There is more then enough evidence to prove God exists.

[serp777]

Well, yes, of course it is because you are not reading it for comprehension. It is your name for the day, isn't it, Strawman



No



God loves us all, even the individual birds in the air does he care for. That you do not understand that shows another argumentum ad ignorantiam

And yet another argumentum ad ignorantiam. 5 billion years? Is that what you think. And you call me a pseudo scientist then say we have been evolving for 5 billion years. Just about says it all, doesn't it?

You think that our purpose in life is to be debating here, really?

Another argumentum ad ignorantiam. You think that all you have to do is pray to Jesus to become a Christian? It is not a necessity to receive a personal testimony then. Oh my word, you do not have a clue what Christianity is about yet you try to debate it.



Neither do you. Your post is full of false accusations without a single quote that corroborates your "shaky" words. I have just demonstrated three argumentum ad ignorantiams of yours to you.

Your challenges became to aggressive for me to respond seriously. Atheists do this all the time, regardless of venue, when you do not agree with them they get aggressive and insulting, after which they stamp their feet in a tantrum and before you know it all of the toys come flying out of the prams, that defines a narcissist.



Another argumentum ad ignorantiam. The old testament is a record of a people who lived under a preparatory law, the Mosaic Law. When Christ came he changed it in the beatitudes to the Abrahamic Covenant, the law of accountability. The Mosaic Law had been fulfilled.

"who knows how to instill moral accountability in himself". The man who knows the law and follows Christ.



Not true, again. I am complaining that you have derailed the thread with your insults. It is what atheists do to stifle debate and prevent good, open and honest debate. Better to halt the debate then to be proven wrong by it.

"God loves us all, even the individual birds in the air does he care for. That you do not understand that shows another argumentum ad ignorantiam

And yet another argumentum ad ignorantiam. 5 billion years? Is that what you think. And you call me a pseudo scientist then say we have been evolving for 5 billion years. Just about says it all, doesn't it? "

I will simply say God does not love us all, because you have absolutely no evidence or proof.

"I am complaining that you have derailed the thread with your insults."
A hence you are still a hypocrite by using your own abysmal insults. GO look up the definition of a hypocrite, since you are clearly unaware of what it means.

"And you call me a pseudo scientist then say we have been evolving for 5 billion years."
Again a strawman. You are terrible at reading comprehension and debate in addition to the fact that you're stupid. I never said we have been evolving for 5 billion. I said:

"God made this entire universe and existence, plus five billion years of evolution, just so we could be having this debate"


That does not mean, in any sense, that we have been evolving for 5 billion years. That just means evolution has been occurring that long, and if you try to pull the accuracy of that figure (4 billion vs 5 billion) then you are an even bigger strawmanning idiot than I thought was possible. If you are this terrible at reading English, how can you think your interpretations regarding documents from bronze age palestine are correct?

"You think that our purpose in life is to be debating here, really?

Another argumentum ad ignorantiam. You think that all you have to do is pray to Jesus to become a Christian?"

You're so bad at reading. This is actually hilarious. Never said any of these things. First I never said I think the universe had a purpose; I was teasing you about your belief in purpose. Second, I said pray to Jesus AND become a Christian, not pray to Jesus TO become a Christian. Learn the definition of "AND". It's a tough one for someone like you, but i'm sure you can handle these basic words. Or maybe not.

"Your post is full of false accusations without a single quote that corroborates your "shaky" words. "

You still haven't provided any quotes or evidence. Your accusations are just as shaky, I was simply responding in kind to point out your blatant ********.

"Atheists do this all the time, regardless of venue, when you do not agree with them they get aggressive and insulting, after which they stamp their feet in a tantrum and before you know it all of the toys come flying out of the prams, that defines a narcissist. "

Some christians, such as you, do this all the time, regardless of venue when you do not agree with them--they get defensive and insulted, after which they cry in a hissy fit, then use ridiculous generalizations; before you know it all the self righteous idiocy comes flying out of the wood work, which would define a straight up moron.

"who knows how to instill moral accountability in himself". The man who knows the law and follows Christ. "

Nice circular reasoning. You know you're moral because you follow Christ which means you know you're moral. Unbeatable argument here.

So basically all of your ad ignorantium claims are total bs, like your arguments, and your reasoned faith. The only reason you feel you need to provide evidence for your faith is because you realize that your faith alone isn't good enough. A self defeating evidentialist if I ever saw one.

SO lets see here. Several counts of strawman, multiple counts of failing 5th grade reading comprehension, a count of fallacy fallacy, and a count of circular reasoning. No wonder why most people on this thread don't take you seriously. You're a joke.

 

[serp777]

I am sure that you are right. I do not think I have used this site before and I am not aware of it being a biased site either. I just Google it and that was the first site I choose.

Because this particular evidences comes direct from the source of the comment, and because it can be found on both atheist and theists sites, it should validate that the comment had been spoken by Krauss and Dawkins, so, to bring it into question must have been to facilitate a stall in the debate again. It really does not take that much to authenticate my assertion, therefore, it should have been left as it was. Unfortunately there are some who prefer to argue personalities and trivialities rather then topics, or just lack in intellect to see the obvious.

"Unfortunately there are some who prefer to argue personalities and trivialities rather then topics, or just lack in intellect to see the obvious."

And this is a great auto biography.

 

[Serenity7855]

1. The best lies are smothered with truths.

Yes, I would agree with that. God has warned us that Satan will tell a thousand truths just to deceive us with the one lie.

New York exists, and in the city there are werewolves.

The sentence is contrived to meet your point. "There are werewolves in New Your" or "There are no werewolves in New York, would be grammatically correct. That would formerly make the statement a lie, or latterly the truth.

According to you, either the whole sentence is completely false (NY doesn't exist, and there are no werewolves there, or NY exists and there are werewolves).

No, according to me I would ask where the writer had received his education, if he had received any at all. Clearly there is no necessity to inform the reader that New York exists, and how do you define exist. It is alive with people or it is bricks and mortar.

What is very interesting is when you ask the question why? Why have you used poor English to attempt to stupefy me? You do not seem unintelligent so why have you contrived a sentence to make my argument, not only look wrong, but ridiculous. What were you feeling at the time. "Got him", "this will make him look daft", "ah, a chance to belittle a Christian". What motivated you to act so badly. Did you feel that it would progress the debate constructively, perhaps. The point you are dissecting is not even relevant to the OP, it relates to the bigotry and bias of a particular web site. My answer was intellectually and logically sound. People either tell the truth or a lie, and with Web pages, it is not the individual sentence that matters it is the overall picture that is being painted, it is either a lie or the truth.

2. For someone to be biased, it means that they are twisting and spinning the truth and making it closer to a lie than a truth. So, a site can be biased, simply because if they're telling lies, then they're doing so from a biased perspective. So your claim that there are no truly biased sites is completely false (hence everything you say must be a lie, according to yourself above).

Argumentum ad ignorantiam. Biased is unfairly prejudiced for or against someone or something, whereas twisting is to alter or distort the intended meaning of something. You are being dishonest in your terminology by ascribing the act of twisting to bias. If you were correct, and you are not, twisting can bring one closer to a lie equally as well as it can to a truth. You are purposely choosing the negative because in that choice you are able to stupefy and insult your opponent, me. (hence everything you say must be a lie, according to yourself above) no everything I say, according to you above, is a lie, however, your logic was ill thought through and, therefore, erroneous. If a site is telling lies then it fulfills my original statement that it is either the truth or it is a lie. That the lie gives a biased perspective is irrelevant as it is superceded by the dishonesty of the lie.

3. Information is rarely 100% true even if the author has good intentions. Language is vague. Information is incomplete. We are flawed humans. All compose a situation where what we say and claim to be true rarely are 100% true, and also unfortunately biased on some level or not.

No, that is unacceptable. It may happen but in order to convey an accurate message the message must be without personal bias. For example, I have used the term "could it be a God" on several occasions when I believe it is a God, however, to state my belief is bias so I omit it from my article. Bias is something that we all do but that does not make it right. It is argumentum as populum. Because we all do it does not make it right.

You are putting up arguments that are poorly thought through as a direct result of desperately trying to make a spectacle of me. Perhaps if you debated instead of trying to agitate me you would reap the pleasure of constructive debate. Looking for arguments and disagreements is tantamount to troublemaking, do you really want to be tarred with that brush?

 

[adi2d]

" argumentum ad ignorantiam

And yet another argumentum ad ignorantiam.
. a pseudo scientist Just about says it all, doesn't it? "

you have absolutely no evidence or proof.

you have derailed the thread with your insults."
you are still a hypocrite. . GO look up the definition of a hypocrite, since you are clearly unaware of what it means.

a pseudo scientist. Again a strawman. . You are terrible. the fact that you're stupid

you are bigger strawmanning idiot than I thought was possible. you are this terrible

"You think that our purpose in life is to be debating here, really?

Another argumentum ad ignorantiam.

You're so bad at reading. This is actually hilarious.; I was teasing you. Learn the definition. It's a tough one for someone like you,.

"Your post is full of false accusations without a single quote that corroborates your "shaky" words. "

You still haven't provided any quotes or evidence. point out your blatant ********.
aggressive and insulting0. stamp their feet. insulted a hissy fit, ridiculous idiocy. straight up moron.

Unbeatable argument here.

So basically all of your ad ignorantium claims are total bs, like your arguments, and your reasoned faith. The only reason you feel you need to provide evidence for your faith is because you realize that your faith alone isn't good enough. A self defeating evidentialist if I ever saw one.

Several counts of strawman, multiple counts of failing 5th grade reading comprehension, a count of fallacy fallacy, and a count of circular reasoning. No wonder why most people on this thread don't take you seriously. You're a joke.

Come on Serp . Don't be shy. How do you really feel about the OP?

 

[Serenity7855]

"God loves us all, even the individual birds in the air does he care for. That you do not understand that shows another argumentum ad ignorantiam

And yet another argumentum ad ignorantiam. 5 billion years? Is that what you think. And you call me a pseudo scientist then say we have been evolving for 5 billion years. Just about says it all, doesn't it? "

I will simply say God does not love us all, because you have absolutely no evidence or proof.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

“For those who believe, no proof is necessary.
For those who don't believe, no proof is possible.”

"I am complaining that you have derailed the thread with your insults."
A hence you are still a hypocrite by using your own abysmal insults. GO look up the definition of a hypocrite, since you are clearly unaware of what it means.

If you find my post insulting it is because the truth can cut deep and cause a great deal of pain. If I insult you can trace the insult to someone else insulting me first.

"And you call me a pseudo scientist then say we have been evolving for 5 billion years."
Again a strawman. You are terrible at reading comprehension and debate in addition to the fact that you're stupid. I never said we have been evolving for 5 billion. I said:

"God made this entire universe and existence, plus five billion years of evolution, just so we could be having this debate"

You are saying 5 billion years of evolution. Those are the words you have used. As the earth is only 3.7 billion years old how could it have been evolving for 5 billion years?

By saying that I am Stupid you are breaking the rules of the forum by attacking the person and not his post.

That does not mean, in any sense, that we have been evolving for 5 billion years. That just means evolution has been occurring that long, and if you try to pull the accuracy of that figure (4 billion vs 5 billion) then you are an even bigger strawmanning idiot than I thought was possible. If you are this terrible at reading English, how can you think your interpretations regarding documents from bronze age palestine are correct?

Why are you being so nasty to me. I cannot possible respond to such vitriolic denigration. Is this another case of the angry atheists who gets angry when his beliefs are questioned so feels he must besmirch and berate his opponent. Get a grip man and settle down, you will give yourself a heart attack. You don't always have to be right you know.

"You think that our purpose in life is to be debating here, really?

Another argumentum ad ignorantiam. You think that all you have to do is pray to Jesus to become a Christian?"

You're so bad at reading. This is actually hilarious. Never said any of these things. First I never said I think the universe had a purpose; I was teasing you about your belief in purpose. Second, I said pray to Jesus AND become a Christian, not pray to Jesus TO become a Christian. Learn the definition of "AND". It's a tough one for someone like you, but i'm sure you can handle these basic words. Or maybe not.

No, this drivel does not deserve a response. You are making the debate personal. You do not know me. You only see my words. Attack them and not me.

"Your post is full of false accusations without a single quote that corroborates your "shaky" words. "

You still haven't provided any quotes or evidence. Your accusations are just as shaky, I was simply responding in kind to point out your blatant ********.

Ah, the profanity has begun. Another trait of the angry atheists. A inability to talk without debasing themselves in profanity. I have provided evidence.

"Atheists do this all the time, regardless of venue, when you do not agree with them they get aggressive and insulting, after which they stamp their feet in a tantrum and before you know it all of the toys come flying out of the prams, that defines a narcissist. "

Some christians, such as you, do this all the time, regardless of venue when you do not agree with them--they get defensive and insulted, after which they cry in a hissy fit, then use ridiculous generalizations; before you know it all the self righteous idiocy comes flying out of the wood work, which would define a straight up moron.

I am trying hard not to report this post but you are pushing it. This is puerile.

"who knows how to instill moral accountability in himself". The man who knows the law and follows Christ. "

Nice circular reasoning. You know you're moral because you follow Christ which means you know you're moral. Unbeatable argument here.

You are becoming incoherent, have you been drinking?

So basically all of your ad ignorantium claims are total bs, like your arguments, and your reasoned faith. The only reason you feel you need to provide evidence for your faith is because you realize that your faith alone isn't good enough. A self defeating evidentialist if I ever saw one.

The only reason I am offering evidence to to stimulate debate. You are to narcissistic and angry to debate.

SO lets see here. Several counts of strawman, multiple counts of failing 5th grade reading comprehension, a count of fallacy fallacy, and a count of circular reasoning. No wonder why most people on this thread don't take you seriously. You're a joke.

I am sorry, I do not intend to respond to the drivel you are spewing forth with venom.

 

[Mycroft]

199 pages in. Still waiting for any evidence.

 

[Sapiens]

I think that the wait is the proverbial, "till hell freezes over."

 

[Mycroft]

I think that the wait is the proverbial, "till hell freezes over."

You know, that would be quite the Irony.

 

[Serenity7855]

You know, that would be quite the Irony.

I have posted the evidence, you probably missed it when you were trolling

 

[Sapiens]

That wasn't evidence, it was (at best) moldy bait. You should never troll with moldy bait.

 

[Serenity7855]

That wasn't evidence, it was (at best) moldy bait. You should never troll with moldy bait.

I am sure that is good advice, but only you would know.

 

[Sapiens]

Evidently, but here must be some others here that learned that lesson too.

It sure appears to be a lesson that you have failed to learn so far.

 

[serp777]

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

“For those who believe, no proof is necessary.
For those who don't believe, no proof is possible.”



If you find my post insulting it is because the truth can cut deep and cause a great deal of pain. If I insult you can trace the insult to someone else insulting me first.



You are saying 5 billion years of evolution. Those are the words you have used. As the earth is only 3.7 billion years old how could it have been evolving for 5 billion years?

By saying that I am Stupid you are breaking the rules of the forum by attacking the person and not his post.



Why are you being so nasty to me. I cannot possible respond to such vitriolic denigration. Is this another case of the angry atheists who gets angry when his beliefs are questioned so feels he must besmirch and berate his opponent. Get a grip man and settle down, you will give yourself a heart attack. You don't always have to be right you know.



No, this drivel does not deserve a response. You are making the debate personal. You do not know me. You only see my words. Attack them and not me.



Ah, the profanity has begun. Another trait of the angry atheists. A inability to talk without debasing themselves in profanity. I have provided evidence.



I am trying hard not to report this post but you are pushing it. This is puerile.



You are becoming incoherent, have you been drinking?



The only reason I am offering evidence to to stimulate debate. You are to narcissistic and angry to debate.



I am sorry, I do not intend to respond to the drivel you are spewing forth with venom.

Just for the record you have been equally unpleasant, even if i did get a little carried away . If you reported me, then you would have to deal with the mods going through your posts where you have insulted numerous members. Ill agree to stop being insulting if you will because even though i heavily disagree with most of your arguments, i still hold no malice.

Furthermore making a claim like my alleged incoherence requires at least some justification or it's just a baseless statement.

Also you seem to assume that im an athiest. Im an agnostic--i do not know what i cannot know.

I also fail to see how the use of a single profane word reflects anger, and if im angry, then based on your tone, you're equally angry. But imagined anger on either side is irrelevant.

Finally the earth is 4.54 billion years old. 5 billion was an easy round up number. So then about 4 billion years of evolution. The point wasnt about the precision, it was about the unnecessarily long duration to develop a species of evolved primates, including our cousins the Neanderthals. If this was a universe that arose from physical means, then these ridiculously large durations would be very consistent.

Could God have designed a better universe? Indeed he could because he has infinite power and knowledge

Also why do you feel like you need evidence for your faith? Why isn't faith alone good enough?

 

[ScuzManiac]

Really, I have said 'nah uh' whilst I have debated. Please show me the offending post, or be labelled a blatant liar, who is using the misrepresentation card that atheists regularly use. It don't matter if they said it or not, just say that they have said it anyway.

It was a figure of speech but label me as a liar all you want.

I can also label you as someone who claims to have this prestigious knowledge of God's existence...

Yet you can't even use proper grammar?

Yeah, we're going to take you VERY seriously on this site.

I think you and Aman777 would make the perfect team.

 

[Serenity7855]

Evidently, but here must be some others here that learned that lesson too.

It sure appears to be a lesson that you have failed to learn so far.

Appearances can be very deceptive, especially on a Internet forum full of words

 

[Serenity7855]

It was a figure of speech but label me as a liar all you want.

I can also label you as someone who claims to have this prestigious knowledge of God's existence...

Yet you can't even use proper grammar?

Yeah, we're going to take you VERY seriously on this site.

I think you and Aman777 would make the perfect team.

My grammar is not the topic of debate.

I do not claim a prestigious knowledge of anything. Those are words that you have carefully placed in my mouth intended to misrepresent me. A tad underhanded, but typical.

You labelled yourself a liar by claiming I said something that I did not.

 

[Sapiens]

Appearances can be very deceptive, especially on a Internet forum full of words

Indeed, I suspect that you are as deceptive as you appear.

 

[ScuzManiac]

If I could take any reasonable man, from off the street, who was totally impartial and without mindless bigotry, void of the brain washing techniques of Atheists and open minded enough to learn, I could satisfy his mind, using the scientific knowledge that we currently have, that it is more likely for their to be a God, then not. Even with the little knowledge that I have of the universe we live on a knife edge in, I could demonstrate that a superior force caused the universe to come into existence. Indeed, Kalam's cosmological argument is sufficient to do that on its own, that is, without mentioning the singularity, the Big Bang, rapid expansion, anthropic principle, dark matter and energy, fine tuning, etc etc etc... So why is it that Atheists have such leverage in our society to preach their counterfeit arguments.

If a man wants to know the truth, without a need to subscribe to any groups who all think the same and who all point the same condescending fingure, as there is safety in numbers, then the truth is in the stars for all to see. Why do men need to be told what to believe instead of finding out for themselves by looking at our world that simply could not exist without divinity.

Look at the vast gap between the intelligence of Man and that of our closest counterpart in the animal Kingdom to see how much more intelligent we are to them. Have we evolved that much faster then they have, and if we have, then why have we? Something so fundamentally obvious, both scientifically, cosmological and supernaturally has to have a form of intelligence behind it. It is so obviously God who created the universe and set our planet up for habitation. The "by chance" idea is hugely more improbable then a supernatural being is, yet we readily believe the former. Why? How do atheists reconcile this overwhelming cosmological and intellectual evidence. How is it possible to categorically claim that God does not exist.

You didn't say all of this? Seems like a vast knowledge of God's existence to me.

My grammar is not the topic of debate.

I do not claim a prestigious knowledge of anything. Those are words that you have carefully placed in my mouth intended to misrepresent me. A tad underhanded, but typical.

You labelled yourself a liar by claiming I said something that I did not.

I didn't label myself as that (you did).

And I'm sure no one on this forum will agree with you either.

Besides, the topic of this debate isn't your "nuh uhs" and "no sirs" either.

You can decipher what is and isn't to be taken literally in The Bible...

Why can't you do it within my messages as well?

:sarcastic

 

[Serenity7855]

Just for the record you have been equally unpleasant, even if i did get a little carried away . If you reported me, then you would have to deal with the mods going through your posts where you have insulted numerous members. Ill agree to stop being insulting if you will because even though i heavily disagree with most of your arguments, i still hold no malice.

No, no I haven't. I have responded I have not attacked. I have no fear of mods going back through my post. The easiest way to stop my insults are to stop yours.

Furthermore making a claim like my alleged incoherence requires at least some justification or it's just a baseless statement.

No, it is a allegations.

Also you seem to assume that im an athiest. Im an agnostic--i do not know what i cannot know.

I fail to see the difference between an atheist and a agnostic.

I also fail to see how the use of a single profane word reflects anger, and if im angry, then based on your tone, you're equally angry. But imagined anger on either side is irrelevant.

I am just not an angry person. I believe everyone has a right to believe it what ever they choose. I do not get angry because my choice is not selected.

Finally the earth is 4.54 billion years old. 5 billion was an easy round up number. So then about 4 billion years of evolution. The point wasnt about the precision, it was about the unnecessarily long duration to develop a species of evolved primates, including our cousins the Neanderthals. If this was a universe that arose from physical means, then these ridiculously large durations would be very consistent.

We are relatively young in comparison to the age of the earth. Primates, I believe, are just about 200 million years old. It took as long as it was necessary to take.

Could God have designed a better universe? Indeed he could because he has infinite power and knowledge

God had no control over the results of the big bang. If he did then there would be no need for fine tuning.

Also why do you feel like you need evidence for your faith? Why isn't faith alone good enough?

Faith alone is good enough for me. I am just enjoying the debate with those who do not believe the same as me. That is what this forum is about.

 

[Serenity7855]

You didn't say all of this? Seems like a vast knowledge of God's existence to me.

Not until I actually say the words that you claim I said.

I didn't label myself as that (you did).

And I'm sure no one on this forum will agree with you either.

Quite an assumption

Besides, the topic of this debate isn't your "nuh uhs" and "no sirs" either.

Obviously

You can decipher what is and isn't to be taken literally in The Bible...

Can I?

Why can't you do it within my messages as well?

:sarcastic

Ah, sarcasm, the lowest form of wit.