Searching for GOD...

[Nearly Sane]

I wonder what it would take to convince the average atheist if JC did return (assuming he came once before).

I, for one, would be very sceptical because of the fantastic illusions such as David Copperfield can orchestrate. 

As Shaker says, if he was just another Billy Graham type character none of us would even listen.

I don't get the idea of miracles. We are always at Arthur C Clarke's point about anything sufficiently advanced will appear as magic. Anything that is an actual god, as I understand the most common use of the term, would not be pulling dead people from graves.

The most counterproductive bit of any message in the NT is the 'Oh look and there baskets of fishes and bread left over!'

[ippy]

And you mine. You are hopelessly biased and use double standards .

OK, now try to explain what it is you mean  "You are hopelessly biased and use double standards"?

ippy

[Nearly Sane]

OK, now try to explain what it is you mean  "You are hopelessly biased and use double standards"?

ippy

I mean what it says. What words are you struggling with?

[ippy]

I mean what it says. What words are you struggling with?

I find you seem to speak in riddles, when I manage to get, (understand), some of the stuff you write, it seems to me we're standing on the same side of the fence, I'm not struggling with your words, I could quite simply look them up if I needed to do so, it just appears that you can't just say something like, this is a table, you seem to have some need to go into a four foolscap pages of complications describing a table. (I'm only exaggerating to make a point).

I have no bone with you other than as I have said above, I'm not trying to be your lifetime enemy; as near as I can tell we only differ on, perhaps, maybe, some ideas.

ippy

[Nearly Sane]

I find you seem to speak in riddles, when I manage to get, (understand), some of the stuff you write, it seems to me we're standing on the same side of the fence, I'm not struggling with your words, I could quite simply look them up if I needed to do so, it just appears that you can't just say something like, this is a table, you seem to have some need to go into a four foolscap pages of complications describing a table. (I'm only exaggerating to make a point).

I have no bone with you other than as I have said above, I'm not trying to be your lifetime enemy; as near as I can tell we only differ on, perhaps, maybe, some ideas.

ippy

I don't really care about your motivation. What didn’t you get (understand) about the post?

[ippy]

I don't really care about your motivation. What didn’t you get (understand) about the post?

I will tell you what it is I don't understand, but only after you make yourself clear because I don't really care about anyone barking orders in my direction, so go away and think of a polite way to address me, that might get you an answer.

ippy 

[Nearly Sane]

I will tell you what it is I don't understand, but only after you make yourself clear because I don't really care about anyone barking orders in my direction, so go away and think of a polite way to address me, that might get you an answer.

ippy

Asking a question isn't barking orders. It might be easier to talk if you weren't so emotional.

[ippy]

Asking a question isn't barking orders. It might be easier to talk if you weren't so emotional.

Now you must try harder N S you're not quite there yet.

ippy

[Nearly Sane]

Now you must try harder N S you're not quite there yet.

ippy

eh?

[Alan Burns]

As quite a few of us have said before, one single fact would, at stroke, turn all atheists into believers.

If you can't accept the miracle of life itself, there is not much hope that you will accept other evidence of our Creator.

As I have said before, we are so surrounded by God's creation that we just accept it as "natural".

[Shaker]

If you can't accept the miracle of life itself, there is not much hope that you will accept other evidence of our Creator.

As I have said before, we are so surrounded by God's creation that we just accept it as "natural".

That's exactly what it looks like - natural - and until and unless you can stump up with some (a) evidence of anything other than the natural and (b) an appropriate methodology for evaluating this evidence and ascertaining as to whether such claims are true or not, that's the way it's going to stay, old fruit.

[Alan Burns]

That's exactly what it looks like - natural - and until and unless you can stump up with some (a) evidence of anything other than the natural and (b) an appropriate methodology for evaluating this evidence and ascertaining as to whether such claims are true or not, that's the way it's going to stay, old fruit.

It is a demonstrable fact that natural forces are destructive rather than creative.

[Shaker]

It is a demonstrable fact that natural forces are destructive rather than creative.

Not always - I see your quite woeful misunderstanding of science is going to get yet another airing ... *sigh*

[Alan Burns]

Not always - I see your quite woeful misunderstanding of science is going to get yet another airing ... *sigh*

My understanding of science is precisely what shows me how unlikely it would be for natural, unguided, inherently destructive forces to bring into existence the most specifically complex item known to mankind - the human DNA molecule.  A single microscopic molecule which contains all the information needed to create and maintain a complete human being, together with the scientifically undefinable attributes of conscious awareness and free will.

[savillerow]

AB So how bloody lucky it was a god, your god, you chose  the right one, first time, didnt have to consider any other gods, answers your prayers and hes on your side. Boy oh boy you are blessed.. . . . .think i will stick to a "no faith" position. It just feels more real.

[Alan Burns]

AB So how bloody lucky it was a god, your god, you chose  the right one, first time, didnt have to consider any other gods, answers your prayers and hes on your side. Boy oh boy you are blessed.. . . . .think i will stick to a "no faith" position. It just feels more real.

But it was God chose to make Himself known to me

[Stranger]

Not always - I see your quite woeful misunderstanding of science is going to get yet another airing ... *sigh*

My understanding of science is precisely what shows me how unlikely it would be for natural, unguided, inherently destructive forces to bring into existence the most specifically complex item known to mankind - the human DNA molecule.  A single microscopic molecule which contains all the information needed to create and maintain a complete human being, together with the scientifically undefinable attributes of conscious awareness and free will.

Shaker was clearly right, you don't understand the science behind evolution. You also seem to be labelling things that are not yet completely understood as "scientifically undefinable" (it must be magic god) without any justification.

[torridon]

My understanding of science is precisely what shows me how unlikely it would be for natural, unguided, inherently destructive forces to bring into existence the most specifically complex item known to mankind - the human DNA molecule.  A single microscopic molecule which contains all the information needed to create and maintain a complete human being, together with the scientifically undefinable attributes of conscious awareness and free will.

Free will is undefinable because it is an incoherent fictional concept of your imagination;  conscious awareness is not undefinable, rather understanding it is a work in progress and you would know this if you paid attention to this thread; the human DNA molecule is not the most complex item known to mankind, in fact the common water flea Daphnia pulex is way out of our league with over 30,000 genes, vastly more than in human DNA.

[Shaker]

But it was God chose to make Himself known to me

As circular arguments go, that one's a doozy.

[torridon]

If you can't accept the miracle of life itself, there is not much hope that you will accept other evidence of our Creator.

As I have said before, we are so surrounded by God's creation that we just accept it as "natural".

What's your methodology for differentiating between 'miraculous' and 'hard to understand'?

[Shaker]

Free will is undefinable because it is an incoherent fictional concept of your imagination;  conscious awareness is not undefinable, rather understanding it is a work in progress and you would know this if you paid attention to this thread; the human DNA molecule is not the most complex item known to mankind, in fact the common water flea Daphnia pulex is way out of our league with over 30,000 genes, vastly more than in human DNA.

The protist Polychaos dubium has one of the largest genomes known at 670,000,000,000 base pairs.

That's 200 times larger than the human genome.

Floor's yours, Alan.

[torridon]

But it was God chose to make Himself known to me

That is a self-defeating observation.

A 'God' would be good (by most definitions, at least).

 A 'good' God would not be so capricious as to introduce himself to certain individuals but hide from others. That is not consistent wth being good.

Q.E.D

[Alan Burns]

The protist Polychaos dubium has one of the largest genomes known at 670,000,000,000 base pairs.

That's 200 times larger than the human genome.

Floor's yours, Alan.

The Polychaos dubium genome contains mostly junk which can't be classified as specific complexity.

[Alan Burns]

What's your methodology for differentiating between 'miraculous' and 'hard to understand'?

"Miraculous" could be used to describe anything which is deliberately brought about by an act of free will, be it human or God's.  It is not hard to understand.

[Shaker]

The Polychaos dubium genome contains mostly junk which can't be classified as specific complexity.

And what's that supposed to be when it's at home?