Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Ashiraya wrote:

And there is one that is true.

Your move, Peregrine.

Yes, mine. It has just as much evidence as the bible ever had.

Except its written about a mortal man in a parody of my God.

You can't prove that he is mortal, whereas my book proves he is divine.

 Tactical_Spam wrote:
And there is one that is true.

Your move, Peregrine.

On your side you have your declaration that your religious text is true, because you said so.

On my side I have mountains of scientific evidence about things like evolution, planet formation, etc, all of which can be verified experimentally if you insist on checking them yourself. And many of these things have been confirmed in multiple independent ways (for example, DNA and fossil evidence for evolution agree on a single answer), making it even less likely that there is any mistake in the theories.

Your move.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Tactical_Spam wrote:
And there is one that is true.

Your move, Peregrine.

On your side you have your declaration that your religious text is true, because you said so.

On my side I have mountains of scientific evidence about things like evolution, planet formation, etc, all of which can be verified experimentally if you insist on checking them yourself. And many of these things have been confirmed in multiple independent ways (for example, DNA and fossil evidence for evolution agree on a single answer), making it even less likely that there is any mistake in the theories.

Your move.

And all of that, the universe, all living things, our planet... Came from nothing? You cannot simply get something from nothing. That is quite solid reasoning, yet you believe that.

So tell me, oh wise Peregrine, what does the Bible contain?

 Tactical_Spam wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Tactical_Spam wrote:
And there is one that is true.

Your move, Peregrine.

On your side you have your declaration that your religious text is true, because you said so.

On my side I have mountains of scientific evidence about things like evolution, planet formation, etc, all of which can be verified experimentally if you insist on checking them yourself. And many of these things have been confirmed in multiple independent ways (for example, DNA and fossil evidence for evolution agree on a single answer), making it even less likely that there is any mistake in the theories.

Your move.

And all of that, the universe, all living things, our planet... Came from nothing? You cannot simply get something from nothing. That is quite solid reasoning, yet you believe that.

So tell me, oh wise Peregrine, what does the Bible contain?

Horrid mistranslations, missing sections, dietary restrictions and what not

If atheism is so smart why are there still igloos? Checkmate atheism.

And you argue God came from nothing, or that he always existed.

So we can just apply that to the real universe too.

It is certainly not a field in favour of religion.

 Ashiraya wrote:
You can't prove that he is mortal, whereas my book proves he is divine.

Find his IP Address and go to his house or internet cafe. This isn't a Schodinger's experiment.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ustrello wrote:

 Tactical_Spam wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Tactical_Spam wrote:
And there is one that is true.

Your move, Peregrine.

On your side you have your declaration that your religious text is true, because you said so.

On my side I have mountains of scientific evidence about things like evolution, planet formation, etc, all of which can be verified experimentally if you insist on checking them yourself. And many of these things have been confirmed in multiple independent ways (for example, DNA and fossil evidence for evolution agree on a single answer), making it even less likely that there is any mistake in the theories.

Your move.

And all of that, the universe, all living things, our planet... Came from nothing? You cannot simply get something from nothing. That is quite solid reasoning, yet you believe that.

So tell me, oh wise Peregrine, what does the Bible contain?

Horrid mistranslations, missing sections, dietary restrictions and what not

I agree with the first. There is an interesting verse in the New Testament that talks about false teachers and telling people they can't eat certain things.

 Tactical_Spam wrote:
And all of that, the universe, all living things, our planet... Came from nothing? You cannot simply get something from nothing. That is quite solid reasoning, yet you believe that.

So where did your god come from? Proposing the existence of god doesn't do anything to solve this problem, it just moves the problem back one level. You still have to answer the same questions that I do about where things came from. Except I can at least prove that the universe exists and must have come from something, while you can't do the same for your god.

And of course once you consider the small-scale things like our planet and life rather than the entire universe it's pretty easy to explain where things came from. Astronomy has told us quite a bit about how planets form, evolution tells us how life developed into what we see now, etc. And that picture doesn't leave any room where a god is required.

So tell me, oh wise Peregrine, what does the Bible contain?

A whole lot of boring "begat"s, some decent moral principles that are also included in other religious and secular sources, some horrifying evil, some interesting historical records for scholars to analyze, etc.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Tactical_Spam wrote:
Find his IP Address and go to his house or internet cafe. This isn't a Schodinger's experiment.

What exactly would that prove? If you found Jesus in a cafe 2000 years ago you'd have seen someone who looks an awful lot like a normal human (according to your religion).

 Peregrine wrote:

 Tactical_Spam wrote:
And all of that, the universe, all living things, our planet... Came from nothing? You cannot simply get something from nothing. That is quite solid reasoning, yet you believe that.

So where did your god come from? Proposing the existence of god doesn't do anything to solve this problem, it just moves the problem back one level. You still have to answer the same questions that I do about where things came from. Except I can at least prove that the universe exists and must have come from something, while you can't do the same for your god.

And of course once you consider the small-scale things like our planet and life rather than the entire universe it's pretty easy to explain where things came from. Astronomy has told us quite a bit about how planets form, evolution tells us how life developed into what we see now, etc. And that picture doesn't leave any room where a god is required.

According to the Bible, God exists outside of time. He has no creator.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Tactical_Spam wrote:
Find his IP Address and go to his house or internet cafe. This isn't a Schodinger's experiment.

What exactly would that prove? If you found Jesus in a cafe 2000 years ago you'd have seen someone who looks an awful lot like a normal human (according to your religion).

 Tactical_Spam wrote:
According to the Bible, God exists outside of time. He has no creator.

How is that any different from a parent universe for our universe existing outside of time and having no creator? And how can you simultaneously say "everything must have a cause/creator" and "there is at least one thing with no cause/creator"?

And of course there's the very important question here of why we should care what the bible says. Simply saying "because I said so" is not a compelling argument.

 Peregrine wrote:
And of course there's the very important question here of why we should care what the bible says. Simply saying "because I said so" is not a compelling argument.

I know I said I was done, but I needed to answer this.

 Tactical_Spam wrote:
You don't need to care. You have the free will to reject the Bible in its entirety. I am only doing what the Bible says and spreading the Word, albeit badly. My gifts do not lie with teaching and there is someone better suited to tell you. I pray you find him or her.

That isn't an answer, that's preaching at me.

Religious beliefs cannot exist in the face of two words; "prove it". Or indeed one; "evidence".

The correlation between education and lack of belief goes hand in hand with education typically teaching critical thinking and an evidence based view to understanding. With the massive explosion of information in the last 50 years, learning and education is now more than ever focused on equipping people with the skills to find and critically appraise information rather than just rote learn things; a trend that will further erode religions grip on people's minds.

If the same 2 posters managed to fill up 2 entire pages with alternating posts that suggests that it is well past the time when both parties should walk away.

 Silent Puffin? wrote:
If the same 2 posters managed to fill up 2 entire pages with alternating posts that suggests that it is well past the time when both parties should walk away.

Alternatively, if you don't want to look at a discussion between two people, you could always walk away.

 Silent Puffin? wrote:
If the same 2 posters managed to fill up 2 entire pages with alternating posts that suggests that it is well past the time when both parties should walk away.

You're not wrong.