Originally posted by Darth ThorCan I be the next one?
Revelation is how we believe GOD has historically communicated with Humanity.Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, Muhammad (peace be upon them) all came with Revelation.
"Oh Andy loved geology. Geology is the study of pressure and time. That's all he needed. That and a big god damn poster." - Red
Originally posted by Patient_Leech
Oh, all I saw previously was this...I didn't see this...
Ah no worries.
Originally posted by Patient_Leech
1. Again, the analogy will only go so far. Biology does not function the same way technology does (and don't start hypertheorizing some super advanced nano technology that reproduces with pseudo-DNA, for crying out loud).
And why is that? Why does Biology function in a far more advanced way. Because even single celled organisms are infinitely complex and have purpose programmed into them.
And yes there clearly is programming whether you believe in a programmer or not.
Originally posted by Patient_Leech
2. Evolution is actually not random. That's a big misconception that apologists like to throw around as a strawman because it sounds bad for the other side. External forces such geographical separation and selection pressures (for example) are anything but random. They are very grounded in the specific surrounding environment. Is it random when a female chooses a mate for superior coloring or patterns or strength that will help the animal avoid danger and survive? That's the opposite of "random chance." That's choosing very specifically.
I get it's not random in that sense.
But choosing a mate for superior colouring and trillions and trillions of other choices naturally selected to survive, is still a MASSIVE (and kinda lazy) Leap of logic to expect that to take us from single celled organisms to the complex super computers (with free will) that we are today.
And btw how did those single celled organisms come about in the first place, and also where did the survival programming come from? Why would surviving even matter, if it's all just luck that we're here in the first place.
Originally posted by Patient_Leech
Put down your Koran, pick up a science book on evolution and come back.Otherwise this is a waste of time.
It probably is. But I don't mind hearing the other side of the argument. It won't make my brain explode.
Originally posted by Darth Thor
And btw how did those single celled organisms come about in the first place, and also where did the survival programming come from? Why would surviving even matter, if it's all just luck that we're here in the first place.
Abiogenesis is a separate field from evolution with its own studies and evidences. Go listen to some experts in the field. Not me. I guarantee they don't say, "Well, there's God!"
Originally posted by Darth Thor
And why is that? Why does Biology function in a far more advanced way. Because even single celled organisms are infinitely complex and have purpose programmed into them.And yes there clearly is programming whether you believe in a programmer or not.
I get it's not random in that sense.
But choosing a mate for superior colouring and trillions and trillions of other choices naturally selected to survive, is still a MASSIVE (and kinda lazy) Leap of logic to expect that to take us from single celled organisms to the complex super computers (with free will) that we are today.
God used to be the reason the rain fell, or the crops grew, the tides came in and out, the seasons changed, etc etc. But of course now we know the natural processes that account for them (hell, even stars are still being born as we speak, and God ain't doing it).
So essentially what you're doing is saying, hey, see this mysterious thing that we don't necessarily entirely understand yet? That's God (or in your case Allah, I assume? And nevermind that it depends on your culture as to which god you attribute it to).
But everything so far has turned out to be natural processes. No god required. Bummer. Sorry.
"Does it mean, if you don’t understand something, and the community of physicists don’t understand it, that means God did it?... If that’s how you want to invoke your evidence for God, then God is an ever-receding pocket of scientific ignorance that’s getting smaller and smaller and smaller as time moves on."
-Neil Degrasse Tyson
...
Originally posted by Patient_Leech
Abiogenesis is a separate field from evolution with its own studies and evidences. Go listen to some experts in the field. Not me. I guarantee they don't say, "Well, there's God!"
Exactly, evolution doesn't explain how we got here. And to just believe it's explanation of trillions of choices (where did life even get the ability to make choice from) based on natural selection (which is based on survival PROGRAMMING), over millions of years lead to an organ which is a complex visual monitor like the eye, and a supercomputer as sophisticated as our brains, with supposedly Zero Intelligent design guiding the entire process, just to deny the existence of GOD, takes a HUGE Leaps in Logic.
You say that that experts no there's no GOD, but I've already pointed out many intellects including Einstein, did believe there was an Intelligent Design to the Universe.
Originally posted by Patient_Leech
God used to be the reason the rain fell, or the crops grew, the tides came in and out, the seasons changed, etc etc. But of course now we know the natural processes that account for them (hell, even stars are still being born as we speak, and God ain't doing it).
I must have missed the part when it was proven there was no Intelligent Design behind any of those things.
All those miracles must be random luck right? Billions or absolute perfect alignment and correct choices without which we wouldn't be here. Just luck right?
I'd argue that's frankly impossible just from what we know about random chance and coincidences.
Originally posted by Patient_Leech
So essentially what you're doing is saying, hey, see this mysterious thing that we don't necessarily entirely understand yet? That's God (or in your case Allah, I assume? And nevermind that it depends on your culture as to which god you attribute it to).
ONE God. One Source, One Intelligent Design.
We're not talking about superheroes living in clouds throwing lightning bolts.
Originally posted by Patient_Leech
But everything so far has turned out to be natural processes. No god required. Bummer. Sorry.
And it all works perfectly just by sheer luck? No engineer or repair man ever needed? Sounds more magical tbh.
Originally posted by Patient_Leech
"Does it mean, if you don’t understand something, and the community of physicists don’t understand it, that means God did it?... If that’s how you want to invoke your evidence for God, then God is an ever-receding pocket of scientific ignorance that’s getting smaller and smaller and smaller as time moves on."-Neil Degrasse Tyson
Again it's not about having perfect understanding of everything, (although that could easily be turned back on you, as you reject GOD because the idea seems absurd to you). It's about the Fact that We Exist, when we Shouldn't. And we are pretty sophisticated beings with in a pretty vast and complex Universe supporting us.
In other words There's Something, not Nothing for a reason.
Originally posted by BlakemoreLet's instead try to discover the world around us, instead of relying on old text books that are clearly bullshit.
Of course we should discover the world around us. Who claimed we shouldn't?
It's just the more we discover, the more miraculous Life and the Universe turns out to be.
How do you know every one of those old text books and everything in them are BS?
Most of your response was just rambling. But I will make a couple main points...
Originally posted by Darth Thor
You say that that experts no there's no GOD, but I've already pointed out many intellects including Einstein, did believe there was an Intelligent Design to the Universe.
Einstein did not believe in a personal god. He outright denied such a thing. He does admit an appearance of design in the natural world, but that is not the same thing as admitting that it was "Designed Intelligently." There are plenty of design flaws we can get into if you would like. The results of the flawed process of evolution.
Originally posted by Darth Thor
Again it's not about having perfect understanding of everything, (although that could easily be turned back on you, as you reject GOD because the idea seems absurd to you). It's about the Fact that We Exist, when we Shouldn't. And we are pretty sophisticated beings with in a pretty vast and complex Universe supporting us.In other words There's Something, not Nothing for a reason.
The fact that there is something instead of nothing does not prove a god. That is a huge jump in logic. Evidence of supernatural happenings could potentially indicate a deity. But we've seen nothing of the sort. It's just the same argument you've been making, spooky-woo-woo stuff we don't understand; therefore God.
The burden of proof lies on the person making the claim. You are claiming a deity has done all of this. So it is not on me to disprove it. It is on YOU to prove it. So no, you can't exactly just "turn it back on me." I'm making no ludicrous, unfalsifiable claim.
See Bertrand Russell's Celestial Teapot...
https://yandoo.wordpress.com/2014/11/27/bertrand-russell-on-the-celestial-teapot/
Deism is the most I'll grant any Theist. With the evidence we have that's the most you can get. But you certainly can't jump to any specific religion or omniscient and omnipotent Almighty. More like impotent human invention.
All this "revelation" (you brought it up) and God intervening (conveniently buried in distant history) nonsense you true believers rant about is tripe.
Originally posted by Patient_Leech
Einstein did not believe in a personal god. He outright denied such a thing. He does admit an appearance of design in the natural world, but that is not the same thing as admitting that it was "Designed Intelligently." There are plenty of design flaws we can get into if you would like. The results of the flawed process of evolution.
Einstein actually wrote about awe being the foundation of science, not proof of Allah, lol... "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science ... In this sense, and in this sense only, I belong in the ranks of devoutly religious men ... It is enough for me to contemplate the mystery of conscious life perpetuating itself through all eternity, to reflect upon the marvelous structure of the universe which we can dimly perceive, and to try humbly to comprehend even an infinitesimal part of the intelligence manifested in nature."
-Albert Einstein (my bolding)
Originally posted by Patient_Leech
Einstein did not believe in a personal god. He outright denied such a thing. He does admit an appearance of design in the natural world, but that is not the same thing as admitting that it was "Designed Intelligently." There are plenty of design flaws we can get into if you would like. The results of the flawed process of evolution.
I never claimed he believed in a personal God or that he was Religious in any way.
Well he's clearly not talking about a daft design.
Originally posted by Patient_Leech
The fact that there is something instead of nothing does not prove a god. That is a huge jump in logic. Evidence of supernatural happenings could potentially indicate a deity. But we've seen nothing of the sort. It's just the same argument you've been making, spooky-woo-woo stuff we don't understand; therefore God.The burden of proof lies on the person making the claim. You are claiming a deity has done all of this. So it is not on me to disprove it. It is on YOU to prove it. So no, you can't exactly just "turn it back on me." I'm making no ludicrous, unfalsifiable claim.
I don't have to prove anything to you. I'm explaining why I don't buy into your notion that "Evolution is a fact that disproves Religion".
I'm explaining that believing we have a complex visual monitors and a supercomputer through sheer chance is the real ludicrous notion which requires the massive jump in logic.
Being open to the idea that there is an Intelligent Design to the Universe, given the perfect forces and conditions it took for us to be here, isn't so ludicrous. Nor is associating that design with the Origins of the Universe given everything comes from something.
Originally posted by Patient_Leech
See Bertrand Russell's Celestial Teapot...https://yandoo.wordpress.com/2014/11/27/bertrand-russell-on-the-celestial-teapot/
Yeah I'm not responding to random quotes. You also told me to go look into Abiogenesis when I questioned how or why we would have survival programming in the first place. You should be able to make your own arguments. Especially when you seem to be claiming that it's ludicrous to believe otherwise.
Originally posted by Darth Thor
I'm explaining that believing we have a complex visual monitors and a supercomputer through sheer chance is the real ludicrous notion which requires the massive jump in logic.
Ugh, we've already been over how it isn't chance.
I'm assuming you're talking about eyes and brains? Are you denying that they evolved through incremental changes over huge periods of time (ie evolved) or you're admitting that, but saying it's still a divine creation?
I think I've lost track of what your stance is.. lol
Originally posted by Darth Thor
Yeah I'm not responding to random quotes. You also told me to go look into Abiogenesis when I questioned how or why we would have survival programming in the first place. You should be able to make your own arguments. Especially when you seem to be claiming that it's ludicrous to believe otherwise.
Yeah, I don't care. Respond to it or don't. But just understand the burden of proof. Because you clearly don't.
Originally posted by Patient_Leech
Ugh, we've already been over how it isn't chance.I'm assuming you're talking about eyes and brains? Are you denying that they evolved through incremental changes over huge periods of time (ie evolved) or you're admitting that, but saying it's still a divine creation?
I think I've lost track of what your stance is.. lol
I get its Incremental changes without an end game. Which is absurd when you end up with a species of biological robots powered by supercomputers with free will.
My stance is any of that happening without being directed by intelligent design is the real absurdity and leap in logic.
Originally posted by Patient_Leech
Yeah, I don't care. Respond to it or don't. But just understand the burden of proof. Because you clearly don't.
Burden of proof seems to be the typical atheist GOTCHA argument.
But theres no burden of proof here. We only giving our stance and reasoning on what we think is more plausible.