About Evidence of God

Oops!

[Kate]

scathach wrote

I think the tards would prefer to do quite an un-motherly type of gushing where Choobus is concerned, wouldn't you say, Kate?

Most definitely!!

[psyadam]

Francis wrote

Rhinoq.

I'mnot the only one here who has heard of the "carnal" thing. Anyway, I'm waiting for you to answer my question respecting the Order in the Universe.

Forgive as this thread is 44 pages long now, but what is the post # where you asked about "respecting the Order in the Universe"?

Nevermind, reading more you repeated the question:

"I ask you why you don't agree that the Order in the Universe scientifically proves the existence of God? To elaborate upon the perfectly obvious notion inherent in it, if a person has a more accurate view of existence and creation than does an atheist, the theist is therefore more grounded in reality and his philosophy has therefore led him to truth."

I think Francis may have read "The Case for a Creator"--a book I am reading now. I can see how someone who strongly wants to believe in God could be convinced of the arguments that were in Chapter 7 "Evidence from Astronomy". Francis, have you read this chapter, and are you refering to the types of arguments from chapter 7 like I suspect?

I don't know this book.

[Waddlie]

Francis wrote

I don't know this book.

Do you know any books?

[Choobus]

he knows THE book. That's the only one you need. In fact, when your reading comprehension is actually negative you do better by not reading.

Francis wrote

Start by removing all of your clothes and looking into a mirror. Ask yourself 'Am I (meaning you)the master of the universe'?

Next draw a circle. Have it represent the total of all knowledge in the universe.

Now fill the circle in to represent that portion of the total knowledge you possess. Consider how identical (if you are truthful) the "before" and "after" circles appear.

Consider whether evidence of your own human existence could be grasped by your goldfish. Does the fish have any hope of understanding the evidence of your existence, even if it were presented to said fish? Can the fish ever hope to grasp that you could live outside of his watery environment? Even if a smarter fish could grasp in some inadequate way that you are alive, can this smarter fish ever grasp that you live a full and complex life? That you drive mechanical devices? That you read?

Now review the mirror, circle and goldfish. Ask yourself in all honesty---

If evidence were presented to you of the existence of God, isn't it certain that you would fail to grasp it?

Here is a question, if your God exists and designed us to have a relationship with "it" why the in the fuck did "it" not create us with the ability to grasp its existence? Why are we fucking even flesh and bone and not souls, spirits, what ever the fuck disney land shit I dunno. :angel:
You cannot say that "it" had a perfectly good reason for making shit the way "it" did. That is like me saying I can come to your house, ass fuck your pet dog (lets assume you have a dog) in the middle of the night, and say it was to cure your dog of a rare disease, but I tell you I have a perfectly good and rational reason for doing it, but I am forbidden to explain it to you for it to be logically consistent. Or I could say you couldn't grasp it anyway. :bop: