Atheism (2)

[Gadarene]

well technically it is combustion but it's not combustible material. Its very dense material that was compressed to a singularity and exploded. If I have my big bang chronology correct.

No...it isn't combustion. Combustion requires oxygen. Explosions involve chemical reactions.

It was an expansion of spacetime.

Let me get this right, you think you've refuted (or can at least copypasta in a refutation of) the best theory that several generations of scientists have worked on - and you don't even know what it says.

 

[Davian]

First off, I don't agree that if God exists in every dimension he'd be beyond space-time.... but that's not the most important point.

The most important point is that you must DEMONSTRATE that God ACTUALLY DOES exist in every dimension.

Throwing out a random idea with a shaky foundation, and no demonstrable evidence to back it is simply wasting time.

I would say that attempting to get gradyll to clearly state his postion and substantiate it is simply wasting time.

OTOH, it is fascinating to see how many ways he can go wrong.

 

[createdtoworship]

No, it's not the only option at all. In fact, it's an incredibly implausible option.

Even the remarkably difficult scenario you listed above is far more plausible than a miracle. We know it'd be extremely difficult to pull off, and it would take an element of luck.... but at least we could demonstrate it's possible.

There is no evidence that any miracle has ever occurred, nor is there any reason to assume one ever will. Just taking a very unlikely situation and slapping the name miracle on it without evidence proves nothing.

Using your standard of evidence to assert it's a miracle, we could literally take anything we can think of, and use that as the explanation as well.

Why not claim it's the invisible seismograph pixies? As ridiculous as it sounds, there is exactly the same amount of evidence as there is for the seismograph pixies as there is for your miracle. That makes them EQUALLY plausible.

well it's about as likely that a tornado went through a junk yard and created a Boeing 747. But it is possible, I guess....I mean remember then that when this person is signing His/her name they must know exactly where the pen would start off and finish their name at the exact same spot as where the machine would start it's cycle at.....it is possible, but it is more plausible that it was a miracle.

 

[Gadarene]

well it's about as likely that a tornado went through a junk yard and created a Boeing 747.

Right.

And even then this is still less likely than some god doing it.

We at least have prior knowledge of junkyards, whirlwhinds and the assembly of 747s.

We have no prior knowledge of deities.

Odds and possibilities are supposed to actually represent how often we see things occurring. A scenario that does not involve a god is much more likely than one which does, because we observe the former more often.

 

[Dave Ellis]

firstly, time is only the fourth dimension of 24 or some odd dimensions.

so one only need to be beyond the fourth dimension to be beyond time.

(see flatlanders on you tube for an illustration of dimension superiority)

secondly, Christ appeared in a closed upper room without going through the door. Again see flatlanders if you don't believe me on this. But all one need to do is be one dimension beyond the three dimensions of our universe.

included is flatland video

Dr Quantum - Flatland - YouTube

I'll have to watch the video when I get home, as I'm about to head out.... but just as a quick rebuttal before I go (which may or may not be applicable after watching the video)

If you exist within all 24 dimensions, that does not prove anything.

Existing within the 4th dimension, still means you exist within time. It does not mean you transcend it. Humans exist within time, that doesn't give us freedom from the first three dimensions or allow us to transcend anything.

Again, I'll watch the video at home and write a new rebuttal if that doesn't address it's argument

 

[createdtoworship]

Right.

And even then this is still less likely than some god doing it.

We at least have prior knowledge of junkyards, whirlwhinds and the assembly of 747s.

We have no prior knowledge of deities.

Odds and possibilities are supposed to actually represent how often we see things occurring. A scenario that does not involve a god is much more likely than one which does, because we observe the former more often.

romans 1:20 I believe
For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse

here is an easier translation to read

For ever since the world was created, people have seen the earth and sky. Through everything God made, they can clearly see his invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature. So they have no excuse for not knowing God.

 

[Gadarene]

romans 1:20 I believe
For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse

here is an easier translation to read

For ever since the world was created, people have seen the earth and sky. Through everything God made, they can clearly see his invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature. So they have no excuse for not knowing God.

Assertion.

We still have no prior knowledge of deities.

Besides, weren't you bawling STRAWMAN a few pages back because apparently this baseless causation argument wasn't about the Christian god? Plenty of other theists that arent' Christians claim that theirgoddidit instead.

 

[createdtoworship]

Assertion.

We still have no prior knowledge of deities.

Besides, weren't you bawling STRAWMAN a few pages back because apparently this baseless causation argument wasn't about the Christian god? Plenty of other theists that arent' Christians claim that theirgoddidit instead.

I am just saying that the Christian faith has the answer to your question

 

[Gadarene]

I am just saying that the Christian faith has the answer to your question

It's not an answer. It's not evidence. It's just more claims. And it makes no mention of causation.

Have you just abandoned the causation argument then?

 

[createdtoworship]

It's not an answer. It's not evidence. It's just more claims. And it makes no mention of causation.

Have you just abandoned the causation argument then?

nope, but you were going in circles I thought we were done with the causation argument. You still want to get owned by this idea? Go ahead.

 

[Gadarene]

nope, but you were going in circles I thought we were done with the causation argument.

No, you never seemed to grasp the fact that we have no evidence for any kind of uncaused cause - agent or naturalistic, then you seemed to think some guff about pen scratchings proved god, displaying no knowledge of how probability works.

But do go on.

You still want to get owned by this idea? Go ahead.

Aw, you're adorable

 

[Davian]

romans 1:20 I believe
For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse

here is an easier translation to read

For ever since the world was created, people have seen the earth and sky. Through everything God made, they can clearly see his invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature. So they have no excuse for not knowing God.

"...they can clearly see his invisible qualities" - no, they can't.

I just never get why someone would think this would make sense to someone else. And it may be more parsimonious to replace 'invisible' with 'nonexistent'.

Got anything else?

 

[createdtoworship]

"...they can clearly see his invisible qualities" - no, they can't.

I just never get why someone would think this would make sense to someone else. And it may be more parsimonious to replace 'invisible' with 'nonexistent'.

Got anything else?

Thats a problem with the Bible, take it up with God.

 

[Going Merry]

im eating a atheist pizza, cos pizzas dont believe in deities

 

[createdtoworship]

No, you never seemed to grasp the fact that we have no evidence for any kind of uncaused cause - agent or naturalistic, then you seemed to think some guff about pen scratchings proved god, displaying no knowledge of how probability works.

okay how about a boeing 747 coming out of a tornado wrecked junk yard.

thats the evidence for design.

All you have to say is, there is a designer.

I will take it from there.

 

[Davian]

Thats a problem with the Bible, take it up with God.

Your bible, your problem.

 

[createdtoworship]

Your bible, your problem.

It's not my Bible, it's God's Bible. Besides your the one with the problem with the Bible.

 

[Gadarene]

im eating a atheist pizza, cos pizzas dont believe in deities

Haha.

And I have an unmarried table in my house.

 

[Gadarene]

okay how about a boeing 747 coming out of a tornado wrecked junk yard.

thats the evidence for design.

All you have to say is, there is a designer.

I will take it from there.

That's the evidence for design? We don't see it, so design fails.

I'm going to assume that you just phrased that incorrectly.

You analogy is like the cookie idea - an idea. Not evidence. This has even less substance than your previous arguments.

 

[Belk]

If God exists in every dimension (twenty something) then He would be beyond space and time and have no beginning. Tahts what I am talking about.

Your conclusion does not follow your premise. Simply occupying multiple dimensions does not suddenly grant being beyond space time nor a lack of beginning.