davidylan:

=
But that is your own opinion. you dont know what was of utmost priority in the mind of the bible writers. If they had to write down EVERYTHING you expect to find in the bible we'd probably need a truck to carry it to church on sunday.

Wasn't it men that sat down and choose what they believe was the word of god that should be included and what was not through votes?

noetic2:


What is the scientific evidence for the non-existence of GOD?

What is the intellectual analyses/evidence that suggests the non-existence of GOD?

Simply put, there is none.
Actually , what science has really done in the past few years is to make Darwin's theory of evolution look like a joke.

Anybody that has a little itty bitty knowledge of Molecular Biology and/or Paleontology would know this.  The more science digs into the origin of the earth , the more the concept of an intelligent designer becomes more appealing even to the unbeliever.

bindex:

Wasn't it men that sat down and choose what they believe was the word of god that should be included and what was not through votes?

and what does this have to do with the topic?

davidylan:

Is that the topic of the thread? When you block heads hit a dead-end you start grasping at straws.

But that is your own opinion. you dont know what was of utmost priority in the mind of the bible writers. If they had to write down EVERYTHING you expect to find in the bible we'd probably need a truck to carry it to church on sunday.

We do NOT like it when people spread falsehood as gratuitously as you do. On the one hand you try to pass off yourself as a [pseudo]-scientist and on the other you do your utmost of impede, malign and denigrate science enterprise. What a shame and sham.

huxley2:

We do NOT like it when people spread falsehood as gratuitously as you do. On the one hand you try to pass off yourself as a [pseudo]-scientist and on the other you do your utmost of impede, malign and denigrate science enterprise. What a shame and sham.

I have never denigrated science . . . on the contrary.

I have rather made sure that charlatans like yourself dont get away with using science as a cloak for your unbelief.

davidylan:

All this can be summed up in a single sentence - you simply do not understand my side of the story but are simply writing out of a pre-concieved anti-me bias based on earlier interaction on previous posts.

No I am not writing based on any pre-conceived anti you bias. I was just trying to understand how you came to the conclusions that science does not explain all your queries when it was only through the knowledge of science that you got to know about them not through your reading on the bible.

I said this on another post and will repeat it here - rather than science being an indictment against the bible, it has actually turned out to be an important tool in understanding how amazing God really is. Is the bible a science textbook? No. and i have never intimated so.
Is science bad? No! If not i wouldnt be a scientist myself.

Science is an indictment against the bible  because scientist have been able to prove some of the bible assertion to be false. Does that mean we should all throw away our bibles? NO but when you keep saying that science supports the bible then you should also expect them to ask you questions as to how science supports the assertions of the bible. The fact that through science we came to have the knowledge that the human eye looks intricately designed does not mean that science supports the bible, if you say that because the human eyes are intricately designed then that means that it supports the bible then you should be able to provide answers to them when they ask you how it does. The complexity of the universe and how it is governed by its laws does not prove the bible. If you say that the science behind the complexity of the universe proves that the bible is true then you should be able to explain it and show how it can be supported by the scientific evidence. You believe that God did it so do I, but to go into any other details is to go off course because the bible does not talk about how the earth and the universe functions. It only says that God created them.

The bible actively promoted learning, one of the early disciples (Luke) was a greek doctor, obviously he wasnt practicing his trade by reading the teachings of Christ alone! Simon was a fisherman, a trade that required at least a rudimentary knowledge of oceanography . . . did that stop him from being one of the leaders of the early church? No.

That is why I keep saying that you are fighting so hard. The bible does not actively promote learning and knowledge.The Old Testament says that people's reasoning abilities are unreliable and deceptive. It warns "There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death." This pathway to ruin results, at least partly, from the fact that the "heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked.In describing the vast superiority of divine thinking over human thinking, the Lord proclaims that "my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways. . . . For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts."That being the case, people cannot expect to understand God's methods. The New Testament is very scornful of human knowledge. It views this world's wisdom as stupid and worthless:

"If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. . . . The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain."

Because the wise in this world cannot apprehend the ways of God, only those having a childlike mentality should find Christian teachings attractive according to the bible. Jesus said,

"Let the children come to me . . . for the kingdom of Heaven belongs to such as these." And he prayed, "I thank thee, O Father, . . . because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes."

The writer of Ecclesiastes states that he applied himself to know wisdom. But he "came to see that this is chasing the wind. For in much wisdom is much vexation, and the more a man knows, the more he has to suffer." Moreover, his learning turned out to be pointless:

"So I said to myself, 'I too shall suffer the fate of the fool. To what purpose have I been wise? What is the profit of it? Even this,' I said to myself, 'is emptiness.' The wise man is remembered no longer than the fool, for, as the passing days multiply, all will be forgotten. . . ."

The book of Colossians urges people to direct their thoughts far out into the heavens.  It tells Christians to "aspire to the realm above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God, and let your thoughts dwell on that higher realm, not on this earthly life.". I don't know that Luke is a doctor but to say that the bible actively encourages scientific reasoning and research is false.

davidylan:


So the problem here is NOT science . . . you seem to have the idea that i'm saying science is bad and we shld simply hug the bible . . . that is far far from the truth. [/b]The bible was not written by a bunch of learned scientists so obviously there was a lot they didnt know about the world around us, no one expects to go read the bible to understand the principles of physics . . . infact Genesis simply says "let there be light" . . . we are not told the speed of that light, anything about how it is reflected, nothing on its physical properties . . . we simply know that "and there was light".

Another point in your diatribe that caught my attention was this - [b]You don't have to disprove science and the tremendous knowledge of the world it has helped us acquired because you want to prove the biblical assertions that we all believe through faith.

where in any of my earlier posts was i trying to "disprove science"?   I am a scientist-in-training, why would i want to disprove my own profession? Does that make a shred of sense?

My point was simple - science has taught us a ton . . . but is it the answer to the most critical questions about how the earth appeared, why we could not have simply appeared by chance or "evolved" from simple organisms? Apparently NO!
Science has its limits . . . it is just sad that many who dont even understand the basic principles of science try to use it as a cloak to justify their unbelief.

It is one-thing to doubt the bible, i have no problems with that . . . but to use UNVERIFIED, UNSUBSTANTIATED scientific theories to debunk the theory of creation is pretty absurd.

It would be a cold day in hell the moment many of you start commenting on topics free of bias and without coming here with a chip on your shoulders.

Science has its limits but my problem with your post was that you were using the knowledg how the hypothalamus functions which you acquired only through science to say that science does not explain it.

I have noticed the new trend now: You ask the atheist/naturalist/humanist/disbelievers/muslims to defend their belief and they start running from pillar to post . . , . .bringing up irrelevant postulations, . . . . . pathetic.

noetic2:

I have noticed the new trend now: You ask the atheist/naturalist/humanist/disbelievers/muslims to defend their belief and they start running from pillar to post . . , . .bringing up irrelevant postulations, . . . . . pathetic.

How have you defended your own faith?

Good question!

dalaman:

That is why I keep saying that you are fighting so hard. The bible does not actively promote learning and knowledge.The Old Testament says that people's reasoning abilities are unreliable and deceptive. It warns "There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death." This pathway to ruin results, at least partly, from the fact that the "heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked.In describing the vast superiority of divine thinking over human thinking, the Lord proclaims that "my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways. . . . For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts."That being the case, people cannot expect to understand God's methods. The New Testament is very scornful of human knowledge. It views this world's wisdom as stupid and worthless:

I dont think so. I think you're reading your own pre-concieved ideas into the bible no matter how loudly your proclaim the opposite . . .

An apparent contradiction here is that you say the new testament is scornful of human knowledge . . . but used quotes from the old testament to accentuate that fact . . . odd. Methinks you're the one trying way too hard.

1. Here is how the bible starts to define Daniel and his peers - Daniel 1:4 Children in whom was no blemish, but well favoured, and skilful in all wisdom, and cunning in knowledge, and understanding science, and such as had ability in them to stand in the king's palace, and whom they might teach the learning and the tongue of the Chaldeans.

Wow . . . shldnt God have been disdainful of Daniel for "understanding science" as you claim?

2. 1 Chonicles 12:32 And of the children of Issachar, which were men that had understanding of the times, to know what Israel ought to do; the heads of them were two hundred; and all their brethren were at their commandment.

Why were these men important to David if the bible so hated knowledge?

Now lets look at the new testament . . .

3. Did the new testament simply disdain human knowledge?

1 Corinthians 3: 18 Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise. 19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness. 20 And again, The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain. 21 Therefore let no man glory in men.

while verse 18-20 might seem so, i'm more interested in what verse 21 has to say. It seems here that what Paul was trying to say was NOT that we shld refuse to be wise, refuse to learn . . . but that in all our learning and wisdom we shld NOT give in to the temptation to ascribe the glory to ourselves.

Now the bible talks about money being the root of all evil . . . does that mean the bible disdained money? I think not!

How have you defended your own faith? Grin Grin

It doesn't require a microscope to see that all over nairaland.

davidylan:

I have never denigrated science . . . on the contrary.

I have rather made sure that charlatans like yourself dont get away with using science as a cloak for your unbelief.

OK, let us examine that, David.  

1)  What does science say about the age of LIFE on earth?

2)  Why is there no scientific evidence that proves that mammals life in the pre-cambrian?


Let us see how a scientist-in-entertaining  would answer these questions


Can't wait to see his answers and I am already preparing my belly for a good laugh.  

@ Huxley

OK, let us examine that, David.

1) What does science say about the age of LIFE on earth?

2) Why is there no scientific evidence that proves that mammals life in the pre-cambrian?


Let us see how a scientist-in-entertaining would answer these questions


Can't wait to see his answers and I am already preparing my belly for a good laugh. Smiley

WHY is it very difficult to prove the non-existence of GOD scientifically or intellectually?

huxley2:

OK, let us examine that, David.  

1)  What does science say about the age of LIFE on earth?

2)  Why is there no scientific evidence that proves that mammals life in the pre-cambrian?


Let us see how a scientist-in-entertaining  would answer these questions


Can't wait to see his answers and I am already preparing my belly for a good laugh.  

1) What does science say about the formation of the earth?

2) Why is there no scientific evidence that proves that God does not exist?

Answer those first. You dont have a monopoly over questions.

davidylan:

I dont think so. I think you're reading your own pre-concieved ideas into the bible no matter how loudly your proclaim the opposite . . .

An apparent contradiction here is that you say the new testament is scornful of human knowledge . . . but used quotes from the old testament to accentuate that fact . . . odd. Methinks you're the one trying way too hard.

You quoted  from the passages i presented from the new testament didn't you? Why are you trying so hard?

1. Here is how the bible starts to define Daniel and his peers - Daniel 1:4 Children in whom was no blemish, but well favoured, and skilful in all wisdom, and cunning in knowledge, and understanding science, and such as had ability in them to stand in the king's palace, and whom they might teach the learning and the tongue of the Chaldeans.

Wow . . . shldnt God have been disdainful of Daniel for "understanding science" as you claim?

So how has this provided any support to your claim that the bible actively supports knowledge. The bible says that human wisdom deserves only to be destroyed and denigrated. God will "destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the cleverness of the clever." The bible does not support the idea that people should depend on the works and knowledge of other men unless if you want to keep lying all the time which you are very well known for. Because human reasoning is so inferior to the Almighty's thoughts, "It is better to trust in the Lord than to put confidence in man." In fact, "It is plain stupidity to trust in one's own wits."This is so true that "Cursed be the man that trusteth in man. . . ."

2. 1 Chonicles 12:32 And of the children of Issachar, which were men that had understanding of the times, to know what Israel ought to do; the heads of them were two hundred; and all their brethren were at their commandment.

Why were these men important to David if the bible so hated knowledge?

How has the passage that you have posted above explain anything? how does it negate the fact that the bible does not really support the idea of people wanting to know more about how the universe functions? God created the universe and the bible says that he doesn't want people to know how it functions. In describing the vast superiority of divine thinking over human thinking, the Lord proclaims that "my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways. . . . For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts." That being the case, people cannot expect to understand God's methods. As a result, the Old Testament commands people to "Put all your trust in the Lord and do not rely on your own understanding." These teachings are intended to have people shut down their reasoning powers and blindly follow religious dogma.

Now lets look at the new testament . . .

3. Did the new testament simply disdain human knowledge?

1 Corinthians 3: 18 Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise. 19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness. 20 And again, The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain. 21 Therefore let no man glory in men.

while verse 18-20 might seem so, i'm more interested in what verse 21 has to say. It seems here that what Paul was trying to say was NOT that we shld refuse to be wise, refuse to learn . . . but that in all our learning and wisdom we shld NOT give in to the temptation to ascribe the glory to ourselves.

Now the bible talks about money being the root of all evil . . . does that mean the bible disdained money? I think not!

The Bible says that human wisdom produces misery, disappointment, and emptiness. I said that The writer of Ecclesiastes states that he applied himself to know wisdom. But he "came to see that this useless  and it is just like chasing the wind. He went on to say that "So I said to myself, 'I too shall suffer the fate of the fool. To what purpose have I been wise? What is the profit of it? Even this,' I said to myself, 'is emptiness.' The wise man is remembered no longer than the fool, for, as the passing days multiply, all will be forgotten. By depicting the results of wisdom in such negative terms, the Bible does not promote good study habits such as research and the knowledge of how things function as you will like people to believe.

dalaman:

You quoted from the i presented from the new testament didn't you? Why are you trying so hard?

i see that is your favorite insult. you dont have to try so hard either. Its obvious you only post to oppose David . . . not to add substance to the thread. Its allowed.

dalaman:

So how has this provided any support to your claim that the bible actively supports knowledge. The bible says that human wisdom deserves only to be destroyed and denigrated. God will "destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the cleverness of the clever." The bible does not support the idea that people should depend on the works and knowledge of other men unless if you want to keep lying all the time which you are very well known for. Because human reasoning is so inferior to the Almighty's thoughts, "It is better to trust in the Lord than to put confidence in man." In fact, "It is plain stupidity to trust in one's own wits."This is so true that "Cursed be the man that trusteth in man. . . ."

Again you completely misinterprete what the bible was saying in those 2 passages you quoted. You quoted 1 Cor 1:19 OUT OF CONTEXT to forcefully support your claim that the bible disdains knowledge. Why did the bible say God would destroy the wisdom of the wise and who were these "wise"?
Did not the same bible say we shld be WISE AS SERPENTS? Did he mean He would destroy us too?

What 1 Cor 1 was saying was simple . . . those "wise" to be destroyed are those to whom the preaching of the cross is foolishness. People like the atheists we see here who say that science has rendered the bible useless, those who (like the greeks in 1 Cor 1:23) seek for a sign (empirical proof that God exists, that Noah's ark exists, that a whale could swallow Jonah and keep him alive) . . .
verses 29 and 31 bring it into clearer relief . . . let no man glory in His presence. God and the bible is NOT against wisdom, He is simply against the wisdom that glories in self.

dalaman:

How has the passage that you have posted above explain anything? how does it negate the fact that the bible does not really support the idea of people wanting to know more about how the universe functions? God created the universe and the bible says that he doesn't want people to know how it functions.

I would be happy to see the exact verse that says that.

Again i reiterate . . . why did those attributes of Daniel and his peers not disqualify him from God's favour?

dalaman:

In describing the vast superiority of divine thinking over human thinking, the Lord proclaims that "my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways. . . . For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts." That being the case, people cannot expect to understand God's methods. As a result, the Old Testament commands people to "Put all your trust in the Lord and do not rely on your own understanding." These teachings are intended to have people shut down their reasoning powers and blindly follow religious dogma.

That would then mean this verse makes no sense right? - Is 1:18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.

couldnt he have simply said - come now, let me fill your head with unquestionable dogma?

dalaman:

The Bible says that human wisdom produces misery, disappointment, and emptiness. I said that The writer of Ecclesiastes states that he applied himself to know wisdom. But he "came to see that this useless and it is just like chasing the wind. He went on to say that "So I said to myself, 'I too shall suffer the fate of the fool. To what purpose have I been wise? What is the profit of it? Even this,' I said to myself, 'is emptiness.' The wise man is remembered no longer than the fool, for, as the passing days multiply, all will be forgotten. By depicting the results of wisdom in such negative terms, the Bible does not promote good study habits such as research and the knowledge of how things function.

Ecclesiastes says a lot of negative stuff about life in general . . . shld we all commit suicide since it means the bible does not promote a healthy outlook on life too?

lol dalaman makes me laugh

davidylan:

and what does this have to do with the topic?

Yes this have to do with the topic, just answer his question, just be honest.

Horus:

Yes this have to do with the topic, just answer his question, just be honest.

Who are you? I dont have to do what you say.

Who are you? I dont have to do what you say.

Dont lie it is agaisnt the law of your Bible so be honnest before your god get angry at you. Actualy lying is a SIN but maybe you forget.

@ Davidylan

I will be travelling soon so let make my final input. The Bible dissuades people from obtaining worldly knowledge by telling them to keep their thoughts on heaven and not earth. It's hard to be wise about this world while oblivious to it. No? As I aforementioned  The book of Colossians urges people to direct their thoughts out into heaven (which may explain a lot of Christian philosophy). It tells Christians to "aspire to the realm above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God, and let your thoughts dwell on that higher realm, not on this earthly life." Does this passage sounds as a passage that encourages knowledge of how the world functions and how to make the world a better place since it says that people should let their thoughts dwell on the higher realm? I don't think so. This implies that there's little point in studying the world, anyway, because it belongs to Satan and will soon be destroyed and replaced by another. The bible in so many places says that pursuing knowledge of this world brings misery. People's main focus(thoughts) should be on heaven and not earth. That is what the bible says.

dalaman:

@ Davidylan

I will be travelling soon so let make my final input. The Bible dissuades people from obtaining worldly knowledge by telling them to keep their thoughts on heaven and not earth. It's hard to be wise about this world while oblivious to it. No? As I aforementioned  The book of Colossians urges people to direct their thoughts out into heaven (which may explain a lot of Christian philosophy). It tells Christians to "aspire to the realm above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God, and let your thoughts dwell on that higher realm, not on this earthly life." Does this passage sounds as a passage that encourages knowledge of how the world functions and how to make the world a better place since it says that people should let their thoughts dwell on the higher realm? I don't think so. This implies that there's little point in studying the world, anyway, because it belongs to Satan and will soon be destroyed and replaced by another. The bible in so many places says that pursuing knowledge of this world brings misery. People's main focus(thoughts) should be on heaven and not earth. That is what the bible says.

Oh my my . . . this dude is seriously confused.

did not that same bible say - occupy till i come?

So you mean the bible simply wanted us to just sit down fixing our gaze on the sky, refuse to go to school or earn a living?

But Paul and even simon Peter had jobs that they did on the sides apart from their evangelising. Paul's friends were wealthy businessmen and women . . . remember Lydia?

lol Dalaman makes me laugh . . . he's probably going to accuse me of "trying too hard". I wonder why many of these clueless "christians" dont try understanding the scriptures first before launching into meaningless tirades.

davidylan:

Who are you?.

Your Father.

@ dalaman

This only shows that the bible is very contradictory. It says one thing in one part and says something else in another. In one part is says that the knowledge of god and how he operates can not be understood by man and then turns around and say that come let us reason together says the lord in another different part. The book was never peer reviewed to make sure that it had a consistent message, that is why we have every body creating his/her own god using the bible and each person that creates a god and doctorine out of the bible uses the same bible to defend his own position.

davidylan:

Oh my my . . . this dude is seriously confused.

did not that same bible say - occupy till i come?

