Disproving god with the laws of logic

[Bware]

I’m not being belligerent or disrespectful when I say this, but you appear to have been filled with huge chunks of crap that you have mistaken for science.

Lol this reminds of the movie money train when the guy walks up to the other guy in the bar and says " has anyone ever told you that your face looks like a hat full of a**holes?"

 

[Thief]

Shall we stay on topic?
We are 162 postings into this topic, and it is digressing into less.

Sometimes logic fails.
Then the emotional portion of the discussion comes up.

Would anyone like to reaffirm their logic for not believing in God?

 

[Bware]

Hey Bware....
I can see your displeasure about my technique.

You should refrain sarcasm. It does suit you.
Your last post contained no useful rebuttal.

Sarcasm does suit me. You are correct sir. This rubuttal is useful, it passes my time at work. Useful to me and useful to you are different things entirely.

 

[Thief]

Then your motives are as shallow as your rebuttal.

 

[Beaudreaux]

You're so right it is the wrong tool to use:
Logic is the science of reasoning, proof, thinking, or inference [Concise OED]. Logic allows us to analyze a piece of reasoning, and determine whether it is correct or not. To use the technical terms, we determine whether the reasoning is valid or invalid.
The believe in God is by Faith, we individually believe that that there is a God, the conflict with non-believer arises when believer are drawn to these Logical arguments that demand that we provide them with a logical argument to convince them and make them believe though premises that we know conduct to the conclusions cemented in their system of beliefs, I think that that is what it meant by seek and you’ll find, if you allow them to submit you to their rules what other result could you get but what you get? You can only convince them if they have Faith and this is gift from God.

If belief in God is, as you say, not in the realm of logic and reasoning but is rather based on faith, I must ask you a question. How do you know what you will choose to believe? I'm cool with people saying "I will believe in the supernatural even though there is no logical reason to do so". But the moment you claim that that supernatural being manifests in the physical world, it must be subject to the tried and true tools of human understanding. In fact, the moment you make any affirmational statement about that being, you are open to inquiry.

 

[Thief]

You've made an incorrect assumption.
God is not subject to our standards of thought.

Our methods take us to greater understandings, day by day.
We correct ourselves, day by day.

Eventually we will have a more thorough consensus about God.
Until then the debate will continue.

 

[Beaudreaux]

You've made an incorrect assumption.
God is not subject to our standards of thought.

Our methods take us to greater understandings, day by day.
We correct ourselves, day by day.

Eventually we will have a more thorough consensus about God.
Until then the debate will continue.

If you believe that God is not subject to our standards of thought, then there is no debate possible for you. How would you go about analyzing the issue?

 

[Beaudreaux]

Shall we stay on topic?
We are 162 postings into this topic, and it is digressing into less.

Sometimes logic fails.
Then the emotional portion of the discussion comes up.

Would anyone like to reaffirm their logic for not believing in God?

Sure!

I do not believe in God for the same reason I do not believe in fairies, invisible flying spaghetti monsters or unicorns. There is no evidence for any of these things, so why let such notions affect the way I life my life and perceive the world?

 

[Archer]

If you argue that something is not real and let it consume you, then are you not acknowledging that it is real?

The Bible lays out many things that science has proven! The scholars have dated the age of the earth to ~6500 years? Science shows us that around this time Ur was getting into high gear then the Hittites came with steel and the Assyrians moved around the fertile crescent. HMMMM???? Did not Abraham come from that area?

Science says man evolved? Perhaps something was missed? We know Adam and Eve were the first created but is it not limiting God by saying that he only created them?

Science says the earth was covered with water so does the Bible.

The earth was void and formless. Science says it was formed from dust.

We now know how fragile out earth is and that fire will be the final end of the earth as the sun turn's into a red giant.

 

[Thief]

So...Beau....The Creator is a great big fairy?

Equating in that manner doesn't do the topic (or you) any credit.
Perhaps you would define God...in your words.

 

[Beaudreaux]

If you argue that something is not real and let it consume you, then are you not acknowledging that it is real?

YES! I get you man. Similarly, if you go on and on about how something IS real are you not admiting that it is a figment of your imagination?

The Bible lays out many things that science has proven! The scholars have dated the age of the earth to ~6500 years? Science shows us that around this time Ur was getting into high gear then the Hittites came with steel and the Assyrians moved around the fertile crescent. HMMMM???? Did not Abraham come from that area?

The YEC scholars who date the earth at around 6,500 years old are in direct conflict with the findings of science by several orders of magnitude.

Science says man evolved? Perhaps something was missed? We know Adam and Eve were the first created but is it not limiting God by saying that he only created them?

OK, we DON'T know that Adam and Eve were the first created and I don't understand what you're getting at with the rest of this point.

Science says the earth was covered with water so does the Bible.

There is no evidence whatsoever for a global flood that killed everything but the evil ducks.

 

[Archer]

YES! I get you man. Similarly, if you go on and on about how something IS real are you not admiting that it is a figment of your imagination?

I am only logically approaching this discussion. Logically you are correct, however you must consider that I (and many others) are not in doubt of anything and therefore are only entertain the premise that others believe God is not real.

The YEC scholars who date the earth at around 6,500 years old are in direct conflict with the findings of science by several orders of magnitude.

I disagree. Things can not be comprehended by man and therefore we seek understanding of what we cannot comprehend by denying what the truth is.

ie. Science says nothing can move faster than light yet parts of the universe have, do and will move faster than the speed of light. Now with that in mind scientifically speaking time is relative to light speed and the effects of time are distorted.

The Earth can be billions of years old and still be 6500 of our years old.

OK, we DON'T know that Adam and Eve were the first created and I don't understand what you're getting at with the rest of this point.

Thank you for admitting that in some deep space you believe in God unless you were created by an amoeba.

The rest of the point was we only know what has been revealed not everything that has ever been.

There is no evidence whatsoever for a global flood that killed everything but the evil ducks.

I was speaking of the creation and the oceans came before the mountains, proven by science.

The flood was a regional in Mesopotamia The Epic of Gilgamesh verifies this. Yet the world was flooded (the known world).

 

[McBell]

that I (and many others) are not in doubt of anything

Yes.
And there in lies the problem.

 

[Archer]

Then the question is posed. Why does it bother non-believers that one should believe or not? I do not beat people over the head; I do present facts that can be backed up. I am not one to go by faith alone, I carry science in my back pocket and the Lord has revealed himself in many ways through the years.

I am not a traditionalist, I do not believe God sits in a big chair judging people (that only limits god). God works within the bounds of science and nature, we don't know all the bounds yet.

 

[Beaudreaux]

Then the question is posed. Why does it bother non-believers that one should believe or not?

Guy who believes and is discussing it with me on RF......no problem.
Guy who believes and hijacks a plane to fly into a building to please his God.......problem.

 

[GiantHouseKey]

Guy who believes and hijacks a plane to fly into a building to please his God.......problem.

Maybe if those guys stopped thinking about killing themselves and others and started thinking about going out on the pull they could get laid whilst they are still alive

GhK.

 

[Archer]

Guy who believes and is discussing it with me on RF......no problem.
Guy who believes and hijacks a plane to fly into a building to please his God.......problem.

AHHH radicals!!!! I do agree, but the question rises are they following the founding texts of their religion or are the following the teachings of those that came after? We are also people of the Book (Word) and should be respected. They are off in their interpretations as the early crusaders used religion as an excuse to plunder.

 

[McBell]

AHHH radicals!!!! I do agree, but the question rises are they following the founding texts of their religion or are the following the teachings of those that came after? We are also people of the Book (Word) and should be respected. They are off in their interpretations as the early crusaders used religion as an excuse to plunder.

Now you are moving the goal posts.

It does not matter.
They believe. As per your question:

Why does it bother non-believers that one should believe or not?
​

Now if you meant to specify a belief....

 

[Beaudreaux]

AHHH radicals!!!! I do agree, but the question rises are they following the founding texts of their religion or are the following the teachings of those that came after? We are also people of the Book (Word) and should be respected. They are off in their interpretations as the early crusaders used religion as an excuse to plunder.

When one believes that there is a divine being that tells them how to act on earth, then there is virtually nothing out of the question. If you believe God is telling you to do it, you are justified in doing it whether God is telling them to blow themselves up on a crowded bus, or to burn a woman because she's a witch or to invade the middle east to reclaim your homeland. Once God says to do it, reason goes out the window.

 

[Archer]

Oh no, I cant specify. There will always be weak minded followers that can be manipulated. All religions should be illegal if they cant follow their original texts. I think that would knock out a lot Christian Churches (gay's in the pulpit, women leading the church), Muslim (killing with impunity) come to think of it there would be very few houses of religion left.