primates with moral sence, empathy and fairness

Originally posted by Proper Knob
That's complete tosh, you're instructed what to believe by the Governing Body in Brooklyn. Anything which contradicts what they preach you just ignore as has been evidenced on this forum many times.

As for punctuated equilibrium, you are being lied to. Simple as that. As Stephen Jay Gould, one of the men who came up with the theory of punctuated equil ...[text shortened]... larger groups."[/quote]

http://www.stephenjaygould.org/library/gould_fact-and-theory.html

So this guy is where you get all this crap about evolution be fact and not fiction.
You would rather believe the lies of a man than the truth of God.

Originally posted by galveston75
But your problem is the Bible in NO way supports your theory. Sorry.

There are many, MANY things the Bible does not tell us. Mainly because we don't necessarily have a need to know. While the argument could be made that everything in the Bible is true, it should be equally obvious that not ALL true things are in the Bible.

Originally posted by stellspalfie
if you believe god created everything then at some point he used his magic wand.

Not necessarily. Why limit God to just using a magic wand? That is soooo unimaginative. How lazy must an omniscient God have to be to just "poof" something into existence? How much more masterful is it to create a universe where everything naturally follows after the Big Bang? The stars are made in their own time. The planets are made in their own time. Life populates a planet in its own time. Man develops intelligence and eventually tries for the stars in his own time. What's time to God?

Originally posted by Suzianne
There are many, MANY things the Bible does not tell us. Mainly because we don't necessarily have a need to know. While the argument could be made that everything in the Bible is true, it should be equally obvious that not ALL true things are in the Bible.

Ahem, are you going to respond to my post here...?

6th post down on page 6 of "Jews and atheism" thread.

http://www.redhotpawn.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=146358&page=&page=6

Originally posted by Suzianne
Not necessarily.

God works by magic, sort of by definition.

God is supernatural, and to claim that something was created by god is to claim it was
created supernaturally... by magic.


If god created nothing by magic then god created nothing.

To believe in a creator god requires that you believe at some point god 'waved his magic wand'
and poofed stuff into existence.


Even if you only believe that all god did was kick start the universe off with the big bang singularity
and it has been following the laws of physics ever since you are still claiming that the universe was
created by magic.

Originally posted by googlefudge
God works by magic, sort of by definition.

God is supernatural, and to claim that something was created by god is to claim it was
created supernaturally... by magic.


If god created nothing by magic then god created nothing.

To believe in a creator god requires that you believe at some point god 'waved his magic wand'
and poofed stuff into ...[text shortened]... he laws of physics ever since you are still claiming that the universe was
created by magic.

So you are now redefining the Big Bang as magic?

You, Mr. Science Guy, are suddenly now claiming the Big Bang was magic?

Originally posted by Suzianne
So you are now redefining the Big Bang as magic?

You, Mr. Science Guy, are suddenly now claiming the Big Bang was magic?

No of course not.


I am saying that if you claim that the big bang was caused by god then you are by definition
claiming that the universe was created by magic.



I don't believe that the big bang was caused by god.

Thus I don't believe that the universe was created by magic.

Originally posted by googlefudge
No of course not.


I am saying that if you claim that the big bang was caused by god then you are by definition
claiming that the universe was created by magic.



I don't believe that the big bang was caused by god.

Thus I don't believe that the universe was created by magic.

My argument is that the Big Bang is a natural process, yes, put in motion by God, and the initial state was crafted by God to produce our reality in the past as well as our reality now, and our reality in the future. What else would one expect of an omniscient God? (I know the mental picture of God as some old, grey-haired man sitting on a beach somewhere with a canvas on an easel, applying paint to the canvas to make our reality moment by moment may be comforting to some here, but that is just limiting God to reaction, instead of action.)

A natural process, like evolution. Not magic. The more dim-witted ones here think magic is all God is capable of. He's not a "one-trick pony".

Originally posted by Suzianne
My argument is that the Big Bang is a natural process, yes, put in motion by God, and the initial state was crafted by God to produce our reality in the past as well as our reality now, and our reality in the future. What else would one expect of an omniscient God? (I know the mental picture of God as some old, grey-haired man sitting on a beach somewhere ...[text shortened]... more dim-witted ones here think magic is all God is capable of. He's not a "one-trick pony".

I understand that.

But by claiming that the 'natural' process was 'put in motion' by god you are still claiming
a supernatural intervention by god to start the whole thing off.

You are still invoking magic.

Now whether or not the system runs on magic thereafter or not is irrelevant to the point
that if you believe in a creator god then you are claiming that the universe was at least
started by magic.

There is of course no reason or benefit to thinking that the universe was created by magic
or that god exists but that is separate to the question of whether or not you think the universe
was created by magic.

If you believe in a creator god you do.

Everything after that is a question of degree.


EDIT: btw your suggestion that god created the universe with the big bang in such a way as to
guarantee the existence of us 14 billion yrs later and building in everything that was going to
happen completely invalidates any possibility of the existence of free will.

Everything would and must be deterministic and predetermined and known by god at the beginning.


Now unless the universe couldn't have been created by god in any other way with any other outcome
that makes god directly responsible for everything that has ever happened.

Including every crime and atrocity ever committed or will be committed by any person in history or in the future.

Every iota of suffering is gods fault, because god knew it was going to happen and could have made it
happen differently and chose not to.


And there is and can be no free will because the universe is deterministic and no such thing exists.


This concept of god and the universe hits the problem of evil and dies.

God cannot possibly be good or loving in such a scenario.

Originally posted by googlefudge
Ahem, are you going to respond to my post here...?

6th post down on page 6 of "Jews and atheism" thread.

http://www.redhotpawn.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=146358&page=&page=6

I don't know if I'm equipped properly to unweave your finely woven "logic blanket" that helps you sleep at night.

My initial feeling is that your Premise #4 contains error. Your logic is finely constructed to avoid absolutes and is thus extremely hard to pin down. It's full of what I would call loopholes that let you claim you're not saying something that it appears you're saying if/when you're called on it.

Originally posted by Suzianne
I don't know if I'm equipped properly to unweave your finely woven "logic blanket" that helps you sleep at night.

My initial feeling is that your Premise #4 contains error. Your logic is finely constructed to avoid absolutes and is thus extremely hard to pin down. It's full of what I would call loopholes that let you claim you're not saying something that it appears you're saying if/when you're called on it.

Well if you could respond in the relevant thread stating what you think is wrong with premise 4 then
I will address it there.


I don't know what you mean by loopholes, I am very clear and fixed about what it means.

However if you can pin down more precisely what it is you don't like and post a a response to that
thread I will be more than happy to explain and respond.

Originally posted by googlefudge
I understand that.

But by claiming that the 'natural' process was 'put in motion' by god you are still claiming
a supernatural intervention by god to start the whole thing off.

You are still invoking magic.

Now whether or not the system runs on magic thereafter or not is irrelevant to the point
that if you believe in a creator god then you a ...[text shortened]...

If you believe in a creator god you do.

Everything after that is a question of degree.

You can label my belief in a Creator God as a belief in magic all you want. I would label it more a belief in Nature (another word for God, in my opinion), rather than magic.

You are well aware of the standard model of the Big Bang theory and how science believes it was a natural process. Yet you label my belief in God as meaning that I believe this natural process was a magical process. The fact is that no scientist who is truthful with themselves has any idea how the Big Bang came to happen. My opinion of it is therefore equal in possibility as any of the scientists' opinions. Because I, too, think it is a natural process. The guiding hand, the crafting hand, of God was an intrinsic part of the process, and just like everything attributed to God since then, the plagues of Egypt, for example, was a natural process, not magical.

I grant you that this difference may be semantic, but I feel it's a valid difference nonetheless.

Originally posted by googlefudge
Well if you could respond in the relevant thread stating what you think is wrong with premise 4 then
I will address it there.


I don't know what you mean by loopholes, I am very clear and fixed about what it means.

However if you can pin down more precisely what it is you don't like and post a a response to that
thread I will be more than happy to explain and respond.

Again, I am not a logician. It's definitely NOT my strong point. I hesitate to start along a path that may only lead to frustration. Keep bugging me about it and I will address it when I'm more in the mood to argue. 😀

Originally posted by googlefudge

EDIT: btw your suggestion that god created the universe with the big bang in such a way as to
guarantee the existence of us 14 billion yrs later and building in everything that was going to
happen completely invalidates any possibility of the existence of free will.

Everything would and must be deterministic and predetermined and known by god ...[text shortened]... the problem of evil and dies.

God cannot possibly be good or loving in such a scenario.

I should have seen this coming.

No, I disagree. (Oh, really, Suzi? 🙂 )

Quantum Mechanics alone should tell you that this is not true (or, rather, that it doesn't have to be true). Simultaneous universes running at the same time, with the invalid, or unchosen, ones collapsing can take care of this. Suddenly the universe we experience becomes a lot less "deterministic". Free Will, as a concept and as a reality, survives.

Originally posted by twhitehead
This is how I have summarized it in the past:
1. Do not do deliberate harm to others for benefit to oneself.
2. Assist others when the cost to oneself is low.
3. You may harm others to prevent loss to oneself, when that loss is caused by others (self defence).
4. All rules are given weightings based on how important the 'other' is to you.
Roughly lik ...[text shortened]... nderstand what it is doing for it to behave morally.

Do you separate empathy from morality?

We definitely attaching very different meanings to the word “morality”.

Do you separate empathy from morality?

Yes.