Disproving god with the laws of logic

[Archer]

I Read it, as I said I can do it too, here: Safety investigation of Noah’s Ark in a seaway

As I said pointless to debate this.

 

[Archer]

Here are some questions I have for you:

Does it bother you if others believe?

Do Christians treat you badly if you tell them you do not believe?

 

[freethinker44]

Does it bother you if others believe?

It bothers me when people make decisions for other people based on faulty beliefs.

Do Christians treat you badly if you tell them you do not believe?

Well George Bush sr. once said atheists shouldn't be considered citizens, so yeah, christians for some reason really don't like atheists. You should try a little social experiment, go to a christian chat room and tell them you worship satan and then give some quotes from the satanic bible, and then go to a different christian room and tell them you are atheist and post some things from talkorigins.org or some other site like that and see which one gets the worse treatment. I have actually done this and they are usually more outraged that an atheist is in their room than a satanist.

 

[freethinker44]

Here are some more scary religious quotes.

"Therefore, I am convinced that I am acting as the agent of our Creator. By fighting off the Jews, I am doing the Lord's work."
[SIZE=-1] - Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf[/SIZE]

Secular schools can never be tolerated because such a school has no religious instruction and a general moral instruction without a religious foundation is built on air; consequently, all character training and religion must be derived from faith.... We need believing people.
[SIZE=-1] - Adolf Hitler, April 26, 1933, from a speech made during negotiations leading to the Nazi-Vatican Concordat of 1933[/SIZE]


Lol, you probably thought hitler was atheist didn't you. So yeah, I fear christians in power, only because history has seen them consistently abuse the power they are given.

 

[Archer]

Well George Bush sr. once said atheists shouldn't be considered citizens, so yeah, christians for some reason really don't like atheists. You should try a little social experiment, go to a christian chat room and tell them you worship satan and then give some quotes from the satanic bible, and then go to a different christian room and tell them you are atheist and post some things from talkorigins.org or some other site like that and see which one gets the worse treatment. I have actually done this and they are usually more outraged that an atheist is in their room than a satanist.

It seems that these people are scared Why rebuke one who does not believe? Our faith is of acceptance not hate. I accept all people weather I like their lifestyle or not. It is not for me to judge.

I do not however condone some things and TBH it is better not to believe that to be a radical killer.

 

[Archer]

Here are some more scary religious quotes.

"Therefore, I am convinced that I am acting as the agent of our Creator. By fighting off the Jews, I am doing the Lord's work."
[SIZE=-1] - Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf[/SIZE]

Secular schools can never be tolerated because such a school has no religious instruction and a general moral instruction without a religious foundation is built on air; consequently, all character training and religion must be derived from faith.... We need believing people.
[SIZE=-1] - Adolf Hitler, April 26, 1933, from a speech made during negotiations leading to the Nazi-Vatican Concordat of 1933[/SIZE]


Lol, you probably thought hitler was atheist didn't you. So yeah, I fear christians in power, only because history has seen them consistently abuse the power they are given.

Hitler had problems dude!

 

[freethinker44]

More reasons atheists should get involved in christian beliefs.

"The "wall of separation between church and state" is a metaphor based on bad history, a metaphor which has proved useless as a guide to judging. It should be frankly and explicitly abandoned."
[SIZE=-1]- William Rehnquist, Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, Dissenting Opinion in Wallace v. Jaffree (1985)[/SIZE]

"God, the source of all knowledge, should never have been expelled from our children's classrooms."
[SIZE=-1]- Ronald Reagan, address, National Religious Broadcasters, Washington, D.C., January, 1984, quoted from Menendez and Doerr, The Great Quotations on Religious Freedom[/SIZE]

"Tolerance is the worst roar of all, including tolerance for homosexuals, feminists, and religions that don't follow Christ."
[SIZE=-1] - Josh McDowell, at a Youth for Christ rally in 1994[/SIZE]

“I want you to just let a wave of intolerance wash over you. I want you to let a wave of hatred wash over you. Yes, hate is good. Our goal is a Christian nation. We have a Biblical duty, we are called by God, to conquer this country. We don’t want equal time. We don’t want pluralism.”
[SIZE=-1] - Randall Terry, founder of Operation Rescue quoted in The News-Sentinel, 8-16-93 [/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1][/SIZE]

If I didn't know any better I would judge hitler as having higher morals than randall terry, just by looking at that last quote anyways.

 

[freethinker44]

Compare and contrast.

Hitler:
Secular schools can never be tolerated because such a school has no religious instruction and a general moral instruction without a religious foundation is built on air; consequently, all character training and religion must be derived from faith.... We need believing people.
[SIZE=-1]- Adolf Hitler, April 26, 1933, from a speech made during negotiations leading to the Nazi-Vatican Concordat of 1933[/SIZE]


Ronald Reagan:
"God, the source of all knowledge, should never have been expelled from our children's classrooms."
[SIZE=-1]- Ronald Reagan, address, National Religious Broadcasters, Washington, D.C., January, 1984, quoted from Menendez and Doerr, The Great Quotations on Religious Freedom[/SIZE]


I hate to compare the two but.... It's their words.

 

[Archer]

One is trying to convince the other is blowing air at his party. Ronnie should be honored and not put in the same context as Hitler.

 

[emiliano]

Quaxotic,

I don't understand the question, could you please rephrase it for me.

I’ll try. If you read the Bible you would know that Love is not God’s sole characteristic, so if you know Christians doctrines you would know that God is just, sovereign and omniscient. Yet you state “Now everything i've been told about god is that he's all loving. Not very loving to wihthold his love from me is it” You mean to tell me that nobody told you that His promise is subjected to your obedience to what He demand, one is that you repent from disobeying Him, that you must resigning to do your will and do His, for one you demand that He overlook your shortfalls because He create humans with flaws, but that is not the case He created all of humanity very good for the task ahead, even with the ability to freely choose do what is good and used the great gift of reason to make the right decision, animals are also love by God without the same demands, because they are irrational brutes and live by instincts not reason.
Craiky is Steve Irwins a famous wild life conservationist (I don’t know if is spell that way) is a bit of Australiana (slang )

You are indeed correct i will endeavour to give only my opinions from now on.
My opinion on the subject is that it is rude of you to try and force your beliefs on to me. This is especially hurtful to me since:

What make you think that I want or think that I could convert you to my religion? I am sorry if I hurt you, I have a problem turning the other cheek (I am not a very good Christian yet, I am work in progress) and if you call me arrogant you can expect a reaction and that how we got into this. I debated your opinion of God’s love on the ground that He does not come down to reveal Himself to you, I am surprise that you weren’t told that He did come down and did that in Jesus.

It is not my fault that god hasn't chosen me, and you rubbing my face in it smacks of a complete lack of compassion (which i believe is one of the chief virtues of christianity)

.

And whose fault is it? There are God commands in them you can measure your life and see like in a mirror to see what need to be changed to enjoy God promised Love.

Yes i am currently studying a degree in applied social sciences, so this definitely qualifies me as a student of the human mind.

Congratulations, it is such an interesting subject. Ever since a human use his reason, he looks for God and the reasons of his own existence, when he thought of his own complexity and haw wonderfully he is made, he thought of a creator a God and began his search, he has not seen his loving creator because he is a spirit but he know that God exist. How far have you gone in your study? To the first philosopher that is nothing more to a man that sat down and sought answer to the question. Who made me what I am?

What i actually meant was parents in general with no bias towards religious beliefs.

My mistake I assumed (bad thing to do) and it was due to the fact that you brought it up in a discussion about God and this thread is steered toward the God of the Abramic religions and in particular Christianity “TAG (transcendental argument for god)”

Could you please reword this sentence i think i know what you are trying to say but i would like to clarify it before responding.

I think that it will help if I point to what I was referring to, I was referring to Archer’s testimony, how He came to know God, anyways I should have better stay out that one because he has made a meal out the mockers, he is too good for me to get in to support him, he put his argument batter than I can, so perhaps we can pass that one.

I understand that i am challenging your deeply help beliefs and i apologise if i have upset you. I will endeavour to be less 'douchie' in my posts as i think you and i can have some interesting discussions.
Thankyou,

It’s OK and I apologize for my aggressiveness and sort fuse, you right we could have some interesting discussions as I enjoy them, it will take some doing though because I do have problems in this area.
Thank you.

 

[The Neo Nerd]

You mean to tell me that nobody told you that His promise is subjected to your obedience to what He demand, one is that you repent from disobeying Him, that you must resigning to do your will and do His, for one you demand that He overlook your shortfalls because He create humans with flaws, but that is not the case

Actually my parents forced me to go to church from preschool through year 7. They never attended church themselves, kinda hard to believe in something when your parents don't. They sent me to a christian high school. In high school i made a conscious effort to believe in god so i could fit in with all the other kids. It did not work i just could not believe, because i have questions and nobody has ever been able to answer them in any way that has made sense.

