Reason and Experience tell us that there is Evidence for a Creator

[BULLDOG]

When you create something is your creation usually the realization of your intention?

Nope...

So when you create something your creation is usually not the realization of your intention? Only a moron would say that.

Not necessarily. I built a motorized cart for my nephews to haul a couple of bales of hay on, but they didn't really like it. It ended up working perfectly pulling a little walk behind tiller. No where near what it's intended purpose was.

You built a motorized cart which is what you intended to build, right? It's just that you used it for a different purpose than you intended, right?

A totally different purpose than intended .

Sure, but it was still a motorized cart, right? It had wheels and a platform and a motor, right? It's not like it ended up being a boat, right?

For a totally different purpose than intended, but continue.

 

[BULLDOG]

Can I use something you created to learn things about you?

Perhaps,in some cases.

Ok, fair enough. So what you create can be used as evidence and in some cases I could use that evidence to learn some things about you some of the time. I can work with that.

For instance, if you made a turkey sandwich or a cell phone, wouldn't I know that it took you more steps and more intelligence to create the cell phone than a turkey sandwich?

I'm pretty sure you would have a had time determining the steps. Many things just don't work, so you backup a little way and try again. How can you tell how many false starts are involved?

I couldn't learn from anything that I did not have evidence of so I could not learn anything about you from your false starts. So let's limit it to the finished product, ok? So if I have a finished product, do you think I could learn anything from it that might tell me how you did it or what level of skill or intelligence you had?

Well, no. The false starts indicate my reasoning process. Are you going to assume that I make no mistakes? Are you going to assume that my process is a perfectly linear process?

Again, it doesn't matter what happened before the finished product because it is the finished product that is the evidence, right? You aren't going back on that, right?

I have no idea if it matters, because I don't know where you are headed.

 

[ding]

So when you create something your creation is usually not the realization of your intention? Only a moron would say that.

Not necessarily. I built a motorized cart for my nephews to haul a couple of bales of hay on, but they didn't really like it. It ended up working perfectly pulling a little walk behind tiller. No where near what it's intended purpose was.

You built a motorized cart which is what you intended to build, right? It's just that you used it for a different purpose than you intended, right?

Someone evaluating it's use would have no idea of it's intended purpose.

Maybe. Let's take your motorized cart as an example, ok? Could I not tell that it was for transportation?

Powering an implement during it's intended purpose is not the same as transporting something. I'm having problems with my connection, but proceed.

Ok, it is still a motorized cart, right? It is still a transportation device, right? Just because it doesn't transport what you intended doesn't change the fact that they could still use it as evidence to learn something about you, right?

 

[ding]

Can I use something you created to learn things about you?

Perhaps,in some cases.

Ok, fair enough. So what you create can be used as evidence and in some cases I could use that evidence to learn some things about you some of the time. I can work with that.

For instance, if you made a turkey sandwich or a cell phone, wouldn't I know that it took you more steps and more intelligence to create the cell phone than a turkey sandwich?

I'm pretty sure you would have a had time determining the steps. Many things just don't work, so you backup a little way and try again. How can you tell how many false starts are involved?

I couldn't learn from anything that I did not have evidence of so I could not learn anything about you from your false starts. So let's limit it to the finished product, ok? So if I have a finished product, do you think I could learn anything from it that might tell me how you did it or what level of skill or intelligence you had?

Well, no. The false starts indicate my reasoning process. Are you going to assume that I make no mistakes? Are you going to assume that my process is a perfectly linear process?

Again, it doesn't matter what happened before the finished product because it is the finished product that is the evidence, right? You aren't going back on that, right?

I have no idea if it matters, because I don't know where you are headed.

I am trying to head towards the use of evidence and how it pertains to proof. Much of what we are discussing is concerning proof and not evidence.

 

[BULLDOG]

Can I use something you created to learn things about you?

Perhaps,in some cases.

Ok, fair enough. So what you create can be used as evidence and in some cases I could use that evidence to learn some things about you some of the time. I can work with that.

For instance, if you made a turkey sandwich or a cell phone, wouldn't I know that it took you more steps and more intelligence to create the cell phone than a turkey sandwich?

I'm pretty sure you would have a had time determining the steps. Many things just don't work, so you backup a little way and try again. How can you tell how many false starts are involved?

I couldn't learn from anything that I did not have evidence of so I could not learn anything about you from your false starts. So let's limit it to the finished product, ok? So if I have a finished product, do you think I could learn anything from it that might tell me how you did it or what level of skill or intelligence you had?

Well, no. The false starts indicate my reasoning process. Are you going to assume that I make no mistakes? Are you going to assume that my process is a perfectly linear process?

Again, it doesn't matter what happened before the finished product because it is the finished product that is the evidence, right? You aren't going back on that, right?

I have no idea if it matters, because I don't know where you are headed.

I am trying to head towards the use of evidence and how it pertains to proof. Much of what we are discussing is concerning proof and not evidence.

This is taking much longer than I expected. Make your point.

 

[ding]

Ok, fair enough. So what you create can be used as evidence and in some cases I could use that evidence to learn some things about you some of the time. I can work with that.

I couldn't learn from anything that I did not have evidence of so I could not learn anything about you from your false starts. So let's limit it to the finished product, ok? So if I have a finished product, do you think I could learn anything from it that might tell me how you did it or what level of skill or intelligence you had?

Well, no. The false starts indicate my reasoning process. Are you going to assume that I make no mistakes? Are you going to assume that my process is a perfectly linear process?

Again, it doesn't matter what happened before the finished product because it is the finished product that is the evidence, right? You aren't going back on that, right?

I have no idea if it matters, because I don't know where you are headed.

I am trying to head towards the use of evidence and how it pertains to proof. Much of what we are discussing is concerning proof and not evidence.

This is taking much longer than I expected. Make your point.

So can we agree that what you create can be used as evidence and that there may be things we can learn about you from studying what you created. Obviously there are limitations to what we can learn. Can we agree on that? Then we can move on, ok?

 

[ding]

Sorry about how long this is taking. I wish it was going faster too. But I do appreciate your honesty.

 

[BULLDOG]

Well, no. The false starts indicate my reasoning process. Are you going to assume that I make no mistakes? Are you going to assume that my process is a perfectly linear process?

Again, it doesn't matter what happened before the finished product because it is the finished product that is the evidence, right? You aren't going back on that, right?

I have no idea if it matters, because I don't know where you are headed.

I am trying to head towards the use of evidence and how it pertains to proof. Much of what we are discussing is concerning proof and not evidence.

This is taking much longer than I expected. Make your point.

So can we agree that what you create can be used as evidence and that there may be things we can learn about you from studying what you created. Obviously there are limitations to what we can learn. Can we agree on that? Then we can move on, ok?

To a point . Continue.

 

[ding]

Again, it doesn't matter what happened before the finished product because it is the finished product that is the evidence, right? You aren't going back on that, right?

I have no idea if it matters, because I don't know where you are headed.

I am trying to head towards the use of evidence and how it pertains to proof. Much of what we are discussing is concerning proof and not evidence.

This is taking much longer than I expected. Make your point.

So can we agree that what you create can be used as evidence and that there may be things we can learn about you from studying what you created. Obviously there are limitations to what we can learn. Can we agree on that? Then we can move on, ok?

To a point . Continue.

Right. Would you like to put it in your own words or is what I wrote good enough?

 

[BULLDOG]

I have no idea if it matters, because I don't know where you are headed.

I am trying to head towards the use of evidence and how it pertains to proof. Much of what we are discussing is concerning proof and not evidence.

This is taking much longer than I expected. Make your point.

So can we agree that what you create can be used as evidence and that there may be things we can learn about you from studying what you created. Obviously there are limitations to what we can learn. Can we agree on that? Then we can move on, ok?

To a point . Continue.

Right. Would you like to put it in your own words or is what I wrote good enough?

Continue.If I find a misunderstanding, I will point it out.

 

[ding]

I am trying to head towards the use of evidence and how it pertains to proof. Much of what we are discussing is concerning proof and not evidence.

This is taking much longer than I expected. Make your point.

So can we agree that what you create can be used as evidence and that there may be things we can learn about you from studying what you created. Obviously there are limitations to what we can learn. Can we agree on that? Then we can move on, ok?

To a point . Continue.

Right. Would you like to put it in your own words or is what I wrote good enough?

Continue.If I find a misunderstanding, I will point it out.

Great. Have you ever been to court? Whether it is a criminal case or a civil case or a regulatory proceeding, they all have one thing in common. Evidence will be presented. The interesting thing is that opposing sides will almost have a different interpretation of what that evidence means, right? Do you agree with that?

 

[BULLDOG]

This is taking much longer than I expected. Make your point.

So can we agree that what you create can be used as evidence and that there may be things we can learn about you from studying what you created. Obviously there are limitations to what we can learn. Can we agree on that? Then we can move on, ok?

To a point . Continue.

Right. Would you like to put it in your own words or is what I wrote good enough?

Continue.If I find a misunderstanding, I will point it out.

Great. Have you ever been to court? Whether it is a criminal case or a civil case or a regulatory proceeding, they all have one thing in common. Evidence will be presented. The interesting thing is that opposing sides will almost have a different interpretation of what that evidence means, right? Do you agree with that?

Continue. Yes opposing parties will have different opinions of what the facts present.

 

[ding]

So can we agree that what you create can be used as evidence and that there may be things we can learn about you from studying what you created. Obviously there are limitations to what we can learn. Can we agree on that? Then we can move on, ok?

To a point . Continue.

Right. Would you like to put it in your own words or is what I wrote good enough?

Continue.If I find a misunderstanding, I will point it out.

Great. Have you ever been to court? Whether it is a criminal case or a civil case or a regulatory proceeding, they all have one thing in common. Evidence will be presented. The interesting thing is that opposing sides will almost have a different interpretation of what that evidence means, right? Do you agree with that?

Continue. Yes opposing parties will have different opinions of what the facts present.

Great and the judge or the jury must weigh the evidence and testimony to decide which interpretation is the one they will choose, right?

 

[there4eyeM]

The most that can be said is that one's manner of looking at the universe infers creation. Since no outside, objective point is available for observation of this universe, everything is subject to perfectly relative perceptions.

 

[ding]

The most that can be said is that one's manner of looking at the universe infers creation. Since no outside, objective point is available for observation of this universe, everything is subject to perfectly relative perceptions.

You are skipping steps. Right now we are just discussing evidence and proof. You are jumping to the verdict.

 

[BULLDOG]

To a point . Continue.

Right. Would you like to put it in your own words or is what I wrote good enough?

Continue.If I find a misunderstanding, I will point it out.

Great. Have you ever been to court? Whether it is a criminal case or a civil case or a regulatory proceeding, they all have one thing in common. Evidence will be presented. The interesting thing is that opposing sides will almost have a different interpretation of what that evidence means, right? Do you agree with that?

Continue. Yes opposing parties will have different opinions of what the facts present.

Great and the judge or the jury must weigh the evidence and testimony to decide which interpretation is the one they will choose, right?

Continue.

 

[yiostheoy]

Reason and experience tell us that there is evidence for a Creator.

Ok it looks like you are going to try this thread again.

Philosophical reasoning does indeed give us reason to conclude that a God or Gods must exist.

In a nutshell, the argument and reasoning go that something had to exist endlessly for the creation of matter to occur at some point.

Experience is anecdotal and subject to reasonable or unreasonable self determination.

If God appeared to you, as in the reputed cases of Moses, Elijah, Mary, John The Baptist, Jesus, Peter, James, John the Apostle, and Paul the Apostle, then you can say that in your experience you KNOW there is a living God or Gods.

Any other type of delusion such as self delusion is not valid. Unless you have seen with your eyes, heard with your ears, and touched with you hands, you do not know for yourself.

Faith is what comes into play if you do not know. Faith is the criterion that Jesus gave us for knowing God.

If this is what you are trying to say then I agree.

 

[ding]

Right. Would you like to put it in your own words or is what I wrote good enough?

Continue.If I find a misunderstanding, I will point it out.

Great. Have you ever been to court? Whether it is a criminal case or a civil case or a regulatory proceeding, they all have one thing in common. Evidence will be presented. The interesting thing is that opposing sides will almost have a different interpretation of what that evidence means, right? Do you agree with that?

Continue. Yes opposing parties will have different opinions of what the facts present.

Great and the judge or the jury must weigh the evidence and testimony to decide which interpretation is the one they will choose, right?

Continue.

Right. So each of us are the judge and jury. We have to weigh the evidence and decide for ourselves. We can both look at the exact same evidence and come to different conclusions, but we know from our experiences and our own reasoning that what is created can be used as evidence to learn something about the creator who made it. So when people say that someone who believes in God has no evidence, that isn't really correct because reason and experience tells us that there is evidence. Its just that some people don't accept it while others do.

You have been a great sport. I appreciate your honesty. Do you have any questions for me?

 

[ding]

Reason and experience tell us that there is evidence for a Creator.

Ok it looks like you are going to try this thread again.

Philosophical reasoning does indeed give us reason to conclude that a God or Gods must exist.

In a nutshell, the argument and reasoning go that something had to exist endlessly for the creation of matter to occur at some point.

Experience is anecdotal and subject to reasonable or unreasonable self determination.

If God appeared to you, as in the reputed cases of Moses, Elijah, Mary, John The Baptist, Jesus, Peter, James, John the Apostle, and Paul the Apostle, then you can say that in your experience you KNOW there is a living God or Gods.

Any other type of delusion such as self delusion is not valid. Unless you have seen with your eyes, heard with your ears, and touched with you hands, you do not know for yourself.

Faith is what comes into play if you do not know. Faith is the criterion that Jesus gave us for knowing God.

If this is what you are trying to say then I agree.

You are missing the point.

 

[yiostheoy]

...people claim there is no evidence of a Creator.

Can I use something you created to learn things about you?

When people make these claims they are called Atheists.

Atheism is a belief system it is not a school of rational thought.

It is an anguish and hate for a God of any kind.