Post Reply
Page 5 of 19  •  Prev 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 ... 19 Next
Switch to Forum Live View Off Topic/Hijack Response Thread.
4 years ago  ::  Jun 21, 2011 - 10:54PM #41
CaliberCadillac
Posts: 2,867

Jun 21, 2011 -- 9:20PM, Wiscidea wrote:


We could start by pointing out that god cannot be supernatural.


By definition, the supernatural is beyond nature, does not interact with nature, does not affect nature, cannot exchange energy with natural phenomena, cannot exchange matter with natural phenomena, cannot exchange information with the natural world.


The moment a "god" affects or intervenes in the natural world, it becomes another natural phenomenon.


Is there is a supernatural entity of some sort, whatever you want to call it, it is 100% irrelevant to the natural world ... and there is no way to prove it exists or does not exist. Is this the sort of "god" you have in mind?




I agree.  The word "supernatural" does not even appear in Scripture.  A self-existent Creator (God) Creating everything that is contingent is perfectly natural.  And the existence of a contingent universe is 100% proof positive that God exists.

"Sometimes you gotta step into the ring and throw a few punches for what you believe in."

--Ernest Hemingway--
Quick Reply
Cancel
4 years ago  ::  Jun 21, 2011 - 11:44PM #42
teilhard
Posts: 52,239

I agree ... The Term, "Super-Natural," is NOT helpful and should be avoided ...


Jun 21, 2011 -- 10:54PM, CaliberCadillac wrote:


Jun 21, 2011 -- 9:20PM, Wiscidea wrote:


We could start by pointing out that god cannot be supernatural.


By definition, the supernatural is beyond nature, does not interact with nature, does not affect nature, cannot exchange energy with natural phenomena, cannot exchange matter with natural phenomena, cannot exchange information with the natural world.


The moment a "god" affects or intervenes in the natural world, it becomes another natural phenomenon.


Is there is a supernatural entity of some sort, whatever you want to call it, it is 100% irrelevant to the natural world ... and there is no way to prove it exists or does not exist. Is this the sort of "god" you have in mind?




I agree.  The word "supernatural" does not even appear in Scripture.  A self-existent Creator (God) Creating everything that is contingent is perfectly natural.  And the existence of a contingent universe is 100% proof positive that God exists.





Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Jun 23, 2011 - 7:30PM #43
Aka_me
Posts: 12,632

Jun 21, 2011 -- 10:50PM, CaliberCadillac wrote:

Jun 21, 2011 -- 8:25PM, Aka_me wrote:

Jun 21, 2011 -- 8:11PM, JCarlin wrote:

I am reviewing a book called The Believing Brain by Michael Shermer, NYTimes Books, 2011.  who asserts that when a believer is confronted with evidence in conflict with herm belief, the rational areas of the brain are cut out and only the conflict resolution centers which always resolve in favor of belief then the reward centers get a big hit for being right.  Scientific Proof of "don''t confuse me with facts, my mind is made up." Thanks to fMRI study by Drew Weston 



why would it be any different when ZeroGod atheists are presented with fact they have no concrete evidence in their favor?


the resolution is in favor of belief, dispite the absence of facts.



Its not.  Shermer cant get around his own confirmation bias.



getting the ZeroGod atheists to identify themselves... harder than pulling teeth


getting the NullAtheists to acknowledge that ZeroAtheists exist... next to impossible


getting the NullAtheists to splain to the ZeroAtheists that "they can't KNOW that"...


priceless


no wait, I mean FugetAboutIt.

the US exports death and corruption globally on a scale undrempt by Iranian authorities. war for corporate profits funded by taxpayers and soldiers' lives plus unofficial war funded by drugs to minorities. wave that flag of corruption in blissful ignorance of the orphans it creates assisting the rich to get richer. it's all good though cause we don't need to do ANYTHING to change... mother nature will create the necessary change.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Jun 23, 2011 - 8:19PM #44
Wiscidea
Posts: 2,319

There isn't a God, but this doesn't mean there isn't a god ... or goddess.


What's a ZeroGodist?


Do you have a lot of experience pulling teeth?

"Some people claim that there's a woman to blame. But I know it's my own damn fault."

Jimmy Buffet (Margaritaville)
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Jun 23, 2011 - 9:12PM #45
Blü
Posts: 25,274

Aka_me


why would it be any different when ZeroGod atheists are presented with fact they have no concrete evidence in their favor?


You constantly replace the mainstream atheist position in this forum with a strawman.


I have no authority to speak for anyone else here, but I'd state the position like this : we have no reason to think supernatural beings have objective existence, any more than we have reason to think that Mickey Mouse has objective existence.


A real supernatural being or Mickey Mouse may exist.  On all we presently know, the odds are vanishingly small, and favour the mouse - since I can tell you what to look for when seeking real Mickey Mouses, and you can't tell me what to look for when seeking real supernatural beings, thus throwing the very concept of the category into doubt.


 

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Jun 23, 2011 - 10:47PM #46
CaliberCadillac
Posts: 2,867

Jun 23, 2011 -- 7:30PM, Aka_me wrote:


Jun 21, 2011 -- 10:50PM, CaliberCadillac wrote:

Jun 21, 2011 -- 8:25PM, Aka_me wrote:

Jun 21, 2011 -- 8:11PM, JCarlin wrote:

I am reviewing a book called The Believing Brain by Michael Shermer, NYTimes Books, 2011.  who asserts that when a believer is confronted with evidence in conflict with herm belief, the rational areas of the brain are cut out and only the conflict resolution centers which always resolve in favor of belief then the reward centers get a big hit for being right.  Scientific Proof of "don''t confuse me with facts, my mind is made up." Thanks to fMRI study by Drew Weston 



why would it be any different when ZeroGod atheists are presented with fact they have no concrete evidence in their favor?


the resolution is in favor of belief, dispite the absence of facts.



Its not.  Shermer cant get around his own confirmation bias.



getting the ZeroGod atheists to identify themselves... harder than pulling teeth


getting the NullAtheists to acknowledge that ZeroAtheists exist... next to impossible


getting the NullAtheists to splain to the ZeroAtheists that "they can't KNOW that"...


priceless


no wait, I mean FugetAboutIt.




I think its because being atheist has nothing to do with the intellect.  It has everything to do with the will.

"Sometimes you gotta step into the ring and throw a few punches for what you believe in."

--Ernest Hemingway--
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Jun 23, 2011 - 10:51PM #47
teilhard
Posts: 52,239

 ... and "The Heart" ...


Jun 23, 2011 -- 10:47PM, CaliberCadillac wrote:


Jun 23, 2011 -- 7:30PM, Aka_me wrote:


Jun 21, 2011 -- 10:50PM, CaliberCadillac wrote:

Jun 21, 2011 -- 8:25PM, Aka_me wrote:

Jun 21, 2011 -- 8:11PM, JCarlin wrote:

I am reviewing a book called The Believing Brain by Michael Shermer, NYTimes Books, 2011.  who asserts that when a believer is confronted with evidence in conflict with herm belief, the rational areas of the brain are cut out and only the conflict resolution centers which always resolve in favor of belief then the reward centers get a big hit for being right.  Scientific Proof of "don''t confuse me with facts, my mind is made up." Thanks to fMRI study by Drew Weston 



why would it be any different when ZeroGod atheists are presented with fact they have no concrete evidence in their favor?


the resolution is in favor of belief, dispite the absence of facts.



Its not.  Shermer cant get around his own confirmation bias.



getting the ZeroGod atheists to identify themselves... harder than pulling teeth


getting the NullAtheists to acknowledge that ZeroAtheists exist... next to impossible


getting the NullAtheists to splain to the ZeroAtheists that "they can't KNOW that"...


priceless


no wait, I mean FugetAboutIt.




I think its because being atheist has nothing to do with the intellect.  It has everything to do with the will.





Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Jun 24, 2011 - 1:02AM #48
Blü
Posts: 25,274

Caliber


I think its because being atheist has nothing to do with the intellect.  It has everything to do with the will.


It has something to do with the intellect, since you haven't laid an intellectual glove on atheism since you got here.


Not believing in supernatural beings is as natural as not believing in a real Mickey Mouse.  No effort of will is involved.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Jun 24, 2011 - 10:01AM #49
teilhard
Posts: 52,239

"Mickey Mouse" =/= "God" ... except is some Guy's Imagination ...


Jun 24, 2011 -- 1:02AM, Blü wrote:


Caliber


I think its because being atheist has nothing to do with the intellect.  It has everything to do with the will.


It has something to do with the intellect, since you haven't laid an intellectual glove on atheism since you got here.


Not believing in supernatural beings is as natural as not believing in a real Mickey Mouse.  No effort of will is involved.





Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Jun 24, 2011 - 9:09PM #50
Blü
Posts: 25,274

teilhard


"Mickey Mouse" =/= "God" ... except is some Guy's Imagination ...


Mickey Mouse and supernatural beings have in common that they exist only in imagination, without a counterpart in reality.


So the Disney people can if they wish turn Mickey into a god in their next edition, and, say, the Lutherans, can put Yahweh in cartoon form any time they please and depict him as a mouse (think of Apollo smintheus).


Imagination's terrific. The important thing is not to confuse it with reality.

Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 5 of 19  •  Prev 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 ... 19 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook