"No evidence of God" = Is a bad argument against God

[Subduction Zone]

You might know it's true but in the atheist world there's no real reason it should be...there we are just smart animals. I personally have never had a problem killing and eating animals. Yet you want to argue for the inherent value of humans as opposed to cows or sheep. Why? It has to be something inborn.

Only in your opinion. If you look at crime statistics atheists are clearly superior to Christians when it comes to obeying the law. Perhaps it is because they understand morality where too many Christians only believe that they understand morality.

 

[Bathos Logos]

Well, in Euclidean geometry at least.

Yes, measures of flat surface, planar forms. Doesn't matter where in the spectrum of possible geometric objects the rule applies, point is that it applies, and applies absolutely in such instances. On a planar surface, one cannot create a triangle that doesn't conform. That is objective. Doesn't matter who or what is doing the thinking, measuring, analyzing etc. That is the very meaning of "objective".

 

[Bathos Logos]

We will keep it simple. There is one and only one definition of objective in regards to this:
Definition of OBJECTIVE
So which one it is?

Either one or two works for me. Which do you like better? The whole "triangle's inner-angles" bit works as an objective reality using either of those definitions.

For #1:

expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations​

What I have been discussing is a fact that no personal feelings, prejudices or interpretations can distort. Fact.

For #2:

of, relating to, or being an object, phenomenon, or condition in the realm of sensible experience independent of individual thought and perceptible by all observers : having reality independent of the mind​

The relationship I have been discussing most definitely has reality independent of any mind. Fact. The "all observers" bit is, I think, what you're getting hung up on. Because you like to point out that a muskrat can't take the required measurements. This is just you being pedantic, and trying your hardest to "be right." I hope you can understand that.

 

[Bathos Logos]

Sorry, who is it that you are referring to?

In the post you quoted, I had clearly quoted someone. I am not sure how you managed to believe you could potentially be involved. Perhaps you have something to add?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Either one or two works for me. Which do you like better? The whole "triangle's inner-angles" bit works as an objective reality using either of those definitions.

For #1:

expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations​

What I have been discussing is a fact that no personal feelings, prejudices or interpretations can distort. Fact.

For #2:

of, relating to, or being an object, phenomenon, or condition in the realm of sensible experience independent of individual thought and perceptible by all observers : having reality independent of the mind​

The relationship I have been discussing most definitely has reality independent of any mind. Fact. The "all observers" bit is, I think, what you're getting hung up on. Because you like to point out that a muskrat can't take the required measurements. This is just you being pedantic, and trying your hardest to "be right." I hope you can understand that.

Well, thank you for the time. I see no reason to continue because there rest is philosophy.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Only in your opinion. If you look at crime statistics atheists are clearly superior to Christians when it comes to obeying the law. Perhaps it is because they understand morality where too many Christians only believe that they understand morality.

That's got nothing to do with them having any reason for morality in their beliefs.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That's got nothing to do with them having any reason for morality in their beliefs.

Not so. Atheists tend to understand morality. It appears that many Christians do not.

 

[Tiberius]

In the post you quoted, I had clearly quoted someone. I am not sure how you managed to believe you could potentially be involved. Perhaps you have something to add?

This is how that post looked to me:

There were no quote tags used, and even if I was to assume the middle part was a quote, there's no indication who you are quoting. Hence, I think my question was perfectly valid.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

Not so. Atheists tend to understand morality. It appears that many Christians do not.

I couldn't agree more. I know several unbelievers who are more Christ-like than some Christians I know. As I've proven in an earlier post in this thread, Christians aren't morally superior to non-Christians. It's arrogant for Christians to believe they are more moral.

The truth is, Christians aren't morally superior to non-Christians. Christians also lie, steal, commit adultery, divorce, remarry, lust, fornicate, and watch pornography just like non-Christians. As a matter of fact, 68% of Christian men (including pastors) are addicted to pornography. It seems to me that Christians should be more concerned about the plank in their own eye before they worry about the speck of dust in the eye of a non-Christian. As the old saying goes, "Those who live in glass houses should not throw stones."

Porn Addiction Statistics
The statistics for Christian men between 18 and 30 years old are particularly striking:

• 77 percent look at pornography at least monthly.
• 36 percent view pornography on a daily basis
• 32 percent admit being addicted to pornography (and another 12 percent think they may be).

The statistics for middle-aged Christian men (ages 31 to 49) are no less disturbing:

• 77 percent looked at pornography while at work in the past three months.
• 64 percent view pornography at least monthly.
• 18 percent admit being addicted to pornography (and another 8 percent think they may be).

Even married Christian men are falling prey to pornography and extramarital sexual affairs at alarming rates:

• 55 percent look at pornography at least monthly.
• 35 percent had an extramarital affair.

Source: Is Porn Addiction a Problem in Your Church?

 

[Wildswanderer]

Not so. Atheists tend to understand morality. It appears that many Christians do not.

More talk without evidence...

 

[Subduction Zone]

More talk without evidence...

That is an observation, but you are a good example that supports my claim. You have repeatedly demonstrated that you do not understand the concept of evidence when you have denied scientific evidence. Sorry, but one does not get to simply deny evidence. Once presented it has to be refuted. And since I am assuming that you are not lying when you deny the only logical alternative appears to be that you do not understand the nature of evidence. That is why I offer to go over it with you. And not "my definition" of evidence. I have offered to use sources that show it is the definition that scientists use. You could always take me up on my offer, but by refusing to do so only confirms my claim in the post that you referred to.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

That is an observation, but you are a good example that supports my claim. You have repeatedly demonstrated that you do not understand the concept of evidence when you have denied scientific evidence. Sorry, but one does not get to simply deny evidence. Once presented it has to be refuted. And since I am assuming that you are not lying when you deny the only logical alternative appears to be that you do not understand the nature of evidence. That is why I offer to go over it with you. And not "my definition" of evidence. I have offered to use sources that show it is the definition that scientists use. You could always take me up on my offer, but by refusing to do so only confirms my claim in the post that you referred to.

I provided some evidence in my post, but it was ignored by the other member who claimed there's no evidence.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I provided some evidence in my post, but it was ignored by the other member who claimed there's no evidence.

I wonder who

 

[Tiberius]

More talk without evidence...

A quick search on Google led me to these sources...

Are religious people more moral?
Staunch atheists show higher morals than the proudly pious, from the pandemic to climate change

 

[Wildswanderer]

I couldn't agree more. I know several unbelievers who are more Christ-like than some Christians I know. As I've proven in an earlier post in this thread, Christians aren't morally superior to non-Christians. It's arrogant for Christians to believe they are more moral.

We don't claim to be more moral for the 47th time. We claim atheism has no grounds for morality, which is a different thing altogether from saying atheists can't be moral individuals.

 

[Wildswanderer]

A quick search on Google led me to these sources...

Are religious people more moral?
Staunch atheists show higher morals than the proudly pious, from the pandemic to climate change

Sigh.
We don't claim to be more moral for the 47th time. We claim atheism has no grounds for morality, which is a different thing altogether from saying atheists can't be moral individuals.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

A quick search on Google led me to these sources...

Are religious people more moral?
Staunch atheists show higher morals than the proudly pious, from the pandemic to climate change

Despite the denial we're seeing, I know for a fact that there are Christians who claim to be more moral than atheists and other non-Christians. I was a Christian for 30 years, and I heard evangelical Christians claim to be more moral than other Christians. So, I know that the denial is hogwash. There's an old adage that says, "Christians eat their own," and I can attest to the fact that that's true.

 

[rational experiences]

Still got no idea what you're trying to say.

You really must work at putting your thoughts into some kind of coherent manner. I know you can do it, I've seen you do it before.

Basic advice for liars.

No machines no science.

Medical plant mineral presence isn't science. It's natural life support.

The storyteller theist then builder science a man human lied. You lost your origin theist mind as you took your first thesis then burnt it up. Never been rational since.

Pretty basic.

If you use machines to overcome your enemies mind and defeat them you already did it to yourself man scientist.

Thanks however for my life lesson and brain burn. Reason ...if you want a mind destroyed. Thesis for it. Use the machines. It was your first intention.

If you thesis a second time proves how possessed you are as you search for God in human's consciousness.

Is that good enough psychic healer advice?

If you say God is the heavens it existed first when you never existed the man who lies. And as you didn't exist before your own self you can't be god.

Why a once shut book stated after a huge assessment of a man scientists beliefs...no man is God. The assessed review..book shut.

As you decided to research it and it's your proven life's contradiction you seem to ignore why it was a legal testimony only against scientists.

Hence if you weren't once again reading from it you would have no references.

 

[Tiberius]

Sigh.
We don't claim to be more moral for the 47th time. We claim atheism has no grounds for morality, which is a different thing altogether from saying atheists can't be moral individuals.

Except that's not what I was saying, was it?

@Subduction Zone said that atheists "tend to understand morality. It appears that many Christians do not." Post 207.

You dismissed this as "More talk without evidence..." Post 210.

So I'm providing the evidence. Stop trying to pretend you were talking about something else. I was responding directly to your claim in post 210, which I made very clear by quoting it.

 

[Tiberius]

Basic advice for liars.

No machines no science.

Medical plant mineral presence isn't science. It's natural life support.

The storyteller theist then builder science a man human lied. You lost your origin theist mind as you took your first thesis then burnt it up. Never been rational since.

Pretty basic.

If you use machines to overcome your enemies mind and defeat them you already did it to yourself man scientist.

Thanks however for my life lesson and brain burn. Reason ...if you want a mind destroyed. Thesis for it. Use the machines. It was your first intention.

If you thesis a second time proves how possessed you are as you search for God in human's consciousness.

Is that good enough psychic healer advice?

If you say God is the heavens it existed first when you never existed the man who lies. And as you didn't exist before your own self you can't be god.

Why a once shut book stated after a huge assessment of a man scientists beliefs...no man is God. The assessed review..book shut.

As you decided to research it and it's your proven life's contradiction you seem to ignore why it was a legal testimony only against scientists.

Hence if you weren't once again reading from it you would have no references.

I have absolutely no idea what you are trying to say.