Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
Top Ten Creationist Arguments Part 1 and 2
- Thread starter javaguru
- Start date
yeah, but it will probably be about you forgetting her birthday.
javaguru
Banned
Who had a birthday?
javaguru
Banned
I didnt notice this was a java thread until it was too late...
L
lartinos
Guest
that pic probably came from the city I work in
your latest whip project turned out great rob
redshirt27se
New member
Weird, another Java thread baiting Cindy.
I don't mind taking the bait.
I as soon as I saw #1 I knew the video was just going to be silly...lol There is no biblical case for a young earth. Plus, evolution and Christianity are compatible and it's irrelevant to the Christian faith how old the earth is or how we got here..what is relevant is WHY. It's important to understand there is evolutionary theory which the science does not address a creator and theistic evolution which is the belief that God used evolution. Naturalism is a philosophy, no reason for me or any Christian to attack evolution lol or carbon dating because of naturalism... it just does not matter. I know there are Christians out there that think the earth is flat and is only thousands of years old...I know there are some materialistic, vapid, shallow, blundering atheists but that does not mean they all think they same does it? Of course not.
I as soon as I saw #1 I knew the video was just going to be silly...lol There is no biblical case for a young earth. Plus, evolution and Christianity are compatible and it's irrelevant to the Christian faith how old the earth is or how we got here..what is relevant is WHY. It's important to understand there is evolutionary theory which the science does not address a creator and theistic evolution which is the belief that God used evolution. Naturalism is a philosophy, no reason for me or any Christian to attack evolution lol or carbon dating because of naturalism... it just does not matter. I know there are Christians out there that think the earth is flat and is only thousands of years old...I know there are some materialistic, vapid, shallow, blundering atheists but that does not mean they all think they same does it? Of course not.
I don't know if it's just me, or if I'm getting old, or what... but these reiterations of stupid religious "debates" are fucking pathetic. Atheists and theists alike seem trapped in an infinite loop of arguments that aren't far removed from those heard during gradeschool recess.
For Cindy: here's a good series from a logician dood: ‪Logic Lecture: Truth Tables God and the Problem of Evil 1‬‏ - YouTube. Because, as every EF dood knows, the female organism is incapable of logic.
For Java: here's a logical proof for the existance of god: http://mally.stanford.edu/ontological.pdf. Because, as every EF girl knows, you're fucking dense and need to know when to stop.
Now both of you STFU.
For Cindy: here's a good series from a logician dood: ‪Logic Lecture: Truth Tables God and the Problem of Evil 1‬‏ - YouTube. Because, as every EF dood knows, the female organism is incapable of logic.
For Java: here's a logical proof for the existance of god: http://mally.stanford.edu/ontological.pdf. Because, as every EF girl knows, you're fucking dense and need to know when to stop.
Now both of you STFU.
lol thanks Samoth but it was pretty obvious what this thread was about. If you see a thread made by javaguru with the title "Top Ten Creationist Arguments" it's obvious it is another intolerant Christian bashing thread and I'll probably have a post in it or two in defense. If it annoys you that much, you could just not click on it. Good luck getting him to stop making the threads since he's done it for over 5 years now...
Good luck getting him to stop making the threads since he's done it for over 5 years now... lol thanks Samoth but was pretty obvious what this thread was about. If you see a thread made by javaguru with the title "Top Ten Creationist Arguments" it's obvious it's another intolerant Christian bashing thread and I'll probably have a post in it or two in defense. If it annoys you that much, you could just don't click on it.
I think I used to like reading JG's poasts, but since he's turned full-time troll, I just click on his threads to read what other people poast. I've never clicked on a single one of his videos.
You're both good people, and you both have much you can learn. There are many logical arguments you can use as effective retorts to someone poasting brainless anti-god rhetoric from the comedy channel.
Or at worst, maybe you two could find a middle ground and poast philosophy debates or something.
bigpokey
Banned
awww they youtube fight and they youtube flirt awww
mrplunkey
New member
JG flirt = he lets her touch his letter jacket?
Wow, there's not a single coherent, logical thought in this whole mess.
javaguru
Banned
I don't mind taking the bait.
I as soon as I saw #1 I knew the video was just going to be silly...lol There is no biblical case for a young earth. Plus, evolution and Christianity are compatible and it's irrelevant to the Christian faith how old the earth is or how we got here..what is relevant is WHY. It's important to understand there is evolutionary theory which the science does not address a creator and theistic evolution which is the belief that God used evolution. Naturalism is a philosophy, no reason for me or any Christian to attack evolution lol or carbon dating because of naturalism... it just does not matter. I know there are Christians out there that think the earth is flat and is only thousands of years old...I know there are some materialistic, vapid, shallow, blundering atheists but that does not mean they all think they same does it? Of course not.
You need to send a memo to the Republican party...
javaguru
Banned
Actually, it's an EF baiting thread...I know what gets thread of the week nominations.
javaguru
Banned
Unlike the argument for a supernatural santa clause?
They're just using the same MTV non attention and no detail videos that are common in marketing.
Last edited:
javaguru
Banned
I think I used to like reading JG's poasts, but since he's turned full-time troll, I just click on his threads to read what other people poast. I've never clicked on a single one of his videos.
You're both good people, and you both have much you can learn. There are many logical arguments you can use as effective retorts to someone poasting brainless anti-god rhetoric from the comedy channel.
Or at worst, maybe you two could find a middle ground and poast philosophy debates or something.
It's spelled "post."
Quit being smug...
I took logic for my math requirement as an undergrad...I should have taken calculus instead..it would have saved me money and time.
mrplunkey
New member
"had"
Hi archaic interweb meme!
Seriously though, I would like to see a moar fundamental debate on this topic. There exist interesting points on both ends, and it's a shame to see them relegated to the point of youtube video poast flame.
See what folks fail to realize is that he has gotten his ass kicked on every debate about God, but he can't handle defeat, so he's possessed to win a debate. Which he cant, so he plays his little passive aggressive games and we play ours....
LOL, I guess so. I guess so.
I never poast in these religious threads. I'm just trying to move the discussion into a moar interesting and relevant direction. Neither Java nor Cindy are teh dumb, and they can both learn much from a constructive analysis of they're respective arguments.
javaguru
Banned
Just shows how little you know...
javaguru
Banned
I don't really care about the existence of a supernatural creator, it's the specific religious claims made by humans that matter. Craig is a great philosopher but I've been waiting for him to produce a reasoned argument for believing in Christianity over the tens of thousands of religions I could believe in other than Christianity...all he seems to have is..."The Bible is the word of God." I can get that from any religion...
javaguru
Banned
Hi archaic interweb meme!
Seriously though, I would like to see a moar fundamental debate on this topic. There exist interesting points on both ends, and it's a shame to see them relegated to the point of youtube video poast flame.
You're assuming people want to learn and question their beliefs, most people won't; It's human nature.
How have you not heard him or anyone produce a reasonable argument for Christianity? I'd poast ore but I'm drunk
This is how Craig brings it to Christianity; He makes these arguments:
There is a God that exits outside time/space
God fine tuned the universe for life
Morality depends on God
Jesus came back from the dead somehow by God (empty tomb, postmortem appearances can all be established) and they are independent reports of an empty tomb. Maybe I'll post tomorrow if I feel like wasting my time
but ANYWAY none of those prove biblical inerrancy. Craig also makes that argument but you don't have to accept that. No one has to accept anything. No one has to accept traditional Christianity (trinity etc) all his arguments above show is an historical case for ressurection of Jesus without the bible being divinely inspired...you don't have to accept most of the Christian doctrine.
I take that a step further and believe the bible is inerrant...but that does not matter...look up his arguments... Christians are not unreasonable. STFU!
javaguru
Banned
Well, the bible is a political document and archaeology has shown it to be wrong on just about everything...I can probably find hundreds of people that have seen Elvis and Michael Jackson after their supposed deaths. The bible also claims the dead arose in Israel, not just jesus, but there is no account of that or the resurrection of jesus outside the bible in the historical record....I'm pretty sure a zombie plague would have been recorded outside the bible had it actually happened.
oookay ....what does that have to do with anything? You're wrong but it is still irrelevant to the faith
javaguru
Banned
oookay ....what does that have to do with anything? You're wrong but it is still irrelevant to the faith
Indeed, faith means you believe regardless of the evidence.
I could post a book here in this thread, but you are supposed to seek God. It's not supposed to be spoonfed to you. All you are supposed to accept is that the Christian faith is not unreasonable and that Christians are not idiots. At some point at the very very very end (not where you are at) you do..indeed...have to make a leap of faith. Not an unreasonable leap. If you have a certain perception you won't find it. Not that it is wrong but that's why you can't understand...
Last edited:
calveless wonder
New member
nimbus
New member
dude i'm pretty java had THE totw
What? Do you want to provide counterpoints to the ontological argument?
I already did a thousand times...Where you been?
bigpokey
Banned
bro u stfu bout sook, that jaxd up grill is trashy sexy....
i wish she would down a big gulp full of ex-lax and dump all over me in a kiddie pool til i could swim in it
Sorry, man. I haven't been very active here in some time. I'll keep an eye out for your poasts in the future.
I never heard of him, so I looked him up; kinda surprised to see a modern-day logician/philospher as a priest or whatever.
Anyway, his argument is basically a re-hash of Descarte's in the Fifth Meditation; that is, a basic cosmological argument of the form
God is the being with all the perfections
But existance is perfection
So God possesses existance, i.e., God exists
which reduces to
The object which is omnipotent, omiscient, morally perfect, ...
and exists, exists.
which is an invalid inference that assumes what one is supposed to be proving, i.e., it begs the question.
Kant has work that purports that any cosmological argument is necessarily an ontological argument. Interestingly enough, this invokes empericism and turns into an argument among historians.
Likewise,, the Argument for Design (or Argument to Design, or Teleological Argument) requires an a priori assumption that for an ordered universe, the probability of God is greater than the probability of ~God.
Craig assumes the first premise of his argument as "intuitively obvious" (there exists a God, whatever begins to exist has a cause, the infinite cannot exist, etc.), which is probably why he's more a theologist than modern logician.
He is a preist? I didn't know that. What people want to call him does not matter to me...I like him, and I like his voice..lol
You are right of course about what he assumes. Craig uses many types of cosmological arguments....one what he calls the kalam argument, another by Leibniz...everything that exists has an explanation..if the universe has an explanation, then that is God, the universe exits. It is possible God exists, it is up to each individual to accept if they accept that possibility or not.
I know Immanual Kant objected to the conclusion of cosmological arguments and yes, Craig argues that if there is a God he would make the universe. It is not likely that the universe would exist uncaused, it is more likely that God would exist uncaused. I'm surprised java didn't call out Craig's arguments by using Kant earlier...wasn't he Prussian?
That's not his only arguments though, he makes many arguments for the possibility of God's existence. Craig's best argument in my opinion is the moral argument.
Anyway, internet atheist evangelicals don't always attack the actual arguments the theist has..they attack a distorted version of them. Or they'll talk about all the horrible things people have done in the name of God, then pretend that automatically makes atheism true. Oh yeah, all Christians accept a young earth and reject evolution. Some of these atheists will believe ANYTHING as long as it means they don't have to believe in God...even that they themselves might not even exist. lol...which is fine it just makes me smile and smh. Maybe I as drunkylou should start an EF thread about how all atheists (not true but I'll pretend it is true) don't believe they exist just to be obnoxious...
I'm just sayin if I'm pretending to have meaning by pretending there is a God that is no different than the atheist pretending to assign meaning when in reality it all really does not matter anyway...we are all the same just assigning meaning in different areas. We are all just deluding ourselves. I respect atheists but for some it is just an easy way to seem intelligent.
You are right of course about what he assumes. Craig uses many types of cosmological arguments....one what he calls the kalam argument, another by Leibniz...everything that exists has an explanation..if the universe has an explanation, then that is God, the universe exits. It is possible God exists, it is up to each individual to accept if they accept that possibility or not.
I know Immanual Kant objected to the conclusion of cosmological arguments and yes, Craig argues that if there is a God he would make the universe. It is not likely that the universe would exist uncaused, it is more likely that God would exist uncaused. I'm surprised java didn't call out Craig's arguments by using Kant earlier...wasn't he Prussian?
That's not his only arguments though, he makes many arguments for the possibility of God's existence. Craig's best argument in my opinion is the moral argument.
Anyway, internet atheist evangelicals don't always attack the actual arguments the theist has..they attack a distorted version of them. Or they'll talk about all the horrible things people have done in the name of God, then pretend that automatically makes atheism true. Oh yeah, all Christians accept a young earth and reject evolution. Some of these atheists will believe ANYTHING as long as it means they don't have to believe in God...even that they themselves might not even exist. lol...which is fine it just makes me smile and smh. Maybe I as drunkylou should start an EF thread about how all atheists (not true but I'll pretend it is true) don't believe they exist just to be obnoxious...
I'm just sayin if I'm pretending to have meaning by pretending there is a God that is no different than the atheist pretending to assign meaning when in reality it all really does not matter anyway...we are all the same just assigning meaning in different areas. We are all just deluding ourselves. I respect atheists but for some it is just an easy way to seem intelligent.
Last edited:
javaguru
Banned
He is a preist? I didn't know that. What people want to call him does not matter to me...I like him, and I like his voice..lol
You are right of course about what he assumes. Craig uses many types of cosmological arguments....one what he calls the kalam argument, another by Leibniz...everything that exists has an explanation..if the universe has an explanation, then that is God, the universe exits. It is possible God exists, it is up to each individual to accept if they accept that possibility or not.
I know Immanual Kant objected to the conclusion of cosmological arguments and yes, Craig argues that if there is a God he would make the universe. It is not likely that the universe would exist uncaused, it is more likely that God would exist uncaused. I'm surprised java didn't call out Craig's arguments by using Kant earlier...wasn't he Prussian?
That's not his only arguments though, he makes many arguments for the possibility of God's existence. Craig's best argument in my opinion is the moral argument.
Anyway, internet atheist evangelicals don't always attack the actual arguments the theist has..they attack a distorted version of them. Or they'll talk about all the horrible things people have done in the name of God, then pretend that automatically makes atheism true. Oh yeah, all Christians accept a young earth and reject evolution. Some of these atheists will believe ANYTHING as long as it means they don't have to believe in God...even that they themselves might not even exist. lol...which is fine it just makes me smile and smh. Maybe I as drunkylou should start an EF thread about how all atheists (not true but I'll pretend it is true) don't believe they exist just to be obnoxious...
I'm just sayin if I'm pretending to have meaning by pretending there is a God that is no different than the atheist pretending to assign meaning when in reality it all really does not matter anyway...we are all the same just assigning meaning in different areas. We are all just deluding ourselves. I respect atheists but for some it is just an easy way to seem intelligent.
just replace "God" with "Leprechauns" or "Santa Clause" and you have the same argument which is just as valid.
No it is not. What? How is that valid to: everything that exists has a cause? Or anything I typed in that post you quoted? You can prove that "Santa Clause" and "Leprechauns" don't exist. If Santa existed we would see lots of evidence around Christmas Eve. There would be factories at the North Pole..lots of little leprechaun bones and little villages or whatever. "Leprechanuns" and "Santa Clause" are supposed to be physical, material...things. The creator of the universe has to be immaterial, timeless, etc....but naturalists have a bias against something beyond nature...that keeps them from thinking that a nonphysical something outside time and space is that cause...I don't think saying that cause as god is begging the question either if we go further and define that nonphysical something as an eternal metaphysically necessary being that is the point or reason for moral value and the creator of everything.
Last edited:
billfred
New member
and a hot ass!!!
The irony is me poasting a link to a proof for the existance of God ITT but it being ignored by the science atheist doods because the proof has too much logic and math in it.
mrplunkey
New member
The irony is me poasting a link to a proof for the existance of God ITT but it being ignored by the science atheist doods because the proof has too much logic and math in it.
You and I might be in the same camp. The scientist in me makes me believe there is no god, but then the atheists are so evangelical, obnoxious and irrational that it makes me want to check my math.
Yeah, the arguments got old and stale after a while, and the fallacies of both sides obvious and ignored. I just go straight to the logical arguments nowadays, classical or modern, because the various sides are only looking at the argument and validity of the premises themselves without being pro- or anti- any belief. Unfortunetly, this isn't the way most people want to debate... but luckily, there exist a couple millenia of writings to read for personal enjoyment.
What a bizarre perspective. I dare say that for every evangelical atheist, there are thousands of similarly obnoxious Christian evangelists. The difference, apart from numbers, is that getting all Jesusy in other people's faces is somehow socially acceptable.
mrplunkey
New member
I don't like evangelical, obnoxious, irrational Christians either.
I still have respect for people of faith, even though I believe they are wrong.
javaguru
Banned
I agree, I supported the "ground zero mosque" and I support the right of the Muslims to build their mosque in that Tennessee town, Murfreesboro. I have always gone to church with my jesusy girlfriends and my mother. I also support the right of a valedictorian to talk about Jesus, Allah or Leprechauns in their speech but I don't support my tax dollars going to support religion.
I've never had someone approach me on the street or knock on my door and ask if I don't believe in god or leave a pamphlet proclaiming there is no god to believe in; I've never watched a movie where a character proclaims their disbelief in god in an inspirational moment. Honestly, there is no "atheist agenda" pushing their views on people, there is a strange perception among Christians that their 80% majority and 99.9999% majority in government is being persecuted because they can't force people to pray to Jesus in a public school or have their mythology taught as an alternative to science.
Likewise, I wish more people of faith would directly defend their religion as opposed to engaging in pointless arguments about the actual existence of a deity because they have to defend not only their views on morality and salvation but also public policy issues and why I'm going to hell even though the good I have done outweighs the bad and why their god would allow horrible person xyz into heaven if they accepted the dogma on their deathbed.
Finally,there are exactly four people IRL that know my personal view on religion. You shouldn't confuse internet chat and conversation posts with how people conduct themselves in real life.
mrplunkey
New member
I've never had anyone come to my door either, but there is this guy who clutters-up the front page of a popular C&C web site with trollish YouTube videos with the same old stuff again and again. He's the most evangelical person I've encountered in the past 10 years.
lolololololol......poor soul is just a little schizo. I think he was out chasing rabbits and fell into the rabbit hole. Maybe, he should ask Alice if there is a God, I'm sure she knows the truth....
No atheist agenda?
Atheists Trying to Stop Texas Governor?s Day of Prayer
New York Atheists Angry Over 'Heaven' Street Sign Honoring Sept. 11 Victims - FoxNews.com
Atheism Billboard for the Holidays in New Jersey - NYTimes.com
Oh please.
The red herrings are annoying. If you want people to defend their particular religion don't start a thread about creation or intelligent design...or on about can people be good without God. You start the threads. No one is going to seriously take the time to defend their religion to someone that disrespectfully and stupidly compares their god to Santa Clause or Leprechauns. You can't even respect the locus of the whole discussion. I don't mind the threads though..they don't bother me at all. If only four people in your real life know the truth about you then you've got to get it out somehow...You can't live forever even if you have a little bad in you...the good can't just outweigh the bad you have to be perfectly righteous. Surely you can understand that. A little bad can't stretch out into eternity, could you imagine what would happen? He can't allow it. Hell is something you don't have to accept to be a Christian or to accept a God but surely you can grasp the idea that we can't live forever and continue to populate out into eternity in our current state. Life is already hell on earth sometimes for this short amount of time. I can't think of one person who would want to live forever with our current shortcomings and condition as humans. You choose to not even have the opportunity to experience life in this perfect state. You are not sent to hell by God. You choose whatever your own fate is but he can't allow you to live eternal if you reject the blood sacrifice to make you righteous to be accepted in His presence.
Heaven? What? You do realize that any Christian worth speaking with does not believe the dead go to heaven right? We don't spend eternity there either... oookay... but anyway...Rebrobate mind. Horrible person xyz probably does not get an instance of the Holy Spirit convicting them on their deathbed though since I can't see invisible things I could never say for sure, but it's pretty clear that God gives certain people over to this rebrobate and worthless mind state. IDK where people get the idea that just because you're alive God keeps trying to convict you. Besides, who are you to say person xyz is so horrible? What makes you think you've done more good than bad? You take for granted that there is good. That good is God. You take for granted that you exist. You exist because God exists because God is existence.
That is why. But no one is convinced by clever little arguments but through conviction. Are you sure you're not making these threads when you're angry?
To me, in the past the position of the atheist was never a big deal. It was just a position like mine...but something different. I think culture has changed and it is more socially acceptable to be an atheist so you get all kinds...lol The new atheist is the average person who has thought a little about God in the context of Dawkins, evolution and religious extremism...reads "The God Delusion" and thinks those arguments actually disprove something.
Last edited:
mrplunkey
New member
To me, in the past the position of the atheist was never a big deal. It was just a position like mine...but something different. I think culture has changed and it is more socially acceptable to be an atheist so you get all kinds...lol The new atheist is the average person who has thought a little about God in the context of Dawkins, evolution and religious extremism...reads "The God Delusion" and thinks those arguments actually disprove something.
I remember when atheists were the heady intellectual types. Now they've blended in with a more smarmy, angry, less cerebral crowd. It's like every guy with residual issues over their mom forcing them to go to church is now trying to get even.
I know not all atheists are like this...like you for example... but these "new atheists" belong to a tempting new religion that puffs up the ego. They get to wear the label of intelligent without having to actually be intelligent. They get to wear the label of rational and logical while acting irrational and being illogical. Sure it is at the expense of tolerance, intellectual honestly, healthy introspection, and truth but who could turn that down? "My religion is science and logic"...lmfao
Dawkins is a genius. There was a huge market out there for these poor souls searching for meaning. Manipulate their ego by making them feel smart, give them a book, give them meaning by telling them they should attack religion because it is a virus...gather your disciples (the rest of the four horsemen) and get rich along the way!
These youtube atheists refer to their Lord and Master all the time...he is the most quoted atheist of our time. I've been called a fool by these fools all the time...they are the ones with the toliet paper stuck to their shoe.
mrplunkey
New member
I know not all atheists are like this...like you for example... but these "new atheists" belong to a tempting new religion that puffs up the ego. They get to wear the label of intelligent without having to actually be intelligent. They get to wear the label of rational and logical while acting irrational and being illogical. Sure it is at the expense of tolerance, intellectual honestly, healthy introspection, and truth but who could turn that down? "My religion is science and logic"...lmfao
Dawkins is a genius. There was a huge market out there for these poor souls searching for meaning. Manipulate their ego by making them feel smart, give them a book, give them meaning by telling them they should attack religion because it is a virus...gather your disciples (the rest of the four horsemen) and get rich along the way!
Well said!
And yes, Dawkins is a genius. He has successfully sold religion to people who supposedly hate religion. Only Barry could do better than that.
The southpark guys even explore it on a two-part episode. I believe the name of it was "Go God Go".
javaguru
Banned
lol @ clutter being one or two threads that stay there by being bumped by yourself and others.
That's the great thing about the internet forums....I can choose to not click on a thread and even if I click on a thread by accident I can still avoid it by not reading it or watching the youtube; I'm giving you two chances to voluntarily engage the material. I avoid about 99% of threads on EF because I choose to NOT click on them.
So, I'll ask you...who is the "real troll"...the person that posts a thread or the person that can't help but respond to a thread they consider a "troll" tread and makes it thread of the week because they choose to post in it over and over?
Back in usenet days...circa 1995 it was always a sticky to "not feed the trolls" but human nature is what it is.... they were guaranteed to be a popular thread.
javaguru
Banned
I enjoy going to church with my mother; I have more fond memories of summer bible camp than I do of shopping with my girlfriends and ex-wife but I was raised Baptist and didn't have to worry about being raped by a priest....we had female summer bible camp teachers.
javaguru
Banned
I know not all atheists are like this...like you for example... but these "new atheists" belong to a tempting new religion that puffs up the ego. They get to wear the label of intelligent without having to actually be intelligent. They get to wear the label of rational and logical while acting irrational and being illogical. Sure it is at the expense of tolerance, intellectual honestly, healthy introspection, and truth but who could turn that down? "My religion is science and logic"...lmfao
Dawkins is a genius. There was a huge market out there for these poor souls searching for meaning. Manipulate their ego by making them feel smart, give them a book, give them meaning by telling them they should attack religion because it is a virus...gather your disciples (the rest of the four horsemen) and get rich along the way!
