Does God Exist?

[Mavorpen]

[...] while science may explain many things, the sheer improbability of these events happening at once leads to the necessity of a higher being.

And what, exactly, is this probability? And how was it reached given that we know of only the existence of one universe, making the probability exactly 1?

[The Holy Zirid Caliphate]

So since people have also "converted" to atheism, it means we're right? What about people who convert to Islam? Are they right because they think Islam is the most logical or emotionally appealing choice?

I was making that case to combat the claim that Christians are a group of people who blindly follow their faith with no grounding in science or real philosophical reason.

[Neutraligon]

So since people have also "converted" to atheism, it means we're right? What about people who convert to Islam? Are they right because they think Islam is the most logical or emotionally appealing choice?

I was making that case to combat the claim that Christians are a group of people who blindly follow their faith with no grounding in science or real philosophical reason.

That is not generally how most Christians are held, especially since many Christians are scientists. The problem is that many Christians do nt apply the same rigor they do to science to their belief in god.

[The Holy Zirid Caliphate]

While that may be a common approach, particularly by those who are born into a Christian family, however, I think you are failing to examine the whole group. Take examples like J.R.R. Tolkein, C.S. Lewis, Lee Stroble, Francis S. Collins, Allan R. Sandage, and many others who have converted due to their examination of science and philosophy from an either Atheistic or Agnostic standpoint and have come to the conclusion that, while science may explain many things, the sheer improbability of these events happening at once leads to the necessity of a higher being. Upon reaching that conclusion an examination of various philosophies led them to logically conclude that Christianity is the most logical belief system out there and so they converted.

So they figured out that the universe needs a first causal agent (rather a heated topic of debate) and decided promptly that therefore this agent cares about them and sacrificed his son barbarically in the Middle East, not to mention ignoring much of the world til long after his son's death.

Forgive me if I'm not impressed by their reasoning, even if Tolkein was an excellent fantasy writer, I loved the Screwtape Letters, and Collins headed the sequencing of the genome.

You presented three major points, however, they interest me in reverse order in their complexity and likelyhood of a conclusion. To begin with then, what do you mean in saying that God ignored the world until long after Christ's death?

[Highfort]

You presented three major points, however, they interest me in reverse order in their complexity and likelyhood of a conclusion. To begin with then, what do you mean in saying that God ignored the world until long after Christ's death?

To borrow an argument from Mr. Hitchens, God appears to Middle Eastern tribes that are still consolidating their power but totally ignores the contemporary civilizations of the time. Babylon gets no response, neither does Egypt (until they get shat on by Yahweh), China is totally ignored, the Native American tribes seem to get no response, and etc.

Seems as though he localizes all his miracles and works to one small patch of desert whilst totally ignoring other civilizations who already happen to have gods. How convenient.

[Securitan]

You presented three major points, however, they interest me in reverse order in their complexity and likelyhood of a conclusion. To begin with then, what do you mean in saying that God ignored the world until long after Christ's death?

To borrow an argument from Mr. Hitchens, God appears to Middle Eastern tribes that are still consolidating their power but totally ignores the contemporary civilizations of the time. Babylon gets no response, neither does Egypt (until they get shat on by Yahweh), China is totally ignored, the Native American tribes seem to get no response, and etc.

Seems as though he localizes all his miracles and works to one small patch of desert whilst totally ignoring other civilizations who already happen to have gods. How convenient.

Babylon gets destroyed. Anyway, in regards to other religions and faiths across the globe - they DID receive visions and messages from God, but they were misinterpreted and God was not portrayed correctly.

Strange how an omnipotent God happens to be terrible at communicating messages.

[The Holy Zirid Caliphate]

[...] while science may explain many things, the sheer improbability of these events happening at once leads to the necessity of a higher being.

And what, exactly, is this probability? And how was it reached given that we know of only the existence of one universe, making the probability exactly 1?

If you are an atheistic evolutionist, the improbability of life forming in a single cell being 1 in 10*40,000, the improbability of the earth existing in a habitable zone with the proper amounts of of water, oxygen, nitrogen, and gravity to support life, the improbability of this taking place in the very short amount of time provided before the Milky Way ceases to be a spiral galaxy, and the improbability of life evolving into more complex forms, requiring an increase in information in the genetic code, a phenomenon that would break our understanding of biology if it occurred once, let alone trillions of times. The problem with the multiverse theory is that, while it solves evolutionary improbability, there is no scientific theory as to how these universes come into effect, and if they do, the theory is made void as it is unobservable and no experiment could take place to test the theory, that is, if the theory itself is science. This would not be a problem except that the theory is presented as a scientific argument with very little actual science in it.

[Sun Wukong]

To borrow an argument from Mr. Hitchens, God appears to Middle Eastern tribes that are still consolidating their power but totally ignores the contemporary civilizations of the time. Babylon gets no response, neither does Egypt (until they get shat on by Yahweh), China is totally ignored, the Native American tribes seem to get no response, and etc.

Seems as though he localizes all his miracles and works to one small patch of desert whilst totally ignoring other civilizations who already happen to have gods. How convenient.

Babylon gets destroyed. Anyway, in regards to other religions and faiths across the globe - they DID receive visions and messages from God, but they were misinterpreted and God was not portrayed correctly.

Strange how an omnipotent God happens to be terrible at communicating messages.

Babylon gets essentially relocated by Seleucids. Not really much to do with Gods.

[Highfort]

Babylon gets destroyed. Anyway, in regards to other religions and faiths across the globe - they DID receive visions and messages from God, but they were misinterpreted and God was not portrayed correctly.

Strange how an omnipotent God happens to be terrible at communicating messages.

My apologies, I forgot that the Hittites put an end to the Babylonians.

As for the other nations around the globe receiving the visions and messages from God, that's very unimpressive. I mean if God put that on a resume I would send him packing. You have an omnipotent being that claims to have all knowledge and power and then proceeds to botch-up communications with various tribes and civilizations, resulting in bloody wars over whose interpretation of God is correct.

You also have him communicating things that are barbaric and indicative of a primitive, not an advanced, being. Things of this nature include laws for slavery, laws against homosexuality, commandments to exterminate other tribes, and so forth. No, I'm sorry, that's very unimpressive for a deity claiming to be all-knowing and almighty.

[Mavorpen]

If you are an atheistic evolutionist, the improbability of life forming in a single cell being 1 in 10*40,000,

How was this figure reached? Really. Because it seems to me you're just pulling this number of out of thin air, especially since it makes no sense. Life didn't begin with a single cell. Free floating RNA predates cellular life. So the probability of life "forming in a single cell" is downright gibberish.

the improbability of the earth existing in a habitable zone with the proper amounts of of water, oxygen, nitrogen, and gravity to support life, the improbability of this taking place in the very short amount of time provided before the Milky Way ceases to be a spiral galaxy, and the improbability of life evolving into more complex forms, requiring an increase in information in the genetic code, a phenomenon that would break our understanding of biology if it occurred once, let alone trillions of times.

So basically there is no legitimate number of probability. You just SAY it's a small probability because, well, it's the only way God makes sense otherwise.

In other words, your belief is based on something with utterly no substantiation. Let me know when you get an actual probability that wasn't pulled out of someone's ass.

The problem with the multiverse theory is that, while it solves evolutionary improbability,

There is no such improbability in the first place.

there is no scientific theory as to how these universes come into effect,

And?

and if they do, the theory is made void as it is unobservable and no experiment could take place to test the theory,

No, sorry, but that's not how science works. In science, when you have a theory, you form a model based around it to describe the phenomenon being studied in a simplified manner. In these models, you make assumptions. If the assumptions turn out to not conform to new observations, you have two options: change the theory, or abandon it altogether. Being not able to directly measure different universes doesn't make it "void." It just means you need to make a theory/model that makes falsifiable predictions.

that is, if the theory itself is science. This would not be a problem except that the theory is presented as a scientific argument with very little actual science in it.

Stop pretending like you actually understand science.

[Securitan]

And what, exactly, is this probability? And how was it reached given that we know of only the existence of one universe, making the probability exactly 1?

If you are an atheistic evolutionist, the improbability of life forming in a single cell being 1 in 10*40,000, the improbability of the earth existing in a habitable zone with the proper amounts of of water, oxygen, nitrogen, and gravity to support life, the improbability of this taking place in the very short amount of time provided before the Milky Way ceases to be a spiral galaxy, and the improbability of life evolving into more complex forms, requiring an increase in information in the genetic code, a phenomenon that would break our understanding of biology if it occurred once, let alone trillions of times. The problem with the multiverse theory is that, while it solves evolutionary improbability, there is no scientific theory as to how these universes come into effect, and if they do, the theory is made void as it is unobservable and no experiment could take place to test the theory, that is, if the theory itself is science. This would not be a problem except that the theory is presented as a scientific argument with very little actual science in it.

First of all, if you are not an atheist that believes in evolution, what the hell do you believe in? I think you mean single cellular life forming, or abiogenesis - which isn't single cellular life forming in the first place. Our understanding of biology is not broken now, and evolution exists. No one is advocating for the multiverse here, that is pure speculation. I also don't see how that would decrease the chances of evolutionary probability, which I assume means the chances of an organism adapting to its environment. But wait, that also doesn't make sense.

Wow. You presented no sources and half the claims you made don't make sense.

[Securitan]

Babylon gets destroyed. Anyway, in regards to other religions and faiths across the globe - they DID receive visions and messages from God, but they were misinterpreted and God was not portrayed correctly.

Strange how an omnipotent God happens to be terrible at communicating messages.

Babylon gets essentially relocated by Seleucids. Not really much to do with Gods.

Right, but it is claimed to be done by God in the Bible, which means that Babylon did get some attention from God.

[Highfort]

Babylon gets essentially relocated by Seleucids. Not really much to do with Gods.

Right, but it is claimed to be done by God in the Bible, which means that Babylon did get some attention from God.

So not only is he a genocidal maniac but he's not even competent. He has to take credit for other people's actions.

[Securitan]

Right, but it is claimed to be done by God in the Bible, which means that Babylon did get some attention from God.

So not only is he a genocidal maniac but he's not even competent. He has to take credit for other people's actions.

Or people blame their genocidal actions on him.

[The Holy Zirid Caliphate]

You presented three major points, however, they interest me in reverse order in their complexity and likelyhood of a conclusion. To begin with then, what do you mean in saying that God ignored the world until long after Christ's death?

To borrow an argument from Mr. Hitchens, God appears to Middle Eastern tribes that are still consolidating their power but totally ignores the contemporary civilizations of the time. Babylon gets no response, neither does Egypt (until they get shat on by Yahweh), China is totally ignored, the Native American tribes seem to get no response, and etc.

Seems as though he localizes all his miracles and works to one small patch of desert whilst totally ignoring other civilizations who already happen to have gods. How convenient.

Keep in mind however, that the Israelites were more than happy to adopt pseudo-pagan worship based around Baal. In regard to contemporary civilizations I agree with the first half of the comment following this one, but, again, God took the Israelites and made them into one of the most powerful civilizations in the time, I fail to see the fault in choosing to exalt an initially minor tribe rather than to choose to work through Egypt or China instead. If that does not satisfy your question, I apologize, it is late and I will retire for the night, I look forward to continuing this discussion tomorrow.

[Neutraligon]

And what, exactly, is this probability? And how was it reached given that we know of only the existence of one universe, making the probability exactly 1?

If you are an atheistic evolutionist, the improbability of life forming in a single cell being 1 in 10*40,000, the improbability of the earth existing in a habitable zone with the proper amounts of of water, oxygen, nitrogen, and gravity to support life, the improbability of this taking place in the very short amount of time provided before the Milky Way ceases to be a spiral galaxy, and the improbability of life evolving into more complex forms, requiring an increase in information in the genetic code, a phenomenon that would break our understanding of biology if it occurred once, let alone trillions of times. The problem with the multiverse theory is that, while it solves evolutionary improbability, there is no scientific theory as to how these universes come into effect, and if they do, the theory is made void as it is unobservable and no experiment could take place to test the theory, that is, if the theory itself is science. This would not be a problem except that the theory is presented as a scientific argument with very little actual science in it.

How did the come by that number. What sort of things were included? Why does it matter where life occurs? Why does it matter that it is on Earth and not on some other habitable planet? Also yu have it mixed up, life occurred here because it was possible not the other way around given that there where in essence millions, billions of chemical experiments occurring on a planet at any one point, life is all but guaranteed provided there is a location where it can happen. If it where not possible here on earth, the simple fact is we would not be here. While evolution certainly takes a good deal of time, the time it takes is minuscule in comparison to time on the galactic level. Why is life evolving so unlikely again? Define information. That is an argument from ignorance, the correct response to lacking a scientific explanation is not god did it, but rather we do not know yet, until we can find a way of testing or observing or making predictions, the answer will remain we do not know.

[Highfort]

So not only is he a genocidal maniac but he's not even competent. He has to take credit for other people's actions.

Or people blame their genocidal actions on him.

Also a possibility, although if its in a holy book attributed to him then I assume he's taking credit. Unless he's got nothing to do with the holy books in which case there is some serious libel going on.

[Neutraligon]

Or people blame their genocidal actions on him.

Also a possibility, although if its in a holy book attributed to him then I assume he's taking credit. Unless he's got nothing to do with the holy books in which case there is some serious libel going on.

There is reason I claim biblical literalists worship the book and not the god.

[Mavorpen]

If you are an atheistic evolutionist, the improbability of life forming in a single cell being 1 in 10*40,000, the improbability of the earth existing in a habitable zone with the proper amounts of of water, oxygen, nitrogen, and gravity to support life, the improbability of this taking place in the very short amount of time provided before the Milky Way ceases to be a spiral galaxy, and the improbability of life evolving into more complex forms, requiring an increase in information in the genetic code, a phenomenon that would break our understanding of biology if it occurred once, let alone trillions of times. The problem with the multiverse theory is that, while it solves evolutionary improbability, there is no scientific theory as to how these universes come into effect, and if they do, the theory is made void as it is unobservable and no experiment could take place to test the theory, that is, if the theory itself is science. This would not be a problem except that the theory is presented as a scientific argument with very little actual science in it.

How did the come by that number. What sort of things were included? Why does it matter where life occurs? Why does it matter that it is on Earth and not on some other habitable planet? Also yu have it mixed up, life occurred here because it was possible not the other way around given that there where in essence millions, billions of chemical experiments occurring on a planet at any one point, life is all but guaranteed provided there is a location where it can happen. If it where not possible here on earth, the simple fact is we would not be here. While evolution certainly takes a good deal of time, the time it takes is minuscule in comparison to time on the galactic level. Why is life evolving so unlikely again? Define information. That is an argument from ignorance, the correct response to lacking a scientific explanation is not god did it, but rather we do not know yet, until we can find a way of testing or observing or making predictions, the answer will remain we do not know.

The hilarious part, of course, is that the number he's citing comes from someone who had no formal training in biology and doesn't actually support the conclusion he's reached.

Fred Hoyle made a whole host of unfounded and silly assumptions in order to try to substantiate not that God existed (funny how theists use a number obtained by an anti-theist), but, rather to support his idea that life was of extraterrestrial origin and that organisms of extraterrestrial origin helped facilitate early evolution.

[Securitan]

To borrow an argument from Mr. Hitchens, God appears to Middle Eastern tribes that are still consolidating their power but totally ignores the contemporary civilizations of the time. Babylon gets no response, neither does Egypt (until they get shat on by Yahweh), China is totally ignored, the Native American tribes seem to get no response, and etc.

Seems as though he localizes all his miracles and works to one small patch of desert whilst totally ignoring other civilizations who already happen to have gods. How convenient.

Keep in mind however, that the Israelites were more than happy to adopt pseudo-pagan worship based around Baal. In regard to contemporary civilizations I agree with the first half of the comment following this one, but, again, God took the Israelites and made them into one of the most powerful civilizations in the time, I fail to see the fault in choosing to exalt an initially minor tribe rather than to choose to work through Egypt or China instead. If that does not satisfy your question, I apologize, it is late and I will retire for the night, I look forward to continuing this discussion tomorrow.

First of all, the Canaanites that worshipped Baal were a monolatristic group. So no, not pseudo-pagan. Second, there is no evidence that 2.5 million Israelites broke out of slavery in Egypt and walked around murdering people and kings forty years after the fact*. In fact, Exodus is considered untrue or massive embellishment, even to most serious theologians**. The point he was trying to make was not why God only chose to work with the Israelites - it was why the hell God wouldn't tell everyone around the world about his chosen people. It would have certainly made Judaism the most wide reaching religion of all time. But no, he has to go at the pace of humans - strange.

Now for something semi-unrelated. Did you ever notice that God never tries to convert people? He didn't try to convert the people of Sodom, or the people or Babylon, or the Baal worshippers. What did he do instead? He fucking slaughtered them. He shows an uncanny amount of human limitation here, as I am sure humans would not have been able to convert people devoted to other faiths. Instant death is seen as the ultimate solution, all throughout the Old Testament. I am curious for a Chrisitian response and explanation for God's human tendencies.

* This is actually seen in the Bible, where 800,000 men, not including women and children, depart Egypt in their exodus. Later, a common theme is for the Israelites to stumble upon an innocent kingdom or two and take it upon themselves to burn, loot, and rape their lands.
**Here.

[Russels Orbiting Teapot]

Do you want arguments based on what sets Christianity apart from the other world views or a general proof of God leading to Christianity?

Assuming that I were to accept the god claim as a logical necessity, show me what makes Christianity an accurate description of this god's properties.

Why should I believe that any of it is true?

[Risottia]

There was no Big Bang. The universe has always been here, no beginning and no end.

How do you justify the redshift of the far galaxies and the background radiation then?

Hello?

[Knockturn Alley]

With all due respect to Christians, the number of inconsistencies in the Bible is what prompted a lot of people to discard the idea in the first place, which allowed space for atheistic, agnostic and nihilistic arguments to take place.

Plus with technology ever increasing, the relevance of a higher being is fast decreasing, due to the fact that most people have what they need to be happy within their arm's reach. Also the concept of organized religion is stereotypically associated with conservatism, racism and chauvinism which causes the neutral majority (the people who hold neither theistic nor atheistic views) to detach themselves from religion.

My belief is that everyone is born atheist, that is no one is born with prior knowledge of a supernatural entity. All of that is enforced by society and can be thought of as akin to brainwash. I also believe that we should try harder to be nice people than religious people.

[The Land of Eternal Prosperity]

Plus with technology ever increasing, the relevance of a higher being is fast decreasing, due to the fact that most people have what they need to be happy within their arm's reach. Also the concept of organized religion is stereotypically associated with conservatism, racism and chauvinism which causes the neutral majority (the people who hold neither theistic nor atheistic views) to detach themselves from religion.

Racism? When?

[Ashmoria]

we don't know.

He might exist.

The Bible could be true.

We should be careful just in case...

its OK I have Mormonism as my backup religion. they believe that you get another chance after you are dead when you will be shown for sure that god exists (as they conceive of him). ill avoid hell at that time by signing on after death.