Near perfect existence

[DogmaHunter]

So someone who believes evolutionary theory doesn't necessarily believe the purpose of evolutionary theory is to explain how life came about?

Yet it fails to explain how non-life turned into life.

A theory can't "fail" at explaining things that it is not supposed to be explaining.
Scope. It matters. Evolution is not a theory about the origins of life. It's a theory about the diversification of already existing life.

If I had a coin for everytime I had to point that out.......

 

[DogmaHunter]

None of the above.

Hmm.

Then you shouldn't use the word "alive", because that is what the word means.
This is the same kind of mumbo-jumbo we get from people who talk about a "desembodied mind" or an "intelligence" that somewho isn't produced by a brain.

Well, sorry, but such concepts don't mean anything.

It's like saying that you bought this great new wooden dining table. And when asked from which kind of tree the wood is, you reply with "ow, this wood doesn't come from a tree..."

Well, sorry, but that doesn't mean anything. Then we don't know what the heck you are talking about.

It's perhaps a correct english sentence, but it is meaningless.
Like the "taste" of the color purple.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Ah, the religionist's game of telling me what their god isn't. Isn't detectable. Isn't testable. Isn't presentable. Isn't definable.

Is there anything else that your god isn't?

"Real"?

 

[Chriliman]

A theory can't "fail" at explaining things that it is not supposed to be explaining.
Scope. It matters. Evolution is not a theory about the origins of life. It's a theory about the diversification of already existing life.

If I had a coin for everytime I had to point that out.......

So what's the current most popular theory for the origins of life?

 

[DogmaHunter]

So what's the current most popular theory for the origins of life?

Abiogenesis. And it's not really a single theory. More a collection of theories / hypothesis.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis

Why do you pretend not to know this? Because I find it extremely hard to believe that nobody ever informed you of this.
In fact, I don't believe it for a second.

 

[Chriliman]

Abiogenesis. And it's not really a single theory. More a collection of theories / hypothesis.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis

Why do you pretend not to know this? Because I find it extremely hard to believe that nobody ever informed you of this.
In fact, I don't believe it for a second.

I've heard of abiogenesis, but have never studied it in detail.

Hypothetically, if you realized the truth about how life came to be, wouldn't you want to tell everyone about it?

Abiogenesis is just a collection of theories, not necessarily the truth.

 

[Davian]

I've heard of abiogenesis, but have never studied it in detail.

Hypothetically, if you realized the truth about how life came to be, wouldn't you want to tell everyone about it?

Abiogenesis is just a collection of theories, not necessarily the truth.

I do not accept your religious opinion as truth.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I've heard of abiogenesis, but have never studied it in detail.

Hypothetically, if you realized the truth about how life came to be, wouldn't you want to tell everyone about it?

I'd do better than that...I'd prove it.

Otherwise I'd just be spouting nonsense.

 

[anonymous person]

I'd do better than that...I'd prove it.

Otherwise I'd just be spouting nonsense.

Why should we bother to prove our beliefs true if all you would do is say, "Ok, your beliefs are true." and go about your merry way. As ambassadors of Christ we are beseeching you ultimately to be reconciled to God, not just to give mere intellectual assent to some propositions.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Why should we bother to prove our beliefs true if all you would do is say, "Ok, your beliefs are true." and go about your merry way. As ambassadors of Christ we are beseeching you ultimately to be reconciled to God, not just to give mere intellectual assent to some propositions.

I'm pretty sure that if you 'proved' (proof is really just for math and alcohol) Christianity to be true I wouldn't just go about my merry way. So you're really just knocking down a straw man with that statement...

 

[Ana the Ist]

Why should we bother to prove our beliefs true if all you would do is say, "Ok, your beliefs are true." and go about your merry way. As ambassadors of Christ we are beseeching you ultimately to be reconciled to God, not just to give mere intellectual assent to some propositions.

Why would anyone "be reconciled" to a false god?

You have to start at the truth.

It's nice to see you starting to realize that you haven't proven your proposition true though...

 

[quatona]

Why should we bother to prove our beliefs true if all you would do is say, "Ok, your beliefs are true." and go about your merry way. As ambassadors of Christ we are beseeching you ultimately to be reconciled to God, not just to give mere intellectual assent to some propositions.

First step first.

 

[Davian]

Why should we bother to prove our beliefs true if <snip>

Wait a minute! You can prove your beliefs to be true? Have you been holding back all of this time?

 

[Davian]

"Real"?

"Isn't real" would be the logical conclusion, the complaints from the religionists notwithstanding.

 

[anonymous person]

Wait a minute! You can prove your beliefs to be true? Have you been holding back all of this time?

If I did, would you repent?

 

[Davian]

If <snip>

You do tend to get ahead of yourself there.

I'm still waiting for you back at post #774.

 

[quatona]

If I did, would you repent?

First step first. Let´s see how far your proof goes into the details of your god concept.

 

[Chriliman]

There you atheists go again, failing to use logic when thinking.

Logically, if an eternal infinite God exists, only this God would be able to prove itself to your finite self. If a finite man proved God's existence then that finite man would have to be God and that man was Jesus who is God.

Christianity is the only logical way to explain God in this way.

I think we're well on our way to finding the truth, since we've all agreed it's rational to believe God is possible.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Logically, if an eternal infinite God exists, only this God would be able to prove itself to your finite self.

Why?

And we don't agree...no matter how much you'd like to pretend so.

 

[Davian]

There you atheists go again, failing to use logic when thinking.

Logically, if an eternal infinite God exists, only this God would be able to prove itself to your finite self. If a finite man proved God's existence then that finite man would have to be God and that man was Jesus who is God.

How is a 2000-year-old-man not dead?

Christianity is the only logical way to explain God in this way.

You keep using that word "logical" in a manner that is unfamiliar to me.

I think we're well on our way to finding the truth, since we've all agreed it's rational to believe God is possible.

Is this the same "God" that allegedly walked and talked in a garden that has no evidence of having existed, poofed people and animals into existence, and later, in a manner contrary to the modern understanding of genetics, populated the planet with a tiny group of individuals and animals that survived a global flood in an unbuildable boat, a flood that killed the dinosaurs in a manner that only *appears* to be 65 million years ago, because the Earth is really only somehow 6000 years old, yet remains, by every objective measure to date indistinguishable from nothing, or something else?