18 Mar 07
Originally posted by ballsofsteel"The presence of contradiction doesn't necessarily indicate a falsity"
On the contrary, the bible proves itself. Its inner integrity is evident to anyone diligent enough to discover it for themselves.
Most people who disregard the bible so flippantly rarely have made any significant foray into its pages, and even fewer have given any consideration beyond what they initially perceive as irreconcilable contradiction.
...[text shortened]... essarily indicate a falsity, and neither does lack of contradiciton necessarily indicate truth.
Yes it does. Look up the logical proof methodology called "Reductio Ad Absurdum".
Once you have educated yourself, come back and formulate a decent argument.
Until then, stop wasting my time.
19 Mar 07
Originally posted by howardgeeI'm not wasting your time, you're wasting it yourself. Don't push that off on me. I happily leave you to your own devices. This sandbox is yours, just let me shake off the dust before I leave...
"The presence of contradiction doesn't necessarily indicate a falsity"
Yes it does. Look up the logical proof methodology called "Reductio Ad Absurdum".
Once you have educated yourself, come back and formulate a decent argument.
Until then, stop wasting my time.
19 Mar 07
Originally posted by howardgeeSo have we moved from the invitation to consider evidence disproving the existence of God to supposed contradictions in the Bible? Perhaps we should start a new discussion thread.
The bible disproves itself. The whole thing is riddled with contradictions.
I don't know that I could ever convince anyone that the Bible doesn't have contradictions simply because every writing is subject to interpretation, meaning there is ample opportunity to lay the charge of contradiction.
19 Mar 07
Originally posted by ballsofsteelPascal's Wager is silly. Generally, it's stated something like, "We make no assumptions about whether God exists or not. If God exists and you believe in him, you get an infinite reward. If God exists and you don't believe in him, you get an infinite punishment. If God does not exists, you get a small reward for not believing in him (saved time), and a small punishment for not believing in him (wasted time). The best bet is to believe in God, since on average, no matter how low the probability that God exists, you get an infinite reward, since any fraction of infinity is infinity."
It may be profitable for you to review Pascal's Wager methinks. If all you have to lose is 'being right', is that too much to ask for the assurance of heaven? After all, there's nothing funny about being wrong about the Truth. You won't find me laughing anyway. Better safe than sorry, my friend. Peace.
The problem is that if you're assuming nothing about God, you cannot assume that God is benevolent. What if the "Truth" is that God is going to send the faithful to hell and the unfaithful to heaven? In that case believing nets you an infinite punishment, on average (no matter how unlikely it is that such a God exists!). Nothing funny about being wrong with that "Truth" either. "Better safe than sorry," don't you think?
20 Mar 07
Originally posted by howardgeeid have to explain my philosophy:
This is a sincere question for everybody out there who believes that God exists.
It is a thought experiment for you, so give it a good shot and please admit it if you cannot think of anything at all, as this is all a part of the exercise.
The question for you to try to answer is this:
"What evidence would be sufficient to persuade you that God does not exist?"
22 Mar 07
OK, so it's been 2 weeks now, and not one believer has been able to give a single piece of evidence which would persuade them that God does not exist.
(KellyJay gave some conditions, but they required his non-existence so do not qualify as evidence)
This is no surprise to me. For a long time I have realised that religious belief is just blind faith and stupidity, and has no basis in reality whatsoever. Thus its believers will never accept anything in reality to dissuade them from their belief.
In short, religious belief is so dangerous because it is not falsifiable.
That is, its believers will always take evidence and twist the evidence to fit the theory and not allow evidence to shape the theory.
Ultimately then, religion is an empty concept.
It has no explanatory powers whatsoever. It cannot predict future events. Rather, events are molded to fit the theory.
See the philosophy of this guy to understand the importance of falsifiability:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Popper
22 Mar 07
1 edit
Originally posted by howardgeeWhat evidence you are talking about?
OK, so it's been 2 weeks now, and not one believer has been able to give a single piece of evidence which would persuade them that God does not exist.
(KellyJay gave some conditions, but they required his non-existence so do not qualify as evidence)
This is no surprise to me. For a long time I have realised that religious belief is just blind faith an ...[text shortened]... guy to understand the importance of falsifiability:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Popper
If your mind can't see the GOD existance then what evidence you search for for enything.
The only way I will belive that GOD doesn't exist if there were no universe, humans, animals, and every thing else.
If you can prove to me they don't exist then you win.
22 Mar 07
1 edit
Originally posted by ahosyney"It is known that there are an infinite number of worlds, simply because there is an infinite amount of space for them to be in. However, not every one of them is inhabited. Therefore, there must be a finite number of inhabited worlds. Any finite number divided by infinity is as near to nothing as makes no odds, so the average population of all the planets in the Universe can be said to be zero. From this it follows that the population of the whole Universe is also zero, and that any people you may meet from time to time are merely the products of a deranged imagination."
What evidence you are talking about?
If your mind can't see the GOD existance then what evidence you search for for enything.
The only way I will belive that GOD doesn't exist if there were no universe, humans, animals, and every thing else.
If you can prove to me they don't exist then you win.
Q.E.D.
And if you don't agree, well,
"The Guide is definitive. Reality is often inaccurate."
22 Mar 07
Originally posted by GregMso what does that should mean exactly?
"It is known that there are an infinite number of worlds, simply because there is an infinite amount of space for them to be in. However, not every one of them is inhabited. Therefore, there must be a finite number of inhabited worlds. Any finite number divided by infinity is as near to nothing as makes no odds, so the average population of all the planets in ...[text shortened]...
And if you don't agree, well,
"The Guide is definitive. Reality is often inaccurate."
22 Mar 07
Originally posted by ahosyneyI win anyway, as you have just proved your stupidity and blind faith.
What evidence you are talking about?
If your mind can't see the GOD existance then what evidence you search for for enything.
The only way I will belive that GOD doesn't exist if there were no universe, humans, animals, and every thing else.
If you can prove to me they don't exist then you win.
22 Mar 07
1 edit
Originally posted by howardgeeYou called me stupid although you don't know me and don't know what I belive and how I do belive it it. This is the first sign of stupidity.
I win anyway, as you have just proved your stupidity and blind faith.
Saying I have a blind faith is your problem alone. I will no tell you why I belive that GOD exist, simply because the question is very stupid, and the answer is there if you really care. I will ask you to show me the unblind faith of yours .
EDIT: Can you help yourself and try to remove the word GOD from the english dictionary? The word has no meaning and it shouldn't be there.