@StateofHead completely incorrect. As a judeo/christian we have a superset of concepts, religious and scientific with which to understand the others. Furthermore I have far more evidence than all the others put together. I was an atheist until the age of 23, and having MET Jesus have never looked back.
Well you missed the point didn't you. Let's pose the question this way: All religions have their gods/beliefs, supported by their scripture and devout followers (who have sincere faith). What additional evidence do you have, that other religions don't, that proves Christianity is the truth? NONE. All religions have the same "bag of tricks" and are all indistinguishable to the enlightened. You actually are an atheist to all those other religions, other fellow atheists just went one god further.
The christian community of counsellors and psychologists has within it, documented in many papers and books the technical knowledge for the cure of all mental illnesses that I know of. I have personally witnessed the majority of mental health problems healed through technical know how learned through a christian perspective on reality.
Naturalistic science on the other hand has been able to offer very little in the way of cures in this field. Butchery yes (ECT Lobotomies), cures no.
So you asked for biblically derived observtn, that would not be scientific. In science observations come first, not assumptions. So... I observed a friend who hears a voice swear at her in her head out of the blue. The biblical explanation is that it is a demon, it can be conversed with & removed. After the removal, the voice problem went away. Science also requires repetition to learn cause and effect principles. So repeated the above 1000 times. Conclusion, science is ignoring lots of reality.
@keith1y I see your mind is an erratic jumble of confused tautologies. The only biblical "observation" you provided was a case of demon possession. I would think, at your age, you'd be ashamed to make the idiotic assertion of demons. You're clearly a backward sub-intellect with no grasp of the real world.
@fdasherv ad-hominem attacks are not a scientific argument.
I have thousands of documented observations, you have a dismissive approach. You should be ashamed to call yourself scientific with such a blinkered view of the world, and a shameful attitude to someone who doesn't agree with you. It's pathetic.
@keith1y Yup, you got me! Demonic possessions, talking snakes, virgin births, invisible overlords, dinosaurs on a boat, angel-fuelled raging bears, and other magical hoo-doo. That's right, I dismiss it all outright. Why? For 3000 years not a single supernatural claim has ever been shown to be true. In this supposedly demon-infested world, why am I untroubled by these bogiemen behind every facade of reality? Because mine is not the mind of a fearful child. Dude, you're middle aged. Grow up.
@fdasherv now its straw men! Do you know any science?
All real things are natural,God is real,therefore God is natural. Everything you mention has various interpretations, for example there is no mention of a talking snake,that is an interpretation of an ancient text which happens to be a mis-interpretation.
What you are showing is an inability to think for yourself,spouting rhetoric you saw on the internet. It really is not
necessary,because you can meet God if you want to, he's cool
@fdasherv also there was no tautology. It was ONE observation of many. The biblical worldview makes for a far better and more useful understanding of the world.
In your world view you cannot give an objective valued reason for anything at all, even answering this post. Everything, every opinion according to your world view is subjective. What a joke, how do you expect to do science with that constraint?
Really? Christianity gives you a broader understanding of reality than science? Please, enlighten us with a few of your biblically derived observations.
@fdasherv science cannot answer the question Why? Engineering can but science can't. In engineering principles are far more effective. Normally you ask the guy that made it why he made it, and how to fix it. Engineers also don't settle for conjecture and guesses. What you don't realise is how much of what you call science is actually guess work dressed up. Don't forget science is supposed to explain things, but most of mainstream science leaves more questions. I like knowing how things work.
@fdasherv materialistic science ignores non-physical things. Every decision you make in your life is based upon non-physical things, logic emotions, loves and values weighing up options. Materialistic naturalistic science can't help you with any of that, let alone help you with understanding it. It is totally useless for understanding "reality" in a practical sense. I include in reality non-physical things which make up more important slice of reality as concerns your day to day life.
@Lan5in6 "almost every single time?" I said that because I was being honest, sometimes the person is not interested, leaves before the process reaches its conclusion, is too upset to be in the necessary reflective mood, or is too drunk.
You're an idiot. This is a statement that can be backed up with factual evidence, such as this video you have made. Saying Christianity is the one true religion because of statements taken from the Bible is some pretty fucked up chicken and egg logic. This shouldn't have to be pointed out to you.
I derived logical necessary characteristics of God from the Laws of physics, that he must be an ultimate source, and must be uncreated. Then I looked to scriptures of all religions to see if the gods they describe match the ultimateness of God that science requires. The Bible is a compilation of all the good historical evidence we have of this Ultimate God. It is not the only one, the Chinese have a description of ShangDi in their border ceremony.
@keith1y Talking out of your arse again. Stephen Hawkins says the Universe can have originated because of the laws of physics, and no God is needed during the process. Religion is a fairy tale. I'll think I'll take his word over yours. Real physicists like Hawkins, Feynman, Sagan, Einstein would laugh at your God derived from physics argument. Newton might agree, but he lived 200 years before Darwin so he's excused.
@Lan5in6 anyone who does not believe that "the 2nd Law of thermodynamics is universal" is not a real physicist, no matter what their name.Appeal to authority is not a valid form of argument, not as bad as your excellent ad hominem attacks but nevertheless you concede again that you are unable to make your own points.
Logically speaking those you quote are merely re-expressing their a priori assumptions,they are presenting their religious position,not a scientific one.It's called self-delusion.
@keith1y I appologise for using the authority argument, but I know these scientists weren't in the habit of using them themselves, and have a deep understanding of physics far beyond yours, this isn't proof they are right but you should be cautious if you think you have arrived at the existence of god logically, when they have not. Watch Feynman on UFO's, he explains why saying something improbable doesn'exist despite lack of proof, is the correct scientific position
@Lan5in6 if an atheist's assumptions dictate his conclusions nothing has been learned about the actual truth. A theoretical-theists different assumptions lead to different conclusions, but still no one is any the wiser as to the truth.
If either breaks the rules of their own world view, they commit intellectual suicide, denying the 2nd law, strike 1, being unable to put any objective value to anything,strike 2,living as if things have value when they have none in that world view, strike 3 - out
@keith1y Intellectual suicide is when you give up trying to understand the world and say "God did it" Nothing much can ever be said about the actual truth of anything, since there is no way of proving for example we are not in the matrix. However, You will be the one commiting "Actual suicide" if you neglect the law of Gravity for being based on observations asssumed to be correct, and jump off a bridge you could be imagining.
@Lan5in6 pathetic naive rhetoric. I have not stopped trying to understand the world, the question "What exactly did God do, how and why did he do it?" is far more engaging than "what did Nothing do to create everything for no reason".
Objectively according to atheism understanding the world is a waste of time, we all die & the universe is tending towards heat death. It makes no difference at all in the long run.
Since God is real, I can ask him how and why. Science can't answer that, booooring.
@Lan5in6 And since you asked. How? God said that He spoke things into being. Everything he speaks happens. Mathematicians have told us that the universe started as a multidimensional wave. Your voice is a sound wave, Gods voice is a multidimensional wave, known in scripture as the Logos, or "Gods creative Word".
The theologians got there first by a couple of thousand years.
An eternal powerful sentient being would be lonely on his own, in fact it would literally be hell!
The physicality of the universe, space, time, biology etc., was made so that we can exist independent of God's presence. This gives us total freedom to make an honest choice. When we see Love in action, do we respond positively to it or not, there is no coercion at all
Jesus died on the cross out of total Love for YOU, take it or leave it. The universe was made for the CROSS
@Lan5in6 The whole universe is a stage for a love story.Jesus showed us how much he loves you by sacrificing himself to save your life.If you respond to this act of love & love Jesus back,then he will point out to you that you too are an eternal being.But to survive the rigors of eternity you need a pure heart,which God can give you if you ask for it. All your pain,hurt,anger, fear, and weakness is transferred to Jesus,leaving you clean to be filled with Gods Love.Then you can cope with eternity
@Lan5in6 "Nothing much can ever be said about the actual truth" that's what I call giving up. The Best and Only way to know the ACTUAL truth is to ask Jesus, the creator, the only person who has ever claimed to BE the creator and the personification of The Truth and of Wisdom. He is the WORD of God, He was the initial multidimensional wave mathematicians tell us about. (see BBC Horizon on pre-universe physics)
"The truth shall set you free, and whoever the son sets free shall be free indeed."
@keith1y Don't you think you should be a bit more sceptical? anyone can make those claims. There isn;t any evidence he did anything to back up those claims. yet you are sceptical about sciience because you question observation? That is a foolish and naive position. Extremely biassed and unscientific. You need to accept the fact the idea of God isn't rational, otherwise we'd wouldn't have this debate. Do you think God would survive as a scientific Hypothesis?
@Lan5in6 How skeptical do you want me to be, I was an atheist for 23 years! Since then I have put it to the test.
Almost every single time I have prayed for someone in the past 10 years they have heard God for themselves and have received measurable healing as a result.
God is real, so of course he survives investigation with science, IF and ONLY IF science does not assume he is not there.
@keith1y almost every single time? so there a times it doesn't work? what are you proving? In the harvard experiment patients died more often when prayed for. I'm guessing it has no effect. if it did physical laws would have to be broken! Why would it matter if the people running experiments are atheist? i for one am will find god more credible if evidence is brought forward, but not before.
@Lan5in6 perhaps you should know that I was an atheist for 23 years.
This means that I had a model, I had my own a priori assumptions upon which I based my atheism, but in the light of events, science, philosophy and experience, when this was challenged by the facts, and by God, the logic of atheism crumbled into dust.
The atheist has no objective reason for doing anything, if you reply to this, just by that act, you demonstrate that your own world view is false.
@keith1y True there probably isn't. Won't stop me tho. You think your on God's mission? I can make up my own reason for living, your doing it as well even if you haven' realised. Well actually you haven't, you accepted something other people have made up to be the objective truth.
@Lan5in6 When you make up your own reason for living, that is an admission of complicit self-delusion. Your own reason for living is purely a product of your own reasoning, not a satisfying basis for living.
Actually I have not accepted something other people made up to be objective truth. I converted form atheism when God, aka. Jesus spoke to me directly and personally. I accepted Him, not religion, not even the Bible.
@keith1y the atheist is out in 3 strikes,but we still don't know exactly what the truth is. The theoretical-theist is only offering a theory. What you need to find the truth is someone with ACTUAL experience which you are so quick to deny,even though it is your only hope of finding the ACTUAL truth, not dictated by a priori assumptions.
I have my own experiences, I met Jesus, I have documented hundreds of encounters.Heidi Baker, had a vision of Jesus which led her to adopt thousands of orphans.
@quaffly simple, I met jesus - I should explain, he IS the creator. When you act "in his name" as his ambassador, demons must obey. I understand the laws of thermodynamics according to themselves they are laws. You do not get something from nothing. God is not nothing, granted he is non-physical, but he is not nothing.
Please keep your comments objective, not subjective. Every comment you make needs a measure of objective value, what actual difference does it make in your world view.
"Atheism has no means to appreciate the reality of anyone's spiritual experiences at all, let alone categorize and understand them."
yes we do, because as an atheist, i've had, and have, spiritual experiences. i just don't believe they originate from a god. it's just the beauty of an intelligent, and aware existence, as a human being.
it's hard to explain, as it's subjective..moments of what some call grace. being reduced to tears merely reflecting on reality. just very rare, vivid, powerful experiences.
i can already see where this is going though..i don't believe in god. so, what i experienced, couldn't have been meaningful, or spiritual, right?..it couldn't have been the same as what you've experienced.
@itzahazylife tearful moments can simply be an emotional association to a past memory. I have found the same origin for specific headaches, migraines, and sickness.
The real questions are 1) what changed? 1a) Intellectually - What new information did you get that you did not know already? 1b) Emotionally - What was the detailed effect on the emotional beliefs of the experiential mind
2) What specific insights on the nature of 'things' did you get clarity on.
i remember the first time i learned that the elements that compose human beings, are created in the core of stars, and then spread throughout the universe via supernova explosions, and that every atom in our bodies came from a bunch of different stars..i realized i was the universe conscious of itself. i am the universe. u are the universe. and the universe is us. a tremendous feeling came over me..there's no explaining it.
@itzahazylife "the elements that compose human beings, are created in the core of stars, and then spread throughout the universe via supernova explosions"
What a load of tosh, the consensus view makes no sense. Look at the distances involved, how does a supernova explosion reach the next star to spread its wares. The universe is too sparse for this to work. Instead google "Alfvén Triumphs Again"
The universe is not conscious, your warm fuzzy feeling is caused by a spirit, selling you a lie.
pure scientific ignorance..it's a well known fact in cosmology that all of the life-bearing elements are created in the core of stars via stellar nucleosynthesis. we have direct evidence of this. so, since we know where and how these elements and molecules are created, then comes the question how do they get spread into the universe?..do supernova explosions eject them at very high speeds into space, or does god grab his jar of elements and sprinkle them onto planets?..hmm i wonder.
@itzahazylife that "fact of cosmology" you cite is merely a guess, no one has ever looked inside a supernova to see. I merely pointed out the illogical nature of that guess. The "science" you quote is actually mathematical models. In real life however > 99% of matter in the universe is plasma, the Electric Universe Hypothesis, based upon understanding the properties of plasma, does a far better job of explaining things, including the creation of heavy elements, as stars are formed in a z-pinch..
"do supernova explosions eject them at very high speeds into space"
Please think logically, so what slows them down in space to the point where they collect into a whole sun and planets? At what speeds are they traveling and how long would it take to reach anything else? What is the probability of them hitting anything in the emptiness that is space.
I gave you the means to find an article which gives a plausible explanation.
rocky planets form FROM the expelled heavier elements of supernova explosions. the building blocks of life and planets first originate inside of stars via stellar nucleosynthesis. then the star explodes and releases all of those heavy elements and organic molecules into space..planets form from that gas and dust. life then forms on the planets that contain the right elements, molecules and temperature. so, in essence, supernova explosions seed the cosmos with the stuff of life.
but, are u really talking to god by reading what is supposedly his word?..maybe if your head wasn't buried so far up your ass, you'd realize that you're only reading words, and that the "conversation" taking place is actually an illusion, and that the only one you're actually having a conversation with is yourself..but, since u want so badly for it to be god, it becomes god..at which point anyone with an ounce of reason shakes their head and laughs.
@itzahazylife "since u want so badly for it to be god, it becomes god..at which point anyone with an ounce of reason shakes their head and laughs."
Actually I would rather not hear God on occasion, because usually he wants me to do something, that is either hard to do, or I don't want to do it, because I am stubborn like that.
One day God even told me that he would "tell me a joke later that day"... and he did, the joke was personal to me, but it did make me laugh.
1)we know atoms attract and bond by themselves to form molecules, which form chains and compounds, which then form cells. (a process of self assembly and emergent complexity) 2)we know that we consist of the same elements and molecules we find on earth and in space 3)we know that these elements and molecules are created in stars, and dispersed into space. 4) so, we conclude that life originates on the right planets following the same process of self assembly over a very long time.
God could very well be behind the formation of the laws of physics. it could be part of his design. he could have designed the laws of physics to result in everything we see. i personally don't believe that. i believe the laws of physics are caused by some other type of natural phenomenon. and it'd make God out to be deceiving, since he would be using unintelligent processes to intelligently design.
The previous video is not an actual "argument for atheism" since that term is not in proper context but more "argument for anti-theism." Atheism does not believe or recognize in a God or Gods due to lack of evidence, nothing more. Faith by definition means "belief without proof" which religion is based. Your views are assumes not proven in any way whatsoever using blind assertion therefore invalid.
@chrisinsocalif you are making up your own definition of faith, just like Dawkins does.Allow me to annihilate your straw man.No believer uses the word faith to mean blind faith.The Complete Jewish Bible translates the greek word in the new testament into "TRUST" When we use the word faith,we use it in the sense that you put repeated trust in the chair upon which you sit.I repeatedly pray for sufferers of PTSD, and I see the Lord Jesus heal them by speaking to them, daily repeatable over 10 yrs
@keith1y Here are some excerpts from dictionaries: "Faith: belief that is not based on proof" OR" firm belief in something for which there is no proof." The definition is universal. Your response alone shows your delusion. Oh another thing, Intercessory Prayer does not make a different in the recovery of patients according to studies. Latest study showed those who were prayed for had higher incidents of complications. But of course you dont accept real data, you choose to stay deluded.