Now you tell me that i have to believe in god before god will reveal himself to me (please correct me if i'm misunderstanding you on this). I have a problem with this. How do i know that the god you believe in is the real god, there are many different religions out there that say their god is the real god. How do i know that any revelation from god is not brought on by some kind of belief induced hallucination, or a belief induced interpretation of revelation from some other higher power. I am fascinated by shamanism as well and have had an out of body experience, i question this experience as well. What a wonderful feeling to be free of ones earthly body

I would like to share a story that one born again christian told me about how he saw jesus. He decided to fast for three days and im not just talking about not eating food but also not drinking water. On the third day he saw jesus come to him bathed in the purest light. Now let's put aside for a second how STUPIDLY dangerous this was, how am i to be sure that his vision was not brought on by the delerium by not eating or drinking for three days.

I have always been fascinated by the human mind, it is not until recently that ive made official my studies of it. But i have been aware for most of my life how the mind can play tricks on itself. I have these questions and the only answer i've gotten from any of the christians is the same answer that i'm asking questions about AKA you just have to believe or you just have to have faith.

Craiky is Steve Irwins a famous wild life conservationist (I don’t know if is spell that way) is a bit of Australiana (slang )

Ohh you mean CRIKEY!!!!!!

And whose fault is it? There are God commands in them you can measure your life and see like in a mirror to see what need to be changed to enjoy God promised Love.

From my point of view the bible is a religious text (not a historical one), written by religious people, with religious motivations. It is said that the bible was written by man but by revelation from god. My problem with accepting this is that i put these revelations to the same questions as i put my own beliefs that i mentioned above. Once again until someone can come up with a better answer than you just have to believe/have faith i cannot accept it as true.

Congratulations, it is such an interesting subject. Ever since a human use his reason, he looks for God and the reasons of his own existence

I would agree with this statement, but i would like to go further and theorise that the search for a god is a search for some kind of immortality, a means to make life mean more just just existing. A deist will search for this immortality through a god and some form of afterlife. Others will search for this immortality through the passing on of ones genetic code. I myself search for immortality by helping people, when i die i want to know that i have done more than just looked after me and mine. I'm not smart enough to be a doctor and i've always been interested in the human mind so the way i plan on helping people is through psychology.

How far have you gone in your study?

I am still in my first year.

-Q

 

[Bware]

I say it would float, you say no! so what. I am sure we can both find substance to back ourselves up as I have I am also sure you have, so this point is moot.

It's not that it wouldn't float. In still water with no waves then it would probably float. The problem is that wood is flexible, and at that length it starts to resonate with the waves and breaks apart. It is IMPOSSIBLE to make a seaworthy wooden boat that is over 300 feet long. The longest was 450 and was steel reinforced all along the ship.
Here's the link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_world27s_largest_wooden_ships
Notice that every single one of these boats that is over 300 feet sank. Notice especially the longest one, the Wyoming: 450 loot, it sank due to the fact that it would TWIST and FLEX, it leaked very badly and the crew had to constantly pump out the water to keep it afloat. This ship was steel reinforced throughout. Noah didn't have access to steel, FYI.

 

[Archer]

As I said moot point. I can find just many that say it is seaworthy.

 

[Bware]

I Read it, as I said I can do it too, here: Safety investigation of Noah’s Ark in a seaway

As I said pointless to debate this.

And again the problem with this is that they used a 1/50th scale model. A model this small is not subject to the resonation from the waves. The wood is stiffer and stronger in a small size. Actually it doesn't even say what material they used for this model. That matters, if you are going to do a valid test you need to recreate everything. Again this IMO is the typical thiestic way of doing things; coming to a conclusion first, then finding data to back it up. Science gathers data first then puts it together to draw a conclusion from the known evidence. If the evidence changes then it is all reevaluated and a new conclusion is drawn. When a theist draws a conclusion about something, if new evidence comes in that would disprove their conclusion, then they just don't use that evidence or they claim it is invalid evidence.

Good day,
BW

 

[Beaudreaux]

As I said moot point. I can find just many that say it is seaworthy.

I find it interesting that you considered your earlier posting to be evidence when you posted it, but now that an ancient, seaworthy, 450 foot wooden boat seems almost impossible you consider the point "moot". Moot schmoot. It couldn't have happened.

 

[Bware]

As I said moot point. I can find just many that say it is seaworthy.

Really? so show me some. And while you are at it, see if you can find any data about someone building a full size ark out of the same materials, using only the tools availalbe to Noah at the time. I bet you can't, because if that were done then we wouldn't be having this conversation because the boat would sink, proving the point.

