03 Apr 13
Originally posted by FreakyKBHHilarious. If that bit about atheists is an open and intellectually honest perspective of the situation, I'll eat my hat.
I lose nothing if God doesn't exist, therefore, I can have an open and intellectually honest perspective of the situation.
The atheist has an agenda as well.
He needs for life to end at death, for there to be no accounting of his time on earth before an all-powerful God, else his life was wasted in stubborn rejection.
03 Apr 13
Originally posted by twhiteheadHope you're hungry.
Hilarious. If that bit about atheists is an open and intellectually honest perspective of the situation, I'll eat my hat.
You're looking at it through the prism of your former religious life, when you had a vested interest in the outcome, and thought of it in terms of a trade agreement.
There is no such program.
God doesn't trade something of ours for something of His.
He redeems something something without value and gives His life in return.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHI haven't been a theist since I was a child. My 'former religious life' was around 30 years ago.
You're looking at it through the prism of your former religious life, when you had a vested interest in the outcome, and thought of it in terms of a trade agreement.
There is no such program.
God doesn't trade something of ours for something of His.
He redeems something something without value and gives His life in return.
I don't believe in God. That you think I secretly do, shows that your view of the situation is not as open and intellectually honest a perspective as you claim. You refuse to accept that I may be telling you the truth when I say I do not believe in God. You don't even consider it a possibility. My hat is perfectly safe.
03 Apr 13
Originally posted by FreakyKBHNo. no. no.
The atheist has an agenda as well.
He needs for life to end at death, for there to be no accounting of his time on earth before an all-powerful God, else his life was wasted in stubborn rejection.
I have no agenda.
And I certainly have no need for life to end at death.
If there is some kind of existance after death - hooray!
And I have better things to do than devoting my life to "stubborn rejection".
I have just this one life - I'm not going to waste it!!!!
Originally posted by FreakyKBHI have no idea what you're talking about with the first several paragraphs here. Furthermore: Goo.
I'm shifting nowhere.
Instead, I'm pointing out that I literally have no skin in the game, agenda-wise.
You seem to be laboring under the false concept that belief in God's existence[hidden]which, by nature of the name the atheist has given themselves, appears to be a non sequitur of the highest order. "I choose to be known by the thing which I am also n behind the curtain, or to acknowledge its dependence on such faulty grounds logically.
As far as the rest of it goes, I read the exchanges and my mind is the same.
You hold the argument to have some magical power, and simply fail to see the man behind the curtain, or to acknowledge its dependence on such faulty grounds logically.
We're not talking about magic here, Freaky (I'll leave such discussion to your supernatural circles). It's a logical argument; ever heard of one? It's this thing that has these things called premises that purport to support this other thing, the conclusion. If you do not want to be rationally committed to the conclusion that your God doesn't exist, you have a number of avenues available, as outlined below.
For one, you can simply reject the argument on the grounds that 'God' as defined in the argument does not properly apply to your own theistic conception. If you recall, I explicitly asked you in the previous thread if you would pursue this avenue, and you responded that no you could not do that because the GAFE's definition of 'God' is "true to form". So, so much for this avenue.
For two, you can show that the argument is logically invalid (i.e., show that its conclusion does not logically follow from the premises). However, you do not want to pursue this, since the argument is obviously a logically valid reductio. So, so much for this avenue, as well.
For three, you can show that one (or more) of the premises is false. This is the avenue you want to pursue. However, you stated multiple times in the previous thread that you intended to show that Premise 2 of the GAFE is false; whereas your actual reasons why (you know, the reason that were supposed to show that Premise 2 is false, in accordance with your intent) in fact entail that Premise 2 is true! Remember my argument I presented that explicitly shows that your considerations -- far from showing that Premise 2 is false -- actually entail that Premise 2 is true? So, you need to revise. Or focus on a different premise to falsify. I'm certainly willing to listen to your revisions or new arguments, whatever you may have. But please don't pretend like you satisfactorily showed the GAFE to be unsound when, in fact, your own rebuttal to the GAFE only succeeded in entailing precisely the premise you intended to show false!
04 Apr 13
Originally posted by FreakyKBHWhat a generalization, 'he NEEDS to find death is final' or however you put it.
I'm shifting nowhere.
Instead, I'm pointing out that I literally have no skin in the game, agenda-wise.
You seem to be laboring under the false concept that belief in God's existence[hidden]which, by nature of the name the atheist has given themselves, appears to be a non sequitur of the highest order. "I choose to be known by the thing which I am also ...[text shortened]... n behind the curtain, or to acknowledge its dependence on such faulty grounds logically.
