Does the Theistic God Exist?

21CenturyIconoclast

@ProudToBeCatholic

Well, I'll be damned, you came back from hiding relative to your primitive faith of being a Catholic where I easily Bible Slapped you Silly®️ to no end!

If you have the nerve to "try" and engage me again, will you RUN AWAY again if your kitchen gets to hot? Huh? Don't be SCARED, okay?

ProudToBeCatholic

Argument Topic: A Couple of Stipulations

@21CenturyIconoclast

A pleasure to see you back on this website. I have been eagerly awaiting your return hahahaha. I think you have misremembered our past debates. You have not once Bible Slapped me Silly, but it does make me happy to see you have retained your snarky sense of humor, albeit your long absence from this site. It makes for most interesting debate, I must say. So, welcome back!

I certainly have to nerve to engage you again for it is quite enjoyable. A couple points of clarification regarding your statement:

I never ran away from you. I clearly explained to you on three different occasions that I was seventeen years old at the time and my parents no longer wanted me using my computer for anything other than school. I told you I would return as soon as I turned eighteen and you will see that I did indeed return around the time of my birthday.
Again, I never ran away from you. On the contrary, as soon as I returned to this debate site, I tagged you in a message, asking you where you were and letting you know I had returned. If you would like the link to that post, I would absolutely love to provide it for you.

Now that we have clarified your dishonesty, allow me to lay out the stipulations for debate that I will be adhering to whether you like it or not.

I am entering the Marine Corps come September and as such, I will be here for about two more weeks.
You may create the topic of debate; whatever you would like, and I will be happy to debate you on that topic of your choosing. Make the debate quickly though, for there is not much time.
In order to prevent endless debate that devolves into ad hominem attacks and fruitless discussion, I will be adhering to my rule of five. I will counter your arguments five times and if the debate is still continuing after five responses from each of us, I will not respond. We are not in a formal debate setting and as such, debate can last as long as both wish to continue it, resulting in an endless ping pong match of rebuttals. I will be following the typical form of a formal debate with limited responses in order to prevent this.

If you have no objection to any of these three stipulations, I would absolutely love to engage you in debate again. (Just make sure you don’t declare yourself the winner too quickly, especially when everyone can clearly see otherwise

Dreamer

Argument Topic: This is confusing, what's the difference between God in general versus theistic god? I want to understand.

@ProudToBeCatholic

"(c) The universe cannot be its own cause, for the Big Bang is a chain of causal events which produced the universe"

I think this is the weakest link in your argument. Just for starters the Big Bang theory is only one of many scientific theories. There is the Big Bounce scientific explanation for example.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bounce

This is also the God of the gaps, focusing on what is unknown to science.

""God of the gaps" is a theological perspective in which gaps in scientific knowledge are taken to be evidence or proof of God's existence."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_of_the_gaps

Therefore, even if you are correct in that the universe cannot be its own cause, choosing God as the answer with infinite regressions, doesn't help much. Who created God?

just_sayin

@Dreamer

I think this is the weakest link in your argument. Just for starters the Big Bang theory is only one of many scientific theories. There is the Big Bounce scientific explanation for example.

You are right there are a lot of universe creating theories. The big bounce was abandoned 3 decades ago as a viable option. Counting the 75% of missing mass from Dark Matter and Dark Energy, the amount of mass needed is still too small to cause a retraction in our universe. Further, in any "contraction" there would be a loss of energy, if even a small loss. This would mean that each bounce would get smaller and smaller. That means that the universe would have ended a literal eternity ago.

This is also the God of the gaps, focusing on what is unknown to science.

There is also a science of the gaps, when people will appeal to science as if it is magic to solve the issue. For example appeals to quantum mechanics to explain how you fit all the mass and energy of the universe in zero space. People will often just ignore scientific problems with some of these theories like Lawrence Krauss's universe from nothing ignoring the math that a quantum fluctuation of sufficient size to create our universe would not exist long-enough in spacetime for the fundamental forces to form to allow for the expansion of the universe. Seems like a big problem to me. Krauss admits its a problem but he appeals to the magic of science, even though there is no science that explains it.

Others appeal to a multiverse to minimize the dramatic impact of just how finely tuned the fundamental forces of our universe are to permit a universe at all. All known non-theoretical evidence suggests there is no multiverse, for it there were an eternity of universe out there, they would have coalesced and we would either get a radiation signal from them, or they would be moving in various directions within our universe. But hey, if science doesn't prove your point, then go with magic and call it 'science' instead. Isn't that right, Dreamer?

21CenturyIconoclast

@ProudToBeCatholic

ProudToBeCatholic, whose mantra is; "Do not cherry-pick biblical passages, even though they are inspired by Jesus, that totally embarrasses me and my primitive thinking Bronze and Iron Age Catholic Religion,” and is the number one king of using ungodly EISIGENSIS in trying to rewrite Jesus' actual literal words, and the number one Bible Apologist that twists himself into a pretzel to "try" and change Jesus' disturbing and despicable inspired words, ran away from many of my posts because his "mommy and daddy" doesn’t want him to be on this Religion Forum in the first place, and where he outright ungodly dishonors his parents that are paying his way at this time to not follow their rules,

YOUR PATHETIC RUN AWAY EXCUSE #4832726734: “I never ran away from you. I clearly explained to you on three different occasions that I was seventeen years old at the time and my parents no longer wanted me using my computer for anything other than school.”

You have RAN AWAY and went into hiding to save face when you did not address my following BIBLE SLAPPING YOU SILLY in the following links:

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/162895/#Comment_162895

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/162919/#Comment_162919

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/163010/#Comment_163010

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/163147/#Comment_163147

YOUR DIRECT QUOTE IN GOING AGAINST YOUR PRIMITIVE BRONZE AND IRON AGE BIBLE: “I am entering the Marine Corps come September and as such, I will be here for about two more weeks.”

WHAT?!!! The concept of joining the marines is to eventually MURDER or KILL Jesus’ creation, get it? Therefore you ONCE AGAIN go directly against the primitive Bible as shown herewith:

“You shall not murder.” (Exodus 20:13)

“‘You shall not murder.” (Deuteronomy 5:17)

“You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not murder; and whoever murders will be liable to judgment.” (Matthew 5:21)

“For the commandments, “You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not covet,” and any other commandment, are summed up in this word: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” (Romans 13:9)

“For he who said, “Do not commit adultery,” also said, “Do not murder.” If you do not commit adultery but do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law.” (James 2:11)

CAN YOU SPELL “B-I-B-L-E H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-T-E?” Sure you can, Bible fool!

So, with you joining the marines in being a direct pseudo-christian now, is yet another excuse for me not to easily BIBLE SLAP YOU SILLY®️ again and again! Good move primitive thinking Catholic!

.

ProudToBeCatholic

Argument Topic: THE COMEDIAN RETURNS

@21CenturyIconoclast ;

21 Century Iconoclast, who doesn’t know how to differentiate falsehood from reality, preferring to live in their delusional world which prevents them from seeing the arrogance and downright stupidity of their posts, who can’t even get their facts right on what the Bible teaches, erroneously claiming the Bible condemns killing of any kind and not realizing the definition of murder,

YOUR HILARIOUS QUOTE: You have RAN AWAY and went into hiding to save face when you did not address my following BIBLE SLAPPING YOU SILLY in the following links:

Are you delusional or just dishonest? I responded to link one and links three and four do not even require a response since you were just spewing your nonsense about me leaving this debate website. Link two is the only one I actually didn’t respond to and I am not going to unless you would like to start a new debate topic concerning the Trinity, in which case I would love to defend this fundamental Christian belief. I should note that your downright dishonesty and delusional thinking is quite hilarious though.

YOUR QUOTE THAT SHOWS JUST HOW BIBLICALLY ILLITERATE YOU REALLY ARE: WHAT?!!! The concept of joining the marines is to eventually MURDER or KILL Jesus’ creation, get it? Therefore you ONCE AGAIN go directly against the primitive Bible as shown herewith:

You should be a comedian, man. Do you know the definition of murder? Is your intelligence high enough to recognize the difference between killing and murder? Probably not, so allow me to explain it to you. Murder is the “the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another” (Oxford Dictionary) and to murder is to “kill (someone) unlawfully and with premeditation” (Oxford Dictionary). To kill is to “cause the death of (a person, animal, or other living thing)” (Oxford Dictionary), Do you notice the difference? Murder is the unlawful or unjust killing of man while killing is just to cause death to someone. Killing is not murder unless it is done unlawfully and unjustly. Here are a couple of Scripture verses:

Exodus 22:2-3- “If a thief is caught breaking in at night and is struck a fatal blow, the defender is not guilty of bloodshed; but if it happens after sunrise, the defender is guilty of bloodshed.”

Genesis 9:6- “Whoever sheds human blood, by humans shall their blood be shed; for in the image of God had God made mankind.” (This verse obviously speaks of murder, for God is not establishing a chain of killing where one man kills a killer and thus must be killed by another, who then becomes a killer and must be killed by another, and on and on and on.)

Romans 13:4- “For he is God’s servant for you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer”.

Exodus 23:7- “Keep far from a false charge, and do not kill the innocent and righteous, for I will not acquit the wicked.”

Leviticus 24:17- “whoever takes a human life shall surely be put to death”.

Ecclesiastes 3:8- “A time to love, and a time to hate; a time for war, and a time for peace.”

And I could provide hundreds of other verses that show there is not only a difference between just and unjust killing, but that Sacred Scripture actually condones justified killing as a good thing.

I must ask, do you not know any philosophy, textual criticism, or theology? Is this why you resort to making yourself the Bible fool in taking verses out of Scripture that suit what you are saying in the moment and then creating absurd debate topics nobody should be having, like whether handicapped people are allowed in churches and whether or not Christians can use medicine, not to mention your dishonest attacks on both the current and previous pope. A bit of friendly criticism; go educate yourself in some basic atheist apologetical arguments so we can actually have a fruitful discussion where you bring valid argumentation to the table. You will find you won’t be nearly as embarrassed every time you post here if you do, and you won’t have to make up for what is lacking in your arguments with insults or ad hominem attacks. Intellectual conversations are actually pretty enjoyable; you oughtta try having one someday.

just_sayin

Argument Topic: Miracles are evidence God exists

The evidence that the universe had a beginning and its incredible fine tuning show us that God
1. Is powerful enough to create a universe
2. Is timeless - because he must exist out side of space-time, because something can not create its own self
3 Is Spaceless - because he must exist out side of space-time
4. Is intelligent to create a finely tuned universe

Dreamer and JulesKorngold will tell you to deny science and say there are no miracles. But peer reviewed science suggests otherwise. Such as this miracle of healing from blindness in Science Direct:

Case report of instantaneous resolution of juvenile macular degeneration blindness after proximal intercessory prayer

Or a case of miraculous stomach healing printed in Science Direct:

Case Report of gastroparesis healing: 16 years of a chronic syndrome resolved after proximal intercessory prayer

Now science denying atheists will claim we should deny science and instead have faith that there are no miracles. But if even 1 case of a miracle is documented, then they lose.

But when there is evidence of healings of eyesight and hearing (see Southern Medical Journal):

Study of the Therapeutic Effects of Proximal Intercessory Prayer (STEPP) on Auditory and Visual Impairments in Rural Mozambiqu

you have to conclude that the the anti-science atheistic community just doesn't have a prayer of convincing people that science is wrong on the evidence of miracles.

21CenturyIconoclast

@ProudToBeCatholic

ProudToBeCatholic, whose mantra is; "Do not cherry-pick biblical passages, even though they are inspired by Jesus, that totally embarrasses me and my primitive thinking Bronze and Iron Age Catholic Religion,” and is the number one king of using ungodly EISIGENSIS in trying to rewrite Jesus' actual literal words, and the number one Bible Apologist that twists himself into a pretzel to "try" and change Jesus' disturbing and despicable inspired words, ran away from many of my posts because his "mommy and daddy" doesn’t want him to be on this Religion Forum in the first place, and where he outright ungodly dishonors his parents that are paying his way at this time to not follow their rules, Listen up pseudo-christian hell bound Catholic,

YOUR QUOTE AGAIN: “Do you know the definition of murder? Is your intelligence high enough to recognize the difference between killing and murder?”

What part of my quote to you in relation to your dumbfounded quote above didn’t you understand as shown below?:

"WHAT?!!! The concept of joining the marines is to eventually MURDER or KILL Jesus’ creation, get it? Therefore you ONCE AGAIN go directly against the primitive Bible as shown herewith …"

Heads up dumb pseudo-christian, marines MAY “Murder” an individual, and they MAY “kill” them as well, therefore you wasted your time again in bringing forth verses that show it is okay for YOU to murder and kill, which goes directly against the will of Jesus IN CONTRADICTION, as shown below where Jesus will revenge you in your lifetime, bible fool!:

JESUS AS GOD SAID VENGENCE IS HIS, AND NOT YOURS ON THE BATTLEFIELD: “Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.”
(Romans 12:19)

JESUS AS GOD SAID AGAIN VENGENCE IS HIS, NOT YOURS!: “For we know him who said, “Vengeance is mine; I will repay.” And again, “The Lord will judge his people.” (Hebrews 10:30)

ON THE BATTLEFIELD OF A MARINE, YOU ARE TO FOLLOW JESUS’ DIRECT WORDS: "Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.”

Do you want to call Jesus a regarding in how you are to conduct yourself as a marine in battle as shown in the 3 passages above? Huh? I DARE YOU!!! LOL!

As shown ad infinitum, you are as bible as “just_sayin” in their ungodly ramblings. Seriously, with the challenged mental state that you show relative to the primitive Bronze and Iron Age Bible, and in taking this lack of mental capabilities to the marine corps, you will NOT make it, but will be jettisoned quickly to not only save your life, but other marines as well!

NEXT HELL BOUND CATHOLIC BIBLE INEPT PSEUDO-CHRISTIAN LIKE “PROUDTOBECATHOLIC” WILL BE …?

.

21CenturyIconoclast

@ProudToBeCatholic

ProudToBeCatholic, whose mantra is; "Do not cherry-pick biblical passages, even though they are inspired by Jesus, that totally embarrasses me and my primitive thinking Bronze and Iron Age Catholic Religion,” and is the number one king of using ungodly EISIGENSIS in trying to rewrite Jesus' actual literal words, and the number one Bible Apologist that twists himself into a pretzel to "try" and change Jesus' disturbing and despicable inspired words, ran away from many of my posts because his "mommy and daddy" doesn’t want him to be on this Religion Forum in the first place, and where he outright ungodly dishonors his parents that are paying his way at this time to not follow their rules, Listen up pseudo-christian hell bound Catholic,

YOUR SLATHERING FALSEHOOD QUOTE: “Are you delusional or just dishonest? I responded to link one. …….”

LINK ONE: https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/162895/#Comment_162895

Yes, you did respond to my link one above, and you laid on your back with your feet in the air in giving up because I owned you upon the topic of link one, whereas you apologized that I was correct by you stating the following:

1. “Actually, you made some good points here, even if I disagree with some of it. Thank you for calling me out on this matter; that I should find some other means to preach the Gospel besides online.”

2. “You are correct that they told me I am not to use the computer for anything except college,…”

3. “ ….. without pause, disobey the rule by talking to others about it, but not while using their computer. So seriously, thank you for bringing this to my attention.”

4. “So, once again, thank you for bringing to my attention that I need to respect my parents’ wishes on their computer and use it for the purposes they established. I appreciate you bringing this up.”

In your response to my link one as embarrassingly shown above in your behalf, I have NEVER had my assed kissed as much as you did in one post before, so congratulations on admitting in just how BIBLE you truly are, we thank you!!!

Furthermore, let it be known that you RAN AWAY from the other 3 links with little boy grade school excuses, of which I expected nothing less!

NEXT DUMBFOUNDED CATHOLIC THAT WOULD LIKE TO TRY AND BE BIBLE DUMBER THAN “PROUDTOBECATHOLIC” WILL BE …?

.

ProudToBeCatholic

Argument Topic: Twisting of Scripture on the Iconoclast's Part

@21CenturyIconoclast

21CenturyIconoclast, who doesn’t know how to differentiate falsehood from reality, preferring to live in their delusional world which prevents them from seeing the arrogance and downright stupidity of their posts, who can’t even get their facts right on what the Bible teaches, erroneously claiming the Bible condemns killing of any kind and not realizing the definition of murder,

YOUR QUOTE IN TRYING TO SAVE FACE: Heads up dumb pseudo-christian, marines MAY “Murder” an individual, and they MAY “kill” them as well, therefore you wasted your time again in bringing forth verses that show it is okay for YOU to murder and kill, which goes directly against the will of Jesus IN CONTRADICTION, as shown below where Jesus will revenge you in your lifetime, bible fool!:

As a Marine, I will not murder anyone, but I will certainly kill, if the need arises. Again, Murder is the unjust taking of the life of an individual while killing is the just taking of the life of an individual. You need to get that straight in your mind.

Secondly, the Bible verses I listed are written by this same Jesus you say condemned killing, but as I showed previously, He only condemned murder, not killing. In fact, the Bible condones killing in certain cases and God Himself even commanded it at times.

Thirdly, there must be a difference made between taking vengeance and fighting in a war to defend your country or another country. We are not to avenge ourselves, the Bible says so, but this does not mean we cannot defend the United States, Ukraine, or any other country. Avenging is taking revenge for a personal harm done to you. Defense is fighting against those who are planning to or are in the process of harming you. Case in point: Jesus commanded His disciples in Luke 22:36 to “Let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one.” Here Christ commanded His disciples to buy a weapon to defend themselves with. Or how about King David? He was a warrior and God even worked through him to kill Goliath with five stones and a sling. What about all the other great men and women of the faith in both Sacred Scripture and Church history who fought to defend their countries and were helped by God, such as Gideon, Barak, Joshua, Moses, David, Saul, and so on? The Scriptures are not at contradiction, your twisting of them are.

Now, instead of pettily attacking me for joining the Marine Corps, actually start a debate so we can have intellectual conversation. And please do try to avoid making arguments like this one: https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/9079/pseudo-christians-do-not-need-doctors-or-hospitals

Or this one: https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/8886/christian-churches-remove-your-handicapped-ramps-and-parking-spaces-now

Or this one: https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/8873/pope-the-dope-francis-says-being-gay-is-not-a-crime-wrong

These three debate topics you have created in the past did not even warrant responses and I don’t know anyone, including myself, entertained them for more than a second. Heck, I spent months and months arguing with you about whether the Bible prohibited churches from allowing handicapped people inside, for heaven’s sake! Maybe you don’t understand how utterly that really is, but I am pretty sure everyone else did, to the point where you had other atheists telling you you were being ridiculous. I really hope you will actually start an intellectual debate where we can discuss the topic without resorting to insults or distortions of Scripture like you so often like to do.

21CenturyIconoclast

@ProudToBeCatholic

ProudToBeCatholic, whose mantra is; "Do not cherry-pick biblical passages, even though they are inspired by Jesus, that totally embarrasses me and my primitive thinking Bronze and Iron Age Catholic Religion,” and is the number one king of using ungodly EISIGENSIS in trying to rewrite Jesus' actual literal words, and the number one Bible Apologist that twists himself into a pretzel to "try" and change Jesus' disturbing and despicable inspired words, ran away from many of my posts because his "mommy and daddy" doesn’t want him to be on this Religion Forum in the first place, and where he outright ungodly dishonors his parents that are paying his way at this time to not follow their rules, Listen up pseudo-christian hell bound Catholic, and truly acts his age of an 18 year old bible dumbass,

First off, I don't blame you for not addressing my post in correcting your OUTRIGHT BIBLE STUPIDITY relative to you shamefully discarding your parents wishes, especially while still living with them at 18 years old! Like I stated, I have NEVER had my kissed that much by any bible inept pseudo-christian, other than YOU! LOL!!! Here is the link again in you groveling at my feet in being so dumbfounded of what the Bible says about parents that you did not follow: https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/166456/#Comment_166456

After wiping the egg from your face regarding your embarrassment above in placating to me on all fours, you then step in more proverbial poo in having an 18 year old mind set that can't be changed, but only to be made fun of at your young age

YOUR REVEALING QUOTE IN OUTRIGHT CALLING JESUS A !!!!!!!!!: 'Thirdly, there must be a difference made between taking vengeance and fighting in a war to defend your country or another country."

Oh, oh, not sure of your Bible stupidity when you said "there must be a difference" made between taking vengeance (by god) and fighting in a war...." WRONG, 18 YEAR OLD DUFUS! Jesus, as God, in his direct understandable words, once again, said the following, to wit:

1. JESUS AS GOD SAID VENGEANCE IS HIS, AND NOT YOURS ON THE BATTLEFIELD: “Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.”
(Romans 12:19)

2. JESUS AS GOD SAID AGAIN VENGAENCE IS HIS, NOT YOURS!: “For we know him who said, “Vengeance is mine; I will repay.” And again, “The Lord will judge his people.” (Hebrews 10:30)

3. ON THE BATTLEFIELD OF A MARINE, YOU ARE TO FOLLOW JESUS’ DIRECT WORDS: "Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.” (Romans 12:19)

Simply put for your 18 year old vacant mind set, what part of when Jesus said the following don't you understand?!:

1. "never revenge yourselves."
2. "Vengence is mine, I will repay"
3. "but leave it to the wrath of god"
4. “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.”

Most importantly, what don't you understand when Jesus' inspired words regarding this topic, said this:

"Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for it is written: 'It is mine to avenge; I will repay,' says the Lord” (Romans 12:18-20). Jesus as God will repay, so leave room for His wrath. You don't need to take it into your hands when you know it is in His. God will deal with this! GET IT DUMB 18 YEAR OLD PSEUDO-CHRISTIAN?

YOU ARE NOW ON RECORD IN CALLING JESUS A BLATANT FABRICATOR BECAUSE YOU DO NOT BELIEVE THAT REVENGE IS IN HIS HANDS TO REPAY WITH HIS WRATH, AND NOT YOURS AS A MARINE UNTIL YOU FLUNK OUT!

.

21CenturyIconoclast

@ProudToBeCatholic ;

ProudToBeCatholic, whose mantra is; "Do not cherry-pick biblical passages, even though they are inspired by Jesus, that totally embarrasses me and my primitive thinking Bronze and Iron Age Catholic Religion,” and is the number one king of using ungodly EISIGENSIS in trying to rewrite Jesus' actual literal words, and the number one Bible Apologist that twists himself into a pretzel to "try" and change Jesus' disturbing and despicable inspired words, ran away from many of my posts because his "mommy and daddy" doesn’t want him to be on this Religion Forum in the first place, and where he outright ungodly dishonors his parents that are paying his way at this time to not follow their rules, Listen up pseudo-christian hell bound Catholic, and truly acts his age of an 18 year old bible dumbass,

YOUR LAUGHABLE 18 YEAR OLD QUOTE OF WHERE YOU HAD TO RUN AWAY FROM ME IN THE LINKS IN QUESTION SHOWN BELOW: "These three debate topics you have created in the past did not even warrant responses and I don’t know anyone, including myself, entertained them for more than a second"

HUH? The three threads of question are listed below, and when you said they DID NOT even warrant responses, then why did you TRY to respond to them in the first place with overly long dissertations that reached a record, and made you the continued Bible fool that you are?

1. You "tried" to respond 9 TIMES, I REPEAT, 9 TIMES with empty long dissertations to this thread!
https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/9079/pseudo-christians-do-not-need-doctors-or-hospitals

2. Here you "tried" again 29 TIMES, I REPEAT, 29 TIMES with yet more long-winded vacant dissertations in this thread!
!https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/8886/christian-churches-remove-your-handicapped-ramps-and-parking-spaces-now

3. You didn't enter this thread because you obviously new that I would easily BIBLE SLAP YOU SILLY®️like I have done many times at your embarrassing expense in the two threads above!

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/8873/pope-the-dope-francis-says-being-gay-is-not-a-crime-wrong

Therefore, why did you LIE to the membership in saying in your quote above that the above 3 threads of mine did not warrant responses, especially from you, when in fact, you did respond to them 38 times, I repeat, 38 times total, where you made yourself the continued bible fool, !

Your big problem, is that you think that everyone else is as DUMB as you are in you being only 18 years of age, where in fact, you act like a 7 year old, and where we won't catch your LIES that you continue to bring forth as exampled above, to take the spot light off of your complete and unadulterated Bible stupidity! LOL!

To save yourself blatant and further embarrassment in this Religion Forum, can't you move up you joining the marines sooner than later, and then report back to this forum subsequent to you FLUNKING basic training and not having the marine mind set to begin with? You can thank me later.

NEXT PSEUDO-CHRISTIAN CATHOLIC LIKE "PROUDTOBECATHOLIC" THAT LIES IN FRONT OF JESUS AND THAT HAS RAN AWAY FROM MANY OF MY THREADS, WILL BE ...?

.

Dreamer

Argument Topic: Most Christians are reduced to a caricature.

Jehovah's Witness has child sex abuse.

"In 2015, it was disclosed that the Australia Branch of Jehovah's Witnesses had records of 1,006 alleged perpetrators of child sexual abuse, relating to more than 1,800 victims since 1950, none of which were reported to police by the group."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah's_Witnesses'_handling_of_child_sex_abuse

just_sayin

@Dreamer
Argument Topic: Most Christians are reduced to a caricature.

Let's assume for a moment all Christians can be reduced to a caricature. So? That does not disprove that there is a theistic God. Personal attacks may make some feel better, but it doesn't win the argument. Now I've provided examples of miracles that have not been refuted, and by definition miracles are supernatural events, which would suggest a God exists as their source. See the difference in support for a argument and a personal attack? I get it though. When the blind suddenly can see, the deaf can suddenly hear, and the lame can now walk, its kind of hard to deny what you can see, hear, and touch. Hard to argue against miracles when they are right there in front of you disproving your claim that there is no God. So it makes sense some would instead try to change the subject and attack those who dared provide medically documented evidence of miracles.

I believe there is more evidence than the blind seeing, the deaf hearing and the lame walking to show that there is God though. I believe that the fact the universe had a beginning suggests that there is a God. As philosopher, Anthony Kenny said “A proponent of the big bang theory, at least if he is an atheist, must believe that the universe came from nothing and by nothing.” That seems ridiculous to me. Only nothing can come from nothing, because nothing has no properties from which to bring anything. Yet, many atheists would rather believe in magic than God. As atheist philosopher Kai Neilson has conceded “Suppose you suddenly hear a loud bang ... and you ask me, ‘What made that bang?’ and I reply, ‘Nothing, it just happened.’ You would not accept that. In fact, you would find my reply quite unintelligible.” If there was a Big Bang, where did it come from? How can you fit an entire universe in zero space?

Since the universe came into existence and wasn't always there, it must have a cause, and that cause must be uncaused, changeless, timeless, and immaterial because it must have existed outside of space-time itself. Desperately, some have appealed to quantum mechanics for a 'magical' solution. But as philosopher Robert Deltete has observed, “There is no basis in ordinary quantum theory for the claim that the universe itself is uncaused, much less for the claim that it sprang into being uncaused from literally nothing.”

Let's just take a moment and debunk some of the classic alternative theories of the universes beginning:

1) Oscillating Universe (which expands and re-contracts forever) -
Science debunks this one and has for at least 3 or more decades. Even granting the 75% of missing dark matter and dark energy in the universe, the mass needed to trigger a contraction does not exist in our universe. Scientists believe that it will keep expanding for ever. Further, while you could conceive of a universe that continues into the future forever, there is no scenario for a past eternal universe. Also, any expanding/contracting universe would lose some energy with each expansion/contracting, meaning that the universe would have ended a literal eternity ago.

2) Vacuum Fluctuation Universe theories (which postulate an eternal vacuum out of which our universe is born)
This theory falls apart with a very basic question. If the vacuum was eternal, why do we not observe an infinitely old universe? It should be radiating with the energy of numerous eternal universes. Yet, we do not observe these universes and there is no indication of them.

3) Quantum Gravity Universe theory [Stephen Hawking] - sometimes called the shuttlecock theory
This theory fails the math test. I mean that literally. Hawkings formula doesn't work with real numbers, only imaginary ones. Its hard to imagine a scenario where imaginary non-material numbers can create a material universe. Further, since Hawking claims in this infinitely small universe there were fluctations, why didn't the universe come into being and cease to exist an eternity ago? Even Hawking admitted “Almost everyone now believes that the universe, and time itself, had a beginning at the Big Bang.”

As philosopher, Richard Swinburne, has observed a cause must come before its effect, and there is no moment before the Big Bang. Therefore, there cannot be a scientific explanation of the first state of the universe. So, without a personal explanation, there is no explanation at all.

See, an argument based on points, science, and reason, without personal attacks, can be made.

21CenturyIconoclast

@just_sayin

just_sayin,

YOUR QUOTE RELATING TO A GOD CONCEPT: "Hard to argue against miracles when they are right there in front of you disproving your claim that there is no God."

Addressing your complete ignorance to your faith again, within your quote above relative to miracles and a god, which god are you referring to in this statement? The Hebrew god Yahweh, or is it Jesus, or Allah?

Awaiting a cogent response this time. Thank you.

.

just_sayin

@21CenturyIconoclast
Awaiting a cogent response this time.

Me too.

Addressing your complete ignorance to your faith again, within your quote above relative to miracles and a god, which god are you referring to in this statement? The Hebrew god Yahweh, or is it Jesus, or Allah?

The debate doesn't specify a particular God. Now I have provided 3 scientific studies that showed miracles happened after prayer. I've provided arguments based on the universe having a beginning which suggests that there is a God and debunked several popular theories for the beginning of the universe while those who are arguing that God doesn't exist have tried desperately to change the topic and have not put forward any credible evidence that there is no God.

ProudToBeCatholic

Argument Topic: Is Vengeance Prohibited in All Cases?

@21CenturyIconoclast

21CenturyIconoclast,

Thank you for adding onto your description of me. It really is quite comical that I make you so flustered that you devote your time to making a paragraph-long description of me, but it is also unfortunate that a lot of it is objectively false, such as “and where he outright ungodly dishonors his parents that are paying his way at this time to not follow their rules”. I think I have told you five or six times now that now that I am an adult, my parents do not care what websites I go on. I explained multiple times that their rules were only for while I was underage and now that I am an adult, my parents no longer hold me to those restrictions. But please, keep it in there because it makes my description longer!

YOUR QUOTE: First off, I don't blame you for not addressing my post in correcting your OUTRIGHT BIBLE STUPIDITY relative to you shamefully discarding your parents wishes, especially while still living with them at 18 years old! Like I stated, I have NEVER had my kissed that much by any bible inept pseudo-christian, other than YOU! LOL!!! Here is the link again in you groveling at my feet in being so dumbfounded of what the Bible says about parents that you did not follow:

I didn’t address your post because it was not worth addressing. First of all, I am no longer discarding my parents wishes. Since your skull is too thick for you to finally get that through your head, let me type in all-caps for you. MY PARENTS RULE WAS THAT, UNTIL I AM EIGHTEEN AND NO LONGER UNDER THEIR AUTHORITY, I WAS NOT ALLOWED TO USE THE COMPUTER FOR ANYTHING BUT SCHOOL. Now that I am eighteen however, I have my own computer and am allowed to use it for whatever I want. As a side note, I am not even in school anymore so they are no longer paying my way at this time. Second, I knew exactly what the Bible said on the issue of obedience to parents, and I had been choosing to get around them by saying I had a right cause. Of course, debating with you, if you even want to call this debate, is a shameful thing for anyone, since you don’t know how to argue logically, but regardless, I had wanted so badly to defend the Catholic faith and to possibly convert you to Christianity that I decided to continue debating. When you brought that up, I was willing to concede that you were correct and leave because I knew I would return just a few months later, once I was eighteen. I never kissed your , I merely acknowledged you were right and thanked you.

YOUR QUOTE: Oh, oh, not sure of your Bible stupidity when you said "there must be a difference" made between taking vengeance (by god) and fighting in a war...." WRONG, 18 YEAR OLD DUFUS! Jesus, as God, in his direct understandable words, once again, said the following, to wit:

What are you even talking about? Are you even reading my arguments? I just said there is a difference between vengeance and defense or even offense. Vengeance is “punishment inflicted or retribution exacted for an injury or wrong” (Oxford Dictionary). A point on this needs to be made however though, that when God speaks of vengeance, it is almost always in the context of personal vengeance. He has established the government to enact vengeance on criminals, as Paul says in Romans 13:4 and as God commands all throughout Scripture. When God says vengeance is His and that we are not to take vengeance, He is speaking of us avenging ourselves for a personal wrong. That is God’s job. Secondly, Paul says that the government is God’s instrument in Romans 13:4. He writes: “The authorities are God’s servants, sent for your good. But if you are doing wrong, of course you should be afraid, for they have the power to punish you. They are God’s servants, sent for the very purpose of punishing those who do what is wrong.” The military is a part of the government, ie, the Department of Defense. Therefore, the military is authorized BY GOD HIMSELF to punish wrongdoing and defend ourselves and others against potential threats. I really hope you actually understand this time and don’t continue posting the same disproven argument over and over again in reply to my points.

Now, I will address each of your points:

Paul is speaking of personal vengeance here. He tell us not to avenge ourselves because God will repay the person for any wrongs they have done. For example, if someone steals something from my house, I am not to take vengeance on them by stealing from them or wronging them in any way. Rather, I am to leave it to God and allow Him to work through the government to bring this man to justice, hence Romans 13:4.
This verse has the author cross referencing to the Old Testament, but he applies the verse to apostasy. He warns the people that if they trample “the Son of God underfoot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified them, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace” then there will be vengeance on them from God and “It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God”. Read this verse in this context instead of cherrypicking passages that suit your argument.
Once again, Paul writes, “never avenge yourselves”. We are not to avenge ourselves but we are to leave it for the wrath of God. As God said in Hebrews 13:4 however, the government is an instrument of God that He uses to punish wrongdoing. The military is a division of the government and thus, has the express permission from God Himself to punish wrongdoing.

Not one of these passages apply to the Marine Corps, for they are all either speaking of personal vengeance, not governmental punishment, or are completely irrelevant to the discussion, ie, the second point. Again, there are many cases in Scripture where God commands people to go to war and commands punishment by the government for crimes (1 Samuel 15:3, Joshua 4;13, Exodus 21:12, Exodus 22:19, Leviticus 20:11, Numbers 31:2, Deuteronomy 20:16-17, and the list goes on). It should also be noted that God even ordered the Israelites in Numbers 31:2 to “Take vengeance on the Midianites for the Israelites”. This is a case where a military organization would go out and fight to take vengeance on another nation, and they were God’s instrument of justice on this nation. Anytime God prohibits vengeance, it is always in the context of personal vengeance for a wrong done to us.

IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO START A DEBATE ON THIS OR ANY OTHER TOPIC, PLEASE HURRY UP AND START IT. I HAVE MADE MYSELF QUITE PLAIN HERE ON THIS TOPIC, AND I WILL NOT BE RESPONDING AGAIN IF YOU JUST BRING UP THE SAME FEW VERSES THAT PROHIBIT PERSONAL VENGEANCE AND TRY TO APPLY THEM TO EVERYONE RATHER THAN USING WISDOM AND CONTEXT TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE LORD REALLY IS SAYING.

ProudToBeCatholic

Argument Topic: Vengeance is God's

@21CenturyIconoclast

21CenturyIconoclast,

Thank you for adding onto your description of me. It really is quite comical that I make you so flustered that you devote your time to making a paragraph-long description of me, but it is also unfortunate that a lot of it is objectively false, such as “and where he outright ungodly dishonors his parents that are paying his way at this time to not follow their rules”. I think I have told you five or six times now that now that I am an adult, my parents do not care what websites I go on. I explained multiple times that their rules were only for while I was underage and now that I am an adult, my parents no longer hold me to those restrictions. But please, keep it in there because it makes my description longer!

YOUR QUOTE: First off, I don't blame you for not addressing my post in correcting your OUTRIGHT BIBLE STUPIDITY relative to you shamefully discarding your parents wishes, especially while still living with them at 18 years old! Like I stated, I have NEVER had my kissed that much by any bible inept pseudo-christian, other than YOU! LOL!!! Here is the link again in you groveling at my feet in being so dumbfounded of what the Bible says about parents that you did not follow:

I didn’t address your post because it was not worth addressing. First of all, I am no longer discarding my parents wishes. Since your skull is too thick for you to finally get that through your head, let me type in all-caps for you. MY PARENTS RULE WAS THAT, UNTIL I AM EIGHTEEN AND NO LONGER UNDER THEIR AUTHORITY, I WAS NOT ALLOWED TO USE THE COMPUTER FOR ANYTHING BUT SCHOOL. Now that I am eighteen however, I have my own computer and am allowed to use it for whatever I want. As a side note, I am not even in school anymore so they are no longer paying my way at this time. Second, I knew exactly what the Bible said on the issue of obedience to parents, and I had been choosing to get around them by saying I had a right cause. Of course, debating with you, if you even want to call this debate, is a shameful thing for anyone, since you don’t know how to argue logically, but regardless, I had wanted so badly to defend the Catholic faith and to possibly convert you to Christianity that I decided to continue debating. When you brought that up, I was willing to concede that you were correct and leave because I knew I would return just a few months later, once I was eighteen. I never kissed your , I merely acknowledged you were right and thanked you.

YOUR QUOTE: Oh, oh, not sure of your Bible stupidity when you said "there must be a difference" made between taking vengeance (by god) and fighting in a war...." WRONG, 18 YEAR OLD DUFUS! Jesus, as God, in his direct understandable words, once again, said the following, to wit:

What are you even talking about? Are you even reading my arguments? I just said there is a difference between vengeance and defense or even offense. Vengeance is “punishment inflicted or retribution exacted for an injury or wrong” (Oxford Dictionary). A point on this needs to be made however though, that when God speaks of vengeance, it is almost always in the context of personal vengeance. He has established the government to enact vengeance on criminals, as Paul says in Romans 13:4 and as God commands all throughout Scripture. When God says vengeance is His and that we are not to take vengeance, He is speaking of us avenging ourselves for a personal wrong. That is God’s job. Secondly, Paul says that the government is God’s instrument in Romans 13:4. He writes: “The authorities are God’s servants, sent for your good. But if you are doing wrong, of course you should be afraid, for they have the power to punish you. They are God’s servants, sent for the very purpose of punishing those who do what is wrong.” The military is a part of the government, ie, the Department of Defense. Therefore, the military is authorized BY GOD HIMSELF to punish wrongdoing and defend ourselves and others against potential threats. I really hope you actually understand this time and don’t continue posting the same disproven argument over and over again in reply to my points.

Now, I will address each of your points:

Paul is speaking of personal vengeance here. He tell us not to avenge ourselves because God will repay the person for any wrongs they have done. For example, if someone steals something from my house, I am not to take vengeance on them by stealing from them or wronging them in any way. Rather, I am to leave it to God and allow Him to work through the government to bring this man to justice, hence Romans 13:4.
This verse has the author cross referencing to the Old Testament, but he applies the verse to apostasy. He warns the people that if they trample “the Son of God underfoot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified them, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace” then there will be vengeance on them from God and “It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God”. Read this verse in this context instead of cherrypicking passages that suit your argument.
Once again, Paul writes, “never avenge yourselves”. We are not to avenge ourselves but we are to leave it for the wrath of God. As God said in Hebrews 13:4 however, the government is an instrument of God that He uses to punish wrongdoing. The military is a division of the government and thus, has the express permission from God Himself to punish wrongdoing.

Not one of these passages apply to the Marine Corps, for they are all either speaking of personal vengeance, not governmental punishment, or are completely irrelevant to the discussion, ie, the second point. Again, there are many cases in Scripture where God commands people to go to war and commands punishment by the government for crimes (1 Samuel 15:3, Joshua 4;13, Exodus 21:12, Exodus 22:19, Leviticus 20:11, Numbers 31:2, Deuteronomy 20:16-17, and the list goes on). It should also be noted that God even ordered the Israelites in Numbers 31:2 to “Take vengeance on the Midianites for the Israelites”. This is a case where a military organization would go out and fight to take vengeance on another nation, and they were God’s instrument of justice on this nation. Anytime God prohibits vengeance, it is always in the context of personal vengeance for a wrong done to us.

IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO START A DEBATE ON THIS OR ANY OTHER TOPIC, PLEASE HURRY UP AND START IT. I HAVE MADE MYSELF QUITE PLAIN HERE ON THIS TOPIC, AND I WILL NOT BE RESPONDING AGAIN IF YOU JUST BRING UP THE SAME FEW VERSES THAT PROHIBIT PERSONAL VENGEANCE AND TRY TO APPLY THEM TO EVERYONE RATHER THAN USING WISDOM AND CONTEXT TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE LORD REALLY IS SAYING.

ProudToBeCatholic

Argument Topic: Description Corrections and Defenses Against Lies

@21CenturyIconoclast

21CenturyIconoclast,

Firstly, I think you can phrase your description of me a little bit more concisely. Right now it is a very clunky paragraph, and it looks like a ten year old wrote it. Here, let me help you out and you can just copy/paste this in place of yours:

PROUDTOBECATHOLIC, whose mantra is; “Do not cherry-pick Biblical passages, even though they are inspired by Jesus, that totally embarrass me and my primitive thinking Bronze and Iron Age Catholic Religion”, and who is the number one king of using ungodly EISIGENSIS(let me help you out here as well; it is eisegesis, not eisigensis) in trying to rewrite Jesus’ actual literal words, and the number one Bible apologist that twists himself into a pretzel to “try” and change Jesus’ disturbing and despicable inspired words, who ran away from many of my posts because his “mommy and daddy” don’t want him on this Religion Forum in the first place, and outright ungodly dishonors his parents who are paying his way at this time to disobey their rules, listen up pseudo-christian hell-bound Catholic, who truly acts his age of an 18 year old bible dumbass". Feel free to use this instead of yours, and don’t worry about thanking me.

Now, YOUR QUOTE: HUH? The three threads of question are listed below, and when you said they DID NOT even warrant responses, then why did you TRY to respond to them in the first place with overly long dissertations that reached a record, and made you the continued Bible fool that you are?

I am assuming you didn’t end up reading my post in its entirety. I wrote: “These three debate topics you have created in the past did not even warrant responses and I don’t know why anyone, including myself, entertained them for more than a second. Heck, I spent months and months arguing with you about whether the Bible prohibited churches from allowing handicapped people inside, for heaven’s sake! Maybe you don’t understand how utterly that really is, but I am pretty sure everyone else did, to the point where you had other atheists telling you you were being ridiculous. I really hope you will actually start an intellectual debate where we can discuss the topic without resorting to insults or distortions of Scripture like you so often like to do.”

Notice that I already said that I responded to your posts and that I didn’t know why I wasted my time on them. They did not warrant responses, yet everyone humored you by arguing for months. Twenty-nine posts on this thread https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/8886/christian-churches-remove-your-handicapped-ramps-and-parking-spaces-now is absolutely ridiculous and I don’t know why I even bothered. And I didn’t just try to refute your arguments, but I, just_sayin , and pepsi_guy all successfully refuted your argument there over and over again. It is a bit difficult to argue something that virtually nobody believes Scripture teaches, especially in the passage you took completely out of context (cherry-picking) in order to suit your argument. That is why I say you should be honest in your debate instead of resorting to petty tactics. Argue against the existence with philosophy or even science. Show contradictions you think Scripture holds. Argue against the authenticity of the Gospels. These are things that are productive to discuss, rather than whether Churches can allow handicapped people into their congregations.

3. I didn’t enter this thread because others already refuted what you had said and the thread was no longer active. There was no use starting up a debate again when others had shown your dishonesty in their rebuttals.

YOUR QUOTE: Your big problem, is that you think that everyone else is as DUMB as you are in you being only 18 years of age, where in fact, you act like a 7 year old, and where we won't catch your LIES that you continue to bring forth as exampled above, to take the spot light off of your complete and unadulterated Bible stupidity! LOL!

No, you are the one who thinks other people are dumb and you enjoy attacking both atheists and Christians as soon as they dare confront you on something, as you did with Nomenclature and Dee, as well as others, and do with virtually all Christians on this forums. I think you even have more to offer than the arguments you put forth, but you are not willing to put in the time or effort into seriously looking at atheist claims and arguing from a genuine atheistic perspective. Study the works of Bart Ehrman, Matt Dihilunty, Sam Harris, or any number of other atheists who have been at this much longer than you have. They are very intelligent and actually bring logical argumentation to the table whereas you refuse to do so. @MayCaesar and @JulesKorngold both make very logical arguments, as much as I disagree with them, so you are incorrect in thinking I think everyone is else is dumb. I merely think you are dumb on purpose because of the cheap arguments you keep making. And the ad hominem attacks are way over the top as well.

21CenturyIconoclast

@ProudToBeCatholic

WAIT, what is the reasoning that you are NOT addressing my post to you where you were down on all fours supplicating to me regarding your embarrassment in telling me I was correct in admonshining you for going directly against the Bible in acting the way you did towards your parents before you left their home?!

Your initial ungodly post is herewith: https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/162908/#Comment_162908

Here is my refutation to your embarrassing post above, THAT YOU ARE RUNNING AWAY FROM IN EMBARRASSMENT:
https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/166456/#Comment_166456

You don't get something for nothing Bible fool, therefore, when you address the post above as you being an RUMP KISSER to me, then I will continue to make you the 18 year old pseudo-christian Bible fool that you are, understood? GET IT?

BEGIN:

.

21CenturyIconoclast

@just_sayin

just_sayin that you are truly Bible ,

YOUR QUOTE: "The debate doesn't specify a particular God."

What is your faith where a god has to exist? Simple question for you to answer!

YOUR QUOTE: "Now I have provided 3 scientific studies that showed miracles happened after prayer."

Uh, okay, then which god do you pray to subsequent to your needless prayers? Simple question that you may be able to answer in front of the membership.

YOUR QUOTE: "I've provided arguments based on the universe having a beginning which suggests that there is a God"I've provided arguments based on the universe having a beginning which suggests that there is a God"

Okay, which God are you referring to with your statement above, and do you realize that if you can't address this simple question, then all of your rants relative to miracles of a god are all MOOT!

YOUR QUOTE: " ..... while those who are arguing that God doesn't exist have tried desperately to change the topic and have not put forward any credible evidence that there is no God."

In turn to your statement above, YOU are changing the topic without any credible evidence that the god that you speak of exists because you cannot name him/her/it !!!! LOL!

Seriously, why do you remain upon this Religion Forum in making an outright fool of yourself in not naming the god that you relate your topics too? Are you that embarrassed to mention this gods name? We can only wonder in what said god you are referring too and what this god thinks of you by NOT giving their name! BLASPHEME!

ProudToBeCatholic

Argument Topic: LEARN TO READ

@21CenturyIconoclast
I already addressed your post in this response: https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/166490/#Comment_166490
I'll even copy/paste it here for you: "I didn’t address your post because it was not worth addressing. First of all, I am no longer discarding my parents wishes. Since your skull is too thick for you to finally get that through your head, let me type in all-caps for you. MY PARENTS RULE WAS THAT, UNTIL I AM EIGHTEEN AND NO LONGER UNDER THEIR AUTHORITY, I WAS NOT ALLOWED TO USE THE COMPUTER FOR ANYTHING BUT SCHOOL. Now that I am eighteen however, I have my own computer and am allowed to use it for whatever I want. As a side note, I am not even in school anymore so they are no longer paying my way at this time. Second, I knew exactly what the Bible said on the issue of obedience to parents, and I had been choosing to get around them by saying I had a right cause. Of course, debating with you, if you even want to call this debate, is a shameful thing for anyone, since you don’t know how to argue logically, but regardless, I had wanted so badly to defend the Catholic faith and to possibly convert you to Christianity that I decided to continue debating. When you brought that up, I was willing to concede that you were correct and leave because I knew I would return just a few months later, once I was eighteen. I never kissed your , I merely acknowledged you were right and thanked you."

Now, if that is not a sufficient answer for you, I couldn't care less. You will either accept what I have said or you won't and I don't care either way. You give atheism a bad name with you foolish argumentation and until you can find the courage to create a debate topic, I will not be responding to you again. I'll respond on a debate topic of your choice, but that is it. UNDERSTOOD?

ProudToBeCatholic

Argument Topic: Stick to the Topic

@21CenturyIconoclast
Relative to your response against @just_sayin, please note that this debate is not about the existence of the Muslim God, the Christian God, the Jewish God, or any other specific God. I titled the debate, "Does the Theistic God Exist" for a reason. Whether or not all the Abrahamic religions have the same God or not is irrelevant in relation to this debate. This is a debate that, regardless of our beliefs about God, Muslims, Jews, and Christians can all come together and defend. In fact, even the Quran states that in the end, the Muslims and the Christians will come together in order to fight against atheism. We can all defend the existence of the theistic God, even if our views of who this God is are vastly different. So, please stick to the topic of debate, Does the Theistic God exist. If you would like to discuss the difference between the Abrahamic religions or anything concerning that, you can do so in another thread. That is not the concern of this debate. Thank you.

just_sayin

@21CenturyIconoclast
What is your faith where a god has to exist? Simple question for you to answer!

I consider myself a Christian. The debate is about evidence for a theistic God, not specific evidences of the Christian God. For instance, I've cited examples of miracles as an evidence of god, which no one has refuted. Let me provide you links to them again:

Case report of instantaneous resolution of juvenile macular degeneration blindness after proximal intercessory prayer

Case Report of gastroparesis healing: 16 years of a chronic syndrome resolved after proximal intercessory prayer

Study of the Therapeutic Effects of Proximal Intercessory Prayer (STEPP) on Auditory and Visual Impairments in Rural Mozambiqu

In general miracles show a God exists but do not necessarily point to a specific God. For example if someone who is Hindu experiences a miracle where they get their sight back and had people who were Jewish, Muslim, Christian, etc. praying for him, which religion do you give the miracle to? A miracle can point to the existence of a supernatural being, but it doesn't necessarily tell you which God. Miracles have occurred to people of many religions. Evidence of miracles doesn't necessarily affirm their religion, it just serves as an evidence that there is a God.

Now some miracles would indicate which God. For example, the resurrection of Jesus Christ would be a miracle that supports the Christian God because it uniquely affirms that faith. However, in general miracles can tell you there is a God, but not specifically which one.

Okay, which God are you referring to with your statement above, and do you realize that if you can't address this simple question, then all of your rants relative to miracles of a god are all MOOT!

In turn to your statement above, YOU are changing the topic without any credible evidence that the god that you speak of exists because you cannot name him/her/it !!!!   LOL!

Not in the least. A detective may find many pieces of evidence that help lead him to the one who committed a crime. Each piece of evidence may give him some more details, but that one piece of evidence alone may not be enough to give him enough actual information to pinpoint the identity of the criminal. In the same way evidences such as

1) Miracles
2) the beginning of the universe and it needing a cause
3) the astronomical fine tuning of the universe
4) the impossible complexity of even the simplest lifeforms
5) a common set of morals among people groups

can suggest that there is a God, but not necessarily tell you which God. In Christianity, these types of evidences are often called general revelation or natural theology.

If even one miracle exists, that's proof of a God. I don't have to know which God for the miracle to be real. So, the burden is now yours. I've shown evidence of miracles which are supported by scientific journals. And no one has been able to claim these miracles didn't happen. Its hard to argue that the formerly blind are still blind when they can now see. You lost debate and you are just too blind to see it. But the good news is that there is evidence that God can make the blind see.

21CenturyIconoclast

@ProudToBeCatholic

.
ProudToBeCatholic, whose mantra is; "Do not cherry-pick biblical passages, even though they are inspired by Jesus, that totally embarrasses me and my primitive thinking Bronze and Iron Age Catholic Religion,” and is the number one king of using ungodly EISIGENSIS in trying to rewrite Jesus' actual literal words, and the number one Bible Apologist that twists himself into a pretzel to "try" and change Jesus' disturbing and despicable inspired words, ran away from many of my posts because his "mommy and daddy" doesn’t want him to be on this Religion Forum in the first place, and where he outright ungodly dishonors his parents that are paying his way at this time to not follow their rules, Listen up pseudo-christian hell bound Catholic, and truly acts his age of an 18 year old bible dumbass,

YOUR PRAISE JESUS MOMENT IN YOU NOW HAVING TO BE SILENT TO MY POSTS!!!: "I will not be responding to you again. I'll respond on a debate topic of your choice, but that is it. UNDERSTOOD?"

Praise your serial killer Jesus God that you finally understand that you are too embarrassed and Bible to continue with my posts to you in making you the complete Bible fool that you are, THANK YOU!

Now, DO NOT be a HYPOCRITE and respond to me anymore whatsoever, understood?!!!, This is because you should know what Jesus thinks of hypocrites herewith: "And he said to them, “Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written, “‘This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me;" (Mark 7:6)

Now that I don't have to deal with your Bible ineptness anymore, I therefore have free reign over your Bible statements, praise your Jesus! I am not going to fall for your ruse on bringing up a debate, and this is because when I start showing the membership once again in how utterly Bible you are, you will once again come up with yet another LAME EXCUSE TO RUN from said debate, like; "Oh, I am sorry in leaving this debate because I have to join the marines right now, sorry, bye bye." ROFLOL!

HERE ARE OTHER INSTANCES OF YOU RUNNING AWAY FROM MY POSTS LIKE A LITTLE BOY WHERE YOU WENT INTO HIDING AGAIN FOR GOOD REASON!:

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/161176/#Comment_161176
https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/162275/#Comment_162275

NEXT PSEUDO-CHRISTIAN THAT HAS TO USE LITTLE GIRL EXCUSES TO RUN FROM MY GODLY POSTS LIKE PROUDTOBECATHOLIC HAS TO DO, WILL BE ...?

.

21CenturyIconoclast

@just_sayin,

YOUR WANTING QUOTES OF WHICH GOD CREATES ALLEGED MIRACLES: " Evidence of miracles doesn't necessarily affirm their religion, it just serves as an evidence that there is a God." "If even one miracle exists, that's proof of a God. I don't have to know which God for the miracle to be real. So, the burden is now yours."

You and ProudToBeCatholic most certainly have to know which of the Abrahamic gods are creating miracles, you bible fool! Therefore, since there is ONLY ONE GOD, then Allah god of the Islamic faith was the LAST GOD CREATED by the sweaty and stinking desert Muslim pedophile Mohammed of the Abrahamic religions! Therefore, Allah is creating all these alleged miracles since Allah took over for Yahweh and Jesus! GET IT? HUH?

I got it now just_sayin, therefore since there is only ONE GOD, and the last version of the Abrahamic God is Allah, then logic 101 states with specificity that Allah creates ALL MIRACLES now!

Thank you for your heads up upon this most important topic, and now since Allah is your god, how to you supplicate to him?!
What is your most favorite part of Allah's Qur'an? Is it that the Muslim man can marry 9 YEAR OLD CHILDREN?

.

just_sayin

@21CenturyIconoclast
You and ProudToBeCatholic most certainly have to know which of the Abrahamic gods are creating miracles, you bible fool! Therefore, since there is ONLY ONE GOD, then Allah god of the Islamic faith was the LAST GOD CREATED by the sweaty and stinking desert Muslim pedophile Mohammed of the Abrahamic religions! Therefore, Allah is creating all these alleged miracles since Allah took over for Yahweh and Jesus! GET IT? HUH?

I got it now just_sayin, therefore since there is only ONE GOD, and the last version of the Abrahamic God is Allah, then logic 101 states with specificity that Allah creates ALL MIRACLES now!

Thank you for your heads up upon this most important topic, and now since Allah is your god, how to you supplicate to him?!
What is your most favorite part of Allah's Qur'an? Is it that the Muslim man can marry 9 YEAR OLD CHILDREN?

Multiple times you have been challenged to refute claims that there is evidence for miracles. And multiple times you have failed to do so. As an atheist, the existence of miracles shows that your belief is wrong. The fact your belief that there is no God is proven false holds true if the God in question is Jewish, Christian, Muslim, or from the Salvation Army. While you were to focused on going down a rabbit hole and change the debate topic to a debate about which God is the real one, you lost this debate in spectacular fashion. Your hatred of Christians made you blind to the evidence of miracles presented. But there is good news for your blind hatred, there is definitive evidence that God can heal the blind.

Dreamer

Argument Topic: Word puzzles like this help all the religions with an all powerful God, including ones we don't like.

One problem with all these word puzzles like the first cause or the ontological argument and more is they help religions we don't want to help. Sam Harris has made this point. That when defending the faith of Christianity Christian apologists are also defending Islam. The original post could just as easily be for pro-Islam argument or Hindu for example.

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Ontological_argument

ProudToBeCatholic

Argument Topic: The Ontological Argument

@Dreamer ;

Hello Dreamer,

The ontological argument does not help any specific religion. It helps theism as a whole. No one claims the ontological argument proves the Christian God exclusively, for that is not what it is intended to do. Here is the definition from the Oxford dictionary: Ontological Argument: “The argument that God, being defined as most great or perfect, must exist, since a God who exists is greater than a God who does not”. Again, the Ontological Argument has nothing at all to do with Islam, Christianity, or Judaism specifically, and the only reason they are all helped by this argument is that they all hold to theism.

So, you are correct when you state that the original post could just as easily be for Islam or some strains of Hinduism (I say some strains because Hinduism is more a mindset or world view in modern times, and thus there are even atheistic Hindus)

Why do we use this argument then? Because we are not discussing which religion is true; we are discussing the existence of a God in the first place. After we establish that God exists, then we can move on to prove which idea of who God is is correct.

21CenturyIconoclast

@just_sayin

just_sayin you are Bible Dumb,

YOUR QUOTE OF RUNNING AWAY AGAIN, WHATS NEW?: "While you were to focused on going down a rabbit hole and change the debate topic to a debate about which God is the real one, you lost this debate in spectacular fashion."

There is no loss of a debate about "which god" creates miracles, especially when I have shown you with logic 101 that you are still running away from the LAST GOD created in the Abrahamic tradition, which was ALLAH GOD OF THE ISLAMIC FAITH when he took over for Yahweh and Jesus as god! Whereas, they all cannot exist at the same time because their biblical writings BLATANTLY CONTRADICT EACH OTHER, get it Bible inept fool? Huh? Maybe just a little bit? LOL!

Therefore, ONCE AGAIN, since the current god concept available to you is only ALLAH GOD, how do you pray to him, follow his word, and be known as a Muslim? Take your time in trying to answer these questions, and remain intelligent looking in the aftermath, okay?

BEGIN:

.

just_sayin

@21CenturyIconoclast

You get that if there are documented miracles, as there are, then the atheist has lost the debate. Miracles require a supernatural source, such as God. You haven't disproven the miracles I have referenced, in fact no one has. Instead, you have tried to desperately change the topic of the debate without success, and I have repeatedly brought you back to the argument in this debate which you have not been able to answer. You can continue to pretend to be blind to the facts, but the fact is, there is evidence that God makes the blind see.

just_sayin

@Dreamer
One problem with all these word puzzles like the first cause or the ontological argument and more is they help religions we don't want to help. Sam Harris has made this point. That when defending the faith of Christianity Christian apologists are also defending Islam. The original post could just as easily be for pro-Islam argument or Hindu for example.

I saw Sam Harris debate William Lane Craig. Harris got his butt spanked in that debate. See for yourself:

Ontological arguments are part of general revelation or natural theology. They can tell you that there is a God, but not which God . That doesn't make the argument irrelevant anymore than a piece of evidence in a criminal case may not by itself tell you the criminals name, but it contributes to the larger body of evidence. What you are doing is the equivalent of someone saying, 'yes there is video evidence of someone dressed like my client, about my client's height, and about my client's weight, breaking into the building, but the video is too fuzzy to know for certain its my client, therefore there is no evidence that there was a break in." That line of argumentation is silly. If there is evidence of a God, then that same evidence would apply to the specific God it applies to. In essence you are conceding that there is evidence of a God with your argument.

Dreamer

Argument Topic: Old wine new bottle Zeno's paradoxes.

@just_sayin

"In the paradox of Achilles and the tortoise, Achilles is in a footrace with the tortoise. Achilles allows the tortoise a head start of 100 meters, for example."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeno's_paradoxes

The part that is the most annoying about these word puzzle arguments is often multiple of them are presented in a timed or character limit debate. Thus creating gish gallop or as Steven Bannon infamously put it flooding the zone. Seeking to overwhelm and disorient the opponent as opposed to persuade.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/16/media/steve-bannon-reliable-sources/index.html

This is bad because it ultimately wastes time and is a smoke screen. You can see variants on all sorts of subjects by deniers from young earth creationism, to anti-vaxx, and climate deniers. Often, this works because the atheist simply moves on to easier and/or higher priority targets. My favorite is 200 undeniable flat Earth truths, lol.

Dreamer

Argument Topic: Motte and Bailey fallacy.

@ProudToBeCatholic

Hello ProudToBeCatholic,

You have articulated the motte and bailey fallacy. The problem is you conflate two points of view, easy to defend point of view of deism and the difficult to defend of Roman Catholic.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motte-and-bailey_fallacy

just_sayin

@Dreamer

"In the paradox of Achilles and the tortoise, Achilles is in a footrace with the tortoise. Achilles allows the tortoise a head start of 100 meters, for example."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeno's_paradoxes
The part that is the most annoying about these word puzzle arguments is often multiple of them are presented in a timed or character limit debate. Thus creating gish gallop or as Steven Bannon infamously put it flooding the zone. Seeking to overwhelm and disorient the opponent as opposed to persuade.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/16/media/steve-bannon-reliable-sources/index.html
This is bad because it ultimately wastes time and is a smoke screen. You can see variants on all sorts of subjects by deniers from young earth creationism, to anti-vaxx, and climate deniers. Often, this works because the atheist simply moves on to easier and/or higher priority targets. My favorite is 200 undeniable flat Earth truths, lol.

What are you talking about? I think I understand john_c_87 better, and I think the point of his character is generally to say things in a complex way without really saying anything. I have put evidences out there regarding the existence of a God - for example miracles. Could you focus on that evidence? Tell me that the documented examples of the blind seeing, the deaf hearing, and the lame walking are fake. Go ahead. Surely you get that if even 1 miracle exists, that it is proof that a God exists.

The truth is you would rather believe in magic, that the universe came from nothing, than to acknowledge that it does make logical sense to believe in God.

21CenturyIconoclast

@just_sayin

just_sayin you are Bible dumb,

As we can all see once again, you are RUNNING AWAY from my following post herewith with your feeble statements that have nothing to do with said post: https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/166608/#Comment_166608

Can you tell the membership in what running shoes you wear when you run away from our posts? Are they Adidas, Converse, Nike, or? LOL!

You don't have the mental capabilities to understand simple biblical axioms relative to which god is creating miracles at this time, of which it is Allah God that took over for Yahweh and Jesus as gods as I easily explained in said post above!

Therefore, you are to SCARED to even try and refute the position that I have given you, irrelative to miracles being formed, but in which god is doing these miracles now, which is Allah god of the Islamic faith as explained in the link above!

Can you get someone to help you understand the FACTS that I had brought forth in the link above that you are running away from? Maybe your parents can help you? Or, if you have any grade school neighbor kids that may be able to help you with the link above?

Just_sayin, you are as Bible as ProudToBeCatholic since he can't respond anymore to my posts because I have Bible Slapped him silly!

.

21CenturyIconoclast

@ProudToBeCatholic @Dreamer

Dreamer,

Isn't it refreshing and wonderful that the totally Bible "ProundToBeCatholic" had to leave this forum ONCE AGAIN because this bible fool Catholic mackerel snapper could not address our biblical questions to him and remain intelligent looking in the aftermath? I can't count the LAME EXCUSES he had to use for not answering my biblical axioms, whereas we don't have to make him the continued Bible fool now that he has left with yet another lame little boy excuse, praise!

NEXT BIBLE CATHOLIC LIKE "PROUDTOBECATHOLIC" THAT WOULD LIKE TO TAKE HIS PLACE BECAUSE HE HAD TO RUN AWAY AGAIN FROM THIS RELIGION FORUM BECAUSE OF BEING SO BIBLE DUMB, WILL BE ...?

.

Dreamer

Argument Topic: The ontological argument and similar are just confusing gish gallop.

@just_sayin

I was responding to you "Ontological arguments are part of general revelation or natural theology. They can tell you that there is a God, but not which God . "

As for the blind person I really don't know what caused her to regain her sight if she did at all. I didn't look deep. I do know that all sorts of people turn towards all sorts of outlandish diets and other sCAM, complementary and alternative medicine, because an illness suddenly reversed and they were cured.

You can find all sort of devices sold by grifters that claim to cure a long list of diseases. One dangerous example is coffee enemas. You can also find lots of testimonials to back this up.

Let's put this another way, lets say the person decided to ear candle and was suddenly cured of blindness. Or gazed at Braco the Gazer. Would this be proof that God healed them? How about if a person was given a coffee enema and their cancer disappeared, would this be a miracle of God?

Most of the time the patient was simply misdiagnosed, a false positive. Patient gets an x-ray or cat scan and there is what appears to be a mass. Patient panic turns to grifter including crystal healing. Next, patient gets another scan and alleged mass is gone. Patient writes testimonial and continues to buy and promote crystal healing never understanding it was a false positive and they never had cancer.

Another common explanation is that disease is often cyclical. That no matter what the symptoms would cease or the disease goes dormant only to return with a vengeance. In this scenario person the does have cancer and there is a false negative on the 2nd scan. This person continues ineffective treatment and abandons effective treatment and dies because of the grifter.

I would really be concerned that her blindness would return due to the cyclical nature of disease.

Even if we accept a supernatural event, how would we know which supernatural entity was behind it? The creator of the universe wouldn't be necessary. How about a faerie instead of God? Or a demon or the devil playing a mean trick? Wouldn't it be like the Devil to try to trick humans with a false cure?

Dreamer

Argument Topic: Keep at it, they have gone into the realm of quackery which is dangerous.

@21CenturyIconoclast

"

Death (Probable) Due to Delay of or Interference With Proper Care:

6-yr-old girl (Leah Mudd) with unspecified cancer. Delay due to parents’ religious objections; treatment begun only after court order. (San Bernardino Sun, 5/1/84)"

https://quackwatch.org/ncahf/articles/c-d/caquackery/

This is the no.1 threat that intercessory prayer pseudoscience presents, the delay of effective treatment. Belief in intercessory prayer is dangerous.

just_sayin

@Dreamer
As for the blind person I really don't know what caused her to regain her sight if she did at all. I didn't look deep. I do know that all sorts of people turn towards all sorts of outlandish diets and other sCAM, complementary and alternative medicine, because an illness suddenly reversed and they were cured.

Hey, thanks for responding to the argument that miracles prove the existence of a God. You are the first to respond with any type of argument, after numerous requests.

The documented case I shared dealt with a woman who from the time she was 18 was legally blind. The medical history and doctor's notes of her condition are in the study, along with a timeline of her condition. So, the evidence suggests, her condition was real and was documented. For 13 years she was legally blind with lots of doctor's visits and exams to confirm that diagnosis. Let me quote from the scientific research journal about what happened next:

After completing a mobility training in May of 1972, the individual returned home and in August of 1972, one evening prior to going to bed, regained her vision instantaneously after receiving PIP from her husband. This experience occurred after approximately 13 years of blindness. The PIP was presented in a Christian tradition, extended to God as both asked for her eyesight to be restored that night.
When the couple went to bed later than normal (after midnight), her husband performed a hurried spiritual devotional practice (reading two Bible verses) and got on his knees to pray. She describes that they both began to cry as he began to pray, with a hand on her shoulder while she laid on the bed, and with great feeling and boldness he prayed: “Oh, God! You can restore […] eyesight tonight, Lord. I know You can do it! And I pray You will do it tonight.” At the close of the prayer, his wife opened her eyes and saw her husband kneeling in front of her, which was her first clear visual perception after almost 13 years of blindness.

Her first exam after the prayer showed 400% in visual acuity improvement, which would continue till her eyesight was 20/40, pre-cataract surgery. There is no known medical explanation to explain how her eyes improved so dramatically. Further, the placebo effect has been ruled out.

While nutritional interventions may slow degeneration of eyesight, it has not been shown to dramatically improve lost eyesight.

From the study:

An interesting observation of the aforementioned studies is that groups partnering with ministries/intercessors based upon research that showed positive results33 have been able to replicate comparable findings.36., 37., 38.

Did you really compare a legally blind woman getting her eyesight back after prayer to an enema? That's some desperation there.

Even if we accept a supernatural event, how would we know which supernatural entity was behind it?

Even if you did not know which God to attribute a miracle to, you would still have proof of a miracle, which suggests a supernatural source such as a God.

Miracles have happened to people of many different faiths. Typically they don't validate a particular religion though. An exception would be the miracles of Jesus which he pointed to as a sign of his divinity, and his resurrection.

These miracles have lots of attestation from eye witnesses: Peter, Matthew, Mark, Luke (a historian recording what he was told), John, and James. Important to note is that even Jesus' enemies believed he performed miracles. A passage in the Egyptian Talmud calls Jesus a sorcerer, indicating healings and miracles associated with him. Josephus, a Roman historian said

At this time there appeared Jesus, a wise man. For he was a doer of startling deeds, a teacher of people who receive the truth with pleasure. And he gained a following among many Jews and among many of Greek origin.

Note, I'm referencing what was likely his original statement, rather than the Christianized redacted version. Even here, it seems 'startling deeds' references miracles and healings.

The Toledot Yeshu, a Jewish history that is anti-Christian and definitely anti-Jesus, says this of Jesus:

They therefore, brought to him (Jesus) a lame man, who had never walked. Yeshu spoke over the man the letters of the Ineffable Name, and the leper was healed. Thereupon, they worshipped him as the Messiah, Son of the Highest.

Celsius (AD 175) a historian who despised Christianity and Jesus said this of Jesus:

For he [Celsus] represents the Jew disputing with Jesus, and confuting Him, as he thinks, on many points; and in the first place, he accuses Him of having invented his birth from a virgin, and upbraids Him with being born in a certain Jewish village, of a poor woman of the country, who gained her subsistence by spinning, and who was turned out of doors by her husband, a carpenter by trade, because she was convicted of adultery; that after being driven away by her husband, and wandering about for a time, she disgracefully gave birth to Jesus, an illegitimate child, who having hired himself out as a servant in Egypt on account of his poverty, and having there acquired some miraculous powers, on which the Egyptians greatly pride themselves, returned to his own country, highly elated on account of them, and by means of these proclaimed himself a God.

Celsius, who hated Jesus, admits he had miraculous powers. All the evidence from that time period, whether from Jesus friends, followers or enemies, affirms that he did miracles. Why would anyone who was Jesus enemy claim he could do miracles if he didn't do them? The answer is they wouldn't. The number of eyewitnesses and stories of Jesus' healings and miracles were to great to attempt that type of lie.

Dreamer

Argument Topic: I've read your post, and admit I am stumped on how the woman regained her sight. I will ask for help.

Your reaching my limit on what I can debunk on the spot. I will require some time to fact check.

just_sayin

@Dreamer
Argument Topic: I've read your post, and admit I am stumped on how the woman regained her sight. I will ask for help.

Your reaching my limit on what I can debunk on the spot. I will require some time to fact check.

I appreciate your honesty. Take your time.

Please know that there are hundreds, maybe thousands, of miracles I can point to. The Catholic church keeps records of Catholic miracles (I'm not Catholic). Their attitude is that they would rather err on the side of not recognizing a miracle if it doesn't have the level of verification they demand. As part of each team that verifies a miracle there must be a skeptic on the team, whose job is essential to debunk the claim.

To debunk the claim that Jesus performed miracles you'll have to refute several recorded eye witness testimonies, early Christian creeds at most 5 years after Jesus' resurrection, and even debunk the claims of Jesus' enemies about him performing miracles.

Dreamer

Argument Topic: Here's a science based medicine article on the subject of prayer.

@just_sayin

Basically, if quackwatch and sciencebasedmedicine agree, that I accept their conclusion. Now convincing others and pinpointing the flaws of a specific intercessory prayer study is another manner.

"The scientific evidence can therefore not be used to support the intermingling of faith with the practice of medicine. In any case – doing so raises serious ethical and professional concerns. For example, such practices raise the potential of faith-based discrimination against both physicians and patients. Mixing of faith with medicine can also compromise the professional doctor-patient relationship." Steven Novella

https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/the-power-of-faith-and-prayer

just_sayin

@Dreamer

Basically, if quackwatch and sciencebasedmedicine agree, that I accept their conclusion. Now convincing others and pinpointing the flaws of a specific intercessory prayer study is another manner.

"The scientific evidence can therefore not be used to support the intermingling of faith with the practice of medicine. In any case – doing so raises serious ethical and professional concerns. For example, such practices raise the potential of faith-based discrimination against both physicians and patients. Mixing of faith with medicine can also compromise the professional doctor-patient relationship." Steven Novella

https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/the-power-of-faith-and-prayer

You are missing the point. Yes, science can't explain miracles, but that is no justification to say there aren't miracles. Just because science can't replicate them, doesn't mean they aren't real and haven't happened. That's kind of the point of miracles being an evidence for God, they aren't scientifically explainable. The real question is are there documented and confirmed examples of miracles. If so, then that is a strong evidence that there is a God.

Now, answered prayer can also be an evidence that God exists. The bulk of studies on prayer show that prayer improves health outcomes. I've shared a lot in other debates about this. Because of the results of many of these studies many hospitals incorporate spiritual aspects into their treatments. They do so because the evidence shows that prayer works. if prayer works, then that too is an evidence that there is a God. How prayer works may not be something that you can examine under a microscope, but that's kind of the point, as that prayer is a supernatural appeal for help.

Dreamer

Argument Topic: Your statements contradict each other. Which is it does prayer work or doesn't it?

@just_sayin

"Just because science can't replicate them, doesn't mean they aren't real and haven't happened."

" Because of the results of many of these studies many hospitals incorporate spiritual aspects into their treatments. They do so because the evidence shows that prayer works."

Well, no if science can't replicate them then studies are not showing that prayer works.

"Every time such a study shows a hint of positive results the media have a frenzy of reporting that “science proves faith.” When such studies are negative, the footprint in the media is much smaller." Novella

The problem is how the media reports such studies. The media doesn't understand the importance of negative results in studies.

just_sayin

@Dreamer
Well, no if science can't replicate them then studies are not showing that prayer works.

In debates they call this begging the question. You are arguing that prayer must not work because it is not scientific. The claim about prayer is that it is an appeal to a supernatural being. You are essentially saying 'prayer can't work because prayer is directed towards God". But that's what prayer is. Science can show that those who pray or prayed for have better health outcomes, but science can't replicate the supernatural because the supernatural is not about the natural, and science deals only with the natural, it is not equipped to deal with the supernatural.

The problem is how the media reports such studies. The media doesn't understand the importance of negative results in studies.

You are ignoring the evidence now. Over 2/3rds of the most scientifically reviewed prayer studies show it works. You are the one picking and choosing based on the outcome you want.

I keep bringing this up because it is the death knell for your argument. If just one miracle exists, then there is evidence of God. Since there are many documented examples of miracles - there is then evidence for God.

Dreamer

Argument Topic: Strawperson argument. Science shows prayer doesn't work.

@just_sayin

"In debates they call this begging the question. You are arguing that prayer must not work because it is not scientific. The claim about prayer is that it is an appeal to a supernatural being. You are essentially saying 'prayer can't work because prayer is directed towards God". "

Strawperson argument, I am not making that argument. My argument is that prayer is not supported by scientific evidence. Let's take a different topic that had no involvement of the supernatural. Say a scientist claims they created cold fusion. If science can't replicate the results, then that is strong evidence against the hypothesis and the person claiming they created cold fusion is deliberately lying to others or lying to their selves via internal biases.

"You are ignoring the evidence now. Over 2/3rds of the most scientifically reviewed prayer studies show it works. You are the one picking and choosing based on the outcome you want." Just_Sayin

I doubt that is true partly due to the negative studies drawer effect. Negative studies are less likely to be reported and published online.

"publication bias occurs when the outcome of an experiment or research study biases the decision to publish or otherwise distribute it. Publishing only results that show a significant finding disturbs the balance of findings in favor of positive results."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Publication_bias

Finding positive studies for intercessory prayer is better explained by publication bias than by God. Again, I haven't delved super deep on the subject so there is probably somebody who can explain this a lot better than me.

just_sayin

@Dreamer
Strawperson argument, I am not making that argument. My argument is that prayer is not supported by scientific evidence. Let's take a different topic that had no involvement of the supernatural. Say a scientist claims they created cold fusion. If science can't replicate the results, then that is strong evidence against the hypothesis and the person claiming they created cold fusion is deliberately lying to others or lying to their selves via internal biases.

No you are definitely begging the question. You have assumed that something isn't real if it doesn't conform to science. Prayer by its very nature is supernatural, and therefore not subject to scientific repetition. Now science can verify if prayer works. It can examine the physical effects of prayer. But science can not deconstruct prayer or fabricate it. Why would you assume that science which deals with natural cause and effects, be able to replicate supernatural cause and effects. You have indeed begged the question.

I doubt that is true partly due to the negative studies drawer effect. Negative studies are less likely to be reported and published online.

"publication bias occurs when the outcome of an experiment or research study biases the decision to publish or otherwise distribute it. Publishing only results that show a significant finding disturbs the balance of findings in favor of positive results."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Publication_bias

Finding positive studies for intercessory prayer is better explained by publication bias than by God. Again, I haven't delved super deep on the subject so there is probably somebody who can explain this a lot better than me.

It is obvious you have either ignored the summary of prayer studies I have posted or you ignore reading any of the links provided. I have posted at least 2 different large summary studies involving multiple prayer studies, both for and against prayer's benefits. And it is true that the vast bulk of prayer studies, especially those meeting the scientific requirements of the summary studies, found that prayer increased positive healthy outcomes. You can rationalize the evidence away and live in denial, but the evidence is the evidence whether it fits one's narrative or not.

Dreamer

Argument Topic: How would we even tell the difference between supernatural and natural?

@just_sayin

Let's say a being we thought was supernatural appeared in the natural world. Wouldn't that being be considered natural now? Wouldn't it then be bound by the natural world? The very word supernatural is a self-defeating paradox.

As prayer studies I know the general concept or forests but not the specific study or tree. I've read an entire book on the subject and it has been verified by very high quality sources. When a tree stands out and doesn't match I dimiss that specific study without looking at it.

Sciencebased medicine, quackwatch, skepdoc, and Richard Sloan's book Blind Faith.

MayCaesar

just_sayin said:

No you are definitely begging the question. You have assumed that something isn't real if it doesn't conform to science. Prayer by its very nature is supernatural, and therefore not subject to scientific repetition. Now science can verify if prayer works. It can examine the physical effects of prayer. But science can not deconstruct prayer or fabricate it. Why would you assume that science which deals with natural cause and effects, be able to replicate supernatural cause and effects. You have indeed begged the question.

This is a very convenient position: "I am right because what I say is in the realm of supernatural and your standard logical arguments in opposition of it do not apply". Yet what is "supernatural"? By definition, "supernatural" is something that is not a part of this nature. It is something that does not exist in this nature. It is something that, from the point of view of an intellectually honest conscious mind, is a pure fantasy.

There is nothing supernatural about prayer: a person assumes a position, puts his mind in a certain state and starts performing some sort of recitation. It is as natural a phenomenon as rain or stellar wind, subject to the same type of scientific investigation as those. The scientific method is designed in such a way as to be applicable to studying anything that is real; pretty much by definition, anything that is not a subject to scientific investigation is not real.

Ayn Rand used to call religion "a primitive form of philosophy": it is something primal tribes used to use, having very little knowledge about the world, struggling to survive every single day, and needing some sort of a unified moral and mythological framework to keep a tribe from falling apart. There should be no place for religion in a modern society, and, I would argue, as early as at the times of the Ancient Greece much better philosophies had been developed and should have completely replaced religion. Unfortunately, while technology and social structures have moved on, people's minds have not quite kept up. And now we have an absolutely hilarious situation, advanced artificial intelligence and robots driving around Mars coexisting with ancient rituals and superstitions. People in suits riding fancy cars that are incredible feats of scientific engineering - pulling up to a church to seriously talk about ridiculous myths.

I first became familiar with religion when I was 6: my grandmother tried explaining Orthodox Christianity to me, and it made zero sense to me even then. Shortly before that I read a book on aviation, the very first scientific book I have ever read, and even despite most of that book having been incomprehensible to me, I could clearly see just how superior the thought process of its author was to that. As I grew older, my attitude towards religion never changed, just my amazement at the fact that it was still a thing at all kept growing. It truly takes an extraordinary amount of cultural conditioning for someone in the 21st century to seriously believe in this stuff.

frame

Howdy, Stranger!

Communities

"The Demon of Unrest": Recounting the first shots of the Civil War

In this Debate

Does the Theistic God Exist?

Debate Information

Debra AI Prediction

Arguments

Case report of instantaneous resolution of juvenile macular degeneration blindness after proximal intercessory prayer

Case Report of gastroparesis healing: 16 years of a chronic syndrome resolved after proximal intercessory prayer

Study of the Therapeutic Effects of Proximal Intercessory Prayer (STEPP) on Auditory and Visual Impairments in Rural Mozambiqu

Case report of instantaneous resolution of juvenile macular degeneration blindness after proximal intercessory prayer

Case Report of gastroparesis healing: 16 years of a chronic syndrome resolved after proximal intercessory prayer

Study of the Therapeutic Effects of Proximal Intercessory Prayer (STEPP) on Auditory and Visual Impairments in Rural Mozambiqu

Back To Top

foot

DebateIsland.com

Contact us

Get In Touch