Proof For The Existence Of An Intelligent Creator

[Balloon guy 158]

stubbornly refusing to separate what atheists say about your intervening, prayer answering etc. god as literally described in the bible, and the concept of a generic creator in general is just another spin ploy of yours to hide from actual debate. or maybe i'm giving you too much credit and you really are too far brainwashed to grasp that those are completely different subjects.

I know you like to spout atheism as if it is 100% true but hold on to that little baby shield of "We don't really know" whenever you get called. Then you hide behind this insane position that you are now married too that I don't even know enough to warrant your debate because I don't even understand your lofty understanding that you think evolution is true and the Bible is false. Of course you make blanket statements about the Bible that shows you really don't understand the Bible or it's historical accuracy, because you read in some athiest book that the Bible has errors and was written much later than it claims, and this shows me you just believe whatever supports your pre-conceived understanding.So my brainwashing classes haven't totally blinded me to what's going on. Maybe your brainwashing classes are more intense than mine?Of course you have at least stopped spouting Dickie Dawkins and company so you've made some progress. But I doubt it will hold.Hey now I'm the doubter

[Balloon guy 158]

If you weren't lying, probably.

Truth is when I get to heaven and if God says He used evolution, or the earth is old etc...it wouldn't matter any more to me than if my strong belief that Sarah Palin would make a better president than Barak Obama was wrong.I have great confidence that God has the answers, and He shared the relevant ones to me in His Bible.

[crowTrobot 2]

I know you like to spout atheism as if it is 100% true but hold on to that little baby shield of "We don't really know" whenever you get called.

as i just pointed out, 2 different subjects:1. for practical purposes atheists ARE 100% sure that the biblical god is a mythological figure no different than zeus or thor due to overwhelming evidence.2. the atheists here DON'T know, and don't pretend to or claim to know if there is some sort of generic creative force behind the universe.you can disagree with 1. all you want, but stop intentionally confusing those two subjects with the purpose of attacking athesists' motives. it's dishonest.

Then you hide behind this insane position that you are now married too that I don't even know enough to warrant your debate because I don't even understand your lofty understanding that you think evolution is true and the Bible is false.

i'd love to have real debate but whenever it starts, you feel intellectually cornered or something and switch to a mode where you start making mischaracterizations and attacking motives to intentionally avoid debating actual evidence. i'm not even sure if you're aware you are doing that, but it's getting really boring.

[Balloon guy 158]

i'd love to have real debate but whenever it starts, you feel intellectually cornered or something and switch to a mode where you start making mischaracterizations and attacking motives to intentionally avoid debating actual evidence. i'm not even sure if you're aware you are doing that, but it's getting really boring.

I'd love to have real debate but whenever it starts, you feel intellectually cornered or something and switch to a mode where you start making mischaracterizations and attacking motives to intentionally avoid debating actual evidence. I'm not even sure if you're aware you are doing that, but it's getting really boring.You are even stealing my 'you are getting boring' line.It's like athiest only have one mode, that of the parasite, taking from what Christians have built and pretending you would do it better, even though history has shown you guys do nothing but sit on the side lines of life and complain. It's cool, we'll keep housing the homeless, feeding the hungry, visiting the sick.You guys keep pretending you contribute, it's sad but expected now.

[Balloon guy 158]

1. for practical purposes atheists ARE 100% sure that the biblical god is a mythological figure no different than zeus or thor due to overwhelming evidence.2. the atheists here DON'T know, and don't pretend to or claim to know if there is some sort of generic creative force behind the universe.you can disagree with 1. all you want, but stop intentionally confusing those two subjects with the purpose of attacking athesists' motives. it's dishonest.

And what you can't grasp is that your position on here is 100% equal in my perspective as you take on my belief that evolution is a faith based twisting of facts to get the conclusion you want.You sit in a high chair whining that I don't get it, while you are doing the 100% exact same thing in the reverse position.Your overwhelming evidence is 90% garbage, written by people with an pre-conceived notion that the Bible is wrong, and the fact that you think it is in the same camp as the mythologies of the Greeks shows how far from rational your position is.You don't look at the other side of the issue because you already know you are right...which is what you claim on me falsely.You are so completely lost in your falsehoods that you don't even realize how confused your position is, but you pretend that it's all my side who is confused.It's why you are unable to debate and instead fall back on blanket statements with no proof and perjoratives on my beliefs.It's your MOThis is where you try to use the strawman dodge...ignoring that I have done nothing in reply that you didn't do in your post.Then you claim I don't get it.Then you grab your Dawkins book and reread your highlighted words to try to find comfort.

[vbnautilus 48]

It's cool, we'll keep brainwashing the most helpless of society under the guise of helping the homeless, feeding the hungry, visiting the sick.

I have to say, it is a good strategy. #1, you have a population that needs you and whatever you have to offer and #2 since you are doing something "good" you're not allowed to be criticized.

[vbnautilus 48]

Your overwhelming evidence is 90% garbage, written by people with an pre-conceived notion that the Bible is wrong, and the fact that you think it is in the same camp as the mythologies of the Greeks shows how far from rational your position is.

Most of the people who contributed to the theory of evolution were born as christians. Guess your brainwashing didn't hold on these guys. A few getting away is not a big deal, but its like in the Matrix, a small band of determined rebels who know the truth can really blow the whole illusion.

Then you grab your Dawkins book and reread your highlighted words to try to find comfort.

Pfft. That's ridiculous. That is not what we do. We go to the top shelf of our closet and get our secret stash of Mao and Hitler posters, and leaf through kissing and stroking them.

[Balloon guy 158]

I have to say, it is a good strategy. #1, you have a population that needs you and whatever you have to offer and #2 since you are doing something "good" you're not allowed to be criticized.

You caught us. Us crafty Christians have been helping people in need just so we can trick them into thinking like us.Sherlock Holmes would be impressed.

[Balloon guy 158]

Most of the people who contributed to the theory of evolution were born as christians. Guess your brainwashing didn't hold on these guys. A few getting away is not a big deal, but its like in the Matrix, a small band of determined rebels who know the truth can really blow the whole illusion.

Most of them are just rebelling against their parent's beliefs to try to satisfy their Oedipous complex, the rest want to cheat on their wives and not feel guilty.

Pfft. That's ridiculous. That is not what we do. We go to the top shelf of our closet and get our secret stash of Mao and Hitler posters, and leaf through kissing and stroking them.

It always goes to sexual perversion with you...Freud called and would like to see you on his couch for a couple sessions.And pppfffppppfpfppfpfpfpfffffttttttttt on the word secret

[Balloon guy 158]

Not to change the subject, but I was driving to a job after the previous exchange and was thinking that I recognize a couple areas where my beliefs are challenged, things that are the best arguments for the evolutionist side.1. The layering of fossils. The deeper fossils are often times smaller 'less developed' ones. This supports evolution better than Creationism.2. The consitancy of age related testing methods. Carbon dating, Lead/Argon etc all point to an old earth.I have answers for these, but I see the answers as weak. I do recognize that this is the areas of strength for the evolutionist, and luckily you guys have mostly ignored them for area that honestly I think are really weak on your side. I bet that will change soon.I was curious if you guys felt you had any weak spots in your belief in evolution?

[crowTrobot 2]

It's like athiest only have one mode, that of the parasite, taking from what Christians have built and pretending you would do it better, even though history has shown you guys do nothing but sit on the side lines of life and complain. It's cool, we'll keep housing the homeless, feeding the hungry, visiting the sick.You guys keep pretending you contribute, it's sad but expected now.

And what you can't grasp is that your position on here is 100% equal in my perspective as you take on my belief that evolution is a faith based twisting of facts to get the conclusion you want.You sit in a high chair whining that I don't get it, while you are doing the 100% exact same thing in the reverse position.Your overwhelming evidence is 90% garbage, written by people with an pre-conceived notion that the Bible is wrong, and the fact that you think it is in the same camp as the mythologies of the Greeks shows how far from rational your position is.You don't look at the other side of the issue because you already know you are right...which is what you claim on me falsely.You are so completely lost in your falsehoods that you don't even realize how confused your position is, but you pretend that it's all my side who is confused.It's why you are unable to debate and instead fall back on blanket statements with no proof and perjoratives on my beliefs.It's your MOThis is where you try to use the strawman dodge...ignoring that I have done nothing in reply that you didn't do in your post.Then you claim I don't get it.Then you grab your Dawkins book and reread your highlighted words to try to find comfort.

enough already. nobody did anything in this thread that should have provoked all the ranting OT attacks you are making (starting in post 33). too bad you had to derail it. the cosmological argument is the single primary reason many people are theists, kind of an interesting subject.

[crowTrobot 2]

Not to change the subject, but I was driving to a job after the previous exchange and was thinking that I recognize a couple areas where my beliefs are challenged, things that are the best arguments for the evolutionist side.1. The layering of fossils. The deeper fossils are often times smaller 'less developed' ones. This supports evolution better than Creationism.2. The consitancy of age related testing methods. Carbon dating, Lead/Argon etc all point to an old earth.I have answers for these, but I see the answers as weak. I do recognize that this is the areas of strength for the evolutionist, and luckily you guys have mostly ignored them for area that honestly I think are really weak on your side. I bet that will change soon.I was curious if you guys felt you had any weak spots in your belief in evolution?

trying to play nice now lol?

[Balloon guy 158]

trying to play nice now lol?

I was playing nice before.

[crowTrobot 2]

I was curious if you guys felt you had any weak spots in your belief in evolution?

evidence for epigenetics seems to indicate simple environmental selection of random mutations isn't the whole picture of what drives evolution, but otherwise there are no weak spots in believing that speciation occurs by descent with modification, or that the earth is billions of years old. those things are just as supported by evidence as the earth revolving around the sun is.

[Balloon guy 158]

enough already. nobody did anything in this thread that should have provoked all the ranting OT attacks you are making (starting in post 33). too bad you had to derail it. the cosmological argument is the single primary reason many people are theists, kind of an interesting subject.

A couple posts ago you were trying to explain to me how the beginning of the universe and the belief in God are two distinct things that you accused me of lumping together, and now you are saying that in fact they are related.Please try to be consistent

[crowTrobot 2]

A couple posts ago you were trying to explain to me how the beginning of the universe and the belief in God are two distinct things that you accused me of lumping together, and now you are saying that in fact they are related.

nope, i was explaining that the concept of a generic universal creator and belief specifically in the biblical god are two entirely different subjects that you keep lumping.the cosmological argument only relates to the former. it says nothing about whether the bible is true or not.

[colonel Feathers 5]

nope, i was explaining that the concept of a generic universal creator and belief specifically in the biblical god are two entirely different subjects that you keep lumping.the cosmological argument only relates to the former. it says nothing about whether the bible is true or not.

Am I correct in assuming by what you just posted that you could allow for the possibility of a universal creator, Just not the one described in scripture?

[crowTrobot 2]

Am I correct in assuming by what you just posted that you could allow for the possibility of a universal creator

yes to a point, certainly in the deistic sense. seems highly unlikely if one exists a creator would bethe slightest bit interested in humans as individuals, though, given our place in the universe.

Just not the one described in scripture?

or in any other mythology.

[colonel Feathers 5]

yes to a point, certainly in the deistic sense. seems highly unlikely if one exists a creator would bethe slightest bit interested in humans as individuals, though, given our place in the universe.or in any other mythology.

So if God exists at all, he is most likely an absentee landlord, sort of?

[Balloon guy 158]

