Intelligent Design Argument Fails Again

A numbnuts with a sheaf of theological diplomas is still just a numbnuts..
Jesus said:- "I thank you Father for hiding these things from the wise and learned,and for revealing them to little children"(Matt 11:25-27)

 

That conspiracy theory can easily be debunked by simple commonsense mate, namely the snooty priests and Romans were gunning for christians, so why on earth would anybody want to pass themselves off as a christian and lay themselves open to serious hassle?

 

As opposed to numbnuts who believe a book to be true on its face every though there isn't any evidence to back it up?

 

Hundreds of people throughout earth's history have had close encounters with offworld beings, and the bible binds their accounts neatly into one volume, why on earth should we disbelieve them?..

 

Do you believe in the supposed encounters that Hindus, Native Americans, Taoists, etc have had with "off world beings" and their claims about those encounters?

 

We don't actually know whether Jesus said this or not. We only know that someone claimed that Jesus said this decades after the fact. Jesus is like Socrates because we don't really know what either of them actually said. We only know what others claimed they said so our knowledge is really based upon hearsay evidence that could have been nothing more than a fabrication based upon the motives of the author.

Based upon our current understanding of the laws of physics the distances between "livable" planets is far to great to travel between. Interplanetary travel between planets capable of sustaining advanced life forms remains purely science fiction. There are no mathematical formulas that support the science fiction to my knowledge. At best microbial life could have originated within our own solar system on Mars or within a comet but not from a different solar system. The distances are far to great for that to occur and there's no evidence to date that any other advanced form of life exists or has ever existed anywhere other than Earth but statistical probability indicates that it does. It's just a very, very long ways from Earth even if it's in our own galaxy.

 

Not if you've got warp drive..
"God rides upon a swift cloud" (Isaiah 19:1)

 

What "encounters" exactly? All I know is the encounters can't have been much good because Hinduism incorporates the wretched caste system, and the redskins were still scalping palefaces well into the 1800's.
And I think Taoism is more of a philosophy than a religion.

 

Almost every religion on the planet claims to have contact with gods and spirits mutually exclusive to claims made by Christians.

Do you believe those other religions' experiences to be true? If no, is it hypocrisy or confirmation bias?

Why is it not more reasonable to refuse to believe any of those claims are correct without corroborating evidence?

 

Every claim must be examined separately. For example Mormon Joseph Smith had at least 35 wives, carried a gun and was killed in a shootout with the authorities. You can regard his claims of "visions" to be true if you like but include me out..

 

Virtually all Biblical scholars disagree with your shallow apologetic.

 

Why should anyone's claims of "visions" or "miracles" be considered at all unless there is corroborating objective evidence to support them?

 

As Jesus said- "Even if you don't believe me, believe the miracles".
And his 37 miracles blew peoples socks off because they couldn't discount the evidence of their own eyes..

 

No.

The Bible claims Jesus said that and the Bible claims he did miracles. There is zero corroborating evidence for either claim.

 

So according to you and "scholars", people decided to just sit down and "invent" christianity and get themselves arrested and jailed and executed?..

 

Please give a specific example.

 

No you haven't. The lack of evidence doesn't prove your point. Besides science has been able to speed up light up to 300 times.

- - - Updated - - -

Isn't secular indoctrination great?

 

I am not here to be your science teacher.

The fact that you apparently are not aware of the the mountains of evidence in multiple scientific disciplines that corroborate each other is telling.

Perhaps you should start with "nuclear decay" and move on from there.

 

Can you give a specific example?

No. I believe he created a mature universe. He created a fully grown man and woman, a fully grown garden, etc. He stretched out the heavens so the question isn't how did the light get from there to here. The question is how did the star get from here to there.

 

But you are in a debate which requires evidence for your side.

I am aware however each piece of evidence has been disproven.

Are you speaking of radioisotope dating?

 

I'm just trying to point out that scientific theories can be just as hard to believe as religious ones. the biggest difference is you can't teach religious tenets in public school, but you can teach junk science. If brought evidence, you'd likely refute it. Photos - photo shopped. Video - Pixel Studios. There can't exist evidence strong enough to satisfy some people. I don't know how life started, but given life's tenacity to exist I'm somehow convinced that life was not an accident. No one knows how life started, but some around here try to make themselves sound like they were witnesses. What evidence would you accept?

 

So the hundreds of extant skeletons of neolithic man are all 'frauds'. The dinosaurs didn't exist. 30,000 years old cave paintings don't exist. A mature Universe which is even now expanding.

The only thing that has been disproved is the authority of the Bible. A book which has no evidence for much of its stories, and exagerrations and contradictions which prove its unreliability.

 

Well, it's not clear to me what you are saying.

I would have thought that a "mature universe" would mean the galaxies were created where they are, without the necessity of moving them.

The issue of light comes in when people suggest a young universe. By a number of different means, we can determine the distance to other galaxies, and thus have an idea of the time it would take light to reach earth from that distance. The only counter seems to be the notion that God created photons in flight carefully organized to appear as distant objects in order to fool mankind.


The "garden" is a different thing. But, the passages concerning the garden seem deeper and richer when viewed as allegory. They form an amazingly interesting and quite accurate view of the nature of man. Simplifying it to be viewed as man breaking a law is a big mistake that ignores the allegorical meaning of the various elements and their interaction.

Plus, the idea of the tree of life dying and the tree of knowledge of good and evil dying (since they pretty clearly do not exist today) just seems like evidence that the story is allegory.

I don't see anything that is lost by considering it as allegory. Humans have communicated important knowledge by allegory over very long periods of time.

 

Being "hard to believe" is a constraint of the student, not of the truth. So, the most that can come from "hard to believe" is the need for further education of the person who is struggling.

Science doesn't propose that anything in the natural world happened by accident. That's a popular misconception.

I agree that science doesn't have a theory of abiogenesis. There ARE a number of ideas that seem to be leading toward an answer sometime in the future. So, right now science says, "I don't know". But, you can read about some pretty interesting directions of investigation.

I'm not sure what you are asking concerning evidence.

Science will NEVER have evidence of there being (or not being) a God. Science doesn't do that.

Your comment about "junk science" sounds too much like the common epithets of those who don't know jack about science. I hope that was an accident, and that you can describe your concern.

 

There is no theory on how something came from absolute nothing, yet that is the essential question of creation versus evolution. Nothing can evolve from nothingness. A person can multiple times zero an infinite number of times and the result is still always zero. No amount of random events can create something out of absolute nothingness.