Tired of Defending.

[Old Ned]

Why is the onus always on us to provide evidence for Evolution etc?
We provide evidence that gets ignored, and more evidence is asked for.

Yet when we ask for Evidence of god, all we get is scripture.

We make an assertion, we get asked to offer explanations and evidence. We do exactly this and then it gets ignored.
The Transitional Fossil argument is a good example, a question that is infinite.

But easily counter-argued.

We've asked for evidence of God and we get scripture.

We also are constantly explaining that Evolution does not have a conciousness or plan... this also gets ignored.

So... I ask 2 questions.

1: What is god's "End Game"? What does god plan the end result of his creation to be and what is to become of it?

2: I would like someone to offer up some form of evidence that does NOT centre around the Bible.

Quotes from the Bible will not be accepted as an answer.
We offer a scientific paper and get asked for a different one to back it up.
Therefore if one book of science is not enough evidence for you, then one book from religion is not enough for us.

Do unto others as you would have them do to you.

I'm asking the same thing, there's one book that everyone uses to "Prove god" , well I'm asking... Challenging, anyone to offer up something that is NOT from this book and is evidence without simple hearsay.

Anyone?

 

[dogs4thewin]

Why is the onus always on us to provide evidence for Evolution etc?
We provide evidence that gets ignored, and more evidence is asked for.

Yet when we ask for Evidence of god, all we get is scripture.

We make an assertion, we get asked to offer explanations and evidence. We do exactly this and then it gets ignored.
The Transitional Fossil argument is a good example, a question that is infinite.

But easily counter-argued.

We've asked for evidence of God and we get scripture.

We also are constantly explaining that Evolution does not have a conciousness or plan... this also gets ignored.

So... I ask 2 questions.

1: What is god's "End Game"? What does god plan the end result of his creation to be and what is to become of it?

2: I would like someone to offer up some form of evidence that does NOT centre around the Bible.

Quotes from the Bible will not be accepted as an answer.
We offer a scientific paper and get asked for a different one to back it up.
Therefore if one book of science is not enough evidence for you, then one book from religion is not enough for us.

Do unto others as you would have them do to you.

I'm asking the same thing, there's one book that everyone uses to "Prove god" , well I'm asking... Challenging, anyone to offer up something that is NOT from this book and is evidence without simple hearsay.

Anyone?

When you say does not center around the Bible are you saying does not mention creation or what?

 

[Old Ned]

You can mention creation or hypothesis from the bible, but you cannot back it up with quotes from the bible.

Simple, I can explain Evolution to you and you ask for something other than Darwins books, I then provide you with other evidence, testimonial and physical.

I'm simply asking for the same respect to be given to us.

 

[selfinflikted]

There *is* no evidence, other than the Bible (and personal experience, obviously). That is why they simply cannot show the same respect for which you ask. Even if they wanted to.

 

[CabVet]

The onus is not on us. When they ask for evidence, they don't really want to see the evidence, they simply want to refute evolution in an attempt to change our mind (because for them, evolution is the only thing between us and God). And their desire to do so is so large that they will even be dishonest about it if need be.

 

[Old Ned]

There *is* no evidence, other than the Bible (and personal experience, obviously). That is why they simply cannot show the same respect for which you ask. Even if they wanted to.

Well, lets see if anyone can.

Otherwise this is an unfair fight, they get to punch us in the face and we are only allowed to hit them with feathers.

If they believe in fairness... then they will play by fair rules.

 

[CabVet]

If they believe in fairness... then they will play by fair rules.

That's the thing, they don't.

 

[Old Ned]

The onus is not on us. When they ask for evidence, they don't really want to see the evidence, they simply want to refute evolution in an attempt to change our mind (because for them, evolution is the only thing between us and God). And their desire to do so is so large that they will even be dishonest about it if need be.

And this is me offering them the opportunity to prove that statement wrong.
Prove they do not use dishonesty, prove they are good, moral people that can debate in a fair and gentlemanly way.

And the onus is on us, it shouldn't be, but you included man, you offer up evidence and explanations to questions and when you ask one, you get scripture.
I am simply applying their rules to both sides.

 

[Michael]

Why is the onus always on us to provide evidence for Evolution etc?
We provide evidence that gets ignored, and more evidence is asked for.

Yet when we ask for Evidence of god, all we get is scripture.

We make an assertion, we get asked to offer explanations and evidence. We do exactly this and then it gets ignored.
The Transitional Fossil argument is a good example, a question that is infinite.

But easily counter-argued.

We've asked for evidence of God and we get scripture.

We also are constantly explaining that Evolution does not have a conciousness or plan... this also gets ignored.

So... I ask 2 questions.

1: What is god's "End Game"? What does god plan the end result of his creation to be and what is to become of it?

2: I would like someone to offer up some form of evidence that does NOT centre around the Bible.

Quotes from the Bible will not be accepted as an answer.
We offer a scientific paper and get asked for a different one to back it up.
Therefore if one book of science is not enough evidence for you, then one book from religion is not enough for us.

