A Christmas Gift for Atheists (1 Viewer)

[Black Box]

Jayrok, last year I posted, for the purposes of discussion and refutation, 36 reasons why God exists, which included every known argument that's ever been made. All 5 of your reasons were encapsulated in that article. They weren't even, in my mind, the most convincing (for me that, was Spinoza's god, which is a concept I believe most atheists can get behind.)

Wow, it looks like he addressed that same article, maybe?

http://www.reasonablefaith.org/36-arguments-for-the-existence-of-god

 

[timschochet]

Over / Under 100 pages..

You might want to up the over with Tim now involved. He can do 100 pages himself.

Nah. We've covered this at length before. Anyhow, I'm pretty busy this morning. This will be my last post for some time.

 

[Jewell]

I'm an atheist, and a friend got me this t-shirt for Christmas one year...

http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/236x/4f/98/d1/4f98d1898753bb6193ef34e2b37364ed.jpg

Not a bad shirt. I wore it.

 

[Cliff Clavin]

Over / Under 100 pages..

You might want to up the over with Tim now involved. He can do 100 pages himself.

Nah. We've covered this at length before. Anyhow, I'm pretty busy this morning. This will be my last post for some time.

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

I'm an atheist, and a friend got me this t-shirt for Christmas one year...

http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/236x/4f/98/d1/4f98d1898753bb6193ef34e2b37364ed.jpg

Not a bad shirt. I wore it.

I also like that shirt. But I'm dating a gay Puerto Rican, so it makes sense.

 

[Jayrok]

Jayrok, your article states:

Even atheists recognize that some things, for example, the Holocaust, are objectively evil.

Where exactly in Scripture would one discover that the mass killing of masses of innocent people is objectively evil? Doesn't the Bible, in fact, justify similar actions on several occasions?

The Bible justifies God's will. I would imagine that if the Holocaust occured during biblical times and an account of it was included in the OT, it would be depicted as an event selected by God to punish the Jewish people for turning to foreign idol worship.

Since it was post-biblical times, philosophers like Mr. Craig might look upon it as an objectively evil act carried out by an evil madman.

If there are different ways of looking at the Holocaust, then the term "objective" seems out of place, doesn't it?

Now personally I happen to regard the Holocaust as objectively evil. But I don't derive that conclusion from religious teachings- in fact, I would argue that there is NO WAY one can reach such a conclusion from religious teachings. Religion, and in this case Judeo-Christianity, is an insufficient source for objective morality.

I suppose the definition of what is evil lies with the observer. A believer would see the invasion and destruction of OT Caananite villages/cities not as evil, but as necessary to carry out God's will. A non-believer might see those no differently than modern day genocide in Africa or what happened a half century ago in Europe. Perspective.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

looks like someone got a nice fishing boat for christmas

Once you get to know Jesus you only need one fish.

 

[Jayrok]

I'm an atheist, and a friend got me this t-shirt for Christmas one year...

http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/236x/4f/98/d1/4f98d1898753bb6193ef34e2b37364ed.jpg

Not a bad shirt. I wore it.

I also like that shirt. But I'm dating a gay Puerto Rican, so it makes sense.

top shelf there.

 

[Black Box]

Five reasons why God exists.

LinktoGift

1. God provides the best explanation of the origin of the universe. Given the scientific evidence we have about our universe and its origins, and bolstered by arguments presented by philosophers for centuries, it is highly probable that the universe had an absolute beginning. Since the universe, like everything else, could not have merely popped into being without a cause, there must exist a transcendent reality beyond time and space that brought the universe into existence. This entity must therefore be enormously powerful. Only a transcendent, unembodied mind suitably fits that description.

2. God provides the best explanation for the fine-tuning of the universe. Contemporary physics has established that the universe is fine-tuned for the existence of intelligent, interactive life. That is to say, in order for intelligent, interactive life to exist, the fundamental constants and quantities of nature must fall into an incomprehensibly narrow life-permitting range. There are three competing explanations of this remarkable fine-tuning: physical necessity, chance, or design. The first two are highly implausible, given the independence of the fundamental constants and quantities from nature's laws and the desperate maneuvers needed to save the hypothesis of chance. That leaves design as the best explanation.

3. God provides the best explanation of objective moral values and duties. Even atheists recognize that some things, for example, the Holocaust, are objectively evil. But if atheism is true, what basis is there for the objectivity of the moral values we affirm? Evolution? Social conditioning? These factors may at best produce in us the subjective feeling that there are objective moral values and duties, but they do nothing to provide a basis for them. If human evolution had taken a different path, a very different set of moral feelings might have evolved. By contrast, God Himself serves as the paradigm of goodness, and His commandments constitute our moral duties. Thus, theism provides a better explanation of objective moral values and duties.

4. God provides the best explanation of the historical facts concerning Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection. Historians have reached something of consensus that the historical Jesus thought that in himself God’s Kingdom had broken into human history, and he carried out a ministry of miracle-working and exorcisms as evidence of that fact. Moreover, most historical scholars agree that after his crucifixion Jesus’ tomb was discovered empty by a group of female disciples, that various individuals and groups saw appearances of Jesus alive after his death, and that the original disciples suddenly and sincerely came to believe in Jesus’ resurrection despite their every predisposition to the contrary. I can think of no better explanation of these facts than the one the original disciples gave: God raised Jesus from the dead.

5. God can be personally known and experienced. The proof of the pudding is in the tasting. Down through history Christians have found through Jesus a personal acquaintance with God that has transformed their lives.

Atheists--------> Check Mate.

1) So, the universe, because it is so big and awesome, requires a creator of some sort. However, a creator does not require one, because logic fail?

2) I don't think you grasp scale. When things approach infinity in size, the improbable becomes routine and expected. Logic fail #2?

3) Could you be any fuller of yourself? Morality only comes from god and god alone? Please. There is no logic at play in this fail.

4) Really? The evidence of a historical Jesus is weak and inconsistant and written accounts are from long after all of the principle actors were dead. I suppose you think everything written is true. Please take a quick look around the internet and get back to me.

5) What about my personal relationship with Zeus? Or am I crazy for thinking that I have one?

Nevermind.

Short answer: I just check mated in my underpants

1) He is arguing that something does not require a creator. Is it the universe or something else? He argues something else.

2) He is arguing that the fundamental constants in the universe are tuned to promote life. The typically response is not scale, because these constants hold across the universe. The typical response is the many-worlds hypothesis, which would allow scale to then apply to universal constants.

3) He is arguing that only objective morality comes from God.

 

[dozer]

I was so pleased to be informed of this, that I ran twenty red lights in his honor.

 

[Steve Tasker]

at the other articles currently advertised on website sidebar:

- Gutfeld: the difference between charity and government

- Health care going postal?

- Huckabee: Money can't buy manners

- Is President Obama "too big to jail"?

- A look back on liberty in 2013

- Beneath the burqa - a bruised and badly beaten teenager

- Team Obama - a government of boobs and bores led by a narcissist

- Five reasons why God exists

- "Duck Dynasty" gay controversy

- Barbara Walters on Obama: "We thought he was going to be the next messiah"

- Senate Dems side with illegal immigrants over veterans

- WH Counselor John Podesta declares Republicans are a "cult worthy of Jonestown"

- New Yorker charged with SEVEN "knock out" assaults

 

[matuski]

- Team Obama - a government of boobs

The only reason I voted for him.

 

[matuski]

I always get Jayrok and Jayrod confused.

IDENTIFY YOURSELF.

 

[NCCommish]

A supernatural explanation is never the best explanation.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

1. God provides the best explanation of the origin of the universe. Given the scientific evidence we have about our universe and its origins, and bolstered by arguments presented by philosophers for centuries, it is highly probable that the universe had an absolute beginning. Since the universe, like everything else, could not have merely popped into being without a cause, there must exist a transcendent reality beyond time and space that brought the universe into existence. This entity must therefore be enormously powerful. Only a transcendent, unembodied mind suitably fits that description.

Since the argument is based on a false premise, it's unsound. (Things pop into being without causes all the time.) Moreover, I'd really like to see the author show his work supporting his claim that only an unembodied mind can create universes. A bodied mind couldn't? An unembodied non-mind (e.g., a law of physics) couldn't? Moreover, I'd like to see the author show his work for his implicit claim that any universe-creating, transcendent, unembodied mind qualifies as a God.

"We don't know how it happened, therefore God did it" is an argument of generally poor form. For one thing, what happens if we do figure out how it happened? (Remember when gods were in charge of the weather?) If the gaps in our knowledge keep getting smaller, so must any gods who fill them. And for another thing, if we don't know how it happened, it might be an argument that something magical is responsible, but it's quite a large leap to get from something magical to God. Lots of other hypothesized beings are equally magical. Maybe it wasn't God who did it, but some other figure who transcends our understanding, like the Easter Bunny or Penn Jillette. God is one possible supernatural explanation among many. If we don't know whether the explanation is natural or supernatural, that doesn't justify pointing to one possible supernatural explanation among many and calling it the best.

2. God provides the best explanation for the fine-tuning of the universe. Contemporary physics has established that the universe is fine-tuned for the existence of intelligent, interactive life. That is to say, in order for intelligent, interactive life to exist, the fundamental constants and quantities of nature must fall into an incomprehensibly narrow life-permitting range. There are three competing explanations of this remarkable fine-tuning: physical necessity, chance, or design. The first two are highly implausible, given the independence of the fundamental constants and quantities from nature's laws and the desperate maneuvers needed to save the hypothesis of chance. That leaves design as the best explanation.

The author has no idea, other than his own assumptions, under precisely what conditions intelligent, interactive life may exist. What he means to say is that the fundamental constants and quantities of nature must fall into an incomprehensibly narrow range for intelligent life of the kind we're familiar with to exist. There's no telling what kind of intelligent life may be able to exist in some other hypothetical quark-gluon soup. It wouldn't be carbon-based, but so what?

And as for marveling at how the universe seems so perfectly fine-tuned to allow human-type life to exist, Douglas Adams had the best retort. That's like marveling at how perfectly shaped some pothole is to hold precisely the puddle that fills it. (In other words, it's not the environment that marvelously fits its inhabitant, but rather the inhabitant that was shaped by the environment to fit.)

3. God provides the best explanation of objective moral values and duties. Even atheists recognize that some things, for example, the Holocaust, are objectively evil. But if atheism is true, what basis is there for the objectivity of the moral values we affirm? Evolution? Social conditioning? These factors may at best produce in us the subjective feeling that there are objective moral values and duties, but they do nothing to provide a basis for them. If human evolution had taken a different path, a very different set of moral feelings might have evolved. By contrast, God Himself serves as the paradigm of goodness, and His commandments constitute our moral duties. Thus, theism provides a better explanation of objective moral values and duties.

This is a rather worse argument than #1 or #2 because while I don't think we can say that God is the best explanation for the universe's existence or habitability, God is at least one possible explanation. The existence of objective moral values, on the other hand, cannot possibly be explained by the presence of any God. Is something good because God says it is, or does God say that something is good because it really is good? If the latter, things can be good all by themselves without a God to pronounce them so. If the former, that's the very essence of a subjective -- not objective -- morality.

4. God provides the best explanation of the historical facts concerning Jesus life, death, and resurrection. Historians have reached something of consensus that the historical Jesus thought that in himself Gods Kingdom had broken into human history, and he carried out a ministry of miracle-working and exorcisms as evidence of that fact. Moreover, most historical scholars agree that after his crucifixion Jesus tomb was discovered empty by a group of female disciples, that various individuals and groups saw appearances of Jesus alive after his death, and that the original disciples suddenly and sincerely came to believe in Jesus resurrection despite their every predisposition to the contrary. I can think of no better explanation of these facts than the one the original disciples gave: God raised Jesus from the dead.

I don't think there's a consensus among historians about those things. This is a rather boring topic to me (perhaps because it's what my undergraduate degree is in), so I won't elaborate much further than to point out that it's nearly impossible to get a consensus on stuff that allegedly happened over 2,000 years ago when written records were sparse.

Claims about magical things that are alleged to have happened a long time ago will not be persuasive to anyone who's not already inclined to believe. This shouldn't be part of a Christmas Gift for Atheists any more than claims about Krishna would be a gift to Christians, or claims about Joseph Smith would be a gift to Muslims.

5. God can be personally known and experienced. The proof of the pudding is in the tasting. Down through history Christians have found through Jesus a personal acquaintance with God that has transformed their lives.

This may be the best argument for Christianity, but of course there are other explanations besides the truth of its claims. (After all, Buddhism has transformed a lot of people's lives as well.)

 

[Fennis]

I gave a Hanukkah gift to a Hindu. It was a gift card.

 

[Bourbon Cowboy]

1. God provides the best explanation of the origin of the universe. Given the scientific evidence we have about our universe and its origins, and bolstered by arguments presented by philosophers for centuries, it is highly probable that the universe had an absolute beginning. Since the universe, like everything else, could not have merely popped into being without a cause, there must exist a transcendent reality beyond time and space that brought the universe into existence. This entity must therefore be enormously powerful. Only a transcendent, unembodied mind suitably fits that description.

Since the argument is based on a false premise, it's unsound. (Things pop into being without causes all the time.) Moreover, I'd really like to see the author show his work supporting his claim that only an unembodied mind can create universes. A bodied mind couldn't? An unembodied non-mind (e.g., a law of physics) couldn't? Moreover, I'd like to see the author show his work for his implicit claim that any transcendent, unembodied mind qualifies as a God.

"We don't know how it happened, therefore God did it" is an argument of generally poor form. For one thing, what happens if we do figure out how it happened? (Remember when gods were in charge of the weather?) If the gaps keep getting smaller, so must any gods who fill them. And for another thing, if we don't know how it happened, it might be an argument that something magical is responsible, but it's quite a large leap to get from something magical to God. Lots of other hypothesized beings are equally magical. Maybe it wasn't God who did it, but the Easter Bunny or Penn Jillette. God is one possible supernatural explanation among many. If we don't know whether the explanation is natural or supernatural, that doesn't justify pointing to one possible supernatural explanation among many and calling it the best.

2. God provides the best explanation for the fine-tuning of the universe. Contemporary physics has established that the universe is fine-tuned for the existence of intelligent, interactive life. That is to say, in order for intelligent, interactive life to exist, the fundamental constants and quantities of nature must fall into an incomprehensibly narrow life-permitting range. There are three competing explanations of this remarkable fine-tuning: physical necessity, chance, or design. The first two are highly implausible, given the independence of the fundamental constants and quantities from nature's laws and the desperate maneuvers needed to save the hypothesis of chance. That leaves design as the best explanation.

The author has no idea, other than his own assumptions, under precisely what conditions intelligent, interactive life may exist. What he means to say is that the fundamental constants and quantities of nature must fall into an incomprehensibly narrow range for intelligent life of the kind we're familiar with to exist. There's no telling what kind of intelligent life may be able to exist in some other hypothetical quark-gluon soup. It wouldn't be carbon-based, but so what?

And as for marveling at how the universe seems so perfectly fine-tuned to allow human-type life to exist, Douglas Adams had the best retort. That's like marveling at how perfectly shaped some pothole is to hold precisely the puddle that fills it. (In other words, it's not the environment that marvelously fits its inhabitant, but rather the inhabitant that was shaped by the environment to fit.)

3. God provides the best explanation of objective moral values and duties. Even atheists recognize that some things, for example, the Holocaust, are objectively evil. But if atheism is true, what basis is there for the objectivity of the moral values we affirm? Evolution? Social conditioning? These factors may at best produce in us the subjective feeling that there are objective moral values and duties, but they do nothing to provide a basis for them. If human evolution had taken a different path, a very different set of moral feelings might have evolved. By contrast, God Himself serves as the paradigm of goodness, and His commandments constitute our moral duties. Thus, theism provides a better explanation of objective moral values and duties.

This is a rather worse argument than #1 or #2, because while I don't think we can say that God is the best explanation for the universe's existence or habitability, God is at least one possible explanation. The existence of objective moral values, on the other hand, cannot possibly be explained by the presence of any God. Is something good because God says it is, or does God say that something is good because it really is good? If the latter, things can be good all by themselves without a God to pronounce them so. If the former, that's the very essence of a subjective -- not objective -- morality.

4. God provides the best explanation of the historical facts concerning Jesus life, death, and resurrection. Historians have reached something of consensus that the historical Jesus thought that in himself Gods Kingdom had broken into human history, and he carried out a ministry of miracle-working and exorcisms as evidence of that fact. Moreover, most historical scholars agree that after his crucifixion Jesus tomb was discovered empty by a group of female disciples, that various individuals and groups saw appearances of Jesus alive after his death, and that the original disciples suddenly and sincerely came to believe in Jesus resurrection despite their every predisposition to the contrary. I can think of no better explanation of these facts than the one the original disciples gave: God raised Jesus from the dead.

I don't think there's a consensus among historians about those things. This is a rather boring topic to me (perhaps because it's what my undergraduate degree is in), so I won't elaborate much further than to point out that it's nearly impossible to get a consensus on stuff that allegedly happened over 2,000 years ago when written records were sparse.

Claims about magical things that are alleged to have happened a long time ago will not be persuasive to anyone who's not already inclined to believe. This shouldn't be part of a Christmas Gift for Atheists any more than claims about Krishna would be a gift to Christians, or claims about Joseph Smith would be a gift to Muslims.

5. God can be personally known and experienced. The proof of the pudding is in the tasting. Down through history Christians have found through Jesus a personal acquaintance with God that has transformed their lives.

This may be the best argument for Christianity, but of course there are other explanations besides the truth of its claims. (After all, Buddhism has transformed a lot of people's lives as well.)

Platypus

 

[JZilla]

Embarrassingly weak. I've seen shlubs here provide better arguments for religion.

I'm still can't tell Jayrod from Jayrok either so this whole OP may be

 

[Big Cat]

Bah humbug.

 

[Jayrok]

1. God provides the best explanation of the origin of the universe. Given the scientific evidence we have about our universe and its origins, and bolstered by arguments presented by philosophers for centuries, it is highly probable that the universe had an absolute beginning. Since the universe, like everything else, could not have merely popped into being without a cause, there must exist a transcendent reality beyond time and space that brought the universe into existence. This entity must therefore be enormously powerful. Only a transcendent, unembodied mind suitably fits that description.

Since the argument is based on a false premise, it's unsound. (Things pop into being without causes all the time.) Moreover, I'd really like to see the author show his work supporting his claim that only an unembodied mind can create universes. A bodied mind couldn't? An unembodied non-mind (e.g., a law of physics) couldn't? Moreover, I'd like to see the author show his work for his implicit claim that any universe-creating, transcendent, unembodied mind qualifies as a God.

"We don't know how it happened, therefore God did it" is an argument of generally poor form. For one thing, what happens if we do figure out how it happened? (Remember when gods were in charge of the weather?) If the gaps keep getting smaller, so must any gods who fill them. And for another thing, if we don't know how it happened, it might be an argument that something magical is responsible, but it's quite a large leap to get from something magical to God. Lots of other hypothesized beings are equally magical. Maybe it wasn't God who did it, but the Easter Bunny or Penn Jillette. God is one possible supernatural explanation among many. If we don't know whether the explanation is natural or supernatural, that doesn't justify pointing to one possible supernatural explanation among many and calling it the best.

2. God provides the best explanation for the fine-tuning of the universe. Contemporary physics has established that the universe is fine-tuned for the existence of intelligent, interactive life. That is to say, in order for intelligent, interactive life to exist, the fundamental constants and quantities of nature must fall into an incomprehensibly narrow life-permitting range. There are three competing explanations of this remarkable fine-tuning: physical necessity, chance, or design. The first two are highly implausible, given the independence of the fundamental constants and quantities from nature's laws and the desperate maneuvers needed to save the hypothesis of chance. That leaves design as the best explanation.

The author has no idea, other than his own assumptions, under precisely what conditions intelligent, interactive life may exist. What he means to say is that the fundamental constants and quantities of nature must fall into an incomprehensibly narrow range for intelligent life of the kind we're familiar with to exist. There's no telling what kind of intelligent life may be able to exist in some other hypothetical quark-gluon soup. It wouldn't be carbon-based, but so what?

And as for marveling at how the universe seems so perfectly fine-tuned to allow human-type life to exist, Douglas Adams had the best retort. That's like marveling at how perfectly shaped some pothole is to hold precisely the puddle that fills it. (In other words, it's not the environment that marvelously fits its inhabitant, but rather the inhabitant that was shaped by the environment to fit.)

3. God provides the best explanation of objective moral values and duties. Even atheists recognize that some things, for example, the Holocaust, are objectively evil. But if atheism is true, what basis is there for the objectivity of the moral values we affirm? Evolution? Social conditioning? These factors may at best produce in us the subjective feeling that there are objective moral values and duties, but they do nothing to provide a basis for them. If human evolution had taken a different path, a very different set of moral feelings might have evolved. By contrast, God Himself serves as the paradigm of goodness, and His commandments constitute our moral duties. Thus, theism provides a better explanation of objective moral values and duties.

This is a rather worse argument than #1 or #2 because while I don't think we can say that God is the best explanation for the universe's existence or habitability, God is at least one possible explanation. The existence of objective moral values, on the other hand, cannot possibly be explained by the presence of any God. Is something good because God says it is, or does God say that something is good because it really is good? If the latter, things can be good all by themselves without a God to pronounce them so. If the former, that's the very essence of a subjective -- not objective -- morality.

4. God provides the best explanation of the historical facts concerning Jesus life, death, and resurrection. Historians have reached something of consensus that the historical Jesus thought that in himself Gods Kingdom had broken into human history, and he carried out a ministry of miracle-working and exorcisms as evidence of that fact. Moreover, most historical scholars agree that after his crucifixion Jesus tomb was discovered empty by a group of female disciples, that various individuals and groups saw appearances of Jesus alive after his death, and that the original disciples suddenly and sincerely came to believe in Jesus resurrection despite their every predisposition to the contrary. I can think of no better explanation of these facts than the one the original disciples gave: God raised Jesus from the dead.

I don't think there's a consensus among historians about those things. This is a rather boring topic to me (perhaps because it's what my undergraduate degree is in), so I won't elaborate much further than to point out that it's nearly impossible to get a consensus on stuff that allegedly happened over 2,000 years ago when written records were sparse.

Claims about magical things that are alleged to have happened a long time ago will not be persuasive to anyone who's not already inclined to believe. This shouldn't be part of a Christmas Gift for Atheists any more than claims about Krishna would be a gift to Christians, or claims about Joseph Smith would be a gift to Muslims.

5. God can be personally known and experienced. The proof of the pudding is in the tasting. Down through history Christians have found through Jesus a personal acquaintance with God that has transformed their lives.

This may be the best argument for Christianity, but of course there are other explanations besides the truth of its claims. (After all, Buddhism has transformed a lot of people's lives as well.)

Internet bullying is frowned upon on social media platforms.

 

[Jayrok]

Embarrassingly weak. I've seen shlubs here provide better arguments for religion.

I'm still can't tell Jayrod from Jayrok either so this whole OP may be

It's somewhat disappointing that this often seems the case.

 

[dozer]

I confuse Jayrok with J-Wow.

 

[17seconds]

Five reasons why God exists.

LinktoGift

1. God provides the best explanation of the origin of the universe. Given the scientific evidence we have about our universe and its origins, and bolstered by arguments presented by philosophers for centuries, it is highly probable that the universe had an absolute beginning. Since the universe, like everything else, could not have merely popped into being without a cause, there must exist a transcendent reality beyond time and space that brought the universe into existence. This entity must therefore be enormously powerful. Only a transcendent, unembodied mind suitably fits that description.

2. God provides the best explanation for the fine-tuning of the universe. Contemporary physics has established that the universe is fine-tuned for the existence of intelligent, interactive life. That is to say, in order for intelligent, interactive life to exist, the fundamental constants and quantities of nature must fall into an incomprehensibly narrow life-permitting range. There are three competing explanations of this remarkable fine-tuning: physical necessity, chance, or design. The first two are highly implausible, given the independence of the fundamental constants and quantities from nature's laws and the desperate maneuvers needed to save the hypothesis of chance. That leaves design as the best explanation.

3. God provides the best explanation of objective moral values and duties. Even atheists recognize that some things, for example, the Holocaust, are objectively evil. But if atheism is true, what basis is there for the objectivity of the moral values we affirm? Evolution? Social conditioning? These factors may at best produce in us the subjective feeling that there are objective moral values and duties, but they do nothing to provide a basis for them. If human evolution had taken a different path, a very different set of moral feelings might have evolved. By contrast, God Himself serves as the paradigm of goodness, and His commandments constitute our moral duties. Thus, theism provides a better explanation of objective moral values and duties.

4. God provides the best explanation of the historical facts concerning Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection. Historians have reached something of consensus that the historical Jesus thought that in himself God’s Kingdom had broken into human history, and he carried out a ministry of miracle-working and exorcisms as evidence of that fact. Moreover, most historical scholars agree that after his crucifixion Jesus’ tomb was discovered empty by a group of female disciples, that various individuals and groups saw appearances of Jesus alive after his death, and that the original disciples suddenly and sincerely came to believe in Jesus’ resurrection despite their every predisposition to the contrary. I can think of no better explanation of these facts than the one the original disciples gave: God raised Jesus from the dead.

5. God can be personally known and experienced. The proof of the pudding is in the tasting. Down through history Christians have found through Jesus a personal acquaintance with God that has transformed their lives.

Atheists--------> Check Mate.

It's amazing to me that someone can be so delusional he's thinks this is an argument. I mean, he knows this is just a feel good article for him and his ilk, right? He can't really believe he's making an argument.

 

[E Street Brat]

#### um they get nothing

 

[Jayrok]

Five reasons why God exists.

LinktoGift

1. God provides the best explanation of the origin of the universe. Given the scientific evidence we have about our universe and its origins, and bolstered by arguments presented by philosophers for centuries, it is highly probable that the universe had an absolute beginning. Since the universe, like everything else, could not have merely popped into being without a cause, there must exist a transcendent reality beyond time and space that brought the universe into existence. This entity must therefore be enormously powerful. Only a transcendent, unembodied mind suitably fits that description.

2. God provides the best explanation for the fine-tuning of the universe. Contemporary physics has established that the universe is fine-tuned for the existence of intelligent, interactive life. That is to say, in order for intelligent, interactive life to exist, the fundamental constants and quantities of nature must fall into an incomprehensibly narrow life-permitting range. There are three competing explanations of this remarkable fine-tuning: physical necessity, chance, or design. The first two are highly implausible, given the independence of the fundamental constants and quantities from nature's laws and the desperate maneuvers needed to save the hypothesis of chance. That leaves design as the best explanation.

3. God provides the best explanation of objective moral values and duties. Even atheists recognize that some things, for example, the Holocaust, are objectively evil. But if atheism is true, what basis is there for the objectivity of the moral values we affirm? Evolution? Social conditioning? These factors may at best produce in us the subjective feeling that there are objective moral values and duties, but they do nothing to provide a basis for them. If human evolution had taken a different path, a very different set of moral feelings might have evolved. By contrast, God Himself serves as the paradigm of goodness, and His commandments constitute our moral duties. Thus, theism provides a better explanation of objective moral values and duties.

4. God provides the best explanation of the historical facts concerning Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection. Historians have reached something of consensus that the historical Jesus thought that in himself God’s Kingdom had broken into human history, and he carried out a ministry of miracle-working and exorcisms as evidence of that fact. Moreover, most historical scholars agree that after his crucifixion Jesus’ tomb was discovered empty by a group of female disciples, that various individuals and groups saw appearances of Jesus alive after his death, and that the original disciples suddenly and sincerely came to believe in Jesus’ resurrection despite their every predisposition to the contrary. I can think of no better explanation of these facts than the one the original disciples gave: God raised Jesus from the dead.

5. God can be personally known and experienced. The proof of the pudding is in the tasting. Down through history Christians have found through Jesus a personal acquaintance with God that has transformed their lives.

Atheists--------> Check Mate.

It's amazing to me that someone can be so delusional he's thinks this is an argument. I mean, he knows this is just a feel good article for him and his ilk, right? He can't really believe he's making an argument.

Craig believes that what he speaks is the truth. He actually has very good debating skills even though his material isn't always very strong.

 

[Jayrok]

RE: Jayrod and Jayrok. One of us believes in places such as heaven and hell. The other has used a Bill Murray avatar for over 10 years.

 

[JZilla]

Yeah I still don't know what the hell is going on

Thanks for the gift tho

 

[Parrothead]

I am going to re-gift this to someone who doesn't know any better..

 

[dozer]

Number 5 is just plain wackadoodle.

 

[joffer]

It's amazing to me that someone can be so delusional he's thinks this is an argument. I mean, he knows this is just a feel good article for him and his ilk, right? He can't really believe he's making an argument.

he's pretty much a professional debater/apologist. he believes it.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

I confuse Jayrok with J-Wow.

I confuse neither with J-Lo.

http://static.entertainmentwise.com/photos/Image/jennifer06_wenn5927727.jpg

 

[cstu]

Jayrok, last year I posted, for the purposes of discussion and refutation, 36 reasons why God exists, which included every known argument that's ever been made. All 5 of your reasons were encapsulated in that article. They weren't even, in my mind, the most convincing (for me that, was Spinoza's god, which is a concept I believe most atheists can get behind.)

It's a gift, timschochet. It may not be the best gift you receive this holiday season, nor the most expensive.

Kind of like when I got the clap.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

Five reasons why God exists.

LinktoGift

1. God provides the best explanation of the origin of the universe. Given the scientific evidence we have about our universe and its origins, and bolstered by arguments presented by philosophers for centuries, it is highly probable that the universe had an absolute beginning. Since the universe, like everything else, could not have merely popped into being without a cause, there must exist a transcendent reality beyond time and space that brought the universe into existence. This entity must therefore be enormously powerful. Only a transcendent, unembodied mind suitably fits that description.

2. God provides the best explanation for the fine-tuning of the universe. Contemporary physics has established that the universe is fine-tuned for the existence of intelligent, interactive life. That is to say, in order for intelligent, interactive life to exist, the fundamental constants and quantities of nature must fall into an incomprehensibly narrow life-permitting range. There are three competing explanations of this remarkable fine-tuning: physical necessity, chance, or design. The first two are highly implausible, given the independence of the fundamental constants and quantities from nature's laws and the desperate maneuvers needed to save the hypothesis of chance. That leaves design as the best explanation.

3. God provides the best explanation of objective moral values and duties. Even atheists recognize that some things, for example, the Holocaust, are objectively evil. But if atheism is true, what basis is there for the objectivity of the moral values we affirm? Evolution? Social conditioning? These factors may at best produce in us the subjective feeling that there are objective moral values and duties, but they do nothing to provide a basis for them. If human evolution had taken a different path, a very different set of moral feelings might have evolved. By contrast, God Himself serves as the paradigm of goodness, and His commandments constitute our moral duties. Thus, theism provides a better explanation of objective moral values and duties.

4. God provides the best explanation of the historical facts concerning Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection. Historians have reached something of consensus that the historical Jesus thought that in himself God’s Kingdom had broken into human history, and he carried out a ministry of miracle-working and exorcisms as evidence of that fact. Moreover, most historical scholars agree that after his crucifixion Jesus’ tomb was discovered empty by a group of female disciples, that various individuals and groups saw appearances of Jesus alive after his death, and that the original disciples suddenly and sincerely came to believe in Jesus’ resurrection despite their every predisposition to the contrary. I can think of no better explanation of these facts than the one the original disciples gave: God raised Jesus from the dead.

5. God can be personally known and experienced. The proof of the pudding is in the tasting. Down through history Christians have found through Jesus a personal acquaintance with God that has transformed their lives.

Atheists--------> Check Mate.

It's amazing to me that someone can be so delusional he's thinks this is an argument. I mean, he knows this is just a feel good article for him and his ilk, right? He can't really believe he's making an argument.

Craig believes that what he speaks is the truth. He actually has very good debating skills even though his material isn't always very strong.

Jayrok this is a terrible article and so beneath you.

 

[Big Cat]

Five reasons why God exists.

LinktoGift

1. God provides the best explanation of the origin of the universe. Given the scientific evidence we have about our universe and its origins, and bolstered by arguments presented by philosophers for centuries, it is highly probable that the universe had an absolute beginning. Since the universe, like everything else, could not have merely popped into being without a cause, there must exist a transcendent reality beyond time and space that brought the universe into existence. This entity must therefore be enormously powerful. Only a transcendent, unembodied mind suitably fits that description.

2. God provides the best explanation for the fine-tuning of the universe. Contemporary physics has established that the universe is fine-tuned for the existence of intelligent, interactive life. That is to say, in order for intelligent, interactive life to exist, the fundamental constants and quantities of nature must fall into an incomprehensibly narrow life-permitting range. There are three competing explanations of this remarkable fine-tuning: physical necessity, chance, or design. The first two are highly implausible, given the independence of the fundamental constants and quantities from nature's laws and the desperate maneuvers needed to save the hypothesis of chance. That leaves design as the best explanation.

3. God provides the best explanation of objective moral values and duties. Even atheists recognize that some things, for example, the Holocaust, are objectively evil. But if atheism is true, what basis is there for the objectivity of the moral values we affirm? Evolution? Social conditioning? These factors may at best produce in us the subjective feeling that there are objective moral values and duties, but they do nothing to provide a basis for them. If human evolution had taken a different path, a very different set of moral feelings might have evolved. By contrast, God Himself serves as the paradigm of goodness, and His commandments constitute our moral duties. Thus, theism provides a better explanation of objective moral values and duties.

4. God provides the best explanation of the historical facts concerning Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection. Historians have reached something of consensus that the historical Jesus thought that in himself God’s Kingdom had broken into human history, and he carried out a ministry of miracle-working and exorcisms as evidence of that fact. Moreover, most historical scholars agree that after his crucifixion Jesus’ tomb was discovered empty by a group of female disciples, that various individuals and groups saw appearances of Jesus alive after his death, and that the original disciples suddenly and sincerely came to believe in Jesus’ resurrection despite their every predisposition to the contrary. I can think of no better explanation of these facts than the one the original disciples gave: God raised Jesus from the dead.

5. God can be personally known and experienced. The proof of the pudding is in the tasting. Down through history Christians have found through Jesus a personal acquaintance with God that has transformed their lives.

Atheists--------> Check Mate.

It's amazing to me that someone can be so delusional he's thinks this is an argument. I mean, he knows this is just a feel good article for him and his ilk, right? He can't really believe he's making an argument.

Craig believes that what he speaks is the truth. He actually has very good debating skills even though his material isn't always very strong.

Jayrok this is a terrible article and so beneath you.

Fixed.

 

[Fennis]

Five reasons why God exists.

LinktoGift

1. God provides the best explanation of the origin of the universe. Given the scientific evidence we have about our universe and its origins, and bolstered by arguments presented by philosophers for centuries, it is highly probable that the universe had an absolute beginning. Since the universe, like everything else, could not have merely popped into being without a cause, there must exist a transcendent reality beyond time and space that brought the universe into existence. This entity must therefore be enormously powerful. Only a transcendent, unembodied mind suitably fits that description.

2. God provides the best explanation for the fine-tuning of the universe. Contemporary physics has established that the universe is fine-tuned for the existence of intelligent, interactive life. That is to say, in order for intelligent, interactive life to exist, the fundamental constants and quantities of nature must fall into an incomprehensibly narrow life-permitting range. There are three competing explanations of this remarkable fine-tuning: physical necessity, chance, or design. The first two are highly implausible, given the independence of the fundamental constants and quantities from nature's laws and the desperate maneuvers needed to save the hypothesis of chance. That leaves design as the best explanation.

3. God provides the best explanation of objective moral values and duties. Even atheists recognize that some things, for example, the Holocaust, are objectively evil. But if atheism is true, what basis is there for the objectivity of the moral values we affirm? Evolution? Social conditioning? These factors may at best produce in us the subjective feeling that there are objective moral values and duties, but they do nothing to provide a basis for them. If human evolution had taken a different path, a very different set of moral feelings might have evolved. By contrast, God Himself serves as the paradigm of goodness, and His commandments constitute our moral duties. Thus, theism provides a better explanation of objective moral values and duties.

4. God provides the best explanation of the historical facts concerning Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection. Historians have reached something of consensus that the historical Jesus thought that in himself God’s Kingdom had broken into human history, and he carried out a ministry of miracle-working and exorcisms as evidence of that fact. Moreover, most historical scholars agree that after his crucifixion Jesus’ tomb was discovered empty by a group of female disciples, that various individuals and groups saw appearances of Jesus alive after his death, and that the original disciples suddenly and sincerely came to believe in Jesus’ resurrection despite their every predisposition to the contrary. I can think of no better explanation of these facts than the one the original disciples gave: God raised Jesus from the dead.

5. God can be personally known and experienced. The proof of the pudding is in the tasting. Down through history Christians have found through Jesus a personal acquaintance with God that has transformed their lives.

Atheists--------> Check Mate.

It's amazing to me that someone can be so delusional he's thinks this is an argument. I mean, he knows this is just a feel good article for him and his ilk, right? He can't really believe he's making an argument.

Craig believes that what he speaks is the truth. He actually has very good debating skills even though his material isn't always very strong.

jayrod this is a terrible article and so beneath you.

Fixed.

fixed

 

[Jayrok]

Five reasons why God exists.

LinktoGift

1. God provides the best explanation of the origin of the universe. Given the scientific evidence we have about our universe and its origins, and bolstered by arguments presented by philosophers for centuries, it is highly probable that the universe had an absolute beginning. Since the universe, like everything else, could not have merely popped into being without a cause, there must exist a transcendent reality beyond time and space that brought the universe into existence. This entity must therefore be enormously powerful. Only a transcendent, unembodied mind suitably fits that description.

2. God provides the best explanation for the fine-tuning of the universe. Contemporary physics has established that the universe is fine-tuned for the existence of intelligent, interactive life. That is to say, in order for intelligent, interactive life to exist, the fundamental constants and quantities of nature must fall into an incomprehensibly narrow life-permitting range. There are three competing explanations of this remarkable fine-tuning: physical necessity, chance, or design. The first two are highly implausible, given the independence of the fundamental constants and quantities from nature's laws and the desperate maneuvers needed to save the hypothesis of chance. That leaves design as the best explanation.

3. God provides the best explanation of objective moral values and duties. Even atheists recognize that some things, for example, the Holocaust, are objectively evil. But if atheism is true, what basis is there for the objectivity of the moral values we affirm? Evolution? Social conditioning? These factors may at best produce in us the subjective feeling that there are objective moral values and duties, but they do nothing to provide a basis for them. If human evolution had taken a different path, a very different set of moral feelings might have evolved. By contrast, God Himself serves as the paradigm of goodness, and His commandments constitute our moral duties. Thus, theism provides a better explanation of objective moral values and duties.

4. God provides the best explanation of the historical facts concerning Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection. Historians have reached something of consensus that the historical Jesus thought that in himself God’s Kingdom had broken into human history, and he carried out a ministry of miracle-working and exorcisms as evidence of that fact. Moreover, most historical scholars agree that after his crucifixion Jesus’ tomb was discovered empty by a group of female disciples, that various individuals and groups saw appearances of Jesus alive after his death, and that the original disciples suddenly and sincerely came to believe in Jesus’ resurrection despite their every predisposition to the contrary. I can think of no better explanation of these facts than the one the original disciples gave: God raised Jesus from the dead.

5. God can be personally known and experienced. The proof of the pudding is in the tasting. Down through history Christians have found through Jesus a personal acquaintance with God that has transformed their lives.

Atheists--------> Check Mate.

It's amazing to me that someone can be so delusional he's thinks this is an argument. I mean, he knows this is just a feel good article for him and his ilk, right? He can't really believe he's making an argument.

Craig believes that what he speaks is the truth. He actually has very good debating skills even though his material isn't always very strong.

Jayrok this is a terrible article and so beneath you.

 

[Wilfredo Ledezma]

Fox News

hilarious...

 

[Buck Bradcanon]

I confuse Jayrok with J-Wow.

I confuse neither with J-Lo.

http://static.entertainmentwise.com/photos/Image/jennifer06_wenn5927727.jpg

Thank you for this Christmas gift, Hoard. Merry Christmas.

 

[ummich10]

Happy Saturnalia everyone!

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

I thought this debate between Sean Carroll and William Lane Craig was good. I used to read Carroll's blog* a long time ago, but I'd never heard him speak. He's pretty darn good at it.

__

*Cosmic Variance, a group blog. I think it's gone now, but he's apparently got his own blog at preposterousuniverse.

 

[joffer]

I thought this debate between Sean Carroll and William Lane Craig was good. I used to read Carroll's blog* a long time ago, but I'd never heard him speak. He's pretty darn good at it.

__

*Cosmic Variance, a group blog. I think it's gone now, but he's apparently got his own blog at preposterousuniverse.

Without looking, Let me guess. Craig argues Kalam again right?

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Without looking, Let me guess. Craig argues Kalam again right?

Of course. That and fine-tuning.

 

[mad sweeney]

I thought this debate between Sean Carroll and William Lane Craig was good. I used to read Carroll's blog* a long time ago, but I'd never heard him speak. He's pretty darn good at it.

__

*Cosmic Variance, a group blog. I think it's gone now, but he's apparently got his own blog at preposterousuniverse.

Here's one for Hustler. http://www.preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2010/09/23/the-laws-underlying-the-physics-of-everyday-life-are-completely-understood/