• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Ask God for Me

Status
Not open for further replies.

2PhiloVoid

Matt. 16:15-19
Site Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
25,054
11,772
Space Mountain!
✟1,387,508.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
If you can show a creator exists then OK. Until then the answer is I don't know. The fact that the universe exists does not mean there was a creator until it can be demonstrated.

I don't have an explanation as to how or why the universe exists. I don't need to know to not be convinced a god did it.

....um, those of us who work within the epistemic notions of Methodological Naturalism don't think that God can be demonstrated on the experimental front of science. So, why do you keep saying you're waiting for a demonstration IF you operate within Methodological Naturalism?
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Oncedeceived
Upvote 0

Clizby WampusCat

Well-Known Member
Jul 8, 2019
3,657
893
56
Texas
✟124,923.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
What do you mean the Cambrian Explosion is substantiated by Science?

Yes, we have a good idea that suddenly life formed in the ocean, already with complex features and in a very short time. Is that what you meant?
Good question. I meant to say scientists have a good explanation for this and that it is not really an explosion. Did you read the link?
 
Upvote 0

Clizby WampusCat

Well-Known Member
Jul 8, 2019
3,657
893
56
Texas
✟124,923.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
....um, those of us who work within the epistemic notions of Methodological Naturalism don't think that God can be demonstrated on the experimental front of science. So, why do you keep saying you're waiting for a demonstration IF you operate within Methodological Naturalism?
I am open to the supernatural existing as methodological naturalists do as well. If you could show how we can detect the supernatural using science then they would use that to study it. But as of today we have no way to use science to study the supernatural. I think that methodological naturalism is the best method to use for science but that is not the only evidence we could have for a god. This is the reason I am an atheist and not an agnostic.
 
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Matt. 16:15-19
Site Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
25,054
11,772
Space Mountain!
✟1,387,508.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I am open to the supernatural existing as methodological naturalists do as well. If you could show how we can detect the supernatural using science then they would use that to study it. But as of today we have no way to use science to study the supernatural. I think that methodological naturalism is the best method to use for science but that is not the only evidence we could have for a god. This is the reason I am an atheist and not an agnostic.

What? The semantics within the syntax of your statements above seem to belie that you aren't quite aware of what your asking for, specifically as you demonstrate in the sentence I've highlighted in red.

So, you're not looking for "scientific" evidence? What kind of evidence are you looking for then?
 
Upvote 0

Oncedeceived

Senior Veteran
Jul 11, 2003
21,214
629
✟66,870.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
No, I don't need to. I am unconvinced by your evidence.

You say this:



But then say this (#2):



Which do you believe? That intelligent beings only produce information on earth or that intelligent beings are known to produce intelligence on earth.
Known being in evidence, no other KNOWN cause produces information. Your playing semantics here.
 
Upvote 0

Clizby WampusCat

Well-Known Member
Jul 8, 2019
3,657
893
56
Texas
✟124,923.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
What? Your semantics within in the syntax of your statements above seem to belie that you aren't quite aware of what your asking for, specifically as you demonstrate in the sentence I've highlighted above in red.

So, you're not looking for "scientific" evidence" What kind of evidence are you looking for then?
I said if anyone can show how to use science to confirm the supernatural I am interested. I will look at what people think is scientific evidence for the existence of a god. But if we are investigating an unknown phenomenon since the supernatural has never been shown to be the answer we should assume it is not the answer or we will not make progress. I think this has been demonstrated time and time again through history. Scientific evidence is not the only evidence we could have though. God could reveal himself to me in a way that I could not deny he exists. Maybe a philosophical argument could convince me etc.
 
Upvote 0

Oncedeceived

Senior Veteran
Jul 11, 2003
21,214
629
✟66,870.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Good question. I meant to say scientists have a good explanation for this and that it is not really an explosion. Did you read the link?
No didn't realize there was one, but it was really an explosion...hence the name. ;) But I will look at your link what post number is it?
 
Upvote 0

miknik5

"Let not your heart be troubled"
Jun 9, 2016
15,728
2,819
USA
✟109,054.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
If you can show a creator exists then OK. Until then the answer is I don't know. The fact that the universe exists does not mean there was a creator until it can be demonstrated.

I don't have an explanation as to how or why the universe exists. I don't need to know to not be convinced a god did it.
Well can we discuss the scientific suggestion of how the universe and living matter did come into existence to see the silliness of it?

I am sorry, but it is silly
 
Upvote 0

Clizby WampusCat

Well-Known Member
Jul 8, 2019
3,657
893
56
Texas
✟124,923.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Known being in evidence, no other KNOWN cause produces information. Your playing semantics here.
No I am not. You are not being clear on what you mean. Only and Known are not the same thing. Do you think that Only intelligence can produce intelligence on earth? Or do you think it is just the best explanation and there could be other explanations?
 
Upvote 0

Oncedeceived

Senior Veteran
Jul 11, 2003
21,214
629
✟66,870.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
No I am not. You are not being clear on what you mean. Only and Known are not the same thing. Do you think that Only intelligence can produce intelligence on earth? Or do you think it is just the best explanation and there could be other explanations?
It doesn't matter what I think, the ONLY evidence on earth demonstrates that intelligent beings are the ONLY producers of information.
 
Upvote 0

miknik5

"Let not your heart be troubled"
Jun 9, 2016
15,728
2,819
USA
✟109,054.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I am open to the supernatural existing as methodological naturalists do as well. If you could show how we can detect the supernatural using science then they would use that to study it. But as of today we have no way to use science to study the supernatural. I think that methodological naturalism is the best method to use for science but that is not the only evidence we could have for a god. This is the reason I am an atheist and not an agnostic.
You can´t...again, you would have to have a tangible item to prove the intangible...and then what would that intangible be exactly?

Romans 1 tells you already...
 
Upvote 0

Clizby WampusCat

Well-Known Member
Jul 8, 2019
3,657
893
56
Texas
✟124,923.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0

Clizby WampusCat

Well-Known Member
Jul 8, 2019
3,657
893
56
Texas
✟124,923.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Well can we discuss the scientific suggestion of how the universe and living matter did come into existence to see the silliness of it?

I am sorry, but it is silly
Why is that useful? How can you possibly know all the possible ways? I am not claiming a god did not do it. I am claiming that I don't know. Abiogenesis is interesting but nothing has been demonstrated to be the cause. It could be more than one cause, we don't know.

Just writing something off as silly is silly in itself and will never get you to truth.
 
Upvote 0

Clizby WampusCat

Well-Known Member
Jul 8, 2019
3,657
893
56
Texas
✟124,923.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
It doesn't matter what I think, the ONLY evidence on earth demonstrates that intelligent beings are the ONLY producers of information.
Why won't you answer the question? It is a yes or no answer. It would clear my confusion up.

It seems like you are saying that you are open to other causes being a possibility. Is this true?

Or are you saying that intelligence can only produce intelligence period?
 
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Matt. 16:15-19
Site Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
25,054
11,772
Space Mountain!
✟1,387,508.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I said if anyone can show how to use science to confirm the supernatural I am interested. I will look at what people think is scientific evidence for the existence of a god. But if we are investigating an unknown phenomenon since the supernatural has never been shown to be the answer we should assume it is not the answer or we will not make progress. I think this has been demonstrated time and time again through history. Scientific evidence is not the only evidence we could have though. God could reveal himself to me in a way that I could not deny he exists. Maybe a philosophical argument could convince me etc.

.............no, a philosophical argument can never suffice as an end point for the human mind, and this is essentially because even if God were to show up, you're still encountering a phenomenon of some sort from the limited vantage point of a single, mortal, embodied human being. Thus, there will always be an eternal regress in any philosophical consideration that could be applied if and when God were to "show up." So, that's the problem you have in all of this. And if God isn't going to make you believe through a fiat act where He literally switches neurons on or off in your brain FOR YOU in a complete and permanent way, then you're still going to ponder it all after God has 'left the scene.'

Anyway, you're wearing me out here with your constant trapsing about epistemologically and fumbling around without having presented or engaged anything definitive where epistemology or ethics is concerned. Yet, you still make claims as if you have some kind of absolute position that can't be rocked. So, with that being the case, I'm not convinced you're here to help educate anyone or to 'find God.' You just seem to be here to cause trouble. Am I wrong?
 
Upvote 0

Clizby WampusCat

Well-Known Member
Jul 8, 2019
3,657
893
56
Texas
✟124,923.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
You can´t...again, you would have to have a tangible item to prove the intangible...and then what would that intangible be exactly?
I am in agreement. But if someone can somehow use science to study the supernatural then I am open to it.

Romans 1 tells you already...
Looking at the trees is not sufficient evidence.
 
Upvote 0

miknik5

"Let not your heart be troubled"
Jun 9, 2016
15,728
2,819
USA
✟109,054.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I am in agreement. But if someone can somehow use science to study the supernatural then I am open to it.


Looking at the trees is not sufficient evidence.
Wondering where and how the initial tree (and other matter/things) came from is...
 
Upvote 0

miknik5

"Let not your heart be troubled"
Jun 9, 2016
15,728
2,819
USA
✟109,054.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Why is that useful? How can you possibly know all the possible ways? I am not claiming a god did not do it. I am claiming that I don't know. Abiogenesis is interesting but nothing has been demonstrated to be the cause. It could be more than one cause, we don't know.

Just writing something off as silly is silly in itself and will never get you to truth.
Yes...I agree...
 
Upvote 0

Clizby WampusCat

Well-Known Member
Jul 8, 2019
3,657
893
56
Texas
✟124,923.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
.............no, a philosophical argument can never suffice as an end point for the human mind, and this is essentially because even if God were to show up, you're still encountering a phenomenon of some sort from the limited vantage point of a single, mortal, embodied human being. Thus, there will always be an eternal regress in any philosophical consideration that could be applied if and when God were to "show up." So, that's the problem you have in all of this. And if God isn't going to make you believe through a fiat act where He literally switches neurons on or off in your brain FOR YOU in a complete and permanent way, then you're still going to ponder it all after God has 'left the scene.'
Well each person gets to decide what convinces them. Some say they are convinced by philosophical arguments. In the end I am currently not convinced by the evidence I have.

Anyway, you're wearing me out here with your constant trapsing about epistemologically and fumbling around without having presented or engaged anything definitive where epistemology or ethics is concerned. Yet, you still make claims as if you have some kind of absolute position that can't be rocked. So, with that being the case, I'm not convinced you're here to help educate anyone or to 'find God.' You just seem to be here to cause trouble. Am I wrong?
Your unwillingness to engage in an actual discussion over a real ethical situation is why we cannot make progress. You also place a lot of ideas and word in my mouth that I never said such as I have an absolute position that cannot be rocked. I never said this. I have explained how I get to my moral beliefs many times.

I am not very inclined to learn morality from someone where their morality allows for people to be killed for homosexual acts, which yours does.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.