Kevinb Posted September 11, 2017 Group: Seeker Followers: 4 Topic Count: 5 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 423 Content Per Day: 0.16 Reputation: 70 Days Won: 0 Joined: 04/18/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted September 11, 2017 27 minutes ago, shiloh357 said: Quote Despite this you keep saying the creation model provides evidence..last being that's why planets move the way they do. Again with a sigh what evidence of a God involvement? Assertion.. faith and anology as an answer? But you have not provided one satisfactory reason to reject the God of the Bible as the best explanation for the universe's existence and its ongoing processes that continue to pretty much work in order and overall uniformity. The burden of proof isn't for me to reject a claim that you can't investigate and demonstrate with imperial evidence...its on you to prove. Ergo the default not being until you prove invisible fairies don't exist in my garden it's true Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted September 11, 2017 Share Posted September 11, 2017 1 minute ago, Kevinb said: It's not your perception yet you offer nothing but analogy. You think complexity proves God? Still gotta demonstrate that. I don't think it proves God, but I think it proves that there is a designer or Creator behind it. When you look closely at the absolutely incredible complexity of just a single cell, or a string DNA, it defies the notion that these things simply occurred on their own through wholly naturalistic processes. Quote You mean presuppositions prior to darwin and further cosmological understanding. That doesn't help your case it harms it. Before we knew better people presupposed the earth was flat and was the centre of the universe to which everything went around. Let's not forget too what people were subjected to by religion back then when they had evidence which conflicted with doctrine If all of that were true, it would have adversely affected their their scientific research, but it didn't. Much of modern science is built on top of theories that were developed by men who were Christians and believed God created the earth. Those beliefs did not harm modern science at all. It's just the arrogance of an atheistic community that in its insolence is willing to even throw great scientists under the bus if they have to insulate their unbelief from any rational challenge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted September 11, 2017 Share Posted September 11, 2017 3 minutes ago, Kevinb said: The burden of proof isn't for me to reject a claim that you can't investigate and demonstrate with imperial evidence...its on you to prove. Ergo the default not being until you prove invisible fairies don't exist in my garden it's true I didn't say you had any burden of proof, and I have not claimed to be able to prove God. What I am saying is that you keep attempting to throw out my claims about God, but you so far, haven't offered any satisfactory reason why I shouldn't believe in God. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
da_man1974 Posted September 11, 2017 Group: Senior Member Followers: 25 Topic Count: 41 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 726 Content Per Day: 0.14 Reputation: 575 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/22/2010 Status: Offline Birthday: 12/30/1974 Share Posted September 11, 2017 1 minute ago, shiloh357 said: I didn't say you had any burden of proof, and I have not claimed to be able to prove God. What I am saying is that you keep attempting to throw out my claims about God, but you so far, haven't offered any satisfactory reason why I shouldn't believe in God. I kinda think a belief in God boils down to faith. Either you have faith that He exists or you don't. For me, I cannot foresee any situation that would make me believe that He doesn't exist. There is just too much evidence in nature, peoples lives, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted September 11, 2017 Share Posted September 11, 2017 6 minutes ago, da_man1974 said: I kinda think a belief in God boils down to faith. Either you have faith that He exists or you don't. For me, I cannot foresee any situation that would make me believe that He doesn't exist. There is just too much evidence in nature, peoples lives, etc. Yes, that is correct. Biblical faith isn't a leap into the dark. It is evidentiary by nature. Faith always rests on a foundation of evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
da_man1974 Posted September 11, 2017 Group: Senior Member Followers: 25 Topic Count: 41 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 726 Content Per Day: 0.14 Reputation: 575 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/22/2010 Status: Offline Birthday: 12/30/1974 Share Posted September 11, 2017 3 minutes ago, shiloh357 said: Yes, that is correct. Biblical faith isn't a leap into the dark. It is evidentiary by nature. Faith always rests on a foundation of evidence. agreed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevinb Posted September 11, 2017 Group: Seeker Followers: 4 Topic Count: 5 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 423 Content Per Day: 0.16 Reputation: 70 Days Won: 0 Joined: 04/18/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted September 11, 2017 45 minutes ago, shiloh357 said: I realize that you really want what I said be an argumentative fallacy, but it's not. Concluding that because you can't or refuse to believe something, it must not be true, improbable, or the argument must be flawed. https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/196/Argument-from-Incredulity If anyone is making the argument from incredulity is it you, not me. Nothing is about what I want...its about what can be demonstrated..or what has evidence to support the claim. You are the one not accepting the evidence.. okay fine... now you assert God is most likely. Then admit you can't prove or demonstrate God. what's your denominator for probability? Not having evidence or believing evidence and an explanation then asserting one anyway to which isn't demonstrable or investigatible is all kinds of fallacious.. I'm not saying there is 100% no God I'm just not believing the claim that a supernatural being exists based on the evidence provided...not investigatible and not scientifically proven isn't then a good basis to reject evidence for an alternative then also I've got to add faith. Faith isn't a pathway to truth... faith is what you need in the absence of evidence to support the claim. What couldn't people believe on faith... fairies? Mohammeds winged horse? Enoch and others were hundreds of years old? 44 minutes ago, shiloh357 said: I don't think it proves God, but I think it proves that there is a designer or Creator behind it. When you look closely at the absolutely incredible complexity of just a single cell, or a string DNA, it defies the notion that these things simply occurred on their own through wholly naturalistic processes. I don't think it proves God either. Please demonstrate a designer... you're still in assertion ... analogy... faith. 42 minutes ago, da_man1974 said: I kinda think a belief in God boils down to faith. Either you have faith that He exists or you don't. Thanks... that is more like something I can appreciate. This more sums it up for me. In the absence of evidence of involvement then it's faith. Faith isn't a good position to be in for me in this context as if anyone could prove involvement they would... and that would be evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevinb Posted September 11, 2017 Group: Seeker Followers: 4 Topic Count: 5 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 423 Content Per Day: 0.16 Reputation: 70 Days Won: 0 Joined: 04/18/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted September 11, 2017 39 minutes ago, shiloh357 said: 47 minutes ago, da_man1974 said: I kinda think a belief in God boils down to faith. Either you have faith that He exists or you don't. For me, I cannot foresee any situation that would make me believe that He doesn't exist. There is just too much evidence in nature, peoples lives, etc. Yes, that is correct. Biblical faith isn't a leap into the dark. It is evidentiary by nature. Faith always rests on a foundation of evidence. Faith based evidence? Essentially you assert a God involvement... You have no evidence. Statements based on faith and deny theories based on evidence because it conflicts positions based on faith...Mmmmm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevinb Posted September 11, 2017 Group: Seeker Followers: 4 Topic Count: 5 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 423 Content Per Day: 0.16 Reputation: 70 Days Won: 0 Joined: 04/18/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted September 11, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, shiloh357 said: 1 hour ago, Kevinb said: The burden of proof isn't for me to reject a claim that you can't investigate and demonstrate with imperial evidence...its on you to prove. Ergo the default not being until you prove invisible fairies don't exist in my garden it's true I didn't say you had any burden of proof, and I have not claimed to be able to prove God. What I am saying is that you keep attempting to throw out my claims about God, but you so far, haven't offered any satisfactory reason why I shouldn't believe in God How do I falsify the unfalisifiable... something that can't be demonstrated. That which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. However yes this far I throw them out... You admit you can't prove them.. no one can so I can't throw them in. I don't conduct the rest of my life like this outside of God claims as I suspect you don't. If someone said to you... nothing to do with God here...accept claim x please...i can't prove it..throw out theory based on evidence and have faith... I'm sure you wouldn't. Edited September 11, 2017 by Kevinb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enoch2021 Posted September 11, 2017 Group: Royal Member Followers: 11 Topic Count: 19 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 3,396 Content Per Day: 0.90 Reputation: 730 Days Won: 4 Joined: 12/21/2013 Status: Offline Birthday: 12/26/1963 Share Posted September 11, 2017 23 hours ago, siegi91 said: If I may, aren't you the guy who believes that the earth is flat and that the moon really emits its own light (and it is not reflecting the light of the sun)? 1. So you "Quote" my ENTIRE post but... don't speak a SINGLE WORD in response to any of it? Can you explain the rationale? 2. Nope. I'm the guy who "KNOWS" that the Earth is Young Flat Non-Spinning and Domed and that it is IMPOSSIBLE for the Moon to Uniformly Reflect Light equally in all directions. Quote Just to be sure...I need that information in order to tune my debating parameters right and any response to your scientific posts. Translation: I need this Information in order to formulate my Ad Hom Fallacies in lieu of cogent support for my 'beliefs'. regards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts