EVIDENCE OF GOD

God fanatics constantly make the claim the wonders and complexity of the

world is proof of God.

This pretty negative proof and complexity is NOT evidence of some God. It is

only evidence that the world and Universe is complex relative to human

mental capacity, nothing more.

Why does this all powerful creator, all loving and caring intelligent

designer, create Plagues, Tsunamis, Tornadoes, Volcanic Eruptions, Floods,

Wars, Earth Quakes, Cancers and hundreds of debilitating diseases and

serious body malfunctions? There are 12,000 known diseases that affect and

punish mankind indiscriminately. Why does he permit millions of both young

and old to starve to death or die of miserable diseases? Why punish millions

of INNOCENT CHILDREN in this horrible way?

Why does this all powerful and caring god permit totally "innocent children"

to die at birth? Or worse, be born lacking eyesight, a fully developed

brain, deaf and dumb, missing limbs etc.? Why are some born idiots and

others with super intelligence? Why are some born into wealth and others

pauper poor? Why does he permit over 2,000,000 innocent children to die of

starvation every year? Why are his human creations designed to deteriorate

into a miserable and devastating old age regardless of their religious

affiliation?

God supposedly created the world like it is, to punish man for Adam and Eve's

'original sin'. Why does he also punish supposedly innocent children and

animals with thousands of diseases, birth defects, starvation and to be

eaten by other animals?

Why did this all powerful and loving creator create things like sharks,

jelly fish, octopus, lions, tigers, rhinoceros, wolves, poisonous snakes,

stinging and poisonous insects, poisonous plants etc.? Why did this caring

and benevolent god create animals (including man) that need to painfully

kill and eat other animals to survive?

World War I claimed 9,000,000 lives of people of many religious faiths.

World II indiscriminately claimed over 20,000,000 lives of people of all

ages and religious faiths, plus a vast destruction of property and more

millions maimed for life.

The recent Asian Tsunami has claimed the lives of 200,000 men, women and

children of all religious persuasions. Over 100,000 of these were totally

INNOCENT children!

There were three major epidemics of the Bubonic Plaque - in the 6th, 14th.

and 17th centuries. The death toll was over 137 million men, women and

totally innocent children.

The influenza of 1918-1919 killed at least 25 million men, women and

innocent children indiscriminately.

Diseases like malaria, AIDS, tuberculosis, etc. maim and kill millions

indiscriminately every year. More millions die of starvation and

malnutrition.

These indiscriminately afflicted the young and old, atheists and those of

all religious persuasions.

Meanwhile MAN, not god, has developed defenses and cures for hundreds of

serious diseases. Man has learned to create shelter, heat and cooling,

purify water, world wide electronic communications, power and transportation

systems including flying through the air.

Man has created a wonderful medical and drug system and improved housing and

food production. The result of MAN'S inventiveness has

DOUBLED the average life span. None of this was created by any gods.

Perhaps your loving and caring god is actually a cruel, heartless, mean and

torturing tyrant. If he treats us so cruelly during life, why do you think

he will let us enjoy peace and eternal happiness in his Heaven? And why does

he keep all this a secret by preventing communication with our dead parents,

siblings and friends? (Or this god?)

There are thousands of different religious and god beliefs but NO OJECTIVE

VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE for the actual existence of ANY of these gods. ALL god

beliefs are based on the unsubstantiated 'opinions and claims of errant men.

If there is a god that created the Universe, he is obviously not an

all-caring and benevolent god. Nor is he an "Intelligent Designer". The

objective evidence is if there is a god creator, he has NO concern about the

welfare of the creatures on Earth.

The objective evidence is that no gods created man but quite the opposite;

that man created gods!

I challenge god believers to supply ANY objective verifiable evidence that

their god actually exists except in their over active imaginations.

Who will accept the challenge???

"Bill M" <wmech@bellsouth.net> wrote in message

news:tKNpj.66207$Mu4.41907@bignews7.bellsouth.net...

> God fanatics constantly make the claim the wonders and complexity of the

> world is proof of God.

Could expect nothing more from a one-book-wonder fanatic.

>

>

>

> This pretty negative proof and complexity is NOT evidence of some God. It

is

> only evidence that the world and Universe is complex relative to human

> mental capacity, nothing more.

If I get a (complex) rash on my ass, that's proof there is a God.

>

>

>

> Why does this all powerful creator, all loving and caring intelligent

> designer, create Plagues, Tsunamis, Tornadoes, Volcanic Eruptions, Floods,

> Wars, Earth Quakes, Cancers and hundreds of debilitating diseases and

> serious body malfunctions? There are 12,000 known diseases that affect and

> punish mankind indiscriminately. Why does he permit millions of both young

> and old to starve to death or die of miserable diseases? Why punish

millions

> of INNOCENT CHILDREN in this horrible way?

