• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Crazy Bible Stories

I have no idea because so far, I believe God .... MADE THIS ONE.

Come on Learner! I expect better of you.
You've been asked to explain what the universe would be like if God didn't create it.
How hard can that be?

OK - I'll make it a little easier for you.
Imagine a birthday cake that nobody baked. Nobody went to the store and bought the ingredients. Nobody mixed the flour and eggs and sugar. Nobody baked it. Nobody took it out of the oven and decorated it. Nobody...[you get the idea]

Now please! Just tell us all what that cake looks like. Simple.
Piece of cake.

Sorry Lion, I'll try again ... those type of questions are a bit beyond the "basic" logic level. Forgive me.
 
A cake that nobody baked looks invisible.
They were asking you the equivalent of...what the laws of physics be like if they were unpredictable and chaotic.
 
You're telling folks that you believe US Presidents carved on Mt Rushmore were the result of intelligent design.

And what you get asked by skeptics is...what would those faces look like if they spontaneously got their by erosion from thousands of years of wind and rain.

That's the taxi cab fallacy.
Wait till after the cab journey ends then get out of the cab and act as though you might have gotten to your destination by something other than that cab.
 
I have no idea because so far, I believe God .... MADE THIS ONE.

Come on Learner! I expect better of you.
You've been asked to explain what the universe would be like if God didn't create it.
How hard can that be?

OK - I'll make it a little easier for you.
Imagine a birthday cake that nobody baked. Nobody went to the store and bought the ingredients. Nobody mixed the flour and eggs and sugar. Nobody baked it. Nobody took it out of the oven and decorated it. Nobody...[you get the idea]

Now please! Just tell us all what that cake looks like. Simple.
Piece of cake.

Sorry Lion, I'll try again ... those type of questions are a bit beyond the "basic" logic level. Forgive me.
But you already reached a conclusion. YOu see NO EVIDENCE in this universe that it was NOT designed. What tells you this?

You can either describe how you know because of how you expect an undersigned universe would look, or you can point to what you see in this universe that cannot possibly exist without a divine hand... And how you know this to be true.
Lion just asserts that logic and order require the god he wants to believe in. And tries to fob the burden of proof onto his opponents.
But you did make that assertion. So how did you come to that ocnclusion?
 
A cake that nobody baked looks invisible.
They were asking you the equivalent of...what the laws of physics be like if they were unpredictable and chaotic.

Cheers Lion, I would have absolutely no idea (obviously).
No, that's LION's assertion, not yours. I was asking for your evidence for your conclusion, not Lion's hail-mary.
 
You're telling folks that you believe US Presidents carved on Mt Rushmore were the result of intelligent design.

And what you get asked by skeptics is...what would those faces look like if they spontaneously got their by erosion from thousands of years of wind and rain.

That's the taxi cab fallacy.
Wait till after the cab journey ends then get out of the cab and act as though you might have gotten to your destination by something other than that cab.

Is that when they say "hand waving" - I am not actually hailing a cab? Its awfully confusing ... I'm going to have a coffee and think of sweet-simple-things for few moments 'sigh'.
 
Keith&Co asked : What do you think would be different about how the universe looks, operates, is formed if it were an undirected process?

Translation.
What would the laws of physics look like if they weren't laws?
How can you tell the difference between a cake that someone baked and one that nobody baked.
 
Wait till after the cab journey ends then get out of the cab and act as though you might have gotten to your destination by something other than that cab.
Might Have?
Well, of course. I mean, if the taxi is a historical fact, that's fine.
If you see a person standing on the steps of the courthouse, and you just assert, 'The only way he could have gotten there was by Uber,' then you face the burden of proof, not the burden of heaping scorn on anyone asking for your evidence.
There's still Taxi, Lyft, Trains, Walking, Bus, lift by a friend, maybe they're parked a block away. Just seeing a man at an address does not prove how he got there, no matter how much you may depend, emotionally, upon taxis.

If you're going to claim that the only way to reach the courthouse is by taxi, you face the burden of supporting this silly shit with something like a decent argument, or maybe even evidence.
 
You're telling folks that you believe US Presidents carved on Mt Rushmore were the result of intelligent design.

And what you get asked by skeptics is...what would those faces look like if they spontaneously got their by erosion from thousands of years of wind and rain.

That's the taxi cab fallacy.
Wait till after the cab journey ends then get out of the cab and act as though you might have gotten to your destination by something other than that cab.

Is that when they say "hand waving" -
Now that's funny.
I HOPE you're being funny, but it is funny.
 
You're telling folks that you believe US Presidents carved on Mt Rushmore were the result of intelligent design.

And what you get asked by skeptics is...what would those faces look like if they spontaneously got their by erosion from thousands of years of wind and rain.

That's the taxi cab fallacy.
Wait till after the cab journey ends then get out of the cab and act as though you might have gotten to your destination by something other than that cab.

Complexity emerges and forms according to conditions. Conditions emerge and form according to physical principles, what we call the laws of physics....the world at large is not random.
 
Hmm complexity , conformity, principles, not random. No wonder some people see design - (not to mean it is actually true) because they would have no idea (myself obviously) of the example below:

A cake that nobody baked looks invisible.
They were asking you the equivalent of...what the laws of physics be like if they were unpredictable and chaotic.
 
[O]ur ability to
recognize man-made characteristics depends on our ability to identify characteristics that are not
found in nature. If, for example, a man was to design an object which looked like a natural rock in
every respect, then, while this object would in fact be the product of design, another person could
not tell this from merely examining the rock. As far as he is concerned, this rock is a product of
nature. The closer the resemblance between a designed artifact and a natural object, the more
difficult it is to determine that the artifact is in fact a product of design.

--George H. Smith, Atheism: The Case Against God

When someone says, "That watch appears to be designed," it's reasonable to ask, "Compared to what?"

"Compared to the beach that the watch is laying on," goes the answer.

Then when the same person says, "The universe appears to be designed," it's still reasonable to ask, "Compared to what?" Is there an undesigned universe, where we can lay the two universes side by side and compare them?


It's curious that this thread started out about crazy Bible stories, and has morphed into Natural Arguments for the Existence of God. It seems natural for apologists to divert difficult discussions into non-falsifiable philosophical arguments.

It's also curious that the Bible never argues for the existence of God based on design. It merely states, "In the beginning God created." The existence of God is taken for granted, without logic or evidence. That God created the universe is a mere assertion.

And assertions without evidence can be dismissed without argument.
 
Speaking of Crazy Bible Stories, check out Numbers 22, the story of Balaam and his talking donkey.

This was a popular OT story in my childhood Sunday School class, probably because kids love talking animals. But as a story goes, it's utterly bizarre.

So there's Balak, king of Moab, who sees the Israelite army camped on his borders, and he rightfully freaks out. So far the Israelites have been slaughtering every man, woman, and child who lives in the land, anywhere Moses has decided belongs to them now. Because Balak naturally doesn't want the same thing to happen to him and his people, he desperately searches for a solution.

Being superstitious, he offers Balaam money to curse the Israelites--maybe they'll all die of plague or something. Balaam must somehow have a reputation as a powerful magic user. Although he's not an Israelite, Balaam consults Jehovah about what to do. Jehovah tells Balaam, "Don't you dare curse my people."

I wonder why? What's Jehovah worried about?

Balaam tells Balak, "Sorry, nothing I can do."

Balak replies by way of advisors, "What, you need more money?"

Balaam says, "King, you could give me *all* your money, but I can't countermand Jehovah's orders. But to humor you, let me consult Jehovah again."

Jehovah tells Balaam, "Go meet Balak, but don't say anything until I tell you."

The next morning, Balaam does exactly what Jehovah told him to do. He mounts his donkey and rides to meet with the king to tell him that he can't curse the Israelites. The donkey halts when she sees an invisible angel with a sword blocking the road. Balaam, who can't see the angel, beats the donkey mercilessly to get it to keep walking.

Finally, the donkey has had enough and says, "Dude! Knock it off! Can't you see that angel?"

Balaam, who shows no reaction whatsoever to the fact that his donkey is talking to him, can now finally see the angel for himself. Why the angel played this game of hide-and-seek is not explained. The angel asks Balaam, "Why are you beating your donkey, you idiot? I'm here to stop you from seeing Balak, and if you had kept going I would have been forced to kill you."

Never mind that Balaam was only going to see Balak because Jehovah directly ordered him to. For some reason the angel is now trying to block him? Balaam apologizes to the angel (but not to his poor donkey) and says, "I'll go home right now."

The angel says, "No, go see Balak, but don't say anything until Jehovah tells you to." Exactly what Jehovah told Balaam to do the day before.

In other words, go do what you were already doing before I threatened to stop you from doing. Utterly and truly bizarre.[1]

Balak meets the coming Balaam, who says, "Don't get your hopes up. I can only tell you what Jehovah says." Balak responds by holding a huge animal sacrifice, to prime the pump. Balaam steps up, Balak holds his breath, and Balaam says, "Sorry, Israel is going to wipe you out."

Balak is flabbergasted. "What kind of curse is that?!" Balaam shrugs. "I told you, I can only speak what Jehovah tells me to."

Balak, not one to give up easily, holds another animal sacrifice in a different location. In response, Balaam says, "Israel is an awesome people that are going to mop the floor with you."

Balak goes ballistic. "I'm paying you to curse them and you bless them instead?" Balaam just shrugs again. "That's what Jehovah told me to say."

Balak gives it one more try. He holds a bigger animal sacrifice in a third location. Balaam smiles and says, "You are no match for Israel; prepare for your doom."

Now Balak is murderous. "I pay you three times to curse Israel and you bless them three times instead?" Balaam says, "Don't say I didn't warn you." He rattles off all the kingdoms that are about to be slaughtered by Israel, takes his money--prophecy is a profitable gig--and goes home.

And that's it for Balak. According to the Book of Joshua, Israel did indeed wipe him and his people out and took their stuff.



[1] Incidentally, it's passages like this that suggest to scholars that the Bible is a wiki with multiple editors. One writer has Jehovah tell Balaam to go see Balak, another writer has an angel tell Balaam the same thing, and a third writer has an angel stopping Balaam on his journey. There's no way all three viewpoints can be reconciled, so the editors just held their breath, mashed the whole thing together, and published it as is.
 
A cake that nobody baked looks invisible.
They were asking you the equivalent of...what the laws of physics be like if they were unpredictable and chaotic.

It looks invisible but that is a parochial, provincial, unscientific observation. Gods aren't like "invisible" cakes, the constituents of which are around but not yet assembled. These god things on the other hand aren't even that. They're just a pile of mystical goo claims.
 
Keith&Co asked : What do you think would be different about how the universe looks, operates, is formed if it were an undirected process?

Translation.
What would the laws of physics look like if they weren't laws?
How can you tell the difference between a cake that someone baked and one that nobody baked.

So your "designed" universe is the one you see? Wow, that's some really low standards.

Any half intelligent person could design things tremendously better if all they had to do was wish them into existence.

Why are religious people so focused on leaving their wonderful, perfectly "designed" universe that was created just for them by their magic spaceman?
 
At least partially because Liberty University has never been hit by a meteorite the size of, say, the one that created Vredefort Crater in S. Africa: somewhere between 6 to 9 miles in diameter, creating a crater 191 miles across and probably some fast-acting climate change.
 
Back
Top Bottom