The God Debate

[aaron]

A lengthy exchange between Rick Warren, leader of Saddleback church with other 25,000 members and Sam Harris, a prominent atheist. It's a long read, but worth it if you struggle to understand why one believes or doesn't believe in Jesus. There have been several debates, but this one is different to me because if I could pick one person to represent Christians in the debate, it'd probably be Rick Warren. Although, this debate leaves something to be desired, not to mention the fact that I don't think Christianity can be defined in debate. While Harris' science is perfectly suited for such. Here's an excerpt:


WARREN: Where do you get your morality? If there is no God, if I am simply complicated ooze, then the truth is, your life doesn't matter, my life doesn't matter.

HARRIS: That is a total caricature of—

WARREN: No, let me finish. I let you caricature Christianity. If life is just random chance, then nothing really does matter and there is no morality—it's survival of the fittest. If survival of the fittest means me killing you to survive, so be it. For years, atheists have said there is no God, but they want to live like God exists. They want to live like their lives have meaning.

HARRIS: Our morality, the meaning we find in life, is a lived experience that I believe has, to use a loaded term, a spiritual component. I believe it is possible to radically transform our experience of the world for the better, very much the way someone like Jesus, or someone like Buddha, witnessed. There is wisdom in our spiritual, contemplative literature, and I am quite interested in understanding it. I think that medita-tion and prayer affect us for the better. The question is, what is reasonable to believe on the basis of those transformations?http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17889148/site/newsweek/

[CircusRide]

Alot of Christians don't care for Rick Warren's ideas.

[Conveyor Belt]

Did Rick Warren say he was a Christian, or are you just assuming?

[Astra]

He's the leader of a church whose ideals seem to indicate a belief in God and Jesus Christ as his son - that's what a Christian is, isn't it?

And from the article itself:
At the Summit: On a cloudy California day, the atheist Sam Harris sat down with the Christian pastor Rick Warren to hash out Life's Biggest Question—Is God real? A NEWSWEEK exclusive.

[aaron]

Did Rick Warren say he was a Christian, or are you just assuming?

I've read one of his books and attended a seminar where he was doing a drive to get people to go to Africa to help AIDS victims. He certainly talks and acts like one in my book. And that's a Christian book itself.

[TRV25]

Wow- that was a great interview. I always enjoy hearing the atheist perspective and getting a better idea of where they are coming from. I think Rick Warren's closing statement was a great one:

WARREN: I believe in both faith and reason. The more we learn about God, the more we understand how magnificent this universe is. There is no contradiction to it. When I look at history, I would disagree with Sam: Christianity has done far more good than bad. Altruism comes out of knowing there is more than this life, that there is a sovereign God, that I am not God. We're both betting. He's betting his life that he's right. I'm betting my life that Jesus was not a liar. When we die, if he's right, I've lost nothing. If I'm right, he's lost everything. I'm not willing to make that gamble.

[Valkhorn]

WARREN: I believe in both faith and reason. The more we learn about God, the more we understand how magnificent this universe is. There is no contradiction to it. When I look at history, I would disagree with Sam: Christianity has done far more good than bad. Altruism comes out of knowing there is more than this life, that there is a sovereign God, that I am not God. We're both betting. He's betting his life that he's right. I'm betting my life that Jesus was not a liar. When we die, if he's right, I've lost nothing. If I'm right, he's lost everything. I'm not willing to make that gamble

Pascal's Wager is not sound logic.

[Valkhorn]

"Where is the wise man? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolishness the wisdom of the world?" I Corinthians 1: 20

I'm not playing duelling scriptures with you :)

I put to you the Atheist's wager:

You should live your life and try to make the world a better place for your being in it, whether or not you believe in God. If there is no God, you have lost nothing and will be remembered fondly by those you left behind. If there is a benevolent God, he will judge you on your merits and not just on whether or not you believed in him.

[EricStratton]

Glad you're back on here, Doc. Played any tennis lately? (Off-topic)

You and Valkhorn can continue with your lively non-debate.

[SouthChic]

Last time I played tennis was with Seller's brother. He's a good player and a really nice guy.

Huh?? You played tennis with my brother???

[Valkhorn]

Oh, I'm not looking for a duel. I was simply posting my initial reaction to your post.

Oh :(

*hides banjo*

[dollfus46]

Alot of Christians don't care for Rick Warren's ideas.

As a Christian, I find nothing to be gained by debating the subject.

[dollfus46]

He's the leader of a church whose ideals seem to indicate a belief in God and Jesus Christ as his son - that's what a Christian is, isn't it?

Yes and no, in my opinion, Astra. That definition in and of itself, won't do it. I'm sure Zorro and Doc can better describe a Christian, and do it more eloquently, but you must believe that Jesus Christ is the savior, accept him into your heart and follow him. You must be born again. That's how I think of a Christian, anyway.

[Valkhorn]

That's all well and good, but a debate has both sides and there are plenty of people - myself included - who do not believe in any faith.

There are plenty of people in this world who feel Atheists are immoral and evil, and in fact studies have shown Atheists are the most socially discriminated people (even more than homosexuals). People feel more comfortable with their children coming out of the closet than admitting they are an Atheist, and an Atheist has less a less likely chance of ever holding public office than someone who is openly gay.

I know plenty of Atheists who are smart, good people. And frankly I think it's rather silly how we are treated. Yes I used to believe, and no I don't believe anymore - simply because it never made me happy and it never gave me the answers I so desire. Plus I see the world and the universe work just fine without the need for divine explanation and as far as what happens when I die I view it this way.

No matter what, no one in the world really knows what happens when you die. Nothing could happen. Something could happen. But the fact remains that no matter how strongly someone 'believes' or has faith, it doesn't make it so. No one knows. That's what it boils down to. So why should it matter? Deal with your life now. Make now your best moments. Use the time you have now to improve your life and to make others around you feel better.

If there is nothing after this life, then you've not wasted a moment. And, if there is, no matter if there are no gods or 300, if they are just gods then they won't care what you believed. No just and omniscient god or gods could ever punish you for being a good person under a stipulation.

So, I just don't worry about it. I don't believe in anything supernatural. I don't believe in Angels, or Ghosts or anything like that. And that doesn't make me an immoral person. I don't drink or smoke, I don't do drugs, I barely even curse in public, and I try to give to charity when I can.

So, why should I be punished for that just because I didn't sacrifice to Wotan, or because I didn't say there is one god Allah, or that Jesus is the only way?

[Valkhorn]

Actually a close study of the Christian Bible suggests that when the Antichrist appears he will be regarded in the eyes of the world as a very moral and upright (aka, GOOD) person. The issue is reliance...do you place your reliance in Christ (or whatever religion you ascribe to) or in yourself?Ever heard of self-fulfilling prophecy? I do not want a good world with lots of potential to be destroyed over religion. I also do not want to see the end of the world brought about or the destruction of civilization because Jesus might come.

What if he never comes? Who will save us from ourselves?

And also what you said, that someone could be good, but be a horrible person in the eyes of your lord is illogical and does not show a very nice 'lord' to me. Morality is based on actions, not whichever sky being you worship, even if you worship none at all.

Plus, where do you get this idea from? You get it from an old book of prophecy that was written and mistranslated over and over by man. No matter how anyone can claim the Bible was written or inspired by 'god' it was man who put pen to paper, and it was man who wrote what he believed thousands of years ago, at a time when very little about the world was understood.
"Good" and "bad" truly are relative, but not as the world defines moral relativism. That's true to a point, yes. The people who flew planes into the WTC on a faith based initiative thought they were doing god's work. So did the people who conducted the Spanish Inquisition. And even Stalin, who was an Atheist, did not commit his crimes against humanity as an Atheist, he committed them for political reasons. That is why he exiled so many people to Siberia - because they didn't agree with him politically.

For example, if you work as hard as you can in your church, and you help all sorts of people, but you are doing it for your desires, to receive credit, and for other selfish reasons, Christians would consider this wrong. Who said it was for your own desires? You can help others and help yourself at the same time and there's nothing wrong with that. Life is too short to spend it being miserable.

Jesus said that such people have truly already received their reward in full.But Mother Theresa was of that mind too. She MADE people suffer instead of healing them because she felt that Christianity taught her that people were worthless and not worthy of medicine. She didn't try to make people around her feel better. She tried to make them feel miserable. And from what people have told me about her who had met her, she was miserable herself.

See, this is why Christianity bothers me. When you think you know the mind of god, you give yourself liberty to do some pretty silly things - as well as the freedom to hurt others even if you do not know it. Because some people think the 'end times' are coming, they may actually try to get them started. That bothers me as well.

There is no such thing as a second coming or a rapture, and we need to stop dividing people along religious lines and start finding peace somewhere or we will have no civilization left. No one will save us from ourselves. We don't have some magic place to go to. This planet is pretty much it until we have the technology to colonize some other planet and that technology may be centuries off.

Yet, in that time we have the potential for global war due to different people claiming they know the same god, yet claiming different things, and more than willing to hurt many people because their god told them to do it. Never forget 9/11 was done out of faith and religion more than it was done for political reasons, and the way militant Islam is now is just the way Christianity was in the middle ages.

If we go in full war against militant fundamentalism like that, no one will win. We have to find a logical and reasonable solution to it or else it will truly be a Jihad - a holy war with religion against religion.

We shouldn't destroy society and civilization over ignorance and fear.

[Valkhorn]

Okay, I was with you until your comments about Mother Theresa.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mother_Teresa#Critics

That's just from Wikipedia. I've heard interviews of people who worked with her, and they agree with the criticisms.

And I believe that enough of the Christian Gospel has been presented to you now on this thread and others for you to make an informed decision one way or the other.

Were you trying to witness to me? Look, you're not the only one who's tried that game and believe me I know plenty about Christianity (from the history of it to even reading the Bible cover to cover) and I am not sold on it.

Thank you, drive through.

Rather than belaboring these points with you further, I will simply agree to disagree.

See this bothers me. Debate is not a bad thing. Open debate is the only way you can really know anything for sure. To quote Thomas Jefferson:

Shake off all the fears of servile prejudices, under which weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call on her tribunal for every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear.

If you desire any clarification of certain points of Christian theology, etc., I'll be glad to answer, though Zorro typically provides a much more thorough response.


No thank you. I am open to debate over Christianity but I do not desire to be witnessed to :)

[Valkhorn]

Actually Val, debate for debate's sake rarely moves the conversation forward. In fact, the dialogue often becomes circular, redundant, stale, and sometimes emotional elevated. Wrong. Questioning something is how you move forward. Questioning things is how we determined the Earth was no longer the center of the universe. Questioning and Debating things is why we know about general relativity now. That is how we landed on the moon.

Asking.

Doubting.

Questioning.

That is how one knows more about the world around you.

[amanda]

Actually Val, debate for debate's sake rarely moves the conversation forward. In fact, the dialogue often becomes circular, redundant, stale, and sometimes emotional elevated.

Like I said, if you have a geniune interest in particular doctrines of faith, ask away. Otherwise, I'll let what I've already said and the posts of others stand in place of further comment.


Unfortunately, Doc, the title of this thread is "The God Debate". Personally, I don't see any need to debate the issue. I know what I believe and I have believed it for as long as I can remember. I don't understand nor do I think I can change someone else's belief, or lack thereof.

[aaron]

Trillions of people throughout history are wrong. Richard Dawkins is right.

[Fish-Bait]

Wrong. Questioning something is how you move forward. Questioning things is how we determined the Earth was no longer the center of the universe. Questioning and Debating things is why we know about general relativity now. That is how we landed on the moon.

Asking.

Doubting.

Questioning.

That is how one knows more about the world around you.

We determined that the earth was not the center of the universe by using a telescope and math. Math is the only exact science....that's why doctor's have that little saying after their name "practicing medicine".

We landed on the moon in a rocket ship, very slowly.
"One small step for man, One giant leap for mankind."
Again, a little math was involved.:-D

[Valkhorn]

Valkhorn, why do you 'ask, question or doubt' this issue if your mind is already made up? Because I think it's healthy for everyone to debate it, not just me. Plus I'm not forever closed to the idea and I'm simply looking for the other side of the debate.

You already have accepted certain answers to your doubt & questions. So has everyone, but asking for the other side or a valid argument is not a crime. I want to encourage everyone to discuss things openly and fairly.

So, I can only assume that your purpose for debating this issue is to persuade others to accept Aethiest doctrines as you do. But at the same token, couldn't that be said of your side as well? Isn't that the side of a debate - to persuade? How many times have I had your side discussed without the option do discuss my side? How come you like to discuss your side all the time, yet when my side is brought up you think I have evil notions or something.

Free speech applies to everyone, not just those you agree with - and that is why I would like for you to openly discuss or debate your ideas as well.

Otherwise, what would be your reason for debate and why would you care what others believed? Like I said, the same can be said for you guys. I've already had one person attempt to witness to me - so we're both guilty if you want to split hairs. However I'm not afraid to question my ideas or to openly discuss what people believe in or ask about it.

[Valkhorn]

I believe, however, that when a Christian debates this issue (as TheDoc has here) it should be for 3 specific reasons. First, it should be done for the purpose of presenting the gospel of Christ so that God can be glorified. I disagree. I do not attempt do debate my side to glorify how I'm better than everyone else.

Second, God tells us through scripture that Christians are to be prepared at a moment's notice to defend (or explain) our faith to others in a clear manner that can be understood. Yet, I don't think it ever really is.

And finally, as Christians we are called by God to share the principle of salvation with others. To share your idea of salvation when all you've done to establish it is pat yourselves on the back and not really question your faith so you know why whatever you believe in is so.

We are to plant the seed of Christ - as Doc has done in this debate - so that others may hear, see and experience the love of Christ.But if you plant a seed which is intellectually derelect it will not be very effective, now will it?

Otherwise, there would be no other purpose. We as Christians desire and pray for a specific outcome to the debate.But it's incorrect for me to want my own outcome of the debate?

[Valkhorn]

I have no trouble with the premise of the thread. Debate for the sake of discovery, enlightenment, etc. is a noble pursuit that I often enjoy.

As do I.

But as Queen Mother has so eloquently pointed out, Valkhorn has already arrived at a conclusion.

And you haven't? Why are you blaming me for what you've already done yourself?

I agree with you amandah that I cannot make a person change his or her mind. That is a work of God.

I disagree. It is not god, it is logic and reason which makes someone accept something else (or at least that should be the reason). One shouldn't blindly accept something because their friend said so or because they grew up that way. One should find their own way to reason and truth because that is the only way one will know anything for certain.

Life is hard - and in life you have to pave your own path sometimes.

Christians are often called to be His hands and feet

But not called to think for themselves?

I posted what I felt called to post.

As did I.

Once I recognized that Valkhorn was seeking to debate simply for the sake of debate (which is related to arguing simply for the sake of arguing)

Incorrect. I'm trying to think critically upon things and I'm trying to get you to do the same. Why is a perfectly valid question. Why is an uncomfortable question - but it needs to be asked.

, I decided I'd move on and let someone else pick up the banner if they felt called to do so.

Called? What about personal responsibility? Even in the Bible it teaches you to not give up (of course it also says a lot of bad things in the Old Testament too). Also your religion teaches you that God gave you free will - why are you so willing to forsake critical thinking for blind belief?

[Valkhorn]

But the results of the debate lie with God.

No they don't. They lie with the debators. They lie with man. With people.

I do not expect anything said here to change your attitude or beliefs.

Can't the same be said about you?

But, through the debate process and TheDoc's sharing of scripture perhaps the seed will fall on the heart of a reader who needs to hear God's message. And, that is the sole reason that a Christian would ever have to debate Christianity with a non-believer.

And perhaps from what I say the seed of logic and reason over blind belief and fear will take root as well.

[Valkhorn]

And, that is the sole reason that a Christian would ever have to debate Christianity with a non-believer.

This also troubles me as well. It's like saying "Never question what you believe. It is right because I believe and that's all there is to it! Why do I beileve? What evidence? Well... there isn't any... but I believe!"...

That just doesn't float with me. You should always question - I do it every day. Just like Jefferson said, question the very existence of a god, because he would probably like reason more than blind servitude.

[Fish-Bait]

GOD=LOVE

A little more math, "in the red words too!":clap: :clap: :) :smt059

[Valkhorn]

Christians have clear marching orders:

"Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you." Matthew 28: 19-20


*yawn* More scriptures? The Bible was written by men. Fallible men.

Ezekiel also teaches us that God takes no delight in the destruction of those outside of the faith. I think you will find Valkhorn, I'm not judging you. I'm sharing information. I'm simply not going to get into debate for debate's sake.

But the Old Testament disagrees with you there. In the Old Testament God takes the delight in destroying villages, killing babies, wiping out the entire world's population, making a snake crawl on its belly (what kind of punishment is that), etc.

The Bible, or any book for that matter, can be used to fit any idea. The difference is you must back your ideas with evidence, reason, and logic.

I keenly understand the position of the atheist.

I don't think you do :)

The same rings true for zorro. The questions that are asked are questions we struggled with as well.

And I feel we should always ask this.

But I realized a long time ago that when I completely opposed to God, there wasn't a word anyone could say to me to change my mind. God had to regenerate my mind, which He did.

No one regenerates your mind but yourself though.

Therefore, I share His Word with a passion to see others come to the same conclusions. That's what Christians are called to do.

But what about reason? What about thinking for yourself.

You think I am wrong and that is certainly your right.

No. I am questioning as to why you think you are right.

This does not anger me in the least. Unfortunately there are many proclaiming Christians in the world who would attempt to beat people over the head with the Bible.

I've been there before, and thankfully I'm quite immune to that :)

As I said earlier, there has been Gospel presented here for you to make an informed judgment for yourself. But as amandah and Queen Mother have correctly pointed out, without direct intervention from God, the human mind cannot possibly accept the message of God.

But thats just it. Millions of good people have died for the overall sins of man. Does that make it mean any less or any more? No. Crap happens in this world and we all have to do what we have to do to improve it.

The power to change the world is with us, it is not with some supernatural power. The power of reason and thought is with us. It is not with a god or gods or Zeus or Wotan.

And to me that doesn't mean we can just give up and let god sort it out. We have to sort it out because if we don't, no one else will.

I wish you well and welcome to MyHattiesburg.

Likewise :)

[amanda]

Valkhorn the one thing I've noticed you repeat throughout your posts is that we "should thing for ourselves". Well, we are. Each of us on this thread have thought for our selves and made the decisions we are comfortable with regarding our religion. There are many denominations on here and each has discussed interpretations of the Bible and have posed questions on same. But the one constant in each of our lives is our belief in God. I wish I had something magical to say that would open a door to you to believe the same, but alas - I don't. I'm not one for quoting scripture and I'm not going to testify as to why I believe the way I do - mainly because I don't think you would care regardless.

[Valkhorn]

Valkhorn the one thing I've noticed you repeat throughout your posts is that we "should thing for ourselves". Well, we are.

It doesn't seem that way to me. Every other statement is something along the lines of "God says so".

As I posted earlier, I believe that a Christian should have a completely different purpose for debating this issue. A Christian debates the issue of Christianity because we are instructed by God to do so - just as I laid forth in my earlier post. Our belief in what we debate is backed up by faith - a faith in what we cannot see; in what we don't completely understand; in what the Holy Spirit enables us to trust without this understanding.

Without this faith, we are no different from the agnostic or aethiest who believes a certain point of view based on fact or opinion. It is our faith in what we believe - our faith in God - that determines our purpose in the debate and it is our faith that allows us to leave the outcome of the debate to God.

Then that is where we differ. I do not have faith :)

[amanda]

It doesn't seem that way to me. Every other statement is something along the lines of "God says so".

We are God's children and like all children we do question and have to grow on our own. Our decisions and choices are left to us and to some of us we choose to believe in God.

Then that is where we differ. I do not have faith :)


If you do not have faith, then what do you have? What do you believe? Do you believe in any other power but yourself? And when things in your life get's tough - who do you turn too?

[Valkhorn]

If you do not have faith, then what do you have?I have what is real to me. I have logic and reason, and what I can test.

What do you believe?As far as any beliefs go it is outlined as follows. I do not believe in anything supernatural or spiritual at all - nevertheless that doesn't mean I do not find beauty in the world. I find beauty in the world in terms of knowing more about it. Why is a sunset amazing to me? Because of the low-angle refraction through the atmosphere and the science that makes it work. Why is music amazing to me and why does it fulfill me? Because of understanding what efforts it took to compose or to make the music and the understanding that I can have about it.

I recall a quote (although I don't remember who said it) which best sums it up: "I can appreciate my garden without knowing there is a fairy at the bottom of it"

Logic tells me that no one in the world can possibly know what happens after you die because we die before we could ever find out. Plus all the stories of ghosts and spooks and spirits are not verifiable or testable and have never been observed under controlled, predictable conditions. So no one can really know - and it could be something, or it could be nothing.

So that leads me to conclude that it does not matter one iota. The best thing you can do is to lead your life the best you can and to do the best you can do to help others or to lead a good life - and in the end it should not matter. If there isn't a god, then I haven't wasted my life. If there is, I'm sure it's smart enough to realize that what you believe isn't as important as what you do for one has no relavence on the other. (A claim of being very faithful and pious doesn't guarantee that one is so.)


Do you believe in any other power but yourself?Of course there are other powers in this universe by myself. In fact there are things that are so powerful out there they could annihilate entire galaxies, and compared to the rest of the universe our planet is but a pale blue dot. In fact, I think it is a good time to interject a quote by Carl Sagan on that regarding a picture of our lonely planet taken by the Voyager spacecraft outside of our solar system:

We succeeded in taking that picture [from deep space], and, if you look at it, you see a dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever lived, lived out their lives. The aggregate of all our joys and sufferings, thousands of confident religions, ideologies and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilizations, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every hopeful child, every mother and father, every inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every superstar, every supreme leader, every saint and sinner in the history of our species, lived there on a mote of dust, suspended in a sunbeam.

The earth is a very small stage in a vast cosmic arena. Think of the rivers of blood spilled by all those generals and emperors so that in glory and in triumph they could become the momentary masters of a fraction of a dot. Think of the endless cruelties visited by the inhabitants of one corner of the dot on scarcely distinguishable inhabitants of some other corner of the dot. How frequent their misunderstandings, how eager they are to kill one another, how fervent their hatreds. Our posturings, our imagined self-importance, the delusion that we have some privileged position in the universe, are challenged by this point of pale light.

Our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark. In our obscurity -- in all this vastness -- there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves. It is up to us. It's been said that astronomy is a humbling, and I might add, a character-building experience. To my mind, there is perhaps no better demonstration of the folly of human conceits than this distant image of our tiny world. To me, it underscores our responsibility to deal more kindly and compassionately with one another and to preserve and cherish that pale blue dot, the only home we've ever known.


There is a grandeur in this world - and it is far beyond any human imagination. And, to me, God, is part of that limited human imagination. That is why the real world fascinates me more than religion ever could, because no matter how imaginitive humans are, we will never be more imaginitive or innovative than reality across cosmic time.

And when things in your life get's tough - who do you turn too?I try to be reasonable about it. I try to think things logically, weigh the pros and cons, and try to take things a day at a time. It isn't easy to do, nor am I always that way, but I feel it is a much more rational thing to do than to do nothing.

[amanda]

I have what is real to me. I have logic and reason, and what I can test.

Logic tells me that no one in the world can possibly know what happens after you die because we die before we could ever find out. Plus all the stories of ghosts and spooks and spirits are not verifiable or testable and have never been observed under controlled, predictable conditions. So no one can really know - and it could be something, or it could be nothing.




So, it is all about what you can test or can be reflected in a test by scientists somewhere. If someone tells you that the water is hot and will burn you - instead of just believing, you have to test it first?

I've been fortunate that the love of God has always been present in my life. I don't know when it started, but I went to Church when no one in my family did. My mother is Agnostic. She believes in God, but puts no stock in religion. That is her way and I have mine.

True story - but undocumented by any scientist:

My grandfather was not a religious person. He scoffed at religion until he was diagnosed with cancer and was told he would not live long. Toward the end, he sought out God. I was 11 at the time and in my opinion I had thought he waited to long.

On the night he died, I was alone in my grandparents home. While I walked past his bedroom I felt a cold blast of air and I turned to look. Staring back at me was a pair of red eyes and an overwhelming feeling of hate came at me. In a voice that would raise your hair I heard "He's mine". I ran outside shaking and began to pray harder than I ever prayed in my short 11 years. During the prayer, I had a since of peace come over me and another voice in my heart said "no, he's not". I never doubted who either of those forces were and I never doubted that my grandfather went to heaven.

Scoff if you will - I didn't have a gaggle of scientist there or video camera's or any impartial witnesses. It was just me, my God and the devil - but no one can shake what I know and I never turned my back or questioned God from that point forward.

[Valkhorn]

So, it is all about what you can test or can be reflected in a test by scientists somewhere. If someone tells you that the water is hot and will burn you - instead of just believing, you have to test it first?

Well if someone just tells you you really can't know, now can you? Just because someone says something it doesn't mean anything. I once met a homeless guy who thought he was going to overthrow the government, and it doesn't mean he will.

Science isn't like that though - it doesn't take people on word alone. Things are demonstrable, testable, predictable - in other words REAL.

I've been fortunate that the love of God has always been present in my life. I don't know when it started, but I went to Church when no one in my family did. My mother is Agnostic. She believes in God, but puts no stock in religion. That is her way and I have mine.

I grew up in religion and lost my faith years ago. It just didn't make me happy and the more I learned about it the less happy with it I was.

True story - but undocumented by any scientist:

My grandfather was not a religious person. He scoffed at religion until he was diagnosed with cancer and was told he would not live long. Toward the end, he sought out God. I was 11 at the time and in my opinion I had thought he waited to long.

I know of people that were also of no faiths that were also healed. I also have read studies which so faith to be no better than random chance. If I was sick with a disease I would rather be treated by knowledge than superstition.

On the night he died, I was alone in my grandparents home. While I walked past his bedroom I felt a cold blast of air and I turned to look. Staring back at me was a pair of red eyes and an overwhelming feeling of hate came at me. In a voice that would raise your hair I heard "He's mine". I ran outside shaking and began to pray harder than I ever prayed in my short 11 years. During the prayer, I had a since of peace come over me and another voice in my heart said "no, he's not". I never doubted who either of those forces were and I never doubted that my grandfather went to heaven.

I'm sorry that that happened to you, and my condolenses, but it could have been just a cold pocket of air or something that sounded like that. People also see things all the time that aren't really there, and I'm not trying to take away your faith but personally nothing supernatural has ever happened to me.

Scoff if you will - I didn't have a gaggle of scientist there or video camera's or any impartial witnesses. It was just me, my God and the devil - but no one can shake what I know and I never turned my back or questioned God from that point forward.

But that is what you believe. You honestly don't know any of this for a fact - and it could simply be an the typical magination of an 11 year old. When I was 11 I thought I saw some things but I realized that it was just my imagination - so really nothing supernatural occured.

In fact Dawkins talks about some of these things in his latest book - experiences like this when he was a child - in The God Delusion.

And, I'm not trying to take away the feelings you have for your loved ones - we all have feelings like that somewhere. But at the same time I have never seen anything supernatural for myself or to be testable anywhere.

I know you feel quite strongly about what you feel strongly about but that is where we differ.

[Valkhorn]

As a self-professing lover of debate, allow me to invite you to the many other literally thousands of threads here at MyHattiesburg. From what I can tell, you've only posted here on the religious thread. One could conclude that you are simply looking to grind an ax.

I lurk around there and when I want to post there I shall. But as of this time this is what I like to debate about. I am not looking around to grind an ax - I simply want to put for the other side of the issue.

[Fish-Bait]

"But that is what you believe. You honestly don't know any of this for a fact - and it could simply be an the typical magination of an 11 year old. When I was 11 I thought I saw some things but I realized that it was just my imagination - so really nothing supernatural occured."



Valk, Prove to us it was your imagination.

[fuzzis]

I accept that others believe; their beliefs do not threaten my own. I have no need to convince others of my beliefs or to try to persuade them to my point of view when it comes to the existence of god--or in my case, the non-existence. I respect that they have had experiences I have not.

fuzzis

[Augustus McRae]

"But that is what you believe. You honestly don't know any of this for a fact - and it could simply be an the typical magination of an 11 year old. When I was 11 I thought I saw some things but I realized that it was just my imagination - so really nothing supernatural occured."



Valk, Prove to us it was your imagination.


point!

[SoMissTV]

Valkhorn-

To say that you have no faith or trust in things that cannot be personally demonstrated is a broad brush with which to paint. Do you believe that we are involved in a military action in Iraq? Do you believe that England has a monarchy? Do you believe that space has no oxygen?

After all, "Well if someone just tells you you really can't know, now can you? Just because someone says something it doesn't mean anything."

How do you import the circumstances of this world into your mind?

[Fish-Bait]

point!

I have been wondering if you were gonna show up Gus.:)

[Augustus McRae]

Just listening and learning....my usual quiet, unassuming self, you know...

[amanda]

Well if someone just tells you you really can't know, now can you? Just because someone says something it doesn't mean anything. I once met a homeless guy who thought he was going to overthrow the government, and it doesn't mean he will.

So the only way to "know" is to learn totally on your own? But you seem to have no trouble believing in what Darwin wrote.

Science isn't like that though - it doesn't take people on word alone. Things are demonstrable, testable, predictable - in other words REAL.

I grew up in religion and lost my faith years ago. It just didn't make me happy and the more I learned about it the less happy with it I was.

And did a particular event finally turn you away completely? Just a question and you don't have to answer if you don't want to.

I know of people that were also of no faiths that were also healed. I also have read studies which so faith to be no better than random chance. If I was sick with a disease I would rather be treated by knowledge than superstition.

In many instances that is true, but my faith is a medicine all on its own. Besides, I've been fortunate to have doctors that have faith too.

I'm sorry that that happened to you, and my condolenses, but it could have been just a cold pocket of air or something that sounded like that. People also see things all the time that aren't really there, and I'm not trying to take away your faith but personally nothing supernatural has ever happened to me.

It was in June and there was no air-conditioning in my grandparents home.

But that is what you believe. You honestly don't know any of this for a fact - and it could simply be an the typical magination of an 11 year old. When I was 11 I thought I saw some things but I realized that it was just my imagination - so really nothing supernatural occured.

To say that what I wrote may have been a figment of my imagination is insulting. Besides which I have never been referred to as"typical". But I guess without hard evidence you won't believe that.

In fact Dawkins talks about some of these things in his latest book - experiences like this when he was a child - in The God Delusion.

Dawkins, again. So you do BELIEVE in something. Just not God.

And, I'm not trying to take away the feelings you have for your loved ones - we all have feelings like that somewhere. But at the same time I have never seen anything supernatural for myself or to be testable anywhere.

I know you feel quite strongly about what you feel strongly about but that is where we differ.

And hence no need for futher debate. Maybe I'll catch you playing the games.

[Valkhorn]

To say that you have no faith or trust in things that cannot be personally demonstrated is a broad brush with which to paint.

You've got me on that point. I just don't believe in anything supernatural - is that better, hair-splitter? :)

Do you believe that we are involved in a military action in Iraq?

Yes, and an unjust one.

Do you believe that England has a monarchy?

Yes, one with no power.

Do you believe that space has no oxygen?

Space has plenty of things - some stars are Oxygen fusing stars. ;)

Hydrogen -> Helium -> Oxygen -> Carbon -> etc. if I can remember my Astronomy.

After all, "Well if someone just tells you you really can't know, now can you? Just because someone says something it doesn't mean anything."

Well I try to go along what the facts say. Take the boiling water post - yes I know boiling water is at enough of a temperature to burn me - that is enough of a fact and a deduction to know that it will burn me. This isn't knowing off of no evidence though.

The better way to put how I try to live is I try to base conclusions off of as many facts as I can so I can make an informed decision.

How do you import the circumstances of this world into your mind?

Through what is tangible and real. :)

[Valkhorn]

So the only way to "know" is to learn totally on your own? But you seem to have no trouble believing in what Darwin wrote.

Did I say that? No. I use facts uncovered by other people yes. But I don't accept everything I hear willy-nilly. If their stuff isnt' researched or based in reality then it's not worth much. Darwin's book was researched and based on reality (namely the species found in the Galapogos on his voyage on the HMS Beagle).

And did a particular event finally turn you away completely? Just a question and you don't have to answer if you don't want to.

Nope. The older I got, the more I read, and the more people I met who were of different faiths, and of none at all, moved me away from it.


It was in June and there was no air-conditioning in my grandparents home. To say that what I wrote may have been a figment of my imagination is insulting. Besides which I have never been referred to as"typical". But I guess without hard evidence you won't believe that.

I'm sorry you find it insulting but that is the other side of the coin. I told you it wasn't my wish to insult you but this is how I look at the world.

Dawkins, again. So you do BELIEVE in something. Just not God.

Do I accept what he says blindly? No. Do I just randomly agree to whatever he says? No. I agree or disagree based on what I hear or what research I read that he has done.

You can believe in something with tangible evidence because it is as close to reality as you can get (and for it to not be so would be highly unlikely), but it doesn't mean that belief is just blind faith.

Perhaps a better term is that "I accept" what is well supported.

[SoMissTV]

Through what is tangible and real. :)

Music is not tangible, and yet you know which chord progressions are correct, and which are wrong.

[Astra]

Music is not tangible, and yet you know which chord progressions are correct, and which are wrong.
Is tangible necessarily "able to be touched," or is it more accurate to use it as "able to be detected via the senses?" I've heard it used both ways.

[Valkhorn]

Music is not tangible, and yet you know which chord progressions are correct, and which are wrong.There is no such thing as a right or wrong chord progression. :)

Also Music is measurable. It is also tangible because it involves sound - a very tangible thing.

[SoMissTV]

There is no such thing as a right or wrong chord progression. :)

You had class with Luigi Zananelli. :)

[Valkhorn]

You had class with Luigi Zananelli.

I wanted to but didn't. But it is true. People have used all sorts of odd progressions, just check out Integrales when it is at USM again lol

[Valkhorn]

Just reposting since it apparently was missed the first time through.

Factual evidence. Just like when you did your math homework and the teacher wanted you to 'show your work'.

[Valkhorn]

How factual must it be for you?

Factual enough that it can be measured or that it can yield a predictable result.

[Valkhorn]

So you care about reliability but not validity.What are you talking about? Something that can be measured, quantified, or is testable and can yeild a predictable result IS valid. Especially when it works.

[Valkhorn]

WRONG.

If I use a French test to test a math class, it will yield a very predictable and repeatable result. But it will be a completely invalid test of math.

What planet are you getting this from? Yes it would get a predictable result but not one that is 100% dead on. What if you gave the test in France?

The difference between reliability and validity is research methodology 101.

What point are you trying to make?

You can use index fossils to find petroleum and fossil fuels. That is reliability and validity.

Can you test or measure god? Can you tell me that your god is the right one? Can you tell me that your religion is the right one? What if we're all going to Hell because we didn't believe the world was created by Fire Giants in Middle Earth?

You try to put so much scrutiny on me but you leave NONE for yourself. You have used the 'what if you're wrong' argument - well what if YOU are wrong. We all have no way of knowing what happens when we die - and NO ONE knows their religion is the right one because everyone says that. And if everyone says that then how can any particular one be right?

You've tried to convert me - even though I have never tried to convert you.

You keep claiming what you are doing is because it is the will of God. This is ludicrous. You are debating me because you are told to witness to people and you were told by someone who was told by someone else that if you don't everyone's going to hell.

You are trying to scrutinized what I don't believe, but when I point the arrow at you and ask you why you believe what you believe you weasel out of it and give us the likely story that God told you to do it.

You cannot test god.
You cannot measure god.
You cannot even tell us if there is more than one or if there is one.
You cannot tell us what created this god.

Your opinions are just that - opinions. And, I've been trying to get you to realize this all along. Yet, what do you do? Hammer into my head your Judeo-Christian ideals as if your way is the only way and your way is the only way.

I have not tried to convert ANYONE in here, only offered my opinon just like you have of me. I have been insulted many times in this thread alone, yet did I say anything against it? No. I did what Jesus called 'turning the other cheek'.

My rant is about over but honestly its quite ridiculous how I'm criticized for trying to think critically but when I want you to do it you say "How dare you!"

Face it. I do not believe in what you believe. You are not going to convert me. I am just trying to debate the other side of the issue and maybe try to expose you to other opinions.

I guess it was my mistake to try to do that.

[fuzzis]

TheDoc is talking about reliability and validity (http://allpsych.com/researchmethods/validityreliability.html) in terms of statistics; he is not talking about reliability and validity in layman's terms. I can create a test that is reliable, but if it is not also valid, then it has little meaning.

fuzzis

[fuzzis]

As a qualitative researcher with a quantitative background, I have to quibble with the attempt to make quantitative a "better" form of research than qualitative. Both have their place; one is not inherently better than the other. Both give us valuable information, and research is not an either/or proposition.

As far as courses at USM, you will never go wrong taking a course from Dr. Shelley (http://ocean.otr.usm.edu/%7Ew118856) or Dr. Lipscomb.

fuzzis

[dollfus46]

That's all well and good, but a debate has both sides and there are plenty of people - myself included - who do not believe in any faith.

There are plenty of people in this world who feel Atheists are immoral and evil, and in fact studies have shown Atheists are the most socially discriminated people (even more than homosexuals). People feel more comfortable with their children coming out of the closet than admitting they are an Atheist, and an Atheist has less a less likely chance of ever holding public office than someone who is openly gay.

I know plenty of Atheists who are smart, good people. And frankly I think it's rather silly how we are treated. Yes I used to believe, and no I don't believe anymore - simply because it never made me happy and it never gave me the answers I so desire. Plus I see the world and the universe work just fine without the need for divine explanation and as far as what happens when I die I view it this way.

No matter what, no one in the world really knows what happens when you die. Nothing could happen. Something could happen. But the fact remains that no matter how strongly someone 'believes' or has faith, it doesn't make it so. No one knows. That's what it boils down to. So why should it matter? Deal with your life now. Make now your best moments. Use the time you have now to improve your life and to make others around you feel better.

If there is nothing after this life, then you've not wasted a moment. And, if there is, no matter if there are no gods or 300, if they are just gods then they won't care what you believed. No just and omniscient god or gods could ever punish you for being a good person under a stipulation.

So, I just don't worry about it. I don't believe in anything supernatural. I don't believe in Angels, or Ghosts or anything like that. And that doesn't make me an immoral person. I don't drink or smoke, I don't do drugs, I barely even curse in public, and I try to give to charity when I can.

So, why should I be punished for that just because I didn't sacrifice to Wotan, or because I didn't say there is one god Allah, or that Jesus is the only way?

You can only believe what you believe. But there was a song several years back......."You got to walk that lonesome valley. You got to walk it by yourself. Nobody else can walk it for you. You got to walk it by yourself." Well, you do. I don't.

[fuzzis]

I have no issue with this post, but surely you would agree that the more you approach qualitative descriptive research, the weaker your statements of causality become?

As I understand it, the point of qualitative research is not causality.

fuzzis

[Fish-Bait]

O.K. ALREADY...
http://www.christianforums.com/t5167238-a-trip-to-my-local-bookstore.html&page=3

http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=33656649

http://www.giveupalready.com/member.php?u=9829

AND CHECK THIS OUT....
http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=1793696

Valkhorn=oneweirdoinmybookthatlikestotrytomakechri stiansmad+christiansgivehimalltheknowledgehehas*he isyoung/hedontknowwhatwisdomis=needstolearnfromthiscommuni ty:-D
Just simple math......

[Valkhorn]

O.K. ALREADY...
http://www.christianforums.com/t5167...re.html&page=3 (http://www.christianforums.com/t5167238-a-trip-to-my-local-bookstore.html&page=3)

http://www.christianforums.com/showt...php?p=33656649 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=33656649)

This has what to do with anything? Look at my track record there. I back up my claims and post very good threads there. If you are so smart, post there and then get back to me.
[/URL]
http://www.giveupalready.com/member.php?u=9829 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=33656649)

So? I don't even post there.

AND CHECK THIS OUT....
http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm...iendid=1793696 (http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=1793696)

So what?
[URL="http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=1793696"]
Valkhorn=oneweirdoinmybookthatlikestotrytomakechri stiansmad+christiansgivehimalltheknowledgehehas*he isyoung/hedontknowwhatwisdomis=needstolearnfromthiscommuni ty:smt003
Just simple math......

And yet you felt the need to look me up on google.

Look I am who I am, I'm HAPPY with who I am, leave me be.

[amanda]

Look I am who I am, I'm HAPPY with who I am, leave me be.

You are the one that told us to look up the christianforums site. I know my curiosity was piqued by your mentioning that you posted on a christian forum. After reviewing some of your posts I did notice a trend - no matter what anyone tries to say, nothing changes with you. I guess you've gotten bored with pounding YOUR belief into their heads and have decided to grace us with your presence. Lucky us. Maybe you should try joining in on some of the more pleasureable aspects of this site and take a breather from your "preaching".

[Valkhorn]

You are the one that told us to look up the christianforums site. That doesn't mean stalking me on google.

I know my curiosity was piqued by your mentioning that you posted on a christian forum. Exactly. I have nothing wrong with open-minded Christians. They don't witness to me there. They don't force their beliefs down me there. Plus there are people of other faiths there too - like Hindus and Jewish people. And, there are plenty of Atheists there too.

I like to discuss things there because it's fun and the people are very knowledgeable.

After reviewing some of your posts I did notice a trend - no matter what anyone tries to say, nothing changes with you. But the same can be said of you and other hardcore Christians.

I'm HAPPY with what I am though. Why is that such a bad thing?

I guess you've gotten bored with pounding YOUR belief into their heads and have decided to grace us with your presence. I do not pound beliefs into anyone's head. I just try to explain the other side of the coin. Now if you don't like what I say I can see how it may feel like it is being pounded into your head - because I know it's not a very comfortable thought to some.

Lucky us. Maybe you should try joining in on some of the more pleasureable aspects of this site and take a breather from your "preaching".

There is a sermon thread here. There are threads about particular churches. There were posts in here about trying to show me the will of God and open me to Jesus. So in other words, if a Christian comes on here and preaches, it's ok. But if I do anything that remotely appears like it, it isn't ok.

What if I was Islam? Or Jewish? Or Hindu? Or Bhuddist? Would I be treated the same way?

I don't believe this is remotely nice or fair.

[bpitt]

People, people, just chill a minute.......................you go get in your corner, and you go get in yours...............now. I'm a Christian, so I'm biased to begin with. Now, all you fellow believers, the way I understand it, we are supposed to live by example. We are to witness to others. If they who we witness to turn us away, we are to live by example, from a distance, and pray for that person. That person will see the light through us. And will hopefully come around. If they don't, then we've done what we could. We've witnessed and lived like we were told to. To 'argue' with a non-believer if futile. We must live as an example, proof is in the pudding. Love thy neighbor, even if he doesn't believe, stop arguing. Am I starting to sound like a hippie? I hope not, they stink. But I love them. We are not to attack the non-believer, nor should we enter into an argument, for until they believe in Christ, they are ignorant of what is righteous, and one cannot argue with ignorance, one can only teach, instruct, educate, and pray for the individual. Witness, testify, and live by example. I'll pray for you non-believers, I've no gripe with you, I am but to be a humble servant and show you the way and to love you. People, hush and listen. Go pray something.

[Fish-Bait]

This has what to do with anything? Look at my track record there. I back up my claims and post very good threads there. If you are so smart, post there and then get back to me.



So? I don't even post there.



So what?


And yet you felt the need to look me up on google.

Look I am who I am, I'm HAPPY with who I am, leave me be.
I'll leave you be, no need in gettin' uppity about it, but you started it...:)
Don't act like you didn't try and google me:) :-D

[Valkhorn]

I'll leave you be, no need in gettin' uppity about it, but you started it...:smile:
Don't act like you didn't try and google me:smile: :smt003

I never did.

[amanda]

Well...don't google mine! :) Or if you do - don't play the "Amandah bending over and taking it" it has an internet VD.

[SoMissTV]

In another thread, you said:

hell I would like to do a formal...

But you don't believe in that place, so why do you use that word?

[Valkhorn]

But you don't believe in that place, so why do you use that word?

Because it's a word. Saying a word doesn't make a place or thing exist. By your logic I could say "one million dollars" and have it appear on my lap.

Your logic fails.

[SoMissTV]

Your logic fails.

My post was an interrogatory, not a deduction. How does the logic fail when the question does not make an assumption?

[Valkhorn]

My post was an interrogatory, not a deduction. How does the logic fail when the question does not make an assumption?

It was an implication, not an interrogatory. You said yourself you're here to waste my time.

The logic fails because your implication contains logic which fails.

[SoMissTV]

Prove that it was an implication and not a simple interrogatory

[Valkhorn]

Prove that it was an implication and not a simple interrogatory

You told me you were here to waste my time - and you're a smart-ass. :D

[SoMissTV]

You told me you were here to waste my time - and you're a smart-ass. :D

However, you can't measure either of these things, so it must not be true.

[Valkhorn]

However, you can't measure either of these things, so it must not be true.

I can measure the first because you said it. I can measure the second because I know you.

[SoMissTV]

I can measure the first because you said it.

But you don't believe what people tell you, remember?

[Valkhorn]

But you don't believe what people tell you, remember?

I do when they back it up.

Did you not get the memo?

[SoMissTV]

Well if someone just tells you you really can't know, now can you? Just because someone says something it doesn't mean anything.

You told me you were here to waste my time

I can measure the first because you said it.

That's the ballgame, folks. He doesn't believe me because I told him, and yet he does.

[Fish-Bait]

In constant sorrow________ all through his days

[Valkhorn]

That's the ballgame, folks. He doesn't believe me because I told him, and yet he does.

For the last time:

I will believe you if you have something to back up your claim. Maybe I wasn't clear on that but that's what I meant, and that is that.

Apologies to any confusion but again, I will believe you if you have something to back up your claim.

Why is that such a hard concept to grab?

[Fish-Bait]

So, we all come from the first substance on this Earth, like hydrogen or a rock, so I came from a rock. How did this rock get here? It had to be created so therefore there is a creator----So I think I'll call that creator God.
Does this make any sense? I dunno I am still searching and reading and making up my mind as I go along. There is Adam and Eve to contend with.
We will just see. But I just dont see anybody convincing me that there is not a great creator.

[Valkhorn]

So, we all come from the first substance on this Earth, like hydrogen or a rock, so I came from a rock. How did this rock get here? It had to be created so therefore there is a creator----So I think I'll call that creator God.

This is an invalid argument. Because you do not know something you can't invent an excuse - in other words "I don't know, therefore God". Plus, if you argue for there to be a creator, or a bubble-maker - someone had to make the bubble maker. And so it becomes an endless argument.

Plus Evolution says how live evolved. How there is descent with modification. There are plenty of other things that explain how stars form, how life may have gotten its start (Abiogenesis again), etc. We have already observed the birth and death of stars - and can find complete life cycles at any point in time for any type of star in the sky. We see evidence of how planets formed from accretion of matter and gravitational pull. All bodies in the solar system have shown the same approximate age. All meteorites found on Earth, moon rocks, and even rocks from Mars show the same age suggesting they were formed at the same time in the same way. We have even found planets outside of the solar system, suggesting that planetary formation is commonplace.

We have also just only scratched the surface in terms of the search for life as well. We've only really tested two or three bodies in the cosmos, and there are as Carl Sagan put it, billions and billions out there.

If you do not know something, then you simply do not know and won't until you get an answer until you uncover the evidence. You cannot argue from ignorance.

With regards to Abiogenesis (which is not Evolution) there are plenty of arguments for the origin of life. If you wish to discuss this in another thread or on the forum I mentioned feel free. Otherwise I can give you some thigns to read up on.

Does this make any sense?It doesn't. I can't say that a god or gods did something simply because I don't have an answer.

I dunno I am still searching and reading and making up my mind as I go along. We all are.

There is Adam and Eve to contend with.Well I don't agree with that. We don't have archaeological evidence for that. We don't have evidence for modern man suddenly appearing out of nowhere.

We do have evidence of common ancestry and transitional fossils though.

We will just see. But I just dont see anybody convincing me that there is not a great creator.And that's fine for you to believe that. Not one thing is wrong with it. I just don't see the need to interject it into something if I simply do not know.

[SoMissTV]

Now you're saying that you'll believe the assertions of a person if they have something to back up their claim.

When someone uses scripture to back up their claim, you dismiss it as written by man and therefore, not trustworthy.

Yet, scientific method and peer-reviewed journals are also written by man. So are the qualitative and quantitative measuring methods. In fact, all references to logic are based upon mankind's perception thereof, which you have previously stated to be untrustworthy.

Remember, respected scientists until the 1500s believed that the earth was the center of the universe. This was "scientifically proven" in their eyes, and the heliocentric theory was met with disdain.

I'm not knocking science; I think it's the best system we, as imperfect beings, have to measure the environment around us.

Valkhorn, I sense that you are asking many on this forum to quantify the uncountable, and qualify the immeasurable. In your mind, science is the paragon of perfection, and non-scientifically measured occurrences cannot be measured. Yet, we do this all the time through music, art, language, and dance.

The answers of which you seek from those on this forum are answers that cannot be rationalized in your imperfect, human methods.

Many here believe that this is by design.

[Fish-Bait]

This is an invalid argument. Because you do not know something you can't invent an excuse - in other words "I don't know, therefore God". Plus, if you argue for there to be a creator, or a bubble-maker - someone had to make the bubble maker. And so it becomes an endless argument.
If you do not know something, then you simply do not know and won't until you get an answer until you uncover the evidence. You cannot argue from ignorance.
My thoughts seem to bother you for the most part. Why is that?
You can argue from ignorance, lawyers do it for us all the time, (and they win.) Simply because we do not know.........hmmm. Yeah, I am ignorant on alot of stuff. But stuff had to be created man. There are all sorts of theories out there for one to ponder. I am going to ponder on the ones that make me feel better and do good onto others. The argument can be endless, but then we all die, and our argument here on earth stops. I think there is a God. Argue with me all you want to. Just because I cant touch,see, smell, or hear him doesn't mean there isn't one either. It's my opinion, dont get all worked up about it. You are still pretty young as so am I. We both need to learn what wisdom we can from our elders. If you keep all of you doors shut then you will run out of options. I contend your way of thinking will change later on in life. You already have gone from beleiving to non-beleiving, on the soul base of evidence. I like to keep my doors open.

[Valkhorn]

Now you're saying that you'll believe the assertions of a person if they have something to back up their claim.

When someone uses scripture to back up their claim, you dismiss it as written by man and therefore, not trustworthy.

Because it was written by men thousands of years ago who did not know how the world worked. They invented things like a global flood, the firmament, and a flat earth to explain how the world worked.

Yet, scientific method and peer-reviewed journals are also written by man.

But they have gotten us results. They are based in research. They work.

So are the qualitative and quantitative measuring methods. In fact, all references to logic are based upon mankind's perception thereof, which you have previously stated to be untrustworthy.

No. I said that the perception of men 2000+ years ago is untrustworthy because people back then had no idea about the things we know now.

Remember, respected scientists until the 1500s believed that the earth was the center of the universe. This was "scientifically proven" in their eyes, and the heliocentric theory was met with disdain.

But change was opposed by the church and there really wasn't any real research on it. Until Tycho Brahe, Galileo, and Keppler took observations and tried to calculate the data they finally uncovered that it was the Earth which orbited around the Sun. This was done through hard work and data.

Yet it was opposed by the church for some time.

I'm not knocking science; I think it's the best system we, as imperfect beings, have to measure the environment around us.

Agreed. It's given us great results and if anyone can come up with a system that gives us better results than that I'm all for them speaking up and telling us about it.

Valkhorn, I sense that you are asking many on this forum to quantify the uncountable, and qualify the immeasurable.

Because it cannot be done. It is faith, and that is the point I am trying to make.

In your mind, science is the paragon of perfection,

It isn't perfect, but it's like you said 'the best system we have'. If anything is better, I'm all for the use of it.

and non-scientifically measured occurrences cannot be measured. Yet, we do this all the time through music, art, language, and dance.

But there is a difference between supernatural beings and liking a tune. And yet they are both the same because it is opinion. I dont say that there is only one way to like music or that only one music is right (I even said that there is no correct chord progression). But I don't try to express my opinion as fact. And if I do, it is not my intention.

The answers of which you seek from those on this forum are answers that cannot be rationalized in your imperfect, human methods.

My point is that it cannot be rationalized and is no more valid than a belief in Wotan or Thor. Its just a matter of hubris and humility. If I have given off the air that I am right and no one else is - I apologize, as that is not my intention. But I do not feel it is right for me to be humble while others in this forum tell me that god is the only way. Not only a god, but the Judeo-Christian god.

Many here believe that this is by design.

But design cannot really be tested in nature. Are snowflakes designed? Are hurricanes designed? They exhibit great order out of chaos but we know they are done by natural processes. Are galaxies designed or are they just products of gravitation?

See to me, and yes this is my opinion, I feel that conjuring a designer when things seem to work without one is redundant.

[Valkhorn]

My thoughts seem to bother you for the most part. Why is that?

Curiosity. I'm very curious as to why you think this way and so that's why I try to pick it apart. No offense, I'm just too inquisitive.

You can argue from ignorance, lawyers do it for us all the time, (and they win.)

But I don't think that is right for them to do that - and it should stop.

Simply because we do not know.........hmmm. Yeah, I am ignorant on alot of stuff. But stuff had to be created man.

Says who? What if it just always existed? What if it just pops in and out of existance? Who says that is the only option?

And if so, who created the creator?

There are all sorts of theories out there for one to ponder. I am going to ponder on the ones that make me feel better and do good onto others.

Nothing wrong with that, diff'rent strokes, and all, and I'm just trying to show the other side of the coin.

The argument can be endless, but then we all die, and our argument here on earth stops.

Precisely. That is why I feel this life that we have now is so important. And why I feel that no matter what you believe, even if you don't, belief (or a lack thereof) can't and shouldn't be held against you.

I think there is a God. Argue with me all you want to. Just because I cant touch,see, smell, or hear him doesn't mean there isn't one either.

But you accept this on faith. Faith is fine, but to me it's just an opinion no more valid than three gods or none.

It's my opinion, dont get all worked up about it. You are still pretty young as so am I. We both need to learn what wisdom we can from our elders.

Perhaps, but age doesn't always mean wisdom and knowledge :)

If you keep all of you doors shut then you will run out of options.

I don't like to think my doors are all shut because that is why I ask questions. I want to know. I want to question. I want to find out and ask why. In fact I used to be a Christian.

I dont want my curiosity to offend you but it is just in my nature to keep asking the why's and how's.


I contend your way of thinking will change later on in life.

It may, it may not. The future isn't written yet. So might yours.

You already have gone from beleiving to non-beleiving, on the soul base of evidence. I like to keep my doors open.

Why is building beliefs soley on evidence bad?

[aaron]

My point is that it cannot be rationalized and is no more valid than a belief in Wotan or Thor. Its just a matter of hubris and humility. If I have given off the air that I am right and no one else is - I apologize, as that is not my intention. But I do not feel it is right for me to be humble while others in this forum tell me that god is the only way. Not only a god, but the Judeo-Christian god.


I doubt many members here even knew God had created you before you started posting in this forum, so you asked for it.

[SoMissTV]

Because it cannot be done. It is faith, and that is the point I am trying to make.

The point that scientific method cannot prove or disprove the existence of a higher being? I won't argue with you there. As scientific method is conceived by man to explain processes not designed by man, is it not also conceivable that a greater being could easily disguise itself from the scientific process?


See to me, and yes this is my opinion, I feel that conjuring a designer when things seem to work without one is redundant.


I would add one word to that statement: "seem".

As in, "when things seem to work without one." Again, I do not know how to prove the existence of a higher being using man made analysis. Yet, the human mind shows great receptiveness in comprehending nonscientific data, such as the arts. And that's the point I was trying to make.

To me, it is entirely within the realm of possibility that the very reason I can enjoy, interpret, and analyze occurrences which are nonscientific in nature and cannot be measured scientifically is the same reason that I cannot see, hear, or physically touch God, while still knowing He is there.

I will not be able to prove this to you, nor do I have any wish to do so. However, I am very comfortable with my personal beliefs, as they are mine.

[Hermione]

Valkorn has a stunning ignorance of the ancient world. He should sue his school.

[Valkhorn]

I doubt many members here even knew God had created you before you started posting in this forum, so you asked for it

I just said I liked to ask questions and I liked to be curious. Don't forget, you were trying to convert me.

[Valkhorn]

The point that scientific method cannot prove or disprove the existence of a higher being? I won't argue with you there. As scientific method is conceived by man to explain processes not designed by man, is it not also conceivable that a greater being could easily disguise itself from the scientific process?

But that would be a deceptive and redundant god would it not?

I would add one word to that statement: "seem".

Seem isn't always a guess, Mr. Hair Splitter :)

As in, "when things seem to work without one." Again, I do not know how to prove the existence of a higher being using man made analysis. Yet, the human mind shows great receptiveness in comprehending nonscientific data, such as the arts. And that's the point I was trying to make.

But we are beginning to understand how the brain understands these things and how the neurons comprehend them. It doesn't mean it involves magic.

To me, it is entirely within the realm of possibility that the very reason I can enjoy, interpret, and analyze occurrences which are nonscientific in nature and cannot be measured scientifically is the same reason that I cannot see, hear, or physically touch God, while still knowing He is there.

But that still is faith, is it not?

I will not be able to prove this to you, nor do I have any wish to do so. However, I am very comfortable with my personal beliefs, as they are mine.

Likewise with mine. You may not like to hear this but when I started to let go of religion I finally felt free.

[Fish-Bait]

Valk, I never said basing it on evidence was bad. I am just saying your beliefs may change. And thats all I am saying. There is not a negative word in it..I just do not see it like you do, accept it. I'll accept yours for being yours. Just accept mine for mine then we can argue more!

[Valkhorn]

Valkorn has a stunning ignorance of the ancient world. He should sue his school.

How? Ancient Hebrew mythology (which was what Genesis was based off of) believed in the firmament, a flat Earth, etc.:

http://www.ncseweb.org/graphics/Hebrew.gif

That is what they believed, yes. In fact the lengthy geneologies can be traced to the beliefs of Sumerian kings:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumerian_king_list

# Alulim of Eridu(g): 8 sars (28800 years)
# Alalgar of Eridug: 10 sars (36000 years)
# En-Men-Lu-Ana of Bad-Tibira: 12 sars (43200 years)
# En-Men-Ana 1, 2
# En-Men-Gal-Ana of Bad-Tibira: 8 sars (28800 years)
# Dumuzi of Bad-Tibira, the shepherd: 10 sars (36000 years)
# En-Sipad-Zid-Ana of Larag: 8 sars (28800 years)
# En-Men-Dur-Ana of Zimbir: 5 sars and 5 ners (21000 years)
# Ubara-Tutu of Shuruppag: 5 sars and 1 ner (18600 years)

And even the 'global flood' can be traced to a Sumerian merchant by the name of Ziasudra, who placed his wares on a barge over the course of a seven day flood. This became part of Gilgamesh, and later the Noachian flood.

[Valkhorn]

Valk, I never said basing it on evidence was bad. I am just saying your beliefs may change. And thats all I am saying. There is not a negative word in it..I just do not see it like you do, accept it. I'll accept yours for being yours. Just accept mine for mine then we can argue more!

Deal :)

[Valkhorn]

Valkorn has a stunning ignorance of the ancient world. He should sue his school.And yes there was the Library of Alexandria and even Eratothenes who measured the circumference of the world, but by and large a lot of people back then really didn't know much about how the world really worked.

Remember, Gravity wasn't understood or discovered until Newton, Heliocentrism until the 16th century, and even the basics of how the human body worked until around the time of Vesalius.

Disease was still caused by demons, not germs.
And even the global flood wasn't found to be wrong until modern Geology surfaced in the 19th century.
And the age of the Earth? We weren't sure until the 20th century with the advent of radiometric dating.

[SoMissTV]

Valk, you deal in the exoteric; I tend to look at the esoteric.

You know me, and I think you understand what I'm saying. You had to rid yourself of faith to feel free; I need my faith to feel free. I don't even think we're debating anymore, but merely laying out our platforms. Debating serves no purpose. You accept no rationalization using faith as a component, and I cannot discard faith as a component of my rationalization of this world.

You have well-thought out and composed thoughts on the matter. No one can say you didn't do your homework.

[SoMissTV]

Remember, Gravity wasn't understood or discovered until Newton, Heliocentrism until the 16th century, and even the basics of how the human body worked until around the time of Vesalius.


Excellent points. Human understanding continually evolves through time. The discovery of gravity by Newton does not imply that gravity did not exist until his discovery. Just because we do not have a cure for cancer does not mean that it doesn't exist; we just haven't found it yet. Our inability to understand occurrences through scientific method now does not mean this will always be the case.

[Valkhorn]

Valk, you deal in the exoteric; I tend to look at the esoteric.

Perhaps :) At least you're honest. Honesty goes a long way.

You know me, and I think you understand what I'm saying. You had to rid yourself of faith to feel free; I need my faith to feel free. I don't even think we're debating anymore, but merely laying out our platforms. Debating serves no purpose. You accept no rationalization using faith as a component, and I cannot discard faith as a component of my rationalization of this world.

Oh I understand where you're coming from, and I dont wish my curiosity to be offensive. Like I said, I just like to ask why.

You have well-thought out and composed thoughts on the matter. No one can say you didn't do your homework.

Thank you. As do you.

[Valkhorn]

Excellent points. Human understanding continually evolves through time. The discovery of gravity by Newton does not imply that gravity did not exist until his time.

It does, but the truth of it is that it gets better and we are improving. Just think at the quality of life now compared to 100 years ago or even 50.

Just because we do not have a cure for cancer does not mean that it doesn't exist; we just haven't found it yet.

Precisely, and with enough research I hope we do. I kind of relate it to the rhinovirus - there are so many strains and types of it that it is hard to cure rather than treat the symptoms.


Our inability to understand occurrences through scientific method now does not mean this will always be the case.

Very true, and as I've always said, if there is a better way then great. But as of right now it is what we have and it seems to work rather well.

[Hermione]

It's funny. I used to work at a medical school, and one of my tasks was to serve as the scribe for meetings of a research group. They were working on the effects of NO in mediating inflammation. They would be the first to tell you how little they actually knew. And most of them were Christians.

However, I have no interest in arguing with you with the ultimate goal of converting you or convincing you. I was just extremely irritated by the argument that "we know so much more than they did." Yes, we have more facts at our disposal than people did a thousand or three thousand years ago, but our powers of observation or reasoning are not necessarily any more developed. We have our own idols and superstitions, among which I included our belief in our own superiority. If you didn't have microscopes, how would you know about germs? The knowledge of germ theory is an outgrowth of an improved technology, not of improved intelligence. If you had no way to discover germs, the belief that disease is caused by evil spirits is not illogical. And considering that many diseases arise from psychological causes, the belief in "evil spirits" is not all that far off the mark.
I don't care, personally, whether or not you believe in God, but I do care that you avoid this worship of the present age. We are no smarter than those who came before us, we just have better machines.

[Valkhorn]

It's funny. I used to work at a medical school, and one of my tasks was to serve as the scribe for meetings of a research group. They were working on the effects of NO in mediating inflammation. They would be the first to tell you how little they actually knew. And most of them were Christians.

Honesty is good.

However, I have no interest in arguing with you with the ultimate goal of converting you or convincing you. I was just extremely irritated by the argument that "we know so much more than they did." Yes, we have more facts at our disposal than people did a thousand or three thousand years

Which means we technically know more than they did.

ago, but our powers of observation or reasoning are not necessarily any more developed.

In a way they are. We have honed our reasoning process quite a bit since that time.

We have our own idols and superstitions, among which I included our belief in our own superiority.

Carl Sagan once said that Astronomy was a very humbling experience. I encourage you to read Pale Blue Dot sometime and tell me how that is 'superiority'.

If you didn't have microscopes, how would you know about germs?

You very well wouldn't unless you found a way to detect them.

The knowledge of germ theory is an outgrowth of an improved technology, not of improved intelligence.

Did I say it wasn't? Man's brain really hasn't evolved much in the last 4000 years or so. In the last 500,000 years it has, but we're talking about more of an Evolutionary timescale.

If you had no way to discover germs, the belief that disease is caused by evil spirits is not illogical.

It is illogical when we know that evil spirits most certainly do not cause sickness.

And considering that many diseases arise from psychological causes, the belief in "evil spirits" is not all that far off the mark.

But those diseases often are based in a chemical inbalance in the brain or something that just doesn't physically work normally. It isn't based off of magic or pixie dust. We don't change our genetics by thinking about it.

I don't care, personally, whether or not you believe in God, but I do care that you avoid this worship of the present age.

I don't worship anything, and I'm not sure where you got that idea.

We are no smarter than those who came before us, we just have better machines.

Exactly, which leads us to know more. Therefore we can be certain that through progress mankind has great potential, and isn't worthless. Our civilization is what we make of it and if we think of ourselves as a miserable lot that is all we will get in return.

[Valkhorn]

Lou Hayward (and others) - "A man who stands for nothing will fall for anything."

I thought about that quote when I saw your use of the word "something."If I believed in the tooth fairy, the loch ness monster, Atlantis, Bigfoot, and every other hair brained idea that's out there I could see where you get this from.

But I don't. And I don't accept everything people say as the gospel. I told you plenty of times I like statements to be backed up.

I thought I made that abundantly clear.

[Valkhorn]

Do you believe that eye witness testimony offers one form of the "something" you require to convince you that something is valid?I know where you are headed with this and eye witness testimony isn't everything. People can lie. Even in court if an eye witness claim isn't backed by evidence it is unsupported and useless - which is the same way in Science.

Steven Hawking himself could make any 'eye witness' testimony he wanted to and he wouldn't simply be accepted because he is Hawking. He would have to back up his sources. I reccommend the BBC documentary The Hawking Paradox to see how many people are working hard to find evidence to prove him incorrect.