He doesn't want life to be boring.

>

>

> Why does this all powerful and caring god permit totally "innocent

children"

> to die at birth? Or worse, be born lacking eyesight, a fully developed

> brain, deaf and dumb, missing limbs etc.? Why are some born idiots and

> others with super intelligence? Why are some born into wealth and others

> pauper poor? Why does he permit over 2,000,000 innocent children to die of

> starvation every year? Why are his human creations designed to deteriorate

> into a miserable and devastating old age regardless of their religious

> affiliation?

He causes all this suffering so Christians can count their blessings.

>

>

>

> God supposedly created the world like it is, to punish man for Adam and

Eve's

> 'original sin'. Why does he also punish supposedly innocent children and

> animals with thousands of diseases, birth defects, starvation and to be

> eaten by other animals?

Just the fact that a God would punish all of the human race for the act of

two people wanting knowledge, should tell a thinking person how ridiculous

that moron myth really is.

>

>

>

> Why did this all powerful and loving creator create things like sharks,

> jelly fish, octopus, lions, tigers, rhinoceros, wolves, poisonous snakes,

> stinging and poisonous insects, poisonous plants etc.? Why did this caring

> and benevolent god create animals (including man) that need to painfully

> kill and eat other animals to survive?

Bacteria, viruses, fungi, and creatures all eat dead and living things it's

only the size and complexity of the eater and the eaten that varies.

Who decides which living creature has a more deserving life?

The eater does.

>

>

>

> World War I claimed 9,000,000 lives of people of many religious faiths.

Good.

>

> World II indiscriminately claimed over 20,000,000 lives of people of all

> ages and religious faiths, plus a vast destruction of property and more

> millions maimed for life.

That might be a few million off. Maybe 30mil. ttl.

>

> The recent Asian Tsunami has claimed the lives of 200,000 men, women and

> children of all religious persuasions. Over 100,000 of these were totally

> INNOCENT children.

Good, that helps population explosion.

>

> There were three major epidemics of the Bubonic Plaque - in the 6th, 14th.

> and 17th centuries. The death toll was over 137 million men, women and

> totally innocent children.

They probably forgot to pray.

>

> The influenza of 1918-1919 killed at least 25 million men, women and

> innocent children indiscriminately.

That also helped population control.

>

>

>

> Diseases like malaria, AIDS, tuberculosis, etc. maim and kill millions

> indiscriminately every year. More millions die of starvation and

> malnutrition.

Exellent, feels so good when it stops.

>

> These indiscriminately afflicted the young and old, atheists and those of

> all religious persuasions.

Good, I'd hate to think that only the sinners were plagued, that might

signify a God.

>

>

>

> Meanwhile MAN, not god, has developed defenses and cures for hundreds of

> serious diseases. Man has learned to create shelter, heat and cooling,

> purify water, world wide electronic communications, power and

transportation

> systems including flying through the air.

>

> Man has created a wonderful medical and drug system and improved housing

and

> food production. The result of MAN'S inventiveness has

>

> DOUBLED the average life span. None of this was created by any gods.

Now God will send much worse population controls.

>

>

> Perhaps your loving and caring god is actually a cruel, heartless, mean

and

> torturing tyrant. If he treats us so cruelly during life, why do you think

> he will let us enjoy peace and eternal happiness in his Heaven? And why

does

> he keep all this a secret by preventing communication with our dead

parents,

> siblings and friends? (Or this god?)

It wouldn't be very convenient for Christians if God was expected to be

something that could be seen or heard or touched, now would it?

>

>

>

> There are thousands of different religious and god beliefs but NO OJECTIVE

> VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE for the actual existence of ANY of these gods. ALL

god

> beliefs are based on the unsubstantiated 'opinions and claims of errant

men.

As verified by the term (belief) which means (no evidence), except hearsay.

Or, to have confidence in someone's word.

>

>

>

> If there is a god that created the Universe, he is obviously not an

> all-caring and benevolent god. Nor is he an "Intelligent Designer". The

> objective evidence is if there is a god creator, he has NO concern about

the

> welfare of the creatures on Earth.

There is no God to be found, at this time.

>

>

>

> The objective evidence is that no gods created man but quite the opposite;

> that man created gods!

The only logical hypothisis.

>

>

>

> I challenge god believers to supply ANY objective verifiable evidence that

> their god actually exists except in their over active imaginations.

You could offer a billion dollars and none would collect.

>

>

>

> Who will accept the challenge???

Nobody will prove anything. But Christian one-book-wonders, will try in

vain.

>

>

>

>

>

>

"Jamffer" <jamffer@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:13qfdaf8g0r1v3d@corp.supernews.com...

> "Bill M" <wmech@bellsouth.net> wrote in message

> news:tKNpj.66207$Mu4.41907@bignews7.bellsouth.net...

>> God fanatics constantly make the claim the wonders and complexity of the

>> world is proof of God.

>

> Could expect nothing more from a one-book-wonder fanatic.

>>

>> This pretty negative proof and complexity is NOT evidence of some God. It

>> is only evidence that the world and Universe is complex relative to human

>> mental capacity, nothing more.

>

> If I get a (complex) rash on my ass, that's proof there is a God.

>

>> Why does this all powerful creator, all loving and caring intelligent

>> designer, create Plagues, Tsunamis, Tornadoes, Volcanic Eruptions,

>> Floods,

>> Wars, Earth Quakes, Cancers and hundreds of debilitating diseases and

>> serious body malfunctions? There are 12,000 known diseases that affect

>> and

>> punish mankind indiscriminately. Why does he permit millions of both

>> young

>> and old to starve to death or die of miserable diseases? Why punish

>> millions of INNOCENT CHILDREN in this horrible way?

>

> He doesn't want life to be boring.

>

Precisely!!! Also God wants to give people like Bill a chance to show,

that God didn't make a mistake creating him, but that Bill devotes his life

to a useful mission which will improve the quality of God's creation, by

eliminating those things Bill complains about.

--

Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"Bill M" <wmech@bellsouth.net> wrote in message

news:tKNpj.66207$Mu4.41907@bignews7.bellsouth.net...

>

> God fanatics constantly make the claim the wonders and complexity of the

> world is proof of God.

>

Atheist fundamentalist fanatics always claim, that complex designs like

living cells need no designer, but just happen to appear out of nothing, and

from nothing like a miracle. Problem is that such a scenario requires more

belief and faith, than religionists can come up with.

--

Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

On Mon, 04 Feb 2008 18:25:26 -0500, Bill M wrote:

>

> I challenge god believers to supply ANY objective verifiable evidence that

> their god actually exists except in their over active imaginations.

>

>

>

> Who will accept the challenge???

I challenge you to give me a pure gold coin made of silver. I know that

you cannot do it, because the definition of pure gold coin excludes making

it from silver.

Likewise, the definition of God, or any that I have encountered, preclude

"objective, verifiable evidence".

In fact, you cannot even produce objective, verifiable evidence that G.

Bush is the President of the United States. Oh, you can produce newspaper

reports, you might even produce the man himself should it happen that he

is at your beck and call. But how will I know this man is indeed the

president? I cannot. A two million man army at his command is

persuasive, but of course, he would have to present all two million of

them to me to REALLY convince me.

Suppose the FBI comes calling and show you their identification. How can

you prove it is genuine FBI identification? You cannot; at best you can

see that it resembles the first one you ever saw. If the FBI published

specifications so as to enable verification, it would also enable

counterfeit.

So, I do not accept your stupid challenge, and I hope you do not accept my

equally stupid challenge to produce a gold coin made out of silver.

Perhaps you are thinking that someone WANTS to convince you of something

that you have set up to be impossible. If God wishes it, then it will

happen; it is not for anyone else to make happen. That is the way it is

with gods. They do what they want, and they do not do what they do not

want to do.

"Michael" <newsuser3@orneveien.org> wrote in message

news:pan.2008.02.05.04.20.05.755914@orneveien.org...

> On Mon, 04 Feb 2008 18:25:26 -0500, Bill M wrote:

>

>>

>> I challenge god believers to supply ANY objective verifiable evidence

>> that

>> their god actually exists except in their over active imaginations.

>>

>>

>>

>> Who will accept the challenge???

>

> I challenge you to give me a pure gold coin made of silver. I know that

> you cannot do it, because the definition of pure gold coin excludes making

> it from silver.

>

> Likewise, the definition of God, or any that I have encountered, preclude

> "objective, verifiable evidence".

>

> In fact, you cannot even produce objective, verifiable evidence that G.

> Bush is the President of the United States. Oh, you can produce newspaper

> reports, you might even produce the man himself should it happen that he

> is at your beck and call. But how will I know this man is indeed the

> president? I cannot. A two million man army at his command is

> persuasive, but of course, he would have to present all two million of

> them to me to REALLY convince me.

>

> Suppose the FBI comes calling and show you their identification. How can

> you prove it is genuine FBI identification? You cannot; at best you can

> see that it resembles the first one you ever saw. If the FBI published

> specifications so as to enable verification, it would also enable

> counterfeit.

>

> So, I do not accept your stupid challenge, and I hope you do not accept my

> equally stupid challenge to produce a gold coin made out of silver.

>

> Perhaps you are thinking that someone WANTS to convince you of something

> that you have set up to be impossible. If God wishes it, then it will

> happen; it is not for anyone else to make happen. That is the way it is

> with gods. They do what they want, and they do not do what they do not

> want to do.

Setting aside your irrational, strawman, arguments;

it is for those idiots who make CLAIMS about the existence of "gawd" the

challenge is set.

Religious people make the claims ..... THEY have to provide supportive

evidence.

"If god wishes it" .........?

WHAT GOD?

You have not presented ANY valid, verifiable evidence that ANY god even

exists - so the statement "If god wishes" means ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!

If, as you say, god is unprovable ... then try, hard, and be smart enough

NOT to make any claims associated with something that cannot be supported

even by its believers.

"Michael" <newsuser3@orneveien.org> wrote in message

news:pan.2008.02.05.04.20.05.755914@orneveien.org...

> On Mon, 04 Feb 2008 18:25:26 -0500, Bill M wrote:

>

>>

>> I challenge god believers to supply ANY objective verifiable evidence

>> that

>> their god actually exists except in their over active imaginations.

>>

>>

>>

>> Who will accept the challenge???

>

> I challenge you to give me a pure gold coin made of silver. I know that

Straw man.

> you cannot do it, because the definition of pure gold coin excludes making

> it from silver.

>

> Likewise, the definition of God, or any that I have encountered, preclude

> "objective, verifiable evidence".

Then God is no different than Harry Potter, Leprechans, or the

Easter Bunny.

Many claim the Bible is not just evidence of God but

his actual words. But you are saying the Bible is not

even evidence of God.

>

> In fact, you cannot even produce objective, verifiable evidence that G.

> Bush is the President of the United States. Oh, you can produce newspaper

> reports, you might even produce the man himself should it happen that he

> is at your beck and call. But how will I know this man is indeed the

> president? I cannot.

Are you a solipsist?

> A two million man army at his command is

> persuasive, but of course, he would have to present all two million of

> them to me to REALLY convince me.

>

> Suppose the FBI comes calling and show you their identification. How can

> you prove it is genuine FBI identification? You cannot; at best you can

> see that it resembles the first one you ever saw. If the FBI published

> specifications so as to enable verification, it would also enable

> counterfeit.

>

> So, I do not accept your stupid challenge, and I hope you do not accept my

> equally stupid challenge to produce a gold coin made out of silver.

Don't underestimate the stupidity of your challenge.

>

> Perhaps you are thinking that someone WANTS to convince you of something

> that you have set up to be impossible. If God wishes it, then it will

Then nothing that happens is against his will?

9/11 was not against his will?

Or is his will ineffective?

> happen; it is not for anyone else to make happen. That is the way it is

> with gods. They do what they want, and they do not do what they do not

> want to do.

How many gods are there?

Michael wrote:

> On Mon, 04 Feb 2008 18:25:26 -0500, Bill M wrote:

>

> >

> > I challenge god believers to supply ANY objective verifiable evidence that

> > their god actually exists except in their over active imaginations.

> >

> >

> >

> > Who will accept the challenge???

>

> I challenge you to give me a pure gold coin made of silver. I know that

> you cannot do it, because the definition of pure gold coin excludes making

> it from silver.

>

> Likewise, the definition of God, or any that I have encountered, preclude

> "objective, verifiable evidence".

>

> In fact, you cannot even produce objective, verifiable evidence that G.

> Bush is the President of the United States. Oh, you can produce newspaper

> reports, you might even produce the man himself should it happen that he

> is at your beck and call. But how will I know this man is indeed the

> president? I cannot. A two million man army at his command is

> persuasive, but of course, he would have to present all two million of

> them to me to REALLY convince me.

>

> Suppose the FBI comes calling and show you their identification. How can

> you prove it is genuine FBI identification? You cannot; at best you can

> see that it resembles the first one you ever saw. If the FBI published

> specifications so as to enable verification, it would also enable

> counterfeit.

>

> So, I do not accept your stupid challenge, and I hope you do not accept my

> equally stupid challenge to produce a gold coin made out of silver.

>

> Perhaps you are thinking that someone WANTS to convince you of something

> that you have set up to be impossible. If God wishes it, then it will

> happen; it is not for anyone else to make happen. That is the way it is

> with gods. They do what they want, and they do not do what they do not

> want to do.

What does it feel like to be an abject total failure?

"bob young" <alaspectrum@netvigator.com> wrote in message

news:47A8B552.84B22DA6@netvigator.com...

> Michael wrote:

>> On Mon, 04 Feb 2008 18:25:26 -0500, Bill M wrote:

>> >

>> > I challenge god believers to supply ANY objective verifiable evidence

>> > that

>> > their god actually exists except in their over active imaginations.

>> > Who will accept the challenge???

>>

>> I challenge you to give me a pure gold coin made of silver. I know that

>> you cannot do it, because the definition of pure gold coin excludes

>> making

>> it from silver.

>> Likewise, the definition of God, or any that I have encountered, preclude

>> "objective, verifiable evidence".

>> In fact, you cannot even produce objective, verifiable evidence that G.

>> Bush is the President of the United States. Oh, you can produce

>> newspaper

>> reports, you might even produce the man himself should it happen that he

>> is at your beck and call. But how will I know this man is indeed the

>> president? I cannot. A two million man army at his command is

>> persuasive, but of course, he would have to present all two million of

>> them to me to REALLY convince me.

>> Suppose the FBI comes calling and show you their identification. How can

>> you prove it is genuine FBI identification? You cannot; at best you can

>> see that it resembles the first one you ever saw. If the FBI published

>> specifications so as to enable verification, it would also enable

>> counterfeit.

>> So, I do not accept your stupid challenge, and I hope you do not accept

>> my

>> equally stupid challenge to produce a gold coin made out of silver.

>> Perhaps you are thinking that someone WANTS to convince you of something

>> that you have set up to be impossible. If God wishes it, then it will

>> happen; it is not for anyone else to make happen. That is the way it is

>> with gods. They do what they want, and they do not do what they do not

>> want to do.

>

> What does it feel like to be an abject total failure?

>

You should ask yourself that, Bob. As yet you have failed to document

and/or reference anything of your personal convictions and philosophy of

life, other than that you disapprove of everyone else's, as well as

disapprove of any person who has done so. LOL

--

Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"Ron Baker, Pluralitas!" <this@aint.me> wrote in message

news:47a7f3ce$0$6487$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...

> "Michael" <newsuser3@orneveien.org> wrote in message

> news:pan.2008.02.05.04.20.05.755914@orneveien.org...

>> On Mon, 04 Feb 2008 18:25:26 -0500, Bill M wrote:

>>>

>>> I challenge god believers to supply ANY objective verifiable evidence

>>> that

>>> their god actually exists except in their over active imaginations.

>>> Who will accept the challenge???

>>

All you do is show everybody how sly you are when it comes to getting

something for nothing. See below.

Pastor Frank

Our Christian "God is love" (1 John 4:8,16) become fully manifested in

Jesus Christ giving His life for us sinners on the cross of Calvary. We

therefore know our God and have seen Him through Jesus Christ. (Jesus in

John 14:6-10)

Atheists don't know our God and therefore don't see any human

manifestation of love. (Jesus in John 3:3) and no, we won't send you all our

money as "objective, verifiable evidence", to prove our love for you. That's

what you are after, aren't you?

You will just have to believe us, that we answer your posts because we

love you in the Lord and that this loving action evidences our God, whose

essence is that very love and care we show others.

--

Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"Michael" <newsuser3@orneveien.org> wrote in message

news:pan.2008.02.05.04.20.05.755914@orneveien.org...

> On Mon, 04 Feb 2008 18:25:26 -0500, Bill M wrote:

>

>>

>> I challenge god believers to supply ANY objective verifiable evidence

>> that

>> their god actually exists except in their over active imaginations.

>>

>>

>>

>> Who will accept the challenge???

>

> I challenge you to give me a pure gold coin made of silver. I know that

> you cannot do it, because the definition of pure gold coin excludes making

> it from silver.

>

> Likewise, the definition of God, or any that I have encountered, preclude

> "objective, verifiable evidence".

>

> In fact, you cannot even produce objective, verifiable evidence that G.

> Bush is the President of the United States. Oh, you can produce newspaper

> reports, you might even produce the man himself should it happen that he

> is at your beck and call. But how will I know this man is indeed the

> president? I cannot. A two million man army at his command is

> persuasive, but of course, he would have to present all two million of

> them to me to REALLY convince me.

>

> Suppose the FBI comes calling and show you their identification. How can

> you prove it is genuine FBI identification? You cannot; at best you can

> see that it resembles the first one you ever saw. If the FBI published

> specifications so as to enable verification, it would also enable

> counterfeit.

>

> So, I do not accept your stupid challenge, and I hope you do not accept my

> equally stupid challenge to produce a gold coin made out of silver.

>

> Perhaps you are thinking that someone WANTS to convince you of something

> that you have set up to be impossible. If God wishes it, then it will

> happen; it is not for anyone else to make happen. That is the way it is

> with gods. They do what they want, and they do not do what they do not

> want to do.

translaton: there is NO god.

Okay, Bill, let's see what I can do to address your challenges.

"Bill M" <wmech@bellsouth.net> said :

> God fanatics constantly make the claim the wonders and complexity of

> the world is proof of God.

Your challenge is directed at concept of single god, as defined by

monotheistic religions.

> Why does this all powerful creator

This implies a single being directly and consciously response for

existence of world or cosmos.

> all loving and caring

Challenge is directed at god defined as universally benevolent.

> intelligent designer

Reiterates definition from 'all powerful creator'.

> Why punish millions of INNOCENT CHILDREN in this

> horrible way?

Appeal to emotion, along with implication that adult lives are not as

important as those of children.

> Why does this all powerful and caring god permit totally "innocent

> children" to die at birth?

Repetition of previous appeal to emotion.

> Why does he permit over 2,000,000 innocent children to die

Reptition of previous appeal to emotion.

Deity being challenged defined as male.

> God supposedly created the world like it is, to punish man for Adam

> and Eve's 'original sin'.

Adam and Eve feature in Abramic mythology only. God being challenged is

therefore that of the Christians, the Jews and the Muslims.

> Why does he also punish supposedly innocent children

Repetition of appeal to emotion. Intended meaning of 'supposedly' not

clear - term usually implies doubt about a claim.

> Why did this all powerful and loving creator

Repetition of definition; God as necessarily omnibenevolent.

> Over 100,000 of these were totally INNOCENT children!

Repetition of appeal to emotion.

> The death toll was over 137 million men, women and totally innocent

> children.

Repetition of appeal to emotion. Men and women can also be 'totally

innocent', but the same assumption is not made for them. This implies

that at least some adults deserved to die from the Black Death. I would

contest that.

> The influenza of 1918-1919 killed at least 25 million men, women and

> innocent children indiscriminately.

Repetition of appeal to emotion - see above re bubonic plague.

> ALL god beliefs

Indicates challenge towards all forms of religion.

So, Bill, how do I defend my religious beliefs against your challenges?

Well, given that your challenge is directed against a single omnipotent,

omnibenevolent, male creator god, none of it applies to my religion.

Which also doesn't include Adam and Eve.

"Think of the children" - employed repeatedly throughout your lecture -

is an empty argument and can be discarded as the weak rhetoric it is.

Which leaves us with relatively little. In fact, the only thing I can

really address in terms of my own belief system is the question you asked

of how come mankind has managed to do all these wonderful things you've

listed, find these marvellous cures and make stunning discoveries - all,

so you presume, without the help of gods.

Many Christians would argue that if God hadn't wanted us to fly, He

wouldn't have led us to discover how to make airfoils.

The truth is that we have achieved these things because it's in our

nature - whether that nature was designed or not. In the same way that it

appears to be our nature to exploit our world to make weapons out of

natural diseases, and engineer them into new variants in order to cause

even more agony and suffering. The way it appears to be our nature to

discover the spectacular beauty of the quantum world, and turn it

immediately towards wreaking massive death and destruction on our

fellows. The way we discover these wonderful cures for terrible ills,

and then withhold them until the sufferers stump up enough money. The

way we burn and rip the land, fill the sea and the sky with toxic filth,

and guzzle resources we cannot afford to support lifestyles we do not

need.

It's one thing to labour our merits as proof that we don't need gods -

but it leaves us with a rather skewed impression of what mankind is. If

we can take the credit for our achievements, then we must also take the

blame for our failings. If some god or other is to be blamed for the

evil that we do, then that god should also be credited with our good.

> If there is a god that created the Universe, he is obviously not an

> all-caring and benevolent god.

You're probably right.

> The objective evidence is if there is a god creator, he has NO concern

> about the welfare of the creatures on Earth.

And it continually puzzles me why so many people imagine He should -

given the time so many of them spend trying to express just how big He is

in comparison to us.

> I challenge god believers to supply ANY objective verifiable evidence

> that their god actually exists except in their over active

> imaginations.

>

> Who will accept the challenge???

To conclude: speaking for myself, I don't need to. Your challenge

doesn't apply to my beliefs.

"Ron Baker, Pluralitas!" <this@aint.me> said :

>> In fact, you cannot even produce objective, verifiable evidence that

>> G. Bush is the President of the United States. Oh, you can produce

>> newspaper reports, you might even produce the man himself should it

>> happen that he is at your beck and call. But how will I know this

>> man is indeed the president? I cannot.

>

> Are you a solipsist?

Pardon me butting in - but solipsism is an interesting question,

especially asked in one of Bill's threads.

Given that my consciousness is the only one I can know for certain

actually exists, solipsism would seem to be a reasonable conclusion.

According to the standards demanded by Bill et al, I should accept the

possibility that others have similar consciousness only if there is

verifiable, objective evidence to that effect. But of course, there

isn't. Everything I perceive - including whatever evidence you might

show me - is dependent on my perceptions. And if for whatever reason my

perceptions don't show me what really exists, then what evidence could

you ever provide?

Fortunately, I don't adhere to the strict standards demanded by some

here, and so, without any 'verifiable, objective evidence', and based

solely on my gut feeling, I accept that others experience consciousness

in their own way, just as I do in mine.

This is one of the big problems that faces those who live their lives

crowing about 'verifiable, objective evidence'. They don't grasp that

even supposedly objective evidence can only serve as such within a

certain frame of reference. If the question being considered is the very

nature of reality (into which category the matter of gods must surely

fall), then we cannot find answers. There are no instruments we can use,

no tests we can run, no observations we can make, that will serve as

'objective' evidence to answer this question. All our methods of

observing the reality around us (or what we suppose to be the reality

around us) are contained within that reality, and are therefore

subjective in nature. If my perceptions are flawed - and that's required

for the solipsist view to apply - then everything that comes in via those

perceptions is also flawed. Thus, no evidence from outside my

consciousness can be trusted or considered 'objective' (and obviously,

nothing originating inside can be objective either).

Contrary to the presumptions of some, as a religious person I'm not anti-

science. In fact I'm fascinated by science; absorbed by it. I don't see

it as a competitor against my religion: my gods are the natural world, so

science is, if anything, a tribute to them - our attempt to understand

them better. I don't claim any great expertise in science - but to the

best of my ability I follow what's going on, and trust that in the vast

majority of cases, and maybe after some trial and error and some false

starts, scientists get it right. What I don't do is try to use science

as a bludgeon against those who like to ask questions that science

doesn't ask. It's often forgotten, but the questions of gods or of a

reality existing outside 'ours', are matters that science simply doesn't

bother addressing. They're outside its remit. Science knows it has

nothing with which to test these questions. It can't disprove them,

and it knows it can't - but it takes the rational position that if they

can't be tested or observed in some way then they're assumed not to be a

factor.

What science does is look at the world we see around us and try to find

out how it works. It does it - if it's done properly - without any

preconceptions about what it hopes to find (at least beyond the basic

hypotheses that it usually sets out to test). There are those who try

to use science (or sciencey-sounding words, at least) to address the

existence of gods - but invariably they fall into pseudo-science

(Boatwright and Hammond would be good examples of this), because they're

trying to use science to do something it isn't equipped to do.

As I said, I have the utmost respect for science, and where religion and

science come into direct conflict, I'll usually side with science. But

science and religion don't actually come into conflict nearly as often as

some people would like. Those who wield science like an anti-religion

shield misunderstand both concepts, as do those who deny any merit in

science because they think it threatens the possibility of divinity.

There are certainly doctrines and dogmas within religions that can and

should be opposed with science (Genesis Creationism springs to mind), but

the fundamental questions of reality - like solipsism - cannot be

supported or denied through science.

"Bill M" <wmech@bellsouth.net> wrote in message

news:tKNpj.66207$Mu4.41907@bignews7.bellsouth.net...

> God fanatics constantly make the claim the wonders and complexity of the

> world is proof of God.

>

>

>

>

> There are thousands of different religious and god beliefs but NO OJECTIVE

> VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE for the actual existence of ANY of these gods. ALL

> god beliefs are based on the unsubstantiated 'opinions and claims of

> errant men.

>

>

> I challenge god believers to supply ANY objective verifiable evidence that

> their god actually exists except in their over active imaginations.

> Who will accept the challenge???

>

Mr Bill,

I have offered you objective, verifiable evidence in previous posts to your

question.

I posed an experiment YOU could perform for yourself to see for yourself

that the Bible contains instructions on how to improve your mental capacity.

YOU REFUSED TO ACCEPT MY PROOF.

You aren't really interested in a proof are you.

But, I'll keep trying from time to time.

But, please help me. I need to know what kind of proof you will accept. As

you know, there are many definitions of a "proof".

Please provide us with a couple of examples of what standard of proof you

want.

Perhaps you would consider providing "proof" for a Big Bang that created our

universe from nothing, from purely "natural", "physical" univerals laws

requiring no God being involved.

Or, perhaps you can provide an example of the kind of "proof" that the first

life just spontaneously started from elements to produce a DNA molecule.

That would be very helpful to me.

Thanks,

RJBJR

"rjbjr" <rjburnsjr@comcast.net> wrote in message

news:I_Gdnb9cnL8Q_zXanZ2dnUVZ_hynnZ2d@comcast.com...

> "Bill M" <wmech@bellsouth.net> wrote in message

> news:tKNpj.66207$Mu4.41907@bignews7.bellsouth.net...

>> God fanatics constantly make the claim the wonders and complexity of the

>> world is proof of God.

>>

>>

>>

>>

>> There are thousands of different religious and god beliefs but NO

>> OJECTIVE VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE for the actual existence of ANY of these

>> gods. ALL god beliefs are based on the unsubstantiated 'opinions and

>> claims of errant men.

>>

>>

>> I challenge god believers to supply ANY objective verifiable evidence

>> that their god actually exists except in their over active imaginations.

>> Who will accept the challenge???

>>

> Mr Bill,

> I have offered you objective, verifiable evidence in previous posts to

> your question.

Show it now so we can all check it out.

--

Robyn

Resident Witchypoo

BAAWA Knight!

#1557

On Mon, 04 Feb 2008 21:20:08 -0700 in

pan.2008.02.05.04.20.05.755914@orneveien.org, Michael

<newsuser3@orneveien.org> wrote:

> On Mon, 04 Feb 2008 18:25:26 -0500, Bill M wrote:

>

>

>> I challenge god believers to supply ANY objective verifiable evidence

>> that their god actually exists except in their over active

>> imaginations.

>>

>>

>>

>> Who will accept the challenge???

>

> I challenge you to give me a pure gold coin made of silver. I know that

> you cannot do it, because the definition of pure gold coin excludes

> making it from silver.

>

> Likewise, the definition of God, or any that I have encountered,

> preclude "objective, verifiable evidence".

Then they can be dismissed as irrelevant and unimportant.

Next!

--

Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423

EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion

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

“The one permanent emotion of the inferior man is

fear - fear of the unknown, the complex, the inexplicable.

What he wants above everything else is safety.”

- H. L. Mencken

In article <pan.2008.02.05.04.20.05.755914@orneveien.org> Michael <newsuser3@orneveien.org> writes:

> On Mon, 04 Feb 2008 18:25:26 -0500, Bill M wrote:

>

> >

> > I challenge god believers to supply ANY objective verifiable evidence that

> > their god actually exists except in their over active imaginations.

> >

> >

> >

> > Who will accept the challenge???

>

> I challenge you to give me a pure gold coin made of silver. I know that

> you cannot do it, because the definition of pure gold coin excludes making

> it from silver.

>

> Likewise, the definition of God, or any that I have encountered, preclude

> "objective, verifiable evidence".

Well, how about an operational definition then? I define "God" as

"That Being who promised His followers that if they but request it,

He would uproot a mountain and hurl it into the sea".

It seems to me that using this definition, it would be very easy

to look for objective evidence of this God.

-- cary

"Bill M" <wmech@bellsouth.net> wrote in message

news:tKNpj.66207$Mu4.41907@bignews7.bellsouth.net...

> God fanatics constantly make the claim the wonders and complexity of the

> world is proof of God.

Complex AND purposefully organized.... That is observable evidence in the

same way that any fool can recognize a complex and organized computer

program as having an intelligent and purposeful creator/programmer. Adding

to this example, of course, is the fact the creation of a universe and

subsequent resultant consciousness and intelligence, balanced systems for

sustaining life, etc.. is many billions of times more complex than our

computer program example. So can you understand logical reason?

That is overwhelming evidence of an intelligent creator.

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

"The universe and the laws of physics seem to have been specifically

designed for us." - Stephen Hawking

"My attempts to demonstrate evolution by an experiment carried on for more

than 40 years have completely failed." - N.H.Nilson, famous botanist and

evolutionist

"Under slightly reducing conditions, the Miller-Urey action does not produce

amino acids, nor does it produce the chemicals that may serve as the

predecessors of other important biopolymer building blocks. Thus, by

challenging the assumption of a reducing atmosphere, we challenge the very

existence of the "prebiotic soup", with its richness of biologically

important organic compounds. Moreover, so far, no geochemical evidence for

the existence of a prebiotic soup has been published. Indeed, a number of

scientists have challenged the prebiotic soup concept, noting that even if

it existed, the concentration of organic building blocks in it would have

been too small to be meaningful for prebiotic evolution." Noam Lahav (1999)

Biogenesis: Theories of Life's Origins Oxford University Press, 1999,

p138-139

"There is no agreement on the extent to which metabolism could develop

independently of a genetic material. In my opinion, there is no basis in

known chemistry for the belief that long sequences of reactions can organize

spontaneously -- and every reason to believe that they cannot. The problem

of achieving sufficient specificity, whether in aqueous solution or on the

surface of a mineral, is so severe that the chance of closing a cycle of

reactions as complex as the reverse citric acid cycle, for example, is

negligible." Orgel, Leslie (1998) "The origin of life -- a review of facts

and speculations," Trends in Biochemical Sciences, 23 (Dec 1998): 491-495.

(pp. 494-495)

"To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting

the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light

and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have

been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the

highest degree." - Charles Darwin, Origin of Species, chapter "Difficulties"

"I think, however, that we must go further than this and admit that the only

acceptable explanation is creation. I know that this is anathema to

physicists, as indeed it is to me, but we must not reject a theory that we

do not like if the experimental evidence supports it." - H. Lipson, "A

Physicist Looks at Evolution," Physics Bulletin, 31 (1980), p. 138

"Not one change of species into another is on record ... we cannot prove

that a single species has been changed." - Charles Darwin, My Life & Letters