This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

What I don't get about Judeo-Christian belief is why God turned up but then left

#21ThuggernautzPosted 12/7/2012 7:38:16 AM
Julian_Caesar posted...

What kind of evidence?


Anecdotal, I would say.
#22OrangeWizardPosted 12/7/2012 8:01:01 AM
From: Julian_Caesar | #016
What kind of evidence?


Any evidence.

From: JonWood007 | #015
The whole thing is, religious people have a much lower standard of proof than an atheist would on such things.


And this is based more on bias than some inherent +10 to intelligence that atheists have.
---
Hi, I'm Larry the shivering chipmunk
Brr, I'm cold, I need a sweater.
#23UnfairRepresent(Topic Creator)Posted 12/7/2012 8:21:04 AM
I can never get a good answer to this
---
^ Hey now that's completely unfair!
http://i.imgur.com/6kfGg.jpg
#24OrangeWizardPosted 12/7/2012 8:22:51 AM
From: UnfairRepresent | #019
I can never get a good answer to this


Especially if you keep refusing to listen whenever somebody gives you the answer.
---
Hi, I'm Larry the shivering chipmunk
Brr, I'm cold, I need a sweater.
#25hamsandwich3141Posted 12/7/2012 8:52:39 AM
Suibom posted...

And I find it silly to think that a person with finite knowledge and finite power thinks they could do a better job at anything than someone all knowing and all powerful. There are so many variables to consider in the vastness of space and time that even one small variation could wipe us out.

"Oh, let's put a planet here!" Okay, but if we do, it'll cause a comet to crash into earth and kill everyone. But hey, alternatives...

"Ooooh! And a star here!" Comet.

"And a...." Comet.

"Fine. Can we put a comet here?!" Ooooh, that's nice. Very pretty. Gold star for you Jon. Except, COMET!



You act like nothing ever crashes into anything else in space.
---
She went after her kids with super love, they turned into drugs. - LastManStanding
#26SuibomPosted 12/7/2012 9:06:15 AM
That's not the point and I think you know it.

Is that really what you think I was saying?
---
"Remember those who are in prison, as though in prison with them, and those who are mistreated, since you also are in the body." Hebrews 13:3 ESV
#27UnfairRepresent(Topic Creator)Posted 12/7/2012 9:10:30 AM
OrangeWizard posted...
From: UnfairRepresent | #019
I can never get a good answer to this


Especially if you keep refusing to listen whenever somebody gives you the answer.


I've listened to every word in the topic.

I'm just unimpressed and unsatisfied by it like Mary Magdalene was after a night with Jesus.

If I ask what 2 + 2 is and you say 17, that's an answer but it's not a good one. I'd rather you say you didn't know.
---
^ Hey now that's completely unfair!
http://i.imgur.com/6kfGg.jpg
#28kozlo100Posted 12/7/2012 10:04:38 AM
It doesn't seem that hard to me to come up with reasonable analogies for why levels of interaction might change.

Say I want to start a company to make widgets. Right at the start, I'm going to be building my factory, setting up systems, training employees, that sort of thing. You're going to see me in every part of the business all the time.

Later on, once the company is up and running smoothly. I don't need to be on the production floor all the time. I'll probably be staying in my office, supervising. If you work in the factory, you're probably never going to see me, or hear from me directly.
---
The problem, then, is that if subjective worlds are experienced too differently, there occurs a breakdown in communication. -- Philip K. Dick
#29JonWood007Posted 12/7/2012 10:16:04 AM
Suibom posted...
JonWood007 posted...


Whether or not this is true, we don't know. I just find it silly to throw around what ifs though without knowing the alternative. The whole "well God could do better than you" thing is not a valid argument. It's a statement meant to tell atheists to shut up in place of a valid argument.

How could we know if God could do a better job?

Well, one way is to see how God reacted in the situation at hand, and then how a person reacted. Then measure the results. You know, like an experiment.

But until we do that, and we can demonstrate God did a better job, this argument has no real value.



And I find it silly to think that a person with finite knowledge and finite power thinks they could do a better job at anything than someone all knowing and all powerful. There are so many variables to consider in the vastness of space and time that even one small variation could wipe us out.

"Oh, let's put a planet here!" Okay, but if we do, it'll cause a comet to crash into earth and kill everyone. But hey, alternatives...

"Ooooh! And a star here!" Comet.

"And a...." Comet.

"Fine. Can we put a comet here?!" Ooooh, that's nice. Very pretty. Gold star for you Jon. Except, COMET!

Your rebuttal is what's not a valid argument. You couldn't create a universe and timeline. Ever. Let alone a better one. And yet you puff yourself up as a judge of One who did.

You remind me of some homeowners I get, who having no knowledge or training in landscape, try to tell me how to do it.

It is a valid argument. Nobody is telling you to shut up. I'm just saying, if we do things your way, with your finite knowledge and power, your yard (and by extension, all matter, energy and time throughout all the universe) is going to look like garbage and we'd all be dead.

Because.... comet.


And what I'm saying is until you can prove it, your argument is invalid.

Your argument basically boils down to "well God is better than you so checkmate atheists!"

I never claim to know everything, but I will say, of what I do know, Christianity is awfully lacking, and it's tiresome to see people defending it on the grounds that God is better and therefore automatically wins. If God's ways are better than my ways, God, or you, since I can't exactly talk to God, should be able to explain why you can't put a comet there, for example. Instead I get "well you're just a silly human being and God can't be questioned."

Until God speaks for himself, all we have are people defending him with arguments that lack real substance. I get your point. The problem is that until you can establish God as an expert on something, and until you can explain his reasoning, then you can't rely on an appeal to authority.

I can say a flying spaghetti monster created the world and then throw the same arguments at you. But until you can demonstrate that FSM exists, that he did create the universe, and he is an "expert" at it (someone can make something but it could be crappy in quality). The thing with God is 1) we don't know that he exists 2) we don't know if he created the universe, and 3) we don't know if he was competent in doing so! And that's where we're critiquing God....we're questioning point #3.

In essence, your argument is just another BS rationalization that religious people hide behind. Once again, we're not supposed to question, and you make a fallacious appeal to authority. As a landscaper, you could explain why you can't do X. But God doesn't. See the difference?
---
Desktop: Phenom II X4 965 | 4 GB DDR3 | GTX 580 | 1 TB HD | W7 | 650W Antec | 1600x900
Laptop: A6 3400m | 4 GB DDR3 | HD 6520g | 500 GB HD | W7 | 1366x768
#30ThuggernautzPosted 12/7/2012 10:20:04 AM
kozlo100 posted...
It doesn't seem that hard to me to come up with reasonable analogies for why levels of interaction might change.

Say I want to start a company to make widgets. Right at the start, I'm going to be building my factory, setting up systems, training employees, that sort of thing. You're going to see me in every part of the business all the time.

Later on, once the company is up and running smoothly. I don't need to be on the production floor all the time. I'll probably be staying in my office, supervising. If you work in the factory, you're probably never going to see me, or hear from me directly.


In this analogy, would you say the company is up and running smoothly? And if this is the case, why does the business owner have a plan to nuke the place once worker #543 spins on the spot 7 times and throws up the devil horns?