0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
How on Earth do you come to the conclusion that I am happy for people to die.
In what way do I glorify it.
Quote from: duffyd on 30/03/2020 11:17:46Quote from: alancalverd on 30/03/2020 09:04:22Duffyd: Nice to get back on topic. Please state the observables that can only be ascribed to your god. If your god is not the omnipotent, omniscient and anthropic creator of the universe (i.e. the familiar Judaeo-Christian-Islamic deity), please define its functionality.Look to the sun. I can't see it, because it's overcast.Does that mean God ceased to be?
Quote from: alancalverd on 30/03/2020 09:04:22Duffyd: Nice to get back on topic. Please state the observables that can only be ascribed to your god. If your god is not the omnipotent, omniscient and anthropic creator of the universe (i.e. the familiar Judaeo-Christian-Islamic deity), please define its functionality.Look to the sun.
Duffyd: Nice to get back on topic. Please state the observables that can only be ascribed to your god. If your god is not the omnipotent, omniscient and anthropic creator of the universe (i.e. the familiar Judaeo-Christian-Islamic deity), please define its functionality.
Quote from: CliveG on 30/03/2020 10:35:16How on Earth do you come to the conclusion that I am happy for people to die. Well, you don't seem at all upset about it.Quote from: CliveG on 30/03/2020 10:35:16In what way do I glorify it. I don't know. But my guess is that you get up on Sunday + go to church to worship the biggest mass murderer we have ever known.At any rate, you don't say we should despise Him for His actions.
Why hasn't science been able to prove the existence of God? I was A2A on a question about turning into an atheist at 13 years of age. It bothered me deeply and I came to question my own beliefs. I'm at a crossroad. Help me through logical answers.
Quote from: CliveG on 30/03/2020 09:50:03One needs to know the attributes of God if we are to give a scientific probability as to his existence. And there's the problem. Every time a believer lists the attributes of his deity, some skeptic (call him a scientist) points out the contradictions and contradictory evidence.
One needs to know the attributes of God if we are to give a scientific probability as to his existence.
Non sequitur. The existence of the sun is not evidence of my existence, let alone that of an invisible fairy.
Can you cite examples when your god kills with malice aforethought?
Quote from: alancalverd on 30/03/2020 12:04:00Non sequitur. The existence of the sun is not evidence of my existence, let alone that of an invisible fairy.It is relevant. I don't believe it is accurate to say it is non sequitur.Absolutely. Never intended to use it as evidence for an invisible fairy.
Quote from: duffyd on 30/03/2020 13:52:28Can you cite examples when your god kills with malice aforethought? Not having a god, I can't answer directly, but it is inconceivable that any omniscient and/or omnipotent deity would kill without forethought. Malice is a human judgement, but the imposition of anything from Job's plague of boils to the slow strangulation of cystic fibrosis or motor neurone disease would count as malicious in a court of law.
Science proves God exists to some people.
Evil is where people throughout history (the Holocaust is but one example) deliberately and with malice aforethought cause suffering and death,
"Malice" is a legal term and God is not guilty of murder based on its definition.
Malice is a legal term referring to a party's intention to do injury to another party.
Quote from: duffyd on 30/03/2020 13:59:25Science proves God exists to some people. Do you mean in the sense that science also documents the fact that some deluded people think they are Queen Victoria?It's true that the belief exists, but not true that they are a dead monarch.Or are you trying to say that, to some people, science is proof of God?Because that's just wrong.Or are you trying to say that there is a group of people to whom science has proved the existence of God?That's impossible.
Or, what scientific data do you rely upon that proves they are all deluded?
Quote from: duffyd on 30/03/2020 14:48:17 "Malice" is a legal term and God is not guilty of murder based on its definition. QuoteMalice is a legal term referring to a party's intention to do injury to another party.So inflicting the plague of boils on Job, destroying Sodom and Gomorrah, The Flood, and every other recorded Act of God including the 230,000 deaths in the 2004 Sumatra tsunami were unintended? If your god isn't guilty of murder, he'd certainly be convicted of manslaughter.
Sin is not just what is committed or omitted. It is inbred, a condition within each of us
Quote from: duffyd on 30/03/2020 17:48:26Or, what scientific data do you rely upon that proves they are all deluded?That's not what I said.
Quote from: duffyd on 30/03/2020 18:06:10Sin is not just what is committed or omitted. It is inbred, a condition within each of usIt sounds like the God is a twit.Genesis 1:27So God created man in his own image,