A future Pastor and Christian Apologist
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
22-08-2012, 01:26 PM
RE: A future Pastor and Christian Apologist
Quote:There must be something outside of this universe (not in the spatial sense of the word) that caused the universe to come into existence.
How do you know that?

Quote:Because the physical realm could not have caused itself. It did not exist and so it could not have caused anything.
How do you know that?

It's far too time consuming to go through all your posts and ask the same question over and over again, so I won't . The point is you make so many assumptions, when the rest of us accept that we just don't know. Not knowing doesn't explain god. It just means we don't know! It doesn't mean there is no explanation, it just means we don't know the explanation. Making one up is just a waste.

Dammit! Didn't I say I was bailing on this thread?

Just visiting.

-SR
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Stark Raving's post
22-08-2012, 01:28 PM
RE: A future Pastor and Christian Apologist
(21-08-2012 10:59 PM)Logisch Wrote:  Who says that it has to have had a cause? If you go back and say that it had to have a cause and that a being caused it, then we're opening the door to even more questions.

You're still completely ignoring why you seem to think that a creator must be outside space and time and why you think it exists in a place we can't experience. What brings you to such a conclusion? how do you know?

How did that being get here? The generic answer is that "that being always existed" but we don't have any evidence for that either. So that would be an assumption. (unless you have a different explanation, but that's the one I hear 9/10 times)

Your answer is also not the only sound conclusion. There can't be a sound conclusion at this time because we don't have all the answers. If you're bridging gaps with assumptions and philosophy with things we don't yet understand they are still nothing more than assumptions. Philosophy can sound as awesome as you want, it can be filled with pink butterflies and puffy clouds and make you feel totally happy inside, but it doesn't make it true.

We don't even know that the universe that we are in is the only universe.

The philosophical red herring excuse that it's the only sound conclusion is basically saying that nothing else sounds good because we don't understand it, therefore it just makes sense to explain it with something since we don't understand it. Man has filled the gaps with god(s) for centuries for things we don't understand and didn't.

We explained the earth as being flat and sitting on pillars. When the gods got mad they created thunder and lightning. When people died from horrible diseases it was because they did something to anger the gods. These are all things that we now can explain. We know that those things are. We do not have all of the answers to the universe yet, we don't fully understand everything yet. That does not mean that what we do not understand is a god or gods though, since we have no evidence of them in the first place. We are still yet filling in these gaps of things we don't understand with things that "make sense" to us because at least we can explain them away.

It is "philosophically" easier to go through life feeling like you have those answers. Feeling like that "void" you have is filled by something that can be explained by faith, superstition or any other unnatural cause. You hear a noise when you're alone in your house, must have been the ghost of grandma telling you she's watching out for you. Something good happens in life and you were blessed. Go through a struggle or hard time and god is testing you, then things get better and clearly he was setting you up for a life lesson. There's all kinds of things we attribute to "supernatural" cause. We still have no evidence for them.

Things that haven't yet been explained are simply things that haven't yet been explained.

The pleading for everything needing to have a cause is that comfort level we get used to when we're "spiritual" or "religious".... it is easier to go through life if you really feel like some being created this universe, created you and gave you a purpose. What if it isn't? what if that's not the case? (So far there is no evidence to suggest it is the case) it would mean that you weren't created for a purpose, there is no divine plan, there is no god, there is no creator. You are a person, one of billions, a tiny spec in a gigantic universe. This means that you have to give yourself purpose.

A child's world is rocked for a week or two when you tell them that santa doesn't exist. Life is totally different for them now that the mystery of the presents goes away. They realize you were playing tricks on them all along and giving them a story they could enjoy as a kid. Now they realize it doesn't exist. They'll be pissed, maybe sad, angry at you. Eventually they cope with reality and life goes on. Such it is with a god of any kind.

You can talk philosophy all you want, look for all the excuses that you want. At the end of the day there is still no evidence for a god. Explain away the unknown with other unknowns and you can make it sound as reasonable as you want.

The question is: What is more important? What is TRUE? Or what sounds GOOD to you? The truth is not always what you want it to be.

