Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Probability of the existence of God
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 31 of 219 (464533)
04-26-2008 6:44 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by Wumpini
04-26-2008 5:34 PM


Re: Law of Biogenesis
Science has shown that there is no inherent difference between living and unliving matter. There is no theoretical basis for an absolute claim that life must "come from life". While working out how such a thing occurred is very difficult, it is fa too early to assert that the scientific research into abiogenesis must fail.
The best you can claim on this point is uncertainty. The very fact that you have to use this point shows that your claims to have strong evidence of God are less than entirely true. As does the very existence of the highly subjective probability calculations referred to earlier in the thread. If there was good evidence nobody would bother with such poor arguments.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Wumpini, posted 04-26-2008 5:34 PM Wumpini has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by john6zx, posted 04-27-2008 4:01 AM PaulK has replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 32 of 219 (464539)
04-26-2008 9:08 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by Wumpini
04-26-2008 5:34 PM


Re: Law of Biogenesis
Has science proven that life can arise from non-living matter?
Science has not proven that life cannot arise from non-living matter. Hence there is no "law of biogenesis."

Speaking personally, I find few things more awesome than contemplating this vast and majestic process of evolution, the ebb and flow of successive biotas through geological time. Creationists and others who cannot for ideological or religious reasons accept the fact of evolution miss out a great deal, and are left with a claustrophobic little universe in which nothing happens and nothing changes.
-- M. Alan Kazlev

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Wumpini, posted 04-26-2008 5:34 PM Wumpini has not replied

  
Wumpini
Member (Idle past 5764 days)
Posts: 229
From: Ghana West Africa
Joined: 04-23-2008


Message 33 of 219 (464548)
04-27-2008 3:13 AM
Reply to: Message 30 by Blue Jay
04-26-2008 6:02 PM


Ignoring is Ignorance
Bluejay writes:
you cannot assume 50-50 for any yes/no situation based on the fact that there are only two options.
You obviously read my entire post because you pick and choose the points that you want to address. However in addressing the points you ignore the portion of the post that contradicts your response. The probability of drawing an ace or not drawing an ace is 7.7%/92.3%. Not 50/50. I do not need to say that the probability of drawing a deuce instead of an ace is 7.7%, etc. The probability of not drawing an ace is 92.3%. Therefore, there is a dichotomy if I am only dealing with aces! The same is true with God.
The selection of desirable evidence, and ignoring that evidence that contradicts the theory seems to be the same scientific method that is being used in a number of vaious fields, including the orgin of the universe, abiogenesis, and evolution. Picking and choosing the evidence that fits the model.
Based upon the evidence, I believe there is only one possibility. God exists! With only one possibility, the probability is 100%.
Bluejay writes:
you'll have effectively prevented science from ever learning the truth.
By failing to take God into consideration in various scientific models, this is in effect what science is accomplishing in various fields. Preventing themselves from ever learning "the truth."
Thanks for your input.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by Blue Jay, posted 04-26-2008 6:02 PM Blue Jay has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by Straggler, posted 04-27-2008 4:59 AM Wumpini has replied
 Message 52 by john6zx, posted 04-27-2008 3:19 PM Wumpini has not replied

  
john6zx
Member (Idle past 4821 days)
Posts: 66
Joined: 01-27-2007


Message 34 of 219 (464550)
04-27-2008 3:54 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Wumpini
04-23-2008 8:20 AM


Listen, God is part of a belief, a faith. If God was a real person, place, or thing then God would not be included or part of a faith or belief
FAITH.
1. confidence or trust in a person or thing: faith in another's ability.
2. belief that is not based on proof: He had faith that the hypothesis would be substantiated by fact.
3. belief in God or in the doctrines or teachings of religion: the firm faith of the Pilgrims.
4. belief in anything, as a code of ethics, standards of merit, etc.: to be of the same faith with someone concerning honesty.
5. a system of religious belief: the Christian faith; the Jewish faith.
6. the obligation of loyalty or fidelity to a person, promise, engagement, etc.: Failure to appear would be breaking faith.
7. the observance of this obligation; fidelity to one's promise, oath, allegiance, etc.: He was the only one who proved his faith during our recent troubles.
8. Christian Theology. the trust in God and in His promises as made through Christ and the Scriptures by which humans are justified or saved.
1. a strong belief in a supernatural power or powers that control human destiny; "he lost his faith but not his morality" [syn: religion]
2. complete confidence in a person or plan etc; "he cherished the faith of a good woman"; "the doctor-patient relationship is based on trust"
3. an institution to express belief in a divine power; "he was raised in the Baptist religion"; "a member of his own faith contradicted him" [syn: religion]
4. loyalty or allegiance to a cause or a person; "keep the faith"; "they broke faith with their investors"
Belief:
1. something believed; an opinion or conviction: a belief that the earth is flat.
2. confidence in the truth or existence of something not immediately susceptible to rigorous proof: a statement unworthy of belief.
3. confidence; faith; trust: a child's belief in his parents.
4. a religious tenet or tenets; religious creed or faith: the Christian belief.
The mental act, condition, or habit of placing trust or confidence in another: My belief in you is as strong as ever.
Mental acceptance of and conviction in the truth, actuality, or validity of something: His explanation of what happened defies belief.
Something believed or accepted as true, especially a particular tenet or a body of tenets accepted by a group of persons.
Real:
1. true; not merely ostensible, nominal, or apparent: the real reason for an act.
2. existing or occurring as fact; actual rather than imaginary, ideal, or fictitious: a story taken from real life.
3. being an actual thing; having objective existence; not imaginary: The events you will see in the film are real and not just made up.
4. being actually such; not merely so-called: a real victory.
5. genuine; not counterfeit, artificial, or imitation; authentic: a real antique; a real diamond; real silk.
6. unfeigned or sincere: real sympathy; a real friend.
7. Informal. absolute; complete; utter: She's a real brain.
8. Philosophy. a. existent or pertaining to the existent as opposed to the nonexistent.
b. actual as opposed to possible or potential.
c. independent of experience as opposed to phenomenal or apparent.
Real, actual, true in general use describe objects, persons, experiences, etc., that are what they are said or purport to be. That which is described as real is genuine as opposed to counterfeit, false, or merely supposed: a real emerald; real leather binding; My real ambition is to be a dentist. Actual usually stresses contrast with another state of affairs that has been proposed or suggested: The actual cost is much less; to conceal one's actual motive. True implies a perfect correspondence with actuality and is in direct contrast to that which is false or inaccurate: a true account of the events; not bravado but true courage. See also authentic.
”Usage note The intensifying adverb real, meaning “very,” is informal and limited to speech or to written representations of speech: He drives a real beat-up old car. The adjective real meaning “true, actual, genuine, etc.,” is standard in all types of speech and writing: Their real reasons for objecting became clear in the discussion. The informal adjective sense “absolute, complete” is also limited to speech or representations of speech: These interruptions are a real bother.
So, per the definition of real, is God a real physical person.
This is what God has taught us. Lead by example.
We learn from Christianity that if you do not like what people are doing it is o.k. to kill them (the great flood).
We also learn that incest is o.k. The children of Adam and Eve (who were all brothers and sisters) had sex and populated the world.
We also learn to be vindictive. God makes us all sinners and then punishes us and tells us we need to repent for being sinners. God is the maker of faulty products (his children) and then tells them they are bad.
We also learn that insanity is the way of God. God is part of a religion that has convinced people that he is an invisible man in the sky who watches everything that we do, every minute of the day. God has a special list of things that he does not want you to do. If you do any of these things, he has a special place full of fire, smoke, burning, torture and anguish, where he will send you to live and suffer, burn, scream, and cry forever until the end of time . .But he loves you.
We also learn that it is o.k. to sit and do nothing when someone is in trouble, being killed, or starving to death. Witness all of the children that are kidnapped raped or killed. God does nothing. I know of people who have nothing to do with the belief in any God who treat their children better than God. These fathers would give their life for the safety of their children, Yet God is content to just do nothing while his children are raped, killed, and die of some cancer or virus that He himself created.
We also learn from the examples of others who believe in God that killing and torture in the name of religion is o.k. Witness the witch burnings and the inquisition. If you look at the facts of history, more people have been killed for being “identified” as being evil by those who are religious, than those who have been killed who have been identified as being religious by those who are evil. Who is really the evil ones here.
I could go on with this, but it is unnecessary, I think you get the point.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Wumpini, posted 04-23-2008 8:20 AM Wumpini has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by Wumpini, posted 04-27-2008 9:45 AM john6zx has not replied

  
john6zx
Member (Idle past 4821 days)
Posts: 66
Joined: 01-27-2007


Message 35 of 219 (464551)
04-27-2008 4:01 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by PaulK
04-26-2008 6:44 PM


Re: Law of Biogenesis
INHERENT:
1. existing in someone or something as a permanent and inseparable element, quality, or attribute: an inherent distrust of strangers.
2. Grammar. standing before a noun.
3. inhering; infixed
Existing as an essential constituent or characteristic; intrinsic.
There is all the difference in the world between living and unliving matter. Unliving matter is absent of life. It is the difference between life and death. How much more of a difference can you have.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by PaulK, posted 04-26-2008 6:44 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by PaulK, posted 04-27-2008 4:37 AM john6zx has replied

  
john6zx
Member (Idle past 4821 days)
Posts: 66
Joined: 01-27-2007


Message 36 of 219 (464552)
04-27-2008 4:09 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by Wumpini
04-24-2008 1:27 PM


Re: Probability
EXIST:
1. to have actual being; be: The world exists, whether you like it or not.
2. to have life or animation; live.
3. to continue to be or live: Belief in magic still exists.
4. to have being in a specified place or under certain conditions; be found; occur: Hunger exists in many parts of the world.
5. to achieve the basic needs of existence, as food and shelter: He's not living, he's merely existing.
Look at the definition of real I posted.
I know that I have posted many definitions, but these definitions are what we use to define our reality, these definitions are agreed upon realities for us. This whole discussion of the existence of God is easily resolved by defining your terms.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Wumpini, posted 04-24-2008 1:27 PM Wumpini has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 37 of 219 (464556)
04-27-2008 4:37 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by john6zx
04-27-2008 4:01 AM


Re: Law of Biogenesis
A carbon atom that is part of a living being is no different from a carbon atom that is not. An atom of carbon may be part of a carbon dioxide molecule in the atmosphere - unliving matter. It may be absorbed by a plant and incorporated into the plant's structure - living. The plant may be burned and the carbon atoms within it returned to CO2.
I really suggest that you try reading the definition you quote and seeing how it actually applies to the situation. It is quite clear that the difference between life and death is not that living matter is inherently different from unliving matter.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by john6zx, posted 04-27-2008 4:01 AM john6zx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by john6zx, posted 04-27-2008 2:12 PM PaulK has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 38 of 219 (464557)
04-27-2008 4:42 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by Wumpini
04-26-2008 5:34 PM


Re: Law of Biogenesis
Has science proven that life can arise from non-living matter?
Yes.
Or is abiogenesis an unproven theory?
No.
It seems that these theories always take the position that given enough time, even the miraculous can occur!
No.
It would be much easier (and much safer) to attribute the miracle to God!
If a miracle has occured, then by definition God would be the cause. However, I am not convinced of the premise.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Wumpini, posted 04-26-2008 5:34 PM Wumpini has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by Wumpini, posted 04-27-2008 11:33 AM Dr Adequate has not replied
 Message 49 by john6zx, posted 04-27-2008 2:21 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 39 of 219 (464558)
04-27-2008 4:59 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by Wumpini
04-27-2008 3:13 AM


Re: Ignoring is Ignorance
Based upon the evidence, I believe there is only one possibility. God exists! With only one possibility, the probability is 100%
Yes we know you believe that to be the case.
The point is that what you believe has no real bearing on the probability of God existing.
There are many others equally convinced of their god(s) as you are of yours.
They too have concluded that their god(s) exist with 100% certainty. You canot all be right now can you?
Your whole argument boils down to "I think things look like they were designed so my God must exist with 100% certainty"
This neither takes into account the fact that there are alternative nonsupernatural explanations (for which there is much evidence) or that a host of other supernatural explanations could also be invoked to explain the appearanc of design in nature.
You can only get you 100% figure by willfully ignoring all of these other possible explanations.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by Wumpini, posted 04-27-2008 3:13 AM Wumpini has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by Wumpini, posted 04-27-2008 10:09 AM Straggler has replied

  
Wumpini
Member (Idle past 5764 days)
Posts: 229
From: Ghana West Africa
Joined: 04-23-2008


Message 40 of 219 (464570)
04-27-2008 9:45 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by john6zx
04-27-2008 3:54 AM


Actually, I don't get the point!
John6zx writes:
I think you get the point.
Actually, I don't get the point.
You copy a lot of defintions to prove that God is not real, and then you attribute numerous characteristics to God as if He is real. You say God teaches us, He makes us, He punishes us, and He watches us! You say that God has a special place and a special list, and that He is content.
So what do you believe? Is God real or is He not real?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by john6zx, posted 04-27-2008 3:54 AM john6zx has not replied

  
Wumpini
Member (Idle past 5764 days)
Posts: 229
From: Ghana West Africa
Joined: 04-23-2008


Message 41 of 219 (464573)
04-27-2008 10:09 AM
Reply to: Message 39 by Straggler
04-27-2008 4:59 AM


You are correct and incorrect!
Straggler writes:
The point is that what you believe has no real bearing on the probability of God existing.
You are correct that what I beleive has no bearing on the probability of God existing. Although, my reasons for believing what I believe could have a bearing on the probability of His existence.
Your whole argument boils down to "I think things look like they were designed so my God must exist with 100% certainty"
You are incorrect that my whole argument boils down to one of design. It is correct that if you have something that is designed than you must have a designer. It definitely appears that there is design in this universe where we live. Therefore, a portion (not whole) of my argument would be based upon this fact. Design requires a designer!
You can only get you 100% figure by willfully ignoring all of these other possible explanations.
You are incorrect that I am willfully ignoring all other possibilities. If design was my only argument, then you would be correct that there could be other explanations besides the God of Abraham. However, as I said before, there is much additional evidence that points towards the diety where I place my faith! That is how I come to the 100% figure. I do not base this calculation completely upon a design argument!
Maybe the discussion of this additional evidence could be the topic for a different thread.
Thanks for your input.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by Straggler, posted 04-27-2008 4:59 AM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by Straggler, posted 04-27-2008 11:44 AM Wumpini has replied

  
Wumpini
Member (Idle past 5764 days)
Posts: 229
From: Ghana West Africa
Joined: 04-23-2008


Message 42 of 219 (464576)
04-27-2008 11:33 AM
Reply to: Message 38 by Dr Adequate
04-27-2008 4:42 AM


Abiogenesis a proven theory?
Could you give me the scientific evidence to show that abiogenesis is a proven theory as you state?
I cannot locate any scientific breakthrough that proves that spontaneous generation of life has been achieved or is even possible under natural conditions! Has someone spontaneously generated a living cell?
Maybe the real question is "what is life?" Surely not a few amino acids or proteins! I understand that there must be some order to the genetic instructions.
Thanks

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-27-2008 4:42 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-27-2008 1:00 PM Wumpini has not replied

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 43 of 219 (464577)
04-27-2008 11:44 AM
Reply to: Message 41 by Wumpini
04-27-2008 10:09 AM


Re: You are correct and incorrect!
That is how I come to the 100% figure.
How can you have 100% certainty in anything based on evidence?
You cannot have 100% certainty that anything exists. You could be dreaming everything you think is real. There is no amount of evidence that can actually disprove this possibility.
100% certainty requires faith. Not evidence.
The physical evidence suggests natural selection is responsible for the appearance of design in living things. What evidence do you have that opposes this?
I have a question.
What is the probaility of you being delusional about God?
Does this possibility exist at all?
How can we determine this probability?
If it is possible that you are delusional what necessary effect does this have on your 100% certainty figure?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by Wumpini, posted 04-27-2008 10:09 AM Wumpini has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by Wumpini, posted 04-27-2008 1:43 PM Straggler has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 44 of 219 (464581)
04-27-2008 1:00 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by Wumpini
04-27-2008 11:33 AM


Re: Abiogenesis a proven theory?
Could you give me the scientific evidence to show that abiogenesis is a proven theory as you state?
I cannot locate any scientific breakthrough that proves that spontaneous generation of life has been achieved or is even possible under natural conditions! Has someone spontaneously generated a living cell?
Abiogenesis is not spontaneous generation.
The theories are incomplete, but they're working it out.
From wiki:
quote:
There is no truly "standard model" of the origin of life. But most currently accepted models build in one way or another upon a number of discoveries about the origin of molecular and cellular components for life, which are listed in a rough order of postulated emergence:
1. Plausible pre-biotic conditions result in the creation of certain basic small molecules (monomers) of life, such as amino acids. This was demonstrated in the Miller-Urey experiment by Stanley L. Miller and Harold C. Urey in 1953.
2. Phospholipids (of an appropriate length) can spontaneously form lipid bilayers, a basic component of the cell membrane.
3. The polymerization of nucleotides into random RNA molecules might have resulted in self-replicating ribozymes (RNA world hypothesis).
4. Selection pressures for catalytic efficiency and diversity result in ribozymes which catalyse peptidyl transfer (hence formation of small proteins), since oligopeptides complex with RNA to form better catalysts. Thus the first ribosome is born, and protein synthesis becomes more prevalent.
5. Proteins outcompete ribozymes in catalytic ability, and therefore become the dominant biopolymer. Nucleic acids are restricted to predominantly genomic use.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by Wumpini, posted 04-27-2008 11:33 AM Wumpini has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 45 of 219 (464582)
04-27-2008 1:03 PM


It can't be 100%
Even if God, himself, flew down from the sky, landed in front of me, and told me that he existed, it would still not be a 100% probability that he existed. It could have been something other than God tricking me into thinking it was God, or I could have deluded the whole thing. Granted, it would be something like 99.9%, but it can never be 100%.

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by Wumpini, posted 04-27-2008 2:00 PM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 87 by ICANT, posted 04-29-2008 1:00 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024