JGS said:
I still check the religion thread but if it's not in the first few pages I assume it's died out until another time.
I personally feel there is more than enough evidence to suggest there is a God but it really just boils down to odds. I do not think it is possible and never will be possible for life to come about without creation being some part of it. This doesn't have much to do with evolution and entirely to do with life starting or evolving between kinds which there is no proof beyond pictures and essays.
Although any analogy to tie this together gets shot down, it really is as simple as it's more likely for complex things to start out created and then go from there.
Proof is all it would take. I'm very open minded and my faith is strong until it is disproven and then I'm up for change. The proof can come in two ways.
1. Proof of a large conspiracy on the part of writing the Bible. Accusations fly but they tend to be on the basis of dismissing chunks of it and not on actually disproving it. A conspiracy in the Bible would need to cover centuries of deception, proof od non-existence, and verification that there were indeed different writers. This would involve complicity across at least 2 different religions and potentially millions of people even before leaving the 1st century.
2. Time travel since that's really the only way to know that life started with a bang or with the mysterious super cell that defied cell theory to start everything.
Otherwise, I don't think I will ever get out of a natural disposition to believe in something bigger than me. It doesn't necessarily have to be God I guess, but even if it were Zeus or Buddha or anything else, it still lends to the idea that creation was the key. I personally feel that the pieces of the puzzle fit better in Christian Doctrine.
I suppose if scientists discovered the start of life with no time travel involved that would be a start too. Lab work does not count. It's impressive, but far from proof.
No, I don't think this. Sin is pretty much genetic. The standard for eternal life requires perfection, otherwise there's nothing special about perfection itself. Humanity is trapped by sin right now, but Jesus is the reason we aren't held captive to it forever.
I don't know since the Bible doesn't concern itself with it. I personally believe it's both. Evolution can occur simply by changes in environment so, assuming the earth's been arond for billions of years, science has verified time and again that massive changes can occur in very brief periods of time. However, I also think that God can control the course of things or find ways to improve/change the design which would lead to variety. It's hard for us to imagine a million different species, I don't think it's that tough for a person identified as The Creator who is all-knowing.
This & the Trinity is where I diverge from most Christians. I do not believe in the slightest in Hell as a place of fiery torment for all eternity. Don't buy it. Further, there's no way I could really worship a God that endorsed that as a fitting punishment. I would try to fake it though!
Although the Bible discusses Hell, it doesn't discussing the way it is classically known. The few verses that discussed eternal torment were purely in parable/sign form and were pretty obviously explaining something else as symbolic language typically does. The Bible consistently discusses the wages sin pays = death and i believe that.
Hell is generally tied to death and the grave which is why faithful men like Job & Jesus are mentioned in relation to it. Job was preferring to be burned forever in torment to his plight? I doubt it. Why would Jesus have to go there even for a short time?
Thanks for the response JGS, I might put the responses and follow up questions back into number designations so it's easier to see what is in response to particular question. I also want you to know that I will do my best not to be offensive. The reason I say this is because I seem to reach a point where the responder feels like I'm attacking God and thus attacking someone really dear to them, and the conversation shuts down. Just let me know if I step over the line (in terms of what you feel comfortable with).
1: So I might make a couple of points here. The first sentence begins with the acknowledgement that there is evidence (other than the odds thing), is it evidence that I as an Atheist could look at and acknowledge as evidence as well? In terms of odds, I hold the the opposite view and thus this argument would be hard to class as evidence in any sense. I think the odds of an omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent creator are far lower the life arising from natural, observable processes.
In terms life of starting (Abiogenesis) the most intellectually honest thing for me to say is, we don't know how it started... Now in saying that, there is work by scientists that seems to be on the path that leads to Abiogenesis naturally. The formation of organic amino acids, often described as "the building blocks of life", from inorganic chemicals is an interesting scientific model but we just don't currently know the actual first formation of 'life'.
Now you seemed to be implying that we haven't seen/observed Speciation other than within 'pictures or essays'. The amount of evidence that demonstrates the splitting and formation of new species is overwhelming and as such, is classed as part of the evolutionary theory (ie, it's a fact). I can provide some basic examples if you like.
2: Fantastic response, and all anyone can ask of someone. I'm the same, my position would change overnight if there was proof (based on evidence) of God's existence. So why do we hold completely opposing viewpoints? For me it's about the burden of proof (yes, monotonous I know lol), and the burden seems to lie with those making a claim, any claim, in this case the existence of God as described in the bible. You have in essence committed a logical fallacy, in this case 'an argument from ignorance' (do not take offence to this, I'm not calling you ignorant, I am pointing out the logical fallacy in your argument), as you are holding a specific belief as true because we don't know that it isn't true.
In terms of what would count as proof against God's existence, they are interesting pieces of evidence that you require. The biblical conspiracy thing seems strange to me, what sort of cover up would do it for you?
If scientists are able to recreate the process of Abiogenesis in a lab, that wouldn't be good enough for you? Where else are they going to do it? If scientists were able to recreate the conditions of the early earth and provide the raw inorganic chemicals that were present, and then life arose from those elements...That would be proof, undeniable evidence for the origin of life on earth. Can you explain why that wouldn't be the case?
3: I don't understand this response, sorry JGS. So 'Sin' is genetic, what does that mean?
Is original sin, the apparent sin that we inherited from Adam/Eve real? If so, how does the death of a man abolish those sins?
4: Not much else to add here, fair enough response.
5: WOW, was not expecting that response, you're the first Christian I have talked to who hasn't described Hell as a place of torment and that non-believers will burn in that place, I'm glad to hear that you have the moral compass to dismiss a being that would do that to your fellow humans if it were true.
This also opens up more questions for me. Where do non-believers (such as myself) go when we die? Where do believers go? So if there is no Hell, is its dichotomy (Heaven) not a place either?
There we go, hopefully you find something to chew on. I would also really enjoy some questions from you as well JGS, is there anything that you would like to know about my beliefs? Hopefully we can continue this interesting conversation.
