Free Will and Religion

[McGinn77]

In other words; when you can’t convince me (FAIL), you throw the ‘FAIL’ card, but word it differently.

When you unreasonable reject a proven concept you fail.

There is no win or lose here. These things boil down to what you believe. Period! Look, I’ve told you this before, I mostly agree with what our science have revealed. I have told you before that science has convinced me there are black holes. I am using a rhetorical argument to show that you can’t prove – beyond doubt – that anything you believe is true anymore than I can prove my God exists. There is enough evidence for me to BELIEVE black holes exist. There is also enough evidence for me to BELIEVE the God I believe in exists. I was raised in a home where my dad was an atheist and science was the evidence for all things that exist. My neighbor was John Mather (look him up). He frequently came to our house for these discussions. Devoid of any Christian influence in my house, I still became a Christian. So did my brother. :shrug:

Can, and have proven without a reasonable doubt. Sure anyone can say they don't think something exists but that just makes them wrong. As Neil Degrass Tyson says, "Facts are true weather or not you believe them."

The one compelling thing, if nothing else, that has convinced me about God is all these billions of people, passed on from one generation to the next are wrong? I think not. And this doesn’t even consider documented evidence of God as well as archeological evidence. All of which you reject. You refuse to accept that not everything has to have some equation to substantiate. You refuse to accept that perhaps math can’t explain everything; and it doesn’t need to.

So I supposed you also believe in Allah, the Yeti and any number of long standing myths that have been passed down. Some for even longer than Christianity. People believe a lot of stupid things and the fact alone that people believe them not one doesn't prove they are true, it's not even evidence that it's true.

There is no (that is none, zero, not a speck) of archaeological evidence for the existence of god. There is archaeological evidence that some of the events of the Bible took place (mostly the battles of the old testament). The evidence of a battle or that a building once stood somewhere at best only proves (assuming said building was a holy place or the battle was fought for religious reasons) that people believed there was a god, not that there actually was. This argument then is the exact same as the first one, basically "people have believed in god for a long time".

No, I don't say math or science "knows everything". That what religion does, the answer is "god did it". Science is still looking for answers to a lot of questions, but when it comes to black holes, the age of the Earth, how tides work, ect. yes, we do know. There are still more questions than answers and we are still looking but like I've said, if you leave your faith in the god that lives in the gaps of science you'll be forced to either 1) become irrelevant as you reject proven facts of the universe or 2) watch your god shrink away to nothing. Of course the other option is to accept science and find a way to reconcile your religion with the scientific facts as many others have.

How can you claim something exists based on observation yet deny a Christian’s contention that God exists based on the same factors (observation)? You didn’t prove anything except post a video that shows me nothing. I am demanding that you actually SHOW me a black hole. Don’t give me math or ‘observations’; physically show me. Until you can do this, I can place doubt on it.

All you've or anyone else has ever provided is observations that people believe in god, a fact I'm not contesting. Yes, plenty of people believe in god. An observation that people believe in god is not that same as observing god or a work of god.

The only evidence presented is a 2000 year old book, of questionable authorship, questionable authenticity, edited by people with questionable motives. And beyond that, followers of the book don't even agree on which parts are literal and which are poetic.

But you use science as a means to be convinced that God doesn’t exist. By proxy, it is the same thing. Because it can’t prove God exists, therefore God must not exist. But since you inserted logic into this… What sort of logic goes into suggesting that the vast majority of humans on this earth, over several millenia, are wrong? That somehow, you atheists, because you have math and science, you’ve got it right? I live in a place where both worlds can be right. One does not disprove the other in any way.

People are wrong all the time and science is not a democratic process. I'm going to go on a limb and assume you did not vote for Obama for president. If you did replace Obama with Bush. The majority of American citizens voted for Obama, does that mean it is infallible that he is a good president? By your logic Christianity is wrong and Islam is right because world wide there are more Muslims than Christians. There are also more Communists in the world than those who believe in Democracy. Does that make Democracy wrong? Are we just going to take it as fact that just because the majority believes in something that makes it valid? Was the Earth flat before it became the prevalent theory that it was round? Did believing in the roundness of the Earth magically make it round?

You simply can't prove something by saying "a lot of people believe in it." A lot of people think Justin Beiber is a great artist, but he still sucks.

 

[McGinn77]

No... not "How did the universe get here". How did all the stuff (matter) get here. Where did it come from? With every answer (theory) you try to come up with the question "why" can always be asked.

For instance... why does mass have gravity in space? Throw me all of your calcutions and theories and I can still ask "Okay, but why does it happen that way?" There is no real definitive way of explaining WHY these things happen.

Please see the definitions of science and philosophy, compare the differences and you'll arrive very easily at your answer.

 

[McGinn77]

I like your reasoning, I really do; but you really don’t pay good attention.

Since we’ve been down this road a few times, I assumed you knew my arguments are rhetorical. Please stop assuming I don’t have a desire to understand, or even understand science. You really know nothing about me. Attacking my knowledge level does not make your argument stronger.

I gave you my example of my parents (atheists) and my brother and me; same scenario on the opposite end of your spectrum. So what? Try to apply your scientific method here. :shrug:

Hypothesis: Personal beliefs are based upon unique personal experiences.

Experiment: See mine and your examples.

Results: Hypothesis supported.

Conclusion: Belief in a deity is base on personal experiences and not any provable evidence beyond the interpretation of experiences and emotions. There is no valid way of predicting who will and will not hold a belief in a deity. Belief in a deity is therefore based upon subjective experience rather than demonstration of physical evidence.

Done.

 

[PsyOps]

Hypothesis: Personal beliefs are based upon unique personal experiences.

Experiment: See mine and your examples.

Results: Hypothesis supported.

Conclusion: Belief in a deity is base on personal experiences and not any provable evidence beyond the interpretation of experiences and emotions. There is no valid way of predicting who will and will not hold a belief in a deity. Belief in a deity is therefore based upon subjective experience rather than demonstration of physical evidence.

Done.

How is a FACT that billions have believed in this diety based on my personal experiences? My personal experiences do not change that fact. Your disbelieve in this God does not change that fact.

How does historical documentation and archeological evidence become personal experiences?

 

[PsyOps]

When you unreasonable reject a proven concept you fail.

What have you proved; that you can quote laws of nature and equations? You have still yet to show me a black hole.

Can, and have proven without a reasonable doubt. Sure anyone can say they don't think something exists but that just makes them wrong. As Neil Degrass Tyson says, "Facts are true weather or not you believe them."

No you have not. You have asserted a theory which you support.

So I supposed you also believe in Allah, the Yeti and any number of long standing myths that have been passed down. Some for even longer than Christianity. People believe a lot of stupid things and the fact alone that people believe them not one doesn't prove they are true, it's not even evidence that it's true.

And I suppose you believe in man-made global warming, and alien life, and alternate universes, parallel universes, and that matter breaks down in a black hole, and that it doesn't, and that the universe did not begin with a single big bang but with millions of big bangs?

There is no (that is none, zero, not a speck) of archaeological evidence for the existence of god. There is archaeological evidence that some of the events of the Bible took place (mostly the battles of the old testament). The evidence of a battle or that a building once stood somewhere at best only proves (assuming said building was a holy place or the battle was fought for religious reasons) that people believed there was a god, not that there actually was. This argument then is the exact same as the first one, basically "people have believed in god for a long time".

And there is no absolute scientific proof that black holes exist. You only have math and observations of objects never visited by humans, and your belief this is true. :shrug:

You simply can't prove something by saying "a lot of people believe in it." A lot of people think Justin Beiber is a great artist, but he still sucks.

It is one piece of evidence; not proof alone.

I’m not even going to try to disagree with the Beiber point.

 

[PsyOps]

Please see the definitions of science and philosophy, compare the differences and you'll arrive very easily at your answer.

What? What's philosphical about proving how matter came to exist?

 

[UNA]

Predestines is a good enough word for what happens. God knows what will happen to each of us, all the time. He doesn't have to change everything that happens unless He feels that it might cause us mortal harm. He let's a lot of things happen just as they would during the normal course of our lives. He sometimes intervenes, just like our parents would do, to protect us.

...but only sometimes...

Again, He has the ability to intervene (we agree the Bible says this). If He can and has then how can we say we have free will? Parents who intervene to protect does not compare; a parent would not allow mortal harm to come to their children, a parent does not predetermine whether they will love and have mercy on their child (good ones anyways - of course God does this ).

Also, I've noticed that when I say "God does (a) which is bad, if a human did it it would be bad" Christians come back with "God works in mysterious ways", "God doesn't operate like we do" and so on. According to Christians, God's actions cannot be compared to those of a human. So the parent analogy cannot apply.

Not really. It's the difference between knowing about someone vs becoming close with them. I thought I was "cool with God" but I really wasn't until I really got to know Him.

I see

Jesus said there is...

So it must be true! Someone said that someone said that someone hear that someone else said something and 70+ years after he died someone else wrote it down! TRUTH!

No, it was just an analogy.

So faith is God is like having faith that a tornado went trough LaPlata even if I didn't personally see it. OK. So taking the word of a first-hand eyewitness is just as good as the 200th-hand "eyewitness"? Seeing the devastation cause by a natural disaster as evidence of the event is significantly more substantial.

 

[UNA]

But they did UNA! The Old Testament writings of Judaism (Tanakh) were at first passed along through oral teaching but then they were written down by the scribes. Jewish High Priests unrolled the scrolls and taught from them - the teachings of Moses and the Prophets whose words were documented and told the accounts about God's guidance, God's Laws and the coming day of a Messiah who would bring True Peace on earth. Jesus even read from them as noted in Luke 4:17-19:

The Disciples of Jesus wrote letters to one another on parchment and their writings were passed along in the preaching ministry of the early 1st-century church. Those are the eye-witness accounts that are reliable and tell about the events happening during the time of Jesus. The writings comprise The New Testament teachings in the Holy Bible.

So, yes, men did "bother to write it down at the time."

Ever played telephone?

 

[Railroad]

Come on now, kids.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CHkQFjAA&url=http://www.reasons.org/&ei=aUCkT5qWCsy3twfn-9WZDQ&usg=AFQjCNEygJpolkXphGFbfERoSn_18Md5Qw&sig2=D5zZRjgV4BMb60iMYL1ZaQ

 

[UNA]

Perhaps you need to look at demographics to see where peoples’ beliefs lie. I suspect if I throw these stats in front of you, you will reject them. But the fact is people of faith (any faith) make up the vast majority of the world’s population. Of those Christians are the largest population. This doesn’t even account for the billions (or maybe eve trillions) over the millennia that have believed. Now, for people that like to use numbers to prove things, you can’t reject these facts. Claiming all these people are unreasonable while you – in the VAST MINORITY – claim you own reason is nothing more than arrogance in the face of overwhelming numbers.

Didn't you just get upset with McGinn for making assumptions about you?

I never said the non-theists are a majority, or even a large minority! Where did you get that? I also never said that "all (Christians) people are unreasonable".

Of course, falling back on the whole "But lots of people agree" argument is baseless. Throughout history many (often a majority) of people have believed many things that were wrong.

Besides, the Muslims are catching up. By your logic, maybe I should convert!

You obviously don’t have to. Guess what? YOU JUST EXERCISED FREE WILL!

But you’re purposely glazing over my point… God is doing what He wants, exercising His will over us, by giving us free will. Your assertion is false. If you have a child and give him an Xbox, you allow him to play with it any time he wants. However, you CAN take it away any time you want. But you don’t. Because you have the power to do something, yet don’t use it, doesn’t mean it negates the premise of ‘the gift’.

I don't think comparing eternal salvation and mercy to an Xbox is really fair here...

I'm sorry, I must have missed your point since you seem to be under the impression that I am " purposely glazing over" it. Or maybe I'm just disagreeing with you? My refusal to immediately leap to your side is not indicative of a refusal to address your point. I'm trying to understand from where you interpretation is coming and how it is stronger than a literal one.

Ok. :shrug: I didn’t say it didn’t. He is God and CAN do with His creation as He sees fit. Just as the universe turns and moves in its own way. We can't change it and we can't manipulate it to what we want it to be. I am saying that God is not pulling every single human’s strings at His own will. He is not picking and choosing every single person for their salvation. He has, however, used certain people to carry out His purpose. I understand this about as much you understand what REALLY causes mass to attract in space.

OK. And I'm saying that this negates true free will as defined by a majority of (American) Christians today.

Hopes and dreams for what? Leave the world a better place for what? Why? If we’re just here and *poof* we’re gone. What grand purpose did you really serve other than just exist at this particular point in time? The difference is your hopes and dreams are over when you die. There is no hope beyond that. My hopes and dreams are promised forever.

My hopes and dreams do not rely on the HOPE and DREAM that there is a higher power waiting to take me away to my eternal salvation. My hopes and dreams are in the here and now, they will live on in the people I touch throughout my lifetime. For many it lives on in their children. I don't expect my legacy to be a great and world changing one, but if I can make one little corner better for someone then I've accomplished something.

By your logic there is no point, no reason to live a good life other than to have a better one after death. Why do anything?! Sell all your possessions, quit your job, stop voting, stop learning, stop discovering, stop talking, stop donating time or money to charities that make the world a better place in the here and now. Go be a hermit in a cave because according to you there is no point to this life except to get to the next one.

I sure hope for your sake that your hopes and dreams are forever because if they're not you sure as hell wasted this life.

 

[Railroad]

UNA, please check out the link I posted for you. Also, please think about the Higgs Boson and other things that seem to point to our Creator. This is not a pride thing, but an honest search for the truth. If you still disagree, I'm cool with that and will "duel" with you in a nice way until the last.

 

[UNA]

And I suppose you believe in man-made global warming, and alien life, and alternate universes, parallel universes, and that matter breaks down in a black hole, and that it doesn't, and that the universe did not begin with a single big bang but with millions of big bangs?:

Why do you keep accusing him of believing in theories?

For the sake of it, lets say that I say "Alien life exists and they've been here". I can't prove it and I understand that, I've just seen some evidence and I think it pretty compelling BUT I STILL KNOW IT'S JUST A THEORY and I don't try to convince people that it is a FACT and that I have proof because the Great Pyramid exists!***

Figuring that a THEORY might be true and insisting that the existence of God is a FACT are not comparable. Non-theists are OK with not knowing everything (in fact its more fun that way) and don't insist on inserting something into every gap.

***I do NOT believe in ancient aliens

<a href="http://narwhaler.com/ill-tell-you-why-ancient-aliens-Rtv9cb"><img src="http://narwhaler.com/img/rt/v/ill-tell-you-why-ancient-aliens-Rtv9cb.jpg" alt="Ill tell you why Ancient Aliens" title="Ill tell you why Ancient Aliens" /></a><br>View more <a href="http://narwhaler.com/ancient-aliens">ancient aliens images</a>

 

[UNA]

What? What's philosphical about proving how matter came to exist?

(Sorry, I just can't keep my mouth shut) ...weren't you asking for "why's"? Not "how's"?

 

[Railroad]

UNA, please check out the link I posted for you. Also, please think about the Higgs Boson and other things that seem to point to our Creator. This is not a pride thing, but an honest search for the truth. If you still disagree, I'm cool with that and will "duel" with you in a nice way until the last.

Please do look at the suggested site. It will take a while because there is a lot there to be studied.

 

[PsyOps]

Didn't you just get upset with McGinn for making assumptions about you?

I think there’s a little bit of a difference between questioning someone’s level of knowledge (a personal attack), and assuming how someone will answer a question. And, for the record, I didn't get upset; I was setting him straight.

The rest of your post is getting redundant; on both our parts. Agree to disagree.

 

[PsyOps]

(Sorry, I just can't keep my mouth shut) ...weren't you asking for "why's"? Not "how's"?

Yes... because when he answered, my follow up would have been 'why'. You have to give my line dialectics a chance.

 

[PsyOps]

Why do you keep accusing him of believing in theories?

Because he does? :shrug: Believing the phenomena occurring in certain points of space are black holes is completely based on theory. McGinn believes they are black holes. He believes in a theory. That was easy.

 

[Starman3000m]

Oral Laws / Written Word

Ever played telephone?

Ever played post office? * lol

As mentioned about Judaism, the Oral Laws and historical accounts of God dealing with the Jewish people were eventually written down by the scribes and became the verifiable references to turn to for the continued teaching of their faith.

However, unlike the scenario of a gathering of people passing along info where facts change and the story ends up totally different with the last person giving the account, the accuracy of the Word of God was revealed by the Holy Spirit to the Prophets who did not change the message at all. God's Truth to mankind remained as reliable teachings that could be trusted since the Prophets were sent and led by God.

Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things. For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. (2 Peter 1:20-21)

* Now, about playing post office: After the Resurrection of Jesus from the dead and His Ascension to Heaven, His disciples documented their experiences on parchments and even sent letters back and forth among themselves and to the early churches with the Gospel Message that Christ was indeed the Son of God and Jewish Messiah. They shared the accounts of their personal experiences through these letters (epistles). However, as in the case with the Old Testament Prophets, the Holy Spirit of God gave the inspiration to Jesus' disciples of what to write and the accuracy of the accounts of their experiences was brought into their remembrance by God's Holy Spirit, as Jesus said would happen.
The New Testament accounts are the reliable and trustworthy teachings of Jesus Christ that were documented by those who had first-hand experiences and whose writings were led by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. In order to keep the record straight and true, Jesus told His disciples that the Holy Spirit would be sent to remind them of His teachings that they should write about:

“All this I have spoken while still with you. But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you. Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you. I do not give to you as the world gives. Do not let your hearts be troubled and do not be afraid. (John 14:25-27)

The Holy Bible contains all the information necessary for mankind to know about God and His Plan of Salvation for mankind through the Atoning Blood of Christ.

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: (2 Timothy 3:16)

And as the Holy Spirit gave that inspiration to the Prophets and Jesus' disciples of what to write, so too does the Holy Spirit open up the understanding to those who read from The Word of God:

As for you, see that what you have heard from the beginning remains in you. If it does, you also will remain in the Son and in the Father. And this is what he promised us—eternal life.
I am writing these things to you about those who are trying to lead you astray. As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit—just as it has taught you, remain in him. (1 John 2:24-27)

The New Testament accounts of Jesus' birth, life and ministry are the proof that God is and that God is willing to interact in the personal life of each individual who seeks Him with a genuine and sincere desire to know the Truth - and, yes, There is Only One Truth. (John 14:6)

 

[UNA]

UNA, please check out the link I posted for you. Also, please think about the Higgs Boson and other things that seem to point to our Creator. This is not a pride thing, but an honest search for the truth. If you still disagree, I'm cool with that and will "duel" with you in a nice way until the last.

The Higgs Boson remains unobserved. It will neither prove nor disprove the existence of God (if it exists). It would merely prove the Standard Model correct (which isn't really mere is it )

Interestingly Peter Higgs (for which the particle is named) is also an atheist and is therefore not pleased with the Higgs Boson being referred to the "God Particle"

 

[UNA]

I think there’s a little bit of a difference between questioning someone’s level of knowledge (a personal attack), and assuming how someone will answer a question. And, for the record, I didn't get upset; I was setting him straight.

OK, then "Please stop assuming I don’t have a desire to --take all the evidence into account--. You really know nothing about me. Attacking my --ability to reason--does not make your argument stronger."

The rest of your post is getting redundant; on both our parts. Agree to disagree.

Seriously? That quickly?

OK, I'll just copy this to be sure you read it clearly as I don't appreciate being told my life is pointless because I don't believe like you...it's a lot like having one's knowledge or ability to reason attacked...

My hopes and dreams do not rely on the HOPE and DREAM that there is a higher power waiting to take me away to my eternal salvation. My hopes and dreams are in the here and now, they will live on in the people I touch throughout my lifetime. For many it lives on in their children. I don't expect my legacy to be a great and world changing one, but if I can make one little corner better for someone then I've accomplished something.

By your logic there is no point, no reason to live a good life other than to have a better one after death. Why do anything?! Sell all your possessions, quit your job, stop voting, stop learning, stop discovering, stop talking, stop donating time or money to charities that make the world a better place in the here and now. Go be a hermit in a cave because according to you there is no point to this life except to get to the next one.

I sure hope for your sake that your hopes and dreams are forever because if they're not you sure as hell wasted this life.

Yes... because when he answered, my follow up would have been 'why'. You have to give my line dialectics a chance.

You differentiated between the "how's" and the "why's" insisting that the "why" questions be answered with science...then asked...again...a "how" question. The "why's" are philosophical (and/or religious by proxy), the "how's" are scientific.

Because he does? :shrug: Believing the phenomena occurring in certain points of space are black holes is completely based on theory. McGinn believes they are black holes. He believes in a theory. That was easy.

Didn't you watch the video? Stars circle tightly around an unseen central point, no radiation...we have defined that to be a black hole. You saw it with your own eyes! Do you propose a different explanation? I'd love to hear it and look forward to seeing your evidence.