Posts by Viviane

182

The Case for Theism

by FusionTheism in

"theism" here means "belief in a god" or "the worldview that an intelligent designer created the universe and life.

" ("god" here means a being with a mind who initiated and/or wound-up the universe, and designed life on earth)the most common claim that i see atheists making on twitter, is that "no evidence" exists in support of belief in a god.this post will remove any excuse atheists have for claiming "no evidence exists" in support of an initiator.

atheists can still reject this evidence as "weak," but they cannot truthfully say it does not exist.now, it is true that we do not have "observable, repeatable, falsifiable, empirical, scientific" evidence conclusively proving that an initiator exists, but we do have many lines of philisophical, experiential, and logical evidence.and... here... we... go:1:) many leading scientists, including stephen hawking, say that the space-time-matter universe had a beginning at the singularity/big bang.

Viviane

10:) The Bible accurately declared advanced scientific knowledge, such as:
(a): The earth is suspended in empty space. (Job 26:7)
(b): The earth is spherical. (Isaiah 40:22)
(c): There are "springs" on the ocean floor. (Job 38:16; Genesis 7:11; Proverbs 8:28)
(d): You must quarantine sick people. (Leviticus 13:4, 46; Leviticus 14:8; Numbers 5:2; 2 Kings 15:5)

The earth is not suspended in space, the earth is not spherical, Job says nothing about the ocean floor, there are no fountains on the ocean floor and quarantining sick people is just common sense, not special divine knowledge.

None of your claims are true, therefore any conclusion based on them is useless.

182

The Case for Theism

by FusionTheism in

"theism" here means "belief in a god" or "the worldview that an intelligent designer created the universe and life.

" ("god" here means a being with a mind who initiated and/or wound-up the universe, and designed life on earth)the most common claim that i see atheists making on twitter, is that "no evidence" exists in support of belief in a god.this post will remove any excuse atheists have for claiming "no evidence exists" in support of an initiator.

atheists can still reject this evidence as "weak," but they cannot truthfully say it does not exist.now, it is true that we do not have "observable, repeatable, falsifiable, empirical, scientific" evidence conclusively proving that an initiator exists, but we do have many lines of philisophical, experiential, and logical evidence.and... here... we... go:1:) many leading scientists, including stephen hawking, say that the space-time-matter universe had a beginning at the singularity/big bang.

Viviane

Atheists admit that the basis for accepting logic, math, and moral obligations, is the fact that a large majority of human beings experience these things and intuitively know them to be true. A majority of humans have also experienced a "Higher Power" or spiritual things, and the answer to silent prayers.

You don't speak for atheists, they don't have a collective admission of anything and you haven't spoken nor know what the majority of humans have experienced.

Your claims are invalid, therefore any conclusion based on those claims is also invalid.

182

The Case for Theism

by FusionTheism in

"theism" here means "belief in a god" or "the worldview that an intelligent designer created the universe and life.

" ("god" here means a being with a mind who initiated and/or wound-up the universe, and designed life on earth)the most common claim that i see atheists making on twitter, is that "no evidence" exists in support of belief in a god.this post will remove any excuse atheists have for claiming "no evidence exists" in support of an initiator.

atheists can still reject this evidence as "weak," but they cannot truthfully say it does not exist.now, it is true that we do not have "observable, repeatable, falsifiable, empirical, scientific" evidence conclusively proving that an initiator exists, but we do have many lines of philisophical, experiential, and logical evidence.and... here... we... go:1:) many leading scientists, including stephen hawking, say that the space-time-matter universe had a beginning at the singularity/big bang.

Viviane

The Bible accurately predicted, with precise detail, centuries in advance, the following:

The Bible never prophesied one thing with specific dates and details that came true. Your premise is wrong, therefore any conclusion based on it is invalid.

182

The Case for Theism

by FusionTheism in

"theism" here means "belief in a god" or "the worldview that an intelligent designer created the universe and life.

" ("god" here means a being with a mind who initiated and/or wound-up the universe, and designed life on earth)the most common claim that i see atheists making on twitter, is that "no evidence" exists in support of belief in a god.this post will remove any excuse atheists have for claiming "no evidence exists" in support of an initiator.

atheists can still reject this evidence as "weak," but they cannot truthfully say it does not exist.now, it is true that we do not have "observable, repeatable, falsifiable, empirical, scientific" evidence conclusively proving that an initiator exists, but we do have many lines of philisophical, experiential, and logical evidence.and... here... we... go:1:) many leading scientists, including stephen hawking, say that the space-time-matter universe had a beginning at the singularity/big bang.

Viviane

Viviane, Yes, Stephen Hawking does say those things. They are found here on his own webpage:http://www.hawking.org.uk/the-beginning-of-time.html

No, he didn't. Read the paper and know what the words in it mean when you read it.

Your first premise is wrong, therefore any conclusion you make based on it is wrong.

182

The Case for Theism

by FusionTheism in

"theism" here means "belief in a god" or "the worldview that an intelligent designer created the universe and life.

" ("god" here means a being with a mind who initiated and/or wound-up the universe, and designed life on earth)the most common claim that i see atheists making on twitter, is that "no evidence" exists in support of belief in a god.this post will remove any excuse atheists have for claiming "no evidence exists" in support of an initiator.

atheists can still reject this evidence as "weak," but they cannot truthfully say it does not exist.now, it is true that we do not have "observable, repeatable, falsifiable, empirical, scientific" evidence conclusively proving that an initiator exists, but we do have many lines of philisophical, experiential, and logical evidence.and... here... we... go:1:) many leading scientists, including stephen hawking, say that the space-time-matter universe had a beginning at the singularity/big bang.

Viviane

The existence of a "Cosmic Mathematician" (Mind beyond our universe) would explain how a universal working system of mathematics just happened to be built into the universe.

Interesting premise. Explain please, how a "Cosmic Mathematician" came into existence to develop these mathematics.

182

The Case for Theism

by FusionTheism in

"theism" here means "belief in a god" or "the worldview that an intelligent designer created the universe and life.

" ("god" here means a being with a mind who initiated and/or wound-up the universe, and designed life on earth)the most common claim that i see atheists making on twitter, is that "no evidence" exists in support of belief in a god.this post will remove any excuse atheists have for claiming "no evidence exists" in support of an initiator.

atheists can still reject this evidence as "weak," but they cannot truthfully say it does not exist.now, it is true that we do not have "observable, repeatable, falsifiable, empirical, scientific" evidence conclusively proving that an initiator exists, but we do have many lines of philisophical, experiential, and logical evidence.and... here... we... go:1:) many leading scientists, including stephen hawking, say that the space-time-matter universe had a beginning at the singularity/big bang.

Viviane

Science has never observed life naturally developing from non-life on its own, therefore, the scientific position would be to assume that it did not naturally happen on its own (This points to either an Initiator/God or to extraterrestrials seeding and engineering life on earth and beginning evolution).

Science is a process and method for obtaining information about the natural word. It cannot observe anything. Since you don't know what science is or how it works, any claims you make about it are drawn from a lack of knowledge and therefore useless.

182

The Case for Theism

by FusionTheism in

"theism" here means "belief in a god" or "the worldview that an intelligent designer created the universe and life.

" ("god" here means a being with a mind who initiated and/or wound-up the universe, and designed life on earth)the most common claim that i see atheists making on twitter, is that "no evidence" exists in support of belief in a god.this post will remove any excuse atheists have for claiming "no evidence exists" in support of an initiator.

atheists can still reject this evidence as "weak," but they cannot truthfully say it does not exist.now, it is true that we do not have "observable, repeatable, falsifiable, empirical, scientific" evidence conclusively proving that an initiator exists, but we do have many lines of philisophical, experiential, and logical evidence.and... here... we... go:1:) many leading scientists, including stephen hawking, say that the space-time-matter universe had a beginning at the singularity/big bang.

Viviane

The universe and earth appear to be very unlikely and improbably fine-tuned to support life. Even Stephen Hawking and other leading scientists admit this.

No they don't.

Second point is wrong, any conclusion based on this is therefore also wrong.

182

The Case for Theism

by FusionTheism in

"theism" here means "belief in a god" or "the worldview that an intelligent designer created the universe and life.

" ("god" here means a being with a mind who initiated and/or wound-up the universe, and designed life on earth)the most common claim that i see atheists making on twitter, is that "no evidence" exists in support of belief in a god.this post will remove any excuse atheists have for claiming "no evidence exists" in support of an initiator.

atheists can still reject this evidence as "weak," but they cannot truthfully say it does not exist.now, it is true that we do not have "observable, repeatable, falsifiable, empirical, scientific" evidence conclusively proving that an initiator exists, but we do have many lines of philisophical, experiential, and logical evidence.and... here... we... go:1:) many leading scientists, including stephen hawking, say that the space-time-matter universe had a beginning at the singularity/big bang.

Viviane

Many leading scientists, including Stephen Hawking, say that the space-time-matter universe had a beginning at the Singularity/Big Bang. Time itself did not exist, and then it came into existence.

No they don't.

First premise is wrong, therefore anything based on this is wrong. I don't even need to read the rest of your post.

35

Do you consider this site Godly or Ungodly

by Truthexplorer in

over the years, i have seen a change in heart with the country i grew up in and the general view of what they perceive as how everyone should view things in relation to morality.

a strictly religious country for centuries now forever changed within a short number of years.

i have also seen the viewpoint on this site gradually change in many ways.

Viviane

For me, Gods standards NEVER change. I fully believe that Gods word was inspired and that his moral standards are for our (mankind's) benefit....absolutely. Wake up people The world is upside down in their thinking.

So you're advocating for slavery, genocide, ethnic cleansing, women having to marry their rapist, women being property, eating shrimp and bacon being a crime, etc.?

Goodbye everyone. This is my very last post.

Hey, maybe miracles do happen.

86

What are you gonna do when the existence of god is disproved?

by Doltologist in

in 1897, j.j. thomson discovered the electron.

this was the first constituent part of the atom which, for 2,000 years, was thought to be indivisible.

today, we know of 18 elemental particles following the recent discovery of the higgs boson, the so-called god particle.. back in 1897, most people believed in god because there weren't even any theories as to how the universe came into being.

Viviane

There is no end to the physical universe it goes on forever. It must go on forever because if it had an end there would be something beyond that end and mankind would do all he could to get beyond that something.

So, you're very first sentence uses, at best, specious and speculative reasoning that relies upon conjecture and opinion. Any reasoning based that is equally useless.