I thought this was quite the interesting thought. I was gonna write this
as a response to one of a other discussions, but thought that I'd like
to get a bigger audience in on this one.
Many, if not all, good atheist believe that God simply does not exist. But I beg to ask the question: "If he doesn't exist and nothing in creation lends to the existence of God, why do we have so many thoughts about God? Are not our thoughts shaped by our environment? If our environment does not support the existence of a God, why do so many of us rule him into the equation? Is it that we are inclined to desire a god. Are we naturally inclined to think about one irrespective of our environment?"
The light bulb was created based on something that already existed, light! So I imagine Ben Franklin was inspired by the sun. Even the delusional has inspiration of thoughts based on things that exist. So why do we think about God if he doesn't even exist?
Ok now you need to tell us what your definition of god is because this is going to turn stupid soon. We need a coherent description to launch our heathen attack on =P
When this started you were saying that we can't describe this god without seeing it first, now you are saying that we didn't see it and that it was described to us by god. We like anthropomorphizing things, it is that simple, the fact that god has a "superpower" is not abnormal, that is what every child who sees superman wants. Ancient Aztec children didn't see Jesus or Yahweh they saw their own gods so you can't say we all see the same thing and then say "he is in no way a man..God is Spirit." you are then making a specific claim.
Alrighty, I'm done with this conversation. No progress is being made in either direction. Trevauhn, you're not going to get any of us to acknowledge the point you're trying to make. Humanity's inclination towards belief in a god or gods does not prove there actually are gods. It's an assertion and you bring no proof. Not to mention the fact that you're arguing for a specific god's existence and not telling us why we should not believe in Zeus or the other thousand-or-so gods humanity has imagined about over the centuries. There are more rational, reasonable, and testable explanations for the phenomenon of religion across cultures.
If you expect us to be open to the idea there is a god, you should be open to the idea there's not.
There is evidence to the resurrection of Jesus Christ. That is all we really need, although there is more.
You asserted this in another discussion. You even went as far as calling is scientific. However, when I stated this wasn't so and asked for the claimed evidence you simply said to google it and claimed that I was 'behind' on the evidence. I told you that I did google (even though I do keep up on Theist claims) and found nothing scientific. I asked for the info, and earned no reply. If you have this Eath shattering evidence, why be afraid to share it?
Well tell me what your big bang theory is, if not a theory.
A scientific theory is baked by facts. You are using the standard version of theory rather than scientific theory. The big bang theory is supported by facts and evidence, thus it is a theory and not simply a hypothesis.
Scientific theories don't hold very much weight in the court of law either. Hard evidence will always outweigh it. So your court of law thing would also debunk science.
Actually, no. CSI evidence is proof positive that scientific evidence can be incredibly damning.
where have you read that the creationist argument has been debunked. Who is the author of that article. And what other articles have that author written? I guarantee the person who writes that also wrote a bunch of other stuff against Christianity and religion on a whole. Scientists with an agenda are no scientist.
Persecution complex. You can make that claim night and day, but that's not how science works. You don't like the result, so you cry foul. Yet if science were to prove God, you would be pro-science. Scientists don't set out with a conclusion and try to find anything they can that sort of might support it. Rather, Science starts with a question, does research and sees where it takes them. In fact scientific claims that conflict with religion don't typically cause a ruckus until the church notices and denounces the science (wich is supported bu evidence).
1) Why this constant dragon theory. There are stories we write for entertainment and then there are stories we write for the sake of life. They are different. On the other hand, dragons were inspired by dinosaurs, as was mentioned in the book of Job.
The problem isn't if dinosaurs are mentioned in the Bible, but the fact that they lived far before the Bible claims the world war even created. And yes, the idea of the dragon was inspired. Just as the idea of a God or more powerful being was inspired by humans.
What is your historical proof sir?
There is far too much historical proof against Bible claims to start that discussion here. But how about the Sumerians inventing glue before the Biblical creation of the universe, the Egyptians keeping uninterrupted records before, during and after the time the flood was said to happen, many of the Christians God's characteristics and origin story being borrowed from earlier religions, etc, etc.
huh...atheist scientists claim that it happened randomly. Atheist What is the possibility that in a baseball stadium, without a seating chart, that everyone sits in alphabetical order in accordance to their first name first then their last name. Very slim. how many times do you think you could throw a 100 piece jigsaw puzzle in the air before they all fell in their right place. So what makes you think that billions of code of DNA will randomly align itself in such a way so as to produce the life we now have. Odds are not so funny my friend.
First, theists accept evolution as well, and not all biologists are Atheist. Again, you don't like the result, so you claim there is a conspiracy where there is non.
Second, you have just illustrated that you do not have even a loose grasp on the theory of evolution by way of natural selection. Mutations are random, but everything after that is anything but random. We can talk about this more elsewhere if you wish, look at discussions on here or you could read "The Greatest Show on Earth" by Richard Dawkins.
I'd rather have purpose for my life and not just random chance.
We have purpose too. Mine is to love my beautiful wife for the rest of my life, do everything I can to keep her happy and be sure she is taken care of, enjoy my family and friends, enjoy life, help other when I can, etc. And when this life if over I'll have no regrets. We simply value what is true above what we would like to be true.
You know what my conclusion is to this who matter. The atheists here are so desperate to rid the air of God that you'd even deny the wonders of the DNA that is in your very body. The only reason why some of these arguments have come up, is to simply try to disprove theism. It's not even real science. The motive I find here is to simply get rid of God. Even if you have to rip him out by way of twisting science.
You think you know us, but you don't. Most of us were believers once. Many (like myself) truly wanted to believe. When I started having questions, I thought I was the one in error and was determined to study up on my religion and to understand God and Jesus so that I could be true to them. But reading the Bible and reviewing the facts led me the other way. I wanted there to be a Heaven that I could spend eternity, but reality said different. And to me, what is so is above what I wish were the case. People can have their own beliefs, but not their own truths.
You keep asking for proof. And I keep showing you proof. And you keep asking for more proof. Well you have just made an excuse for yourself to not believe God is even a viable option...
No, you haven't provided verifiable testable proof. You have given us your opinion and your interpretation/view on things, but that's it. You have made the spectacular claim there is scientific evidence of the resurrection of Jesus. If true, you could single handily cause many of us to no longer be Atheist. Yet you fail to do anything other than make the claim. Also, once more you claim we are actively looking to dispel and drive away your God. If a God can be proven, I want to know. The truth is my chief concern in this journey. If a God is real it would actually be good news to those of us that want to believe, but can't just because the claim fails all the tests.
Anyways...thanks again. KEEP THINKING. Stop accepting atheist beliefs as the norm. Question your atheist beliefs. I came to this site to question my Christian beliefs.
I can assure you that I avoid confirmation bias and look at both side of the coin. So far, everything I've seen has pointed away from theism. So I remain an Atheist. But I'm open to new ideas, thoughts and evidence as I hope you are as well.
This is my last post, I've been writing for hours now. I'll probably put up one more discussion but that's it for a couple of months. Thank you everyone for all your thoughts. I learned allot.
I hope you did learn something and thank you for joining in on some discussion. I do hope that you do at least read my post. If you do not wish to reply publicly, that is okay. But please do message me privately of there are any points you'd like to discuss one-on-one.