Why do people deny or have various doubts about God?

[Sonofason]

In that case, it simply does not exist to me, isn't that just about right?




It is odd that you talk about evidence for God while doubting the evidence for Evolution. Particularly given your complaints about "going by other people's claims".




Are you attempting to joke?

Yes, I would say that as far as you are concerned, that which I call evidence of God is apparently non-existent for you.

It's hard to doubt the existence of something you've never seen. Show me evidence for evolution, and perhaps I'll have something to doubt.

 

[McBell]

Show me evidence for evolution, and perhaps I'll have something to doubt.

You keep asking for something you refuse to see.
Do you think repeating it mantra like will help?

 

[Sonofason]

You keep asking for something you refuse to see.
Do you think repeating it mantra like will help?

Like I have said many times, I can't be bothered to do my own research here. I really don't care enough about this subject to dedicate my time to it. If you would just kindly show me the convincing evidence I will believe. Keep in mind, if you show me something overly complex, I'm probably not going to understand it, and of course I can't possibly believe in something I don't understand.

I have admitted that evolution is a logical explanation for how God has brought forth such a variety of creatures. I don't know why I should have to research this and prove it to myself that this is indeed the means that God has used.

I don't mind letting God be God. Evolution is not my concern. Apparently, it's your concern. Well, good for you. You know something that is important to you. That's good, right?

 

[Sonofason]

You keep asking for something you refuse to see.
Do you think repeating it mantra like will help?

Also, I cannot help the fact that no one is satisfied with me being satisfied with not knowing if evolution is absolutely true or not. You say, I keep asking for evidence. Well, if you desire for me to stop asking for evidence, then tell everyone to stop suggesting that I doubt the evidence. I don't doubt the evidence. I haven't seen it.

So again and again it goes round and round.

You all say I doubt the evidence.
I say, I haven't seen it.
And then you say you submitted it, and that I doubt the evidence.
And so I say again, I haven't seen the evidence.
And so you say again, that I doubt the evidence.

Where does it stop?
Stop putting words in my mouth, and perhaps I will stop defending what I actually said.

Why do you doubt God?

 

[Bunyip]

Also, I cannot help the fact that no one is satisfied with me being satisfied with not knowing if evolution is absolutely true or not. You say, I keep asking for evidence. Well, if you desire for me to stop asking for evidence, then tell everyone to stop suggesting that I doubt the evidence. I don't doubt the evidence. I haven't seen it.

So again and again it goes round and round.

You all say I doubt the evidence.
I say, I haven't seen it.
And then you say you submitted it, and that I doubt the evidence.
And so I say again, I haven't seen the evidence.
And so you say again, that I doubt the evidence.

Where does it stop?
Stop putting words in my mouth, and perhaps I will stop defending what I actually said.

Why do you doubt God?

The problem is that you are posting against evolution, and admitting that you do not understand it at the same time.

Denyng evolution, and at the same time admitting to failing to understand it makes you appear very disengenuous.

 

[Sonofason]

The problem is that you are posting against evolution, and admitting that you do not understand it at the same time.

Denyng evolution, and at the same time admitting to failing to understand it makes you appear very disengenuous.

I have not posted against evolution. I post as an advocate for God. I couldn't care less about evolution.

Some people have sent me websites, suggesting that what I was going to see was evidence of evolution. What I saw on one site was a bunch of colorful specks that someone was claiming were chromosomes. They were not, they were pictures that someone drew attempting perhaps to make a diagram of sorts of chromosomes. And then I saw some claims about how this is this or that is that, but I did not see anything to confirm what I was being told. That is not evidence to me.

If it's too hard for me to fully understand, well then so be it. I understand many of the processes of evolution. I had to. I was tested on it. But that in no way indicates that I understand it to such an extent that I could identify particular claims as evidence for it. I'm sorry, it doesn't work that way.

But let me be very clear
I have never posted against evolution.
And I have never denied evolution as being true.

So you can call that ingenuous or what ever else you might want to call it. It is what it is.

 

[Tiapan]

I don't believe there is a god, because there is absolutely ZERO REAL evidence for his existence,
but in the words of Gough Whitlam one of Australia's greatest Prime Ministers
"should I meet god, I would treat him as an equal".

Cheers

 

[Bunyip]

I have not posted against evolution. I post as an advocate for God. I couldn't care less about evolution.

Some people have sent me websites, suggesting that what I was going to see was evidence of evolution. What I saw on one site was a bunch of colorful specks that someone was claiming were chromosomes. They were not, they were pictures that someone drew attempting perhaps to make a diagram of sorts of chromosomes. And then I saw some claims about how this is this or that is that, but I did not see anything to confirm what I was being told. That is not evidence to me.

If it's too hard for me to fully understand, well then so be it. I understand many of the processes of evolution. I had to. I was tested on it. But that in no way indicates that I understand it to such an extent that I could identify particular claims as evidence for it. I'm sorry, it doesn't work that way.

But let me be very clear
I have never posted against evolution.
And I have never denied evolution as being true.

So you can call that ingenuous or what ever else you might want to call it. It is what it is.

If you were being honest and really did know what evolution means the evidecne would make perfect sense to you. You pretend not to understand the evidence.

 

[Sonofason]

If you were being honest and really did know what evolution means the evidecne would make perfect sense to you. You pretend not to understand the evidence.

Well, you may be on to something here. I do understand some of the concepts of genetics at least in a most basic sense, and so I do understand some of the language that biologists and geneticists use in the contexts of their claims. But I honestly don't know one gene from the next. And I'm not so sure I should accept some scientists word that something is what he claims it is. So, you're right. It does make a certain amount of sense to me, and that I suppose is why I think it seems so logical to me. I believe I understand what people are calling evidence. But I haven't seen the evidence. Sorry.

 

[Bunyip]

Well, you may be on to something here. I do understand some of the concepts of genetics at least in a most basic sense, and so I do understand some of the language that biologists and geneticists use in the contexts of their claims. But I honestly don't know one gene from the next. And I'm not so sure I should accept some scientists word that something is what he claims it is. So, you're right. It does make a certain amount of sense to me, and that I suppose is why I think it seems so logical to me. I believe I understand what people are calling evidence. But I haven't seen the evidence. Sorry.

Denying the evidence that you admit to not understanding anyway is pretty lame.

 

[Sonofason]

Denying the evidence that you admit to not understanding anyway is pretty lame.

Do you believe I should accept all evidence I do not understand?
Is that an honest approach to anything?

 

[LuisDantas]

It's hard to doubt the existence of something you've never seen.

Nope, it is actually quite easy.

Show me evidence for evolution, and perhaps I'll have something to doubt.

Come on now... you are just being silly there. Go take a look at talkorigins, enroll on a biology course and learn to use the tools, or just admit that you don't want to accept it already. But don't try such a game.

Do you believe I should accept all evidence I do not understand?

I am not Mestemia, but I do think it is dishonest to selectively reject circunstantial evidence out of ideological concerns. At least when it happens to the degree you chose, which is apparently enough to choose to believe in an amazingly sophisticated conspiracy willing and able to "pretend" that the ToE is real.

Is that an honest approach to anything?

That is the question you should ask yourself.

 

[Desert Snake]

I don't believe there is a god, because there is absolutely ZERO REAL evidence for his existence,
but in the words of Gough Whitlam one of Australia's greatest Prime Ministers
"should I meet god, I would treat him as an equal".

Cheers

It's highly unlikely that jesus is fictional.

 

[Bunyip]

Do you believe I should accept all evidence I do not understand?
Is that an honest approach to anything?

Denying evidence you do not understand is dishonest.

 

[LuisDantas]

It's highly unlikely that jesus is fictional.

Sure, if odds of about 80% are highly unlikely.

If anything, one would expect a lot more evidence for his existence than we have, if he turned out to be a real person.

 

[Sonofason]

Nope, it is actually quite easy.




Come on now... you are just being silly there. Go take a look at talkorigins, enroll on a biology course and learn to use the tools, or just admit that you don't want to accept it already. But don't try such a game.




I am not Mestemia, but I do think it is dishonest to selectively reject circunstantial evidence out of ideological concerns. At least when it happens to the degree you chose, which is apparently enough to choose to believe in an amazingly sophisticated conspiracy willing and able to "pretend" that the ToE is real.



That is the question you should ask yourself.

Oh well, that is a relief. I thought I was being persecuted for doubting evidence of evolution that I have never seen. I appreciate your support.

So you accept circumstantial evidence as fact? Lots of innocent people are convicted falsely for crimes due to circumstantial evidence, not to mention fabricated evidence. But we won't go there. I'm in enough hot water just for being honest.

 

[Sonofason]

Denying evidence you do not understand is dishonest.

You're joking right?
Jeez you're too funny.

 

[Sonofason]

Sure, if odds of about 80% are highly unlikely.

If anything, one would expect a lot more evidence for his existence than we have, if he turned out to be a real person.

And why exactly is that?

 

[Desert Snake]

Sure, if odds of about 80% are highly unlikely.

If anything, one would expect a lot more evidence for his existence than we have, if he turned out to be a real person.

So is it all made up by Saul/Paul? I don't understand how that's possible given the timeline.

 

[Bunyip]

Oh well, that is a relief. I thought I was being persecuted for doubting evidence of evolution that I have never seen. I appreciate your support.

So you accept circumstantial evidence as fact? Lots of innocent people are convicted falsely for crimes due to circumstantial evidence, not to mention fabricated evidence. But we won't go there. I'm in enough hot water just for being honest.

You have seen the evidence, just do not understand it.

Denying evidence you do not understand is dishonest, and very different from doubting evidence that you have never seen.