@chrisinsocalif the word in scripture is in GREEK, go look that up. It means fidelity, trust in a reliable person. What kind of proof do you demand from your spouse/gf of their affections. Do you even know what intercessory prayer is?What they studied is not what the bible says to do in case of sickness. They can't read! I have never done anything on blind faith, sure if you call those you disagree with idiots you can ensure you will never find the truth.
what you said isn't that true. i have grown up in a jewish community, and it doesn't give broader views, it gives more narrow. and yes, judaism and christianity are just about the same except for different messiah's and different details. if you can disprove judaism, you can easily disprove Christianity. all you have really done is say that christianity is right, other religions aren't.
@ebrowne369 the jewish community is stuffed full of superstition and ritual which gets in the way of you meeting God for real. Ironic since he told you first that God desired to tabernacle among us, and dwell with men.
btw as far as I understand it the old covenant is now canceled as far as God is concerned. The destruction of the temple in 70AD was kind of the nail in that coffin.
@keith1y i grew up jewish, but am now an atheist. i really don't want to argue about which religion is better, but nonetheless they have the same beliefs and origins, but there has been discrimination over the slightest differences, like prophets, stories, etc. i can't argue about things like the temple and god leaving them behind, because i don't believe in any of it. this is all your opinion,and when you have faith in something, there is very little i can do to convince you without being rude
@ebrowne369 there is nothing at all you can do to convince me,since I met Jesus many times in my own house,he taught me many useful things,including how to heal the most difficult mental illnesses.You are welcome to be as rude as you like,I take the David Berlinski view,the politeness is overrated.So allow me to mock you for believing that everything came from nothing & for being so shallow as to throw all your cultural history in the bin.If Moses met God and talked with him as a friend so can U
@keith1y well first off that is retarded, how could god come from nothing/ and no, i never said it came from nothing, i just said i don't believe a mythical creator differently describes and misinterpreted by millions of religions could just create something out of nothing, which you agree with when you told me about creating something out of nothing. i didn't throw it in the bin, i still study the Torah and jewish perspectives and live in a kosher home. and i doubt that a dead guy talked to you
@ebrowne369 I think you missed the point, Jesus did not die. As the first human to overcome death he makes a way for us to overcome death by identification with him. Jesus is also the Creator God. Doubt all you like, but it happened.
@ebrowne369 there is an interface between the physical and the spiritual. That interface is YOU and ME. God works by filling our hearts with his love (being born form heaven), and then we become his hands and feet in the world.
@ebrowne369 check the teachings of Christianity compared to judaism. Paul says "all things are permissible, not every thing is beneficial". Hardly seems more narrow!
@ebrowne369 if it gives a broader or more a narrow perspective is different to person to person. doesnt it depend how u disporve 1 religion ? before u can say another one is false?
@isjet i personally believe they are all false. the don't explain things to me, and i can see no spiritual connection between humans and the lord as the bible, torah, quoran, etc. describe them.
@ebrowne369 But I have witnessed the Lord heal people in deep emotional pain thousands of times. Follow me on twitter for periodic updates. On these occasions the healer identifies himself as Jesus, as the Father, as the God of the Bible.
It's funny how you arrogantly assume that the "creator" is YOUR GOD, the one that revealed himself to Moses. All you did was prove his argument right. Even though other religions claim that THEIR god created the world, you dismiss those, and say that the law of thermodynamics proves it was YOUR god (which is where I stopped watching due to how ridiculously absurd that statement was.) Sorry buddy, but the law of thermodynamics doesn't prove your God nor anyone else's did a god damn thing.
You are not understanding the argument. The 2nd Law prooves that there has to be a source to all things, therefore any claim to be God has to pass that test. When you go looking at the gods available, only one makes that claim. Mohammed never claimed to have met god, so he only offers a second hand opinion.
@ebrowne369 your statement doesn't really make sense. The laws of physics exist. Therefore any world view which says it is limited to materialism must abide by those laws. Since I am not limited to materialism, I expect to find additional laws in operation in the non-material (and I do), but there is no need to contradict physical laws which apply only to the material. One might find additional laws at work at the interface between the material and the non-material, which scripture alludes to.
@keith1y my statement did make sense. there are laws of physics, and most religions have gods that defy these laws, mainly because something must have created your creator, and also all of these tales of people flying and people surviving ovens go completely against biology and chemistry as well. also the story of the tower of babel completely goes against common history.
@ebrowne369 look in the scripture, God does not defy laws of physics. How did the Red sea part? "A great wind blew up". See God works with the laws of physics, and why wouldn't he.
Why must something have created my creator? Only things which have a beginning need a creation. The ULTIMATE SOURCE of all things does not have a beginning by definition, and so neither does the creator.
The sooner you start thinking logically, the quicker you can meet God have a chat and we can all go home.
@ebrowne369 also, in my video I use the scientific laws of physics as universal principles, which transcend physicality and as many universes as you like. The principle that you cannot get something from nothing should apply universally, even beyond physicality. The only logically valid way of looking at the universe is if it is a slice, glimpse or product of a greater reality of "everythingness". To say it came from nothingness defies everything we know about anything.
@keith1y so bascially there is a physical section, and a spiritual section, and those sections can conflict with each other? this is just my opinion, but i don;t think that makes sense. also, something must have created the creater of the universe, because like you say, you can;t make something out of nothing, unless the creator isn't actually anything, but that defies the logic that we just have to live with.
You also need to consider your view on religion and Christianity would be very different, had you been born in a different country or in a different time frame. If you had been born in Saudi, you would currently be quoting the Koran and Allah would be your god
@airwavesblue200 possibly, but I started from the position of 22 years of atheism. Honest questioning got me here. Being born in saudi might have been a disadvantage if I were brainwashed by some other false teaching. One reason God hates religion, it gets in the way of people finding the truth. Jesus is the only man who ever lived who claimed to be The Truth. Islam doesn't offer any actual answers. Ask them if they go to heaven, they dont know,their god doesn't do or say anything, empty ritual.
@keith1y brainwashed by some other false teaching, huh? Just another example of a biased Christian who refuses to believe that THEY TOO have been brainwashed by false teachings. Show me evidence that Jesus lived. Show me evidence that he rose from the dead. And do it without your fucking bible. Islam doesn't offer any actual answers? Neither does your Bible or YOUR religion, you hypocrite. Oh, and just so you know? Your god doesn't say or do anything either. Besides breed ignorance.
@TwoHandedSledge My God says things all the time, and he heals all the time in my experience. It doesn't look like you have read any of my previous comments to know my experiences of God doing things and saying are repeatable.
I don'rt know if tour take on the cards carries much weight. For example if I believe in Zeus, I sort the religion cards based on whether he uses lightning, changes shape, rapes women, rules other gods and lives on top of a mountain. That fits with the idea of the gods being born from the titans, presumably the original creaters of the Universe now overthrown and/or destroyed. After all, even if there was a creator of the Universe, he or she might no longer be alive. How can we know?
@keith1y I'm defining life in the usual sense we all know. If you breathe you are alive. If you are not breathing and are decomposing, you are definitely dead!
@geniusrepairman1 "If you breathe you are alive. If you are not breathing" ridiculous to apply this concept of life to the necessary source of all things, which is outside of and transcends time and space. If I am not breathing, I am definitely not dead, my mind and spirit live on, I won't even notice the passing of my mortal body.
@keith1y Can spirits hurt and kill eachother in the After World? I suppose they can in Hell. I just mean, how do you know the original creator of the universe could not have been killed by a pack of demons or godlings in the Spirit Universe?
@geniusrepairman1 Hurt yes, kill no. When you see how small demons are, you will wonder how they managed to do anything. In this world they manifest as little more than evil thoughts. However if you believe those thoughts they are able to affect the world through you.
There are similarities between spiritual feelings and the feeling of God,which lead to a conclusion that you probably werent intending to make.Spiritual feelings are real; just as real as love, which numerous studies have shown they can be mapped to different patterns of brain activity. However the feeling of God does not indicate the existence of a separate being. One is an emotion,the other a hypothetical deity. God exists as a feeling in some peoples minds which they’ve decided to call “God”.
@SmileSatanLovesU spiritual feelings don't talk, don't teach, don't make an argument, don't claim to the the creator. don't challenge you to behave better, etc etc.
@SmileSatanLovesU God exists as a being with whom it is easy to converse with. In my experience more than 80% of people I pray for are able to hear God speak in a conherent manner. Check my website for case studies in the future
@SmileSatanLovesU There are similarities between spiritual feelings and the feeling of God
You think? God is a sentient being, whenever people encounter God in scripture he speaks, in understandable language. He can have a conversation with you. Spiritual feelings cant talk.
"whenever people encounter God in scripture he speaks, in understandable language. He can have a conversation with you. Spiritual feelings cant talk."
you're a whack job, plain and simple..of course someone will have an experience of being talked to if they are reading something someone else wrote lol..especially if the writer is supposedly the god who created u and who loves u..scripture is supposedly his word,so of course while reading scripture u will experience talking to god.
@itzahazylife I never said I was reading anything. When God speaks to me I am usually washing up.
You appear to be missing the point, God is a real sentient, non-physical being, whose very nature is Love. He speaks to everyone regularly, if they are listening.
The easiest place to hear him is in the emotional place where you you are feeling most hurt and unloved, since that is where the encounter with God, and the truth he speaks will have the greatest healing effect.
Spirits affect the mind, commonly through specific emotive destructive thoughts e.g suicidal thoughts.Further investigation may result in a vision
When people see visions they don't usually see them with their eyes they often have their eyes closed, yet they see clearly and can describe what they see in detail.A surprising number of people can express a visual representation of their feelings.Many visions are repeatable without the use of drugs or hypnosis and so can be investigated in detail
Astrology also gives a framework for 'understanding the world'.
And assuming the Universe has a thing that caused the big bang does not imply that that thing is Omnipotent, All-Loving, Listens to prayers or appears as a burning bush.
It could simply be a fart from a metaphysical lizard-fairy that brought the universe into being.
I've never seen evidence of spiritual entities in their 'true form' - let alone a christian evocation of them. Where are they?
@mindprism Your imaginary science defying, logic defying, quantum fluctuation did it all?
1) astrology is rubbish. 2) Actually the thing that caused the big bang does logically have to be all the things you say, (unless you don't believe in the laws of science) essentially you haven't followed the logic through.
How do you expect to "See" spiritual entities exactly? Oh you mean you haven't looked, or you don't know how to detect such things. In that case how do you know you haven't "seen" them?
@keith1y {How do you expect to "See" spiritual entities exactly?}
Well your wording at 4:10 uses the word "saw", but then you seem to back up and move into "feelings" and then back into "met a spirit" then you say "show themselves in their true form" - so I suggest it is your wording at fault here that makes me think you are talking about visible entities.
I mean, wasn't God a burning bush after all?
How do you detect entities if they are mere feelings?
@MajorYum, the one thing you cannot logically say is that the source of all things does not exist, yet atheists insist on doing so, despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
@MajorYum since the natural order of things is to decay at every opportunity (e.g. 2nd law of thermodynamics), any move in the contrary direction has to be due to an intentional act. Laws of information, also point to God having a mind and intelligence.
@MajorYum scientifically the ultimate source of everything has to be there, and has to be intentional. There is a way to know God, talk to him about how you feel. Google for "4 keys to hearing Gods voice by Mark Virkler" I will send you a link to a video or two.
@MajorYum The ONLY logical answer is that the creation was made for the purposes of the creator. Therefore any value of life is related to the purpose the creator had in mind. Since the creator knows the purpose, you can ask him and receive a definitive answer, which is in no way confusing, in fact it is liberating to know what's what.
Your purpose is to learn to love sacrificially, and to have a genuine freewill choice, as to whether you want to be in right relationship with God eternally.
@MajorYum I heard God speak to me once 18 years ago, and atheism has no explanation apart from calling me nuts which is quite rude and makes no attempt to explain the coherence of the phenomena and its effect.
Put numbers to it, any materialistic attempt to put value on anything, the ultimate value is actually demonstrably 0. Any time any atheist makes any comparative statement of value it is not explainable or justifiable by his world view. Why are you alive? What value does life have?
The universe is infinite and eternal. Your logic is excluding is theory and assuming there must've been a creator of the universe. But dismisses the logical method you used to dismiss it, to ignore the question then "then who created the creator". And I would like to point out, that it makes no sense that it would be a reasonable assertion that god is a "he", has human petty emotions, has never demonstrated himself at all as he did supposedly to moses, yet that doesnt bother you. Whatever
@splicedenergy according to Hawkins the universe is neither infinite nor is it eternal.So back to the drawing board for you. The uncreated eternal and infinite creator, does not need a creator by definition. He created us in his image, so we and our emotions reflect his nature.You got it around the wrong way. He has demonstrated himself many times, including to myself personally. So far you are wrong on all counts.
you also have no basis for purpose or morality just because you say its god, you need ro show this and anyways, i dont know why im bothering, you are a closeminded fool, just like ALL christians
@blazereef I was an atheist until the age of 23, hence I reject your accusation that I am closed minded. I think your apparent willingness to insult me should cause you to question your basis for lack of morals?
You sent me a PM which, among other things, indicates that you are a faith healer. This disgusts me. Either you are a charlatan or deluded. Either way, you are preventing people from getting actual help. Please stop.
@Antifides rubbish, there is no faith healing in those emails at all. The videos demonstrate what happens when someone who is believing a lie, has a realisation of the truth in response to prayer. You can do this in the bath on your own if you like with or without prayer. There is no blind faith in this process at all, since it has been shown to be at least 90% reliable over 10 years.
@Antifides people tend to come to me AFTER they have tried all other avenues, which do not work. Google for "rape trauma" and see what help/hope is offered and what levels of success are expected. What is the official prognosis of genuine recovery for someone with Schizophrenia, SAD, or OCD. I expect and see 100% recovery. I don't see why anyone who does not see people fully recover can be qualified to comment or even practice.
Who are you to make the spurious claim that the universe began to exist? Scientists don't know what happened before fraction of a second after the Big Bang. So, there's absolutely no way you can assert you know that the universe began to exist. If your God can be forever, why can't the universe?
@Antifides the 2nd law of thermodynamics, indicates that EVERY process within the universe contributes to its overall inevitable decay. Therefore there is NO process within the physicality of the universe capable of initiating things, or bouncing things back from a previous state. The 2nd law in principle transcends physical dimensions too. Latest proposal (horizon bbc last week) is that the universe started as, and I quote, "a wave". In Scripture God creates by his Word speaking it into being.
...so Moses got there first, (scripture is a collection of evidence too) he told us that when the Logos of God speaks from his dimension, light is the first result which emerges as the physical stuff we see (i.e. the universe). What does the "speech" of a pandimensional supreme being look like? Some kind of nD wave perhaps?
Ok that accounts for the origin of matter/energy, what about the origin of information?Coherent information always ultimately originates from an intelligent creative mind.
... i.e. the initial wave cannot have been a simple sin wave or random whitenoise. It must have contained the blue-print of the universe, i.e. it contains coherent data, the selection of precise cosmological parameters, template of the laws of nature, the design of the periodic table, the design of water, etc etc. Also, if with his first breath a universe generating wave is the result. There is no reason why there should not be 6 examples of "speaking" things into being plus a well deserved rest
The principles of conservation and entropy apply everywhere even across a universe of universes, you cant just open a new universe and abandon common sense. You say that the cause of the universe is not necessarily bound by the laws of our universe, but I thought you were arguing against Gods existence. The definition of God is "the ultimate source of all things which is not bound by the laws of our universe".
@keith1y "Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen." - Albert Einstein
I pay as little heed as I can to common sense.
We got the laws of thermodynamics from our universe, we don't have any idea what laws govern outside our universe.
I don't care where an idea is from. Isaac Newton believed in God and alchemy, both of which I consider nonsense. Regardless, his ideas and observations about gravity were quite good.
@Antifides the principle that you can't get a cup of hot water and a cup of cold water out of a cup of warm water stands whichever universe(s) you are in, unless someone decides to switch on the kettle, adding energy.
Deciding requires mind, consciousness, motive. However you trust your worldview and life to some law breaking (supernatural) entity outside of our universe the only property of which you know is your assumption that "it" cant be mindful.
@Antifides I can and I do, because I have met Jesus and he said it was him. All his claims are logically consistent, with the logically necessary attributes of the ultimate, mindful source of all things., who decided to create this universe for a specific reason. Having taken notes on over 2500 occasions when people have heard him speak, you get to know what he is like, and whether he can be trusted.
@keith1y I wonder how many Hindus think Krishna speaks to them. I wonder how many ancient Greeks thought Hermes spoke to them. I wonder how many other religions have a deity that personally spoke to many of their followers.
@Antifides many of them have personal spiritual experiences that's the whole point, remember Mo'hd says he met an "angel". Please watch my video again, spiritual experiences do happen, given some understanding of cause and effect in the spiritual realm is possible,you can evaluate such experiences.The Bible actually teaches how to check that an angel, or the source of a dream or vision is genuine, and Mo'md didn't do this, not many people do.Being God is a tough act to live up to= ultimate etc.
@Antifides The spiritual dimension, encountered by some in clear visions, contains entities which pictorially represent emotions, and other metaphysical concepts. Looking at this the other way around, entities which exist in the spiritual dimension, may be felt in the here and now. Some are more sensitive that others. It gets interesting when you find that these entities have a will, intelligence, and can hold up a coherent conversation.
@keith1y Regarding the scientific portion of our discussion, I'm no geologist, but I gather that talkorigins has refutations for both your "evidences."
"The spiritual dimension, encountered by some..." And there ends our conversation, because I can no longer take you seriously.
this dudes an idiot how can u say u the atheist is rediculous? christians view is a narrow minded way of living not a broad way? an uncreated creator source? hes saying we hope theres a god an ultimate creator, the atheist is saying dude you have no idea just like i have no idea. yes scatter the cards thats just as good as picking a religion cuz u gunna get the same result .....nothing,any of youseen god?jesus?moses? me either and never heard a peep out of any of em till i do i just say who dat
the argument is the same all the time, christians all go back to the bible and quote it, now that being said ,the bible says the earth was made 6000 yrs ago in 6 days right? how do you explain 4.5 billion year old rocks found in deserts? Or how about Niagra falls being 10000 yrs OLD? All these things have been proven by scientist but nothing has been proven from the bible @keith1y is right Science is the answer and will be the answer cuz religion is just comfort for the mind to give people peace
@luked1211 I didn't quote the bible once. The dates you quote depend upon chains of assumptions, which cannot be verified = bad science. I can do better, given the single assumption that radioactive decay of C-14 over "short" periods follows an exponential decay with a half life of 5730 years. How much C-14 would you expect to find in any sample of Diamond formed within the earths crust? If the earth is 4.5bn years old the answer should be Zero. It isn't, therefore 4.5bn years = fail.
@Antifides please don't tell me what I say. I am asking the same question "how indeed did it get there", because in fact it is there. The difference between you and me is that as an engineer I expect science to be built on minimal assumptions and observable facts. I don't believe in fairytales of obscure mathematics (96% of the universe is missing! yeah right) or the engineering ability of chance + lots of time. Evidence #2 against 4.2bn year old earth= presence of helium in zirconium crystals.
Unfortunately, what you call spiritual experiences aren't going to be taken seriously by a lot of people simply because they aren't individually evaluable. You may have some supernatural experience, but without the necessary evidence you will certainly not convince a smart person capable of critical thought. Gullible people, maybe, but thats as much as you'll get, which shouldn't be intellectually satisfying, unless you have one of the 398457238495 churches that raise funds for their own.
@hellhammerz666 you can evaluate any experience within a framework of analysis. In my experience enabling encounters with God is repeatable, and lends itself to scientific enquirey.
@keith1y Then why is it so had to present such analysis to people who haven't had your same experiences? Of course, i could tell you last night i dreamed about a killer pie and his gang of angry pickles. You may believe i dreamed that, but i doubt you would consider my dream to be real in any way, right? The problem with these experiences is that they are personal and you can't really proof they are real with a conventional scientific analysis, since they aren't transmittable to another person.
@hellhammerz666 if 10 people dreamed of angry pickles you then have data which can be analyzed. The first observation of any phenomena is subjective, as is your dream.
Ignoring personal experiences, when you do have tools for examining them, collating them, correlating features of them, and measuring features within them, is just being scientifically lazy.
@keith1y True. However, can you actually give an example about 10 people dreaming the exact same thing about angry pickles? What makes science work isn't that people have similar experiences, but that those experiences give pretty much the same feedback to them, and are replicable by anyone, not just people with special giftss . For instance, anyone can throw an apple up and they will see it fall, to test gravity like Newton did.
@keith1y There relies the fundamental flaw of religion. The so called experiences involved in religious misticism aren't replicable as a scientific experiment, thus rendering them unprovable. It would be like me saying i saw the Loch Ness monster but i didn't have a videocam to film the evidence to present to other people. Without the necessary evidence to actually convince someone about my sighting, i wouldn't expect them to believe me, and even laugh at me.
@hellhammerz666 I agree repeatability is the key to bringing things into the arena for scientific study. For example I use a repeatable process which works for curing phobias, I repeated it 102 times on one person, curing 102 phobias.
We have two interesting differences to your loch ness analog. One your nessie is not callable on demand, and no footprints are left behind. We have both repeatable phenomena on demand, and lasting artefacts which can be measured.
@keith1y Nessie and god aren't that different. Miracles don't happen on demand, in the same way nessie won't come to the shore if you call him. Mundane coincidences that happen to fit a person's needs aren't much of a miracle. If we could see for instance a guy growing up a severed limb, i would admit you had a point, but we don't see that kind of thing ever.
@hellhammerz666 why do you suppose that someone with an interest in science scientist (i.e. me) would stop using a scientific approach when it comes to "trust" in God (faith is incorrect translation, and blind faith was never on the table). As far as I am concerned miracles aka God speaking is repeatable on demand, all you have to do is ask.
Artefact, any measured negative emotion changing to peace and calm, as a result of a vision, or word which results in a fresh perspective or insight.
@keith1y Trust me, i used to "ask", and nothing happened. I must admit i was never a very religious person, but somehow clinging to the cozy feeling of a higher power taking care of me seemed alright. Eventually, the more i asked, the less i saw any sort of evidence for this guy. Its why i'm an atheist. I have absolutely no reasons to believe all the religious stuff is real. It's not even a matter of being angry at god, because it would be childish to be mad at something i don't think exists.
@hellhammerz666 ah ha, when you asked, something did happen every time, however whatever it was that happened, you failed to realize that it is the first word in a conversation. Usually the first thing that happens is a feeling, or a memory that you dismiss because you are busy trying to get an answer from God, the thing you most readily dismiss as not being from God is usually the first word in the conversation which will lead to the context in which the answer when it comes will apply.
@keith1y Can you prove this feeling you describe comes from a god? I may as well assert this first feeling came from a magic midget bouncing on your head. This is one of the problems i find with theist mindsets. They think they have some sort of magic power that allows them to talk to their personal god. Under that scenario, it's impossible to prove or disprove them, hence the very typical "you can't disprove god" position many theists take when his existence is questioned.
@keith1y What they overlook, though, is the fact that the burden of proof is on them to provide evidence of their positive claim (god exists), and decide to turn around the table pretending the burden of proof lies on the unbeliever for not believing their fantastic claim. If i told you the magic midget is bouncing on your head, but he's so light you won't even feel it, would i need to provide proof to convince you? Or would you have to proof he isn't actually there to not believe me?
@hellhammerz666 sorry but logic is self-evident, do I have the burden of proof to prove logic exists before I use it. Self evident things do not require the burden of proof. Since the source of all things logically HAS to be there why is the burden of proof mine? The fantastic claim is the one that says the 2nd law breaks down. Before darwin, God was self evident. The burden of proof is with you to prove that he was correct, but the maths for that doesn't work.
@keith1y That's precisely the problem. Your god is NOT evident. If it was, there wouldn't be thousands of religions spread throughout the history of mankind, each one claiming their personal god(s) is(are) the true one(s). If an ancient greek citizen somehow managed to step into our time and told you zeus was the lord of gods, would you believe him? If a viking broke into your house claiming oden would reward him for his conquest, would you believe him?
@keith1y In the same way you would most likely doubt about other religions' gods, i see your god as something that hasn't been proven, and is therefore an uncertainty. Richard Dawkins has stated people are atheists towards most gods, but atheists just go one god further. In the end, none of them has even been proven real. What you are doing by assuming yours is evident is an argument from ignorance:" I can't think of a better explaination for the universe, therefore, god did it!".
@keith1y The typical problem with darwinian evolution, is that it directly took out gods out of the equation of how the species developwed, hence the heavy opposition to it from creationist groups. However, no matter how much opposition it may have from religious people, it has been extensively proven beyond reasonable doubt, and provides a way more solid explaination than the cryptic bronze-age myths of the religious.
@hellhammerz666 "it directly took gods out" only applies if it is true, a big iff. You have no mechanism for creation of matter, you dont even know what matter it, no mech. for creation of information, no mechanism for biogenises, and not enough time or populations or enough generations for any mammal to evolve anything, no positive innovations have ever been observed. There is NO proof, the numbers don't add up. Conjecture built on conjecture is not science, its embarrasing.
@keith1y True, there's no way to observe the origin of the universe. That's precisely why the right answer to the big question is simply "i don't know". The fact that you don't know how that specific event took place doesn't mean you can simply snap your personal god in the equation and pretend it's true. Ancient cultures did it with natural phenomena, and later we found how reality actually worked. Take the example of lightning: Greeks thought it was Zeus, vikings thought it was Thor's power.
@hellhammerz we are going in circles.The starting point is the characteristics that the ultimate source absolutely must have. It must be logical, coherent,real, non-physical,It must be eternal,it must be capable of "containing" the universe,it must have more energy than or be an infinite source of energy, it must be capable of directing and ordering things contrary to the 2nd law. It must be intelligent(all information comes from intelligence),it must be definitive in all fields e.g. justice.
@keith1y I can understand and share the belief that everything needs a first cause. What i'm objecting to is the positive claim that it has to be your personal god, or any other god. What i'm saying is that even though this question exists, we don't have the answer for it yet, therefore "i don't know" is the only honest answer untill this can be properly explained without the need of ununderstandable, unprovable, comforting, supernatural arguments to be accepted by blind faith.
@hellhammerz666 Of course we have an answer, the answer is that "The Ultimate Source and First Cause" is God by definition. You can pray to "The Ultimate Source" if you wish, that will work, and as you pray ask for more insight which builds on what you already know. When someone says they met the one who says "hello I am The Ultimate Source and First Cause" he at least earns a hearing. Your problem is you are not prepared to give ANY source a hearing, let alone the one who says he is the "I AM".
@keith1y We are indeed running in cricles here, aren't we? The problem here is you have problems accepting we don't possess the necessary knowledge to give a good explaination for the origins of the universe. Assuming from the get go there's a first cause only makes the problem a step more complex, bringing to the table the following question: Who was behind the first cause? You can go undefinitely asking this infinite times, and it would never be satisfied.
@hellhammerz666 I fully accept that "We" can't guess the origin of the universe, therefore I don't just give up. Since you know the cause of the universe is NOT measurable by physical means, to say it is not findable is just lazy. Its not that you don't know you haven't even looked, and by looked I mean you have to ask someone who knows where to look. I continued looking in the logical place.
No you cant go on indefinitely, because the first cause must be uncaused by definition.
@StateofHead completely incorrect. As a judeo/christian we have a superset of concepts, religious and scientific with which to understand the others. Furthermore I have far more evidence than all the others put together. I was an atheist until the age of 23, and having MET Jesus have never looked back.
keith1y 3 weeks ago
Well you missed the point didn't you. Let's pose the question this way: All religions have their gods/beliefs, supported by their scripture and devout followers (who have sincere faith). What additional evidence do you have, that other religions don't, that proves Christianity is the truth? NONE. All religions have the same "bag of tricks" and are all indistinguishable to the enlightened. You actually are an atheist to all those other religions, other fellow atheists just went one god further.
StateOfHead 1 month ago
The christian community of counsellors and psychologists has within it, documented in many papers and books the technical knowledge for the cure of all mental illnesses that I know of. I have personally witnessed the majority of mental health problems healed through technical know how learned through a christian perspective on reality.
Naturalistic science on the other hand has been able to offer very little in the way of cures in this field. Butchery yes (ECT Lobotomies), cures no.
keith1y 3 months ago
So you asked for biblically derived observtn, that would not be scientific. In science observations come first, not assumptions. So... I observed a friend who hears a voice swear at her in her head out of the blue. The biblical explanation is that it is a demon, it can be conversed with & removed. After the removal, the voice problem went away. Science also requires repetition to learn cause and effect principles. So repeated the above 1000 times. Conclusion, science is ignoring lots of reality.
keith1y 3 months ago
@keith1y I see your mind is an erratic jumble of confused tautologies. The only biblical "observation" you provided was a case of demon possession. I would think, at your age, you'd be ashamed to make the idiotic assertion of demons. You're clearly a backward sub-intellect with no grasp of the real world.
fdasherv 3 months ago
@fdasherv ad-hominem attacks are not a scientific argument.
I have thousands of documented observations, you have a dismissive approach. You should be ashamed to call yourself scientific with such a blinkered view of the world, and a shameful attitude to someone who doesn't agree with you. It's pathetic.
keith1y 3 months ago
@keith1y Yup, you got me! Demonic possessions, talking snakes, virgin births, invisible overlords, dinosaurs on a boat, angel-fuelled raging bears, and other magical hoo-doo. That's right, I dismiss it all outright. Why? For 3000 years not a single supernatural claim has ever been shown to be true. In this supposedly demon-infested world, why am I untroubled by these bogiemen behind every facade of reality? Because mine is not the mind of a fearful child. Dude, you're middle aged. Grow up.
fdasherv 3 months ago
@fdasherv now its straw men! Do you know any science?
All real things are natural,God is real,therefore God is natural. Everything you mention has various interpretations, for example there is no mention of a talking snake,that is an interpretation of an ancient text which happens to be a mis-interpretation.
What you are showing is an inability to think for yourself,spouting rhetoric you saw on the internet. It really is not
necessary,because you can meet God if you want to, he's cool
keith1y 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@keith1y "All real things are natural,God is real,therefore God is natural."
Great, maybe he wouldn't mind being studied and questioned.
"you can meet God if you want to, he's cool"
Great, you set that up. Maybe he wouldn't mind being studied and questioned.
fdasherv 3 months ago
@fdasherv also there was no tautology. It was ONE observation of many. The biblical worldview makes for a far better and more useful understanding of the world.
In your world view you cannot give an objective valued reason for anything at all, even answering this post. Everything, every opinion according to your world view is subjective. What a joke, how do you expect to do science with that constraint?
keith1y 3 months ago
Really? Christianity gives you a broader understanding of reality than science? Please, enlighten us with a few of your biblically derived observations.
fdasherv 3 months ago
@fdasherv science cannot answer the question Why? Engineering can but science can't. In engineering principles are far more effective. Normally you ask the guy that made it why he made it, and how to fix it. Engineers also don't settle for conjecture and guesses. What you don't realise is how much of what you call science is actually guess work dressed up. Don't forget science is supposed to explain things, but most of mainstream science leaves more questions. I like knowing how things work.
keith1y 3 months ago
@fdasherv materialistic science ignores non-physical things. Every decision you make in your life is based upon non-physical things, logic emotions, loves and values weighing up options. Materialistic naturalistic science can't help you with any of that, let alone help you with understanding it. It is totally useless for understanding "reality" in a practical sense. I include in reality non-physical things which make up more important slice of reality as concerns your day to day life.
keith1y 3 months ago
@Lan5in6 "almost every single time?" I said that because I was being honest, sometimes the person is not interested, leaves before the process reaches its conclusion, is too upset to be in the necessary reflective mood, or is too drunk.
keith1y 4 months ago
You're an idiot. This is a statement that can be backed up with factual evidence, such as this video you have made. Saying Christianity is the one true religion because of statements taken from the Bible is some pretty fucked up chicken and egg logic. This shouldn't have to be pointed out to you.
Lan5in6 4 months ago
@Lan5in6 I did not do what you accuse me of.
I derived logical necessary characteristics of God from the Laws of physics, that he must be an ultimate source, and must be uncreated. Then I looked to scriptures of all religions to see if the gods they describe match the ultimateness of God that science requires. The Bible is a compilation of all the good historical evidence we have of this Ultimate God. It is not the only one, the Chinese have a description of ShangDi in their border ceremony.
keith1y 4 months ago
@keith1y Talking out of your arse again. Stephen Hawkins says the Universe can have originated because of the laws of physics, and no God is needed during the process. Religion is a fairy tale. I'll think I'll take his word over yours. Real physicists like Hawkins, Feynman, Sagan, Einstein would laugh at your God derived from physics argument. Newton might agree, but he lived 200 years before Darwin so he's excused.
Lan5in6 4 months ago
@Lan5in6 anyone who does not believe that "the 2nd Law of thermodynamics is universal" is not a real physicist, no matter what their name.Appeal to authority is not a valid form of argument, not as bad as your excellent ad hominem attacks but nevertheless you concede again that you are unable to make your own points.
Logically speaking those you quote are merely re-expressing their a priori assumptions,they are presenting their religious position,not a scientific one.It's called self-delusion.
keith1y 4 months ago
@keith1y I appologise for using the authority argument, but I know these scientists weren't in the habit of using them themselves, and have a deep understanding of physics far beyond yours, this isn't proof they are right but you should be cautious if you think you have arrived at the existence of god logically, when they have not. Watch Feynman on UFO's, he explains why saying something improbable doesn'exist despite lack of proof, is the correct scientific position
Lan5in6 4 months ago
@Lan5in6 if an atheist's assumptions dictate his conclusions nothing has been learned about the actual truth. A theoretical-theists different assumptions lead to different conclusions, but still no one is any the wiser as to the truth.
If either breaks the rules of their own world view, they commit intellectual suicide, denying the 2nd law, strike 1, being unable to put any objective value to anything,strike 2,living as if things have value when they have none in that world view, strike 3 - out
keith1y 4 months ago
@keith1y Intellectual suicide is when you give up trying to understand the world and say "God did it" Nothing much can ever be said about the actual truth of anything, since there is no way of proving for example we are not in the matrix. However, You will be the one commiting "Actual suicide" if you neglect the law of Gravity for being based on observations asssumed to be correct, and jump off a bridge you could be imagining.
Lan5in6 4 months ago
@Lan5in6 pathetic naive rhetoric. I have not stopped trying to understand the world, the question "What exactly did God do, how and why did he do it?" is far more engaging than "what did Nothing do to create everything for no reason".
Objectively according to atheism understanding the world is a waste of time, we all die & the universe is tending towards heat death. It makes no difference at all in the long run.
Since God is real, I can ask him how and why. Science can't answer that, booooring.
keith1y 4 months ago
@Lan5in6 And since you asked. How? God said that He spoke things into being. Everything he speaks happens. Mathematicians have told us that the universe started as a multidimensional wave. Your voice is a sound wave, Gods voice is a multidimensional wave, known in scripture as the Logos, or "Gods creative Word".
The theologians got there first by a couple of thousand years.
keith1y 4 months ago
@Lan5in6 Why? Love!
An eternal powerful sentient being would be lonely on his own, in fact it would literally be hell!
The physicality of the universe, space, time, biology etc., was made so that we can exist independent of God's presence. This gives us total freedom to make an honest choice. When we see Love in action, do we respond positively to it or not, there is no coercion at all
Jesus died on the cross out of total Love for YOU, take it or leave it. The universe was made for the CROSS
keith1y 4 months ago
@Lan5in6 The whole universe is a stage for a love story.Jesus showed us how much he loves you by sacrificing himself to save your life.If you respond to this act of love & love Jesus back,then he will point out to you that you too are an eternal being.But to survive the rigors of eternity you need a pure heart,which God can give you if you ask for it. All your pain,hurt,anger, fear, and weakness is transferred to Jesus,leaving you clean to be filled with Gods Love.Then you can cope with eternity
keith1y 4 months ago
@Lan5in6 "Nothing much can ever be said about the actual truth" that's what I call giving up. The Best and Only way to know the ACTUAL truth is to ask Jesus, the creator, the only person who has ever claimed to BE the creator and the personification of The Truth and of Wisdom. He is the WORD of God, He was the initial multidimensional wave mathematicians tell us about. (see BBC Horizon on pre-universe physics)
"The truth shall set you free, and whoever the son sets free shall be free indeed."
keith1y 4 months ago
@keith1y Don't you think you should be a bit more sceptical? anyone can make those claims. There isn;t any evidence he did anything to back up those claims. yet you are sceptical about sciience because you question observation? That is a foolish and naive position. Extremely biassed and unscientific. You need to accept the fact the idea of God isn't rational, otherwise we'd wouldn't have this debate. Do you think God would survive as a scientific Hypothesis?
Lan5in6 4 months ago
@Lan5in6 How skeptical do you want me to be, I was an atheist for 23 years! Since then I have put it to the test.
Almost every single time I have prayed for someone in the past 10 years they have heard God for themselves and have received measurable healing as a result.
God is real, so of course he survives investigation with science, IF and ONLY IF science does not assume he is not there.
keith1y 4 months ago
@keith1y almost every single time? so there a times it doesn't work? what are you proving? In the harvard experiment patients died more often when prayed for. I'm guessing it has no effect. if it did physical laws would have to be broken! Why would it matter if the people running experiments are atheist? i for one am will find god more credible if evidence is brought forward, but not before.
Lan5in6 4 months ago
@Lan5in6 You asked for it. See your inbox!
keith1y 4 months ago
@Lan5in6 perhaps you should know that I was an atheist for 23 years.
This means that I had a model, I had my own a priori assumptions upon which I based my atheism, but in the light of events, science, philosophy and experience, when this was challenged by the facts, and by God, the logic of atheism crumbled into dust.
The atheist has no objective reason for doing anything, if you reply to this, just by that act, you demonstrate that your own world view is false.
keith1y 4 months ago
@keith1y True there probably isn't. Won't stop me tho. You think your on God's mission? I can make up my own reason for living, your doing it as well even if you haven' realised. Well actually you haven't, you accepted something other people have made up to be the objective truth.
Lan5in6 4 months ago
@Lan5in6 When you make up your own reason for living, that is an admission of complicit self-delusion. Your own reason for living is purely a product of your own reasoning, not a satisfying basis for living.
Actually I have not accepted something other people made up to be objective truth. I converted form atheism when God, aka. Jesus spoke to me directly and personally. I accepted Him, not religion, not even the Bible.
keith1y 4 months ago
@keith1y the atheist is out in 3 strikes,but we still don't know exactly what the truth is. The theoretical-theist is only offering a theory. What you need to find the truth is someone with ACTUAL experience which you are so quick to deny,even though it is your only hope of finding the ACTUAL truth, not dictated by a priori assumptions.
I have my own experiences, I met Jesus, I have documented hundreds of encounters.Heidi Baker, had a vision of Jesus which led her to adopt thousands of orphans.
keith1y 4 months ago
@quaffly simple, I met jesus - I should explain, he IS the creator. When you act "in his name" as his ambassador, demons must obey. I understand the laws of thermodynamics according to themselves they are laws. You do not get something from nothing. God is not nothing, granted he is non-physical, but he is not nothing.
Please keep your comments objective, not subjective. Every comment you make needs a measure of objective value, what actual difference does it make in your world view.
keith1y 9 months ago
@keith1y
"Atheism has no means to appreciate the reality of anyone's spiritual experiences at all, let alone categorize and understand them."
yes we do, because as an atheist, i've had, and have, spiritual experiences. i just don't believe they originate from a god. it's just the beauty of an intelligent, and aware existence, as a human being.
itzahazylife 8 months ago
@itzahazylife, so do tell, what kind of spiritual experiences have you had, lets analyse them.
keith1y 8 months ago
@keith1y
it's hard to explain, as it's subjective..moments of what some call grace. being reduced to tears merely reflecting on reality. just very rare, vivid, powerful experiences.
i can already see where this is going though..i don't believe in god. so, what i experienced, couldn't have been meaningful, or spiritual, right?..it couldn't have been the same as what you've experienced.
itzahazylife 8 months ago
@itzahazylife tearful moments can simply be an emotional association to a past memory. I have found the same origin for specific headaches, migraines, and sickness.
The real questions are 1) what changed? 1a) Intellectually - What new information did you get that you did not know already? 1b) Emotionally - What was the detailed effect on the emotional beliefs of the experiential mind
2) What specific insights on the nature of 'things' did you get clarity on.
