# Questions on Christianity (Again...) **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 30, 2010, 2:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/questions-on-christianity-again/551952 "2010-08-30T02:13:22Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 13
**Author:** ![aigonz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4491bb/32.png) [@aigonz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aigonz)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2010, 9:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/questions-on-christianity-again/551952/241 "2010-09-01T21:34:15Z")
[quote=“monavis, post:210, topic:551952”] > [@aigonz](#): > > What you claim to be knowledge of God, is not knowledge, but 'Belief". Some thing you were taught, read, or thought in your own mind. What is called evidence for God is a matter of belief, not fact. Ultimately, an accetance of anything we do not know for sure invokes belief. The multiverse hypothesis requires belief. Belief based on reading and teaching. ---
**Author:** ![aigonz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4491bb/32.png) [@aigonz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aigonz)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2010, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/questions-on-christianity-again/551952/242 "2010-09-01T21:36:25Z")
> [@monavis](#): > > > [@aigonz](#): > > > > Once agian you are pretending to know the mind and purposes of God. Remember He set aside the 7th day for rest. Rest is an intentional part of creation. > > Do you realize you are also pretending to ‘know’ the mind of God? Some human said God set the 7th day aside for rest. it is belief in that person…not God!! You confuse the mind of God with the will of God. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2010, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/questions-on-christianity-again/551952/243 "2010-09-01T21:37:19Z")
> [@aigonz](#): > > > [@aigonz](#): > > > > 1\> Objective moral laws exist. > > > > > [@](#): > > > > > > No they don’t. Sorry. If you disagree, then point to an “objective moral law” and prove that it can exist outside of human thought. > > I have…an abhorrence towards child abuse > > > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > > > This is not an “objective moral law.” This is a widely shared (though not universal) subjective, human emotional response based in an evolutionary impulse to protect offspring. > > Nonsense. The evolutionary response to protect offspring is a fiction…look at animals who kill their young. All your are doing is demonstrating the baselessness of your argument; clearly abhorrence towards child abuse ISN’T some universal law. ---
**Author:** ![aigonz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4491bb/32.png) [@aigonz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aigonz)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2010, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/questions-on-christianity-again/551952/244 "2010-09-01T21:37:50Z")
> [@Meatros](#): > > > [@aigonz](#): > > > > There is no difference. If I made a statement that ‘Sauron does not exist’ I would expect to be able to substantiate it. And the idea that God cannot exist because He violates physical laws is simply nonsense. God is not a physical entity. Therefore He is not bound by physical laws. > > Saw this on the previous page. > > So God is not a physical entity. > > What is God then? It would seem rather obvious. God is seperate from the physical/natural universe. God is non-physical. ---
**Author:** ![aigonz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4491bb/32.png) [@aigonz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aigonz)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2010, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/questions-on-christianity-again/551952/245 "2010-09-01T21:40:05Z")
> [@CurtC](#): > > > [@aigonz](#): > > > > The existence of evil…and our recognition of it. > > I recognize that religion is evil, therefore that is evidence that God exists?!? > > > [@aigonz](#): > > > > Man is incapable of devising an objective moral law, because history demonstrates how problematic human agreement is. Yet we observe an objective moral law. > > But here, your first sentence disproves your second! You yourself recognize that humans can’t agree on what morality IS, which is another way of saying that morality is not objective. > > Then you go on to baldly assert that morality is objective. Do you not see how you’ve contradicted yourself here? Humans could not DEVISE an objecctive moral law. That doesn’t mean we could not recognise one. See the difference? ---
**Author:** ![aigonz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4491bb/32.png) [@aigonz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aigonz)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2010, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/questions-on-christianity-again/551952/246 "2010-09-01T21:44:54Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > > [@aigonz](#): > > > > I have…an abhorrence towards child abuse > > Nonsense. The evolutionary response to protect offspring is a fiction…look at animals who kill their young. > > All your are doing is demonstrating the baselessness of your argument; clearly abhorrence towards child abuse ISN’T some universal law. On the contrary. Child abuse is wrong, any sane person will concur. It is your invoing of an evolutionary explanation that is baseless. ---
**Author:** ![aigonz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4491bb/32.png) [@aigonz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aigonz)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2010, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/questions-on-christianity-again/551952/247 "2010-09-01T21:50:46Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > And as often pointed out in these arguments, pushing the origin question back to “God” just changes the question to “where did God come from”. And if you answer that he came from nowhere or has been around eternally, that answer can be applied to universes just as easily without a character from primitive myths being involved. In the case of God, the question is answered by the notion that he is seperate to the constraints of the physical universe and therefore not bound by them. On the other hand, anything within the physical universe IS bound by the laws of the universe. Despite the theorising, nothing physical that exists is uncaused, and there are very real logical problems with time being eternal (regressed). ---
**Author:** ![CurtC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ce73a5/32.png) [@CurtC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CurtC)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2010, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/questions-on-christianity-again/551952/248 "2010-09-01T22:17:17Z")
> [@aigonz](#): > > Humans could not DEVISE an objecctive moral law. That doesn’t mean we could not recognise one. See the difference? No. You’re vigorously trying to dodge the point, but I’m sticking with it. If we can recognize objective morality, we could devise an objective moral system just by asking ourselves what the objective right yes/no answer is for each situation. > [@aigonz](#): > > Despite the theorising, nothing physical that exists is uncaused, and there are very real logical problems with time being eternal (regressed). 1. You’re not aware of the current state of quantum physics - current as in the last 40 or 50 years. Events without causes most certainly happen. 2. What, pray tell, are the “very real” logical problems with time being eternal (regressed)? You’re not going to pull out that old notion that “if time has been around infinitely long, then we couldn’t have gotten to this point” are you? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2010, 10:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/questions-on-christianity-again/551952/249 "2010-09-01T22:24:25Z")
> [@aigonz](#): > > Nonsense. The evolutionary response to protect offspring is a fiction…look at animals who kill their young. Look at the animals who protect their young. Not every species is evolved the same way. Prove that “morality” exists outside of human thought. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2010, 10:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/questions-on-christianity-again/551952/250 "2010-09-01T22:31:27Z")
> [@aigonz](#): > > Behe, Dembski, Strobel? Here’s some homework for you. Fred Hoyle, George Ellis, Paul davies, Alan Sandage, John O’Keefe, George Greenstein, Arthur Eddington, Arno Penzias, Roger Penriose, Tony Rothman…the list is long. > > Robert Jastrow (self-proclaimed agnostic): “For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries.” Let see Jastrow’s prrof for a magic sky fairy. I’m not interested in his personal beliefs or assertions. > [@](#): > > There Is a God: How the World’s Most Notorious Atheist Changed His MindAntony Flew (Professor of Philosophy, former atheist, author, and debater) “It now seems to me that the findings of more than fifty years of Deoxyribonucleic acid: the chemical inside the nucleus of a cell that carries the genetic instructions for making living organisms.DNA research have provided materials for a new and enormously powerful argument to design.” Yes, Flew was convinced by bogus ID arguments. Flew is a philosopher, not a scientist and didn’t recognize phony science when he saw it. Just so you know, there is no evidence of “design” in DNA. Sorry. If you beg to differ then show what the actual evidence is. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2010, 10:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/questions-on-christianity-again/551952/251 "2010-09-01T22:36:04Z")
> [@aigonz](#): > > > [@monavis](#): > > > > Do you realize you are also pretending to ‘know’ the mind of God? Some human said God set the 7th day aside for rest. it is belief in that person…not God!! > > You confuse the mind of God with the will of God. What makes you think you know the will of God? Isn’t that rather arrogant on your part? Didn’t the 9/11 hijackers also think they were doing God’s will? How do you know they weren’t? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2010, 10:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/questions-on-christianity-again/551952/252 "2010-09-01T22:40:08Z")
> [@aigonz](#): > > > [@Meatros](#): > > > > Saw this on the previous page. > > > > So God is not a physical entity. > > > > What is God then? > > It would seem rather obvious. God is seperate from the physical/natural universe. God is non-physical. How is this any different from saying God is non-existent? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2010, 10:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/questions-on-christianity-again/551952/253 "2010-09-01T22:42:18Z")
> [@aigonz](#): > > Humans could not DEVISE an objecctive moral law. That doesn’t mean we could not recognise one. See the difference? Humans have never recognized any such thing. ---
**Author:** ![aigonz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4491bb/32.png) [@aigonz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aigonz)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2010, 11:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/questions-on-christianity-again/551952/254 "2010-09-01T23:33:14Z")
> [@CurtC](#): > > > [@aigonz](#): > > > > Humans could not DEVISE an objecctive moral law. That doesn’t mean we could not recognise one. See the difference? > > No. > > You’re vigorously trying to dodge the point, but I’m sticking with it. If we can recognize objective morality, we could devise an objective moral system just by asking ourselves what the objective right yes/no answer is for each situation. Are you saying you don’t see the difference between devising and recognising? And what is an ‘objective yes/no answer for each situation’? Think about it. > [@aigonz](#): > > Despite the theorising, nothing physical that exists is uncaused, and there are very real logical problems with time being eternal (regressed). 1. You’re not aware of the current state of quantum physics - current as in the last 40 or 50 years. Events without causes most certainly happen. 2. What, pray tell, are the “very real” logical problems with time being eternal (regressed)? You’re not going to pull out that old notion that “if time has been around infinitely long, then we couldn’t have gotten to this point” are you? [/QUOTE] 1\> I am well aware of current quantum physics. Events without causes don’t happen. Further events that have no ‘state’ in which to occurr don’t happen, so the spontaneous arrival of life has more than one problem. 2\> Infinite regression ---
**Author:** ![aigonz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4491bb/32.png) [@aigonz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aigonz)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2010, 11:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/questions-on-christianity-again/551952/255 "2010-09-01T23:35:32Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > > [@aigonz](#): > > > > Nonsense. The evolutionary response to protect offspring is a fiction…look at animals who kill their young. > > Look at the animals who protect their young. Not every species is evolved the same way. > > Prove that “morality” exists outside of human thought. You digress. The abhorrence of child abuse was explained as an evolutionary response to self preservation. This is absurd. Many species harm their young, including humans. Yet we somehow know it to be wrong. ---
**Author:** ![aigonz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4491bb/32.png) [@aigonz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aigonz)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2010, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/questions-on-christianity-again/551952/256 "2010-09-01T23:42:22Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > > [@aigonz](#): > > > > Behe, Dembski, Strobel? Here’s some homework for you. Fred Hoyle, George Ellis, Paul davies, Alan Sandage, John O’Keefe, George Greenstein, Arthur Eddington, Arno Penzias, Roger Penriose, Tony Rothman…the list is long. > > > > Robert Jastrow (self-proclaimed agnostic): “For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries.” > > Let see Jastrow’s prrof for a magic sky fairy. I’m not interested in his personal beliefs or assertions. > > > [@](#): > > > > There Is a God: How the World’s Most Notorious Atheist Changed His MindAntony Flew (Professor of Philosophy, former atheist, author, and debater) “It now seems to me that the findings of more than fifty years of Deoxyribonucleic acid: the chemical inside the nucleus of a cell that carries the genetic instructions for making living organisms.DNA research have provided materials for a new and enormously powerful argument to design.” > > Yes, Flew was convinced by bogus ID arguments. Flew is a philosopher, not a scientist and didn’t recognize phony science when he saw it. Just so you know, there is no evidence of “design” in DNA. Sorry. If you beg to differ then show what the actual evidence is. Reread the list of names I gave. It is long and gets longer. These are astrophysicists, physicists, mathematicians, astronomers… Vera Kistiakowsky, Frank Tipler, Alexander Polyakov, Ed Harrison… ---
**Author:** ![aigonz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4491bb/32.png) [@aigonz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aigonz)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2010, 11:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/questions-on-christianity-again/551952/257 "2010-09-01T23:44:58Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > > [@aigonz](#): > > > > It would seem rather obvious. God is seperate from the physical/natural universe. God is non-physical. > > How is this any different from saying God is non-existent? You mean you cannot grasp the concept of anything outside the physical universe? ---
**Author:** ![aigonz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4491bb/32.png) [@aigonz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aigonz)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2010, 11:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/questions-on-christianity-again/551952/258 "2010-09-01T23:46:02Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > > [@aigonz](#): > > > > Humans could not DEVISE an objecctive moral law. That doesn’t mean we could not recognise one. See the difference? > > Humans have never recognized any such thing. Is child abuse wrong? ---
**Author:** ![aigonz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4491bb/32.png) [@aigonz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aigonz)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2010, 11:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/questions-on-christianity-again/551952/259 "2010-09-01T23:48:02Z")
Is it always wrong, under any circumstances? ---
**Author:** ![Blut\_Aus\_Nord](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Blut\_Aus\_Nord](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blut_Aus_Nord)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2010, 12:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/questions-on-christianity-again/551952/260 "2010-09-02T00:17:11Z")
> [@aigonz](#): > > > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > > > How is this any different from saying God is non-existent? > > You mean you cannot grasp the concept of anything outside the physical universe? There’s a difference between being outside our physical universe and being non-physical. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/questions-on-christianity-again/551952.md?page=12) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/questions-on-christianity-again/551952.md?page=14)