>>The existence of the Universe is simply evidence that the Universe exists<<

Well, the existence of XYZ is simply evidence that XYZ exists, whatever you wish to substitute for XYZ, Universe, God, my foot or what.

George,

Either you agree of you're impervious to sarcasm. Which is it?

mac,

Sarcasm or not, “the existence of XYZ is simply evidence that XYZ exists” says nothing. If you PRESUME the existence of XYZ, why would you need “evidence” (whatever that means in the abstract context of e.g. contemporary theoretical physics and cosmology) to confirm what you assumed?

Some people believe in God (whatever that means to them), some don’t; like some believe that science can potentially tell us everything about “reality” (quotation marks for the same reasons as above), some don’t.

My post was not to arrgue for or against any of these beliefs (basic worldview assumptions), only to point out that the sentence

“the existence of something is evidence that that something exists”,

the same as e.g.

“the greatness of something is evidence that that something is great”

is meaningless.

I wasn’t talking about Dawkins, Trav.

<<There was no “Clumsy” attribution - I’ve read much of Richard Dawkins’s book…>>

Aside from a passing mention in my first post to you, my response was not in regards to Dawkins and everything I had said since my mentioning of him should have made that crystal clear.

That being said, can I take your lack of any mention of Christian fundamentalists as your acceptance that I was in fact right about your clumsy attribution?

As for the rest of your first paragraph to me, you’d need to be a little more specific for me to answer adequately: -

What are the “small areas of conflict? To which “specific areas of science” do you refer?

What I’d really be fascinated to know, though, is what this obsession with Dawkins is that so many of you theists have? He’s not an authority. Why can’t some theists just listen to what those with whom they are having a discussion believe and address that?

<<Re: How God’s will interacts with ours. This is a very complex issue for a reason. We’re talking about an infinite being who is beyond time.>>

There’s another possible reason for why this is such a complex issue, and that is that this god doesn’t actually exist and that this has all just been made up by people trying to reconcile some very contradictory concepts based on some very contradictory writings. Given the implausibility of your position at this point in time, you would need to provide some evidence for the god to which your argument applies before it warrants any serious consideration. Until such time, the non-existence of this god becomes the more plausible and rational assumption.

Even if your evidence for the Christian God’s existence is sufficient, though, one still cannot answer a mystery by appealing to another mystery; that just pushes the problem back a step and prevents one from ever discovering a different, more valid answer as you no longer feel the need to think.

One way in which science and faith certainly are at odds with each other.

Science, as we recognise it today, is the new boy on the block. It has demonstrated a phenomenal growth in its breadth of scope and application, in its accepted credibility among all who use it and are benefited by it. The results of its pursuit are intensely intellectually satisfying and creates an awe for the natural, the observable and the rational method of inference from evidence.

Were one to be an adherent of the supernatural he might be prompted to declaim upon these qualities as being accurately descriptive of their systems of allegiance. Yet, only when science's advance in human understanding began to clash with supernatural belief has the believer sought with increasing desperation to gather the new competitor for the human mind's allegiance to itself and with Constantinian guile sought to adapt it to being a branch of the supernatural realm.

Religious belief, in its fight for survival, demands it. Science ignores it and will advance inexorably, implacably and with magnificent indifference.

To turn the religious argument on its originator: If you cannot provide compelling evidence that humankind will never "know" everything then we must approach this issue positively and assert that we will, indeed, know everything. And the supernatural will have died a lingering death.

Extropian1,/QUOTE..<<..Religious belief, in its fight for survival, demands it. Science ignores it and will advance inexorably, implacably and with magnificent indifference.>>..

YOU SOUND..SO SURE..your mind is made up

ARE you sure of the fundamentals?

<<..To turn the religious argument on its originator: If you cannot provide compelling evidence that humankind will never "know" everything then we must approach this issue positively and assert that we will, indeed, know everything.>>

lol

INTERESTING..POINT..you have resolved the point
you now shall be content..having removed the other options

fundamentalism..is simply a point decided rESolved
you by having irrevocably solved the co-nundrun..are content

well done number one sun
[its explained better here]

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/tedradiohour/past-programs/

Our Buggy Brain

Our amazing brain, with all of its harmonious functions, also performs any number of peculiar actions, which we might find unexpected and counterintuitive.

<<..Which brings us to the more interesting issue of what their psychological problems are!>>..

by having re-solved..the fundi-mentals..
fun-di-mentaly..the issue is resolved..[Providing the mind says case closed...]

i will confirm it for you absolutely
[we know infinite is lots and lots and lots..[right]
well some gain the great mental boost..of lots is only 1/12 th

so read the [presently]..lAST POST
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=6217&page=11

what we see here
decide for yourself..but its fundamental..to resolving this topic
unless we add a random variable..[stir..the surety]..and give alternates..to create new doubt..
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=15914&page=0

<<And the supernatural will have died a lingering death.>>

you..sound so fundamentally sure of this

TRY LISTENING TO THIS..to..realise why

http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/rn/podcast/2014/02/trh_20140208.mp3

ask why you need to get closure..on your fears