Good day,
BW

 

[Bware]

What I don't understand is why people stick so hard to these tales like this. I'm not trying to prove Christianity wrong at all. I mean it does teach good morals and alot of good lessons, but stuff like this is obviously not real and was never meant to be. I just don't understand why some people are so stubborn about some of this stuff. It's like they feel that if a single item in their holy book is not correct then it completley invalidates their entire faith. That's not the case at all though, it was written by humans not by Gods. I mean people make mistakes all the time, I don't see why if there are some errors in your Holy book that it invalidates your faith (this doesn't mean that your faith is correct and your religion is the "right" religion, but it doesn't make it the "wrong" one either)

 

[Archer]

And again the problem with this is that they used a 1/50th scale model. A model this small is not subject to the resonation from the waves. The wood is stiffer and stronger in a small size. Actually it doesn't even say what material they used for this model. That matters, if you are going to do a valid test you need to recreate everything. Again this IMO is the typical thiestic way of doing things; coming to a conclusion first, then finding data to back it up. Science gathers data first then puts it together to draw a conclusion from the known evidence. If the evidence changes then it is all reevaluated and a new conclusion is drawn. When a theist draws a conclusion about something, if new evidence comes in that would disprove their conclusion, then they just don't use that evidence or they claim it is invalid evidence.

Good day,
BW

Wrong!!!

I find it interesting that you considered your earlier posting to be evidence when you posted it, but now that an ancient, seaworthy, 450 foot wooden boat seems almost impossible you consider the point "moot". Moot schmoot. It couldn't have happened.

It is moot as there is no definite answer as I said some say it floats and is seaworthy and some say not therefore moot.

Really? so show me some. And while you are at it, see if you can find any data about someone building a full size ark out of the same materials, using only the tools availalbe to Noah at the time. I bet you can't, because if that were done then we wouldn't be having this conversation because the boat would sink, proving the point.

Good day,
BW

If you had read previous posts you would see that they are there. I will not post them again.

What I don't understand is why people stick so hard to these tales like this. I'm not trying to prove Christianity wrong at all. I mean it does teach good morals and alot of good lessons, but stuff like this is obviously not real and was never meant to be. I just don't understand why some people are so stubborn about some of this stuff. It's like they feel that if a single item in their holy book is not correct then it completley invalidates their entire faith. That's not the case at all though, it was written by humans not by Gods. I mean people make mistakes all the time, I don't see why if there are some errors in your Holy book that it invalidates your faith (this doesn't mean that your faith is correct and your religion is the "right" religion, but it doesn't make it the "wrong" one either)

I can debunk most things if I put forth enough effort.

 

[Beaudreaux]

And again the problem with this is that they used a 1/50th scale model. A model this small is not subject to the resonation from the waves. The wood is stiffer and stronger in a small size. Actually it doesn't even say what material they used for this model. That matters, if you are going to do a valid test you need to recreate everything. Again this IMO is the typical thiestic way of doing things; coming to a conclusion first, then finding data to back it up. Science gathers data first then puts it together to draw a conclusion from the known evidence. If the evidence changes then it is all reevaluated and a new conclusion is drawn. When a theist draws a conclusion about something, if new evidence comes in that would disprove their conclusion, then they just don't use that evidence or they claim it is invalid evidence.

Good day,
BW

Wrong!!!

YouTube - Hysterical laugh

 

[Bware]

Wrong!!!

How so?

It is moot as there is no definite answer as I said some say it floats and is seaworthy and some say not therefore moot.

If I said it wouldn't float, what I meant was it wouldn't be seaworthy, as soon as it was hit by fairly small waves it would start leaking and sink.

If you had read previous posts you would see that they are there. I will not post them again.

I went back 8 pages in this thread and nowhere do I see you posting a link to any sort of study that was done with a full sized ark replica. A scale model wouldn't work in the case that I am putting out. My case was that wood flexes and resonates with the waves, so anything much over 300ft is unstable. If you had read my previous posts you would see that I covered this. I will not post it again:sarcastic.

I can debunk most things if I put forth enough effort.

This is the reason for my previous post where I said: "Again this IMO is the typical thiestic way of doing things; coming to a conclusion first, then finding data to back it up. Science gathers data first then puts it together to draw a conclusion from the known evidence. If the evidence changes then it is all reevaluated and a new conclusion is drawn. When a theist draws a conclusion about something, if new evidence comes in that would disprove their conclusion, then they just don't use that evidence or they claim it is invalid evidence."