The single greatest scientific pardox revealed.....er....nevermind

[Observer of dreams]

You mean this one?

But..... what if that is not the reason behind the atheist's beliefs, or lack thereof?

[sTATEMENT 1]

Christian: I believe in Jesus Christ as my lord and savior, for he is the son of a loving god that created the world and us in his image and will punish the rebellious for all eternity but welcome the repentant to his side in an eternal paradise.

[END STATEMENT]

[REPLY]

Atheist: How do we know this? Is there any evidence to back it up? If it's not convincing, I'm not going to believe you.

[END REPLY]

My position is, has, and always will be, that the burden of support rests upon the shoulders of the person making the positive statement. In this case, that is the person claiming that there is a Heaven and Hell, Jesus and God, and all the other Christian beliefs. Until something is produced to back that up factually, I'm not going to believe it.

Basically my paradox isn't absolute. It only fits one atheistic view, or observation. It doesn't even address the scientific community necessarily. Like I said before, the conversation has moved from this. We are talking about personal beliefs and actually getting along quite nicely. I must say questioner you remind me a lot of mr. Lepaca......hhhmmmm

[Questioner]

You refuted my own commentary but not the paradox itself. The statement is the observation. If there is no way to test the observation than the observation is unscientific. Just because I use the word statement instead of observation it doesn't change anything here look

[OBSERVATION]

God cannot exist because he cannot be tested by science, and is therefore illogical.

[END OBSERVATION]

No person can provide any evidence to show that the observation is untrue.

The observation is not scientifically testable because nothing can be provided to show it is untrue.

Since the observation cannot be tested by science the observation is therefore unscientific and illogical.

nice try though

This:

God cannot exist because he cannot be tested by science, and is therefore illogical.

Is not an observation. It is also factually false, but that's a discussion for another thread. An observation would be, you see a dead stand up and walk. Or you see a virgin giving birth. Observations are not something that come out of your own mind.

Anyway, I see you're tellng me that I'm late and the discussion has moved on from the OP to something else. That's ok, it wasn't my intention to disrupt the flow; I just couldn't leave alone an argument that seems fallacious to me - I'm that kind of annoying person

[Questioner]

Ahh, okay. I tend to agree with you - it is, after all, impossible to prove something does not exist.

The highest prime number doesn't exist. Want me to prove it?

Some things don't exist by definition. God doesn't exist by definition, too, but I'll talk about this in another thread.

[Observer of dreams]

As far as being annoying questioner don't worry about. I stayed up for six hours working on my computer and was late for work the next day. I have to finish something I start, and it bugs me if I can't get every little detail right. That's why I have such a tough time with things. I think I have it right, then BAM! something totally obvious I didn't see before hits me in the face and I have to go right back to the beggining.

[Observer of dreams]

No cmon atheist I have seen [EDIT] gorrilas [END EDIT] jump out of virgins before , they get scared. I used gorrilas because a semen joke seemed kind of vulgar

[Questioner]

Virgins can get pregnant, you know.... Semen doesn't care how it got where it did, only that it got there, and there's other ways than intercourse.

Just interjecting.

Hey, it was 2000 years ago, you know

[Gerioke]

Virgins can get pregnant, you know.... Semen doesn't care how it got where it did, only that it got there, and there's other ways than intercourse.

Just interjecting.

Hey, it was 2000 years ago, you know

Well at least you admit it really happened.

[maguschris]

Virgins can get pregnant, you know.... Semen doesn't care how it got where it did, only that it got there, and there's other ways than intercourse.

Just interjecting.

Hey, it was 2000 years ago, you know

Well at least you admit it really happened.

Well ok. Seems off track but whatever.

Ok heres the paradox. An atheist cannot rely on God to prove that God doesn't exsist obviously so he must rely on science. In an atheists response they say "God doesn't exist because [PLACE SCIENTIFIC FACT HERE]". Now before anyone gets defensive I want to point out that there is nothing wrong with this. The problem arises when one tries to refute the scientific finding. The main principle of science is the ability to test things.[EXAMPLE] my theory is that a balloon will float when filled with helium regardless of its color. The scientific test is essential to the art of science. Now when an atheist says "God doesn't exist because so and so is this and that. It gives the believer a chance to partake in the scientific way of thinking. So, thinking like a scientist, they refute the claim, over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over using different arguments each time. When the atheist derails every single claim you can only come to one conclusion and that is the claim cannot be tested. So here is the contradiction and thus the paradox.

[sTATEMENT]

God cannot exist because he cannot be tested by science, and is therefore illogical.

[END STATEMENT]

No person can show any evidence to show that the statement is untrue.

The statement is not scientifically testable because nothing can be provided to show it is untrue.

Since the statement cannot be tested by science the statement is therefore illogical.

look the point everyone here is missing is this:

The only way to scientifically prove anything, is to prove that whatever you are testing can't be disproved with current methods.

for example: I cannot disprove God (nor do I want to)

Therefore in a scientific sense God exists. EXCEPT, there is no way for us to test the hypothesis that God does not exist, scientifically; THEREFORE this discussion is moot anyway until we are scientifically able to test for the presence of a higher being, if that day ever arrives.

(and yes I believe God exists, maybe not in the Christian way of thinking about "God", but I do believe a higher being or beings exist)

"God cannot exist because he cannot be tested by science, and is therefore illogical."

this is the most ludicrious unscientific statement I have EVER seen in my life. No scientist with half a brain would say this. That statement (from a science perspective) would be more similar to:

"We cannot prove or disprove God at this time because we do not have any way to test the hypothesis that God does (or does not) exist, therefore we cannot come to a conclusion on this matter at this present time."

Edited January 17, 2007 by maguschris