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

[KWED]

Ok then, I expect a baby to grow in the garden.

It does, kinda.
What do you think happens when you plant a tiny seed that, if nurtured properly, grows into a large and complex plant?

Again, food doesn't create a body.

Of course it does. The chemical compounds in the food are broken down and reassembled as body matter - bone, muscle, blood, etc.

No one should have to explain this.

You are correct. You should have paid more attention in science class.

It's not creating life from nothing, it's nourishing what already exists.

So a fully grown adult exists at the moment of conception? Are you sure?

 

[Sheldon]

I have literally never said that, I have heard the odd atheist offer it as a benchmark for evidence, when pressed by theists, but it always struck me as a bit vague.



You already do, just substitute inexplicable magic for natural processes, oopsy.



You might want to think about that for a minute, as it is another spectacular own goal.


Or an unevidenced archaic creation myth, using appeals to mystery and inexplicable magic.

now are expecting me to believe in your version of a miracle.

No, we are arguing that natural laws allow for much more than some theists like to admit.

That isn't advocating miracles (violations of natural laws).

You just refuse to acknowledge what is obvious

Yet another irony overload aside, you are the one who is refusing to acknowledge that nothing has been claimed that violates any natural or scientific law, do you not know what miracle means? You know you can Google word definitions right?

miracle
noun

1. an extraordinary and welcome event that is not explicable by natural or scientific laws and is therefore attributed to a divine agency.

Care to quote me claiming anything is attributed to a divine agency? Dear oh dear...

 

[KWED]

I attended a Christian school. And I've read plenty about the formation of the Bible. You want to discuss that, start another thread.

So an objective, critical appraisal then?

 

[Sheldon]

Faith is the belief in things not seen. This is not only true in religion, but all secular innovation uses the same schema. This topic is saying if you come up with a new embryonic idea, that is not yet tangible, so others can see it, you need to forget about it.

Such a world will stop in its tracks, at a point on time. That point in time was built on the shoulders of past visionaries, but no new visionaries after that. This is common thinking for those who think now is the best of all times, and nothing new needs to be added, and all change need to be avoided, instead of embraced.

The faith of the believers, of all things not seen, both religious and secular, is the living spirit in the otherwise sterile world of temporal perfection. The resistant to the unseen future, is often less about maintaining temporal perfection and more about power and keeping the seat at the big table. If the horseless carriage was to success what becomes of the horse and buggy and all those who now live large?

The faithful in religion, sense the future that forms via the spirit; thought and imagination. It appears in material reality for all to see only after it can be transposed into material form. They set an example of faith, for others to see and follow, even if they are not religious. The living future, has many paths.

The religious and all faithful, they have a connection to time; future and timelessness, that give some the feelings God. People of all kinds and walks of life, get this extra feeling to compensate for the struggle, this gift of seeing, can create. This gift and the feeling of timelessness makes it hard to shake their faith.

Having confidence in something is not evidence it is true. You are making a false equivalence here.

Religious faith differs in its definition from the commonly understood meaning of the word. Just as scientific theories differ from the commonly understood meaning of the word theory. Just consult any dictionary.

faith
noun

1. complete trust or confidence in someone or something.
2. strong belief in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual conviction rather than proof.

 

[KWED]

Did you forget that the mother's body is a necessary component?

And where did the mother's body acquire the material needed to sustain a foetus for 9 months? She wasn't born with it, you know.

 

[Sheldon]

The chemicals didn't create themselves. And since it can't be replicated, the other options are not more feasible or scientific than God doing it.

How is an appeal to inexplicable magic from an an unevidenced archaic creation myth, feasible or scientific? That's just hilarious.

 

[KWED]

It's a smoke screen... The flying squirrel tactic.
"Look a flying squirrel!"
Because he doesn't want to address the real issue. A baby has nothing to do with life being formed by itself. That should be obvious, so why do I have to keep explaining it?

If there really is a flying squirrel to look at, it is not a smoke screen. People are pointing at real flying squirrels, but you keep looking at the ground and claiming not to see them.

 

[Sheldon]

Oh good grief... just admit you have no answer.

No answer is when you claim an unevidenced deity used inexplicable magic, irony check....

 

[Sheldon]

SkepticThinker said: ↑
We do observe chemicals coming together and interacting in nature all the time.

And creating life?

We know they both exist as an objective fact, we know life exists as an objective fact. Only theists are adding an unevidenced deity using inexplicable magic, which violates Occam's razor.

 

[KWED]

The chemicals didn't create themselves.

Well, some did. Certain elements will naturally form other elements and compounds under the right conditions, - thus "creating themselves".

 

[Sheldon]

I'm going to ignore the fact that you moved the goal posts here and say yes. You know what happens when a sperm and an egg come together, right?

Anti-choicers go into a meltdown of bs and histrionics?

 

[ElishaElijah]

What use is God then?

For doing things that we can’t . Some of those in post 1674

 

[Sheldon]

This should help you understand the difference.

It is astonishing how many people (read theists and the superstitious), who falsely think that open minded means suggestible to claims and beliefs.

 

[Sheldon]

I attended a Christian school.

Set my phaser to stunned...

 

[ElishaElijah]

But God is the source of everything or it is from Satan???

What do you mean by that comment?

 

[Sheldon]

It's your Fantasy, tell it any way you want...

Maybe you should have that laminated on a card, so you don't forget it. It's never too late to learn...

 

[Sheldon]

What do you mean by that comment?

Who are you talking to?

 

[Sheldon]

We can figure that stuff out on our own like we don’t need God to tell us how to tie our shoes, shovel snow, swim etc.

Could've stopped there really.

 

[Subduction Zone]

For doing things that we can’t . Some of those in post 1674

We can't make lightning , yet we know how it occurs without God. Where do we need a God?

 

[Subduction Zone]

The chemicals didn't create themselves. And since it can't be replicated, the other options are not more feasible or scientific than God doing it.

Which chemicals did not create themselves. Please be specific and be ready to support your claims with peer reviewed science.

Folks, how long should I set my timer for? Is an hour a reasonable amount of time for a well supported answer? Maybe a day? And who had never?