I could make a similar psychological argument and say that you don't want to be held responsible for your actions before a just God who will punish all mankind for our rebellion against, and so you hold to the belief that God doesn't exist by demanding solely naturalistic explanations for the origin of the universe and accepting only empirical evidences. But I am not interested in theorizing why you believe what you believe. I am interested at examining the universe as it is. A full explanation of reality requires use of both science and philosophy, both rationalism and empiricism. I see God or God-like being as being the only plausible explanation for the universe. My conclusions are based on the necessity for an origin of everything within the physical universe that is outside of that universe. The result could not have caused itself. Therefore I believe something caused the universe that can only be discussed on the philosophical level as the physical level is insufficient.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-08-2012, 01:28 PM
RE: A future Pastor and Christian Apologist
(22-08-2012 01:26 PM)Stark Raving Wrote:  
Quote:There must be something outside of this universe (not in the spatial sense of the word) that caused the universe to come into existence.
How do you know that?

Quote:Because the physical realm could not have caused itself. It did not exist and so it could not have caused anything.
How do you know that?

It's far too time consuming to go through all your posts and ask the same question over and over again, so I won't . The point is you make so many assumptions, when the rest of us accept that we just don't know. Not knowing doesn't explain god. It just means we don't know! It doesn't mean there is no explanation, it just means we don't know the explanation. Making one up is just a waste.

Dammit! Didn't I say I was bailing on this thread?

Ignorant is just too fucking annoying to ignore.Dodgy

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-08-2012, 01:29 PM
RE: A future Pastor and Christian Apologist
(22-08-2012 01:26 PM)Stark Raving Wrote:  
Quote:There must be something outside of this universe (not in the spatial sense of the word) that caused the universe to come into existence.
How do you know that?

Quote:Because the physical realm could not have caused itself. It did not exist and so it could not have caused anything.
How do you know that?

It's far too time consuming to go through all your posts and ask the same question over and over again, so I won't . The point is you make so many assumptions, when the rest of us accept that we just don't know. Not knowing doesn't explain god. It just means we don't know! It doesn't mean there is no explanation, it just means we don't know the explanation. Making one up is just a waste.

Dammit! Didn't I say I was bailing on this thread?

dude.. i've been trying to kill this thread to no degree....

Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. -- Voltaire
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ddrew's post
22-08-2012, 01:34 PM
RE: A future Pastor and Christian Apologist
(22-08-2012 01:28 PM)TrueReason Wrote:  
(21-08-2012 10:59 PM)Logisch Wrote:  Who says that it has to have had a cause? If you go back and say that it had to have a cause and that a being caused it, then we're opening the door to even more questions.

You're still completely ignoring why you seem to think that a creator must be outside space and time and why you think it exists in a place we can't experience. What brings you to such a conclusion? how do you know?

How did that being get here? The generic answer is that "that being always existed" but we don't have any evidence for that either. So that would be an assumption. (unless you have a different explanation, but that's the one I hear 9/10 times)

Your answer is also not the only sound conclusion. There can't be a sound conclusion at this time because we don't have all the answers. If you're bridging gaps with assumptions and philosophy with things we don't yet understand they are still nothing more than assumptions. Philosophy can sound as awesome as you want, it can be filled with pink butterflies and puffy clouds and make you feel totally happy inside, but it doesn't make it true.

We don't even know that the universe that we are in is the only universe.

The philosophical red herring excuse that it's the only sound conclusion is basically saying that nothing else sounds good because we don't understand it, therefore it just makes sense to explain it with something since we don't understand it. Man has filled the gaps with god(s) for centuries for things we don't understand and didn't.

We explained the earth as being flat and sitting on pillars. When the gods got mad they created thunder and lightning. When people died from horrible diseases it was because they did something to anger the gods. These are all things that we now can explain. We know that those things are. We do not have all of the answers to the universe yet, we don't fully understand everything yet. That does not mean that what we do not understand is a god or gods though, since we have no evidence of them in the first place. We are still yet filling in these gaps of things we don't understand with things that "make sense" to us because at least we can explain them away.

It is "philosophically" easier to go through life feeling like you have those answers. Feeling like that "void" you have is filled by something that can be explained by faith, superstition or any other unnatural cause. You hear a noise when you're alone in your house, must have been the ghost of grandma telling you she's watching out for you. Something good happens in life and you were blessed. Go through a struggle or hard time and god is testing you, then things get better and clearly he was setting you up for a life lesson. There's all kinds of things we attribute to "supernatural" cause. We still have no evidence for them.

Things that haven't yet been explained are simply things that haven't yet been explained.

The pleading for everything needing to have a cause is that comfort level we get used to when we're "spiritual" or "religious".... it is easier to go through life if you really feel like some being created this universe, created you and gave you a purpose. What if it isn't? what if that's not the case? (So far there is no evidence to suggest it is the case) it would mean that you weren't created for a purpose, there is no divine plan, there is no god, there is no creator. You are a person, one of billions, a tiny spec in a gigantic universe. This means that you have to give yourself purpose.

A child's world is rocked for a week or two when you tell them that santa doesn't exist. Life is totally different for them now that the mystery of the presents goes away. They realize you were playing tricks on them all along and giving them a story they could enjoy as a kid. Now they realize it doesn't exist. They'll be pissed, maybe sad, angry at you. Eventually they cope with reality and life goes on. Such it is with a god of any kind.

You can talk philosophy all you want, look for all the excuses that you want. At the end of the day there is still no evidence for a god. Explain away the unknown with other unknowns and you can make it sound as reasonable as you want.

The question is: What is more important? What is TRUE? Or what sounds GOOD to you? The truth is not always what you want it to be.

I could make a similar psychological argument and say that you don't want to be held responsible for your actions before a just God who will punish all mankind for our rebellion against, and so you hold to the belief that God doesn't exist by demanding solely naturalistic explanations for the origin of the universe and accepting only empirical evidences. But I am not interested in theorizing why you believe what you believe. I am interested at examining the universe as it is. A full explanation of reality requires use of both science and philosophy, both rationalism and empiricism. I see God or God-like being as being the only plausible explanation for the universe. My conclusions are based on the necessity for an origin of everything within the physical universe that is outside of that universe. The result could not have caused itself. Therefore I believe something caused the universe that can only be discussed on the philosophical level as the physical level is insufficient.

You are still assuming there must be a cause. How do you know? And to be clear, that IS a philosophical question. No one here has claimed that philosophy is not an important part of the discussion. But you are refusing to take a philosophical look at knowledge. You just assume things "must" be.

Just visiting.

-SR
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Stark Raving's post
22-08-2012, 01:37 PM
RE: A future Pastor and Christian Apologist
(22-08-2012 01:10 AM)Free Thought Wrote:  You know what? When I started reading this thread, it was 16 pages... now who knows what it'll be when I'm finished, (hopefully still 19).

When (somebody, can't remember who first) brought up homosexuality I had a thought "This guy is going to say 'it's bad" or something like that... I was more or less correct in that guess. SO I have a question for you Mr. TrueReason.

You have made it abundantly clear that you dislike the act(s) of homosexuality and probably find them condemnable, due it their nature as a "sin", but have little to no problem with homosexuals themselves, so long as then do not partake in said acts, correct?

That made me wonder; "Does this guy also condemn people who have (and act on) a confectionery affinity toward shellfish?"

So that is ONE of the many questions I had, please go a head and riddle me this my fair automaton; Is eating shellfish a condemnable act?

(I know, it might seem pointlessly semantic but who the hell cares, I'm here now and I'm here for the lulz damnit!)

No. That was ceremonial law given to the historical people of Israel at that particular place and time. Within levitical law you will civil, ceremonial, and moral laws. Of the three, only moral laws apply to today, things like "Thou shalt not murder" etc. etc. An example of a civil law would be a law prescribing the punishment for murder. If you're interested in find out more about this, I would advise purchasing some books on Biblical hermeneutics. If anything it will at least aid you in making more precise arguments against Christianity, and you will learn more behind one of the most influential religious texts in all of history.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-08-2012, 01:39 PM
RE: A future Pastor and Christian Apologist
(22-08-2012 01:28 PM)TrueReason Wrote:  I could make a similar psychological argument and say that you don't want to be held responsible for your actions before a just God who will punish all mankind for our rebellion against, and so you hold to the belief that God doesn't exist by demanding solely naturalistic explanations for the origin of the universe and accepting only empirical evidences. But I am not interested in theorizing why you believe what you believe. I am interested at examining the universe as it is. A full explanation of reality requires use of both science and philosophy, both rationalism and empiricism. I see God or God-like being as being the only plausible explanation for the universe. My conclusions are based on the necessity for an origin of everything within the physical universe that is outside of that universe. The result could not have caused itself. Therefore I believe something caused the universe that can only be discussed on the philosophical level as the physical level is insufficient.

Philosophers... always so eager to get away from the dirty, contradicting physical world Dodgy
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
22-08-2012, 01:44 PM
RE: A future Pastor and Christian Apologist
The bible is, without a doubt, among history's most influential texts. No denying that. No argument here.


My question is, how has that influence affected humanity?


Mien Kampf was also a very influential book. (godwins law has already been invoked, so I'm all good Wink )

Just visiting.

-SR
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-08-2012, 01:50 PM
RE: A future Pastor and Christian Apologist
(22-08-2012 06:21 AM)Hafnof Wrote:  
(21-08-2012 02:50 PM)TrueReason Wrote:  Killing a massive amount of INNOCENT people is wrong. The nations God commanded to be destroyed in the Old Testament was due to the evil in their midst.
A bit shouty there. Did I touch a nerve?

(21-08-2012 02:50 PM)TrueReason Wrote:  God will one day punish all who have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. The nations of the OT we justly punished, and they honestly received a punishment that you , I , and everybody deserves.

So again, yes genocide is wrong because it is the murder of innocent people. As humans, we do not possess the authority to take life. God is the ultimate judge and therefore his punishment of those nations was justifiable.

So... do you believe that every person killed under the command of God was evil? For example, were the killed babies evil? Were the 5 year olds evil? Were the 8 year olds? The 11 year olds?

Were there no adults not consumed with evildoing? Were there no little old ladies free from evildoing?

(21-08-2012 02:50 PM)TrueReason Wrote:  I don't expect you accept this response, but that is the truth if God exists.

If God doesn't exist, then I don't know how I could say genocide is wrong.

Read back over your post. I think you'll find it's not me who has a problem saying genocide is wrong. If I read you right then genocide and murder are only wrong if the victim is innocent. What the Lord giveth the Lord taketh away and all that.

So if you were confident that the voice in your head is God's, would you comfortable with the morality of following his command to murder and to commit genocide?
I apologize if my caps of innocent was taken as shouty, I was merely doing it to emphasize the word.
I believe everyone, including myself, are worthy of God's wrath, so yes, man, woman, and child are worthy of destruction. Thankfully, God has a provided a way of salvation through Jesus Christ.

God is the ultimate moral authority. He is the ultimate judge. While it is His right and responsibility to punish, I am a sinner amongst sinners and so I do not have the right to make such punishment out of my own will.

As for God's voice being in my head, I don't believe that at all. God's revelation is extremely rare, and probably wouldn't be a "voice in my head." God's word and will to mankind can be found in the Scriptures. And before you try to say that God orders us to kill people in the Old Testament, you must understand that most of the OT is descriptive not prescriptive. It merely describes how God acted in human history at certain times, and it should not be taken as a lease to destroy non-believers at will. I hope that answers your question.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-08-2012, 01:53 PM
RE: A future Pastor and Christian Apologist
(22-08-2012 06:28 AM)DLJ Wrote:  Hi TR.
I know you still have lots of catching up to do with such a bombardment of so many pages of truths and reasons but here's another question for you...

What value to society will your future role afford?

It will bring a diversity of thought to the table and spur intellectual reflection in the areas of science, philosophy, and religion. According to my belief, it will also bring the hope of salvation and love of Christ to all people.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: