- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
Originally posted by XanthosNZIf you believe in God, it is also possible to believe in demonic manifestations, which can take the form of a ghost.
But Ghosts are just as plausible as God are they not? The only reason you don't believe in them is because you have preconcieved ideas.
Originally posted by dj2beckerThat's not a very good argument for religion and it doesn't have anything to do with Evolution.
It is easy to be an atheist when everything is going well. But it is another thing to be an atheist while you are busy dying.
I won't lie and say it's nice to see you again dj.
And as for ghosts. So you believe in ghosts and God but why stop there? Why not believe that the Earth is just a billiard ball on a giant table and what we see in space is just the room around us distorted a great deal thanks to the fishbowl effect?
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
2 edits
Originally posted by XanthosNZThat's not a very good argument for religion and it doesn't have anything to do with Evolution.
I won't lie and say it's nice to see you again dj.
And as for ghosts. So you believe in ghosts and God but why stop there? Why not believe that the Earth is just a billiard ball on a giant table and what we see in space is just the room around us distorted a great deal thanks to the fishbowl effect?[/b]
It was not meant to be an argument for religion or against evolution. It was just a comment.
And as for ghosts. So you believe in ghosts and God but why stop there?
I have my reasons for believing in God, believe it or not.
Why not believe that the Earth is just a billiard ball on a giant table and what we see in space is just the room around us distorted a great deal thanks to the fishbowl effect?
That expains a lot if that is what you believe... But why stop there? Why not believe that nothing exploded and created everything there is today? Why not beleive that you are simply the product of natural selection and mutations. Why not believe that the reason you are here is simply a big mistake?
Originally posted by XanthosNZCorrect, it is a matter of belief or faith. I cannot prove it one way or
But Ghosts are just as plausible as God are they not? The only reason you don't believe in them is because you have preconcieved ideas.
another. I have a set of ideas about the reality of it all and apply
those to the universe and the questions being presented. So
what is it are you trying to say?
Kelly
Originally posted by LemonJelloI read what he wrote; I suggest you read my response to it. I take
Strawman. Read Scott's reasons for "rejection" again. It's something closer to contingent naturalism, not a priori rejection of the supernatural.
what you and Scott say very seriously as I believe you both attempt
to give me a thoughtful responses with minimal insults attached and
both attempt more times than not with me any way to see my point
of view. You two don’t agree with me, but agreement isn’t required
understanding each other is.
Kelly
Originally posted by KellyJayI do see your point of view, but I think that you are using a strawman argument. I read your reply to Scott's post, and your response is properly leveled against someone who rejects the supernatural out-of-hand or axiomatically (and in that case, I agree with your sentiment). But that is not Scott's stance as I understand it: the reasons he cites are basically insufficient evidence to warrant supernatural solutions; and, inductively, a good track record for natural solutions. How is any of that based on 'faith'?
I read what he wrote; I suggest you read my response to it. I take
what you and Scott say very seriously as I believe you both attempt
to give me a thoughtful responses with minimal insults attached and
both attempt more times than not with me any way to see my point
of view. You two don’t agree with me, but agreement isn’t required
understanding each other is.
Kelly
Just because one argues for a contingent sort of naturalism does not mean that he doesn't give the supernatural the due that it warrants; and it doesn't mean that any sort of desires or "wants" for natural solutions are controlling his deliberations. I think you were trying to imply both of those.
Originally posted by KellyJayTRY AGAIN!!! READ my response before posting your babble.
Again, plausible only because you have a foundation of what is and
is not real in mind. You leave God out not because you know for a
fact there isn't a God, you just reject the idea. If you have an
explaination for what caused all things from matter to energy, it is
but a best guess/theory/whatever you want to call it. You want a
natural explanation fo ...[text shortened]... se would the source of the noise necessarily
be found in some part of the sound itself?
Kelly
Anyhoo, this all stinks of anthropic reasoning. The fact that we exist proves nothing other than the fact that we exist.
Originally posted by LemonJelloSpot on.
I do see your point of view, but I think that you are using a strawman argument. I read your reply to Scott's post, and your response is properly leveled against someone who rejects the supernatural out-of-hand or axiomatically (and in that case, I agree with your sentiment). But that is not Scott's stance as I understand it: the reasons he cites are ba ...[text shortened]... ions are controlling his deliberations. I think you were trying to imply both of those.
Originally posted by KellyJaySo why is believing God different from believing in ghosts?
Correct, it is a matter of belief or faith. I cannot prove it one way or
another. I have a set of ideas about the reality of it all and apply
those to the universe and the questions being presented. So
what is it are you trying to say?
Kelly
Originally posted by XanthosNZWho told you there is a difference? Belief in what you cannot prove
So why is believing God different from believing in ghosts?
is a belief in what you cannot prove, you want to believe in ghosts,
do so. There are many things we cannot prove, but people believe
nonetheless.
Kelly
Originally posted by scottishinnzI don't think its stupidity, much as some of us might like to deride others. For many it's just easier to take certain options.
There are many stupid people in the world.
If you're brough up in a certain religion, lived your whole life in a community that shares these beliefs, worked and married and had kids in such a place, it's easier to believe than to buck the trends and not believe.
After all, belief or not doesn't really have that much impact on many other aspects of our lives - or at least doesn't for many people. It doesn't matter if I believe in God or not when I go to work and teach my students, or when I go to watch the football or cricket on a weekend, or ride my bike with my kids, or go skiing or surfing, or read a book, or play chess or whatever.
It's not stupidity, just irrelevance for many.
Originally posted by KellyJaySo then you agree that believing in anything that has no evidence for or against it is just as valid as believing in God? Just checking.
Who told you there is a difference? Belief in what you cannot prove
is a belief in what you cannot prove, you want to believe in ghosts,
do so. There are many things we cannot prove, but people believe
nonetheless.
Kelly
But we're getting off track, this thread is about Evolution which does indeed have evidence supporting it and no amount of screaming "Did you watch it happen?" will change that.