Poll: How do we get them to see the truth?
This poll is closed.
Peacefull reasoning 69.23% 9 69.23%
Full attack of facts 30.77% 4 30.77%
Total 13 votes 100%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

Belief vs Facts in the programed religious mind.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
11-06-2016, 04:57 AM
RE: Belief vs Facts in the programed religious mind.
(10-06-2016 08:50 PM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  
(10-06-2016 08:45 PM)CDF47 Wrote:  There are many prophecies in the Bible, thousands. They predict the future with astounding precision.

No, they don't.


failed prophecy


I do not have time to review, analyze, study, and respond to 236, which would take days for me to do, but I looked at some and they are easily explainable.

Like number 1. But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die."
God says that if Adam eats from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, then the day that he does so, he will die. But later Adam eats the forbidden fruit (3:6) and yet lives for another 930 years

Adam had eternal life in the Garden but ate from the fruit which led to the fall of man and death as promised. His death came years later but it came. Now all his descendants also die due to this fall.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-06-2016, 05:00 AM
RE: Belief vs Facts in the programed religious mind.
(10-06-2016 08:51 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(10-06-2016 08:27 PM)CDF47 Wrote:  I've asked a number of posters to explain how the DNA code to molecular machine construction works in a natural sense and no one provided any detail into the process. There is no way this is just some random process.

No one has claimed it is a random process - that is your straw man assertion.
Natural selection is not random.

Quote:I am familiar with all those scientists and watched many videos from them and watched their debates and did some reading on them. Even Dawkins, when asked where the information bearing properties of DNA come from, had to concede and say maybe we were seeded here by aliens. This occurs near the end of the video below:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5EPymcWp-g

That is not what he is saying. That is, what he is saying is not an answer to the question you are asking.

It is one possible answer to the question of where life began, that is all.

Not trying straw man. I despise that tactic. Creation of molecular machines are either happening by design or just dumb luck random chance. Those are the only two options. Call it what you want; random, natural, materialistic means, I don't care, but those are the only two options for this universe and everything in it.

He did not have an answer for where the information bearing properties came from and did not want to look naive so he said maybe we were seeded here by aliens since it is so obvious that this information came from intelligence.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-06-2016, 05:04 AM
RE: Belief vs Facts in the programed religious mind.
(10-06-2016 09:06 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(10-06-2016 08:46 PM)CDF47 Wrote:  Natural/random = Tomato/Tomahto

I was discussing science until I was asked numerous theological questions by others. I absolutely did not initiate the theological discussions. You are making false accusations.

Natural =/= random

Random = no discernible pattern

Natural processes can be random, non-random, or chaotic

Tired ass religious straw men Drinking Beverage

You seriously need to educate yourself on the basics of science and common words within science (like random and natural)

As I stated above, I despise the straw man tactic. I despise all manipulative tactics in debate. I despise deceit and lying. I love the truth and to truthfully discuss things.

I say "random" because the universe and everything in it occurred either by design from intelligence or from pure random chance. No word games, that is just how it is. One of the other occurred and it is crystal clear that the universe and living systems are designed.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-06-2016, 05:40 AM
RE: Belief vs Facts in the programed religious mind.
(11-06-2016 05:04 AM)CDF47 Wrote:  
(10-06-2016 09:06 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Natural =/= random

Random = no discernible pattern

Natural processes can be random, non-random, or chaotic

Tired ass religious straw men Drinking Beverage

You seriously need to educate yourself on the basics of science and common words within science (like random and natural)

As I stated above, I despise the straw man tactic. I despise all manipulative tactics in debate. I despise deceit and lying. I love the truth and to truthfully discuss things.

I say "random" because the universe and everything in it occurred either by design from intelligence or from pure random chance. No word games, that is just how it is. One of the other occurred and it is crystal clear that the universe and living systems are designed.

Living systems became increasingly complex by the process of evolution. It is not random, you're constantly confusing a non-random process with a god.

When it's pointed out that non-random process also will generate things like mutations in viruses to resist vaccinations, you switched and said that was because sin entered the world.

You change from god to sin being the prime mover in regards to biochemistry.

You are extremely dishonest, and extremely biased, you tell your little fantasy creationist story despite the quite thorough debunking you have received.

You are convincing no one of your silly magical belief system, even as you become very specific as to which god.

You are doing nothing more than pointing to a natural process and saying goddidit.

You might as well be pointing to sunsets or clouds and saying goddidit.

You are fooling no one but yourself, all you are doing is putting on a display of arguments from ignorance and special pleading.

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheInquisition's post
11-06-2016, 05:45 AM
RE: Belief vs Facts in the programed religious mind.
(11-06-2016 05:04 AM)CDF47 Wrote:  
(10-06-2016 09:06 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Natural =/= random

Random = no discernible pattern

Natural processes can be random, non-random, or chaotic

Tired ass religious straw men Drinking Beverage

You seriously need to educate yourself on the basics of science and common words within science (like random and natural)

As I stated above, I despise the straw man tactic. I despise all manipulative tactics in debate. I despise deceit and lying. I love the truth and to truthfully discuss things.

I say "random" because the universe and everything in it occurred either by design from intelligence or from pure random chance. No word games, that is just how it is. One of the other occurred and it is crystal clear that the universe and living systems are designed.

Redefining a word to mean what you want it to mean and then assigning it to your opponent's argument to debate against, is a straw man. You say you despise the tactic, but you keep doing it.

Abiogenesis and evolution =/= not random

Chemistry =/= random

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like TheBeardedDude's post
11-06-2016, 05:51 AM
RE: Belief vs Facts in the programed religious mind.
(10-06-2016 09:12 PM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  It's really very simple, CDF. Chemicals (all of them, including DNA) react based on their shape, their structure. Certain electrons will be attracted to others, and influenced by the sum total "cloud" within their reach. That's why water, for instance, bends at an angle to make the molecule look like Mickey Mouse, when drawn, instead of a straight line. Atomic Theory tells us why atoms react as they do, what shapes they will take, and how those shapes will cause them to interact. (This is a very oversimplified summary, but you get the gist.)

The articles to which I referred you earlier are about researchers who have shown that there are certain structures that result in the precursor molecules that lead to the chemistry of life, that the precursors are found throughout nature (including space!) and that those precursors can be made to interact in predictable ways in conditions that are similar to those found on the rocks near ocean-floor geothermal vents. They have recently (as in the article) shown the mechanisms by which the molecules could link together, based on nothing more than shapes, to form a basis for life as we know it.

When you say "if I shake a jar full of parts", you're showing us that you have no idea how chemistry works. Metal bits don't naturally form together to make larger bits, but individual atoms do exactly that: they make molecules. A better analogy would be to say that if you add a bunch of chemicals into a flask and shake it, you get a product that's different from the chemicals you put in-- which is why I alluded to the manufacture of aspirin. If you put in the right chemicals, at the right temperature, and in the right conditions, you get the same result every time-- that's what chemistry *is*. It's how we make nearly every chemical substance used today, from medicines to plastics to glue, and so on.

The "information-bearing" (which is still misleading) element of the DNA is an acquired trait that emerged after the first self-cleaving molecules emerged. All that it took at first was a molecule that could self-replicate, something akin to "Hammerhead RNA", which you can Google if you like. They actually think it's more likely that the first "DNA-like" molecule was something called TNA, based on a simpler sugar found commonly in comets, which you can also Google if you like. [Edit to Add: My point here is that once a self-replicating molecule emerged via natural chemistry, it would self-replicate into a theoretically infinite number of copies of itself... but because no chemical reaction happens perfectly 100% of the time in nature, due to varying conditions, some of those later copies would be different, mutated. As the mutations continued, you'd begin to see more complex forms, since the less-complex forms wouldn't be able to still reproduce and the original represents the "baseline" level of complexity. The only way is up! It was after the origin of the ability to replicate that we would even begin to expect the molecules to "code" for anything other than their own replication. The stuff you're bringing up, about ribosomes and such, would have come much, much later. That's why they're so reluctant to talk to you about it-- if you can't even understand that part, we've nowhere to go from there, in trying to explain how the world works to you!]

Finally, and unrelatedly, I literally laughed out loud when I saw your citation of the "pagan" religions' silly claims, because you are so blind to the silly elements in your own religion. Your religion believes in man made magically out of clay, talking snakes, trees of knowledge, that there was a time when nothing died, that there was a time when childbirth did not hurt, and that sin has the power to magically corrupt DNA. Frankly, I can't think of anything in pagan mythology that's as silly as what's found in the Bible.

Your knowledge on DNA and these processes is insightful and I have learned some things from you.

However, to say that the extreme complexity we see in living systems today, occurring after 4.5 billion years on earth or 13.8 billion years in this universe came to fruition, without any guiding intelligence or design, is completely and totally non-sensible. The degree of specified complexity we are speaking of makes a 747 jumbo jet look like a joke in comparison to the operation of living systems. When I see a 747 flying, I quickly infer design, because I have a general idea of the man-hours it took to design and build such a complex machine and the amount of knowledge throughout the millenium which had to be gained to build that machine. Again, that sophisticated machine, the 747 jumbo jet, is a joke in comparison to the specified complexity of living systems.

The religion I follow says that first man was built from dust; as does science. It is now believed that every element of the body, including the iron in the blood, came from star dust from an explosion of a star in a supernova, eons ago. Inanimate to animate; miraculous!

Some of the stories in the Bible are symbolic with hidden meanings; like many of the prophecies. There are keys in the Bible for the symbols which can help in decoding the prophetic meanings. I posted a link to those symbols in one of my posts above. Some stories are parables and are metaphoric and are deliberately that way to teach a lesson, typically. Then the remaining, approximately 90 percent or so, of the Bible is naturalistic.

There are cases of unnatural phenomenon and miracles in the Bible as you point out. Regarding the talking serpent, the serpent was used as the agent of Satan to speak through. It is apparent in the Bible that Satan and his fallen angels can dwell in and speak through both humans and animals at times.

Also regarding miracles, like the hand of God writing on the wall in ancient Babylon, I believe the Lord designed this universe so he is free to manipulate the laws when he decides. That could explain some of the craziness we see in quantum mechanics as well. Subatomic particles react as if they know when they will be observed by a conscious observer. This is possible, I believe, since the Creator can manipulate the universe explaining the signs, wonders, and miracles. In quantum mechanics, particles can also exist in two places at one time entangled and reactive to each other, regardless of distance apart, instantly. Particles behaving as waves or particles depending on observation is also yet unexplained by science. This is how I believe God builds inside this universe from the ground up, instantaneously upon prayer and thought.

The creation stories of the pagan religions are clearly myths. For instance, the Asatro (Norse) mythology is a pagan religion for worship of the sun and the moon represented by Sol and Mani. In the Norse religion, the origin of the cosmos is just a fabricated story, like a fairy tale. It goes like this, before there was soil or sky there was a gaping abyss. The chaos of perfect silence and darkness lay between the homeland of elemental fire, Muspelheim, and the homeland of elemental ice. Frost from the ice and flames collided together and the fire melted the ice. The drops from the melted ice then formed into godlike giants. Ymir was the first born giant which was a hermaphrodite which could produce asexually. When he sweated, more giants were born. As the frost continued to melt, a cow emerged from it and nourished Amir with her milk and she was nourished by salt-licks in the ice. Her licks eventually uncovered Buri, the first of the Aesir tribe of gods. Buri had a son named Bor, who married Bestla. Their half-god, half-giant children were Odin (Santa Clause and chief of the Aesir gods) and his two brothers, Vili and Ve. Odin and his brothers killed Ymir and constructed the world from his corpse. His blood became the oceans, the soil was his skin and muscles, vegetation from his hair, clouds from his brains, and sky from his skull. Four dwarves, corresponding to the four cardinal points, held Ymir's skull aloft above the earth. The gods eventually formed the first man and woman from two tree trunks and built a fence around their dwelling place to protect from giants. This is known as the Norse creation myth and is an obvious fairy tale fable. Other pagan religions tell similar fairy tale stories. They are almost straight out of a child's book.

Buddhism is a religion based on a man who sat under a tree and figured out a way to meditate to reduce caring in an attempt to eliminate suffering.

Only Christianity and Judaism have a scientifically backed creation story. See the following chart for a breakdown of creation in the Bible compared to science; http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/day-age.html .

These are my theological beliefs which I was asked about or which were commented on. I was earlier falsely accused of starting this argument during a scientific conversation so I just want to be clear that I am only responding to your comments, as I was doing before.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-06-2016, 05:53 AM
RE: Belief vs Facts in the programed religious mind.
(10-06-2016 09:25 PM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  
(10-06-2016 08:41 PM)CDF47 Wrote:  Many of the killings, inquistions,..., are from the Roman Catholic church which combined Christianity and paganism. They attacked true Bible Christians and Jews and I believe they even created Islam to do the same.

The catholic church created islam? To attack other christian sects?


Yeah, I'm done.

I said I believe this is the case. See the following:

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/vatica...ican33.htm
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-06-2016, 05:56 AM
RE: Belief vs Facts in the programed religious mind.
(10-06-2016 11:24 PM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  
(09-06-2016 02:38 PM)CDF47 Wrote:  Again, there are only two options, design or random. That's it.

This is incorrect.

I'm going to take a wild stab in the dark and guess that you're an electrical engineer.

Universe and living systems are either designed from intelligence or came from blind dumb luck random chance. Those are the only two options. The universe and living systems are clearly designed.

Nice guess but I am a mechanical engineer and systems engineer.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-06-2016, 06:00 AM
RE: Belief vs Facts in the programed religious mind.
(11-06-2016 05:45 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(11-06-2016 05:04 AM)CDF47 Wrote:  As I stated above, I despise the straw man tactic. I despise all manipulative tactics in debate. I despise deceit and lying. I love the truth and to truthfully discuss things.

I say "random" because the universe and everything in it occurred either by design from intelligence or from pure random chance. No word games, that is just how it is. One of the other occurred and it is crystal clear that the universe and living systems are designed.

Redefining a word to mean what you want it to mean and then assigning it to your opponent's argument to debate against, is a straw man. You say you despise the tactic, but you keep doing it.

Abiogenesis and evolution =/= not random

Chemistry =/= random

What I am saying is either the universe and livings systems are designed or all came about by some dumb luck random chance. Those are the only two options.

The universe and living systems are clearly designed. The processes used in the design do include some evolution and mutation; some change over time, and many other processes but ultimately the entire system is designed and not random.

That is my argument and there is no straw man in that. I despise the straw man tactic, as well as all the other manipulative debate tactics.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-06-2016, 06:10 AM (This post was last modified: 11-06-2016 06:17 AM by TheBeardedDude.)
RE: Belief vs Facts in the programed religious mind.
(11-06-2016 06:00 AM)CDF47 Wrote:  
(11-06-2016 05:45 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Redefining a word to mean what you want it to mean and then assigning it to your opponent's argument to debate against, is a straw man. You say you despise the tactic, but you keep doing it.

Abiogenesis and evolution =/= not random

Chemistry =/= random

What I am saying is either the universe and livings systems are designed or all came about by some dumb luck random chance. Those are the only two options.

The universe and living systems are clearly designed. The processes used in the design do include some evolution and mutation; some change over time, and many other processes but ultimately the entire system is designed and not random.

That is my argument and there is no straw man in that. I despise the straw man tactic, as well as all the other manipulative debate tactics.

False dichotomy that you then use as a straw man (the straw man is asserting that if we don't believe your religious explanation, we are saying the universe and life are "random" but you use a definition of "random" that isn't random).

You say life is "clearly designed" but don't clearly demonstrate this. You just assert it because it fits your religious worldview. If one needs to presuppose life is designed to see its design, then it isn't "clearly designed" nor is that belief logical or evidence-based.

If you want to invoke design, you have to first demonstrate the existence of the designer to attribute the design to. Then demonstrate the design and its logical connection to the designer you've proven.

We will wait while a preaching theist on an atheist forum proves God Drinking Beverage

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: