Science is a false God

[Timothy Spurlin]

No, I'm demonstrating how overconfident you are. Prove to me what you had for any meal during the last week. Sounds simple enough, doesn't it. You can't. It's impossible. You want me to "prove" that my God is superior? He's the one you spend a considerable amount of time trying to convince others he doesn't exist. He's the one you are talking about thousands of years later.

Now . . . what did you eat last week . . .

I ate food last week, just like you.
I would guess all you have is subjective evidence for a god.

 

[Maximilian]

The Bible is the claim not the evidence. The Bible is a book written by humans to control other humans.

Indirect evidence is frequently and consistently relied upon to ascertain the reality of our world. As a case in point, it's long been widely used to show that our Sun generates power via nuclear fusion, hydrogen is present in it or that our planet features an iron core. In like manner, the fact that there are dozens upon dozens of fulfilled Bible prophecies constitutes probative evidence of the existence of its author, Jehovah God.

This fact is, by far, the most compelling logical reason why millions upon millions of rational people today the world over only accept the Bible as the Inspired Word of Jehovah God. Simply no other book – religious or not – comes with such illustrious prominence. Because it's impossible for any person to foresee with complete precision what's sure to occur from one hour to the next, there's no two ways about it: Bible prophecies are not of natural origin. I kindly invite you to examine for yourself various examples of these specific and accurately fulfilled prophecies.

 

[Timothy Spurlin]

First of all, why is it rude to ask a question?
God would be the same even human beings could prove his existance, but human beings understanding of God would maybe change. and for the million of people who today believe in a God would then find their belief to be true. So actually nothing wrong would happen

It is rude to answer a question with a question. That means you have no answer.
If science proved Zeus was real, would you worship Zeus?

 

[Spirit of Light]

It is rude to answer a question with a question. That means you have no answer.
If science proved Zeus was real, would you worship Zeus?

I am a buddhist, i do not worship buddha, but i try to follow his teachings as best i can. No i would not change my belief if Zeus was proven to be real. Nor would i change my belief if the Christian God was proven by sciece to exist. Because for me it is not about proving anything external. To me all the answer needed lay with in me. I am the one who must change to be able to live a rightroues life according to Buddhas teaching, Buddha him self can not help me now, only his teaching and my own effort can guide me to what a Buddhist seek. and that is the inner wisdom to realize enlightenment.

Many people have been very surprised when i talk about God or Gods, because they see Buddhism as a religion who do not have a God, True we do not follow a god, but i can not disprove Gods existance, so i can not say he does not exist, nor can i say other religions teaching is wrong, Because if they are true, that means that their teaching is true, just different then buddhism.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Science isn't trying to disprove unicorns either. Yet it says they don't exist.

No. Science has made no pronouncements on unicorns. Nor leprechauns, gods or vampires. And all for the same reason;

When I was a kid in Arabia EVERYONE had smallpox scars, eye disease and blindness was the norm … and every child under age 2 in al Hasa had malaria.

We can thank science that that no longer needs to be the case. Religion didn't help a bit. Again.

on what objective moral basis do you dare condemn anyone's moral values?

There are no objective morals. Man chooses right and wrong himself - even those who choose to let a book tell them what that is.

Who made you God Almighty?

I did. Who else?

The gods you suggest exist - or more properly, those that claim to speak for them - have no valuable ethical advice to offer me. I am the god of my life. I am an autonomous human being who needs nobody telling me what I ought to believe, especially the superstitious who get their moral code from an old book. I kneel before no god, nor defer to any god concept.

Which moral system are you recommending. I find the Christian moral system extremely deficient. It never realized that slavery was immoral. There is no commandment against having sex with children. There is no praise of democracy or freedom of and from religion. The Bible actually advises us to submit to kings as divinely appointed rulers.

Sorry, but I can do much better than that without input from that moral system.

 

[Timothy Spurlin]

Indirect evidence is frequently and consistently relied upon to ascertain the reality of our world. As a case in point, it's long been widely used to show that our Sun generates power via nuclear fusion, hydrogen is present in it or that our planet features an iron core. In like manner, the fact that there are dozens upon dozens of fulfilled Bible prophecies constitutes probative evidence of the existence of its author, Jehovah God.

This fact is, by far, the most compelling logical reason why millions upon millions of rational people today the world over only accept the Bible as the Inspired Word of Jehovah God. Simply no other book – religious or not – comes with such illustrious prominence. Because it's impossible for any person to foresee with complete precision what's sure to occur from one hour to the next, there's no two ways about it: Bible prophecies are not of natural origin. I kindly invite you to examine for yourself various examples of these specific and accurately fulfilled prophecies.

What prophecies are you talking about?

 

[Audie]

This is all good fun but our remte has not recognized the
tiniest fraction of error on his part, even on the totally
irrelevant (and silly) science v unicorn bit.

Open minded honest discussion , anyone?

 

[Maximilian]

There are no objective morals. Man chooses right and wrong himself - even those who choose to let a book tell them what that is.

You're not making any sense.

For legitimate ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ to exist morality simply cannot be relative for this makes ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ vulnerable to mere caprice. Under such an ambivalent standard absolutely nothing is actually ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ rendering these terms utterly otiose; conveying a distinction without a difference.

Accordingly:

(1) If God does not exist, objective moral values and duties don't exist.

(2) If evil exists, objective moral values and duties exist.

(3) Evil exists.

(4) Therefore, objective moral values and duties do exist.

(5) Therefore, God exists.

(6) Therefore, God is the locus of all objective moral values and duties.​

That's to say, as Dostoevsky once mused, "If there is no God, everything is permitted."

 

[Maximilian]

I find the Christian moral system extremely deficient.

On what objective moral basis can you even dare to make such an evaluation?

 

[Maximilian]

What prophecies are you talking about?

Here are but a few examples.

 

[Audie]

On what objective moral basis can you even dare to make such an evaluation?

So you got no prob with killing everyone but the virgins,
but dare to challenge anyone but maybe a werewolf,
on morality???

Tell me it aint so.

 

[Audie]

Indirect evidence is frequently and consistently relied upon to ascertain the reality of our world. As a case in point, it's long been widely used to show that our Sun generates power via nuclear fusion, hydrogen is present in it or that our planet features an iron core. In like manner, the fact that there are dozens upon dozens of fulfilled Bible prophecies constitutes probative evidence of the existence of its author, Jehovah God.

This fact is, by far, the most compelling logical reason why millions upon millions of rational people today the world over only accept the Bible as the Inspired Word of Jehovah God. Simply no other book – religious or not – comes with such illustrious prominence. Because it's impossible for any person to foresee with complete precision what's sure to occur from one hour to the next, there's no two ways about it: Bible prophecies are not of natural origin. I kindly invite you to examine for yourself various examples of these specific and accurately fulfilled prophecies.

Nostradamus has more fulfilled prophecies.

 

[sooda]

No. Science has made no pronouncements on unicorns. Nor leprechauns, gods or vampires. And all for the same reason;



We can thank science that that no longer needs to be the case. Religion didn't help a bit. Again.



There are no objective morals. Man chooses right and wrong himself - even those who choose to let a book tell them what that is.



I did. Who else?

The gods you suggest exist - or more properly, those that claim to speak for them - have no valuable ethical advice to offer me. I am the god of my life. I am an autonomous human being who needs nobody telling me what I ought to believe, especially the superstitious who get their moral code from an old book. I kneel before no god, nor defer to any god concept.

Which moral system are you recommending. I find the Christian moral system extremely deficient. It never realized that slavery was immoral. There is no commandment against having sex with children. There is no praise of democracy or freedom of and from religion. The Bible actually advises us to submit to kings as divinely appointed rulers.

Sorry, but I can do much better than that without input from that moral system.

Right.. As I said.. religion didn't give us soap or refrigeration or antibiotics.

 

[Maximilian]

Nostradamus has more fulfilled prophecies.

Prove it.

 

[Maximilian]

Right.. As I said.. religion didn't give us soap or refrigeration or antibiotics.

Examine Numbers 19. A variety of lye-soap formulas demonstrate that, to get lye, water was poured through cinders. The reclaimed water incorporated a dilution of lye. Lye, in higher strengths, is extremely caustic as well as irritating to the epidermis. In more watered down levels, however, it is actually utilized as a superb scrub and cleaning agent. Many manufacturers nowadays still make lye cleansers. Astoundingly, via God’s inspiration, Moses directed the Israelites to make a combination which would have contained lye combined in a diluted emulsion.


On top of that, take into account that hyssop was also included in the “water of purification.” Hyssop consist of the antibacterial and antiviral thymol. The essential oil from the cedar timber in the concoction also furnished a small skin irritant which would have encouraged scrubbing. While the scarlet wool added in wool strands thus rendering it soap. (cf. Hebrews 9 :19)

 

[JChnsc19]

First, the Bible is the Inspired Word of God so nothing within its pages is "folk wisdom."


Second, on what objective moral basis do you dare condemn anyone's moral values? Who made you God Almighty?

Who are you to dare condemn anyone’s moral values???? You’re gonna defend slavery huh?

 

[JChnsc19]

Science and God definitely have one thing in common.

They are both abstract concepts that often are discussed as though they had objective existence. But they don't.
Tom

Science is subjective? So like would you say we all believe in differing levels of gravity? You could think subjectively that gravity isn’t real & jump off a 10 story building & have no injuries because I’m your mind that’s how gravity subjectively works? Is that what you mean?

 

[Maximilian]

Right.. As I said.. religion didn't give us soap or refrigeration or antibiotics.

You're not making any sense. God’s laws and regulations for the ancient Israelites, such as the detection as well as management of illnesses and the great importance of clean water lay bare your sophism. Preventive stipulations dictated the management as well as disposal of dead bodies. Quarantines served as barriers against the spread of infectious diseases. Sewage disposal by burying excreta was a hygienic law very far ahead of the times. (Deuteronomy 23:12-14) The necessity of regular baths along with the laundering of clothing were also rewarding requirements within that nation’s code of laws.

 

[JChnsc19]

You're not making any sense. For legitimate ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ to exist morality simply cannot be relative for this makes ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ vulnerable to mere caprice. Under such an ambivalent standard absolutely nothing is actually ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ rendering these terms utterly otiose; conveying a distinction without a difference.

Accordingly:

(1) If God does not exist, objective moral values and duties don't exist.

(2) If evil exists, objective moral values and duties exist.

(3) Evil exists.

(4) Therefore, objective moral values and duties do exist.

(5) Therefore, God exists.

(6) Therefore, God is the locus of all objective moral values and duties.​

That's to say, as Dostoevsky once mused, "If there is no God, everything is permitted."

Which god?

 

[Maximilian]

Right.. As I said.. religion didn't give us soap or refrigeration or antibiotics.

Just what demonstrable, quantifiable, empirical, falsifiable, testable, replicable evidence do you have demonstrating it’s immoral for an atheist to do this:

Or to rape a little child to death?