A Challenge

[Lullaby Chainer]

Quote by: Paleface2500 I realized that there were too many questions that only God could explain.

Huh.. this looks familiar. You haven't adequately addressed our concerns of this notion.

[Gods_Mercenary]

@ Paleface
That's an opinion, not an objective truth, ( you may find my sig has something to say about this.)

[Paleface2500]

Why have only humans evolved? We are relatively new here, why haven’t other species evolved into intelligence? No matter which way you slice it, this did not happen by accident , it was define influence

[Jack]

Our world is filled with too much beauty, pain, love, and humor to have happened by accident .

It may be human to think so, but really, the links between causality and result are not clear in your statement. Why can't those things have arisen as a result of our brain's evolution?

Why have only humans evolved?

What? Now I have to wonder how well you understand evolution.

[Paleface2500]

Quote by: Lullaby Chainer Huh.. this looks familiar. You haven't adequately addressed our concerns of this notion.

Funny cause you have not adequately adressed my first post.

[Lullaby Chainer]

Quote by: Paleface2500 Why have only humans evolved? We are relatively new here, why haven’t other species evolved into intelligence? No matter which way you slice it, this did not happen by accident , it was define influence

As Richard Dawkins might say it.. I beg your pardon? Who says that evolution is an accident?

[Paleface2500]

Quote by: Isherwood It may be human to think so, but really, the links between causality and result are not clear in your statement. Why can't those things have arisen as a result of our brain's evolution? What? Now I have to wonder how well you understand evolution.

:rolleyes:

[Paleface2500]

Quote by: Lullaby Chainer As Richard Dawkins might say it.. I beg your pardon? Who says that evolution is an accident?

Explain to me then, all of you. Why is the notion of God a fallacy?

[Lullaby Chainer]

Quote by: Paleface2500 Funny cause you have not adequately adressed my first post.

Post # 12. Then you missed it.. and I told you again. Post # 12.

If you have a problem with my response, address it now.

Quote by: Paleface2500 You guys and gals can beat me to a pulp and gang up on me all you want, but it changes nothing. I gave you 3 simple laws and asked you to formulate an opinion on how they relate to God and the big bang. All you can say is fallacy? God of Gaps?

Post #12.

Quote by: Lullaby Chainer No, it could logically be that the universe is simply expanding. Increasing in size. Why do you conclude the universe has no parameters simply because it is expanding? Is it not logical to conclude that IF the universe is finite.. the parameters are simply growing? OR the parameters are very large and there is much room for the cosmos to expand? Also, many many philosophers believe that the universe extends into itself with the help of other dimensions. The best way I can explain this is an ant on a piece of paper. Imagine the ant and the piece of paper is two dimensional. That shouldn't be hard to imagine since it's relatively flat. The ant could obviously reach one end of the piece of paper and be forced to stop. The piece of paper is now finite. Now imagine the 3rd dimension. The 3rd dimension wraps the 2nd dimension through 3rd dimension space and twist the piece of paper to meet one end to another - COMPLETELY OBLIVIOUS to the 2nd-dimension-ant. The ant can now walk and walk from one point all the way around the entire length of the paper (front and back (the paper is twisted as well as bent)) and reach the same point it started at. Many philosophers believe this is true for the universe. Please watch this flash animation to better understand multiple dimensions. Imagining the Tenth Dimension - A Book by Rob Bryanton Move your mouse over Navigation and click "Imagining the tenth dimension." Why a god? Why your god? Why a man-made god? Why not nature? There are plenty of philosophical explanations, mind you, that soundly explain this without the need for gods. Such as a universe that expands and implodes due to gravity. Perhaps the universe is on a cycle of expansion and implosion that has lasted for an eternity. Such as a super string theory that claims that our universe was created by a collision of other-dimension fibers. These fibers could also be infinite.

[Lullaby Chainer]

Quote by: Paleface2500 Explain to me then, all of you. Why is the notion of God a fallacy?

What kind of fallacy? Fallacies usually describe arguments.

[littlebear]

epistemologist said, "There might not be a Prime Mover in the form of God, for instance; it could be a Big Bang. Also, just because God was there to first move the universe doesn't mean that He still exists. There also might not be a first mover at all, and we might be dealing with an infinite regression of causality. We can also object to causality by applying the concepts of quantum physics."

You are incorrect on a few points here. If there was a "Prime Mover" as logically determined by Aristotle and Plato, by definition that being must be eternal. The big bang does not fit that definition. If you don't believe the "Prime Mover" theory proves that this being still exists, try to put a number of years the being existed if it had no beginning. After you wrestle with that for a while, you can come to no other conclusion other than the being is eternal -- having no beginning nor ending.

Logically, there is no such thing as an "infinite regression of causality." The definition of causality indicates something caused something. Therefore, at some point in time something (prime mover) had to always exist.

I don't want to confuse you, but logic cannot lead you anywhere other than there is no such thing as a beginning nor such a thing as an ending. Further thought on the subject will lead you to the conclusion that there is no such thing as time when viewed from this perspective. "Time will be no more"

All honest reason proves there is a God and that He has always existed, always will exist, and from everything that exists, has existed, or will exist sprang from Him. Sounds like good old Bible teaching to me.

[Paleface2500]

Enough with the god of gaps crap and stupid scientific theory, let’s go with what we know.

Space is it is expanding therefore it is finite and had to begin at some point. An object at rest stays art rest unless acted upon. Who acted upon our universe? God, because you are not going to sit here and tell me that gases and crap were always swirling around up there. Something put them there and something started it in motion. It did not start itself in motion and science can’t explain this without contradicting itself. Everything has a beginning and that beginning is god

[Jack]

What makes your god different from all the other gods worshiped throughout history? Nothing. They are all inventions of man to explain the unknown or give the feeling of superiority to one group over another. Why has no god ever been proposed that is distinctly non-human in either appearance or behavior? Because we can only imagine that he'd be like us, with human qualities like jealousy, anger and love. The more advanced society becomes, the less need we have for gods. The notion is antiquated and serves no useful purpose in the modern world.

[Jack]

It did not start itself in motion and science can’t explain this without contradicting itself.

Why can't the universe be eternally expanding and contracting? This wouldn't violate known science and theists would have to allow for the eternal aspect of the universe since they claim that quality for their god.

[Paleface2500]

Quote by: Lullaby Chainer What kind of fallacy? Fallacies usually describe arguments.

Oh my god….. Killer Argument is right. You are not interested in debating. You continually tap dance around the issue. You’re like a magic show, your answers an illusion.

[Lullaby Chainer]

Quote by: Paleface2500 Enough with the god of gaps crap and stupid scientific theory, let’s go with what we know. Space is it is expanding therefore it is finite and had to begin at some point. An object at rest stays art rest unless acted upon. Who acted upon our universe? God, because you are not going to sit here and tell me that gases and crap were always swirling around up there. Something put them there and something started it in motion. It did not start itself in motion and science can’t explain this without contradicting itself. Everything has a beginning and that beginning is god

You know my response to this! Please address it. I won't quote it again, I trust you've seen it by now.

[Jack]

Enough with the god of gaps crap and stupid scientific theory

So you don't want us to debate your points unless we agree to your POV? That's pretty lame.

[Paleface2500]

Quote by: Isherwood What makes your god different from all the other gods worshiped throughout history? Nothing. They are all inventions of man to explain the unknown or give the feeling of superiority to one group over another. Why has no god ever been proposed that is distinctly non-human in either appearance or behavior? Because we can only imagine that he'd be like us, with human qualities like jealousy, anger and love. The more advanced society becomes, the less need we have for gods. The notion is antiquated and serves no useful purpose in the modern world.

Isn't this what some science is? Man trying to explain what he does not know, using theory he invented? You see how contradictory you sound? Most science when pertaining to evolution and creation of our universe is mere speculation and educated guesses. Yes that’s right! Man trying to explain what he does not yet understand with educated guesses backed by more educated guesses and ridiculous theories. Yet I am the poor misguided fool? Yeah right :rolleyes:

[littlebear]

Gods Mercenary said, "You can't use science to prove God, it's as simple as that."

Who would want to? I accept His existance through faith. What bothers me is that science never ceases to attempt to disprove His existance. I cannot understand why. What do they hope to accomplish? Do they view people's belief in Him as a threat? Do they seek to exalt themselves above Him? I am reminded of a quote, "Me thinks she protests too much." The amount of effort science puts into disproving the existance of God may be hiding some deep seated sense of infeority.

I have great difficulty with Christians who attempt to prove their God's existance by scientific evidence or methodology. At the end of all arguments, one must accept God by faith and on no other basis. Will we attempt to prove our faith? Not me. Will I ask the world to think better of me because I can offer scientific reasons for my faith? Not a chance. Will I seek to lead the lost to Christ by filling their heads with scientific proofs? Not hardly. I will ask them to believe in Him as I do, by faith.

[RickSp]

Quote by: Paleface2500 There are two types of debaters. Those who seek to discredit the opposing person’s argument, and those who seek to discredit the person. When you find yourself discrediting the person instead of the argument, you have lost.

So I see you that you would rather play word games than debate. Your choice.