There is no evidence for God, so why do you believe?

[Audie]

I cannot answer how it is evidence for a God for you.
Given my belief in a God however it is just confirmative evidence that God arranged genetics so that life forms continued on for a fair while without too many mutations building up.

We already know you've a case of confirmation bias.

 

[Brian2]

And, again, HOW is that evidence for a God? it is evidence that repair of DNA is a good thing for survival of genetic lines, certainly. And that is precisely what you would expect from evolution. But in what way does it support the e3xistence of a supernatural?

I would not expect evolution to be able to recognise variations in copying sequences and have a variety of ways to fix them. To me that is the hand of God and not of nature. And that no doubt is a logical fallacy (incredulity) but so what, it's my evidence and I'll see it as I want to.
Personally I think that looking at such things and just seeing them as having occurred naturally without a designer is nonsense and probably comes from seeing so many incredible things in nature and being told they did not need a designer, and being desensitised, losing a sense of awe.
And you disagree with that and it does not matter.
I have been desensitised to skeptic/atheist arguments against the existence of God.

 

[sayak83]

I would not expect evolution to be able to recognise variations in copying sequences and have a variety of ways to fix them. To me that is the hand of God and not of nature. And that no doubt is a logical fallacy (incredulity) but so what, it's my evidence and I'll see it as I want to.
Personally I think that looking at such things and just seeing them as having occurred naturally without a designer is nonsense and probably comes from seeing so many incredible things in nature and being told they did not need a designer, and being desensitised, losing a sense of awe.
And you disagree with that and it does not matter.
I have been desensitised to skeptic/atheist arguments against the existence of God.

The reality is different from what you want. The evolution of DNA repair pathways have been charted by scientists already. See here
Evolutionary Origins of DNA Repair Pathways: Role of Oxygen Catastrophe in the Emergence of DNA Glycosylases

 

[Brian2]

The reality is different from what you want. The evolution of DNA repair pathways have been charted by scientists already. See here
Evolutionary Origins of DNA Repair Pathways: Role of Oxygen Catastrophe in the Emergence of DNA Glycosylases

A possible evolution path or a real one does not detract from this incredible ability to repair damage and it being evidence for God's hand in designing such a thing.

 

[Subduction Zone]

A possible evolution path or a real one does not detract from this incredible ability to repair damage and it being evidence for God's hand in designing such a thing.

How is that evidence of God? This is a topic that I do not understand well myself, but my lack of understanding does not make it "evidence for God". Scientists may understand how this ability has evolved, Or they may not know. Either way that is not evidence for God. It sounds as if yo are using the logical fallacy of an Argument From Ignorance.

 

[sayak83]

A possible evolution path or a real one does not detract from this incredible ability to repair damage and it being evidence for God's hand in designing such a thing.

How precisely does this hand work? For example if I time travelled to a certain point in the path when God's hand was at work in "creating" a feature...what would I have observed? Thanks

 

[Audie]

I would not expect evolution to be able to recognise variations in copying sequences and have a variety of ways to fix them. To me that is the hand of God and not of nature. And that no doubt is a logical fallacy (incredulity) but so what, it's my evidence and I'll see it as I want to.
Personally I think that looking at such things and just seeing them as having occurred naturally without a designer is nonsense and probably comes from seeing so many incredible things in nature and being told they did not need a designer, and being desensitised, losing a sense of awe.
And you disagree with that and it does not matter.
I have been desensitised to skeptic/atheist arguments against the existence of God.

Youve desensitized yourself to reading for content.

You religionists have quite the variety of weird n
wacky beliefs, all backed up by exxentric ways to
interpret the Bible.

Trying to show someone that their belief is a world
wide flood is bonkers, disproved 10000 ways by
hard data has nothing to do with " god".

Your contuing to falsely claim that talking science
V ignorance is somehow about the existence is
if not an insult to your own intelligence, it certainly is
to those who offer data to counter your made up nonsense.

It's never against the existence of God.

 

[Audie]

How precisely does this hand work? For example if I time travelled to a certain point in the path when God's hand was at work in "creating" a feature...what would I have observed? Thanks

Easy peezie. Watch under electron microscope.
Suddenly, amazing structural changes would appear.
Like magic.

 

[sun rise]

You religionists have quite the variety of weird n
wacky beliefs, all backed up by exxentric ways to
interpret the Bible.

That's a logical fallacy: Not all "religionists" are Christian.

 

[Audie]

That's a logical fallacy: Not all "religionists" are Christian.

Ha. All Christians are religionists,
AND the weird n wacky comes as thick and
fast from Christians as from any.

No " fallacy" on my part tho you get a ticket
for bringing it up. And for the distinction sans difference.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Youve desensitized yourself to reading for content.

You religionists have quite the variety of weird n
wacky beliefs, all backed up by exxentric ways to
interpret the Bible.

Trying to show someone that their belief is a world
wide flood is bonkers, disproved 10000 ways by
hard data has nothing to do with " god".

Your contuing to falsely claim that talking science
V ignorance is somehow about the existence is
if not an insult to your own intelligence, it certainly is
to those who offer data to counter your made up nonsense.

It's never against the existence of God.

Well, I am religious and have faith in God, but I am not of the Abrahamic tradition.
So you have to broaden your definition of religion or in effect lie.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Ha. All Christians are religionists,
AND the weird n wacky comes as thick and
fast from Christians as from any.

No " fallacy" on my part tho you get a ticket
for bringing it up. And for the distinction sans difference.

Well, not all religious people believe in effect in the Divine Command claim.

 

[sun rise]

Ha. All Christians are religionists,
AND the weird n wacky comes as thick and
fast from Christians as from any.

No " fallacy" on my part tho you get a ticket
for bringing it up. And for the distinction sans difference.

Continuing with the some/all fallacy I see. Not all Christians are "religious zealots" which "religionist" typically means.

 

[Audie]

Continuing with the some/all fallacy I see. Not all Christians are "religious zealots" which "religionist" typically means.

You see things that are not there.

I neither stated nor implied that " all"
have weird n wacky notions.

There's lots of sensible christians.

If you have a real question or problem
with what I said, get to it.

 

[Muffled]

The question better asked is, "Why do you believe in a God who is so perfect that he could be the author of a book riddled with so many errors, contradictions and outright untruths that it would take a book equally as thick to detail them."

At last count GhanaWeb had caught 50,000 Errors and Biblical contradictions

50,000!!!!!!!! This from a "Perfect" God.

50,000 Errors and Biblical contradictions

If the Bible was divinely inspired, then why would it have so many really obvious contradictions?

www.ghanaweb.com

I believe He is not the author. He is the one who inspires the writers. People are imperfect and God allows some of that.

 

[Muffled]

You see things that are not there.

I neither stated nor implied that " all"
have weird n wacky notions.

There's lots of sensible christians.

If you have a real question or problem
with what I said, get to it.

I believe it is not necessary for things to make sense according to our own understanding. Our views of things tend to be deficient.

 

[Muffled]

Continuing with the some/all fallacy I see. Not all Christians are "religious zealots" which "religionist" typically means.

I do not believe that is correct. An activist is someone who is active so a religionist would be someone practicing religion and there are many conservative versions of that.

 

[Audie]

I believe it is not necessary for things to make sense according to our own understanding. Our views of things tend to be deficient.

So by that the Bible is literally sense- less for people to read.
Good one.

But then you are so far off topic.

I said it's impossible to be an educated
Creationist who is intellectually honest.

You've hardly shown that's not so.

 

[Audie]

I do not believe that is correct. An activist is someone who is active so a religionist would be someone practicing religion and there are many conservative versions of that.

And relgionists of many a stripe come up with
endless weird n wacky ideas

 

[Subduction Zone]

I believe He is not the author. He is the one who inspires the writers. People are imperfect and God allows some of that.

But then you are admitting that it is not the "word of God". It is only inspired by God. And yes, people screw up regularly.