OP:So the fact that there is existence seems to allow for the chance that there could have been a Divine cause.crow: no there are many things that have no cause that happen in the quantum levelMe: Ya but those are extremely rare and to pretend that that gives you a pass to ignore cause and effect with regard to all matter and energy in the universe is a reach.crow: you don't even understand basic math because you believe that stupid book and everyone knows it is wrong.Me: No...you don't even understand basic logic because you believe stupid authors and everyone who thinks knows they are wrong.crow: ha you are mixing things because atheist don't say that they know for a 100% certainty that there is no god.Me: ( To myself...That's what the word atheist means..but I'll let crow figure that out )crow: and all evidence and facts show us that the bible is a mythology and if I ran the libraries they wouldn't have a religion section, but i'll pretend they won't for long so i can live through another day without climbing a clock tower.Me: Whatever Skippy, you pretend you make sense.crow: i totally make sense, i can accept that there is a remote chance that there is a god and at the same time believe the proof that the bible can't be true.CF: So it is a possibility that there is a God that created the universe, just not likely that He is the God of the Bible?crow: Exactly, we can accept the remote chance that there is a god who made all matter, but we know for a fact that it's not the god of the bibleMe: So you believe that there is a cause and affect factor that allows for the argument of the existence of a God? And you admit this because you don't have enough information to formulate any other viable explanation for the existence of all matter?But you claim that even though your lack of data is so severe that you are forced to admit in the possible existence of God, you still dogmatically claim that even if there is a God; He's not the Jehovah God of the Bible.Now taking the above...who is the closed minded head in the sand refuses to believe in anything that challenges his pre-conceived worldview?I'll give you a hint: It's you

[crowTrobot 2]

OP:So the fact that there is existence seems to allow for the chance that there could have been a Divine cause.crow: no there are many things that have no cause that happen in the quantum levelMe: Ya but those are extremely rare and to pretend that that gives you a pass to ignore cause and effect with regard to all matter and energy in the universe is a reach.crow: you don't even understand basic math because you believe that stupid book and everyone knows it is wrong.Me: No...you don't even understand basic logic because you believe stupid authors and everyone who thinks knows they are wrong.crow: ha you are mixing things because atheist don't say that they know for a 100% certainty that there is no god.Me: ( To myself...That's what the word atheist means..but I'll let crow figure that out )crow: and all evidence and facts show us that the bible is a mythology and if I ran the libraries they wouldn't have a religion section, but i'll pretend they won't for long so i can live through another day without climbing a clock tower.Me: Whatever Skippy, you pretend you make sense.crow: i totally make sense, i can accept that there is a remote chance that there is a god and at the same time believe the proof that the bible can't be true.CF: So it is a possibility that there is a God that created the universe, just not likely that He is the God of the Bible?crow: Exactly, we can accept the remote chance that there is a god who made all matter, but we know for a fact that it's not the god of the bibleMe: So you believe that there is a cause and affect factor that allows for the argument of the existence of a God? And you admit this because you don't have enough information to formulate any other viable explanation for the existence of all matter?But you claim that even though your lack of data is so severe that you are forced to admit in the possible existence of God, you still dogmatically claim that even if there is a God; He's not the Jehovah God of the Bible.Now taking the above...who is the closed minded head in the sand refuses to believe in anything that challenges his pre-conceived worldview?I'll give you a hint: It's you

more intentional misrepresentations of what was said. stop being a lying a-hole. seriously you're single-handedly killing what's left of this forum.

[Balloon guy 158]

more intentional misrepresentations of what was said. stop being a lying a-hole. seriously you're single-handedly killing what's left of this forum.

Okay, you didn't say that there is a chance that there is a god who started the whole ball rolling, but you know for a fact that it's not the God of the Bible.I guess I don't read good

[crowTrobot 2]

OP:So the fact that there is existence seems to allow for the chance that there could have been a Divine cause.

spin. read the thread title. obviously the OP is claiming cause/effect and the universe's existence PROVES a creator exists, not "allows for the chance". i've said about 8 times in this thread i allow for the chance.

crow: no there are many things that have no cause that happen in the quantum levelMe: Ya but those are extremely rare and to pretend that that gives you a pass to ignore cause and effect with regard to all matter and energy in the universe is a reach.

classically uncaused quantum fluxuations may be going on at every point in space at every instant in time. in other words not so rare.i'm not ignoring cause and effect. since we don't understand how it works on a quantum scale, or how it works when time as we know it isn't involved,both of which would have been the case at the big bang, it's silly to think classical cause and effect can prove anything about the big bang since itmight not even apply.

crow: you don't even understand basic math because you believe that stupid book and everyone knows it is wrong.

pulled out of thin air.

crow: ha you are mixing things because atheist don't say that they know for a 100% certainty that there is no god.Me: ( To myself...That's what the word atheist means..but I'll let crow figure that out )

spin. in practice atheism is lack of belief in a god, not 100% certain belief there is NO god of any kind. you know that.

and if I ran the libraries they wouldn't have a religion section, but i'll pretend they won't for long so i can live through another day without climbing a clock tower.

on the contrary i'm all for universal education about all human religions.

crow: i totally make sense, i can accept that there is a remote chance that there is a god and at the same time believe the proof that the bible can't be true.CF: So it is a possibility that there is a God that created the universe, just not likely that He is the God of the Bible?crow: Exactly, we can accept the remote chance that there is a god who made all matter, but we know for a fact that it's not the god of the bible

more or less accurate.

Me: So you believe that there is a cause and affect factor that allows for the argument of the existence of a God?

false. the cause/effect thing isn't evidence either way. it's worthless.

And you admit this because you don't have enough information to formulate any other viable explanation for the existence of all matter?

BS spin. i can easily formulate viable explanations for the existence of matter other than "god did it".

But you claim that even though your lack of data is so severe that you are forced to admit in the possible existence of God, you still dogmatically claim that even if there is a God; He's not the Jehovah God of the Bible.

spin. falling back on mixing different subjects again.

Now taking the above...who is the closed minded head in the sand refuses to believe in anything that challenges his pre-conceived worldview?

BS spin. i refuse to believe in anything not supported by evidence, but otherwise i'm all for considering evidence that challenges my preconceptions.

[Balloon guy 158]

spin. read the thread title. obviously the OP is claiming cause/effect and the universe's existence PROVES a creator exists, not "allows for the chance". i've said about 8 times in this thread i allow for the chance.

Why do you allow for a chance? Because of the cause and effect angle?

classically uncaused quantum fluxuations may be going on at every point in space at every instant in time. in other words not so rare.

I know what the word may means, and I know what you are trying to say. Do you?

i'm not ignoring cause and effect. since we don't understand how it works on a quantum scale, or how it works when time as we know it isn't involved,both of which would have been the case at the big bang, it's silly to think classical cause and effect can prove anything about the big bang since it might not even apply.

It is refreshing to see how you can admit the complete lack of understanding about an action, while still being able to warp your theory into the predominate likely result.Did I say refreshing? I meant mind bottlingly insane.

pulled out of thin air.

There are these things called jokes, you might see them from time to time.

spin. in practice atheism is lack of belief in a god, not 100% certain belief there is NO god of any kind. you know that.

Definitions of words is relevant, making up definitions is insane

on the contrary i'm all for universal education about all human religions.

As long as you get to be the one to poison the discussion.

false. the cause/effect thing isn't evidence either way. it's worthless.

Worthless?...so the entire time that VB was arguing the validity of the Big Bang due to the centrally radiating motions of space bodies in our universe, he was being worthless?I knew it!

BS spin. i can easily formulate viable explanations for the existence of matter other than "god did it".

No you can make up stuff that supports your desire to remove the need for God, there is a difference.

spin. falling back on mixing different subjects again.

It's all one big subject, the less time you spend whining about how I don't follow your neat little insane package of denial the sooner you can realize that there are plenty of people who find your theory to be insane.

BS spin. i refuse to believe in anything not supported by evidence, but otherwise i'm all for considering evidence that challenges my preconceptions.

You mean like the notion that things that happen that we don't understand may have some how been related to an action that we don't really have a clue about, and this gives you enough 'evidence' to discount another theory because you don't like it? Is that what you mean while you are patting yourself on the back for 'following the evidence'?The rest of that call it stubborn denial of reality

[vbnautilus 48]

This seems like a good spot for us all to take a deep breath. One thing I'd like to throw in to the mix is some appreciation for the beauty of the scientific explanation. One of the corollaries of the Big Bang Theory is that all of the heavier atoms were created by nuclear fusion inside the core of stars or from supernovas when the stars exploded. That means that pretty much every atom in your body was once inside a star. I think religious folks often think science is the cold, heartless alternative to their divine explanations, but usually reality is much more marvelous than the stories we dream up when we don't know. I think one of the biggest "sins" of religion is to underestimate Nature.