Christians Shouldn't Use The Arguement Of Design
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
10-02-2013, 10:41 PM (This post was last modified: 11-02-2013 08:11 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Christians Shouldn't Use The Arguement Of Design
(10-02-2013 12:56 PM)Egor Wrote:  
(09-02-2013 12:54 PM)Starcrash Wrote:  You're right. The teleological argument doesn't prove the Christian God, but rather is an attempt to prove "a" god. However, we've run into so many Christians who use this argument to defend their God that it's hardly a straw man. Outside of the bible, there's simply no way to defend the existence of God specifically, and the problem with using the bible as a defense is that the Christian must agree to standards of evidence that he would not allow for the Qur'an or another holy book. So Christians often use general arguments for the existence of any god and then hope to convince you to just accept that it's their God by default.

Right. And when I argue for the existence of God, I always start with a definition (i.e., God is the fundamental monistic consciousness). I don't argue for "the god of the bible" because, a) I use the Veridican Gospel of Jesus Christ, not the Holy Bible as my authorized scripture, b) there are at least three different types of "Gods" described in the Bible. The one in the Garden of Eden is obviously polytheistic, the one Moses encounters is a monotheistic lawgiver, and then Jesus describes another as a monistic Father. Oh, and then there is the vengful kind of loner God that Noah encounters.

So, the Bible can't be used for any logical philosophical debate on the existence of God, in my opinion. Obviously, I believe God is most accurately described through Veridicanism. The difference between me and other Christians, is that I define what God is and then argue logically for His necessity. Or at least this is what will occur in the near future.

Quote:However, your assertion than "only a conscious entity can order something" is an argument from ignorance. The only positive evidence you can present for design coming from a Supreme Being is to beg the question by assuming that a Supreme Being designs things. Nor can you present negative evidence because, even if we had no observations of the appearance of design or order coming from chaos (and we do), then the best you could say is that we haven't observed it "yet" (even though we have).

It's not an argument from ignorance, but from necessity. Order cannot come from chaos (true chaos that is, which is the underlying structure of the universe if there is no God). To think that order can spontaneously arise from chaos is absurd. The only way to believe that is to change the accepted definition of order or chaos in order to make a theory stick.

We see around us "order" that we did not create. So we use inductive reasoning to reach a conclusion that God exists and must be able to order things. But to order something requires will and anything with will must have consciousness.

Could all of this be untrue? Yes. There could be no God; my consciousness could be an illusion (even though that's a contradiction); there might be no order in the universe at all but only chaos, and in this one little whim of chaos the world has been born and brought only accidently into existence.

So, how to tip the balance? We have to look at other things: the other arguments for the existence of God, the life and teachings of Jesus Christ, the existence of psi phenomena and non-neurologic consciousness, the mysteries of quantum mechanics, and even the very nature of the workings of our mind. When all of these things are examined in addition to the above, the ability to remain atheistic becomes a kind of willful delusion. In the face of all the evidence and logic, for one to remain an atheist leaves only one conclusion: that person needs to be an atheist for alterior reasons (e.g., a homosexual who feels guilt over their sexuality may choose to be atheist in order to reconcile their sinful life, or what they consider is a sinful life).

Moses' god was not monotheistic, and we know from Archaeology that Yahweh had a wife LONG after this mythological period. Egor obviously lacks even a basic education in this, (his own supposed) field. But as most preachers, what this is about is a need to be a self righteous expert in something about which they actually know very little. ANnyone can out out a shingle and be a preacher and buy an office on the internet without really bothering to actually go to a seminary or accredited school. The First Commandment, even IF one believed that Moses was an actual historical person, (and he was not), proves otherwise, "no other gods before me" as handed down, (supposedly) on Saini). All of the New Testament, (therefore anythything drawn from it, ie the supposed "Veridicianism...or whatver it's called) makes NO sense without the Old Testament as it's the same culture. Chaos Theory also puts the lie to all this, and Egor obviously needs more education. What is "absurd" to the human brain has been proven true, (Relativity, Uncertainty and other things, for example the matricies of Dirac, (tensors)). So the argument of inductive reasoning (especially of perceived order, when we know underlying it in Quamtum Mechanics is NO order, and in fact Choas), is what is absurd. The rest of the baloney, (projected guilt), is nothing more. It's rather shockingly apalling that a mental health professional actually knows so litttle about sexuality, and it's origins. Six months ago Egor would have scoffed at HIS OWN PRESENT nonsence. Just wait 6 more. His tune will change again. Nothing is certain except for change. The worm will turn again.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
10-02-2013, 10:49 PM
 
RE: Christians Shouldn't Use The Arguement Of Design
Underlying quantum mechanics is chaos? How do you know? No one else knows, so I'm wondering how you came about this information.

I mean, you wouldn't just be spouting a personal belief, would you?

Besides, you're confusing the definition of chaos. By chaos, we mean complete randomness. You're talking about very complex deterministic systems that can't be predicted. Apples and oranges.

By the way, I know you're Mark. I can tell from your extremly jealous-sounding attacks.
Quote this message in a reply
11-02-2013, 07:22 AM (This post was last modified: 11-02-2013 07:49 AM by TheBeardedDude.)
Re: Christians Shouldn't Use The Arguement Of Design
Still here? You're site must be doing even worse than I anticipated. Can we get a time line for how much longer you're going to linger?

“Science is simply common sense at its best, that is, rigidly accurate in observation, and merciless to fallacy in logic.”
—Thomas Henry Huxley
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-02-2013, 07:52 AM (This post was last modified: 11-02-2013 08:14 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Christians Shouldn't Use The Arguement Of Design
(10-02-2013 10:49 PM)Egor Wrote:  Underlying quantum mechanics is chaos? How do you know? No one else knows, so I'm wondering how you came about this information.

I mean, you wouldn't just be spouting a personal belief, would you?

Besides, you're confusing the definition of chaos. By chaos, we mean complete randomness. You're talking about very complex deterministic systems that can't be predicted. Apples and oranges.

By the way, I know you're Mark. I can tell from your extremly jealous-sounding attacks.
If you're talking to me, accusing me of being Mark Fulton, it's a compliment, but you're wrong, and we can prove it by being here together, and the mods can verify the IP addresses. You need a course in Chaos Theory, as well as the Bible, and Physics, and Psychology, etc etc etc. You have no clue what you're talking about. And the question is, WTF are you doing here, actually ? You're not gonna convert anyone with that nonsense. Constantly insulting people, telling them how much better you are than everyone. In short, a joke. You are however, a walking talking advertisement for why we would want nothing to do with the pompous, patronising, judgemental self-righteous, ill informed religious. So keep it up, Every time you post something, you shoot yourself in the foot, and make more people think, "if THAT'S what religion does to people, I'll have none of it".

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Bucky Ball's post
11-02-2013, 07:59 AM
Re: Christians Shouldn't Use The Arguement Of Design
Jokes are funny though. This is more so pathetic than anything.

“Science is simply common sense at its best, that is, rigidly accurate in observation, and merciless to fallacy in logic.”
—Thomas Henry Huxley
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-02-2013, 08:32 AM
RE: Christians Shouldn't Use The Arguement Of Design
Chaos (as in Chaos theory) actually means a completely deterministic system whose end state is extremely sensitive to its starting conditions, such that the starting conditions cannot be measured accurately enough to predict the final state. This seems to be the opposite of quantum mechanics, which seem to be actually random - ie the best predictor of behaviour is a set of probability density functions.

Give me your argument in the form of a published paper, and then we can start to talk.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-02-2013, 09:02 AM
Re: Christians Shouldn't Use The Arguement Of Design
When ego® says "chaos" he means "something my brain can't perceive so therefore not something that is real because I don't want it to be" not anything scientific.

I mean, look at his definition of "god" as the "fundamental monistic consciousness." That still makes 0 sense.

“Science is simply common sense at its best, that is, rigidly accurate in observation, and merciless to fallacy in logic.”
—Thomas Henry Huxley
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-02-2013, 09:20 AM
RE: Christians Shouldn't Use The Arguement Of Design
(11-02-2013 09:02 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  When ego® says "chaos" he means "something my brain can't perceive so therefore not something that is real because I don't want it to be" not anything scientific.

I mean, look at his definition of "god" as the "fundamental monistic consciousness." That still makes 0 sense.
We should be grateful and thank him for all he does for atheism.
We could have no better reminder why we would want nothing to do with religion.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
11-02-2013, 09:24 AM
RE: Christians Shouldn't Use The Arguement Of Design
(11-02-2013 09:20 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(11-02-2013 09:02 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  When ego® says "chaos" he means "something my brain can't perceive so therefore not something that is real because I don't want it to be" not anything scientific.

I mean, look at his definition of "god" as the "fundamental monistic consciousness." That still makes 0 sense.
We should be grateful and thank him for all he does for atheism.
We could have no better reminder why we would want nothing to do with religion.
It isn't just that he makes religion look absurd, it's that he makes failed logic, anecdotal evidence, and psuedoscience look worse. I didn't think it was possible but...there you go!

“Science is simply common sense at its best, that is, rigidly accurate in observation, and merciless to fallacy in logic.”
—Thomas Henry Huxley
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
11-02-2013, 09:55 AM
RE: Christians Shouldn't Use The Arguement Of Design
(11-02-2013 09:20 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  We should be grateful and thank him for all he does for atheism.
We could have no better reminder why we would want nothing to do with religion.
Every time Egor displays his inability to follow even the most basic teachings of Christ (ex. "Judge not, lest ye be judged.") in his posts, he destroys a little bit of what kingschosen has worked for so hard: getting rid of the popular image of Christians as hateful, self-righteous and judgmental bigots. It's sad, really.

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: