Zero Probability of Evolution. Atheism wrong?

[BilliardsBall]

The difference is that gravity can actually be measured in a direct way, and everyone who experiences gravity is experiencing a demonstrably identical force. God meets neither of those criteria. God cannot be objectively measured, and many people who claims to experience God (or Gods) can experience entirely different and even contradictory things.

If only those things with the same effect/force of feeling/force of response are valid, than what other subjective things may be rejected? Jurisprudence and justice and love are the first three that come to mind.

We can as easily say your parents didn't love either of their children if they loved your sister more/differently.

 

[BilliardsBall]

You don't. Do you think I am lying? If so, state it clearly. I don't deny your experiences. I question your interpretation of them.

Okay, you are either lying or you didn't pray according to God's will. "Hey God, if you exist, speak to me audibly this second!" is not beseeching prayer IMHO.

 

[BilliardsBall]

How do you know about other peoples private relationships?

You will note that the majority of trolls appear to be thosr who do their thing in the name of god

Because when I speak to atheists, they invariably open up about gross sin in their lives.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Schrodinger's cat was a though experiment, interesting how you equate a thought experiment to your deity.

It is a thought experiment for those without relationship with God. Before you start this journey with God, you have to have your sins washed away IMHO.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Of course you have misunderstood something, the confirmation bias is strong in you, you misunderstand, deliberately or otherwise anything that does not slot neatly in to your expectation or faith.

I do not reject your faith, it is entirely up to you what you chose to believe. What i do reject is the the vocal claim that evidence exists for your personal gods existence. Yet interestingly, whenever you are asked to provide said evidence the reply is along the lines of woo, or its all around you orb you completely ignore the question.

Pardon me, but you opened the door by saying "I feel X, so X is real."

 

[BilliardsBall]

It's a thought experiment, speculating about how to view quantum mechanics.
I don't believe any particular interpretation of it....I'm only aware that it can
be viewed that way. (QM isn't my thing. I do gear teeth & bearings.)

I'm referring to how rather than sit on your hands and "I won't pray until there's more evidence," logic should tell you it's worth praying since without total knowledge, God might exist.

I've been a skeptic, but it was difficult to refute that fact that over 90% of persons said I was missing the boat!

 

[BilliardsBall]

Atheists don't believe in the existence of any gods, you don't believe in the existence of any gods except one. You are hardly the right person to criticize non-belief in gods. I assume with "atheists" you actually mean people who don't believe in your particular god?

Christians and atheists are similar: atheists say no gods, Christians say 1 only.

The other difference is that Christians IMHO are more enlightened, nicer, and going to Heaven.

 

[BilliardsBall]

This answer was predicted by another poster. At least you didn't disappoint. All believers KNOW that talking animals, miracles, Gods, resurrecting the dead, myths and superstitions, are not only man-made stories, but also unfalsifiable. They know that parts of the Bible are errant, inconsistent, immoral and cruel, unscientific and primitive, and certainly not consistent with the words of a God. If they don't, they should have "EASY MARK" witten on the back of their shirt. This is why they will avoid offering any evidence specific to their belief. There are so many ways a believer can provide evidence. Prove that the power of prayer works. Demonstrate that at least one of thousands of miracle is real. Demonstrate at least one thing that has been resurrected, or is immortal(other than the humble jellyfish). Demonstrate at least one thing that has a supernatural reference(ghosts, fairies, dragons, spirits, etc.), and scientifically exists. This never happens.

If you simply believe that some supernatural multi-dimensional father figure, exists with powers far greater than mortal man, fine. If you want to believe that this super daddy will look after you, and guide you in life and in death, that is also fine. Since this is only your belief, no evidence of any kind is required. So why all this silly, dishonest, intellectual BS, to infer that your belief is real? Not only do you think your belief is real to you, but you arrogantly believe that it should be real to everyone else? Why do you need to infect the healthy, pristine, and inquisitive minds of those that are the most vulnerable(children, handicap, sick, desperate, and the poor)? We all have our own personal beliefs. We just keep them to ourselves, especially if they need to invoke the the supernatural card. It is believers that must shift the burden of proof and demand that others prove that their version of reality, is the only possible version. It is believers who must eventually deny, or ignore, all physical laws governing our physical reality. Non-believers have no need to use fallacies, misrepresentations, distortions, make-believe, scripture, avoidance and deflections, as the basis for their arguments. Non-believers are essentially arguing with themselves, when arguing with believers. All we can do is expose the folly of their self-serving logic. The mind is truly a terrible thing to waste. Don

Rather than tear down what I wrote, you raised over a dozen questions, but answered them all rhetorically. I've known God for years, and would be lying if I said I didn't have a strong relationship with Him. If you have a question for me or want to answer the objections I raised, go for it.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

If only those things with the same effect/force of feeling/force of response are valid, than what other subjective things may be rejected? Jurisprudence and justice and love are the first three that come to mind.

Except, once again, we can independently verify the effect of those things. If multiple lines of inquiry converge, it leads to an increased understanding of objective reality. Where God is concerned, the lines of inquiry don't converge - they diverge wildly depending on time, culture and personal perspective, just like any myth.

We can as easily say your parents didn't love either of their children if they loved your sister more/differently.

That's just a nonsensical non-sequitur.

 

[Revoltingest]

I'm referring to how rather than sit on your hands and "I won't pray until there's more evidence," logic should tell you it's worth praying since without total knowledge, God might exist.
I've been a skeptic, but it was difficult to refute that fact that over 90% of persons said I was missing the boat!

To pray to a particular god just in case it exists doesn't seem productive.
Would I have to pray to every god who could exist, eg, Odin, Zeus, Allah?
But if I pray to all, would the true one(s) object, & punish me?
Should I roll the dice & pick just one, eg, FSM?

It seems silly that a supreme being who denies us evidence of its existence would.....
- Care what this lowly critter's opinion of it is.
- Expect telepathic expression of my devotion.
- Punish me for not obeying one of all the mixed messages of various scriptures on the market.

 

[Polymath257]

Okay, you are either lying or you didn't pray according to God's will. "Hey God, if you exist, speak to me audibly this second!" is not beseeching prayer IMHO.

Then what *is*? How about 'if you are out there, please send a signal that I can understand'?

And it is clear that you are so convinced of your myth that you are willing to claim someone is lying about their experiences merely because they disagree with you.

 

[ArtieE]

Christians and atheists are similar: atheists say no gods, Christians say 1 only.

If those Christians actually believe in the Bible they would have to believe in the existence of many gods and be polytheists. The Bible’s Many Gods | Gerald McDermott Do you believe in the Bible and are a polytheist or are you a monotheist?

 

[Darkstorn]

Christians and atheists are similar: atheists say no gods, Christians say 1 only.

The other difference is that Christians IMHO are more enlightened, nicer, and going to Heaven.

Can you even once make an argument that doesn't sound like wishful thinking? I honestly am not surprised that you don't find the tone of some of your messages insulting. You're the kind of person who only perceives fault in others.

Then what *is*? How about 'if you are out there, please send a signal that I can understand'?

And it is clear that you are so convinced of your myth that you are willing to claim someone is lying about their experiences merely because they disagree with you.

Not to mention his own argument hinges on his personal experiences. He expects us to hold his experiences as valid as a scientific theory. But other peoples' experiences can be hand waved just like that whenever he feels like it.

Im not sure what BB's place is in the forums but I know one thing: He makes those around him look better. I'm sure that's a benefit.

 

[Revoltingest]

The other difference is that Christians IMHO are more enlightened, nicer, and going to Heaven.

You're only nicer cuz you're threatened
with eternal torture if you're not.
But when we're nice, it's sincere.

Caution:
The above should be read with mirth.

 

[ChristineM]

Because when I speak to atheists, they invariably open up about gross sin in their lives.

What? You mean not believing in god i a sin? Maybe by your interpretation which appears to be somewhat suspect or you are dreaming?

 

[ChristineM]

It is a thought experiment for those without relationship with God. Before you start this journey with God, you have to have your sins washed away IMHO.

Nope it had nothing to do with your version on god unless Tiddles happened to be a deity.

What sins, sins are a selective religious concept that are irrelevant to non religious and cats

 

[ChristineM]

Pardon me, but you opened the door by saying "I feel X, so X is real."

Show me where i said I feel X, so X is real. In fact i said some thing completely different regarding weighing, measuring etc?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Okay, you are either lying or you didn't pray according to God's will. "Hey God, if you exist, speak to me audibly this second!" is not beseeching prayer IMHO.

And my prophecy came true. Thank you for raising me to the level of the best of biblical prophets.

 

[Truly Enlightened]

Rather than tear down what I wrote, you raised over a dozen questions, but answered them all rhetorically. I've known God for years, and would be lying if I said I didn't have a strong relationship with Him. If you have a question for me or want to answer the objections I raised, go for it.

You claim that you have a personal relationship with a God. So let me ask you, do you claim that you KNOW that your God is real and exists, or do you just BELIEVE that your God is real and exists? If you only believe this to be true, then lets move on to the second question. Do you think that the government should enact new laws, to protect our children and other vulnerable members of society, from the unfounded, uncertain, and illogical beliefs-claims, by well-intentioned believers incapable of critical thinking?

Since you avoided and deflected all my other questions, maybe asking only two will keep it simple. Personally I only expect MOTSS. Don

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

you are either lying or you didn't pray according to God's will.

You forgot the most likely option: Nobody is hearing and answering prayer.

when I speak to atheists, they invariably open up about gross sin in their lives.

Atheists reject the idea of sin, It's a religious concept.

I'm referring to how rather than sit on your hands and "I won't pray until there's more evidence," logic should tell you it's worth praying since without total knowledge, God might exist.

That's exactly how I approached Christianity - suspending disbelief for most of a decade to try this religion on and take it for a test drive to see if it would begin to make sense and its god become apparent.

Less than a decade later, I returned to atheism.

I've been a skeptic, but it was difficult to refute that fact that over 90% of persons said I was missing the boat!

So, you claim that you were once of the mind that unsupported claims should not be accepted, but rather, require supporting evidence before being believed, but then gave that up for faith based belief instead?

Christians IMHO are more enlightened

Are you offering yourself as evidence of that?

If you have a question for me or want to answer the objections I raised, go for it.

Yeah. What does your religion have to offer besides promises that can't be validated and don't need to be kept? What does it have to offer a happy secular humanist?