English
Reasoned Apostate
9.6K posts
Reasoned Apostate
@ReasonApostate
Formerly Reasonable Globie The world isn't flat. Recently set aside a Christian faith due to applying logic and reason to the Bible.
Entrou em Mart 2024
123 Seguindo160 Seguidores
@ReasonApostate @Accounted44 @AleMartnezR1 On the contrary, existing in spacetime is merely one mode of existence, numerous modes of existence are possible that don't depend on time.
English
Proof for a Necessary Being.
1. If all that exists, has existed, or will exist were contingent, then nothing would exist now.
2. At least something exists.
Therefore, not everything that exists, has existed, or will exist is contingent.
3. If not everything that exists is contingent, then a Necessary Being must exist.
.: Therefore, a Necessary Being exists.
Justification
This premise relies on the idea that contingent things—those that do not have to exist and depend on something else for their existence—cannot explain their own origin. If everything were contingent, there would be a "time" or a logical state where nothing existed. Since nothing comes from nothing (ex nihilo nihil fit), if there were ever nothing, there would be nothing now.
This is the undeniable observation that something is currently here (the universe, you, this text).
Conclusion (Necessity): Therefore, it is logically impossible for every single thing to be contingent. There must be at least one Necessary Being—something that exists by its own nature and cannot not exist—to ground the existence of everything else.
English
@PrestorJohn @LonghornJoker So every elementary school teaches you how to read properly?
English
@LonghornJoker My elementary school was largely an accident of birth … but they still taught me how to read properly.
English
This is a textbook case of the genetic fallacy. While you almost certainly would have different beliefs…that says nothings about their truth value.
Danish Gerd@Danish_SMF
Your religion is largely an accident of birth. You didn’t choose your culture or where you were born. And if you had, chances are you’d believe something entirely different. Worth reflecting on.
English
@ApoloJedi_ You're joking right? Maybe we're working with different definitions of dissent?
English
@ReasonApostate Most evolutionists have never heard of any dissent. They are safe in their echo chambers
English
Evolutionists tend not to understand their own theory...it's why they're evolutionists
Darwin to Jesus@darwintojesus
Imagine knowing that flour is a key ingredient of cake and then saying flour has nothing to do with cake.
English
@ApoloJedi_ Never heard of it. Want to summarize or want me to have AI do it?
English
@ApoloJedi_ Land that plane for me buddy. What censorship and cite a lack of dissent.
English
@ReasonApostate The tyrannical censorship of evolutionists has transformed the scientific community into an ideological hive that suffers no dissent
English
@ApoloJedi_ Mutations don't "code". But the mutation changed the thing that does.
A mutation is a copying error. But just like moving the comma in a sentence can drastically change the outcome, so too can a mutation drastically change the structure created.
English
@ApoloJedi_ This is why it's impossible to talk to you about evolution... You grab onto the conversational shortcuts as though they're the actual argument... Again, no Elon tax so here's a screenshot...
English
@ApoloJedi_ It can be wrong, but the explanatory power of evolution has transformed science.
English
@ApoloJedi_ No one has it perfect. And any simplified model aiming to explain it to you or me will also be incomplete, take some amount of explanatory liberty and likely oversimplify to the point of error.
Not a means to say it can't be wrong as a theory.
English
@ApoloJedi_ I agree Darwin wasn't perfect. I don't know anyone that thinks his theory was perfect.
Why is that foresight? If a mutation codes for gibberish, what happens?
English
That was Dawkins's error in his infantile "METHINKSITISLIKEAWEASLE" program. He built the goal right into the program like you did ("the only sentences that stay on the screen are the ones that happen to form functional instructions"). ERROR
It's begging the question and giving evolution powers of foresight that it does not have.
The OP is confirmed. Evolutionists do not understand their own theory
English
English
The necessary thing that caused all contingent things would have to:
1. Exist outside of spacetime, otherwise it would be contingent on space time.
2. Have the ability to create spacetime from a state outside of spacetime, otherwise it would already exist in spacetime (see prop 1).
3. Have the will (conscious mind) to create spacetime from that state, otherwise there would be no grounding for the creation of spacetime.
So we have a thing that that is aspatial and eternal with a mind, that sounds rather like God to me.
Don't you think?
English
@AleMartnezR1 Wtf is with your crappy chatgpt apologetics philosophy...
English
@ApoloJedi_ Not where I'd go at all. So the code does make the traits. You're arguing that random mutation is the equivalent of smashing on a keyboard and I think we can get somewhere with that description. I didn't pay the Elon tax so picture attached.
English
Everyone understands that mutations happen. Evolutionists believe that these random mutations can form biological code that create novel biological traits...not just some biological traits - ALL biological traits
It's the same level of belief as saying that random keystrokes produced EVERY program in existence. It's a bonkers belief
And before you're tempted to say: "But what about natural selection?!?!? It's not random", if you understand natural selection at all, you must know that it does not create anything new. It is simply a description of the idea that nature selects the fit phenotype to persist and REMOVES the phenotype with supposedly inferior genetic code. The whole process could best be described as quality control. It is a description of culling the unfit
English
@ApoloJedi_ Sadly, many Christians have been deceived into believing that the curses for sin have existed.
English
Sadly, many Christians have been deceived into believing that the curses for sin have existed for millions of years prior to the rebellion of mankind
Some Christians even admit that they believe death, suffering, corruption and thorns are very good
ICR@ICRscience
A faithful reading of Scripture shows there is no good reason to place human or animal death before the Fall of man.
English
@GaryHeron2 @LonghornJoker It's a rhetorical game 2 fold.
Either the atheist has to spend time correcting the disputed definition
Or
The theist receives a strawman "your worldview is illogical" trump card to play when they get into murky water.
English
@LonghornJoker I don't see the point in getting hung up on labels, people should just explain their views. Theists claim that a God exists, I haven't seen good evidence to support this claim. Until good evidence is available I don't accept the claim. You can call that atheism if you want.
English
Atheism is the stance that there are no gods. It doesn’t have to claim certainty or prove non-existence, but neither is it just suspending judgement. It’s making a judgement:
Danish Gerd@Danish_SMF
Atheism is simply: “I’m not convinced by the evidence presented.” This position doesn’t require proving non-existence. It is just rejecting insufficient evidence.
English
@LonghornJoker Not necessarily.
A - without
Theism - god belief
Without god belief. That's it.
It doesn't need to posit that there isn't a god or can't be a god. Just that one lacks the conviction that there is a god.
English
@SensibleFascist @SlagNotSlug That's simply untrue and is a bias of the men first society that we've been a part of for thousands of years.
And no, it's not that there aren't alternatives. Matriarchal societies exist too.
English
@ReasonApostate @SlagNotSlug Women aren’t dumb but the smartest people to ever live are almost all men. It’s a bell curve: the dumbest and smartest people are all men while most women fall somewhere in the middle.
English
Atheists saying stuff like this is always so funny to me because space travel wouldn’t exist without Christianity.
Have Muslims gone to the moon? Nope.
Have Hindus gone to the moon? Nope.
Have Buddhists gone to the moon? Nope.
Have pagans gone to the moon? Nope.
But you know who has?
Christians.
Every single astronaut to ever land on the moon was Christian.
Reddit Lies@reddit_lies
Looks like Victor Glover pissed off even more Athei- Wait, why is r/Christianity upset?
English
@Idontevenk85653 @SensibleFascist @DeathKultAdept I don't see it as one as it had practically no medical intervention. Especially when we have other precursors that combined superstition with medical intervention.
English
English