Don't you think we should be consistent?

Question

Scientists look at our universe and it isn't adding up like they think it should. In order to explain everything, they have come up with a concept called dark matter. That most of the matter in the universe is invisible. You can see the effects of this dark matter but you cannot touch it, see it, smell it, manipulate it, or prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that it exists. The scientific community is very comfortable accepting the theory because it explains what they are seeing. And it very well may exist.

My point is, though, when a Christian uses this same logic about the existence of God we are told by atheists we are foolish for believing in something that we cannot see, touch, smell, taste, or prove exists. We can see the effects of God around us. We can see how He works in our lives but we cannot PROVE that He exists. But we accept His existence because it explains very well what we see in the world around us. Same logic but Christians are called foolish. Go figure.

You atheists have again proven my point. My observations of the effects of God prove He exists TO ME on a daily basis. The problem is you will never allow us to use the same logic because God does not fit in your world and therefore you do not accept the evidence of His existence. The evidence is there you simply refuse to accept it. And sadly that is why eternity looks bleak for atheists. God will ask you "why were YOU unwilling to accept my evidences when my faithful were willing to accept it?"

To Dangerous Danny,

Ok. Will do. ALL YOU CRAZY CHRISTIANS ------ CALM DOWN!

Answer 1

s.

Answer 2

There is a difference.

Scientists weigh all possible reasons to explain observations and give more weight to the best ones. Christians don't acknowledge that natural processes are the most likely explanation for what they see. They constrain the possible explanations where scientists don't. They postulate an explanation which has never been seen, cannot be tested or calculated, and cannot make predictions. Scientists instead develop theories which can make predictions about future observations. They give great weight to those theories that make successful predictions. That is called the scientific process.

God may exist to you because of your logic, but your logic is faulty.

Answer 3

Hmmm. Let's say the scientist also says that this 'dark matter' is exclusively for the benefit of people named 'Walter' and that it looks like Stephen Hawking's grandmother when she was about 35 years old, complete with eyeglasses and a strong lisp.

There's nothing wrong with having a theory about how everything came to be. It is when the theory turns into a self-serving, money-making excuse to hate targeted groups of people according to arbitrary, unreasonable criteria that things get out of hand.

Just think, what would YOU say, if, out of the blue, someone told you a mythical tale about a 14-year old girl impregnated by a god spirit, parlour-trick type 'miracles' and the entire business not documented in any verifiable historical records? And, if you don't accept this, give money, your loyalty and yes, even your life if requred, you are going to go straight to hell when you die?

I prefer the scientists and the dark matter. At least it doesn't cost me anything.

Answer 4

The Christian Bible has both the former testomony and New testomony, Jesus not in any respect spoke antagonistic to the patriarchs and prophets of the former testomony. that is Islamic incorrect information. Moses turned right into a Hebrew he become no longer a Muslim, Jesus become Jewish He become no longer a Muslim, Christianity originated from Judaism no longer Islam, Islam originated after Christianity. So Muslim teachings are irrelevant to Christians because Christianity did not originate from Islam. Even the Bible is older than the Qu'ran. The origins of Islam date decrease back to 633 advert which become depending with the help of their prophet Mohammad, the religion has no connection to Judaism or Christianity the guidance which Mohammad received from those different 2 religions makes it glaring that it turned right into a borrowed faith. The Perpetual Virginity of Mary the mummy of Jesus existed ever sense the start of Christianity.

Answer 5

If you just believed in god I don't think anyone would have a problem. Its just that many Christians try to shove that idea down every ones throat. So many Christians are arrogant and self-righteous and it just pisses people off. Perhaps if you kept your beliefs to yourself or just discussed it in an open minded fashion you would not be called foolish. It may not even be you, but other Christians that give the good Christians a bad name. If you wanna nip this problem in the bud, you should talk to the crazy christians and tell them to calm down.

Answer 6

Based on the logic used in your question, you would have no problem then in calling Christianity a religious theory, that is a social construction created to relieve stress in the life of the participant for use as a form of self medication.

Answer 7

Yes, except that after the hypothesis of Darkn Matter was exposed they started looking for evidence and have found it. It shows up in gravitaional and momentum effects. So now it is a proven theory and no longer a hypothesis.

http://space.newscientist.com/channel/astronomy/dn9809-cosmic-smashup-provides-proof-of-dark-matter.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/5272226.stm

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/missing_matter_050202.html


Now be a good person and bring us some evidence to back up your God hypothesis, maybe we can upgrade it to a theory if you can demonstrate it.

Yah, Yah. I don't pay much attention to what is real to the smelly old guy ranting on the street corner outside either. Bring some evidence.

Answer 8

An amusing analogy, but what you "see" in the world around you that you believe supports God, others also see and do not share your interpretation. The evidence you believes supports God is based solely on your subjective, personal interpretation. It is not based on solid evidence--it is based on faith. In contrast, although dark energy may be mysterious in many ways, it is not subjective: its consequences are observable. Although it is not fully understood, that it exists is not a faith-based proposition, anymore than the existence of your own hand is faith-based: rather, its a conclusion from the evidence, in the form of, for example, consistent gravitational anomalies.

Moreover, scientists do not dogmatically claim that dark matter has qualities which they cannot prove; they hypothesize, but they do not merely assert without evidence. In contrast, theists frequently assert with great vigor that they know with certainty things which they clearly cannot--for example, that they are immortal, that they have magic powers, that someone thousands of years ago was the son of God, etc. These sorts of things aren't testable, and when they are testable, the tests have falsified them. In contrast, the effects of dark matter are perfectly testable, although, because we know so little about dark matter, we can't know much more about it than that it exists (and has certain measurable, quantifiable effects), in some form or other.

Although physicists may disagree on the exact nature of dark energy, none disagree on whether it exists or not. In contrast, the religious will never agree on whether or not a supreme, intelligent, supernatural creator exists--the overwhelming majority of religions throughout the world's history haven't even adhered to that belief.

yagman, you haven't given us any reason to accept the evidence that proves God's existence "for you". As I noted, your evidence is based on your subjective, prejudiced view; it has never been reviewed by unbiased peer-reviewed academics and confirmed as compelling evidence for God. In contrast, exactly this has been done, thousands of times over, for dark matter. The evidence for dark matter is not subjective; anyone who observes the gravitational pull of galaxies comes to the necessary conclusion that dark matter exists (though they may disagree on its specific form). In contrast, not everyone who observes the world believes that God exists; indeed, a majority of people in the world don't accept any one coherent conception of God or other. Comparing your belief in God to dark matter would be like comparing someone's belief in Santa Claus to dark matter: absurd and unsubstantiated.

Answer 9

it is a working theory, which will serve until it is confirmed, or something better comes along.

it's about making estimates based upon the evidence, and re-evaluating.

Christians refuse to do this. Their "infallable" book is always thier last word on the error, and they refuse to question it's accucy.

your argument is like saying the space shuttle is the same as white paint because they're both white.

Answer 10

Sure, if you want to believe that God = dark matter, thats fine by me. At least its a logic physics conclusion and not a bunch of fairies dancing in the wind BS.

Edit... you jsut proved the point made by aetheists that you are irriational.. .saying God exists to me... ok, unicorns exist to me... even though thats not actually logically true!

Answer 11

You are 100% correct. the sad fact remains that people only hear what they want and refuse to apply the very reason they ask for to others beliefs.