The go a little easy on theists thread
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-02-2014, 08:21 PM
RE: The go a little easy on theists thread
(07-02-2014 05:05 PM)lookingforanswers Wrote:  Yeah dude, I think you missed my point...

I don't believe I did. There is no evidence of anything but the natural world.
No theory of anything contains any gods. Only theology contains gods.

A universe that contains magic would be very different.

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
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
08-02-2014, 11:25 AM
RE: The go a little easy on theists thread
(07-02-2014 08:21 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(07-02-2014 05:05 PM)lookingforanswers Wrote:  Yeah dude, I think you missed my point...

I don't believe I did. There is no evidence of anything but the natural world.
No theory of anything contains any gods. Only theology contains gods.

A universe that contains magic would be very different.

You definitely did miss my point, and are arguing against a stawman argument. I've never argued for magic.

The problem with your statement is that you said "that the universe looks exactly as a material, natural universe would look." I'm asking you: how could you possibly know that? Have you ever seen a different universe in order to compare?

If our universe looks like a natural universe, what would an unnatural universe look like? Are you just making the simple claim against an interventionist God with your Magic talk? Because, if so, I agree with you and we can move on. But, your comment seemed to be focused on saying, "This universe doesn't look like a universe that was created by a creator. If it was created by a creator it would look different." And, if that actually is your comment then you are going to need a lot more than bold statements to back that up.

How would anything look any different if the universe was made by a non-interventionist creator (ie. one who's intervention in the universe was limited only to his creation thereof) as opposed to being as a result of purely natural processes?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-02-2014, 07:41 PM
RE: The go a little easy on theists thread
(08-02-2014 11:25 AM)lookingforanswers Wrote:  
(07-02-2014 08:21 PM)Chas Wrote:  I don't believe I did. There is no evidence of anything but the natural world.
No theory of anything contains any gods. Only theology contains gods.

A universe that contains magic would be very different.

You definitely did miss my point, and are arguing against a stawman argument. I've never argued for magic.

Bullshit. Your "gawd" is all about "magic".


Quote:The problem with your statement is that you said "that the universe looks exactly as a material, natural universe would look." I'm asking you: how could you possibly know that? Have you ever seen a different universe in order to compare?

It would look like one in which there had been a gigantic flood only 4000 years ago, killing off every living plant forever, with dinosaurs and dodo birds and humans buried in the same soil and rock layers, like the idiotic fairy tale story you can't quite let go of claims.


Quote:If our universe looks like a natural universe, what would an unnatural universe look like?

Look in your fairy tale book, and you will see. And look around you, nad you will see that the two don't match.


Quote:Are you just making the simple claim against an interventionist God with your Magic talk? Because, if so, I agree with you and we can move on. But, your comment seemed to be focused on saying, "This universe doesn't look like a universe that was created by a creator. If it was created by a creator it would look different." And, if that actually is your comment then you are going to need a lot more than bold statements to back that up.

Is this bold enough for you?: Fuck off with your idiotic shell game.

Quote:How would anything look any different if the universe was made by a non-interventionist creator (ie. one who's intervention in the universe was limited only to his creation thereof) as opposed to being as a result of purely natural processes?

Your "creation" would be an act of "intervention" in itself. Your claim is self-refuting.

It's Special Pleadings all the way down!


Magic Talking Snakes STFU -- revenantx77


You can't have your special pleading and eat it too. -- WillHop
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-02-2014, 09:32 PM
RE: The go a little easy on theists thread
(08-02-2014 11:25 AM)lookingforanswers Wrote:  
(07-02-2014 08:21 PM)Chas Wrote:  I don't believe I did. There is no evidence of anything but the natural world.
No theory of anything contains any gods. Only theology contains gods.

A universe that contains magic would be very different.

You definitely did miss my point, and are arguing against a stawman argument. I've never argued for magic.

The problem with your statement is that you said "that the universe looks exactly as a material, natural universe would look." I'm asking you: how could you possibly know that? Have you ever seen a different universe in order to compare?

If our universe looks like a natural universe, what would an unnatural universe look like? Are you just making the simple claim against an interventionist God with your Magic talk? Because, if so, I agree with you and we can move on. But, your comment seemed to be focused on saying, "This universe doesn't look like a universe that was created by a creator. If it was created by a creator it would look different." And, if that actually is your comment then you are going to need a lot more than bold statements to back that up.

How would anything look any different if the universe was made by a non-interventionist creator (ie. one who's intervention in the universe was limited only to his creation thereof) as opposed to being as a result of purely natural processes?

You don't seem to understand that every investigation of the universe results in a naturalistic answer. An interventionist deity would leave evidence of the intervention.
Never once has a miracle been shown to have occurred, no ghosts - holy or unholy.

So, yes, I am stating that there is absolutely no evidence for an interventionist deity.
There is also no evidence of a non-interventionist deity either.

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
[+] 3 users Like Chas's post
09-02-2014, 07:47 AM
RE: The go a little easy on theists thread
(08-02-2014 09:32 PM)Chas Wrote:  There is also no evidence of a non-interventionist deity either.

He's cunning like that Tongue

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-02-2014, 04:26 PM
RE: The go a little easy on theists thread
(06-02-2014 07:21 PM)Chas Wrote:  the universe looks exactly as a material, natural universe would look.

(08-02-2014 09:32 PM)Chas Wrote:  So, yes, I am stating that there is absolutely no evidence for an interventionist deity.
There is also no evidence of a non-interventionist deity either.

Nope, you definitely didn't understand, or you chose to ignore, because the part of your statement that I called you out on is not the one that you seem to have settled on. Your first one is a positive statement about what a material, natural universe would look like, which you couldn't possibly back up (and thus have not even tried to). So, instead you ended up throwing out some statements about magic and going back to the tired old "THERE"S NO EVIDENCE!!!1!1!!1!!eleven!!!" statement, which seems to be the atheist equivalent of taking their toys and going home.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-02-2014, 04:32 PM
RE: The go a little easy on theists thread
(09-02-2014 04:26 PM)lookingforanswers Wrote:  Nope, you definitely didn't understand, or you chose to ignore, because the part of your statement that I called you out on is not the one that you seem to have settled on. Your first one is a positive statement about what a material, natural universe would look like, which you couldn't possibly back up (and thus have not even tried to). So, instead you ended up throwing out some statements about magic and going back to the tired old "THERE"S NO EVIDENCE!!!1!1!!1!!eleven!!!" statement, which seems to be the atheist equivalent of taking their toys and going home.

Okay...I've kind of been following the thread.

So, Lookingforanswers, first...since this is the only reality we currently have, this is the reality by which we work things out and go by.

What is there, do you think, to show any evidence of any god sticking their fingers/pseudo-pods into this, our one and only reality?

Because, from where I'm sitting...the only place a diety can be left hiding is 13 odd billions years behind us. Which kind of makes any sort of 'wishful thinking' to them rather pointless.

Very much cheers to all.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-02-2014, 05:09 PM
RE: The go a little easy on theists thread
(09-02-2014 04:26 PM)lookingforanswers Wrote:  
(06-02-2014 07:21 PM)Chas Wrote:  the universe looks exactly as a material, natural universe would look.

(08-02-2014 09:32 PM)Chas Wrote:  So, yes, I am stating that there is absolutely no evidence for an interventionist deity.
There is also no evidence of a non-interventionist deity either.

Nope, you definitely didn't understand, or you chose to ignore, because the part of your statement that I called you out on is not the one that you seem to have settled on. Your first one is a positive statement about what a material, natural universe would look like, which you couldn't possibly back up (and thus have not even tried to). So, instead you ended up throwing out some statements about magic and going back to the tired old "THERE"S NO EVIDENCE!!!1!1!!1!!eleven!!!" statement, which seems to be the atheist equivalent of taking their toys and going home.

I understand quite well. All of the evidence points to a natural universe. There is no evidence for anything else.
What you don't appear to understand is that evidence is the only thing on which to stake a position.

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
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
09-02-2014, 07:51 PM
RE: The go a little easy on theists thread
(09-02-2014 04:26 PM)lookingforanswers Wrote:  [quote='Chas' pid='489339' dateline='1391916779']
the tired old "THERE"S NO EVIDENCE!!!1!1!!1!!eleven!!!" statement, which seems to be the atheist equivalent of taking their toys and going home.

The reason it's so tiresome for you is because it defeats your bullshit at every turn.

[Image: funny-pictures-auto-comics-logic-371546.jpeg]

It's Special Pleadings all the way down!


Magic Talking Snakes STFU -- revenantx77


You can't have your special pleading and eat it too. -- WillHop
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Taqiyya Mockingbird's post
10-02-2014, 08:32 AM
RE: The go a little easy on theists thread
(09-02-2014 05:09 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(09-02-2014 04:26 PM)lookingforanswers Wrote:  Nope, you definitely didn't understand, or you chose to ignore, because the part of your statement that I called you out on is not the one that you seem to have settled on. Your first one is a positive statement about what a material, natural universe would look like, which you couldn't possibly back up (and thus have not even tried to). So, instead you ended up throwing out some statements about magic and going back to the tired old "THERE"S NO EVIDENCE!!!1!1!!1!!eleven!!!" statement, which seems to be the atheist equivalent of taking their toys and going home.

I understand quite well. All of the evidence points to a natural universe. There is no evidence for anything else.
What you don't appear to understand is that evidence is the only thing on which to stake a position.

The thing you, and everyone else who touts the "There's no evidence" thing doesn't seem to understand, is that there is plenty of evidence for the existence of God, it's all in the interpretation.

I'd point you to all of reality as my evidence for the existence of God. The fact that anything exists at all is the evidence that I rely upon (see: the seemingly infinite number of posts where I have discussed the cosmological argument). You may not accept my interpretation of the evidence, and that is your prerogative, but continually saying that, "there is no evidence" is just being ignorant.

Similarly, religious people will give you tons of evidence for their own gods. Whether it be personal revelations, miracles, seeing Jesus in a cheese sandwich, etc. Now, you may not accept that evidence (in the same way that I reject it as lacking credibility), but saying that there is no evidence is once again, just ignorant.

You can address the evidence and reject it. You can argue with the interpretation. But, it is just plain ignorant to say that there isn't any evidence at all.

Oh yeah, and every shred of evidence for the "natural universe" is also consistent with a "created universe", so there's that, too...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: