Am i the only one?

@Brandon9000,

Quote:

So, if the reasoning is not false, then, you think that there are kindly aliens in a nearby spaceship intervening in my life to help me? You think that such a belief is justified by that reasoning?

That does not follow at all, Brandon...and if you think about it a while (it will require that you open your mind in order to do that)...you will see that it does not follow.

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

Brandon9000 wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:

There is nothing "false" about my reasoning, Brandon. You simply have got you mind so closed to the arguments being made...that they cannot penetrate.

Like I said...your problem, not mine.

One thing false about your reasoning, for instance, is that you say, and I paraphrase:

If there is a God, then everything is evidence for the existence of God

This argument is obviously specious. If my life's successes are the result of intervention by aliens in a nearby spaceship, then my life's successes are evidence for their existence. This argument hardly supports the idea that such aliens are responsible.

Open your mind, Brandon.

I am not trying to support the idea that there is a god.

I am simply trying to suggest to you, a guy with a tightly shut mind, that IF THERE IS A CREATOR GOD...then everything you see (or think you see) IS evidence that the god exists.

It is a tautology of sorts...

And if aliens in a nearby spaceship are responsible for my life's successes, then my life's successes are evidence that they exist. You figure this is a pretty good argument that it's so?

You are grasping at straws now, Brandon.

That could be a good thing or a bad thing.

Sometimes that is the last futile gesture before the dawn breaks.

We'll see.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

Quote:
Believing or guessing that God exists is illogical because there is little, if any, evidence that it is so.

There MAY BE all sorts of evidence, Brandon...but you are dismissing it as non-evidence because you do not want to acknowledge the possibility of a god.

In any case, it is not illogical to guess that gods exist...or, for that matter, that gods do not exist.

It is illogical to insist that gods exist...or that gods do not exist.

When you finally "get" that...it will be significant progress.

I do not insist that a God does not exist. I am saying that there is little or no evidence to support the idea and that it is illogical to believe things for which there is no evidence. The so called evidence that you have presented so far consists entirely of phenomena which can be explained in other ways. If you think that there may be "all sorts of evidence," give me an example, and it cannot be a reference to phenomena which easily admit other explanations. That is simply not evidence.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

Quote:
So, if the reasoning is not false, then, you think that there are kindly aliens in a nearby spaceship intervening in my life to help me? You think that such a belief is justified by that reasoning?

That does not follow at all, Brandon...and if you think about it a while (it will require that you open your mind in order to do that)...you will see that it does not follow.

Sure it follows. You asserted that if there is a God, then everything is evidence of his existence. This argument can be used to justify the existence of anything. For example, using your argument, if my life's successes are the result of alien intervention, then my life's successes are evidence for alien intervention. Clearly, this argument does not support the idea of such alien intervention.

2 Replies

@Brandon9000,

Only if you're an agnostic like Frank. Anything is possible. Mr. Green

0 Replies

@Brandon9000,

are you after evidence or proof?

2 Replies

@Brandon9000,

Brandon9000 wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:

Quote:
Believing or guessing that God exists is illogical because there is little, if any, evidence that it is so.

There MAY BE all sorts of evidence, Brandon...but you are dismissing it as non-evidence because you do not want to acknowledge the possibility of a god.

In any case, it is not illogical to guess that gods exist...or, for that matter, that gods do not exist.

It is illogical to insist that gods exist...or that gods do not exist.

When you finally "get" that...it will be significant progress.

I do not insist that a God does not exist. I am saying that there is little or no evidence to support the idea and that it is illogical to believe things for which there is no evidence. The so called evidence that you have presented so far consists entirely of phenomena which can be explained in other ways. If you think that there may be "all sorts of evidence," give me an example, and it cannot be a reference to phenomena which easily admit other explanations. That is simply not evidence.

It IS evidence.

We do not know if it is evidence of a god or not.

It MAY be...and it may not be.

You are asking for proof.

Can't get that.

0 Replies

@Brandon9000,

Brandon9000 wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:

Quote:
So, if the reasoning is not false, then, you think that there are kindly aliens in a nearby spaceship intervening in my life to help me? You think that such a belief is justified by that reasoning?

That does not follow at all, Brandon...and if you think about it a while (it will require that you open your mind in order to do that)...you will see that it does not follow.

Sure it follows. You asserted that if there is a God, then everything is evidence of his existence. This argument can be used to justify the existence of anything. For example, using your argument, if my life's successes are the result of alien intervention, then my life's successes are evidence for alien intervention. Clearly, this argument does not support the idea of such alien intervention.

Stop grasping at straws, Brandon.

Next thing you know, ci will be trying to support you...and then where will you be?

0 Replies

Claiming that if there were a god, the evidence would be all around us inferentially assumes both monotheism, and a creator god. Frank is very much the product of christian thinking, and it colors all of his assumptions.

1 Reply

@Smileyrius,

Smileyrius wrote:

are you after evidence or proof?

He is after proof.

Evidence often is not proof...and almost always it has to be evaluated. Sometimes it even has to be guessed at.

Watch any trial...and you will see that.

But what Brandon is saying is that "everything" cannot be evidence of a god...because he does not want to see any evidence of a god.

He wants proof.

He isn't gonna get that.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

Claiming that if there were a god, the evidence would be all around us inferentially assumes both monotheism, and a creator god. Frank is very much the product of christian thinking, and it colors all of his assumptions.

Actually, Setanta...Brandon specifically asked about a "creator god"...which is the reason I am heading where I am in my discussion with him.

0 Replies

@Smileyrius,

In the thread to which Ros, Set, and Brandon are referring, it was asked whether there was any reason to believe the Bible story of creation. Since the creation account in the Bible amounts to only a few paragraphs, I confined my posts to what had been written. I could be mistaken, of course, but it certainly seemed to me that my discourse was rejected because it was so limited.

Then, when I tried to add additional information about authenticity such as the prophecy foretelling the complete destruction of Babylon, my discourse was rejected because Babylon continued to exist until after the time of the apostles.

So I discontinued trying

May the hamsters have mercy

3 Replies

@neologist,

neo, Another way to look at the promise of jesus' return is that people have been praying and waiting for over two thousand years. All the while, this planet produces more people who are doomed to die that nasty death of hell.
If you can interpret that as mercy, than you have no idea about human pain and suffering. Billions of people who live and die on this planet are already doomed, so what does that promise to return really mean?

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

One thing that apears true about unbelievers is their willingness to accept the spew of nominal christianity as Bible teaching. Look at it this way. When the preachers bless the cannons for both sides of the war, can they possibly tell you the truth about God?

Learn what the Bible really says.

0 Replies

@neologist,

Your bogus claims about the "complete destruction" of Babylon were rejected for several reasons. First, because the events predicted did not take place as described in scripture. Second, because you were fudging the historical record to attempt to claim that the events did happen (such as the diversion of a river being equated to a prophecy that there would be a drought and the rivers would dry up). But finally, because Babylon was not destroyed--it simply withered away after the establishment of the Caliphate. Nobody mentioned the so-called apostles. I see you as willing to lie about very recent history as you about events 2500 years ago.

0 Replies

@neologist,

By the way, i referred to no thread, so if you don't want me to slap you around for lying, keep my name out of it.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Sorry, sir. I added your name in an edit when I discovered your post above. I had not read it completely. As for Babylon in prophecy.
Conquered by Cyrus............................ Check
Waters (river) dried up ........................Check
Eventualy desolated .............................Check
Not part of prophecy,
but mentioned in discussion, I think.
After apostles (after Bible written) ......Check

1 Reply

@neologist,

You are a liar, and you are a liar because you cannot accept that your fairy stories are not inerrant. The waters did not dry up, the river was diverted. The modifier "eventually" is not used in your phony baloney prophecies. Babylon was not desolated, it was simply abandoned.

You're self-delusion, and because you cling to your delusions so desperately, you have also become a liar. You have detailed putative prophecies, and not a tenth of what they say ever came to pass. You are apparently of the "two out of three ain't bad" school--it's not good enough to get around the abject failures of you so-called prophecies.

You are a liar.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

Smileyrius wrote:

are you after evidence or proof?

He is after proof.

Evidence often is not proof...and almost always it has to be evaluated. Sometimes it even has to be guessed at.

Watch any trial...and you will see that.

But what Brandon is saying is that "everything" cannot be evidence of a god...because he does not want to see any evidence of a god.

He wants proof.

He isn't gonna get that.

No, I am not asking for proof. I am asking for any evidence at all to suggest that God created the universe and maintains a hand in its operation. My point is that it is illogical to believe things if there is no evidence to suggest that they are true.

When I ask you for evidence, you list phenomena which could easily be attributable to other causes. Evidence would be something which could easily be caused by a God and much less easily attributed to other explanations. That's what evidence means. If I see that a basketball has appeared in my yard, it might have been blown there by wind, but it might also have gotten there other ways. Its presence is not particularly proof that it was blown there by the wind, because it doesn't suggest that explanation more than other explanations. Surely this is elementary. The existence of stars and grapefruits could be attributable to a God, but it is not really evidence of a God because it could also be the work of natural forces.

2 Replies

@Brandon9000,

You wrote with which I agree,

Quote:

My point is that it is illogical to believe things if there is no evidence to suggest that they are true.

Trying to prove a negative goes nowhere. As individuals, we must make up our mind whether something exists or not from the 'evidence' that's available.

Most adults understand that santa clause is a fictional character who are played by many during the christmas season. We can observe them in most shopping malls. No harm is done.

As subjective beings, we have choices. Some of us prefer to believe there are no gods because no one has yet produced any evidence for it.

It's somewhat like science; it can show evidence from observation that can be repeated without any sense of emotion or faith. It is or it isn't. No one can with gods.

0 Replies

Am i the only one?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know