"Faith is the permission the religious give themselves when reason fails." - Harris

And I see gnomes all the time working in my life.



God must be a gnome.

 

we know you need to believe this, in order to make what you do seem 'okay', but we also know that you know that it's hogwash.

 

it's 'less' than trust, actually. trust is earned via repeated demonstration.

faith is not earned, at all. that's the point of it. if indeed it has a point, other than as a mechanism for the spruikers of superstition to keep the masses in line via fear.

 

yes, you do. trust is earned, usually over time. that's the evidence. if someone doesn't demonstrate (provide evidence) that they are trustworthy, they won't be trusted. if you car doesn't start 5 times out of 10, you won't trust it to start on any given day. trust-earning actions are the repeated, demonstrable evidence that a thing or a person is trustworthy.

gods in no way meet the criteria for trustworthiness, nor do the authors of books about gods. all 'repeated' experiences attributed to gods is easily explained via psych 101, so you're left with nothing at all in the way of reason to trust.

 

No faith is trust.

- - - Updated - - -

Trust in God or gods is typically earned as well. So what's your point?

 

Alrighty. So, atheists don't have faith, hmm? Do you have faith that evolution is true? Or do you not have faith in evolution?

 

Simply leaving the origin of life as a "we don't know" is not a sufficient answer in convincing anyone. Unless, of course, being an atheist means to assume ignorance under every category. If that's the case, then why go to an atheist for anything? They'll simply say they don't know.

 

I don't need to know how life started the Theory of Evolution follows the visible fossils and other evidence like DNA studies to demonstrate how simple life became complex life such as birds, dogs, fish and the dominant species the human race how it began has no bearing its logical to assume it did begin in some way to be considered by science since we are here. We aren't ignorant like the religious we use reason and science to develop our understanding of things.

 

I mean, you claim you're not ignorant, but your facts are a bit off....

1) The fossil record isn't proof of evolution. It's actually the exact opposite. In the fossil record, we don't see transitional fossils. Instead, we see fossils of animals suddenly appearing fully formed without a single transition in sight.
Source: http://www.truthinscience.org.uk/ti...olution-mainmenu-65/48-the-fossil-record.html

2) DNA studies show information. Evolution cannot account for the complexity of information being copied from one animal down to its descendent. DNA is so complex, that the co-discover (James Watson) who discovered DNA began to believe that perhaps DNA was from alien intelligence.
Source: http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/the-origins-of-directed-panspermia/

 

I went to the Smithsonian Institution two years ago to their massive natural history section and they had transitional fossils dinosaurs ,small, with wings of various stages and variant forms so they have them its just finding them and properly integrating them into a clear display takes many fossils and ample resources to do and few museums can do that around the world. The London Museum of Natural History is another one.

As for DNA I watched a fine NOVA program where they found Neanderthal DNA in the modern human genome in Northern areas of Europe and ancestry tied to there so its clear we had interbreeding between them and our earlier human ancestors of modern man.

Its the combination of all evidence that is used to support Evolution we have NOTHING for the "deity did it or even sound evidence of the supernatural" so the Theory of Evolution wins the evidence game unless you can do better on your side that can meet scientific rigor.

 

it's sufficient for honest adults, and we don't seek to 'convince anyone'.

people 'go to' others for information in the expectation they'll be told the truth (which in some cases, is "I don't know"). if people say they know things they can't possibly know, they engage in falsehoods. why would you believe the lie?

 

I trust the theory of evolution. That trust has been earned, and is not contrary to the evidence. Ergo it is not faith.

Why is it so important to you to bring atheists down to your level (faith - belief without evidence, or belief despite evidence to the contrary)?

 

Earned you say? There's no evidence supporting evolution. There's no transitional fossils anywhere. According to the fossil record, fossils appear suddenly and fully formed.

If you say you trust it, then that means you have faith. If you have faith then what makes you any different than us? Seems like you're having a hard time separating yourself from that fact. Seems to me like you're on this forum, not because you want to know the facts, but because you want to make yourself feel better.

So, adults should be content with either being told lies or told that nobody knows? Seems pretty depressing, don't you think? Christians aren't telling people they don't know. They are telling them that the truth lies in the bible, and science seems to back up this truth. If the bible is able to predict things in the future and many of those things have come true (such as the birth of Jesus Christ) - If many of the things written in the bible are considered historical fact by a multitude of historians (including skeptics), then its reasonable to assume that if someone wants an answer to the question of "where do we come from?", they'll get that answer honestly from a Christian rather than an atheist who would either lie to them or tell them that they do not know.

 

So, you actually haven't seen any transitional fossils. You actually saw diagrams. You realize that fossils and pictures aren't the same thing, right?

But DNA isn't proof we evolved from monkeys. Notice how the NOVA program shown we came from other humans. Think about it.

But we do have evidence for God.

1) There's archeological evidence that shows Christianity is true (a lot of it!)
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdSExDE8EsU

2) There's historical evidence agreed, even upon skeptics, that Jesus existed and that his tomb was indeed empty. There's even written eye testimonies of Jesus being alive after his death.
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYa_70-XL6Y&index=1&list=PLD19E118A03DC5F17

3) There's cosmological arguments that reference a strong possibility into the existence of God himself.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CulBuMCLg0&list=PL3gdeV4Rk9Ef6jhlYL-Pp1UwzvnL_kbqw&index=1

4) There's theological arguments as well, such as the fine tuning of the universe in which majority of scientists all believe.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UpIiIaC4kRA&index=1&list=PL9A91B68D2FB071C1

Take your pick.

 

yes, maturity means comfort in the absence of certainty. and it's not even remotely depressing to not have all the answers - it's actually rather wonderful. I find the idea that the entire universe and all of time is quantified in a single unpleasant book depressing.

and I'm sorry, but a book written after the fact can't 'predict' anything. are you seriously that gullible?

no Christian is honest when they claim to know all - because they don't. No one does. Anyone, Hindu, atheist, Muslim, or Christian, who claims knowledge in this regard is engaging in falsehood.

finally, it's no more reasonable to assume the bible is legit than that the bhagavad gita is, or the norse myths, or the tooth fairy myth. they're all equally likely to be true.

 

Written after the fact? After the fact of what? How old do you believe the Bible is?

Doesn't seem like you've done a whole lot of research on religion or even science, because you've been wrong on both on several occasions.

 

We've already been over this before. Saying "we don't know" when we don't know is simply intellectual honesty. Your assumption that a guess is better than an honest admission of a lack of knowledge has been addressed with numerous counterexamples. Again. Who was your great, great (to the 13th degree) grandfather, along your paternal line? Is "I don't know" a better answer than "Gort, the three-legged cartwheel artist, astronomy enthusiast and expert aardvark hunter"? If so, there is a flaw in your reasoning.

If someone is more "convinced" by a guess than by an honest admission, then there are more important flaws at hand. Our answers should be based on evidence, not the bare desire for an answer -- any answer at all.

 

And yet there is no archaeological evidence that the Jews were enslaved by the Egyptians, or for various other historical claims of the Bible.

There were eye witnesses who said they saw the Bab after his death. So what?

All of which I've addressed before; they all boil down to "causality needs a cause".

The "fine tuning" that scientists talk about and the "fine-tuning" that theists talk about are very different.

 

Watch as I shut your argument down...

If you watch the video, you would see the evidence that they were enslaved by the Egyptians.

FYI: Most historical accounts (such as wars) are deemed true by eye witness accounts. Welcome to History 101. Uh huck yuck!

If you disagree that everything has a cause, then you have to believe that the universe always existed. Science has shown time and time again that it is showing signs it has a beginning. Otherwise, the first and second laws of Thermodynamics wouldn't exist. If you want to be taken seriously, then you have to come up here with us in the 21st century. Yep... Where we learned that the sun actually doesn't revolve around the earth.

Nope. It's the exact same.

 

You're intellectually dishonest all the time. Why should this stop you?

If I had a nickel for every time you had your facts twisted on this forum...

 

....you'd be a very very poor individual indeed.

 

Would you like to address anything I said and actually engage in debate and discussion? Maybe clarify your point or show where anything I said was wrong?

- - - Updated - - -

Would you like to address anything I said and actually engage in debate and discussion? Maybe clarify your point or show where anything I said was wrong?

 

In the name of communicating better (which would have allegedly kept many people out of "hell", since they'd be more convinced that Jesus was god, for one thing!), if you were in Jesus' shoes, Qchan, would you have taken a mere 10 seconds out of your entire life and turned to your disciples and said "please write down what I say, it's important stuff!"? I bet crank and yardmeat would have. How about you? Or are you fine with the fact that (allegedly), because he communicated so poorly, that there are fewer Christians, and therefore more people will apparently end up in "hell", all because Jesus didn't say that, and the stuff was just handed down VERBALLY, over many decades before it was first written down?

 

Even if one does find proof of God "out there" - and I for one agree that this is possible - there is no way to tell what the name of that God or who that God is.

If I roll the dice, praying that a 7 comes up, and a 7 comes up, does this mean that "God did it" ? You often find folks crediting God for good things that happen but rarely blaming them when bad things happen.

We witness the spectacle of "Tim Tebow" falling to his knees in the middle of a football field after making a good play "Thank you Jesus, Thank you Jesus" Does he curse Jesus when a bad play is made ?

Do we really think that God cares that much about the outcome of a football game ?

When I look around for God "out there", it is true that I find evidence for God. What is also smacks you in the face when you look "out there" is that this God does not seem to have much interest or to care much about what happens on Earth.

If you want a bunch of examples there are not hard to find. In fact, examples of God "not caring" are far easier to find than God existing. In fact you provide a good example !

If God was really that concerned about folks worshiping him by name. One would think God might show up once in awhile and say "Folks, its me, I am God so and so and you should worship me".

Same thing for the "so called" rules of God that we are supposed to follow. If God cared deeply about us following some rules he would show up once in awhile and say " Follow these rules - don't do this- and so on" or a simple "This book "Bhagavad gita, Quran, Bible, or some other book" is the one to follow.

Why would God create an entity (humans), give that entity intelligence, logic and rational thought, and then expect that entity to do something so completely irrational as to believe in something totally and completely on faith.

To believe 100% that some holy book is 'the written word of God" even though there is no way to prove that this is true is neither logical nor rational.

For a God to create an intelligent being and then turn around and expect that being to do something so "unintelligent" then makes this God irrational.


With this in mind I will quote from one of my favorite books of the Bible - Proverbs. From Proverbs 1.

Proverbs is all about doing wisdom and doing intelligent things and seeking knowledge. Its about making good decisions and avoiding bad ones.

No need for Proverbs if all one needs is "faith" ! "Just have faith and all will be good" is a "mockery" of knowledge and rational thinking.

One more quote from another of my favorite books of the Bible Ecclesiastes 3

How does a faithful literalist take this passage? (normally with abject denial but aside from this). Clearly this fellow has "no faith" in some paradise in the afterlife.

The adherent will say "Oh but Jesus changed this". I say, if this was what God wanted then why did he not say so to begin with ?

So what then .... God did not care back in the day but somehow cares now ?

 

Oh, changing topics already, huh? Realized you couldn't back up the "after the fact" claim, eh?

As far as Jesus telling anyone to write stuff down... He didn't! Surprise! Jesus didn't tell anyone to write anything down. It just so happened that what Jesus did was so apparent, that people couldn't help but document his actions.

You have to understand that by the time Jesus died, everyone knew who he was. He was a celebrity. What he did was just known fact. So, of course his actions would be documented. It would be silly if they weren't.

Nah. Far too time consuming, and I honestly couldn't care less, really.