What is Tim Duncan's religion?

[tmtcsc]

What we have here is the ultimate cop-out.

Let's try and make this into a deductive argument.

P1) Your beliefs differ from mine.
C1) You are unable to believe anything.
C2) You do not understand my beliefs.
C3) You are unable to accept my beliefs.

This argument consists of one premise and three conclusions (each of which is a non sequitur fallacy).

It's also a rhetorically ineffective argument to the extent that it victimizes and condescends to the opposition.

The ultimate cop-out ? How ? By keeping things in their simplest terms ?

Here's what I believe:

1. The existence of God can be explained through science.
2. The existence of God can be explained through theology.

Some non-believers say that man's existence was dumb luck. That our lives are nothing more than insignificant blips in a vast and infinite universe. Take a moment to think about that.

Most scientists believe the Universe is infinite. Assuming that is true, what are the statistical chances that only one planet in this vast universe would be capable of sustaining life as we know it ? What's easier to believe ?

1. That our existence is due to one deity that decided to bring forth life

OR

2. That somehow all of the millions upon millions of factors that had to have happened for your mom and dad to have created you...just happened.

Man has thus far been unsuccessful at finding life on other planets. It's 2012 and we have the most powerful cameras and satellites, the smartest scientists in the history of the world and to this day, have not been able to find life on other planets. Forget the Universe, lets narrow it down to our own Galaxy. -- Nothing. Zip.

You believe in the Big Bang theory ? Cool, who or what caused it ?

[Dunc n Dave]

You failed to appreciate the content of the link that he provided and responded with one that begs the question of your beliefs and is irrelevant to anyone outside of your belief system.

If you read the link that jARS mEsH sEt provided, you might find it very informative about the topic at hand.

I Read the link... And it's a sweeping generalization to think that all atheists know more about the Bible than Christians based on a survey of a few hundred people (many who claim to be Christian but probably only go to church/open their Bibles on Christmas and Easter), especially one that includes questions about preachers during the 2nd Great Awakening, which is not in the Bible, and is more of a history question that a Bible or belief question. Why not throw in some questions about the Great Crusades while you're at it? That's always a popular topic for atheists...

I could easily pull some idiots off the street that say they are atheists but have very little knowledge of the Bible, pit them against some "Christian" scholars and show you more biased statistics that show the opposite of what this study shows. Anyone who uses statistics to back up their arguments FOR or AGAINST religion is wasting their time. Stats/surveys can and will always be manipulated to make them appear to support one's own side of an argument.

[Brutalis]

The ultimate cop-out ? How ? By keeping things in their simplest terms ?

Here's what I believe:

1. The existence of God can be explained through science.
2. The existence of God can be explained through theology.

Some non-believers say that man's existence was dumb luck. That our lives are nothing more than insignificant blips in a vast and infinite universe. Take a moment to think about that.

Most scientists believe the Universe is infinite. Assuming that is true, what are the statistical chances that only one planet in this vast universe would be capable of sustaining life as we know it ? What's easier to believe ?

1. That our existence is due to one deity that decided to bring forth life

OR

2. That somehow all of the millions upon millions of factors that had to have happened for your mom and dad to have created you...just happened.

Man has thus far been unsuccessful at finding life on other planets. It's 2012 and we have the most powerful cameras and satellites, the smartest scientists in the history of the world and to this day, have not been able to find life on other planets. Forget the Universe, lets narrow it down to our own Galaxy. -- Nothing. Zip.

You believe in the Big Bang theory ? Cool, who or what caused it ?

Not sure of your point. All I know is for one to think we are the only life out of billions of galaxies would be ignorant.

And, 100 years ago we started driving cars. 100 years... and now we're supposed to have technology that can find other life out there? Lmao. Maybe in a 1000 years if we're lucky.

[jARS mEsH sEt]

The ultimate cop-out ? How ? By keeping things in their simplest terms ?

Here's what I believe:

1. The existence of God can be explained through science.
2. The existence of God can be explained through theology.

Some non-believers say that man's existence was dumb luck. That our lives are nothing more than insignificant blips in a vast and infinite universe. Take a moment to think about that.

Most scientists believe the Universe is infinite. Assuming that is true, what are the statistical chances that only one planet in this vast universe would be capable of sustaining life as we know it ? What's easier to believe ?

1. That our existence is due to one deity that decided to bring forth life

OR

2. That somehow all of the millions upon millions of factors that had to have happened for your mom and dad to have created you...just happened.

Man has thus far been unsuccessful at finding life on other planets. It's 2012 and we have the most powerful cameras and satellites, the smartest scientists in the history of the world and to this day, have not been able to find life on other planets. Forget the Universe, lets narrow it down to our own Galaxy. -- Nothing. Zip.

You believe in the Big Bang theory ? Cool, who or what caused it ?

Who or what caused God - the infinitely complex being capable of creating universes? Right, you (the Bible) defines God to be sufficiently magical that this isn't an issue for you, right? This is a classic example of special pleading.

You've provided nothing but logical fallacies.

Argument from incredulity

Arguments from incredulity take the form:

1. P is too incredible (or: I cannot imagine how P could possibly be true); therefore P must be false.
2. It is obvious that P is true (or: I cannot imagine how P could possibly be false); therefore P must be true.

These arguments are similar to arguments from ignorance in that they too ignore and do not properly eliminate the possibility that something can be both incredible and still be true, or appear to be obvious and yet still be false.

"I can't imagine how the universe could possibly have come into existence without the intervention of an infinitely complex intelligent being, therefore the universe did not come into existence naturally (God did it)"

[jARS mEsH sEt]

I Read the link... And it's a sweeping generalization to think that all atheists know more about the Bible than Christians based on a survey of a few hundred people (many who claim to be Christian but probably only go to church/open their Bibles on Christmas and Easter), especially one that includes questions about preachers during the 2nd Great Awakening, which is not in the Bible, and is more of a history question that a Bible or belief question. Why not throw in some questions about the Great Crusades while you're at it? That's always a popular topic for atheists...

I could easily pull some idiots off the street that say they are atheists but have very little knowledge of the Bible, pit them against some "Christian" scholars and show you more biased statistics that show the opposite of what this study shows. Anyone who uses statistics to back up their arguments FOR or AGAINST religion is wasting their time. Stats/surveys can and will always be manipulated to make them appear to support one's own side of an argument.

Says the person who literally responded with a Bible quote as an example of using google to "look smart."

Here's a verse from the Q'uran (4:171-172)

"O People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion: nor say Of Allah ought but the truth. Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) A Messenger of Allah, And His Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and the Spirit proceeding From Him: so believe In Allah and His Messengers. Say not "Trinity": desist: It will be better for you: For Allah is One God: Glory to Him: (Far Exalted is He) above Having a son. To Him (Allah) Belong all things in the heavens And on earth. And enough Is Allah as a Disposer of affairs. Christ disdaineth no To serve and worship Allah, Nor do the angels, those Nearest (to Allah): Those who disdain His worship and are arrogant, He will gather them all Together unto Himself (Jesus) to (answer).

[jARS mEsH sEt]

Oh, by the way tmtcsc, do you know what the correct, current scientific understanding is to the question "What caused the big bang?"

It's "I don't know, and I don't know if the question is even valid to begin with."

[Dunc n Dave]

Says the person who literally responded with a Bible quote as an example of using google to "look smart."

Here's a verse from the Q'uran (4:171-172)

"O People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion: nor say Of Allah ought but the truth. Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) A Messenger of Allah, And His Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and the Spirit proceeding From Him: so believe In Allah and His Messengers. Say not "Trinity": desist: It will be better for you: For Allah is One God: Glory to Him: (Far Exalted is He) above Having a son. To Him (Allah) Belong all things in the heavens And on earth. And enough Is Allah as a Disposer of affairs. Christ disdaineth no To serve and worship Allah, Nor do the angels, those Nearest (to Allah): Those who disdain His worship and are arrogant, He will gather them all Together unto Himself (Jesus) to (answer).

Maybe you missed the part where I was mocking you for just posting links, with nothing to add yourself on the topic? I demonstrated that anyone could post links that support their side. The Bible verse I linked to is not a survey, nor a statistic.

You can't make a sweeping generalization like "atheists are more intelligent because they are atheists" and then expect everyone to buy your lie simply because you back it up with stats from a study performed by a Neo-Nazi who believes white men are superior to women and blacks. Anyone can google "Athiests intelligence" find the same link and pretend to be smart by posting that crap.

Problem is, you didn't first check the background/credibilty of the guy you propped up, so it pretty much blew up in your face when I shot his credibility to .

[tmtcsc]

Not sure of your point. All I know is for one to think we are the only life out of billions of galaxies would be ignorant.

And, 100 years ago we started driving cars. 100 years... and now we're supposed to have technology that can find other life out there? Lmao. Maybe in a 1000 years if we're lucky.

Oh I see. You are taking it on faith that there is life on other planets. Do you have absolutely any reason to believe there is life on other planets ? One scientific ounce of proof or thought on the subject ? Tell me why I'm ignorant to believe that its entirely possible that we are it ?

Yeah, I'm LMAO too.

[Dunc n Dave]

I fully expect Jars to comeback with a shot at the credibililty of the Bible as a source. SO I'll save him the trouble here and post about it 1st.

Don't believe what you don't want to believe, I know I can't change your mind and I'm not trying to. Next time, just try to check your "facts" before you try to present them as "facts". Peace out!

[jARS mEsH sEt]

I fully expect Jars to comeback with a shot at the credibililty of the Bible as a source. SO I'll save him the trouble here and post about it 1st.

Don't believe what you don't want to believe, I know I can't change your mind and I'm not trying to. Next time, just try to check your "facts" before you try to present them as "facts". Peace out!

Do you think I'm going to ?

[tmtcsc]

Who or what caused God - the infinitely complex being capable of creating universes? Right, you (the Bible) defines God to be sufficiently magical that this isn't an issue for you, right? This is a classic example of special pleading.

You've provided nothing but logical fallacies.

Argument from incredulity

Arguments from incredulity take the form:

1. P is too incredible (or: I cannot imagine how P could possibly be true); therefore P must be false.
2. It is obvious that P is true (or: I cannot imagine how P could possibly be false); therefore P must be true.

These arguments are similar to arguments from ignorance in that they too ignore and do not properly eliminate the possibility that something can be both incredible and still be true, or appear to be obvious and yet still be false.

"I can't imagine how the universe could possibly have come into existence without the intervention of an infinitely complex intelligent being, therefore the universe did not come into existence naturally (God did it)"

You're adding nothing to this debate by explaining my answers from a logic standpoint. Seriously, what the good is that ? Any answer I give you can be categorized in to a logical formula. What's the logical formula for truth ? Do you have one ?

My scientific reasoning for the existence of God lies in the Cosmological Argument:

1. Everything that has a beginning of its existence has a cause of its existence;

2.The universe has a beginning of its existence;

Therefore:

3.The universe has a cause of its existence.

4. Since no scientific explanation (in terms of physical laws) can provide a causal account of the origin of the universe, the cause must be personal (explanation is given in terms of a personal agent) - God.

[mathbzh]

You're adding nothing to this debate by explaining my answers from a logic standpoint. Seriously, what the good is that ? Any answer I give you can be categorized in to a logical formula. What's the logical formula for truth ? Do you have one ?

My scientific reasoning for the existence of God lies in the Cosmological Argument:

1. Everything that has a beginning of its existence has a cause of its existence;

2.The universe has a beginning of its existence;

Therefore:

3.The universe has a cause of its existence.

4. Since no scientific explanation (in terms of physical laws) can provide a causal account of the origin of the universe, the cause must be personal (explanation is given in terms of a personal agent) - God.

And the cause for God existence is?

Seriously, philosophers have been discussing god existence for centuries...
If there is a logical answer, we would know it by now.
I am not sure were you are going (believers and atheist) with this debate.

By the way, I don't see how this is Spurs related (not the question about Tim, the great debate).

[jARS mEsH sEt]

You're adding nothing to this debate by explaining my answers from a logic standpoint. Seriously, what the good is that ? Any answer I give you can be categorized in to a logical formula. What's the logical formula for truth ? Do you have one ?

My scientific reasoning for the existence of God lies in the Cosmological Argument:

1. Everything that has a beginning of its existence has a cause of its existence;

2.The universe has a beginning of its existence;

Therefore:

3.The universe has a cause of its existence.

4. Since no scientific explanation (in terms of physical laws) can provide a causal account of the origin of the universe, the cause must be personal (explanation is given in terms of a personal agent) - God.

You've got to be kidding me. The Kalam cosmological argument? Really?.

Actually, this is funny, because the version you posted isn't even the true Kalam cosmological argument. The actual argument goes as follows -

1. Everything that has a beginning of its existence has a cause of its existence;

2.The universe has a beginning of its existence;

Therefore:

3.The universe has a cause of its existence.

Point #1: "4" does not follow from 1 through 3. Even if the reasoning of this argument was logically sound, the only conclusion you come to is "the universe has a cause." That's it.

Point #2: The Kalam cosmological argument isn't a scientific argument, it's a philosophical argument.

Seriously, you must be trolling to throw this at me. I don't for a minute believe that you are actually this stupid, thinking that an age old, long debunked logically flawed philosophical argument cons utes "scientific" reasoning.

Please, please watch this video

[tmtcsc]

And the cause for God existence is?

God has always been and did not have a beginning to require a cause.

Sounds good right ? This logic BS is just that and plays in to the hands of those who want to apply formulas to God. Getting caught up in the philosophy or science of God's existence is a waste of time.

I don't need equations or logic to FEEL that God exists. I don't need to argue the existence of a soul. You either believe and have faith or you don't.

Hey !!!! Spurs win, Spurs win, Spurs win ! (Insert Will Ferrel's imitation of Harry Carrey here. On that note, I'm going to bed.

[Proxy]

God has always been and did not have a beginning to require a cause.

Sounds good right ? This logic BS is just that and plays in to the hands of those who want to apply formulas to God. Getting caught up in the philosophy or science of God's existence is a waste of time.

I don't need equations or logic to FEEL that God exists. I don't need to argue the existence of a soul. You either believe and have faith or you don't.

You're programed to believe in supers ion and why add a step. Universe to life... why Universe to god to life. Ain't logical.

[doldrums]

Like I said, there's no such thing as a soul. There's a brain. Your body can function with minimal brain function. Read up on the brain stem.

I think you need to take an educational course on the word 'evidence' and what it means. You keep using it incorrectly.

edit: Also stop using a 1500 year old book written by men of the old ages as a backdrop. what is 1500 years compared to the timeline of the universe? Look it up.

Agreed 100%. Ever notice that when a person develops alzheimers, they become a different person, sometimes completely. That's because the brain is altered. Sorry folks, there is no soul.

[jARS mEsH sEt]

Agreed 100%. Ever notice that when a person develops alzheimers, they become a different person, sometimes completely. That's because the brain is altered. Sorry folks, there is no soul.

True, but there are better examples.



Probably the most famous case has to do with that of Phineas Gage: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phineas_Gage

Sam Harris sums it up pretty well:

[Em-City]

did somebody just prove that god exists?!?

[tmtcsc]

You're programed to believe in supers ion and why add a step. Universe to life... why Universe to god to life. Ain't logical.

Programmed to believe in supers ion ? Please. I'm not some child that will bow to psycho-babble nonsense mixed with philosophical and logical explanations.

I believe in God and while I was raised and educated in the Christian doctrine, it was not tattooed on me for life at young age. I had every opportunity to accept or reject what I was being taught. I chose to accept.

You on the other hand, need formulas and science to explain feelings. The idea that there is no existence of a soul because the brain is the epicenter of the body doesn't fly either. How ridiculous is that ?

When someone tells you "I love you", do you respond with "Oh, you're just saying that because your brain processed that message to deliver to me." ?

Do you love someone because of their brain or because of the personality developed from the brain ? You people are attempting to think way too deep in to this.

[Proxy]

Programmed to believe in supers ion ? Please. I'm not some child that will bow to psycho-babble nonsense mixed with philosophical and logical explanations.

I believe in God and while I was raised and educated in the Christian doctrine, it was not tattooed on me for life at young age. I had every opportunity to accept or reject what I was being taught. I chose to accept.

You on the other hand, need formulas and science to explain feelings. The idea that there is no existence of a soul because the brain is the epicenter of the body doesn't fly either. How ridiculous is that ?

When someone tells you "I love you", do you respond with "Oh, you're just saying that because your brain processed that message to deliver to me." ?

Do you love someone because of their brain or because of the personality developed from the brain ? You people are attempting to think way too deep in to this.

Everything on this planet that lives is from a common ancestor. A theory of how life came to this planet is that it arrived via astroid, which I buy into.

Through this planet's existence, evolution took place and we evolved through an incredible line of life. People who can't accept that we are an advanced breed of monkey are scared or morons. I say that because our ancestry stems way beyond that. Before primates existed, our line was shared with reptiles, plants, organisms...etc. Our purpose? Our purpose is to and have a baby. Reproduction. Same goes for animals, trees, viruses, and single celled organisms. Life's purpose is to multiply.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_descent

Now the reason I said that was to make the point that everything you feel is for reason of survival. All emotions can be grouped into forms of being happy or sad, and you developed the ability to feel them by evolutionary process.



Now, you assume that's where my thought process stops, and that I live a sad life where nothing means anything... well, you're wrong to think that. The awesome advantage that you and I have is the gift of self awareness. I have the ability to choose my destiny, and that is an incredible gift. I'm not a tree that has no perception that it lives, and I'm not a mosquito that dies within days... I'm a human being that can perceive my surrounding existence and feel happiness, sadness, anger, confusion, hope, depression, and love. Just because I understand why I love someone, doesn't make it any less amazing.

I don't believe in a soul, because I know humans aren't immortal. I understand that religion is mankind's way of admitting they're scared of death. Some would argue that dogma has allowed man to grow with morals, and I don't disagree with that, but it's time to leave the fairy tales behind. Way too much hate, abuse, and death coming in the form of dogma these days. If mankind is to take advantage of the gift they've been given, religion keeps us back from realizing the true potential.

To retort to your post directly... Formulas are behind everything, from our emotions, to mathematical patterns and constants, to physics and the structure of our body and universe. To say I need formulas to understand things and use it in negative connotation is like me ridiculing you for needing oxygen to breathe.

When my SO tells me she loves me, I reply to her that I love her too, and I mean it with 100% sincerity. Like I said, understanding the formula to my emotions doesn't cheapen it. If anything, understanding why I feel a certain way is a huge advantage. I can lessen the amount of time I feel sad, and make the most of my ability to feel happiness.

[Sean Cagney]

SMH at the argument between athiests or belivers now like they have been dead before and know 100%! This argument always makes me laugh because everyone is right! They know it all. The truth might lie somewhere in the middle, I leave it there (Not whate either believes but an unknown).

[manufan10]

Do you think I'm going to ?

That's for God to decide, tbh.

[Aiko9245]

I'm planning a trip to the islands and found this old gem: Tim in St. Croix talking about his childhood. When his hometown pool was destroyed by Hugo, he turned to basketball.

He speaks of God at the 5:40 mark - blessings and having a plan for him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5asWo...eature=related

Part two if you haven't seen it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iH3C4...eature=related

We are lucky fans.

[Agloco]

Since no scientific explanation (in terms of physical laws) can provide a causal account of the origin of the universe, the cause must be personal (explanation is given in terms of a personal agent) - God.

<facepalm>

Man can't provide a rational explanation, thus he shall concoct an irrational one.

Because........everything must have an explanation!!!!!

sigh.

[Juggity]

Man can't provide a rational explanation, thus he shall concoct an irrational one.