My proof for God. Critiques please

[greylorn]

Just want to say, I find it rather funny how 2 rivals have united in the face of a common antagonist (greylorn).

Heh.

Okay, I’ll shut up now.

Please don’t! A bit of chortling and who knows what else from the sidelines might turn this into an interesting thread.

With a bit of paraphrase…
“…The little dog laughed to see such sport, while the cow jumped over the moon.”

 

[Moonstruck888]

Please don’t! A bit of chortling and who knows what else from the sidelines might turn this into an interesting thread.

With a bit of paraphrase…
“…The little dog laughed to see such sport, while the cow jumped over the moon.”

And there you go again. The only person in the world with anything to say is you. You really do believe you’re the only one who thinks.

 

[tonyrey]

Really? How do you define “natural”? That which be seen, heard, tasted, smelt and touched? Thoughts, feelings and decisions are not natural because they are intangible! Where are you located? Inside your skull?

Yes. Inside my cranium is precisely where I am located.
If you were located inside your cranium you would have no self-control! All your activity would have physical causes. You wouldn’t be able to think for yourself. You would just be a brain, a lump of tissue, a biological machine… And in addition to being a mindless body you wouldn’t even have a self because a self is intangible…

I am a biological machine, a self motivating automaton. So are you. So is everyone. It’s only human ego that tells us otherwise.
If you’re a biological machine you cannot think for yourself, make any decisions for yourself or be responsible for anything you think, feel, decide or do. How does it feel to be an impotent robot?
BTW How can you be self-motivating without a self?

Evidence of that can be found in examining changes in people with brain damage caused by injury or illness.

It is not evidence at all. It merely demonstrates that the brain is the mechanism by which we communicate and control our body. Are your thoughts, feelings and decisions tangible? If so let us know precisely where they are located and how they can be observed…
They’re emergent.
You think using a word solves the problem? If it were true it would merely demonstrate that your thoughts are merely valueless electrical impulses. If nothing but matter exists nothing is significant…

 

[momor]

If they take neither position then they have no positive belief in God. That makes them Atheists.

Those sub-sets again… Well, they would disagree with you and I have to declare them the authority on what they believe and wish to call themselves.

 

[Moonstruck888]

Those sub-sets again… Well, they would disagree with you and I have to declare them the authority on what they believe and wish to call themselves.

Fine. If they can’t understand the English language and you wish to follow the herd of sheep, don’t let me stand in your way.

Talking about agnosticism as a form of Theism or Atheism is like talking about banannas as a form of apple.

 

[coolduude]

@ Bonzerdad:

I’ll get back to you. I just have to work some stuff out with this first

 

[Moonstruck888]

Moonstruck888;6784498:

If you’re a biological machine you cannot think for yourself, make any decisions for yourself or be responsible for anything you think, feel, decide or do. How does it feel to be an impotent robot?
BTW How can you be self-motivating without a self?

You think using a word solves the problem? If it were true it would merely demonstrate that your thoughts are merely valueless electrical impulses. If nothing but matter exists nothing is significant…

Where did I say that I don’t have a self?

Why on Earth would it follow from the discovery that human beings are not supernatural that nothing is significant or has value?

 

[greylorn]

Ditto. If I was a religious man, I’d pray for you.

Don’t worry about it. It’s amazing how many religious people, who I generally either love or at least appreciate, pray for me. I always invite them not to draw God’s attention my way, please, as I’d prefer to be ignored.

By, the way, that “ditto” of yours was a sharp retort. Incisive, thoughtful, cogent. Did you get it from a book of famous quotes?

I at least am capable of acknowledging my more endearing personality traits. You, the only way you can raise yourself up is to put everyone else down.

Not everyone. Few are qualified to be a good straight man.

But isn’t it great that you have someone to get testy with, instead of spending another Saturday watching Howdy Doody reruns?

And your endearing trait, other than your considerable potential to learn more than you currently know, is what, exactly? Do you have a great chow mein recipe using cat food?

 

[Moonstruck888]

Don’t worry about it. It’s amazing how many religious people, who I generally either love or at least appreciate, pray for me. I always invite them not to draw God’s attention my way, please, as I’d prefer to be ignored.

By, the way, that “ditto” of yours was a sharp retort. Incisive, thoughtful, cogent. Did you get it from a book of famous quotes?

Not everyone. Few are qualified to be a good straight man.

But isn’t it great that you have someone to get testy with, instead of spending another Saturday watching Howdy Doody reruns?

And your endearing trait, other than your considerable potential to learn more than you currently know, is what, exactly? Do you have a great chow mein recipe using cat food?

I was being ironical when I used the word endearing.

Like I said, I at least am not in such a pathetic predicament that the only way I can raise myself up is to put everyone else down. You must be one of the most self-deluded and downright unhappy creatures I’ve ever encountered.

The more I learn about you, the less I dislike you and the more I pity you.

 

[tonyrey]

If you’re a biological machine you cannot think for yourself, make any decisions for yourself or be responsible for anything you think, feel, decide or do. How does it feel to be an impotent robot?
BTW How can you be self-motivating without a self?

You didn’t but you implied it. You said you are inside your cranium - without telling us what your self consists of - presumably just brain cells… Is it an entity or a collection or what?

Why on Earth would it follow from the discovery that human beings are not supernatural that nothing is significant or has value?

You are putting words into my mouth. My precise words:

If nothing but matter exists nothing is significant - which is logical enough because value and significance presuppose the existence of minds. You still haven’t explained how you can be self-motivating if your thoughts and decisions are merely electrical impulses…

 

[momor]

Don’t worry about it. It’s amazing how many religious people, who I generally either love or at least appreciate, pray for me. I always invite them not to draw God’s attention my way, please, as I’d prefer to be ignored.

By, the way, that “ditto” of yours was a sharp retort. Incisive, thoughtful, cogent. Did you get it from a book of famous quotes?

Not everyone. Few are qualified to be a good straight man.

But isn’t it great that you have someone to get testy with, instead of spending another Saturday watching Howdy Doody reruns?

And your endearing trait, other than your considerable potential to learn more than you currently know, is what, exactly? Do you have a great chow mein recipe using cat food?

Ah yes, I recognize it now. Another devotee of the Don Rickles School of Humor.

 

[Moonstruck888]

You didn’t but you implied it. You said you are inside your cranium - without telling us what your self consists of - presumably just brain cells… Is it an entity or a collection or what?

It still isn’t fully understood. It may never be fully understood.

If nothing but matter exists nothing is significant - which is logical enough because value and significance presuppose the existence of minds. You still haven’t explained how you can be self-motivating if your thoughts and decisions are merely electrical impulses…

I know for a fact I can self motivate. I do it every day. I don’t fully understand how the process occurs, but I do not see any reason to think that it’s supernatural.

 

[tonyrey]

You didn’t but you implied it. You said you are inside your cranium - without telling us what your self consists of - presumably just brain cells… Is it an entity or a collection or what?

In that case you’re not justified in regarding the self - or the mind - as a natural phenomenon, especially in view of its extraordinary powers.

If nothing but matter exists nothing is significant - which is logical enough because value and significance presuppose the existence of minds. You still haven’t explained how you can be self-motivating if your thoughts and decisions are merely electrical impulses…

I know for a fact I can self motivate. I do it every day. I don’t fully understand how the process occurs, but I do not see any reason to think that it’s supernatural.

And I see no reason whatsoever to believe it is natural. For one thing self-motivation infringes the law of the conservation of energy. For another it presupposes an intangible entity. For yet another it implies foresight - whereas physical events are strictly restricted to the present moment…

 

[Moonstruck888]

In that case you’re not justified in regarding the self - or the mind - as a natural phenomenon, especially in view of its extraordinary powers.

Neither of us would be justified in being definitive about a construct that is not understood.

And I see no reason whatsoever to believe it is natural. For one thing self-motivation infringes the law of the conservation of energy. For another it presupposes an intangible entity. For yet another it implies foresight - whereas physical events are strictly restricted to the present moment…

It does not infringe the law of conservation of energy. The human brain uses 25% of the energy we injest. Comapred to other animals that is a disproportionate amount. That energy explains, in natural terms, our enhanced pattern recognition filtering. Incidentally, most animals can self motivate.

Foresight occurs in the present moment. That is why it is called foresight.

 

[greylorn]

And there you go again. The only person in the world with anything to say is you. You really do believe you’re the only one who thinks.

Not really, but when I do, I tend to put my thoughts out there for people to consider. Check out Tonyrey’s post 317. He does a lot of thinking. I don’t often agree with him, but I respect his mind. You’ve gotten yourself too worked up with me to learn anything, but Tonyrey could teach you logic and a thoughtful style of presenting it.

Speaking of thinking, did you bother to read the post wherein I explained that the BIG FAT QUOTE you append to your posts is both meaningless and wrong? Instead of quoting some atheist nit, or whining about how you don’t like me, or how you don’t like religion, say something constructive. Present some ideas which are genuinely your own, instead of parroting atheistic drivel.

Out of curiosity, would you care to calculate the probability of the 2.9 billion base-pair human genome having developed via the force of random DNA mutations (i.e. according to neo-Darwinian belief)? It is a relatively straightforward calculation. The magnitude of the result gives mathematical meaning to the concept of “absurd.” If you are not qualified to make the calculation yourself, perhaps an atheist website would be helpful.

I suggest this, because it might put this “Proof for God” thread back on track, back to topic instead of mindless neuron-flexing. Mine are older than yours.

 

[Moonstruck888]

Speaking of thinking, did you bother to read the post wherein I explained that the BIG FAT QUOTE you append to your posts is both meaningless and wrong? Instead of quoting some atheist nit, or whining about how you don’t like me, or how you don’t like religion, say something constructive. Present some ideas which are genuinely your own, instead of parroting atheistic drivel.

Yes, I did. I didn’t consider your pathetic insults worth responding to. I still don’t.

Out of curiosity, would you care to calculate the probability of the 2.9 billion base-pair human genome having developed via the force of random DNA mutations (i.e. according to neo-Darwinian belief)? It is a relatively straightforward calculation. The magnitude of the result gives mathematical meaning to the concept of “absurd.” If you are not qualified to make the calculation yourself, perhaps an atheist website would be helpful.

No problem. The odds are one in one. We’re here, incase you hadn’t noticed. The process of evolution is not random and I would never suggest that it is.

I suggest this, because it might put this “Proof for God” thread back on track, back to topic instead of mindless neuron-flexing. Mine are older than yours.

What do you want me to do, take the fact that you’re a silver haired dotard into account and give you a sporting chance?

 

[greylorn]

I was being ironical when I used the word endearing.

Like I said, I at least am not in such a pathetic predicament that the only way I can raise myself up is to put everyone else down. You must be one of the most self-deluded and downright unhappy creatures I’ve ever encountered.

The more I learn about you, the less I dislike you and the more I pity you.

That figures, since pity is the last refuge of the futile. Can we go back to dislike, which I know how to deal with?

If you pay attention, you’ll see that I’m trying to raise you up. What a load!

I don’t pick on groups of “others” to put down. I carefully select those with a big red circle that they’ve painted on their own backside for that kind of target practice. I prefer to get into honest discussions with informed, non-dogmatic CAF participants. What has surprised me is that many Catholics are in this category, but not a single atheist.

Thanks for explaining that you were being “ironical.” Gee, otherwise I’d have never guessed it.

How old are you anyway? 16, 17, 18 maybe?

 

[Moonstruck888]

How old are you anyway? 16, 17, 18 maybe?

Not that it’s any business of yours, but I’m 35.

 

[momor]

I suggest this, because it might put this “Proof for God” thread back on track, back to topic instead of mindless neuron-flexing. Mine are older than yours.

How about YOU get it back on track by posting that evidence you said you had for proving the Biblical God doesn’t exist.

 

[coolduude]

@ Bonzerdad:

I’ve thought it over and I do think you’re correct in stating that a continuum cannot be divided. However, how do you account for this discrepancy?

1. An actually infinite number of things cannot be created by successive addition
2. The past has been created by successive addition
3. Therefore, the past is finite.

Now that is deductive reasoning, so if the premises are true (which I believe they are), then the conclusion must be true.

So how do you account for this?