"there need not be a precise definition of "GOD" to enjoy ones faith..." Strawman. The issue is NOT that a definition is needed to "enjoy ones faith". This issue is, does god EXIST. As for love... I agree, we probably have very different definitions, and yet we can all agree that we believe in love. But what does this tell us? Nothing. Its nearly useless since we have NO IDEA if we are in fact talking about the same thing. We can both believe in blorgrats, but if a blorgrat is a tree by your definition and a blorgrat is a car by mine, who gives a rats ass. Failing to properly define what a blorgrat IS before it is formally debated would be a serious error. peace axeman
I don't see how that applies in this case. This is a simple numerical sequence as opposed to pattern recognition. This is more like operating a sophisticated zoo exhibit. Your job is to walk into a room of 50 analog meters and tweak them all to the specs your boss has given you. You know that the readings on the meters must read the following 4+1.001, 6.25+-.0025, 45.78+-.11, etc for your animal to survive. To your amazement, you find that every meter came right out of the package perfectly tweaked to keep the animal alive. Do you assume it was just coincidence?
Why do you do this Shiner? This has NOTHING to do with ANYTHING we are talking about. Are you honestly claiming that nobody would have EVER thought of raising a family with a mother and father teaching their kids good moral habits unless the Bible pointed it out? That is ABSURD. That this universe may have been created has got NOTHING to do with what are the best child rearing practices. You are CONFLATING -- get it CONFLATING -- "creator" and (biblical) "God". Are you aware of some of the other concepts of social organization the bible advises? Like the fact that it is OKAY with slavery, for example? Should the fact that slavery is, today, regarded as vile, evil, backward be used as evidence against your "creator" then?
No you don't see huh? Gee, why aren't I surprised. Have you read the book? If not why not? Isn't this issue close to your heart? Do you not wish to understand what scientific methods have to say about the "amazing coincidences" that you claim exist? A man is walking down the street. A gust of wind begins to blow and a shingle from a roof above falls and strikes him on the head, killing him. Look at all the factors that must have been EXACTLY as they were for this to have happened. The man must have been walking down PRECISELY this street (out of dozens or hundreds), at precisely the speed he was walking at, the gust of wind had to gather at precisely that time, that very shingle had to be precisely as loose as it was, etc. No way could this have happened accidently. A higher power must have been involved! (I'm paraphrasing someone else's example here, can't remember who wrot the original.)
It applies perfectly. You simply insist on continuing to call the sky PINK. You use the same old debunked analogies over and over again. Your saying nothing more than: WOW... isnt it amazing, that the universe spawned life which can exist in the universe which spawned it. Ummmm shoeshine... there is NOTHING amazing about this at all. Ive shown several examples of where humans easily PERCEIVE order where there is NONE. This is all you are doing. You haven not provided a shred of evidence that it is anything beyond this. peace axeman
Okay, if that's the argument, then I understand. Axe and others have repeated that ad infinitum. And for the 100th time I will say this: I'm not trying to prove God with this. I am willing to admit I can't do that. Going to your example: you cannot prove someone did not throw the tile off the roof any more than I can prove someone did.
>We can both believe in blorgrats, but if a >blorgrat is a tree by your definition and a >blorgrat is a car by mine, who gives >a rats ass. Or a blorgrat's ass for that matter. JB
Shiner, that wasn't the point of the example. The example just showed how a normal event of a shingle falling from a roof and killing someone could be spun into a tale of "amazing coincedences", too great to have happened by chance alone. You don't really believe anything "supernatural" occurred, do you? It really was just a case of "bad luck" for the poor guy, you understand? (I hope so!) I have no idea where you got the someone throwing it at him from. I included that example because that is very much what you are doing with your design "arguments" (assertions, really).