Three Claims of Uniformitarian Naturalism

Discussion in 'Religion' started by SetiAlpha6, May 27, 2020.

  1. SetiAlpha6 Come Let Us Reason Together Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,283
    The Whale Story of Jonah exists.

    If God exists then it is completely possible.
    If God does not exist then it is highly unlikely, but not impossible. After all, life is supposed to be able to create itself, which I regard as being even more unlikely.

    The exquisite beauty and design of a woman, alone, causes me to praise God instead of praising primordial soup.

    I can’t prove God exists.
    You can’t prove God doesn’t exist.

    We look at the same data and reach different conclusions. The same thing happens in Science all the time.

    I appreciate the conversation, don’t have all the answers, and am always challenged to think harder about things, when I come here.

    I understand your concerns Alex, and I know you have a heart to help others learn and grow in truth.
    I believe that it is because of your beautiful heart that many of your concerns about Christianity even exist in the first place.

    Alex, you are always a great blessing to me!!!

    I am going to pause and see what I can learn about the Sumerians. Coming from zero knowledge at the moment.

    Thanks So Much Alex!!!
     
    Last edited: Jun 14, 2020
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,502
    Good but having established that it does let me use it to demonstrate why faith is a very dangerous thing, faith is not a virtue, to follow its direction that leads you to casually disregard the grave implication of the inclusion of this story, and many others, and then to let faith let you accept that such a flaw can anyway be attributed to Devine inspiration. You need to consider this not just shrug it off...you are a father you can not demonstrate bad behavior such that will in the future be times two...it is your duty to teach them to be rational and not proceed on faith..bad investments follow faith.

    And there is no need to get into any discussion as to the existence of God but only to ask if the claims that this generally flawed book should be held up as having Devine relevance...I like the book..I open it from time to time at random for wisdom or stupidity but never to look for god.

    Your faith has you seeking to prove it's stories as evidence of God and yet here is but one example that in itself clearly demonstrates that the bible could not have been inspired by God or it's production and editing could be guided by the Devine.

    Faith should not be used to abandon reason nor should it be used to enable the perpetuation of faulshood.

    If there is a God is not the issue..my observation is simply that faith is a terrible thing in its application...simply consider your casual approach to this matter but when it comes to mountains and rocks that you feel support the story you are most diligent..the question I ask is why do you have your reasoning turned all the way up to establish the validity of the story and yet, as you demonstrate, be entirely casual and fail to consider the inescapable conclusion that the whale story, and many others, exclude the bible from the claim that is was inspired by the Devine.

    We can all find good ideas in the bible but it would be honest to accept that the words written are written by men and to claim Devine inspiration can only be wrong.

    If it were a matter before a court where well tested rules of evidence apply I say that I certainly could prove what you say I can not...in criminal matters a high test is required..beyond a reasonable doubt..do you not think that the non existence of God can be proved beyond a reasonable doubt?
    I had a thread here where I demonstrated the idea but as I recall I backed off because those I argued with were incapable of being reasonable.
    Anyways given that it can't be proved and given that if true everything is about god and we are about god could one not expect that the presence of God would be physically obvious, that suffering and inequity was not common place, that instead of a miracle being claimed because a child survived an Earthquake that the thousands of deaths that happened as a result of that same Earthquake could have been avoided...that a god could have put something in our wiring that just makes it impossible for us to kill each other, after all could we not find an example in the animal world of species that simply do not kill another in that species...if one were to use faith in a decent way could one not say I have faith that if there were a god that he would not stand by and let things happen that if I or you or any decent person would be morally bound to stop,..domestic violence, human and animal cruelty, war, cancer, starvation, mental illness, homelessness, murder, rape etc etc...but no..free will..tell me why is it that victims have no free will not to be victims? Rational thinking sees all gods disappear.

    Come on now it is nothing like that...I look at the "data" with a rational mind..you look at the data and armed with faith cherry pick to support your belief... me I look at the data, whale story and call it for what it is..you look at the whale data and say " oh well"..do you see the difference?
    To suggest the same think happens in science is running close to the edge in the lieing department and it is only ignorance that saves you..think about it ..I just ask you to think about data analysis in science..and if interested look up Sigma ratings...honestly Set I can you not see how this faith destroys your ability to think reasonably and rationally.

    I certainly appreciate the conversation..I have no other.. I have virtually nil contact with other humans in the real world and no opportunity to chat like we do here...it has dragged my brain out of a 25 year storage..I retired at 50..so 23 year storage...well I still made money but got out of running a full on business...a big change from living like a playboy to living like a peasant...peasants have the best life I find...but demonised as governments and business men hate them.

    Honestly my claims re the history seem to be the way of it...you should watch that last vid..Laurence K said something so very very profound, but I have been saying it for years, ...science unites humanity but religion perpetuates the us and them thing that all wars are driven by...
    Please watch it..I was for once extremely impressed by this chap and believe me that is rare..but I was impressed by V with his reply, rather that he replied re extinctions.

    If that is true I am happy...I want to help your kids and if you gain some thing that will make you a better father I can only be very happy.
    Truth has many enemies so please be it's friend.

    Good luck. Good bye ...

    Alex
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    Yes as a myth and in an ancient non scientific book.
    Nature has had 13.83 billion years to go from primordial soup, to life as we know it.
    That's true and factual.
    It is illogical to try and prove a negative. Prove to me that Unicorns don't exist?
    Yes, but in the course of time, science generally reaches a conclusion. And of course no discipline ever has a 100% agreement rate, remember?

    And thanks for some honest answers.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,502
  8. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,502
    I think you could prove god does not exist if only armed with the rules of evidence actually.
    And if nothing else that it is a baseless claim.
    Alex
     
  9. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    Xelasnave.1947 likes this.
  10. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,502
    I see it as clear evidence that God has destroyed many worlds and what we see is the sad remains of sinners or it could be one of the greatest discoveries of all time suggesting that life will be absolutely everywhere ..if you buy that nonsense that life "happens by chance" unregulated by a chemical process that no doubt we will discover when we create life in the lab.
    What will creationists see in this I wonder.
    Alex
     
  11. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,502
  12. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,426
    I'm coming to this thread late, so please excuse the data dump.

    Why do you want these things proven?

    Or is it that you think that if they can't be proven, then God Did It is somehow proven?
     
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2020
  13. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,426
    If you dig deep enough, you'll probably find that everything is based on unprovable assumptions, sooner or later.

    The proof of the pudding with science is in its results. Has science led to the most productive models of the natural world? Answer: yes. Has science given us technological advances that no religion has ever begun to approach? Answer: yes.

    Could it possibly be that electricity isn't real? Not really. Your computer and your toaster both do what they were designed to do, based on the scientific theory of electricity. Is electricity real? It's real enough for your toaster to work. What else matters? Is the theory of electricity built on "unprovable assumptions"? Probably it is, but they sure seem to produce useful results!

    Luckily, science is self-correcting. It's more a collection of methods than a collection of dogma. Quite unlike many religions in that respect, to take one comparison that probably interests you. Science doesn't rely on authority in quite the same way that religion does. When it comes to science, nature itself is the ultimate arbiter of what works and what doesn't.

    Oh, then you've just made a mistake, easily corrected. Let me help you.

    No such claim is made by scientists. Science deals with what is testable, what is evidenced, what is natural. That doesn't imply that nature is all there is, necessarily. There's no good evidence for anything else, but we haven't ruled out the existence of something else.

    You might like to contrast a claim like "God exists". That would be an example of a claim without any good evidence. It is certainly one that has been used to manipulate and deceive many people, as I'm sure you'll agree.

    Again, no such claim is made by scientists. It is part of the methodology of science to look for natural explanations of observable things, but science has very little, if anything, to say about what's left after you remove all the observable, testable things.

    That doesn't sound like a general axiom of science to me. It sounds more like an error that a creationist might make. For starters, "always" is a long time. Secondly, "processes of geological change" covers a very broad range of things in a quite narrow sub-field of science.

    Does that help you?
     
    Xelasnave.1947 likes this.
  14. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,426
    And so.... ?

    Are you suggesting there's some alternative, superior method for acquiring reliable knowledge about the natural world? Do you have anything that would give us the required level of "proof" you seem to want?

    You're willing to accept that a random rock in the desert was split by a God, bringing forth water, without any special proof, so why are you so keen that scientific claims be proved all of a sudden?

    Sure, but being the accepter of evolution that you are, you also accept that the rare beneficial mutations are sufficient to account for the diversity of life that we see today, don't you?

    You answered your own question. Most of these conditions do not automatically affect our ability to reproduce and pass them on.

    See, you're picking this stuff up unconsciously while you're here, despite your best efforts!
     
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2020
    Xelasnave.1947 likes this.
  15. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,426
    Who are these "self-styled atheists" you are referring to? Can you link me to some examples of statements from those people that support your contention that they view science as the ultimate truth, synonymous with reason itself and all that other rhetoric?

    I mean, most of the time, atheists with some science education are merely urging religious people to start thinking a little critically about their beliefs and their holy books, in terms of things like evidence and reliability. It's really not about putting science on a pedestal. There might well be atheists somewhere who do that, but on the whole if you think that is representative of atheists in general I'd say you're misinformed.

    As far as I'm aware, a "miracle" is invariably assumed to be an act of a divine agent of one kind or another (often a God), subverting the expected "natural order" in some way. If, as per Augustine's argument, "miracles" are allowed to have natural causes, then you risk putting every unlikely coincidence down to divine intervention.

    If you want to define "miracle" as simply any amazing or wonderful occurrence, then there's nothing in particular that would lead us to make a special connection between miracles and gods. Any fortunate coincidence would suffice to count as a miracle.

    As I understand the word, miracles are supposed to be special acts of God, explainable only with reference to His Divine Will.
     
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2020
    Xelasnave.1947 likes this.
  16. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,426
    Suppose that 2000 years from now, society were to follow the morals derived from the ancient texts known as the Harry Potter gospels. In the year 4020, Harry Potter is considered to be a paragon of virtue, cheeky yet an excellent role model. I can imagine the SetiAlpha6 of that future sitting in his holodeck chat room asking how it could possibly be that the great Harry Potter - one of the most influential figures known in his world - could not have existed in reality.

    Does that help you at all?

    Not that I'm aware of.

    The Shroud of Turin, as you're probably aware, is most likely a fake.

    Correction: there are records of floods.

    Only if you choose to interpret them that way. It's like the Bible Code. Seek out patterns and you'll find them, even when they aren't there.

    No. The geological record utterly disproves Noah's flood, beyond any reasonable doubt.

    Interesting. Tell me how you decide which parts to take literally and which to take metaphorically or as fiction. I'd really like to know.

    You're saying that you can always excuse away problems in the bible, because you are willing to believe no matter what.
     
    Xelasnave.1947 likes this.
  17. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,426
    You're conflating two different meanings of faith. I've walked you through this before, haven't I? On the one hand, there's the usage of the word "faith" to mean trust in a person or thing based on actual evidence, and then there's the usage to mean pretending to know stuff you don't actually know (i.e. for which there is no sufficient evidence). Religious faith is of the latter type.

    The evidence-based kind of faith exists in science, but that is why "faith" is a very bad word to use in that context. Better to talk about evidence or knowledge in that case, to avoid confusion with the religious connotations of the word "faith".

    As you likely know, Intelligent Design may be "common sense" in the sense that uninformed religious people believe it on "faith", but in practice it's mostly a dishonest veneer painted over young-earth Creationism to try to give those ideas the semblance of scientific legitimacy.

    There's no good evidence for ID. You've been fed a line on that.
     
    Xelasnave.1947 likes this.
  18. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,426
    Why do you need something to explain "everything we observe in this world"? Do you think Intelligent Design can do that for you? If your ID explains everything, then I suggest it actually explains nothing, because it's most likely unfalsifiable. It would be equivalent to "God did it", explaining everything and nothing.

    Do you understand why "God did it" isn't an explanation, on its own?

    Touche. That God created life has also never been proven. So, where to from here?

    Can you describe for me, in a couple of sentences, your understanding of the term "scientific hypothesis"?

    Do you want your readers to think you're naive and ignorant, for some reason, or are you actually naive and ignorant?

    Why did you bring up Piltdown Man again, when I walked you through that in a previous thread? Did you forget our previous discussion, or are you being dishonest and pretending it never happened? If it's the latter, that doesn't seem to me like something a good Christian should be doing.

    Do you think it's acceptable to lie for your religion, SetiAlpha6?

    No. Got any evidence for the God?

    If God exists, then magic merry-go-rounds falling from the sky is completely possible.

    Is life supposed to be able to create itself? Do tell.

    I assume you're male. You're evolutionarily programmed to find female human beings attractive. You're praising the wrong thing.

    Well done. I call that progress. Let's make a note you wrote that, for future reference.
     
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2020
    Xelasnave.1947 likes this.
  19. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,502
    When you get hold of a thread it can be hard to let go of it suits your story but it could alert one to look for similar cons played upon say... religion...maybe the shroud of Turin could be considered for example...I know it's only a slim chance but could it be a con?
    Alex
     
  20. SetiAlpha6 Come Let Us Reason Together Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,283
    James,

    Many of your assumptions and philosophy seem to rely on a number of unproven, perhaps even unprovable things!

    The basis of much of it seems to actually depend on you having a Rock as a Great, Great, Great, and on and on to billions of generations, Great Grandpa and stirring in Water and Lightning, etc, as additional Ancestors. A sort of hopeful, incomprehensibly improbable Chemical Soup.

    My own father was healed by God, not by a Rock. There is no way I can prove that to you or to anyone else. I have no need to even try to do so. And I also have no need for anyone else to take my word for that or for anything else either. We all have to reach our own conclusions in life, we are all on our own.

    So I choose to trust in the very real God who healed my own Dad, instead of trusting in made up fairy tales about mythical magical Rock Ancestors.

    That is just me. No one else need do that.

    Thanks so much for your comments!

    Very Best Wishes,
    Seti
     
    Last edited: Jul 29, 2020
  21. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    So why has this God allowed other people to die horrible deaths, and why does he now ravage us with a virus...and why does he also chose to let infants, babies etc also die so prematurely in their lives, some quite painfully so.....
    Why did this god not conduct another miracle and strike Hitler dead before he could cause the death of 6 million? I could go on and on and on.....
     
  22. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,502
    James can answer that but I don't expect he relies upon things that are indeed not reasonably provable...at least say in the case of life from chemistry a truck load of credible evidence that is entirely supportive is available that beats a god modelling clay.. You saying otherwise really is a misrepresentation.
    You have made the unfortunate choice to think ancient stories are more reliable than flawless reseach by well educated modern humans..that only makes sense to you because you want to believe a fantasy invented by humans making unsupported claims to give authority to their also invented laws. Your loss.
    I guess your father was saved in a church and had no need of doctors.

    There is a good reason why you can't prove it.

    Well here's the thing..if you make a claim you must be able to prove it.
    I claim the god of the bible was invented and I can back up that claim with real evidence...and the thing is that evidence is not secret..If you after reading this took thirty minutes doing research you will find the evidence..will you no ..that's the problem right there.

    And yet you will not inform yourself as to who invented your god..that is available and it's in writing..clay tablets.

    The claim that the god of the bible was invented is entirely supported by evidence it's just that you choose to ignore it because to inform yourself of the facts will bring down your fantasy house of cards. You can believe what you want of course but please realise that the facts of history absolutely prove you are wrong. You are keen to examine history but only what you feel supports your belief...so realise your unsupported claims are countered by real evidence. It is entirely unreasonable to suggest your side has anything going for it when you are ignorant of the history don't you think?
    I hope you are well and safe.
    Alex
     
  23. SetiAlpha6 Come Let Us Reason Together Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,283
    Hi Alex,

    I have no need ultimately to convince anyone else of anything. I expect and want everyone to make up their own mind.

    It is your mission, if you choose to accept it, to prove those two statements false.

    This post will self destruct in 10 seconds.

    Best Wishes,
    Seti
     
    Last edited: Jul 30, 2020

Share This Page