Atheists don't need any such thing. They simply think there is no god and it would follow naturally life ends at death.
You on the other hand have that wish fulfillment thing that you and a few billion other Abrahamic religions sell you, life after death.
So instead of actually doing your best to live to your fullest in the here and now, you pull back, not giving all because you think you will go to some nirvana after you die.
Which makes about as much sense as saying the Earth is only 6000 years old. All snake oil salesmen making up fairy tales that have half the planet duped and brainwashed.
Until we shuck that brainwashing, the human race will wallow in its present state of misery.
When we shuck that brainwashing, the human race has a chance at real maturity.
Which of course could take another 10,000 years assuming we live through the next 1000.
I wonder what the last Christian alive will say as he sees a glacier heading down on him after it has killed every other human on the planet?
04 Apr 13
Originally posted by wolfgang59And yet, in your denial of God, I maintain that you are doing exactly that.
No. no. no.
I have no agenda.
And I certainly have no need for life to end at death.
If there is some kind of existance after death - hooray!
And I have better things to do than devoting my life to "stubborn rejection".
I have just this one life - I'm not going to waste it!!!!
Ironic, isn't it?
04 Apr 13
Originally posted by sonhouseYou mean assuming we live through the next 100 years.
What a generalization, 'he NEEDS to find death is final' or however you put it.
Atheists don't need any such thing. They simply think there is no god and it would follow naturally life ends at death.
You on the other hand have that wish fulfillment thing that you and a few billion other Abrahamic religions sell you, life after death.
So instead of ...[text shortened]... as he sees a glacier heading down on him after it has killed every other human on the planet?
Personally, I'd reduce that still further to 50 years.
04 Apr 13
Originally posted by twhiteheadI haven't been a theist since I was a child. My 'former religious life' was around 30 years ago.
I haven't been a theist since I was a child. My 'former religious life' was around 30 years ago.
[b]There is no such program.
God doesn't trade something of ours for something of His.
He redeems something something without value and gives His life in return.
I don't believe in God. That you think I secretly do, shows that your view of the situat ...[text shortened]... do not believe in God. You don't even consider it a possibility. My hat is perfectly safe.[/b]
I'm not sure what relevance this has to the statement.
I have no doubt of your belief in God, as you have made considerable effort to take a position relative to His existence.
Who does that?
The concept of Santa Claus has been around for quite some time, yet we don't see any group of people who align themselves under the auspices of "anti-Santa Claus," or some such!
04 Apr 13
Originally posted by sonhouseWhat a crock of crap.
What a generalization, 'he NEEDS to find death is final' or however you put it.
Atheists don't need any such thing. They simply think there is no god and it would follow naturally life ends at death.
You on the other hand have that wish fulfillment thing that you and a few billion other Abrahamic religions sell you, life after death.
So instead of ...[text shortened]... as he sees a glacier heading down on him after it has killed every other human on the planet?
By your thinking, the only people living full lives are the ones who think it all ends here.
Horsechip.
The arrogance is insulting, and will not receive anything more by way of response.
You are so bound up by your own position, you fail to address the thoughts put forth--- then plagiarize the exact same message, only twisted around!
What a crock of crap.
04 Apr 13
Originally posted by sonhousePart of God's Creation Minimum Age of the formation (yrs.)
What a generalization, 'he NEEDS to find death is final' or however you put it.
Atheists don't need any such thing. They simply think there is no god and it would follow naturally life ends at death.
You on the other hand have that wish fulfillment thing that you and a few billion other Abrahamic religions sell you, life after death.
So instead of ac ...[text shortened]... say as he sees a glacier heading down on him after it has killed every other human on the planet?
Age of moon rocks 4.5 billion19
Age of meteorites 4.5 billion24
Accumulation of space dust on the moon (at the measured rate of about 2 nanograms per square centimeter per year) 4.5 billion25
Age of earth rocks 4.2 billion17
Relaxation times of star clusters 4 billion26
Erosion on Mercury Mars, and Moon 4 billion27
Length of days of coral fossils (coral reference) 370 million28
Accumulation of sodium in the oceans 260 million29
Rate of continental drift to form the the Atlantic Ocean 200 million30
Reversals of the earth's magnetic pole recorded in the Atlantic Ocean sea bottom80 million31
Erosion of the Grand Canyon. 17 million32
Geometric measurement to the galaxy NGC4258. 23.5 million33
Carbonate deposits: The Great Bahama Bank, off the coast of Florida, has multiple layers over 14,500 feet thick 12.4 million34
There are sedimentary rock formations on Mars that are over 4 kilometers thick. Such layers would require tens to hundreds of millions of years of running water to form. In addition there must have been millions of years for all the water to have disappeared, since Mars is now extremely dry. (View pictures from the article) 10 million35. Ooids (small spheroidal bodies): Formation for adding many layers of mineral deposits involves massive time elements. >7 million36. The Green River annual layers (alternating Summer calcium carbonate and Winter organic layers). 4 million37.
Geometric measurement to the galaxy M33. 2.4 million38
Evaporites: When bodies of salt water are trapped so that circulation is limited, evaporation produces precipitation of calcium carbonate, then calcium sulfate and finally calcium chloride out of the water. Each layer takes several years to form. The Delaware Basin formation is 1,400 feet thick, consisting of 200,000 layers, requiring at least 600,000 years to form. The Mediterranean Sea floor is underlain by about 7,000 feet of evaporites, requiring millions of years to form and evaporation of a 60 miles depth of salt water. >3 million39
Length of time that surface rocks have been exposed to cosmic rays (Antarctic rocks). 3 million40
Huge stalactites, stalagmites, and columns in the Carlsbad Caverns in New Mexico (Carlsbad reference) 500,00041
Vostok ice core in Antarctica. 420,00042
Thickness of coral reefs 130,00043
Organic banks (The Capitan Reef of West Texas, 2,000 feet thick in places, with fossilized remains of organisms.) 100,00044
Radiocarbon dating of wood (upper limit of 14C dating method) 50,00045
Bristlecone pine trees in California 11,00046
Dolomite formation: Replacement of calcium carbonate particles in lime sediment or lime rock gives strong evidence of vast amounts of time required. Rate is as slow as 200 million years/mm.millions47 [page 1 of 2]
.
CONCLUSION
The Bible establishes a minimum date for the creation of human beings on the sixth "day" of ~50,000 years ago. However, because the Bible clearly indicates the length of the previous five creation "days," are longer than ordinary solar days, we must look to God's creation to establish an accurate date for the length of the days and the age of the earth. The age of the earth is most accurately established by examining the age of its rocks, along with the age of rocks from the moon and meteorites, which were formed around the same time. All these measurements indicate that the earth is just over 4.5 billion years old. Measurement of the ages of some of earth's features establish a minimum age for those features that is in the hundred of thousands to millions of years. Since most of the measurement merely involve the counting of annual layers, they are unlikely to be grossly inaccurate. Therefore, the young earth paradigm that the earth is merely 6,000 years old is falsified by both the Bible and science. The vast ages of the earth does not diminish the power and glory of God, but establishes that God thought that preparing the earth for human habitation was billions of years of preparation. 'Since God is not subject to the temporal dimension of this universe, it all happened instantly for Him. [page 2 of 2]
http://www.godandscience.org/youngearth/age_of_the_earth.html
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/answers.html
.
05 Apr 13
Originally posted by LemonJelloThe argument revealed its weakness in its second premise, which was based upon a fallacy--- which, as you know, I pointed out.
I have no idea what you're talking about with the first several paragraphs here. Furthermore: Goo.
[quote]As far as the rest of it goes, I read the exchanges and my mind is the same.
You hold the argument to have some magical power, and simply fail to see the man behind the curtain, or to acknowledge its dependence on such faulty grounds logically.[/ ...[text shortened]... AFE only succeeded in entailing precisely the premise you intended to show false!
I most certainly did not offer anything of any sort which would have led to your conclusion; in fact, I said just the opposite.
05 Apr 13
Originally posted by FreakyKBHI really don't recall a whole lot from my childhood. I certainly don't look at anything 'through the prism of my former religious life'.
I'm not sure what relevance this has to the statement.
I have no doubt of your belief in God, as you have made considerable effort to take a position relative to His existence.
That you consider this 'an open and intellectually honest perspective of the situation' is ridiculous. You are biased to the point of being unable to see the obvious.
The concept of Santa Claus has been around for quite some time, yet we don't see any group of people who align themselves under the auspices of "anti-Santa Claus," or some such!
Start trying to teach Santa Clausium in schools and I will be the first to form such a group.
And besides, I don't align myself under the auspices of "anti-Cristian" or "anti-God". I am generally against religion, but thats not the same thing is it?
And in case you didn't realize it, you are an aSantarist just like me.