God is not going to help you win your match!

[ArtOfTheCue]

Hmm. Who says we have useless body parts? Why do some blind people have eye balls? Maybe our parts are not working as they should be... Maybe humanity has introduced something into the design that has caused our bodies not work as they should?

Uh, science says? I thought you were a fan of science. The appendix is a vestigial part that held bacteria used to digest cellulose long, long ago, when the lower primates from which we evolved ate mostly leaves. It serves no functional role in the modern human digestive system - it's obsolete.

So let me repeat the question: if we were created by an all-knowing intelligent creator, why does the design include obsolete parts that could kill us? The only possible answers I can see are either 1) we weren't, or 2) this god was far from all-knowing, and in fact, was a pretty crappy designer. It seems to me that the first explanation is much more realistic.

 

[ArtOfTheCue]

However, come to think of it, if the second answer is correct (there is a god and he's a bumbling idiot), that would explain a whole lot, too.

 

[st_michael]

No, it doesn't. There is no evidence to say that anything started the big bang. Any claims to have knowledge of events that happened before the big bang are simply conjecture and not to be taken as fact.

There you go again... The evidence is reason... * All our experiences suggested something causes other things... * Please show me one thing that is in the Universe that was not caused by something else... *Everything in the Universe that we have been able to test and verify was caused by something else... * Because we exist here and now we know something started it... Because everything has a beginning from all of our own collective experiences we know this... * Because we know this the conclusion that something beyond our evidence was the spark... *Something that is not governed by our universal laws of cause and effect... *A causless cause...

You may say "nothing can't come from nothing, so there must be a creator." That is a false dichotomy. Nothing comes from nothing all the time, it is one of the main points of quantum physics. Of course, that is not to say for a fact that the universe is a giant quantum fluctuation because that would be as arrogant as claiming that god did it was a fact. The plain and simple answer is "We don't know."

We are not nothing. *We exist. And therefore something called us into existence. *For as you say.. Nothing begets nothing...so something begotten us... *

You don't need to prove beyond a doubt. For starters, you need just give something credible that suggests he exists. As of now, in all the thousands of years god(s) have been worshiped to, there has been none.

Why do you believe George Washington was real? * Can you give evidence of his existence? * We believe the people of our recent past walked and talked easily... But as we march down the years, centuries it becomes too easy to start doubting the trustworthy witnesses that have come to us today... * I believe the trustworthy sources about Jesus... Why would people die for a lie? *I Cannot see it happening... *Therefore I trust the sources that came through the Apostles...

No, science does not premise that the universe is ordered. It may come to that conclusion after repeat testing, but that is not assumed.

I respectfully disagree... *

We do experiments because we expect a result. *If what happens was not expected the scientist does not throw up his arms and blames chaos... *He looks for a reason... *A reason that can be repeated....

 

[st_michael]

Uh, science says? I thought you were a fan of science. The appendix is a vestigial part that held bacteria used to digest cellulose long, long ago, when the lower primates from which we evolved ate mostly leaves. It serves no functional role in the modern human digestive system - it's obsolete.

So let me repeat the question: if we were created by an all-knowing intelligent creator, why does the design include obsolete parts that could kill us? The only possible answers I can see are either 1) we weren't, or 2) this god was far from all-knowing, and in fact, was a pretty crappy designer. It seems to me that the first explanation is much more realistic.

This world has many things that "could kill us". Some from within our bodies and some from outside ourselves... As I have said... Maybe humanity introduced something in the design that has caused all these issues your are upset about? We can speculate about the appendix... Maybe it was used in our development and maybe it will be used again in our future development...

Evolution does not disprove God...

 

[Masayoshi]

There you go again... The evidence is reason... * All our experiences suggested something causes other things... * Please show me one thing that is in the Universe that was not caused by something else... *Everything in the Universe that we have been able to test and verify was caused by something else... * Because we exist here and now we know something started it... Because everything has a beginning from all of our own collective experiences we know this... * Because we know this the conclusion that something beyond our evidence was the spark... *Something that is not governed by our universal laws of cause and effect... *A causless cause...

Quantum fluctuations.

We are not nothing. *We exist. And therefore something called us into existence. *For as you say.. Nothing begets nothing...so something begotten us... *

Sorry, I made a mistake. I meant to say that you might say "something can't come from nothing," but that is not the truth. Something comes from nothing all the time. Look above.

Why do you believe George Washington was real? * Can you give evidence of his existence?

Credible documentation from multiple independent sources is good enough for historical evidence and there is no particular reason to doubt that evidence.

* We believe the people of our recent past walked and talked easily... But as we march down the years, centuries it becomes too easy to start doubting the trustworthy witnesses that have come to us today... * I believe the trustworthy sources about Jesus... Why would people die for a lie? *I Cannot see it happening... *Therefore I trust the sources that came through the Apostles...

There is only one source that refers to Jesus as you and I would recognize him, and that source claims to be the word of god, so its credibility is questionable.

I respectfully disagree... *

We do experiments because we expect a result. *If what happens was not expected the scientist does not throw up his arms and blames chaos... *He looks for a reason... *A reason that can be repeated....

Neither does he throw his arms up in the air and blame god.

Assuming things can be repeated is not the same as expecting an underlying order to everything. In fact, things that don't repeat i.e miracles, i.e. the basis for which most believe in jesus is counter to that principle.

 

[st_michael]

Quantum fluctuations.

From what I read on Quantum Fluctuations is that people have tried to describe it simplistically as a causeless cause... however it is describe more as a texture of the Vacuum and not an actual event...

My brother told me of a person who asked a question about some Electrical Engineering thing and my brother gave him a really low understanding... and he could not except his answer... so he said to him that his question to be answered properly he would need to have such and such level of education before he could even begin to understand the correct answer... I believe the Quantum Fluctuation thing is like that... I am not a scientist... so I defer to others on this subject...

 

[st_michael]

Credible documentation from multiple independent sources is good enough for historical evidence and there is no particular reason to doubt that evidence.*

There is only one source that refers to Jesus as you and I would recognize him, and that source claims to be the word of god, so its credibility is questionable.

One source? *How do you figure... *The bible is a collection of multiple sources put into one book written within the first 100 years since the advent of Christianity (New Testement).*

Christianity was here long before the Bible was completed... *We also have non Christian sources that talk bout Jesus and his followers believing in weird things... * Like Jesus was crucified and yet still lives....

Now I can understand you do not believe in the claims made... *But we have independent sources on Jesus and his followers (the 12 Apostles) that stand on there own... **

 

[Masayoshi]

One source? *How do you figure... *The bible is a collection of multiple sources put into one book written within the first 100 years since the advent of Christianity (New Testement).*

Yes, one source, as in the church who compiled and edited everything hundreds of years after the events in question supposedly appeared. Non-biblical sources are non-existent. Which is quite suspect considering the esteem and reknown he supposedly commanded.

Christianity was here long before the Bible was completed... *We also have non Christian sources that talk bout Jesus and his followers believing in weird things... * Like Jesus was crucified and yet still lives....

No, actually we don't. The main historical documentation outside of the bible used to reference Jesus were written second hand (or third or fourth, more likely) decades after Jesus supposedly died and after Christianity had hit the "mainstream". There are no contemporary first hand accounts of him and even the earliest gospels were written multiple decades after his death, by authors other than the disciples who supposedly wrote them.

Now I can understand you do not believe in the claims made... *But we have independent sources on Jesus and his followers (the 12 Apostles) that stand on there own... **

No, those are not independent sources, even if they were written as first hand accounts of Jesus (they have been shown not to have been), they all came out of the church that resulted from whatever happened in that era.

 

[st_michael]

Yes, one source, as in the church who compiled and edited everything hundreds of years after the events in question supposedly appeared. Non-biblical sources are non-existent. Which is quite suspect considering the esteem and reknown he supposedly commanded.

Ok. *For the first 300 years the Church was a hunted group... *They did not have much time to build this great conspiracy you suggest when they were just trying to survive. * The books of the Bible where letters to individual groups and they have been copied multiple times to the point it would be impossible to modify to suit one groups personal agenda...

Jesus was only in the public eye for 3 years in a small region to the great Roman empire... * He would have gone unnoticed quite easily... *It was his followers that brought notice because of their huge claims and unyielding joy in the face of death and torture.... *We have non- biblical sources of theses events... *

No, actually we don't. The main historical documentation outside of the bible used to reference Jesus were written second hand (or third or fourth, more likely) decades after Jesus supposedly died and after Christianity had hit the "mainstream". There are no contemporary first hand accounts of him and even the earliest gospels were written multiple decades after his death, by authors other than the disciples who supposedly wrote them.

Hmmm... All historical records of any note before the printing press is all second hand... *The Catholic *Church did not just copy scriptures but all the classics that you enjoy today is thanks to the Catholic Church more than likely.

 

[scsuxci]

I watched an old video tape years ago about a man, Doctor somebody(PhD), who set out to prove God did not exist. In the end he converted, and became a believer. He said the one thing he could not explain, unless what they saw was real, was the death of the Disciples. All died horrible deaths save one, John, who was exiled to an island where he wrote the book of Revelations.The bible doesn't speak much on the deaths, but had to be researched by historians.He put it kind of like this....you get 12 people together and make up a story. Now the 12 split up, and go to different parts of the world. Each of the 12 are arrested, and told that if they do not deny God they will die. Some were stoned, burned alive, crucified, killed by sword, but not one of them would deny Christ and live. They all chose to die. This goes against human nature, I mean if what they saw was not real, and believing that denying what they saw would be a fate worse than death, most if not all of them would have said "Hey man, I was just kidding!". Not one, they all chose death! Believe or don't believe, but somebody saw something!

I'm glad you wrote this. I can't remember the guys name either but remember
the story as you put it. Somebody saw something and as most people
of today would save there own hide, its the purists at heart that stuck to
what they seen and took death as the result.
For the people that would kill the believers but claim God doesn't exist,
sure sounds like people who feared and still fear to this day that
something is out there they have no control over. Great Post

 

[JoeyA]

SCIENCE has proven that "religious" people live longer and happier lives. Oh that's right, "Who wants to live forever?"

That ought to give some additional life to this thread.

JoeyA

 

[GodIsNotGreat]

SCIENCE has proven that "religious" people live longer and happier lives.

JoeyA

"The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality of happiness, and by no means a necessity of life.”


― George Bernard Shaw, Androcles and the Lion

 

[JoeyA]

"The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality of happiness, and by no means a necessity of life.”


― George Bernard Shaw, Androcles and the Lion

So you think a drunken man is happier than a sober man? Most drunks drink because they are unhappy or discontented with their lives.

Oh well, each to his own.

JoeyA

 

[scsuxci]

So you think a drunken man is happier than a sober man? Most drunks drink because they are unhappy or discontented with their lives.

Oh well, each to his own.

JoeyA

I think he said that, saying that's what you meant.

 

[Rjmoncrief]

Tell me something... Why, in your opinion, do you have an appendix? I mean, if we were created by an all-knowing, all-powerful designer, why give us unnecessary parts? Especially something like an appendix that can blow up, release poison into your system, and kill you? Do you think a good engineer would design a randomly timed self destruct function into a car or an airplane?

You should learn a little about something before you say it has no purpose. The God you say doesn't exist never does anything in error, especially when it came to putting the structure of the human body together.

The following was written by one of the most highly regarded physicians on the planet.

"For years, the appendix was credited with very little physiological function. We now know, however, that the appendix serves an important role in the fetus and in young adults. Endocrine cells appear in the appendix of the human fetus at around the 11th week of development. These endocrine cells of the fetal appendix have been shown to produce various biogenic amines and peptide hormones, compounds that assist with various biological control (homeostatic) mechanisms. There had been little prior evidence of this or any other role of the appendix in animal research, because the appendix does not exist in domestic mammals.

"Among adult humans, the appendix is now thought to be involved primarily in immune functions. Lymphoid tissue begins to accumulate in the appendix shortly after birth and reaches a peak between the second and third decades of life, decreasing rapidly thereafter and practically disappearing after the age of 60. During the early years of development, however, the appendix has been shown to function as a lymphoid organ, assisting with the maturation of B lymphocytes (one variety of white blood cell) and in the production of the class of antibodies known as immunoglobulin A (IgA) antibodies. Researchers have also shown that the appendix is involved in the production of molecules that help to direct the movement of lymphocytes to various other locations in the body.

 

[Masayoshi]

You should learn a little about something before you say it has no purpose. The God you say doesn't exist never does anything in error, especially when it came to putting the structure of the human body together.

The following was written by one of the most highly regarded physicians on the planet.

"For years, the appendix was credited with very little physiological function. We now know, however, that the appendix serves an important role in the fetus and in young adults. Endocrine cells appear in the appendix of the human fetus at around the 11th week of development. These endocrine cells of the fetal appendix have been shown to produce various biogenic amines and peptide hormones, compounds that assist with various biological control (homeostatic) mechanisms. There had been little prior evidence of this or any other role of the appendix in animal research, because the appendix does not exist in domestic mammals.

"Among adult humans, the appendix is now thought to be involved primarily in immune functions. Lymphoid tissue begins to accumulate in the appendix shortly after birth and reaches a peak between the second and third decades of life, decreasing rapidly thereafter and practically disappearing after the age of 60. During the early years of development, however, the appendix has been shown to function as a lymphoid organ, assisting with the maturation of B lymphocytes (one variety of white blood cell) and in the production of the class of antibodies known as immunoglobulin A (IgA) antibodies. Researchers have also shown that the appendix is involved in the production of molecules that help to direct the movement of lymphocytes to various other locations in the body.

Not that either is a particularly convincing argument, but here you go.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_poor_design

The structure of humans' eyes (as well as those of all vertebrates). The retina is 'inside out'. The nerves and blood vessels lie on the surface of the retina instead of behind it as is the case in many invertebrate species. This arrangement forces a number of complex adaptations and gives mammals a blind spot. (See Evolution of the eye). Six muscles move the eye when three would suffice.[11][12]

If god exists, and he doesn't make mistakes, he has an odd sense of humor.

 

[Rjmoncrief]

Not that either is a particularly convincing argument, but here you go.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_poor_design



If god exists, and he doesn't make mistakes, he has an odd sense of humor.

Oh he definently has a nice sense of humor........I can vision this as his response sometimes over what some have to say about his non-existence. .:rotflmao1:

 

[itsfroze]

---------------------------

 

[bdorman]

Based on my experience, I agree that God will not help me win a match.

However, He does help my opponents. Lucky SOBs! And they even take His name in vain when they miss a shot -- what's up with that?

 

[poolhustler]

music mood today......

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sb6HJ4CkPuI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHmTqoLjlXo