The solution to science arguments against creations age.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
21-03-2014, 03:00 PM
RE: The solution to science arguments against creations age.
Okay what do you not understand? I though I was clear enough in the original post. If god has the power do do ANYTHING and knows EVERYTHING then there is no situation that god can not cause to be, even an intelligently created universe that looks like it's not..

Keep in mind as I've stated this a few times, that's not a belief, it's a logical thought construct, and it's the one that subconsciously drives most theists. The point is to try to give some perspective to those that don't believe to the logic behind some of the people that do believe.

Even if you don't understand WHY someone believes something doesn't mean you should do your best to understand how their thought process works otherwise there's no possibility of ever reasoning with them. I do think it's still possible to reason with some of them, mostly the younger one's of course.

(19-03-2014 03:23 PM)Impulse Wrote:  
(19-03-2014 03:14 PM)Sceadwian Wrote:  That is EXACTLY the point Impulse, the concept of an omnipotent omniscient god doesn't require evidence, it's evidence proof, granted you can strike down about 90% of religious wack jobs without having to resort to this extreme from a logical foundation there's no way to attack it. Any statement can instantly be answered 'because god is all powerful and made it so' Which is the exact foundation of all hyper theist beliefs.

I'm not trying to prove that this is true, it's again as I stated before a self fulfilling statement, but THIS is the core of rationality that hyper theists hold on to because it can never be defeated.

Understanding this is the key I think to a greater understanding between the theistic and atheistic communities and humanity in general as it requires you to step back take a breath and allow for understanding of another person.

It's a war no one can win.
I don't really understand what you are saying, especially in that first sentence which itself makes no sense. And why do you think the concept of an omnipotent omniscient god doesn't require evidence?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-03-2014, 03:04 PM
RE: The solution to science arguments against creations age.
The same thing as an extremist anything..

A person who has made up their mind seeks out information that supports their viewpoints and ignores all other thought patterns. Unfortunately this is almost everyone.

Most of it boils down to how inadequate existing language and thought structures are in the human race to deal with these concepts without the conversation degrading into "I'm right, you're wrong"

That's why I like to point out the logical possibility that if God is all powerful and all knowing then they can create whatever conditions he requires for any observation us humans make. It's an important thing to be comfortable with rather than upset with which is what causes extremism.

You have to look for ways IN to the mind of a radical you can't force them to do anything their resolve becomes like a brick wall and all conversation ceases..

Something like that at least.

(19-03-2014 07:00 PM)Taqiyya Mockingbird Wrote:  
(19-03-2014 12:41 PM)Sceadwian Wrote:  Jesse a lot of people seem to miss the point, from a core logic standpoint the it's totally impossible to prove it's wrong, that's the power of the idea of an omniscient omnipotent God. I see it as a core problem when dealing with extremists of any kind, theist or atheists.

And exactly what is an "extremist atheist" to you?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-03-2014, 03:09 PM
RE: The solution to science arguments against creations age.
That's a human perception, god is not human god is god, what you're implying is what the bible says, god created us in his image.

I'm not asserting any such garbage, so you're applying human constructs to the thinking of an all powerful all knowing being because that's all you can do because you are human, the mind of god whatever that might be will have no such constructs inherent, that's why I like this thought exercise because what atheists need to understand is that the concept of god alone outside of specific religions has no discrete meaning only context to other beliefs and that perhaps the truth if there is a god that truth is forever beyond the ability of our minds to encompass.

That's the only 'rational' concept of god I've ever been able to come up with.

Most arguments I see against this concept of god really show you a LOT about the person that answers own opinion about god because it's factually neutral, we all respond based on our own experiences with religion and god in general and I find it FASCINATING all the different answers and counter arugements I get.

The human mind has such an ego and this weird desire to fight things which it can never comprehend, and that's true in the real solid world not just the metaphysical one, I never understood because I'm not a common mind, I just don't get it.

(21-03-2014 11:48 AM)UndercoverAtheist Wrote:  If this is true, then God himself must have the desire to deceive us, and, more importantly, lead us away from his "righteous path".
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-03-2014, 03:16 PM
RE: The solution to science arguments against creations age.
(21-03-2014 03:00 PM)Sceadwian Wrote:  Okay what do you not understand? I though I was clear enough in the original post. If god has the power do do ANYTHING and knows EVERYTHING then there is no situation that god can not cause to be, even an intelligently created universe that looks like it's not..

Keep in mind as I've stated this a few times, that's not a belief, it's a logical thought construct, and it's the one that subconsciously drives most theists. The point is to try to give some perspective to those that don't believe to the logic behind some of the people that do believe.

Even if you don't understand WHY someone believes something doesn't mean you should do your best to understand how their thought process works otherwise there's no possibility of ever reasoning with them. I do think it's still possible to reason with some of them, mostly the younger one's of course.

(19-03-2014 03:23 PM)Impulse Wrote:  I don't really understand what you are saying, especially in that first sentence which itself makes no sense. And why do you think the concept of an omnipotent omniscient god doesn't require evidence?

I disagree, and say that it is not logic, but is nothing but belief - faith. Not only is there no evidence to support the position, but they actually have to create logical fallacies to explain away evidence that contradicts their beliefs. It may be a "thought construct", but it is not a logical one.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-03-2014, 03:20 PM
RE: The solution to science arguments against creations age.
(06-03-2014 04:17 PM)Sceadwian Wrote:  This is just a thought exercise type question not a belief or opinion but...

If (G)god is an all knowing all powerful being for which there is no greater, and the world really is only about 6,000 years old, isn't it perfectly plausible that (h)He created the universe 6,000 years ago, but created it 14 billion years old?

No, semantically, what you said is not possible.

God can't create a 14 billion year old universe 6,000 years ago. It's impossible in its own terms, because then the universe just created would be 6,000 years old, by definition.

Now, if you clarified, and asked can God make a universe that appears 14 billion years old, but is really only 6,000, that's a fundamentally different question.

Let me break this apart, and you can reply to me and try to argue in defense or something.

Now, this thought process is predicated on an assumption that the Bible is indeed correct, or at least Genesis is. Why is that an assumption, because you made it one when you assumed the number was 6,000 years old, and you mentioned creationism. Now, if the Bible is indeed correct, then the statement "God is not the author of confusion." Is also correct, as it appears in the Bible (remember, we are running under the assumption that the creator is one based off the Bible, or at least the one that is in Genesis) which can't possibly be because if he WASN'T the author of confusion, he wouldn't be tricking us into believing the universe is 14 billion years old, when it is in fact 6,000 years old.

You following what I am putting down?

Now, also, the question is unfalsifiable, meaning, that if it were true, there was no way I can prove it to be, or disprove it. Meaning that it won't matter if the earth is 6,000 years old, but looks 14 billion, there is no way to prove it to be so. All the evidence is pointing to a 14 billion year old universe (which is exactly the way, in this hypothetical, God wants it), and if all the evidence is pointing to a 14 billion year old universe, and we can't prove it's 6,000, then the question is useless. Either way, people are justified in believing that creationism is not valid.

Meaning that, based on scientific and logical thinking, creationism STILL FAILS to be an even half-decent explanation of the universe.

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Atothetheist's post
21-03-2014, 04:04 PM
RE: The solution to science arguments against creations age.
(21-03-2014 03:00 PM)Sceadwian Wrote:  Okay what do you not understand? I though I was clear enough in the original post. If god has the power do do ANYTHING and knows EVERYTHING then there is no situation that god can not cause to be, even an intelligently created universe that looks like it's not..

Keep in mind as I've stated this a few times, that's not a belief, it's a logical thought construct, and it's the one that subconsciously drives most theists. The point is to try to give some perspective to those that don't believe to the logic behind some of the people that do believe.

Even if you don't understand WHY someone believes something doesn't mean you should do your best to understand how their thought process works otherwise there's no possibility of ever reasoning with them. I do think it's still possible to reason with some of them, mostly the younger one's of course.

(19-03-2014 03:23 PM)Impulse Wrote:  I don't really understand what you are saying, especially in that first sentence which itself makes no sense. And why do you think the concept of an omnipotent omniscient god doesn't require evidence?
Why are you assuming that we don't already understand the perspective of someone who believes? Many of us - myself included - were believers once.

The problem with your line of reasoning is this is also possible:
God created the earth 6,000 years ago, but made it 40 billion years old. He created weird looking creatures with 10 heads, 2 bodies, 20 legs, and 5 tails. After about 2,000 years, he decided he didn't like that so he wiped out all life. He then changed the earth to be 14 billion years old.

I mean seriously, you could ad lib anything into the fable (which I understand IS your point), but why...? We're talking about an omnipotent being who, if he existed, could do anything in any way he so desired, but who being omnipotent would also likely take the most efficient path possible - which would be to create the earth right the first time. That would be 6,000 years ago brand new (in keeping with the 6,000 year premise.)

Also, you didn't answer this:
Why do you think the concept of an omnipotent omniscient god doesn't require evidence?

"Religion has caused more misery to all of mankind in every stage of human history than any other single idea." --Madalyn Murray O'Hair
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-03-2014, 07:07 PM
RE: The solution to science arguments against creations age.
To those who would say "god is all powerful and made it this way" I would reply with "give me all your money or I will shoot you. Both of our statements began with the letter g. Which one do you think is the more powerful influence upon your actions at this very moment and which one is powerless to do anything at all ?"

Insanity - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-03-2014, 07:26 PM
RE: The solution to science arguments against creations age.
(21-03-2014 03:04 PM)Sceadwian Wrote:  The same thing as an extremist anything..

A person who has made up their mind seeks out information that supports their viewpoints and ignores all other thought patterns. Unfortunately this is almost everyone.

That is simply not true. Nor is it the definition of an "extremist".


You sound like one who thinks being "open-minded" means that one must treat every bizarre claim seriously.


Quote:Most of it boils down to how inadequate existing language and thought structures are in the human race to deal with these concepts without the conversation degrading into "I'm right, you're wrong"


That does not follow.


Quote:That's why I like to point out the logical possibility that if God is all powerful and all knowing then they can create whatever conditions he requires for any observation us humans make. It's an important thing to be comfortable with rather than upset with which is what causes extremism.

There are a helluva lot of presumptions in that claim. Replace "gawd" with "Flying Spaghetti Monster", and you might be able to see how silly and illogical your assertion is.


Quote:You have to look for ways IN to the mind of a radical you can't force them to do anything their resolve becomes like a brick wall and all conversation ceases..

NO, you don't.

Quote:Something like that at least.

It's nonsensical.

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
21-03-2014, 07:30 PM
RE: The solution to science arguments against creations age.
(21-03-2014 03:00 PM)Sceadwian Wrote:  Keep in mind as I've stated this a few times, that's not a belief, it's a logical thought construct,

No, it's not. It's pseudo-logic, a counterfeit designed to LOOK like logic to the credulous.


Quote:...and it's the one that subconsciously drives most theists. The point is to try to give some perspective to those that don't believe to the logic behind some of the people that do believe.


How does one "believe in" logic? Word sald much?

Quote:Even if you don't understand WHY someone believes something doesn't mean you should do your best to understand how their thought process works otherwise there's no possibility of ever reasoning with them.

Ad hoc assertion. Non Sequitur.


Quote: I do think it's still possible to reason with some of them, mostly the younger one's of course.

Not if they have thrown reason out the window. And again, what you describe above is not reason or logic.

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
21-03-2014, 07:32 PM
RE: The solution to science arguments against creations age.
(21-03-2014 03:20 PM)Atothetheist Wrote:  
(06-03-2014 04:17 PM)Sceadwian Wrote:  This is just a thought exercise type question not a belief or opinion but...

If (G)god is an all knowing all powerful being for which there is no greater, and the world really is only about 6,000 years old, isn't it perfectly plausible that (h)He created the universe 6,000 years ago, but created it 14 billion years old?

No, semantically, what you said is not possible.

God can't create a 14 billion year old universe 6,000 years ago. It's impossible in its own terms, because then the universe just created would be 6,000 years old, by definition.

Now, if you clarified, and asked can God make a universe that appears 14 billion years old, but is really only 6,000, that's a fundamentally different question.

Let me break this apart, and you can reply to me and try to argue in defense or something.

Now, this thought process is predicated on an assumption that the Bible is indeed correct, or at least Genesis is. Why is that an assumption, because you made it one when you assumed the number was 6,000 years old, and you mentioned creationism. Now, if the Bible is indeed correct, then the statement "God is not the author of confusion." Is also correct, as it appears in the Bible (remember, we are running under the assumption that the creator is one based off the Bible, or at least the one that is in Genesis) which can't possibly be because if he WASN'T the author of confusion, he wouldn't be tricking us into believing the universe is 14 billion years old, when it is in fact 6,000 years old.

You following what I am putting down?

Now, also, the question is unfalsifiable, meaning, that if it were true, there was no way I can prove it to be, or disprove it. Meaning that it won't matter if the earth is 6,000 years old, but looks 14 billion, there is no way to prove it to be so. All the evidence is pointing to a 14 billion year old universe (which is exactly the way, in this hypothetical, God wants it), and if all the evidence is pointing to a 14 billion year old universe, and we can't prove it's 6,000, then the question is useless. Either way, people are justified in believing that creationism is not valid.

Meaning that, based on scientific and logical thinking, creationism STILL FAILS to be an even half-decent explanation of the universe.

You beat me to it. ^^
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: