Is There Any Reason to Believe the Biblical Story of Creation?

@mark noble,

mark noble wrote:

What's not the truth?
People believe different truths - How can you state that anything is true or false?
Is there any reason to believe anyone's story of anything?

Once you define God clearly, then either that thing you've specified exists or it doesn't. You probably can't determine the truth about it, but everyone doesn't get to have his own truth, just his own opinion about the truth. Either there are macroscopic aquatic creatures under the oceans of Europa or there aren't. Once you tie down the details of what you're asserting, either your assertion is true or it isn't. It's not both true and false and it's not neither true nor false. It's either true or false.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

You and I obviously think differently.

As Olivier put it, you seem to believe that rationality is the alpha and omega of the human condition. I do not.

We have gone beyond the original question of a "reason" to believe in what we probably agree is a creation myth told by the Bible, to is there a "reason" to believe in God, and I have already explained to you that in the absence of empirical evidence that precludes a conclusion that God exists or God doesn't exist, I prefer not to settle with "I can't say," and based on contemplation, have concluded there is a God.

I understand that you believe it heretical or even just plain stupid for me to believe that there is a sound basis for my belief in God that is not based on empirical evidence, but I see no profit in attempting to explain the nature of my contemplation further since we both know it doesn't contain empirical evidence, and I know that you cannot appreciate any basis that does not.

Since you can't get past the notion that a "reason" can't exist or is invalid unless it is based on empirical evidence, and you view these threads a debate to be won or lost, there's no "reason" for me to continue what I would have liked to be a discussion.

I also know you enjoy declaring victory in your debates and so I concede.

You won.

You don't get to hint that you won but state that I won. The technique of believing what you want in the absence of evidence that it's true produces both correct and incorrect conclusions randomly. If I say that I believe that bird-like creatures fly around the atmosphere of Jupiter with no evidence that it is true, then I am using a method of reasoning that doesn't work in any situation in which it's testable. Your conclusion, or whatever you want to call it, is unjustified by rationality.

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

Brandon9000 wrote:

You don't get to hint that you won but state that I won.

I don't? I guess I broke another one of your rules. Sorry, I didn't mean to rob you of the thrill of victory.

I didn't hint that I won, because I don't think that I won. I never viewed my participation in this thread as joining in a contest with you. There was never anything to debate with you from the start. As I noted, we both know that there is no empirical evidence that the Biblical creation myth is factual, nor is there empirical evidence that God exists. You have set this thing up from the start as a debate you can't lose, and on those terms you won. No one has provided you with evidence that the Biblical creation myth is fact or that God exists. You win.

Maybe some another poor Christian sap will come along and try and play with you. I came for a discussion, and frankly, all I have gotten is seemingly endless versions of the same thing you've repeated yet again in your response to me declaring you the winner.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

So sorry that I tried to prevail in what was obviously a disagreement, as hundreds of people have with me on this board. I have had people call me all sorts of names here in response my assertions of opinion. I, on the other hand, never made any reference to you as a person. My desire to promote my viewpoint is no different from anyone else's. Apparently, it must be somehow unfair for me to wish to show that my viewpoint is right.

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

There is a difference between promoting a viewpoint and repeating the same argument over and over again. In this forum, people are forever calling other people names. You're not alone in having been on the receiving end of the name calling. That you don't engage in the practice yourself is to your credit, but you needn't keep flashing that badge. Perhaps I have unduly thin skin but I perceive your constant equating of my belief with childish and ignorant fantasies to be saying something about me as a person.

In any case, I don't wish to be engaged in a debate on the topic of this thread and I don't want to be engaged in a debate on my departure. Have an enjoyable 4th of July.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

There is a difference between promoting a viewpoint and repeating the same argument over and over again. In this forum, people are forever calling other people names. You're not alone in having been on the receiving end of the name calling. That you don't engage in the practice yourself is to your credit, but you needn't keep flashing that badge. Perhaps I have unduly thin skin but I perceive your constant equating of my belief with childish and ignorant fantasies to be saying something about me as a person.

In any case, I don't wish to be engaged in a debate on the topic of this thread and I don't want to be engaged in a debate on my departure. Have an enjoyable 4th of July.

I have never, in any post, said anything about you as a person. Speaking exclusively about the content of your opinions doesn't count. Happy Independence Day.

0 Replies

@Brandon9000,

Quote:

How do social, cosmological, or poetic considerations provide a basis believing that God actually does exist?

They provide (to some of us) social, cosmological, or poetic reasons to opt for believing rather than not believing.

Quote:

Once the word "God" is defined clearly, then either he exists or he doesn't. You can't have your own version of reality. There is only one right answer.

First, how do you know that for a fact? Just because we cannot think of an alternative does not mean that there is no alternative. Our logic is only human, and thus probably imperfect... There is no proof whatsoever that our logic works all the time in in all situation, nor that it applies beyond this universe.

Even within our universe, the wave-particle duality proves that apparently illogical things can be empirically supported...

Second, even if you believe the alternative "exist/not exist" truly applies to God, you have no possible way of proving which side of the alternative is true, at least if one defines God as an architect of the universe who does not interfere with his creation anymore. Such a god would remain undetectable, by definition.

I agree however that the interventionist gods of the Bible can be proven to not exist.

I use the plural "gods" because I contend that Yahweh is a different god than El, the god of genesis. So there's already two gods in the old testament, and then there is a third one in the new testament: Jesus. It's fairly clear to me that as defined or described, these three gods do not exist.

1 Reply

Quote:

Topic title: Is There Any Reason to Believe the Biblical Story of Creation?

Einstein proved time is stretchy and elastic, and the bible agrees with him-
"With God a thousand years are as one day" (2 Peter 3:8 )
"Behold, I will bring again the shadow of the degrees, which is gone down in the sun dial of Ahaz, ten degrees backward. So the sun returned ten degrees, by which degrees it was gone down" (Isaiah 38:8 )
And in a separate incident- "The sun stopped in the middle of the sky and delayed going down about a full day. There has never been a day like it before or since" (Joshua 10:12-14)

But of course God couldn't use terms like "time dilation" or "quantum physics", so he dumbed down the creation timeline and put it into human language.
Jesus too said later- "You hardly believe me when I tell you earthly things,so how would you believe me if I told you heavenly things?" (John 3:12)
which is why he tried to get his message across in simple parables that hopefully everybody could understand.. Smile

1 Reply

@Romeo Fabulini,

Quote:

Einstein proved time is stretchy and elastic

You need to brush up on Special and General Relativity.

Quote:

But of course God couldn't use terms like "time dilation" or "quantum physics", so he dumbed down the creation timetable and put it into human language..

Yeah, cause I guess god thought we would ALWAYS be dumb, huh?

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:
How do social, cosmological, or poetic considerations provide a basis believing that God actually does exist?

They provide (to some of us) social, cosmological, or poetic reasons to opt for believing rather than not believing.

Not the question. I didn't ask you why you opt for believing. I asked you how social, cosmological, or poetic considerations provide a basis believing that God actually does exist? I have news for you, poetry isn't evidence that a God exists.

Olivier5 wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:
Once the word "God" is defined clearly, then either he exists or he doesn't. You can't have your own version of reality. There is only one right answer.

First, how do you know that for a fact? Just because we cannot think of an alternative does not mean that there is no alternative. Our logic is only human, and thus probably imperfect... There is no proof whatsoever that our logic works all the time in in all situation, nor that it applies beyond this universe....

So that's your argument? When I state that something either exists or doesn't exist, you ask how I know that logic works? Henceforth, whenever you make any argument whatsoever on any topic whatsosever, you will be subject to the question, "How do you know that logic works?" What a cop-out. It's an answer to any argument someone doesn't like. The next time someone gives a good argument that I'm wrong, instead of admitting it, or shutting up, I'll just say, "Oh yeah, well how do you know that logic works?"

Believing things with no evidence that they are true is a method of arriving at truth that doesn't work in any situation in which you can test it. Your conclusions are right or wrong only randomly. I guess I'll go and believe that a kindly group of advanced extraterrestrial aliens watch over the human race, guiding us at critical moments because I feel like it.

1 Reply

Quote:

Romeo said: Einstein proved time is stretchy and elastic
Glujohn said:You need to brush up on Special and General Relativity.

Are you saying time is NOT stretchy and elastic mate? What are you, an oldtime fundy preacherman?.. Wink

Quote:

Romeo said: But of course God couldn't use terms like "time dilation" or "quantum physics", so he dumbed down the creation timetable and put it into human language..
Glujohn said: Yeah, cause I guess god thought we would ALWAYS be dumb, huh?

Nah mate he gave us the brains to work it all out, and even threw in a few clues to help us along.. Smile

"God hangs the Earth on nothing" (Job 26:7)

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/starfield_zpsb2a298c0.jpg~original

1 Reply

@giujohn,

giujohn wrote:

Yeah, cause I guess god thought we would ALWAYS be dumb, huh?

Not all of us.

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

Quote:

poetry isn't evidence that a God exists.

No evidence, no. Poetry is better than that.

Brandon9000 wrote:

Olivier5 wrote:
There is no proof whatsoever that our logic works all the time in in all situation, nor that it applies beyond this universe.

What a cop-out. It's an answer to any argument someone doesn't like. The next time someone gives a good argument that I'm wrong, instead of admitting it, or shutting up, I'll just say, "Oh yeah, well how do you know that logic works?"

Believing things with no evidence that they are true is a method of arriving at truth that doesn't work in any situation in which you can test it.

The problem is precisely that you try to apply logic in an area where you cannot test it: the supernatural. What evidence do you have that God is subjected to logic?...

Even testing logic empirically within our world seems difficult. Logic is an a priori framework through which we interpret data. You either believe in it or not. Most people do.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

Quote:
poetry isn't evidence that a God exists.

No evidence, no. Poetry is better than that.

Are you saying that the existence of poetry or certain poetry indicates that God exists? If so, please say how it does that?

Olivier5 wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:

Olivier5 wrote:
There is no proof whatsoever that our logic works all the time in in all situation, nor that it applies beyond this universe.

What a cop-out. It's an answer to any argument someone doesn't like. The next time someone gives a good argument that I'm wrong, instead of admitting it, or shutting up, I'll just say, "Oh yeah, well how do you know that logic works?"

Believing things with no evidence that they are true is a method of arriving at truth that doesn't work in any situation in which you can test it.

The problem is precisely that you try to apply logic in an area where you cannot test it: the supernatural. What evidence do you have that God is subjected to logic?...

Even testing logic empirically within our world seems difficult. Logic is an a priori framework through which we interpret data. You either believe in it or not. Most people do.

You can use that reasoning to prove anything whatsoever:

1. Olivier is a criminal who intends to use his membership on A2K to commit a crime.
No matter what you say, no matter how good a case you make that it isn't so, my answer is that you haven't demonstrated that logic works.
2. I am the rightful owner of A2K and all equipment connected with it.
No matter what argument you give, and no matter how many bills of sale for the equipment you show, my argument is that you haven't shown that logic works.
3. The Moon is made of green cheese.
You say we've already been there and shown that the parts we've seen aren't made of cheese? You say we have spectrographic data on its actual composition? My argument is that you haven't proven that logic works.

Any test you run will show that the technique of believing specific facts without evidence produces correct results only randomly. The only way anyone can believe in God is to make the argument that rationality is wrong. Nice. From now on, no matter what argument you give about anything, I will invalidate it by pointing out that you haven't shown that reasoning works. By the way, I urge you to change you plan and not use A2K to commit a crime.

1 Reply

@neologist,

giujohn wrote:

Yeah, cause I guess god thought we would ALWAYS be dumb, huh?

Not all of us.

uh oh...was that an insult? Shocked

1 Reply

@giujohn,

There ya go. Puttin' words in my mouth .. . . .

0 Replies

Anyone who believes this ridiculous tripe should be locked up for their own safety and that of others. They're pathetic, frightened fools.

0 Replies

@Brandon9000,

You simply don't understand the points I am making.

1. One side point is that you keep saying that you can't believe something without evidence, and yet you believe some things without evidence. Such as logic. I trust logic too and would never argue against it, but I am AWARE that I do so without evidence. I believe in logic and so do you, but contrary to me, you're not acknowledging it as a belief.

2. But the central, topical point is that, even if you trust logic in the natural world, you cannot apply it to the supernatural world.

2 Replies

There is no such thing as a "supernatural world." You're attempting to constrain Brandon with your own superstition.

There is evidence for logic. If properly applied, it confirms hypotheses, or refutes them. If it has not been properly applied, this can be determined by reviewing the syllogism employed, or the premises from which the syllogism derives. All non-cetacean mammals have four legs. All dogs are non-cetacean mammals. Therefore, all dogs have four legs. Any objection to that syllogism would have to be based on a refutation of the premises.

My experience of the drivel you post at this site is that you wouldn't know logic if it bit you in the ass.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

At the least, the supernatural world exists as human thought: beliefs, psychological and social entities, as folklore. In folklore, logic does not apply very well, not the logic of mathematicians anyway.

Whether or not there exists something beyond this universe is a moot question. The way I see it, if it's truly beyond the universe, then it is beyond us. No need to waste time on that.

And BTW, some dogs have three legs...

1 Reply

Is There Any Reason to Believe the Biblical Story of Creation?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know