Why Does The Answer Matter?

[goodlife]

If we really are the product of evolution and there is no Creator, the human race would, in a sense, be an orphan.

Mankind would have no source of superior wisdom to consult—no one to help us solve our problems. We would have to rely on human wisdom to avert environmental disaster,

Does not the events in the world prove that.

[vulcan42]

\\ As I said time will tell, your all a dead loss.//
How does that explain why you are misquoting your scriptures?

[jomifl]

Don't get over excited Khandro, there is a big difference between the possibiity of the existence of a god and the likelihood of the existence of a god..... I think if we are seriously going to discuss this issue then we need to know what we are talking about.... so what is meant by the term 'God'?

[Togo]

All men are cremated equal.

Spike Milligan.

[anaxcrosswords]

‘God’ is the default answer of a weak mind. There are many things in the universe for which science hasn’t yet provided full explanations, but only unintelligent minds would in response to the question “I don’t understand how this thing was created. How did it get here?” abandon reason and say “Well it must have been a god”. It’s illogical and the response of someone who can’t or doesn’t want to think.

[Khandro]

anax; Thank you for pointing out my error; all this time there was I believing I had the ability to think.

[RATTER15]

Well Khandro, I cant help but to agree with anax. I really don't understand how any logical thinker whose mind hasn't been indoctrinate can be much of a thinker when they believe the things you believe. No matter how open minded I am, I really cannot see anything, not even the remotest shred of evidence that would come anywhere near convincing me into believing in all this God nonsense, and I do look. I would actually love to believe in a superior God of some description, as long as it isn't this disgusting and barbaric God of the Bible.

[Arksided]

Yes we are the product of evolution... from the Creator of the universe.

United Whom in fact lost yesterday to a Dragon side spawned of swans...

well if you don't believe I'm an actual angel... god bless you.

Witchever Cu*t you follow.

[birdie1971]

Gooflife - "As I said time will tell, your all a dead loss."

You routinely refuse to debate anything meaningful but on the odd occasion you do get off your high horse and actually converse with the rest of us, you post meaningless gibberish and then flounce off in a huff.

The only "dead loss" on here is you.

[Jackdaw33]

You routinely refuse to debate anything meaningful but on the odd occasion you do get off your high horse and actually converse with the rest of us, you post meaningless gibberish

Pot calling kettle?

[birdie1971]

Jackdaw33

I think you'll find that I debate all the time. I have done so now for several years. Strange that you think I refuse to debate anything meaningful or that I post gibberish. Since you've been on AB for around 9 months and that you're commenting on my ability to debate, you must have read some of my posts. As such, what specifically has lead you to believe that I shy away from debate or that I post meaningless gibberish?

Care to elaborate? I'm all ears.

[Jackdaw33]

I was merely referring to your post@23:56.

You only come on here very late at night. You do not debate, you merely preach the same message time after time as do the religious. i would be hard put to put a cigarette paper between you and Goodlife in terms of dogmatism.

[birdie1971]

Jackdaw33

You say I don't debate. How so? I answer questions and I pose them. That's debate. Goodlife refuses to answer questions. He refuses to engage with his audience. He evades questions and simply posts screeds of religious text.

Your accusation that we are one and the same simply does not stand up to any scrutiny. It is a false and lazy accusation. It is also insulting.

As for the, "... You only come on here very late at night...", what does this matter? Apart from the fact it isn't true, is there some rule that says rational debate can only be conducted in the daylight hours? If so, you're violating that rule.

Your criticism of me is based not on evidence but upon a personal dislike of what I say. You clearly don't like me and that's absolutely fine. But don't tell lies by falsely accusing me of avoiding debate.

[vulcan42]

Jackdaw, your entry @ 23:59 ( an even later entry) isn't part of a debate it's only a statement, Pot calling kettle calling pot?

[Khandro]

Ratter; jomifl has (sensibly. imo) said, //given the limitations of the human intellect and the presumed infinity(?) of the universe then I think it reasonable to assume that mankind will never be able to explain the entirety of the universe//

Do you agree or disagree with him?

[jomifl]

Jomifl also says that given the complexity of an infinite universe and the processe therein it would be impossible for a being that was capable of understanding that universe in it's entirety to exist within that universe. Therefore if an omniscient god exists it must exist outside the universe of which it is omniscient..Still no definition of a god so I have had to make one up. Of course any kind of lesser god isnt really a god at all.

[Khandro]

//it would be impossible for a being that was capable of understanding that universe in it's entirety to exist within that universe//

So you are now saying - using that 3 pounds of grey matter behind your eyes - how and where an omniscient god cannot exist. Isn't that a wee bit presumptuous of you?

[modeller]

Khandro Ref: ( would you concede that a 'higher power/ supreme being/or a God' should not be ruled out? ) . The problem with that concept is twofold
1. You cant stop! , For every power, high, higher , super , supreme etc. they all require something even higher to have created them.
2. What makes the concept even worse is attributing powers to these imaginary entities . From the minutia of life to the creation.

[jomifl]

/So you are now saying - using that 3 pounds of grey matter behind your eyes - how and where an omniscient god cannot exist. Isn't that a wee bit presumptuous of you? /
Scientists can only make deductions and extrapolations from what they know. Philosophers can make deductions and extrapolations from what they think they know. Personally I think it is a bit presumptious to come to profound conclusions about thhe universe etc. without drawing the curtains and looking out of the window.

[vetuste_ennemi]

Anybody watch the recent repeat of Al-Khalili's series on quantum mechanics (BBC4) - "spooky action at a distance" and so on?
Only a century or so ago dualists would argue that matter and mind were totally unlike, even if they somehow interacted. What we now know is not only that mind is totally unlike matter, but that matter is totally unlike matter.