Welcome to Cutting Edge. Guests can see and read the contents of most of the boards on this forum but need to become members to read all of them.

Members may post messages and start threads, but it is essential that they read our posting rules and advice before doing so. If you have any immediate questions or queries, please post them on the suggestions board.

After posting at least ten messages, members are able to contact each other and the staff through our personal messaging system.

This forum is administrated by Ivan and moonbeam and moderated by astradt1.

Thank you for visiting Cutting Edge.

Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Page 3 of 25 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 14 ... 25  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by ROB on Thu Feb 21, 2013 4:00 pm

First topic message reminder :

Shirina wrote:
Humans are easily fooled.

Perhaps that’s why atheism is growing in spite of its illogicalness.

To prove that an omniscient being does not exist, one must be an omniscient being. Only God can prove God’s existence, and only God can prove God’s nonexistence; thus, if God’s nonexistence is ever proven, God will have proven God’s own nonexistence.


Last edited by RockOnBrother on Wed May 01, 2013 2:05 am; edited 1 time in total
avatar
ROB
Guest


Back to top Go down


Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by snowyflake on Thu Mar 21, 2013 5:58 am

Rock, I have posted several websites that show evidence of macro-evolution. Did you even look at them?

snowyflake

Posts : 1221
Join date : 2011-10-07

Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by egginbonce on Thu Mar 21, 2013 7:24 am

Tosh wrote:So, if either of our two defenders of the faith would like to detail their scientific objections to macro evolution, then please proceed. I wish to hear the science behind their claim it has not been proven.

If not, we will consider it an evidence based fact, and join every science academy and education system in the modern world.


My objection, is not to evolutoion, but to fuzzy thinking(And bad spelling!)...............the point is academic as to the status of evolution or creationism or Pastafarianism........the concept of proof is whats at stake here,and where thats concerned,it has long been an (the?) issue in philosophy, that proof is a rather moveable feast,as is 'truth'.....................deducing a thing from overwhelming,(in the case of evolution)evidence, isnt the same as knowing it to be true;the creationists and religious freaks also miss this point(with knobs on!!),and because many of their asertions are so counter-logical(we've been indocrinated in the west, with waht we proudly call logic,and its infallibility) ,we are much less tolerant with their assumptions than with the many assumptions hidden inside 'logical thought'...................Mr Spock exemplifies our hidden ansd instinctive antipathy to logic;also, our clinging to it in out insecurity that we may not be altogether in control of things(anythhing?).............
avatar
egginbonce

Posts : 99
Join date : 2013-03-18
Location : UK

Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by Guest on Thu Mar 21, 2013 8:20 am

.


Last edited by RockOnBrother on Sun Apr 21, 2013 1:38 am; edited 1 time in total
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by Tosh on Thu Mar 21, 2013 8:29 am

I asked for any scientific objections to macro-evolution and all I get is an unsupported and unscientific denial of macro evolution, sorry try again.

Macro-evolution is unproven.

There is evidence that proves the theory, its all about the evidence.


No proof exists that unproven macro-evolution is “micro-evolution over a long period of time.

There is evidence, and I am awaiting your scientific objections to this evidence.














avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by Tosh on Thu Mar 21, 2013 8:33 am

Evidence is not proof. I have evidence that some of my West African ancestors were Yoruba, bot, as there are no records, I have no proof.

Evidence tests the theory, to prove in science is to test, if you have nothing to test the theory with then you have no evidence, its very simple.

avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by Tosh on Thu Mar 21, 2013 8:38 am

he concept of proof is whats at stake here,and where thats concerned,it has long been an (the?) issue in philosophy, that proof is a rather moveable feast,as is 'truth'.....................deducing a thing from overwhelming,(in the case of evolution)evidence, isnt the same as knowing it to be true;

Science is not interested in philosophical truths, it is interested in testing evidence and testing any conclusion or deduction against the evidence. Science accepts the probable nature of knowledge precisely because future evidence may alter the deduction.
avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by Guest on Thu Mar 21, 2013 8:40 am

.


Last edited by RockOnBrother on Wed May 01, 2013 2:09 am; edited 2 times in total
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by Tosh on Thu Mar 21, 2013 12:11 pm

Evidence is not proof.



Never said it was.

Still waiting for your scientific objections.


Last edited by Tosh on Thu Mar 21, 2013 12:57 pm; edited 1 time in total
avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by Tosh on Thu Mar 21, 2013 12:53 pm

Proofs exist only in mathematics and logic, not in science. Mathematics and logic are both closed, self-contained systems of propositions, whereas science is empirical and deals with nature as it exists. The primary criterion and standard of evaluation of scientific theory is evidence, not proof. All else equal (such as internal logical consistency and parsimony), scientists prefer theories for which there is more and better evidence to theories for which there is less and worse evidence. Proofs are not the currency of science.
Proofs have two features that do not exist in science: They are final, and they are binary. Once a theorem is proven, it will forever be true and there will be nothing in the future that will threaten its status as a proven theorem (unless a flaw is discovered in the proof). Apart from a discovery of an error, a proven theorem will forever and always be a proven theorem.
In contrast, all scientific knowledge is tentative and provisional, and nothing is final. There is no such thing as final proven knowledge in science. The currently accepted theory of a phenomenon is simply the best explanation for it among all available alternatives. Its status as the accepted theory is contingent on what other theories are available and might suddenly change tomorrow if there appears a better theory or new evidence that might challenge the accepted theory. No knowledge or theory (which embodies scientific knowledge) is final. That, by the way, is why science is so much fun.
Further, proofs, like pregnancy, are binary; a mathematical proposition is either proven (in which case it becomes a theorem) or not (in which case it remains a conjecture until it is proven). There is nothing in between. A theorem cannot be kind of proven or almost proven. These are the same as unproven.
In contrast, there is no such binary evaluation of scientific theories. Scientific theories are neither absolutely false nor absolutely true. They are always somewhere in between. Some theories are better, more credible, and more accepted than others. There is always more, more credible, and better evidence for some theories than others. It is a matter of more or less, not either/or. For example, experimental evidence is better and more credible than correlational evidence, but even the former cannot prove a theory; it only provides very strong evidence for the theory and against its alternatives.
The knowledge that there is no such thing as a scientific proof should give you a very easy way to tell real scientists from hacks and wannabes. Real scientists never use the words “scientific proofs,” because they know no such thing exists. Anyone who uses the words “proof,” “prove” and “proven” in their discussion of science is not a real scientist.
The creationists and other critics of evolution are absolutely correct when they point out that evolution is “just a theory” and it is not “proven.” What they neglect to mention is that everything in science is just a theory and is never proven. Unlike the Prime Number Theorem, which will absolutely and forever be true, it is still possible, albeit very, very, very, very, very unlikely, that the theory of evolution by natural and sexual selection may one day turn out to be false. But then again, it is also possible, albeit very, very, very, very, very unlikely, that monkeys will fly out of my ass tomorrow. In my judgment, both events are about equally likely.

So much for evolution is not proven, now can we get back to the debate concerning the evidence that supports the theory, still awaiting scientific objections.
avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by Shirina on Thu Mar 21, 2013 2:49 pm

Evidence is not proof.

Evidence is what determines proof. There's no such thing as proof all by itself because proof is subjective - as well as evidence. Yet, if there is enough evidence, there is also proof.

There's not a hard fact in the world that I cannot challenge and claim there is no proof for - just evidence.
avatar
Shirina
Former Administrator

Posts : 2232
Join date : 2011-10-07
Location : Right behind you. Boo!

Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by Guest on Thu Mar 21, 2013 3:20 pm

.


Last edited by RockOnBrother on Sun Apr 21, 2013 1:39 am; edited 1 time in total
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by Shirina on Thu Mar 21, 2013 5:08 pm

I have proof of my grandparents’ birth in the places at which they were born. Paperwork, verbal testimony, all verify that each was indeed born in the places at which they were born.

Paperwork and verbal testimony are only proof because you accept it as such. I could easily say that the paperwork is a forgery and the testimonials are lies. I could go at this all day. It is also where confirmation bias comes into play. If I want to believe that your grandparents were NOT born in those places, I can simply doubt your evidence and proof ad infinitum.
avatar
Shirina
Former Administrator

Posts : 2232
Join date : 2011-10-07
Location : Right behind you. Boo!

Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by Tosh on Thu Mar 21, 2013 5:16 pm

I have proof of my grandparents’ birth in the places at which they were born. Paperwork, verbal testimony, all verify that each was indeed born in the places at which they were born.

You have evidence that proves, you do not have proof, proof is absolute, you are wrong again.

You just keep evading the real debate, give us your scientific objections instead of playing imbecilic semantic games...LMAO.

avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by Tosh on Thu Mar 21, 2013 5:18 pm

Paperwork and verbal testimony are only proof because you accept it as such. I could easily say that the paperwork is a forgery and the testimonials are lies. I could go at this all day. It is also where confirmation bias comes into play. If I want to believe that your grandparents were NOT born in those places, I can simply doubt your evidence and proof ad infinitum.

HE STATES EVIDENCE IS NOT PROOF THEN SUBSTITUTES PROOF FOR EVIDENCE, THE GUY IS BORDERING ON CERTIFIABLE.
avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by pilgrim47 on Thu Mar 21, 2013 5:37 pm

Still looking for evidence?

pilgrim47

Posts : 2
Join date : 2013-03-13

Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by snowyflake on Thu Mar 21, 2013 6:35 pm

Evidence is as good as proof. When there is enough evidence or overwhelming evidence, in science that is good enough. In a court of law, overwhelming evidence can find someone guilty or not guilty.
avatar
snowyflake

Posts : 1221
Join date : 2011-10-07
Age : 59
Location : England

Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by Tosh on Thu Mar 21, 2013 6:42 pm

in spite of paperwork and testimony,

...which is evidence not proof, you are all over the place, maybe it makes sense in Hebrew.

Anyway lets get back to reality and the crux of the debate, science concludes common ancestry as an evidence based fact, they say nothing about proof only evidence.

Do you disagree with their conclusion and if so, provide your scientific objections.

I know he will never engage in the real debate, he knows he will get hammered.

avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by Guest on Thu Mar 21, 2013 6:58 pm

.


Last edited by RockOnBrother on Sun Apr 21, 2013 1:42 am; edited 1 time in total
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by snowyflake on Thu Mar 21, 2013 7:11 pm

How many people are in jail in the great state of Texas, Rock? 30 people is probably low compared to the number of rightfully convicted criminals. And perhaps the evidence was circumstantial, the defense lawyers were crap or the men were illiterate, mentally ill, poor or otherwise unable to help in their own defense. Evidence, overwhelming or otherwise, is what convicted those men and then science saved them! Smile


avatar
snowyflake

Posts : 1221
Join date : 2011-10-07
Age : 59
Location : England

Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by egginbonce on Thu Mar 21, 2013 7:30 pm

Tosh wrote:
he concept of proof is whats at stake here,and where thats concerned,it has long been an (the?) issue in philosophy, that proof is a rather moveable feast,as is 'truth'.....................deducing a thing from overwhelming,(in the case of evolution)evidence, isnt the same as knowing it to be true;

Science is not interested in philosophical truths, it is interested in testing evidence and testing any conclusion or deduction against the evidence. Science accepts the probable nature of knowledge precisely because future evidence may alter the deduction.

science(or to be exact, the method of analysis which we believe in( 'the scientific method'), as its known) was originally indistinguishable from art and religion and philosophy(Leonardo?),and used whatever means came to hand to 'discover truth'.............Im not sure that truth(Truth?), can be divided into different types of truth,scientific or philosophical..........we're into semantics at this point, I believe,BTW............
Even Pilate (whose existence is apocryphal),apparently was unsure as to the nature of Truth........('what is truth-is truth unchanging law?;we both have truths-is mine the same as yours?') (form jesus christ superstar...),and clearly had no truck with Truth, but discussed truths,the diference being obvious(I hope!).
So for 'science', use 'western philosophy' and ti'll be a step closer to truth...............what is the glue that sticks the petals onto a flower?...........if you could market THAT, I would be mor e impressed with science as a means to an answer, rather than merely a way of providing us with fridges, cars, computers, etc............................
avatar
egginbonce

Posts : 99
Join date : 2013-03-18
Location : UK

Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by Guest on Thu Mar 21, 2013 7:33 pm

.


Last edited by RockOnBrother on Sun Apr 21, 2013 1:44 am; edited 1 time in total
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by egginbonce on Thu Mar 21, 2013 7:39 pm

Do you know, Tosh..............I think wher e we're going with this, is that I have reservations about both science AND religion, whereas you think that science is able to give you the answers that religion cant ......but.......an answer which is just in words and numbers, however cleverly they are put together, doesnt hit the spot....................When youre bonking your favorite wife/GFwhatever, youre not stringing words together or doing sums- youre lost in the bliss of the moment,and wouldnt give a fart for all the fancy theorems in the world,even if they had Isaac Newtons name attached to them!
Now, as they say........'thats what im talking about!'
avatar
egginbonce

Posts : 99
Join date : 2013-03-18
Location : UK

Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by snowyflake on Thu Mar 21, 2013 7:41 pm

When youre bonking your favorite wife/GFwhatever,

Mad
avatar
snowyflake

Posts : 1221
Join date : 2011-10-07
Age : 59
Location : England

Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by oftenwrong on Thu Mar 21, 2013 7:49 pm

Pass the smelling-salts.
avatar
oftenwrong
Sage

Posts : 12039
Join date : 2011-10-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by Tosh on Thu Mar 21, 2013 8:12 pm

Do you know, Tosh..............I think wher e we're going with this, is that I have reservations about both science AND religion, whereas you think that science is able to give you the answers that religion cant ......but.......an answer which is just in words and numbers, however cleverly they are put together, doesnt hit the spot....................When youre bonking your favorite wife/GFwhatever, youre not stringing words together or doing sums- youre lost in the bliss of the moment,and wouldnt give a fart for all the fancy theorems in the world,even if they had Isaac Newtons name attached to them!

Egg,

I haven't a clue what you are alluding to, I accept reality, I accept reality is based on probability, I accept knowledge is subject to revision, my mind is open to all possibilities.

I do not accept Deities or ghosts or psychics or any other belief we inherited from our dumb ass ancestors because there is not one iota of supporting evidence, and these claims contradict all evidence.

Forget evidence, give me one reason why I should even consider these supernatural phenomena exist, it doesn't even have to be scientific just reasonable.






Last edited by Tosh on Thu Mar 21, 2013 8:18 pm; edited 1 time in total
avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by Tosh on Thu Mar 21, 2013 8:17 pm

science(or to be exact, the method of analysis which we believe in( 'the scientific method'), as its known) was originally indistinguishable from art and religion and philosophy(Leonardo?),and used whatever means came to hand to 'discover truth'.............Im not sure that truth(Truth?), can be divided into different types of truth,scientific or philosophical..........we're into semantics at this point, I believe,BTW............

We live in a physical cause and effect deterministic universe and metaphysics is dead, the reason it took us so long to obtain knowledge was precisely because religion and to some extent philosophy obstructed science. Philosophy is built on logic and logic without evidence is just formalised lies.
avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by Tosh on Thu Mar 21, 2013 8:23 pm

Thirty wrongfully uncharged beasts might yet roam throughout Dallas County Texas and beyond because of evidence that was adjudged proof in a Texas criminal court of law. How could that be? Since The Innocence Project hooked up with Dallas County District Attorney Craig Watkins shortly after Watkins’ election in 2006, thirty (30) wrongfully convicted men, each of whom was proven guilty by proof beyond a reasonable doubt, have been DNA-exonerated, have had their sentences overturned, and have been freed from incarceration, which means that thirty (30) beasts that actually committed the heinous crimes for which the wrongfully convicted were incarcerated have wrongfully roamed free for decades.

So DNA evidence proved they were innocent, the defence rests, get back to Hebrew its easier to bullshit us all.
avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by egginbonce on Thu Mar 21, 2013 8:50 pm

Tosh wrote:
Do you know, Tosh..............I think wher e we're going with this, is that I have reservations about both science AND religion, whereas you think that science is able to give you the answers that religion cant ......but.......an answer which is just in words and numbers, however cleverly they are put together, doesnt hit the spot....................When youre bonking your favorite wife/GFwhatever, youre not stringing words together or doing sums- youre lost in the bliss of the moment,and wouldnt give a fart for all the fancy theorems in the world,even if they had Isaac Newtons name attached to them!

Egg,

I haven't a clue what you are alluding to, I accept reality, I accept reality is based on probability, I accept knowledge is subject to revision, my mind is open to all possibilities.

I do not accept Deities or ghosts or psychics or any other belief we inherited from our dumb ass ancestors because there is not one iota of supporting evidence, and these claims contradict all evidence.

Forget evidence, give me one reason why I should even consider these supernatural phenomena exist, it doesn't even have to be scientific just reasonable.





not trying to persuade you of supernatural things,at all, not trying to persuade u of anything, really, other than accurate thinking...............if you see me put the orange into the box and close the lid, you have no proof at all that it is in there;only faith................... the best you can say, is that it is very likely that it is in there, based on the evidence available to you; the same goes for the big bang, evolution;, jesus and all the saints and the devil too,are even less likely than the orange...............(much less.................... Surprised )
avatar
egginbonce

Posts : 99
Join date : 2013-03-18
Location : UK

Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by Tosh on Thu Mar 21, 2013 9:06 pm

not trying to persuade you of supernatural things,at all, not trying to persuade u of anything, really, other than accurate thinking...............if you see me put the orange into the box and close the lid, you have no proof at all that it is in there;only faith................... the best you can say, is that it is very likely that it is in there, based on the evidence available to you; the same goes for the big bang, evolution;, jesus and all the saints and the devil too,are even less likely than the orange...............(much less.................... Surprised )

Look I am about ready to explode if I read one more diatribe about fridge lights, cats and oranges in boxes, what is freakin wrong with constructing reality from the very likely, it freakin works ?

Do you know how many scientific theories have been found to be completely false since the modern scientific method ?

NONE...ZIP...NADA...ZERO, new evidence and methods simply refine the existing theory, my point is this, everything has to be wrong to accommodate the supernatural, you cannot just squeeze voodoo into evolution when no one is looking.
avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by Tosh on Thu Mar 21, 2013 9:10 pm

Physics begat Chemistry and Chemistry begat Biology, now where would you like to put the non-physical in this symmetry ?

Every bit of supernatural guff concerns one universal theme, it denies finiteness, it denies death of consciousness, our survival genes effect our psyche, we are hard wired to deny death and seek immortality.
avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by snowyflake on Thu Mar 21, 2013 9:33 pm

Right if you are going to use Shrodinger's orange for pete's sakes, then I can say if I see you put the orange in the box, if I lift the lid and see the orange inside the box, I can reasonably expect the orange to still be inside the box when I lift the lid again. Barring any magicians tricks, the orange will still be inside the box. That's not faith, that's reasoning.


Last edited by snowyflake on Thu Mar 21, 2013 9:46 pm; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : vehement fingers :))
avatar
snowyflake

Posts : 1221
Join date : 2011-10-07
Age : 59
Location : England

Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by Tosh on Thu Mar 21, 2013 9:38 pm

Let us for arguments sake agree with Texas, and accept Genesis 1.1 mirrors the Big Bang theory, is this really evidence that only God could have discerned this in the bronze age ?

In reality there are only two options, beginning or no beginning, every model in nature has a beginning, and all living things are born (created). It does not need much lateral thinking to see where they got the idea of a creator and a beginning from.

If Genesis had mentioned genetic variation, I would be on my knees.
avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by Tosh on Thu Mar 21, 2013 10:00 pm

The wedge strategy is a political and social action plan authored by the Discovery Institute, the hub of the intelligent design movement. The strategy was put forth in a Discovery Institute manifesto known as the Wedge Document,[1] which describes a broad social, political, and academic agenda whose ultimate goal is to defeat materialism, naturalism, evolution, and "reverse the stifling materialist world view and replace it with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions."[2] The strategy also aims to affirm God's reality.[3] Its goal is to change American culture by shaping public policy to reflect conservative Christian, namely evangelical Protestant, values.[4] The wedge metaphor is attributed to Phillip E. Johnson and depicts a metal wedge splitting a log to represent an aggressive public relations program to create an opening for the supernatural in the public’s understanding of science.[5]

Intelligent design is the religious[6] belief that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not a naturalistic process such as natural selection. Implicit in the intelligent design doctrine is a redefining of science and how it is conducted (see theistic science). Wedge strategy proponents are opposed to materialism,[7][8][9] naturalism,[8][10] and evolution,[11][12][13][14] and have made the removal of each from how science is conducted and taught an explicit goal.[15][16] The strategy was originally brought to the public's attention when the Wedge Document was leaked on the Web. The Wedge strategy forms the governing basis of a wide range of Discovery Institute intelligent design campaigns.

These vermin are more dangerous than Al Qaeda in my opinion.
avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by Tosh on Thu Mar 21, 2013 10:09 pm

[quote]
Theistic science, also referred to as theistic realism,[1] is the viewpoint that methodological naturalism should be replaced by a philosophy of science that is informed by supernatural revelation,[2] which would allow occasional supernatural explanations particularly in topics that impact theology; as for example evolution.[3] Supporters of this viewpoint include intelligent design creationism proponents J. P. Moreland, Alvin Plantinga, Stephen C. Meyer[4][5] and Phillip E. Johnson.[1][6][/q

According to Johnson, true knowledge begins with the acknowledgment of God as creator of the universe, the unifying characteristic of which is that it was created by God. Theistic realism relies on a concept of God which involves that He is real, personal, and acting in the world through mechanistic creationism.

Not very scientific just accepting God as evidence based knowledge.
avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by boatlady on Thu Mar 21, 2013 10:16 pm

Isn't it true though, that all 'knowledge' is only provisional? (i.e. we can only 'know' something until further evidence comes along to prove our 'knowledge to be partial or wrong)?
avatar
boatlady
Former Moderator

Posts : 3806
Join date : 2012-08-24
Location : Norfolk

Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by oftenwrong on Thu Mar 21, 2013 11:06 pm

If it walks like a duck and it looks like a duck and it quacks like a duck you KNOW it's a duck.

Over to the grownups ....
avatar
oftenwrong
Sage

Posts : 12039
Join date : 2011-10-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by Tosh on Thu Mar 21, 2013 11:30 pm

Isn't it true though, that all 'knowledge' is only provisional? (i.e. we can only 'know' something until further evidence comes along to prove our 'knowledge to be partial or wrong)?

Yep, you can open your fridge in the dark to fetch an orange, only to find a cat in a box who asks you for a light in Hebrew.

We may not know every single thing about evolution but there is nothing supernatural about our closest ancestor, unless you think a chimp learning sign language is evidence of some psychic phenomena or quantum interference from another freakin dimension.
avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by Tosh on Thu Mar 21, 2013 11:42 pm

The briefest examination of a true feral child screams we are just social primates with an evolved potential for increased awareness, a potential only reached if the environment demands it.

A real life Tarzan would be in a zoo happily catching peanuts hanging upside down.
avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by egginbonce on Thu Mar 21, 2013 11:51 pm

Do you know how many scientific theories have been found to be completely false since the modern scientific method ?

To say that a cow is a 4-sided figure with a leg in each corner is inarguably correct, but a cow is also so much more than that;the science is correct,as far as it goes
avatar
egginbonce

Posts : 99
Join date : 2013-03-18
Location : UK

Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by Tosh on Fri Mar 22, 2013 12:05 am

To say that a cow is a 4-sided figure with a leg in each corner is inarguably correct, but a cow is also so much more than that;the science is correct,as far as it goes

I know the chocolate I am eating is but a collection of chemicals, but it still tastes good and it sure tastes like chocolate.

I do not believe a rational mind builds their worldview on the premise everything is possible, in reality its not, a god cannot create a rock too heavy to lift.

Philosophy died with the arrival of real science.
avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by tlttf on Fri Mar 22, 2013 7:54 am

Universe Older Than Previously Thought

March 21, 2013: Europe's Planck spacecraft has obtained the most accurate and detailed map ever made of the oldest light in the universe. The map results suggest the universe is expanding more slowly than scientists thought, and is 13.8 billion years old, 100 million years older than previous estimates. The data also show there is less dark energy and more matter in the universe than previously known.

http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2013/21mar_cmb/

tlttf
Banned

Posts : 1029
Join date : 2011-10-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Evidence for the existence of God (Part 2)

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 3 of 25 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 14 ... 25  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum