If God were real, you wouldn’t need a book

[Into the Night]

Nope, it is an irrational claim.

Denial of logic.

 

[Into the Night]

As you and I have discussed before, militant atheists are as emotional and irrational as Bible-thumpers.

There is no such thing as a 'militant atheist'.
There is nothing irrational about Christianity.
You are denying logic again.

 

[Into the Night]

The point is: there is nothing in the real world that verifies the existence of any specific given God. Nothing

There IS evidence of any given god or gods.
There is no proof, and none is possible.

 

[Into the Night]

Well, what would happen as it relates to math, science and technology if all of their existence was wiped from the Earth? Would we eventually rediscover electricity? Medicine? Computers?

Likely not.

 

[Into the Night]

Science and logic.

Science is not a cause.
Logic is not a cause.

Yes, you are irrational if you think the universe can physically pop into existence from nothing.

What makes you think it did?

You are also irrational for thinking animals could have religion.

Nothing irrational here.

Maybe? More blind guesses from you? You are irrational if you think the most likely explanation is that order and design spontaneously comes from inanimate random chance.

Go learn what 'irrational' means.

You still haven't given me your logical argument for why animals might have religion.

Attempted negative proof fallacy.

You didn't explain why it's irrational. You're just howling that it's irrational.

Inversion fallacy.

Howling is not a logical argument.

Void conclusion fallacy.

A logical rational argument doesn't have to be true. It just has to be justified on the basis of it's premises.

Irrational. Paradox. You cannot argue both side of a paradox.

 

[Into the Night]

There’s literally no evidence of the Christian god. Period.

There happens to be quite a bit of evidence.

The Bible.
The Earth.
The Sun, moon, and stars.
The presence of life on Earth.
Our freedom to choose.

Nobody has seen, heard, nor spoken to it, or any god for that matter.

How do you know? You don't get to speak for everyone. Omniscience fallacy.

There’s no evidence that prayers get answered.

There is plenty of evidence of that as well.

There’s no evidence of any afterlife.

There is an inherent belief that death is not final. That itself is evidence.

The Trinity was adopted after a fucking vote at Nicaea. On and on.

No vote was taken to create God, Jesus Christ, or the Holy Ghost.

 

[Diesel]

By saying I am irrational and gossiping about me and passing judgement on me with your good buddy, the noted liar and sock puppet GMark.

Yes this thread open to reveal who actually started insulting, and who resorted to four letter curse words and bitch insults.

I don't know gmark.

 

[Uncensored2008]

There is no such thing as a 'militant atheist'.

WRONG. An agnostic thinks there is a god, but cannot describe it. He assumes that such is unknowable.

WRONG. An atheist cares not whether a god or gods exist or not. Science, for example, is atheistic. So is mathematics. So is logic. NONE of them care whether a god or gods exist or not. They simply don't go there.
Atheism is not a religion.

The Church of No God is a fundamentalist style religion.

Nonsense - an Atheist seeks to force all to follow their faith. Atheists demand there is no possibility of any god save themselves.

 

[Cypress]

Well, what would happen as it relates to math, science and technology if all of their existence was wiped from the Earth? Would we eventually rediscover electricity? Medicine? Computers?

The answer is obviously yes.

Correct. Anything not based in fact and evidence would suffer the same fate.

Me either, yet here we are

Science is based on repeatable observations.

The world is made of number, so it's a guarantee that humans would rediscover math. We are literally surrounded by the quantifiable and the countable.

The intellectual foundation of Christianity is based on a historical claim: the life, death and resurrection of the historical person Jesus of Nazareth.

History is different from science and math.
It's not repeatable. It's a unique event

You get rid of Jesus from history, you eliminate Christianity.

This isn't some profound revelation.

 

[Hume]

Why would Darwinian evolution equip us uniquely, out of all the life forms in Earth history, with an affinity for the spiritual and the transcendental?

The spiritual and transcendental mean nothing to me. Just religion words.

 

[Hume]

The human brain is a "pattern matching" machine.

Agree with that.

 

[ZenMode]

Likely not.

Why would it happen once but not again?

 

[Ross Dolan]

That's a you and a Cypress problem. I didn't call anyone or anything irrational as an insult. A belief in God is irrational. That's a simple statement of fact.

I do not "believe in" any gods...but why do you suppose such a belief "irrational?

 

[Ross Dolan]

You can be insulted, too, Dutch. As you know, I could hardly care less what you and Cypress imagine about my intentions. I dare either of you to explain to me how a belief in a god is rational. You can't. So both of you can fan yourselves and sniff your smelling salts in private.

I dare you to explain to me why you consider it to be irrational?

 

[Ross Dolan]

The point is: there is nothing in the real world that verifies the existence of any specific given God. Nothing. The only thing there are are "questions" (where did it all come from? why do bad things happen to good people? etc. etc.)

Yet we are talking about easily the most important question of all: Is there a God? There is literally nothing to point to any specific God. Even you favored deist position of mush-mouthed "semi-squishy nearly meaningless" concept of "god" is not present anywhere except as a placeholder for your favorite question about fine tuning.

All you have are mysteries. God is a placeholder because there is literally nothing to point to God as an explanatory variable for anything.

The most important question of all actually is: What is the true nature of the REALITY of existence? The questions "Is there at least one GOD?" and "What is/are its nature?...are merely pieces of it.

What is YOUR answer to the question you posed? Is there a God?...which I prefer posed as, Is there at least one GOD?

 

[ZenMode]

Science is based on repeatable observations.

Right and with enough time, scientists would make the same observations, run the same experiments and come to the same conclusions/discoveries.

The world is made of number, so it's a guarantee that humans would rediscover math. We are literally surrounded by the quantifiable and the countable.

The intellectual foundation of Christianity is based on a historical claim: the life, death and resurrection of the historical person Jesus of Nazareth.

History is different from science and math.
It's not repeatable. It's a unique event

You get rid of Jesus from history, you eliminate Christianity.

This isn't some profound revelation.

This isn't only about Jesus. If you got rid of the writings of any religion, and wipe the memories of it's believers, there is nothing in existence today that would lead anyone back to any specific religion.

There is no reason today to "rediscover" the Christian/Jewish God, just as there's nothing today to rediscover Zeus.

 

[gmark77]

Science is based on repeatable observations.

The world is made of number, so it's a guarantee that humans would rediscover math. We are literally surrounded by the quantifiable and the countable.

The intellectual foundation of Christianity is based on a historical claim: the life, death and resurrection of the historical person Jesus of Nazareth.

History is different from science and math.
It's not repeatable. It's a unique event

You get rid of Jesus from history, you eliminate Christianity.

This isn't some profound revelation.

It's only a profound revelation if one doesn't believe that Yahweh God is the single most important fact of your entire existence, the single most important fact of EVERYTHING.

If you were a believer it would be a revelation that everything that underlies your belief is totally and 100% predicated on a copy of a copy of a copy of an ancient scroll which was itself written after a generation of oral tradition.

It's sobering to realize the single most important thing in the entire COSMOS has such a flimsy birth certificate.

 

[Cypress]

Right and with enough time, scientists would make the same observations, run the same experiments and come to the same conclusions/discoveries.

That's what I said. Science is based on pattern recognition and repeatability. Math originates from the fact that the countable is literally all around us.

That's not analogous to a historical event. A religion which is based on a historical claim is not repeatable or countable.

This isn't only about Jesus.

Your entire point was originally about Christianity. I can only respond to what you write, and cannot anticipate when you want to go back and change what point you want to make.

If you got rid of the writings of any religion, and wipe the memories of it's believers, there is nothing in existence today that would lead anyone back to any specific religion.

There is no reason today to "rediscover" the Christian/Jewish God, just as there's nothing today to rediscover Zeus.

I don't understand why you think this is such a profound point to make.

If you could use magic and wave a magic wand to make historical events and historical documents dissapear, of course they cannot be recreated.

History is not like math or science.

But humans always still would have had an affinity for spirituality, divinity, transcendalism. It's hard wired into us.

 

[gmark77]

The OP is still correct: if God were real you wouldn't need someone else's word for it. It would be manifest in the world in such a way that it could no more be ignored than gravity.

Instead what we get are the weak tea of "I don't know how this formed, ergo it must be God" followed up by "Over here someone has written about God. That must be true!"

 

[ZenMode]

That's what I said. Science is based on pattern recognition and repeatability. Math originates from the fact that the countable is literally all around us.

That's not analogous to a historical event. A religion which is based on a historical claim is not repeatable or countable.

Your entire point was originally about Christianity. I can only respond to what you write, and cannot anticipate when you want to go back and change what point you want to make.

I don't understand why you think this is such a profound point to make.

If you could use magic and wave a magic wand to make historical events and historical documents dissapear, of course they cannot be recreated.

History is not like math or science.

But humans always still would have had an affinity for spirituality, divinity, transcendalism. It's hard wired into us.

Christianity isn't a "historical event". According to Christians, Jesus and God are still alive and are active in the lives of Christians and other Earthly events on a daily basis yet, if the writings and memories of Christianity were wiped, there would be no reason that Christianity or a belief in God/Jesus would ever re-create itself, as would be the case with Zeus.