So you mean the bible simply wanted us to just sit down fixing our gaze on the sky, refuse to go to school or earn a living?

But Paul and even simon Peter had jobs that they did on the sides apart from their evangelising. Paul's friends were wealthy businessmen and women . . . remember Lydia?

lol Dalaman makes me laugh . . . he's probably going to accuse me of "trying too hard". I wonder why many of these clueless "christians" dont try understanding the scriptures first before launching into meaningless tirades.

You weren't able to refute any of his the arguments he presented all you did was just do your usual dance around and claim victory by declearing that he does not understand the scriptures, without even showing him how he doesn't understand. Wasn't it the same paul that was busy telling people that the end was immenent and very close? In the espitle of peter it is written that "the end of all things is upon us" Paul in his letter to the Corinthians, talks about"time we live in will not last long,For the whole frame of this world is passing away."

What kind of Job did paul have? Was he trying to know anything about gravity and the distance of the earth from the sun? Was he encouraging people to know more about the origin of life or how to get to the moon? So because paul had a Job that means the bible encourages people to find out more about the cure to diseases and how to prevent natural disasters like tsunamis and earth quakes eh? Does the passage in colossian that tells Christians to aspire to the realm above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God, and let their thoughts dwell on that higher realm, not on this earthly life. Sound like anything that encourages the research and the need to know the origin of life or the component of the rainbow and how the sun operates? does your bible not claim that knowledge comes from god alone?

The bible teaches people to distrust and renounce their reasoning powers. This is seen in both the Old and New Testaments. As dalaman has stated in describing the vast superiority of divine thinking over human thinking, the bible proclaims that the thoughts of the bible god are not the thoughts of humans and neither are his ways the ways of humans,For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are his ways higher than that of humans ways, the bible says the bible god's thoughts  are not the same with human thought thoughts. Hence people are NOT expect to understand God's methods by such declaration. Now I know you are going to come and tell me that this also encourages man to seek for the origin of life and know how the forces of nature function.

The bottom line is that the bible is against secular knowledge and claims that the bible god is the only giver of knowledge.

Ecclesiastes says that "God giveth to a man that is good in his sight wisdom, and knowledge
Proverbs conveys a similar lesson by saying "the Lord bestows wisdom and teaches knowledge and understanding."
James assertsthat "If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him. But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering."
Proverbs says that "The first step to wisdom is the fear of the Lord, and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding."
The Psalmist writes that God's "commandments are mine for ever; through them I am wiser than my enemies. I have more insight than all my teachers, for thy instruction is my study; I have more wisdom than the old, because I have kept thy precepts." The writer also says the "Lord's instruction never fails, and makes the simple wise."

So instead of using science to gain wisdom, people are encouraged to rely on and depend soley on god to provide and give them wisdom and knowledge.

In the end those who do not believe that God YHVH exists will be the most disappointed.

Becos they will see appearance of His glory when he descends from heaven to destroy those who have slandered his name.

ifele:

Becos they will see appearance of His glory when he descends from heaven to destroy those who have slandered his name.

Your god is suposed to be Omnipresent, and be everywhere at the same time, so how can he descends from heaven if he is already everywhere and omnipresent?
Or are you saying that your god is only in heaven?

davidylan - answer the question now

"I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.”

Henry Roberts (1901-1971)

Horus:

Your god is suposed to be Omnipresent, and be everywhere at the same time, so how can he descends from heaven if he is already everywhere and omnipresent?
Or are you saying that your god is only in heaven?

U are simply limiting the God concept to the "container" of ur imagination. True . . . . .God is omnipresent. . . . .that presence is manifested in various ramifications including visual, feeling, experience, hearing, inspiration and lots more. He sees all too and knows all.

why dont u attempt answering the initial questions asked in the opening post

noetic2:

U are simply limiting the God concept to the "container" of ur imagination. True . . . . .God is omnipresent. . . . .that presence is manifested in various ramifications including visual, feeling, experience, hearing, inspiration and lots more. He sees all too and knows all.

This was not a statement from me, I was just replying to a post by asking the poster two questions , to make the poster aware that he was  limiting god to a limited geographical location called heaven only when his god is suposed to be omnipresent.

noetic: Mr A believes that there is a living and existing GOD.
Mr B believes in the nihilance/non-existence of GOD.

Both Mr A and B must be able to analyse and define their beliefs, within the concepts of scientific knowledge, intelectualism and rationality.

To the advocates of Mr B's postulation, I ask: what is the scientific evidence for the non-existence of GOD?

what is the intellectual evidence for the non-existence of GOD?

Well, let's first start with the assertion that A can analyse and define her beliefs within the concepts of scientific knowledge, etc. I honestly doubt that's an accurate assessment of the theist's position in regards to gods. The allure - and flaw - of gods is that when scientific evidence that is falsifiable (c.f. empirical evidence) is asked of or for them, the theist is able to reside or hide behind the claim that his or her god is beyond the scope of humanity; essentially, that the god or gods are transcendental - sometimes, even impossibly beyond transcendent. It all belies what you claim.

In any case, on to B. What is the scientific evidence for the non-existence of gods? There isn't any per se. What can be pointed to instead is the existence of alternative, empirically based theories and concepts that could help us understand the existence of humans sans gods. With that B doesn't need to accept "Goddidit" as a viable reason for her existence.

As far as the intellectual goes, though, there are several arguments - some more satisfactory than others. The problem of evil is a firm favourite for many when informed of the supposed existence of an omni-max deity like the Christian one, thus one can present the argument so neatly summed up by Archibald McLeish in JB: "If God is God, he is not good/ If God is good, he is not God/ Take the even, take the odd"

For me, since simply pointing out I just don't believe any gods exist is enough for most people, I'm more content with just pointing out the glaring contradictions in the characteristics and actions of their gods, and the inanity in the dogmas they espouse. For instance, then, to use the Christian god again, the inherent philosophical contradiction in presenting YHVH as both immediately immanent and transcendental is one to which I may point.

KAG:

Well, let's first start with the assertion that A can analyse and define her beliefs within the concepts of scientific knowledge, etc. I honestly doubt that's an accurate assessment of the theist's position in regards to gods. The allure - and flaw - of gods is that when scientific evidence that is falsifiable (c.f. empirical evidence) is asked of or for them, the theist is able to reside or hide behind the claim that his or her god is beyond the scope of humanity; essentially, that the god or gods are transcendental - sometimes, even impossibly beyond transcendent. It all belies what you claim.

In any case, on to B. What is the scientific evidence for the non-existence of gods? There isn't any per se. What can be pointed to instead is the existence of alternative, empirically based theories and concepts that could help us understand the existence of humans sans gods. With that B doesn't need to accept "Goddidit" as a viable reason for her existence.

As far as the intellectual goes, though, there are several arguments - some more satisfactory than others. The problem of evil is a firm favourite for many when informed of the supposed existence of an omni-max deity like the Christian one, thus one can present the argument so neatly summed up by Archibald McLeish in JB: "If God is God, he is not good/ If God is good, he is not God/ Take the even, take the odd"

For me, since simply pointing out I just don't believe any gods exist is enough for most people, I'm more content with just pointing out the glaring contradictions in the characteristics and actions of their gods, and the inanity in the dogmas they espouse. For instance, then, to use the Christian god again, the inherent philosophical contradiction in presenting YHVH as both immediately immanent and transcendental is one to which I may point.

KAG. Are you a hermaphrodite . You are now a male? Excellent post by the way.

bindex:

You weren't able to refute any of his the arguments he presented all you did was just do your usual dance around and claim victory by declearing that he does not understand the scriptures, without even showing him how he doesn't understand.

Oh really? I'm sure dalaman would beg to disagree with you.

Even if i published my riposte you wont see it, you're programmed not to.