Nenlow77 And Kuriokaze Debate

[♦ nivek ♦]

Gentlemen,

 

It is now 2130PDT, 70.14.2008

 

Antlerman has sent me this information in which I believe that you both wish to participate in.

 

If so, this discussion time is Open for your use. Understand that only you two, and under some circumstances reserved by Mods, are allowed to post in this section. All others will be removed with malice on my part.

You will be given the whole of this thread to do as you need to do to take care of your part of discussion.

 

Participants, please do not discuss this outside the Arena, and stay out of the Peanut Gallery, as "cross talk" there mixes, confuses, and clouds conversations.

Peanutting tends to get rough as leftover fuck. I suggest you try and avoid that area, concentrate on your opponent rather than those out tossing shells.

 

Looking forward to a decent discussion. I limit by convention this to 15 (fifteen) pages, or 30 (thirty) days of calender time.

 

Carry on, and we'll be watcing and reading.

 

kevinL

******************************************************

 

 

 

The Rules:

 

1. I lead the topic of discussion until I get answers from Kuroikaze once I get across what I am trying to say then I will turn the floor over to Kuroikaze which will allow him to ask me questions until he gets what he wants across and turns the table back over to me. And we can do this until the debate is over. (For the other person to start interjecting questions the floor must be turned over to them by the other person)

 

2. (This site is not my life I do have to work so it may take time to respond) That Kuroikaze will be patient on me as I will him to respond to questions. I will get back and post as fast as I possibly can and try to do it in a timely manner but there may be times where it may take days for me to respond and this is why I am asking for patience.

 

3. That this be a civil debate where we both together are searching for truth and are being honest when we really do not have an answer for a question. None of us no matter what we do or do not believe have all the answers and I want us both to be humble enough to admit when we do not have answers to a question. And if we do not have the answer the other does not attack and name call for this is an unintelligent way to react when someone cannot answer a question.

 

4. That it is fair game to bring in the works of others as long as we cite the person and from what work/speech/sermon it was spoken/written, but try not to bring in lengthy citations. The substance of our debate should be what we ourselves have learned but when bringing others in we cite them.

 

5. That there be no interruptions from others in between our posts and it only be between me and Kuroikaze, unless one of us is breaking the rules we each can pick one person (by giving their screen name) before the debate to watch and interject if one of us is breaking the rules. So we can help come to a conclusion together through more than just us if the rules are being broken.

 

The definitions:

 

God- He created all things including matter and energy and he does poses intelligence

 

faith- we have faith in our car working everyday and have faith in our oven working

 

atheist- an athiest is someone who believes no god

 

Call this thread nenlow77 vs. Kuriokaze

[Kuroikaze]

Nenlow has asked to make the opening remarks so I will await his first post.

[nenlow77]

Kuroikaze I ask you is there logic in faith? Why?

[Kuroikaze]

Kuroikaze I ask you is there logic in faith? Why?

 

To answer this question one must be careful to define exactly what one means by faith.

I commonly define faith as believing in something without sufficient evidence to believe it is true, in this case I would say that faith is illogical, and possibly harmful, by definition.

 

Illogical because believing something without sufficient evidence is a waste of time, possibly harmful because you will make choices based upon said belief which can lead to incorrect decisions, which in severe cases can bring you to harm. For instance, if you believed you could fly, you might well attempt to do so based upon that belief. The results would not be good for you.

 

Of course you define faith in a much looser sense. That is, any belief that does not rest on absolute proof. I think this definition may be a little too loose, but I’m not going to argue semantics with you. Of course it is rational to believe things when one does not have 100% proof. Most of the things we believe are what I would call “qualified beliefs,†in other words, we believe it because it seems the most likely of all the options. We continue to believe it until we learn of a new option, or new evidence makes us reconsider options we had previously discarded.

 

If we waited for our evidence to prove an idea 100% before we believed it we would simply never be able to act, instead we look at the facts and decide which option is most reasonable, then we act on that option until a better option is presented.

If we define faith in your way then I can say that I have no problem with it, because it is something everyone, including me, engages in every day.

 

However, this does nothing to deal with the central issue. That being, does the preponderance of the evidence we have available to us suggest that an intelligent being created all matter an energy, instead of matter and energy (a.k.a. something unintelligent) being self existent.

 

I would argue that there is very little positive evidence for either position (except that matter and energy exists and so it seems probable that one of the two is true). Furthermore, I would argue that logic dictates that the default position on any such an idea is skepticism and doubt that said claim is true, until such a time as reasonable evidence can be gathered. Then a more firm position can be taken either pro or con.

 

Of course, since you are supposed to be arguing that atheism is illogical I am guessing that you believe that there is sufficient evidence that an intelligent being is responsible for the origins of existence. So why don't you go ahead and present said evidence, then I will review it and if it is something I have already considered I will tell you why I think it fails to prove your position.

[♦ nivek ♦]

Kuroikaze I ask you is there logic in faith? Why?

 

Calling a Techical Foul here nenlow77.

 

Please restate your Opener in a clearer more concise format.

 

As posted this is a conversational opportunity not a Debate Opening Statement.

 

I would prefer that you open up with your statement of intent, what direction you intend to go, and how your posts will help you to a logical conclusion.

 

If you are not yet conversant in the technicals of Robert's Rules formatting in debate, I'd suggest you ask someone like Antlerman how to form up your statements.

 

 

kL

[nenlow77]

Okay my intent is to discuss with Kuroikaze about the atheism lifestyle he lives and also to discuss how it is not all logic but includes the same faith which I have in my God by forming together what faith is and how I can believe in a factual intelligent God who created everything around us. This topic is not to discuss if the Christian God is true or not( this would be a different debate) but the fact that one God is real and that he is intelligent. I also want to discuss with Kuroikaze about logic and how logic is only one way we are created to think and is not the only say all way.

 

Kuroikaze I would like to say that the first topic of discussion is a very common one about our universe being an obvious sign that a creator exists. Starting with all the galaxies moving all the way down to the DNA in our very body. There is so much proof in the scientific findings in just our DNA that chance plays such a tiny role it is obsolete. I am confused at how we as Christians could be looked down upon for believing that we in actuality were created, compared to the thought that some rare chance everything just came to be. I believe by your definition of faith it takes more faith (Kuroikaze, "I commonly define faith as believing in something without sufficient evidence to believe it is true, in this case I would say that faith is illogical, and possibly harmful, by definition. ") to believe in what you believe than having faith that there is a creator (intelligent design). I am looking for sufficient evidence in how you think we came to be, and if you do not have much evidence for this (I know scientists even claim to have little physical evidence) then it must be that you have a lot of faith in atheism. I would like to here what you have to say about this and what questions this arises in you?

[Kuroikaze]

Okay my intent is to discuss with Kuroikaze about the atheism lifestyle he lives and also to discuss how it is not all logic but includes the same faith which I have in my God by forming together what faith is and how I can believe in a factual intelligent God who created everything around us.

 

Does my life include things that are not logic? Of course. Does it include faith? no.

 

I also want to discuss with Kuroikaze about logic and how logic is only one way we are created to think and is not the only say all way.

 

I want to introduce three different groups at this point.

 

1. Things that are logical

2. Things that are non-logical, that is they exist outside the bounds of examination of pure logic, but do not contradict anything in logic.

3. the illogical, things that are within the bounds of examination by logic and clearly contradict rules in logic.

 

For instance, I would consider love to be non-logical. I can, of course, explain a lot of the biological and social drives that make us love, so there is no contradiction to logic in its existence, but the feeling itself cannot be quantified with logic.

 

The existence of god is not something I believe can be put in category 2 because he either exists or he doesn't, and this is a question that is quantifiable by logic.

 

I would not say logic can deal with every problem in life, but it is a useful tool to answer many questions. That is my view of logic in a nutshell.

 

Kuroikaze I would like to say that the first topic of discussion is a very common one about our universe being an obvious sign that a creator exists. Starting with all the galaxies moving all the way down to the DNA in our very body. There is so much proof in the scientific findings in just our DNA that chance plays such a tiny role it is obsolete.

 

This is too vague to refute. What proof do you have? I have read much on statistical analysis of evolution and I am convinced that there is sufficient evidence for it without the help of an intelligence being. I may be wrong on my reading of the evidence, but this would not be called faith, it would simply indicate I had made a mistake in my inquiry.

 

Suffice to say, that most of the statistical studied creationists have done mostly relied on drumming up figures they could not posibly know, and leaving out much information. They will claim that the chances of life beginning accidentally is "1 to such and such to the 1 millionth power" Where do they get such a figure? There is not enough information on this topic for them to give the exact numbers they do. Furthermore, suggesting the chance is "1 to whatever" suggests that life only gets one chance to start and if it screws up its all over. When in fact the building blocks of basic life are constantly interacting in many environments.

 

Think about this, if the chance is only 1 to 9,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999 but instead of only once, the event that starts life occurs 9,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999 many times. Well, if I remember my grade school math I can simply that fraction down to a 1 to 1 chance. Of course creationists won't tell you that because they aren't interested in truth as far as I can see.

 

 

I am confused at how we as Christians could be looked down upon for believing that we in actuality were created, compared to the thought that some rare chance everything just came to be.

 

This isn't why look down on many Christians, I just think they haven't properly examined the evidence, just as I once had not. If I do look down on any Christians it is mostly for their poor stances on certain moral issues, but that is not part of this debate so I'll leave it be. I would suggest you do the same and try to refrain from Ad hominems like this in the future.

 

I believe by your definition of faith it takes more faith (Kuroikaze, "I commonly define faith as believing in something without sufficient evidence to believe it is true, in this case I would say that faith is illogical, and possibly harmful, by definition. ") to believe in what you believe than having faith that there is a creator (intelligent design). I am looking for sufficient evidence in how you think we came to be, and if you do not have much evidence for this (I know scientists even claim to have little physical evidence) then it must be that you have a lot of faith in atheism. I would like to here what you have to say about this and what questions this arises in you?

 

The answer, you won't like it, is that I have no clue how we came to be. Faith requires that one holds a position true without sufficient evidence. You make a claim that an intelligent being created the universe, I claim that there is not enough evidence to support that claim. You seem bound to turn atheism in to a positive claim that there is not god. You have been told before that it is not, this is a straw man of my position. As an atheist I am not making ANY claim at all, except perhaps that I haven't met an ideal of god I find logically coherent or worthy of worship.

 

It takes no faith to say "I have no idea how matter and energy came to be, and for all I know they have always existed on their own."

One should never claim to know things they do not know.

[nenlow77]

It takes no faith to say "I have no idea how matter and energy came to be, and for all I know they have always existed on their own."

One should never claim to know things they do not know.

 

I would have to agree that you have no faith on this stand point, so it does alter the debate in a large degree, but I can explain to you why I believe what I do and the evidence I have for this.

 

I believe that God created the earth, why do I believe this because I believe in His word. I believe that He is here with me and speaks to me, and no it is not just my own thoughts in my head. The reason why I believe in His word is because of the truth that it speaks an how so often people will try to prove things wrong about the Bible but we find more and more historical facts from the Bible. Pieces of Noah's Ark was found about 15 years ago on a Mount Ararat and are actually doing studies on what they found to prove this. There has been proof that King David and King Solomon existed. There is tons of evidence that Jesus was a real man and they know where he was buried, but have no body found (he was risen that is why). The Bible even speaks of dinosaurs in the book of Job. There are plenty of facts we can go through why I believe and have faith in the God I do, but will you just reject what I have to say? The Bible has stood the test of time and is still going and also has never been able to be proven untrue with hard evidence, but only speculation. Scientists have even admitted to saying that we cannot prove evolution is true. So all I can say is I do not have the complete hard evidence you are looking for. There must be an actual change in your heart and you must realize that the mind of reason will push you farther away from the Lord. To question and to become a skeptic of everything the word says will only take you down a dark road to where reason is your only answer and this is where Satan gets his stronghold.

 

Romans 1:18-32

18"The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

21For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.

 

24Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.

 

26Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

 

28Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done. 29They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them."

 

Reason and logic will become the downfall of many. "We have the same evidence, the same earth, the same universe, but it is our presuppositions that lead us to our conclusions. We know that we can clearly see God’s hand in nature—the question is whether we have the courage to submit ourselves to Him. If we refuse, then we are “without excuse.â€-David MacMillan III

 

Faith is a hard thing for many to grasp, because it is not reasonable or logical. Can faith be logical? That is up to you to decide. I have faith a strong faith in a creator in one who has come and saved me and no not all of it makes sense to me but then if it did it would not be possible. For if I could understand everything the Lord has done and placed down on this earth then I would be God and God would become god. I understand logic as a tool as time is also. We live inside of time but God is outside of time just as we do not know how to live or even understand life outside of time this is also how I believe you may be trapped inside logic. You must come to an understanding that God is outside of these things for He created them, then you must come to yourself come to the conclusion that is everything I am saying garbage and reject what I have to say and go on with our life or say wow he may have some truth to what He is saying. Maybe you will say to yourself I have been coming to my conclusions of God with the wrong mindset, maybe there is truth in a God. To see the truth in God though you must be humble enough to admit that you can not do it alone you are in need of a saviour. For whatever your decision and conclusions are of life on the die you die I pray that the Lord may become a part of it once again.

 

Now after this that I have written and understanding my beliefs and where I come from do you Kuroikaze have questions for me on what I believe? Do you have honest questions looking for honest answers from me? I would like to here them and see the questions that rise up within your heart. I would like to know the struggles and trials you have had with Christianity and faith more specifically why s faith so hard for you? I would also like to know more of who you are as a person (but you for the question on who you are you can just send me a pm on this if you ever feel comfortable with that). Please ask me questions.

[♦ nivek ♦]

nenlow,

 

Is this an opportunity to preach or time to educate?

 

I'm not seeing anything more erudite than recycled religious cark, same things most of we read, know, believed, preached, taught, spread, and cast off eventually.

 

Even as a roundtable discussion, a less than formal form of debate, there MUST be something brought to the argument table that is more than speculative religious imagination.

 

Everything you've said so far can be read from almost any sects Sunday School Weekend Reader and How To Avoid Hell News.

 

Not asking for anything earthshakingly **new**, however the presentation requires more than just simple pasted out of texts existing elsewhere.

 

Won't foul this one, but need you to focus, and find at least *A* point to pick on, something your part of discussion might help those of we out here reading find a better understanding.

 

So far I do not see that, and encourage you to think, fall back, and cogitate prior to your next postage here.

 

 

kL

[Kuroikaze]

I would have to agree that you have no faith on this stand point, so it does alter the debate in a large degree, but I can explain to you why I believe what I do and the evidence I have for this.

 

I appreciate your admission on this point. Most Christians I discourse with on this subject have trouble making the distinction here, so appreciate that you understood my point.

 

There must be an actual change in your heart and you must realize that the mind of reason will push you farther away from the Lord. To question and to become a skeptic of everything the word says will only take you down a dark road to where reason is your only answer and this is where Satan gets his stronghold.

 

I don't really know what to do with most of your first paragraph since it isn't really an argument, but I really disagree with this conclusion. I don't know of a single person or society that suffered by becoming too reasonable. One SHOULD be skeptical of all things until there is good reason to believe in them. Isn't it the bible which says to "question all things and hold on to that which is true."

 

Personally I find the notion that "learning is of the devil and will lead you astray" slightly nutty, and a little scary.

 

 

Reason and logic will become the downfall of many. "We have the same evidence, the same earth, the same universe, but it is our presuppositions that lead us to our conclusions. We know that we can clearly see God’s hand in nature—the question is whether we have the courage to submit ourselves to Him. If we refuse, then we are “without excuse.â€-David MacMillan III

 

Well, with all due respect, David MacMillian was a jack ass. Claiming your opponents "really" know you are right is a pretty underhanded tactic.

 

Faith is a hard thing for many to grasp, because it is not reasonable or logical. Can faith be logical? That is up to you to decide. I have faith a strong faith in a creator in one who has come and saved me and no not all of it makes sense to me but then if it did it would not be possible. For if I could understand everything the Lord has done and placed down on this earth then I would be God and God would become god. I understand logic as a tool as time is also. We live inside of time but God is outside of time just as we do not know how to live or even understand life outside of time this is also how I believe you may be trapped inside logic. You must come to an understanding that God is outside of these things for He created them, then you must come to yourself come to the conclusion that is everything I am saying garbage and reject what I have to say and go on with our life or say wow he may have some truth to what He is saying. Maybe you will say to yourself I have been coming to my conclusions of God with the wrong mindset, maybe there is truth in a God. To see the truth in God though you must be humble enough to admit that you can not do it alone you are in need of a saviour. For whatever your decision and conclusions are of life on the die you die I pray that the Lord may become a part of it once again.

 

You seem to be arguing for the Christian god, not the simple definition of god we agreed upon at the start of this debate. You are also preaching, I don't want to be rude, but you are wasting both of our times with this. I have heard more preaching, and indeed preached more sermons than you could know. If reading the entire bible from end to end, and reading the apologetics of all the greatest theologians of the past 2,000 years only convinced me that it was all bunk, then you don't have much chance.

 

Now after this that I have written and understanding my beliefs and where I come from do you Kuroikaze have questions for me on what I believe? Do you have honest questions looking for honest answers from me? I would like to here them and see the questions that rise up within your heart. I would like to know the struggles and trials you have had with Christianity and faith more specifically why s faith so hard for you? I would also like to know more of who you are as a person (but you for the question on who you are you can just send me a pm on this if you ever feel comfortable with that). Please ask me questions.

 

Questions? not really, you see I am quite satisfied with my life, and even if I were not, belief in any religion is no guarantee of happiness. I have simply been exposed to too many different thoughts, other cultures, ideas, people to go back to that old life. My best attributes, my inquisitiveness, my love of other people and cultures, are all liabilities to believing in Christianity. By your own words thinking too much or asking too many questions are the ways Satan distracts you.

I just disagree, reason is not, as Luther once said of it, the devil's whore. It is one of the best tools we have for making correct choices.

 

Actually, I do have one question. Do you even know what you are arguing for? You started out trying to argue that being an atheist was less reasonable than your position, but now you are arguing that it is more reasonable but that reason is bad and should be avoided in favor of believing as you do. Also, why should I bother debating you when you aren't even sure what you believe yourself?

[nenlow77]

Sorry for the delay in posting.

 

Actually, I do have one question. Do you even know what you are arguing for? You started out trying to argue that being an atheist was less reasonable than your position, but now you are arguing that it is more reasonable but that reason is bad and should be avoided in favor of believing as you do. Also, why should I bother debating you when you aren't even sure what you believe yourself?

 

I still believe that atheism is less reasonable than believing in a God. I also believe that reason can be good but also can be bad, because even you yourself said that you do not know how we originated, I have belief of exactly where we came from. It seems this point in saying why should you debate me when I am unsure of what I believe myself contradicts your whole system of beliefs. Doesn't Atheism basically mean -"I do not know?" Yes I do not have all the answers and some things I believe cannot be proven to you by reason on a piece of paper and this is where my faith comes in.

 

Let me set out a point to this discussion. There is great reason for me to believe in the Bible and the word of God, but I will pinpoint that I believe in earthly surroundings and I know I spoke of this earlier but let me go into detail. I believe you are a smart man but I do not understand how you will take something as amazing as our DNA (a key code to our living body) and just say by chance this all happened? How can you look up into the stars and be looking at lights from objects that may not even be in existence anymore from light years away and still say we just came do be? Many atheists hate it when Christians show the insurmountable odds of this universe coming to be by chance, I say just by this alone there must be a creator of some sorts. If you put such a high regard in logic and reason then please tell me how someone with such intelligence can overlook these facts. Would you wager bets on a baby versus Mohammed Ali in his prime in a fight? This is basically the wager atheists make on believing there is no creator, there must be intelligent design. I just get so confused at people when they put their basis of beliefs in logic and reason but when it comes to believing in an intelligent creator they take the less logical less rational side.

 

So Kuroikaze how can you on holding reason in such high regard preach to me the importance of reason but neglect reason when it comes to an intelligent creator?

[Kuroikaze]

I still believe that atheism is less reasonable than believing in a God.

 

But you can't provide evidence that this is true.

 

I also believe that reason can be good but also can be bad, because even you yourself said that you do not know how we originated, I have belief of exactly where we came from.

 

Ok, but I could believe all sorts of things, just because one believes something doesn't make it true, wouldn't you agree?

 

It seems this point in saying why should you debate me when I am unsure of what I believe myself contradicts your whole system of beliefs. Doesn't Atheism basically mean -"I do not know?" Yes I do not have all the answers and some things I believe cannot be proven to you by reason on a piece of paper and this is where my faith comes in.

 

No, first off, it is one thing to be unsure, but another to make contradicting statements in the same debate, it says to me that you either aren't really paying attention, or you don't understand the end result of the statement you made.

 

Being an atheist isn't about being unsure, but about being humble enough to not pretend to know things that are not known. To me, when a christian claims to "know" things about god, it is quite arrogant. I also suspect that if there is a god, he would probably find it pretty arrogant too, but what do I know?

 

Let me set out a point to this discussion. There is great reason for me to believe in the Bible and the word of God, but I will pinpoint that I believe in earthly surroundings and I know I spoke of this earlier but let me go into detail. I believe you are a smart man but I do not understand how you will take something as amazing as our DNA (a key code to our living body) and just say by chance this all happened? How can you look up into the stars and be looking at lights from objects that may not even be in existence anymore from light years away and still say we just came do be? Many atheists hate it when Christians show the insurmountable odds of this universe coming to be by chance, I say just by this alone there must be a creator of some sorts. If you put such a high regard in logic and reason then please tell me how someone with such intelligence can overlook these facts. Would you wager bets on a baby versus Mohammed Ali in his prime in a fight? This is basically the wager atheists make on believing there is no creator, there must be intelligent design. I just get so confused at people when they put their basis of beliefs in logic and reason but when it comes to believing in an intelligent creator they take the less logical less rational side.

 

Ok, I think I explained this one before. I have already explained in this thread why statistics on this are not worth debating so don't bother talking about odds, read my other post, I have addressed this already. You don't know if the odds are "insurmountable" anymore than I do, stop pretending to know what you do not, unless you can present evidence.

 

You are supposing that the universe must have a creator because it is complex and precise. Would that sum up your argument?

 

In terms of logic your argument would look something like this

 

P=premise

C=conclusion

 

P1 = All things that are complex and precise have a creator

P2= The universe is complex and precise

 

C = The universe must have had a creator.

 

If you feel this incorrectly states your views in some way, feel free to correct me, but if you attempt to change the argument by claiming god is an exception, you should note that this is a logical fallacy called "special pleading." Look it up if you are so inclined.

 

Now, I will freely admit that P2 is correct, however P1 is another matter. I don't accept it, and, in fact, neither do you. Let me ask you a question. Is god complex and precise? Do you see where I am going with this? In fact, it would be reasonable that he is MORE complex than this universe is. By this argument god would also require a creator because it specifically says "All things."

 

Do you see? We both must conclude that there are complex and precise things that just exist, without a creator.

 

So did an intelligent being create the universe? I don't know, and neither do you, despite claims to the contrary. If a "complex and precise" god can just exist, then so can a "complex and precise" universe.

 

So Kuroikaze how can you on holding reason in such high regard preach to me the importance of reason but neglect reason when it comes to an intelligent creator?

 

This not the Lion's den so you should reign in the smart ass comments, just as I have done. If you cannot be respectful then I will take my leave.

[nenlow77]

That last question I proposed was to to be smart or sarcastic I truly would like to know your answer that why do you not believe in what is more logical and reasonable that some how something created this universe?

 

I can give you evidence of what I believe and how I have come to believe that there is a God and He created me, but this evidence does not suit you. I can understand by looking at my God how if you look at the Christian faith through logic it does not seem to make sense and if you look at the Bible through this same logic the Bible will seem to contradict itself. I understand your viewpoints in how you once were here and lost faith and said being a Christian is not logical I can understand how you came to these points, I do not know the road and feelings that brought you here but I can understand the outcome of your belief/no belief. But right now I am not going to debate if my God is the one true God I am trying to point out that by all the evidence we have here on earth.

 

What can be said about energy and the law of entropy? We all know energy cannot be created or destroyed, and with this we know that whenever energy changes forms (though no energy is lost) it becomes more random and less useful. This means there has to be some form of special creation (an intelligent creator) to actually bring into existence something that cannot be created or destroyed. "any physical system left to itself tends to move spontaneously toward disorganization. That is, entropy increases. But, evolution requires the opposite of this, a spontaneous decrease in randomness and an escalating complexity of life." -Ken Clark

 

 

 

Now, I will freely admit that P2 is correct, however P1 is another matter. I don't accept it, and, in fact, neither do you. Let me ask you a question. Is god complex and precise? Do you see where I am going with this? In fact, it would be reasonable that he is MORE complex than this universe is. By this argument god would also require a creator because it specifically says "All things."

 

Do you see? We both must conclude that there are complex and precise things that just exist, without a creator.

 

So did an intelligent being create the universe? I don't know, and neither do you, despite claims to the contrary. If a "complex and precise" god can just exist, then so can a "complex and precise" universe.

 

You are right I do not know for certain if God created the universe but because of the evidence shown to me I have chosen to believe that a creator exists. I also do not know if we landed on the moon but because of the evidence shown to me I believe we did, the same can go with things throughout history I think there is much about history in our school books that is fiction because of the lack of evidence. Just because someone writes it does not mean it is truth. I believe you agree with me on the fact that much of our information on this earth will change and much of what we believe now will evolve or completely be eradicated. But I truly believe that the only thing that has stood the test of time is the belief that their is a creator of some sort.

 

I am not trying to convince you that there is a Christian God, but trying to discuss why with all the evidence we have are you willing to believe/ex-believe there is no creator?

[Kuroikaze]

That last question I proposed was to to be smart or sarcastic I truly would like to know your answer that why do you not believe in what is more logical and reasonable that some how something created this universe?

 

It seemed to be so to me, but I may have been wrong, my apologies.

 

 

What can be said about energy and the law of entropy? We all know energy cannot be created or destroyed, and with this we know that whenever energy changes forms (though no energy is lost) it becomes more random and less useful. This means there has to be some form of special creation (an intelligent creator) to actually bring into existence something that cannot be created or destroyed. "any physical system left to itself tends to move spontaneously toward disorganization. That is, entropy increases. But, evolution requires the opposite of this, a spontaneous decrease in randomness and an escalating complexity of life." -Ken Clark

 

You have the wrong definition of entropy, the correct one is

 

any closed system tends towards disorganization

 

A closed system is one in which no energy can enter from the outside. Now, when you walk outside do you see a giant yellow ball in the sky? It's called the sun, and it is a giant natural nuclear reactor that is constantly radiating our planet with energy. Therefore, the law of entropy does not apply to a discussion on evolution, because the earth is not a closed system.

 

Do you really think that biologists simply forgot about the laws of thermodynamics? Even when I was a christian I knew this argument did not work.

 

Now, I will freely admit that P2 is correct, however P1 is another matter. I don't accept it, and, in fact, neither do you. Let me ask you a question. Is god complex and precise? Do you see where I am going with this? In fact, it would be reasonable that he is MORE complex than this universe is. By this argument god would also require a creator because it specifically says "All things."

 

Do you see? We both must conclude that there are complex and precise things that just exist, without a creator.

 

So did an intelligent being create the universe? I don't know, and neither do you, despite claims to the contrary. If a "complex and precise" god can just exist, then so can a "complex and precise" universe.

 

You are right I do not know for certain if God created the universe but because of the evidence shown to me I have chosen to believe that a creator exists. I also do not know if we landed on the moon but because of the evidence shown to me I believe we did, the same can go with things throughout history I think there is much about history in our school books that is fiction because of the lack of evidence. Just because someone writes it does not mean it is truth. I believe you agree with me on the fact that much of our information on this earth will change and much of what we believe now will evolve or completely be eradicated. But I truly believe that the only thing that has stood the test of time is the belief that their is a creator of some sort.

 

I'm not sure if you understood my point. The whole point is that this argument you just used is invalid, it is NOT evidence that god created the universe. Do you concede this point or do you want to debate my understanding of your argument?

 

As to your last statement, even if everyone in all of human history had believed there was a god, it would not prove there is a god. Lots of people believe false things.

Besides, many religions and cultures have completely ignored the question of who created the universe. In fact, the notion of god creating the universe from nothing "ex-nilho" is a fairly recent one. Most ancient religions had their god creating the universe out of preexisting stuff. This notion that matter and energy must all originate with god is a christian one.

 

I am not trying to convince you that there is a Christian God, but trying to discuss why with all the evidence we have are you willing to believe/ex-believe there is no creator?

 

I understand this, I am simply explaining my position, and showing you why all the evidence you have is not very good, which would be why I rejected said evidence in the first place and became an atheist. If it hasn't become clear to you yet, it will soon, I have heard every single argument for the existence of god that you have, studied it, and rejected it as a valid proof. It isn't a matter of me doubting despite good evidence, but because there is not any good evidence. Did you really think my position was any different?

 

Your part in this debate is to try to provide me with some of this evidence you think exists, if there is some good evidence, I am more than willing to concede and change my beliefs to match new facts. So far you have only presented me with arguments that are logically or empirically invalid, therefor they do not convince me.

[Kuroikaze]

Just wanted everyone to know that I won't be able to respond for a few days starting tomorrow, I am going on a camping trip for three or four days.

[♦ nivek ♦]

Last Call, no more served after this post.

 

Gave the religious participant plenty of time past state 30 days of Discussion to reply to last post by Kurokazi.

 

As nothing has happend for the past twenty-seven odd days, I am pulling the plug, closing sign, and shutting this part of the Discussion down.

 

As I fear little good came of discussion for Kuro, and Peanutting was more exciting than discussion sands, this one is a "no brainer" for who defined their cause, directed thought to better ends, and in turn helped those reading understand a bit more the world around them.

 

Gentlemen, thank you for your participation.

 

 

Closed, 08.26.2008 2042PDT

 

kFL