Do unto others as you would have them do to you.

I'm asking the same thing, there's one book that everyone uses to "Prove god" , well I'm asking... Challenging, anyone to offer up something that is NOT from this book and is evidence without simple hearsay.

Anyone?

http://www.christianforums.com/t7440288/

The problem is that you are trying to debate a *scientific* topic with one side providing no *scientifically peer reviewed* material, yet believing they can 'debunk' the peer viewed material that you provide with non peer reviewed material. I see that same pattern play out all the time in EU/PC debates as well. I'll be happy to have a real debate the scientific evidence related to God in terms of pure physics if you like. Penrose actually currently enjoys more empirical support for the concept of "soul" than Lambda-CDM enjoys for *any* of it's supernatural claims.

 

[AV1611VET]

Evidence can take a hike.

So don't worry.

I won't be asking you for any evidence of evolution; because, in my opinion, you don't have any that would satisfy me.

In fact, I wish my brothers & sisters would just stop demanding evidence for anything ... but it's certainly their prerogative to do so.

So while I'm being ridiculed for saying "evidence can take a hike," you go ahead and complain that you're being asked to provide evidence; and we'll both consider evidence a burden.

How's that?

 

[Old Ned]

Evidence can take a hike.

So don't worry.

I won't be asking you for any evidence of evolution; because, in my opinion, you don't have any that would satisfy me.

In fact, I wish my brothers & sisters would just stop demanding evidence for anything ... but it's certainly their prerogative to do so.

So while I'm being ridiculed for saying "evidence can take a hike," you go ahead and complain that you're being asked to provide evidence; and we'll both consider evidence a burden.

How's that?

That's fine Av, that's exactly what I thought you would say.

But Evidence is necessary in life. Without it we would not be able to fight crime, or disease, nor would your computer exist, we would not be able to stay warm or eat.

If Doctors had just had some dude say "Oh Cancer? Nah, not worth worrying about, it's harmless" and they had simply taken that on faith and not looked for evidence that it is NOT harmless... then many people both you and I know would not be here today.

Evidence is necessary in life and there is no denying it.

But thanks for your honesty once again.

 

[selfinflikted]

Evidence can take a hike.

So don't worry.

I won't be asking you for any evidence of evolution; because, in my opinion, you don't have any that would satisfy me.

Which is it? Evidence can take a hike, or is there some scenario you could come up with in which some form of evidence would satisfy you?

 

[Strathos]

Like AV said, most creationists will not be convinced of evolution by any form or amount of evidence. So when they keep moving the goalposts and demanding more and different evidence, most of them are being dishonest about it.

As for evidence of God, that's a different matter, as you can't find God via reason alone, at least as far as I understand. The problem is that you frame the question as if acceptance of evolution and belief in God were mutually exclusive.

 

[Old Ned]

Like AV said, most creationists will not be convinced of evolution by any form or amount of evidence. So when they keep moving the goalposts and demanding more and different evidence, most of them are being dishonest about it.

As for evidence of God, that's a different matter, as you can't find God via reason alone, at least as far as I understand. The problem is that you frame the question as if acceptance of evolution and belief in God were mutually exclusive.

Ok, interesting point.

My question was posed because of the demand for evidence for Evolution.
We just have to constantly validate it.

I realise few will change their mind, that's not what I'm getting at, if there is no evidence for god, then it must be stated there is no evidence outside of the bible for god.

At this point it's simply a case of if you are going to make a statement and expect people to believe you without evidence then it's a 2 way street, you must also expect others to expect you to believe evolution (for example) without evidence.

God is real and he made you.

Evolution is real and that is how we came to be.

Both sides ask for proof, only one side offers it up.
If neither side require proof then both statements are as valid as each other as both are stated in an original book.

 

[Michael]

Ok, interesting point.

My question was posed because of the demand for evidence for Evolution.
We just have to constantly validate it.

I realise few will change their mind, that's not what I'm getting at, if there is no evidence for god, then it must be stated there is no evidence outside of the bible for god.

At this point it's simply a case of if you are going to make a statement and expect people to believe you without evidence then it's a 2 way street, you must also expect others to expect you to believe evolution (for example) without evidence.

God is real and he made you.

Evolution is real and that is how we came to be.

Both sides ask for proof, only one side offers it up.
If neither side require proof then both statements are as valid as each other as both are stated in an original book.

In my experience, the topics change but the behaviors remain the identical when people do not *want* to change their position.

Regardless of the topic of debate, lots of people believe if they can somehow 'debunk' a peer reviewed paper based on even a random unpublished thought they have about it, that they've somehow provided you with the same 'quality' of reference/rebuttal as the one you've provide them in the peer reviewed paper. In other words, even their own verbal objection in the present moment is enough in their mind to "make up for" and counteract any peer reviewed scientific paper you might hand them. Their own preconceived beliefs are elevated to the status of godhood, and nothing else really matters.

In this particular case it doesn't even matter to the individual that they are in a minority position even among Christians about attempting to interpret that particular book *literally* in the first place.

 

[bhsmte]

The onus is not on us. When they ask for evidence, they don't really want to see the evidence, they simply want to refute evolution in an attempt to change our mind (because for them, evolution is the only thing between us and God). And their desire to do so is so large that they will even be dishonest about it if need be.

IMO, a lot of creationists really aren't trying to change the minds of those who believe in evolution, but are instead, simply trying to feel more secure with their own belief when they reject objective evidence out of hand.

They are far too busy trying to rectify the cognitive dissonance in their own mind, then really trying to change anyone else's mind.

 

[Gottservant]

Scripture says you were always going to get tired, because you are not of the truth.

 

[Old Ned]

Scripture says you were always going to get tired, because you are not of the truth.

lol what the smeg does that even mean?

 

[dcalling]

The evidences are pretty simple, which come first, chicken or egg? Why is the Y Chromosome getting shorter over time? The missing links in fossil records. There are strong evidences of natural selection (systematic distinction of species), but few evidence of revolution (except on simple cells).

The best examples of revolution come from human involvement of DNA changing, but in my view, it is either bring up old traits that already exists, or creating something that might fail in some way (i.e. dogs with certain traits but got other problems that leads to pre-mature organ failure).

 

[KWCrazy]

Why is the onus always on us to provide evidence for Evolution etc?

From the time when Adam first walked the earth, man has had a relationship with his Creator. The events written about in the Scriptures date back thousands of years. Evolution is the new theory. The burden of proof is always on the new theory. Evolution proposes a universal common descent from an origin it can't validate using a process that can't be duplicated, and stands in direct contradiction to the word of a living God. The burden of proof is high, and it has never been met.

We provide evidence that gets ignored, and more evidence is asked for.

Likewise.

Yet when we ask for Evidence of god, all we get is scripture.

"God" in this usage is a proper noun which is always capitalized; whether you believe in a deity or not.
You do not accept evidence of God. You want proof of God. The two are not the same. One cannot provide physical evidence of a supernatural being. It's faulty logic to believe otherwise. We can present evidence, but all evidence is subject to acceptance or rejection.

The Transitional Fossil argument is a good example, a question that is infinite.

There are no provably transitional fossils. You believe all fossils are transitional because you believe all of life is transitional. We understand that we were created in God's image; that we did not evolve; and that nothing else did either. The fact that fossils exist at all indicates rapid encasement in sediment before any other predator could feed on the carcass. We see that as evidence of a flood, you do not.

We've asked for evidence of God and we get scripture.

I've listed a number of ways a person could get evidence of God, but so far as I know no atheist has ever had the guts to put them to he test. Believable eyewitness testimony is strong evidence. It can send people to prison. The right testimony can even free an imprisoned soul.

1: What is god's "End Game"? What does god plan the end result of his creation to be and what is to become of it?

Our existence separates the wheat from the chaff; it is a proving ground where we either prove ourselves worthy to spend eternity with God, or we reject salvation and prove ourselves unworthy. The end game is that the soul is eternal and the body is temporary. It serves to glorify the Father, not to satisfy the egos of man.

2: I would like someone to offer up some form of evidence that does NOT centre around the Bible.

If you want proof of God you will only get it when you stand before Him. He will NOT reveal Himself to the unworthy. If you want evidence of God, I'll give you some places to look.
Volunteer at a nursing home. Take account of which patients (of those still lucid) are saved and which are not. Judge for yourself whether they have peace in their hearts or whether they are agitated and fearful of death.

Speak to an old minister who has been preaching at least 20 years. Ask him to tell you what personal experiences he has had with the supernatural; with good and with evil. Watch his eyes as he explains so you know whether he's telling you the truth or not. Most ministers I know have had multiple encounters with the forces of evil they live to fight against. They could tell you some tales.

Spend a day watching Youtube videos of people who have had near death experiences. Watch them closely as they relate their encounters. Are they lying? Did they really see something that could not be explained by oxygen deprivation.

I would never advocate "playing" with a Ouija board because the basic intent is to communicate with unworldly spirits. Evil spirits and demons are very real. They were cast out of people even after Jesus ascended to heaven, which means that demonic possession and demonic influence, though rare, can still happen. Beyond that, these spirits can and do communicate. Many people who have used the Ouija board have had some very terrifying encounters. The Bible says these evil spirits will defile you. Read up on it. Even though most stories are probably hype, it only takes one real one to really hit home.

Here's the scariest one, because it could totally shake your (lack of) belief system. Get on your knees and ask for Jesus to come into your life and reveal Himself to you. Confess that you're a sinner and ask for Jesus to be your personal savior; to take away your sins so that you may be re-born. Spend the next six months attending a good church that teaches from the Scriptures and dedicate this time to trying to find God. Jesus said seek and you will find, ask you will receive, knock and it will be opened to you. The knowledge of God can connect you to the ultimate truth of the universe. What researcher could turn up a chance at such knowledge?

Only one afraid to challenge his assertion that there is no God.