Do You Believe In God, Why? Don't You Believe In God, Why?

[Skywalker]

I rest my case.
So when you previously, dogmatically, stated that "lying is wrong, period!", you were actually wrong about that.

So really, you have to acknowledge now that it is indeed as I said: it's contextual. An action that is immoral in scenario A, isn't necessarily immoral in scenario B.

So, the bold dogmatic black and white statement "lying is wrong, period", is false.

Glad we cleared that up.



Except when it isn't, apparently.

Now.... are you absolutely certain that I can't just as easily come up with a scenario where stealing is the right thing to do?

Rules are not based on their exceptions.

 

[Skywalker]

Sounds like a very trivial distinction.

There is only one God. Witchcraft is people trying to be God. Let there be light has nothing to do with witchcraft.

 

[Skywalker]

Is this your way of admitting that there is nothing immoral about living together without being married, as you previously claimed?

You called it immoral. Remember?


As for the points about slavery and homophobia in the bible, I guess we're just going to ignore all that then?

Homophobia is relating to womanizing, which is behavior that the Bible says is wrong. I'm not I think people living together before marriage is right, but I was agreeing with you saying that couples who live together before marriage get along good.

 

[savagewind]

Here is the question! What do you think?

I believe in God because I want to believe that there is some goodness (God is good!) behind the magic. I see too much magic.

 

[Polymath257]

But they would still be fully formed organs. They would only be intermediate in a relative sense.

Exactly. Just like ALL organs are. Transitional animals are the same way: fully formed and intermediate.

 

[Skywalker]

I believe in God because I want to believe that there is some goodness (God is good!) behind the magic. I see too much magic.

I believe that the standard of what's right and what's wrong comes from God.

 

[Polymath257]

Adultery is never considered a sign of respect.

OK, non-monogamy.

Gravity cannot form spheres that create plants or living organisms. Its not an example of creative powers, like God is.

You are right. To form life requires chemistry. And life *is* a complex collection of chemical reactions.

 

[Skywalker]

Exactly. Just like ALL organs are. Transitional animals are the same way: fully formed and intermediate.

But to be an intermediate, ti would have to either by definition not be fully formed or it would have to be a fully functioning intermediate.

 

[Polymath257]

What Christian nation executed homosexuals or kept slaves?

Living together before marriage takes away from the specialness of what it means to be married.

I disagree. Living together (and being sexual) is a good way to ensure compatibility, thereby ensuring the marriage will be a good one.

 

[Polymath257]

But to be an intermediate, ti would have to either by definition not be fully formed or it would have to be a fully functioning intermediate.

Exactly. A *fully functioning* intermediate.

 

[savagewind]

I believe that the standard of what's right and what's wrong comes from God.

I agree! But, still, there are hundreds, even thousands, of unexplainable happenings that I want an explanation for so I opt for God.

 

[Polymath257]

The human hand. How do all the joints work together to move it so perfectly? Without one part the entire hand wouldn't function.

OK, now prove it was designed as opposed to being produced by natural selection.

 

[Polymath257]

Mutations are generally not favorable.

True. But all that is required is that *some* of them be beneficial.

 

[Polymath257]

If I had kids they would still have fully formed organs and not half a heart, and the same would apply to me and my parents.

Yes, just like all intermediate species would have fully functioning hearts. Otherwise they would die off (be selected against).

 

[savagewind]

Is this a conversation about sex?

 

[Polymath257]

There is very little evidence of those in the fossil record, besides the Tiklaak fish.

Again, simply false. We have a great deal of evidence for the reptile->mammal transition, to the reptile-->bird transition, to the fish-->amphibian transition, and for a wide variety of smaller level transitions.

 

[Polymath257]

Mutations changing to natural selection is unlikely at best.

We know things reproduce. We know mutations happen: both positive and negative. We know that many more individuals die before reproducing than manage to reproduce. We know that *which* ones survive depends, in part, on their genetics.

That is enough for natural selection to operate and produce increasing complexity and optimal solutions to structural problems. In other words, it is enough to give the *appearance* of design without there being design.

 

[Skywalker]

OK, non-monogamy.



You are right. To form life requires chemistry. And life *is* a complex collection of chemical reactions.

Monogamy was always God's ideal. Abraham and David having many wives was like people getting divorced. It is permissible to God, but not beneficial.

Outside of a lab, what's an example of chemical reactions creating life forms that have been shown to have evolved or show signs of evolution?

 

[Skywalker]

No. A law that that people can't live upto, is a bad law. An unjust law. An unfair law.



Right, but aparantly my analogy went way over your head.



Yes, that's the analogy. That's exactly what your god did. This is why he needed to "sacrifice" himself to himself, to find a loophole in a messed up system that he himself is ultimately responsible for. That would actually be a more appropriate understanding of this whole thing... god punishing himself for the mess he created.



Then why did you give such as an analogy?
Would you have also said this if I hadn't pointed out the absurdity thereof? I doubt it.



I don't believe there is a god to begin with.
But in context of the story, he clearly didn't become a mortal being.
A mortal being would stay dead.

Jesus didn't stay dead because he resurrected, not as a zombie-like being like Osiris, but as the resurrected prince of glory.

 

[Skywalker]

We know things reproduce. We know mutations happen: both positive and negative. We know that many more individuals die before reproducing than manage to reproduce. We know that *which* ones survive depends, in part, on their genetics.

That is enough for natural selection to operate and produce increasing complexity and optimal solutions to structural problems. In other words, it is enough to give the *appearance* of design without there being design.

That doesn't mean that macroevolution is possible, because there are limits to the changes that mutations allow.

It's not possible for populations to develop survival traits without individuals first developng those traits, and those individuals would die before they develop their survival traits.