Question from an athiest

[freesoulhope]

Do you not think that God would also be beyond definition?

Why?

Different religions have different explanations for questions that are asked, they can’t all be right.

Certainly, but I was talking about an uncaused cause; an eternal foundation to existents. I was not talking about religion, and you fully well know it!

The only thing we know that is beyond a finite universe is eternity. The universe has to have come from an eternal foundation for its existent to make logical sense; since nobody believes that a pink elephant can materialize out of absolutely nothing (non- existents) and neither can the universe. Reason tells us that it is a product of something else.

 

[freesoulhope]

Science puts forward theories which are subject experimentation. .

Logic and reasoning is the foundation of Science.

 

[predator_CA]

Why do people want purpose in their lives? No other organism wants purpose in its life. What is different about people, and why are they alone dissatisfied with reality? Biologically it makes no sense.

Humans are very smart animals, period. Why do you find it so difficult to believe biology would/could produce abnormally intelligent animalts based upon environment and circumstance? I’m not trying to be hostile, but I really don’t see how this is biologically makes no sense. It makes much more sense to me than “god,” whatever that thing is supposed to be. How does god make biological sense?

 

[jmcrae]

Humans are very smart animals, period. Why do you find it so difficult to believe biology would/could produce abnormally intelligent animals based upon environment and circumstance?

It is not possible to get something from nothing.

The product can never be greater than the producer, which means that if the product is intelligent, then the producer is also at least as intelligent.

I’m not trying to be hostile, but I really don’t see how this is biologically makes no sense. It makes much more sense to me than “god,” whatever that thing is supposed to be. How does god make biological sense?

It makes sense that such a well-organized intelligent creation has a well-organized and intelligent Creator - which is God.

 

[tdgesq]

Humans are very smart animals, period. Why do you find it so difficult to believe biology would/could produce abnormally intelligent animalts based upon environment and circumstance? I’m not trying to be hostile, but I really don’t see how this is biologically makes no sense. It makes much more sense to me than “god,” whatever that thing is supposed to be. How does god make biological sense?

Predator, do you believe that we have free will? If you do, then demonstrate how biology can account for it. If you like, I’ll accept the challenge to demonstrate why biology will never be able to account for it. Let me know.

 

[Keikiolu]

Quote:
Originally Posted by VociMike forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif
Why do people want purpose in their lives? No other organism wants purpose in its life. What is different about people, and why are they alone dissatisfied with reality? Biologically it makes no sense.

Humans are very smart animals, period.

That sums up your philosophy nicely, but is nothing more than a bald assertion. And I accept that that is your belief.

When I say that humans are given a quality by God that is from Him, which calls us to be like Him, and which will not only last beyond our death but for eternity either with Him or Away from Him, I’m also making a bald assertion.

Can you accept that that is my belief?

Why do you find it so difficult to believe biology would/could produce abnormally intelligent animalts based upon environment and circumstance?

My personal belief is that God used those “biological forces” to produce the material portions of what God further fused a “soul” to to create humanity.

Why do you find that so difficult to believe?

I’m not trying to be hostile, but I really don’t see how this is biologically makes no sense.

The curious thing about humans, as opposed to other lifeforms, is our capacity for “things religious”.

Perhaps our “physical development” enabled us to have these “religious” inclinations,… but I take that to mean that God arranged things such that our physicality was developed by Him, His “molding of the clay of the earth” into human-capable form, so that He could imbue us with “His likeness” and have us to strive for union with Him.

On what basis do you simply dismiss this “religion thing” that obviosly does exist in humans?

It makes much more sense to me than “god,” whatever that thing is supposed to be. How does god make biological sense?

God doesn’t make biological sense,… He makes biology.

If you admit to the existence to nothing but the material world, then what do you make of the number “ONE”?

Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaikai ia oe. Aloha nui.

 

[Keikiolu]

Predator, do you believe that we have free will? If you do, then demonstrate how biology can account for it. If you like, I’ll accept the challenge to demonstrate why biology will never be able to account for it. Let me know.

Uh,… TD,… you’ll never be able to “prove” that, especially to Pred.

The reason being that you’ll smack into the “complexity” barrier very quickly, and be left with no forward progress whatsoever.

In other words, you’re just sidetracking the issue into nowhere.

But,… if you’re fool enough to galavant into worthless territory,… go for it.

And YES, I do believe we have free will. Though I also believe that all lifeforms have free will, while denying that any animal but humans have human-souls (which sounds obvious), and remaining utterly neutral about other-lifeform-souls because it’s simply not for us humans to know about such things.

Anyway,… have fun…

Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaikai ia oe. Aloha nui.

 

[tdgesq]

Uh,… TD,… you’ll never be able to “prove” that, especially to Pred.

How about you just leave that to me instead of presuming that you have any idea about how I’m going to approach the problem and how convincing it might end up being.

The reason being that you’ll smack into the “complexity” barrier very quickly, and be left with no forward progress whatsoever.

You don’t know what you’re talking about.

In other words, you’re just sidetracking the issue into nowhere.

But,… if you’re fool enough to galavant into worthless territory,… go for it.

Keikiolu, since when have you ever found it helpful to call a fellow Catholic a fool for his method of apologetics? Your inability to make a convincing argument against free will in deterministic systems is hardly an indicator of what I can do. good grief.

 

[predator_CA]

You too are making an assertion regarding the existence of yourself, myself and the entire universe. You cannot avoid making such an assertion, because the entire universe is a given, a known fact. The existence of the universe cannot be skirted or ignored. So when you deny God you are asserting that the universe exists for another reason - then give the reason! You must give the reason. Otherwise your assertion is simply “I don’t know why or how the universe exists - I only know it’s not God”, and I think you can see how foolish such an assertion is. So give your counter-reasoning…

The universe does exist, so I agree with you there. But, by stating the word “reason”, you assume purpose or intent and use the word creation. And god must be separate from the universe in order to have created it, which is a position I’ve heard from many theists. Most people, at least those that require some empirical data to make there positions, have seen nothing other than known reality. The universe coming to be doesn’t require us to make up a “reason.” It’s alright to admit that we don’t know something.

But before the universe exists there are no “natural processes”! Yours is a circular argument: the universe exists due to the universe existing!..

Time is a concept encompassed by the universe, so “before the universe exists” doesn’t make sense to me. God existing before the universe is less than plausable.

No, you are positing a different faith. Reality has not told you that the existence of the universe has nothing to do with God, because reality cannot tell you this. If I’m wrong, if reality can prove that the universe exists outside of God, then simply show me that proof…

My beliefs are based upon probability, not faith. And as I stated above, the existence of the universe must be separate from god. You are contradicting yourself. I believe what I believe not what I want to believe. It is not a choice. I’ll simply finish by saying that a true belief, even one based on faith, cannot be chosen.

But isn’t evolution supposed to fine-tune organisms for their environment? No other animals commit suicide because there is no God! Why does reality (no God) cause humans to kill themselves, if evolution has fine-tuned us to that very same reality? It makes no sense. Are you denying evolution perhaps?

Organisms, over very long periods of time and/or generations will generally change, with advantageous traits being passed on. It simply happens that intelligence is an advantage for human survival. Overall, suicide is not very common, and it is perhaps the inevitable result of our freaking brains.

Yes it does, actually. The entire concept of “worth” is not even valid to apply to humans if we are nothing more than fine-tuned bags of chemical reactions.

The fact that any of us are alive is amazing, even just statistically and chance-wise. That and the other qualities of life should be enough for us to hold it precious.

 

[Keikiolu]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Keikiolu forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif
Uh,… TD,… you’ll never be able to “prove” that, especially to Pred.

How about you just leave that to me instead of presuming that you have any idea about how I’m going to approach the problem and how convincing it might end up being.

Quote:
The reason being that you’ll smack into the “complexity” barrier very quickly, and be left with no forward progress whatsoever.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keikiolu forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif
Uh,… TD,… you’ll never be able to “prove” that, especially to Pred.

You don’t know what you’re talking about.

OK. Go for it, dude…!

Quote:
In other words, you’re just sidetracking the issue into nowhere.

But,… if you’re fool enough to galavant into worthless territory,… go for it.

Keikiolu, since when have you ever found it helpful to call a fellow Catholic a fool for his method of apologetics? Your inability to make a convincing argument against free will in deterministic systems is hardly an indicator of what I can do. good grief.

As I said, bucky, go for it…!

I’m just saying that there is no possibility of you proving to Pred that your argument is even remotely sensible, because he won’t accept your basic assertions.

I’m not saying that your arguments aren’t “convincing” to people who WOULD accept your base assumptions, but Pred simply won’t, and that utterly defuses your arguments.

Give it a shot, and see what happens!

I love futile but expressive conversation,… and that’s what you’re in for.

…unless you DO convince him. In which case, GOOD JOB…!!

Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaikai ia oe. Aloha nui.

 

[tdgesq]

I’m just saying that there is no possibility of you proving to Pred that your argument is even remotely sensible, because he won’t accept your basic assertions.

I know what your “just saying” because you said the same thing in your last post. I’m “just saying” (again) that you don’t have any idea what you’re talking about.

I love futile but expressive conversation,…

That is becoming apparent.

…unless you DO convince him. In which case, GOOD JOB…!!

Your comments about what others can or cannot prove or what others will or will not accept in advance of any discussion are entirely unhelpful. More importantly, they are entirely off topic. I’m asking you nicely - please stop.

 

[clmowry]

Mainly, because, to the best of our knowledge, in all off the time living things have been around humans have been unique in terms of their intelligence.

“Millions” of differents creatures and only on species that seems to be able to ponder “why”.

Seems likely that there is a “special cause” involved or their would be some other “civilized” animal about.

Chuck

Humans are very smart animals, period. Why do you find it so difficult to believe biology would/could produce abnormally intelligent animalts based upon environment and circumstance? I’m not trying to be hostile, but I really don’t see how this is biologically makes no sense. It makes much more sense to me than “god,” whatever that thing is supposed to be. How does god make biological sense?

 

[NPS]

…The fact that any of us are alive is amazing, even just statistically and chance-wise. That and the other qualities of life should be enough for us to hold it precious.

Why should we hold life precious, predator?

And what does it mean to hold life precious?

 

[predator_CA]

Fair enough. I would say that you are an agnostic then. There are actually quite a few agnostics on this forum. You aren’t asserting that you can prove God does not exist, just that you haven’t been provided with evidence that would lead you to believe that his existence is probable. So I’ll take your posts as a challenge to theists to provide evidence that God exists. First of all though, I need to know what kind or type of evidence you would accept. Just a very general outline so that maybe I can provide something meaningful.

I hate to even use the word “atheist” when refering to myself because it carries with it such negative connotations, but by definition (one who does not believe in a diety) I qualify. Am I an agnostic atheist? Perhaps.

As for what evidence I would want, physical evidence. Honestly, I can’t imagine anyone could manage anything substantial, but I’m always interesting in hearing meaningful (name removed by moderator)ut.

 

[jmcrae]

I hate to even use the word “atheist” when refering to myself because it carries with it such negative connotations, but by definition (one who does not believe in a diety) I qualify. Am I an agnostic atheist? Perhaps.

As for what evidence I would want, physical evidence. Honestly, I can’t imagine anyone could manage anything substantial, but I’m always interesting in hearing meaningful (name removed by moderator)ut.

The physical evidence is all around us. The Universe and all that is within it has been created - it is here.

 

[freesoulhope]

I hate to even use the word “atheist” when refering to myself because it carries with it such negative connotations, but by definition (one who does not believe in a diety) I qualify. Am I an agnostic atheist? Perhaps.

As for what evidence I would want, physical evidence. Honestly, I can’t imagine anyone could manage anything substantial, but I’m always interesting in hearing meaningful (name removed by moderator)ut.

God is spirit; untangible. If you want evidence, your going to have to use a different investigative technique other then scientific empricism; such as “logic”.

 

[tdgesq]

I hate to even use the word “atheist” when refering to myself because it carries with it such negative connotations, but by definition (one who does not believe in a diety) I qualify. Am I an agnostic atheist? Perhaps.

That’s fine. I see you as an agnostic anyway in the sense that you are not committed to the notion that God doesn’t exist. I accept that you are here in good faith looking for the evidence that theists have to offer.

As for what evidence I would want, physical evidence. Honestly, I can’t imagine anyone could manage anything substantial, but I’m always interesting in hearing meaningful (name removed by moderator)ut.

It does not surprise me at all that you want physical evidence. Those things that we can see, hear, touch etc. are ultimately what put us all in contact with reality. I don’t deny that. But the problem is that direct physical evidence is not the standard by which agnostics (or just about anybody else) utilize to know many things about the world.

For example, you have never directly sensed a subatomic particle before. None of us have. Sure we’ve read about it in books and studied various experiments that others have conducted that have led them to the conclusion that these particles exist. Most of us haven’t even witnessed first hand a particle accelerator at work and the generated results. Agnostics also generally believe that there are moral standards out there. They believe in the universality of laws like those of logic and uniformity of nature even though there is no proper physical evidence of these things.

What is strange to me is that agnostics (not all of them, but most I’ve met) have never made an inquiry into why they believe in these things when they can’t directly sense them. Or ever inquire into why these things exist and in what way they exist. I guess my point is that if you accept some things that you can’t directly sense, wouldn’t that mean that this isn’t necessarily a realistic standard to judge the existence of God? Maybe like the existence of these other things we can’t directly see, we need a different standard to follow. Does this seem reasonable to you?

 

[predator_CA]

Why should we hold life precious, predator?

And what does it mean to hold life precious?

I explained this in that very post. If you don’t hold life precious, then perhaps that shows why you need religion.

 

[CarlosG]

it seems to me that you are arbitrarily assigning preciousness to rarity.

 

[NPS]

Originally Posted by NPS
Why should we hold life precious, predator?

And what does it mean to hold life precious?

I explained this in that very post. If you don’t hold life precious, then perhaps that shows why you need religion.

Sorry, if you don’t mind, you’ll have to walk this (self-described) dumb religious guy through it.

Apparently you experience something you call “amazement” when you consider being alive.

You also say you “hold life precious”. I am very interested to know what you mean by this. Is this some sort of electrical activity which occurs in your brain?

Why does your brain react this way? When does your brain react this way?

Why do you label this reaction as “positive”?

If you called this brain reaction a positive one, what do you mean by “positive”?

Why is it “important” that we should have this reaction in our brains?

Please explain what you mean…evolutionarily speaking, of course.