence to form" What does that even mean?
If there's one thing we should have learned from physics, psychology and neurology, it's that 'the obvious' is not always real.

I see that there are different forms of logic for everybody; what they consider valid.

No. Mathematics is the same for everyone. Logic is an algebra.
You may have your own opinions, but not your own facts.

you are either on one side of the fence or the other, very little crossing over.
to me a valid and worthwhile assertion is that intelligence is fundamental to existence and life forms are created or spawned from intelligence.
it seems to me absurd that lifeless, mindless matter can produce sentient life. I don't consider that plausible.

Again, you're trying to impose your own world-view and prejudices on reality. A reasonable person would be doing the opposite.

 

[Valjean]

IMO most atheist don't want to admit the existence of God. If He real, they will have to change their conduct.

Conduct? What does our behavior have to do with anything?
If you give us tangible evidence of a God, we will believe it. Until then, we withhold belief pending evidence.
How is this not reasonable?

As soon as you can prove God doe snot exist, I will join you.

No, you've got it backwards. It's you who have the burden of proof. It is not reasonable to believe something, until we are presented with evidence for it, till then, the logical position is disbelief.
If I claim there are cities of Mer-people living at the bottom of the sea, would you believe this? -- of course not. You would withhold belief till I presented some tangible evidence.

 

[omega2xx]

I'm busy trying to prove a gazillion other things doesnt exist like Godzilla and unicorns.

God can wait his turn.

Obviously with your same logic, you should believe in Santa Claus, leprachauns and the lochness monster.

That is a common, silly statement make by non-beleivers.

About Christians not understanding most of their beliefs are hypotheticals... Well, isn't that frightening?

What is more frightening is someone making a statement for which they have no evidence. How do you know what we believed is hypothetical? If you want a good example of a hypothetical beliefs look at that the TOE preaches. If you do, take not e of the evidence they offer. You will find they don't offer any. If you are willing to take opinions for evidence, be my guest.

 

[omega2xx]

Conduct? What does our behavior have to do with anything?
If you give us tangible evidence of a God, we will believe it. Until then, we withhold belief pending evidence.
How is this not reasonable?
No, you've got it backwards. It's you who have the burden of proof. It is not reasonable to believe something till we are presented with evidence for it, till then, the logical position is disbelief.
If I claim there are cities of Mer-people living at the bottom of the sea, would you believe this? -- of course not. You would withhold belief till I presented some tangible evidence.

This discussion has become circular, thus meaningless. I enjoyed it but now it is a waste of time. You have a + day.

 

[Valjean]

..... and to me where there is intelligence there is a mind, where there is a mind there is a person, where there is a person there is a personality. According to Psalms 90:2 that person has always been around.

Well, that's all well and good, but what's real to you, doesn't necessarily have anything to do with reality. You're drawing conclusions from an unsubstantiated premise.
And what does Psalms have anything to do with reality?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Your theology is formed from your personal opinions. It can't be substantiated.

We both have personal opinions and probably yours are based on experience just as mine are. Your belief can just as you believe yours can be as well. I acknowledge that other people believe their beliefs can be substantiated. I'd never say it is wrong morally. That's just, wrong.

There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death(Prov 14:12).

That's your belief. It doesn't apply to those who are not believers.

That is not true of born again Christians

So you create your own purpose or does your purpose come from god?

You don't know there is no God. The existence of God can' be proved or disproved.

I actually do. I experienced the spirit of christ. It is defined by culture, language, and traditions not an independent entity. Everyone has a spirit. Christ included. I experienced the spirit of christ just as I do my loved ones and strangers sometimes. Though, christ and strangers aren't as personal as my loved ones.

If you don't know there is a god, how do you talk about him as if he has authority?

You believe in an authority of a god that may not exist?

Because only God, not man, has the information to live a moral life. Living a moral life is the only way to truly live in the Spirit.

How do you know this if he may not exist?

I know my mother has brown hair, brown eyes, and is 5'4 because I know she exists and she raised me. If she was on the other side of the world, I wouldn't know if she exist no matter how many inspired people throughout the ages tell me. So I have no right to say what she says or doesn't and who she is. I also would have no reason to believe the inspired people told me facts but what they personally experienced and their opinions.

But since you don't know if he exist or not, what you are saying are opinions and beliefs not facts.

 

[viole]

why atheists attack on the idea of an intelligent creator? isn't it possible that an intelligent creator might exist? most atheists act like this is absurd.

There is another option: that the designer, if any, is stupid. After all, it is not out of logical necessity that creators must be smart.

The words "creator" and "intelligent" seem to always come together as a package, for some reason. But a cursory look at how things have been created, if they have been created, casts serious doubt on the creator's competence, under the assuption of omnipotence.

I wonder whether there are theists who believe in a stupid creator. At least, I do not see a DIR for such believers here. If not, I wonder why not.

Ciao

- viole

 

[suncowiam]

That is a common, silly statement make by non-beleivers.



What is more frightening is someone making a statement for which they have no evidence. How do you know what we believed is hypothetical? If you want a good example of a hypothetical beliefs look at that the TOE preaches. If you do, take not e of the evidence they offer. You will find they don't offer any. If you are willing to take opinions for evidence, be my guest.

Apparently you do not know the definition of hypothetical.

It is exactly the word to use for your belief.

The "you can't prove it's not true" argument holds little weight. But I've been down this argument with theists and know that it's a big waste of time to continue.

You know you would gain 100% credibility if you're able to prove it, but we both know that isn't happening.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Well, that's all well and good, but what's real to you, doesn't necessarily have anything to do with reality. You're drawing conclusions from an unsubstantiated premise.
And what does Psalms have anything to do with reality?

I find reality is as described at Psalms 72:12-14 that there is deceit, violence, poor and needy people on Earth.
Man's history has proven beyond doubt that man can't deliver man from such conditions, but that Jesus will because his coming rulership will cover from one end of the earth to the other. Jesus will relieve mankind of distresses.

 

[Father Heathen]

IMO most atheist don't want to admit the existence of God. If He real, they will have to change their conduct.

If there is a god - one who would actually have an interest in our conduct, of course - I imagine we would be judged by how we treat each other rather than by how well we blindly, unquestioningly adhere to irrational, unsubstantiated, and arbitrary assertions made up by self-appointed middlemen who presumed to speak on god's behalf.

 

[Valjean]

I find reality is as described at Psalms 72:12-14 that there is deceit, violence, poor and needy people on Earth.
Man's history has proven beyond doubt that man can't deliver man from such conditions, but that Jesus will because his coming rulership will cover from one end of the earth to the other. Jesus will relieve mankind of distresses.

But man can. Those countries that adopt Jesus' socialist policies have made great strides in eliminating poverty, disease, violence, &c.

 

[Father Heathen]

It is only a general thought and not universally true, and of course there are exceptions. Many Non-Christians try to live a moral life. Over the years I have noticed that many Non-Christians are very hostile to Christianity. I understand some don't believe it, been there, done that, but I don't understand the hostility to it.

Any perceived hostility toward Christianity probably comes from attempts by fundamentalists to restrict other people's rights, freedoms, and equality.

 

[Father Heathen]

That is a common, silly statement make by non-beleivers.

Nah, it's an apt analogy. The burden of proof is upon your shoulders.

What is more frightening is someone making a statement for which they have no evidence.

Pause, take a step back, and think about the irony of that statement.

How do you know what we believed is hypothetical? If you want a good example of a hypothetical beliefs look at that the TOE preaches. If you do, take not e of the evidence they offer. You will find they don't offer any. If you are willing to take opinions for evidence, be my guest.

You must not have developed beyond the object permanence stage as a child. There is an insurmountable mountain of evidence for evolution, including this thing called the fossil record.

 

[omega2xx]

We both have personal opinions and probably yours are based on experience just as mine are. Your belief can just as you believe yours can be as well. I acknowledge that other people believe their beliefs can be substantiated. I'd never say it is wrong morally. That's just, wrong.

First of all I have a written record. Second feeling can be deceptive, making them unreliable.

That's your belief. It doesn't apply to those who are not believers.

That depends on if it is true or not. Did it come from God or from me?

So you create your own purpose or does your purpose come from god?

My purpose is to beleive God.

I actually do. I experienced the spirit of christ. It is defined by culture, language, and traditions not an independent entity. Everyone has a spirit. Christ included. I experienced the spirit of christ just as I do my loved ones and strangers sometimes. Though, christ and strangers aren't as personal as my loved ones.

How do you know it was the Spirit of Christ?

If you don't know there is a god, how do you talk about him as if he has authority?

I know there is a God. The heavens are declaring His glory.

You believe in an authority of a god that may not exist?

You seem to not beleive in One that does exist.

How do you know this if he may not exist?

I know my mother has brown hair, brown eyes, and is 5'4 because I know she exists and she raised me. If she was on the other side of the world, I wouldn't know if she exist no matter how many inspired people throughout the ages tell me. So I have no right to say what she says or doesn't and who she is. I also would have no reason to believe the inspired people told me facts but what they personally experienced and their opinions.

But since you don't know if he exist or not, what you are saying are opinions and beliefs not facts.[/QUOTE]

And your belief that He does not exist are opinions and beliefs, not facts.

 

[omega2xx]

Apparently you do not know the definition of hypothetical.

It is exactly the word to use for your belief.

The "you can't prove it's not true" argument holds little weight. But I've been down this argument with theists and know that it's a big waste of time to continue.

You know you would gain 100% credibility if you're able to prove it, but we both know that isn't happening.

Instead of whining about what I do, improve your own credibility by posting some evidence to prove what you say. Unless you do that you have no credibility.

 

[omega2xx]

If there is a god - one who would actually have an interest in our conduct, of course - I imagine we would be judged by how we treat each other rather than by how well we blindly, unquestioningly adhere to irrational, unsubstantiated, and arbitrary assertions made up by self-appointed middlemen who presumed to speak on god's behalf.

WE are not saved by how we treat people. We are saved by what we believe about Jesus. Once we are saved, we are required to treat people, all people, with respect. Those you call self appointed middlemen are not self appointed. They are called by God to minister to the spiritual needs of people. The good ones don't presume to speak for God, they simply teach what the Bible says.

 

[omega2xx]

But man can. Those countries that adopt Jesus' socialist policies have made great strides in eliminating poverty, disease, violence, &c.

Jesus' policies are not socialistic. "great strides" is a bit of hyperbole. IMO they may have made so progressk but not great strides.

 

[omega2xx]

Any perceived hostility toward Christianity probably comes from attempts by fundamentalists to restrict other people's rights, freedoms, and equality.

It is not perceived. Some of it is exhibited in this form. There are also organzations (aclu) that are actively trying to eliminate all references to Christianity out of public life.

Fundamentalist don't try to restrict people's rights, but the aclu does.

 

[omega2xx]

Nah, it's an apt analogy. The burden of proof is upon your shoulders.

I have admitted I can't prove the existence of God. Will you admit you can't prove He does not exist?

Pause, take a step back, and think about the irony of that statement.

No irony. There is proof that God exist, you just don't accept it. The heavens are telling of the glory of God. You can't have a creation without a Creator. You can't wave the magic wand of evolution and have matter, energy and life just pop into existence and you have no other explanation, let alone a scientific one.

You must not have developed beyond the object permanence stage as a child. There is an insurmountable mountain of evidence for evolution, including this thing called the fossil record.

I have been asking for months for one of you evo to cut and past some evidence from a link that I can evaluate. To date not one has accepted my challenge. Would you like to be the first or will you run and hide like the rest of them have. Don't forget to cover your ears and yell as loud as you can"It ain't so, it ain't so.

Evidently you don't eve understand the fossil record. Your greatest evangelist of the fossil record, Stephen Gould, says, I regard the failure to find a clear 'vector of progress' in life's history as the most puzzling fact of the fossil record... we have sought to impose a pattern that we hoped to find on a world that does not really display it.

Is he right or wrong?

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

IMO most atheist don't want to admit the existence of God. If He real, they will have to change their conduct.

I honestly do not believe God exists. I believe wholeheartedly that He does not exist. He's not there. Not looking down, not casting judgment, not tweaking His creation or putting His hand to any "work" being done anywhere in the whole of the universe. HE ISN'T THERE. This is what I believe. This is what I accept as the truth about "God." He is mythology, falsehood, the hope of people who otherwise lack the ability to cope with an indifferent/unforgiving reality. Nothing more. I accept His non-existence as FACT.

I don't need God to stick to my principles of conduct. Do you?