Your approach is lacking rigour.
keith1y 8 months ago
@keith1y
i remember the first time i learned that the elements that compose human beings, are created in the core of stars, and then spread throughout the universe via supernova explosions, and that every atom in our bodies came from a bunch of different stars..i realized i was the universe conscious of itself. i am the universe. u are the universe. and the universe is us. a tremendous feeling came over me..there's no explaining it.
itzahazylife 8 months ago
@itzahazylife "the elements that compose human beings, are created in the core of stars, and then spread throughout the universe via supernova explosions"
What a load of tosh, the consensus view makes no sense. Look at the distances involved, how does a supernova explosion reach the next star to spread its wares. The universe is too sparse for this to work. Instead google "Alfvén Triumphs Again"
The universe is not conscious, your warm fuzzy feeling is caused by a spirit, selling you a lie.
keith1y 7 months ago
@keith1y
pure scientific ignorance..it's a well known fact in cosmology that all of the life-bearing elements are created in the core of stars via stellar nucleosynthesis. we have direct evidence of this. so, since we know where and how these elements and molecules are created, then comes the question how do they get spread into the universe?..do supernova explosions eject them at very high speeds into space, or does god grab his jar of elements and sprinkle them onto planets?..hmm i wonder.
itzahazylife 7 months ago
@itzahazylife that "fact of cosmology" you cite is merely a guess, no one has ever looked inside a supernova to see. I merely pointed out the illogical nature of that guess. The "science" you quote is actually mathematical models. In real life however > 99% of matter in the universe is plasma, the Electric Universe Hypothesis, based upon understanding the properties of plasma, does a far better job of explaining things, including the creation of heavy elements, as stars are formed in a z-pinch..
keith1y 7 months ago
"do supernova explosions eject them at very high speeds into space"
Please think logically, so what slows them down in space to the point where they collect into a whole sun and planets? At what speeds are they traveling and how long would it take to reach anything else? What is the probability of them hitting anything in the emptiness that is space.
I gave you the means to find an article which gives a plausible explanation.
keith1y 7 months ago
@keith1y
rocky planets form FROM the expelled heavier elements of supernova explosions. the building blocks of life and planets first originate inside of stars via stellar nucleosynthesis. then the star explodes and releases all of those heavy elements and organic molecules into space..planets form from that gas and dust. life then forms on the planets that contain the right elements, molecules and temperature. so, in essence, supernova explosions seed the cosmos with the stuff of life.
itzahazylife 7 months ago
@keith1y
but, are u really talking to god by reading what is supposedly his word?..maybe if your head wasn't buried so far up your ass, you'd realize that you're only reading words, and that the "conversation" taking place is actually an illusion, and that the only one you're actually having a conversation with is yourself..but, since u want so badly for it to be god, it becomes god..at which point anyone with an ounce of reason shakes their head and laughs.
itzahazylife 7 months ago
@itzahazylife "since u want so badly for it to be god, it becomes god..at which point anyone with an ounce of reason shakes their head and laughs."
Actually I would rather not hear God on occasion, because usually he wants me to do something, that is either hard to do, or I don't want to do it, because I am stubborn like that.
One day God even told me that he would "tell me a joke later that day"... and he did, the joke was personal to me, but it did make me laugh.
keith1y 7 months ago
@keith1y
1)we know atoms attract and bond by themselves to form molecules, which form chains and compounds, which then form cells. (a process of self assembly and emergent complexity) 2)we know that we consist of the same elements and molecules we find on earth and in space 3)we know that these elements and molecules are created in stars, and dispersed into space. 4) so, we conclude that life originates on the right planets following the same process of self assembly over a very long time.
itzahazylife 7 months ago
@keith1y
God could very well be behind the formation of the laws of physics. it could be part of his design. he could have designed the laws of physics to result in everything we see. i personally don't believe that. i believe the laws of physics are caused by some other type of natural phenomenon. and it'd make God out to be deceiving, since he would be using unintelligent processes to intelligently design.
itzahazylife 7 months ago
@quaffly simple, I met jesus
keith1y 9 months ago
The previous video is not an actual "argument for atheism" since that term is not in proper context but more "argument for anti-theism." Atheism does not believe or recognize in a God or Gods due to lack of evidence, nothing more. Faith by definition means "belief without proof" which religion is based. Your views are assumes not proven in any way whatsoever using blind assertion therefore invalid.
chrisinsocalif 10 months ago
@chrisinsocalif you are making up your own definition of faith, just like Dawkins does.Allow me to annihilate your straw man.No believer uses the word faith to mean blind faith.The Complete Jewish Bible translates the greek word in the new testament into "TRUST" When we use the word faith,we use it in the sense that you put repeated trust in the chair upon which you sit.I repeatedly pray for sufferers of PTSD, and I see the Lord Jesus heal them by speaking to them, daily repeatable over 10 yrs
keith1y 10 months ago
@keith1y Here are some excerpts from dictionaries: "Faith: belief that is not based on proof" OR" firm belief in something for which there is no proof." The definition is universal. Your response alone shows your delusion. Oh another thing, Intercessory Prayer does not make a different in the recovery of patients according to studies. Latest study showed those who were prayed for had higher incidents of complications. But of course you dont accept real data, you choose to stay deluded.
chrisinsocalif 10 months ago
@chrisinsocalif the word in scripture is in GREEK, go look that up. It means fidelity, trust in a reliable person. What kind of proof do you demand from your spouse/gf of their affections. Do you even know what intercessory prayer is?What they studied is not what the bible says to do in case of sickness. They can't read! I have never done anything on blind faith, sure if you call those you disagree with idiots you can ensure you will never find the truth.
keith1y 10 months ago
what you said isn't that true. i have grown up in a jewish community, and it doesn't give broader views, it gives more narrow. and yes, judaism and christianity are just about the same except for different messiah's and different details. if you can disprove judaism, you can easily disprove Christianity. all you have really done is say that christianity is right, other religions aren't.
ebrowne369 10 months ago
@ebrowne369 the jewish community is stuffed full of superstition and ritual which gets in the way of you meeting God for real. Ironic since he told you first that God desired to tabernacle among us, and dwell with men.
btw as far as I understand it the old covenant is now canceled as far as God is concerned. The destruction of the temple in 70AD was kind of the nail in that coffin.
keith1y 10 months ago
@keith1y i grew up jewish, but am now an atheist. i really don't want to argue about which religion is better, but nonetheless they have the same beliefs and origins, but there has been discrimination over the slightest differences, like prophets, stories, etc. i can't argue about things like the temple and god leaving them behind, because i don't believe in any of it. this is all your opinion,and when you have faith in something, there is very little i can do to convince you without being rude
ebrowne369 10 months ago
@ebrowne369 there is nothing at all you can do to convince me,since I met Jesus many times in my own house,he taught me many useful things,including how to heal the most difficult mental illnesses.You are welcome to be as rude as you like,I take the David Berlinski view,the politeness is overrated.So allow me to mock you for believing that everything came from nothing & for being so shallow as to throw all your cultural history in the bin.If Moses met God and talked with him as a friend so can U
keith1y 10 months ago
@keith1y well first off that is retarded, how could god come from nothing/ and no, i never said it came from nothing, i just said i don't believe a mythical creator differently describes and misinterpreted by millions of religions could just create something out of nothing, which you agree with when you told me about creating something out of nothing. i didn't throw it in the bin, i still study the Torah and jewish perspectives and live in a kosher home. and i doubt that a dead guy talked to you
ebrowne369 10 months ago
@ebrowne369 I think you missed the point, Jesus did not die. As the first human to overcome death he makes a way for us to overcome death by identification with him. Jesus is also the Creator God. Doubt all you like, but it happened.
keith1y 10 months ago
@ebrowne369 there is an interface between the physical and the spiritual. That interface is YOU and ME. God works by filling our hearts with his love (being born form heaven), and then we become his hands and feet in the world.
keith1y 10 months ago
@ebrowne369 check the teachings of Christianity compared to judaism. Paul says "all things are permissible, not every thing is beneficial". Hardly seems more narrow!
keith1y 10 months ago
@ebrowne369 if it gives a broader or more a narrow perspective is different to person to person. doesnt it depend how u disporve 1 religion ? before u can say another one is false?
isjet 9 months ago
@isjet i personally believe they are all false. the don't explain things to me, and i can see no spiritual connection between humans and the lord as the bible, torah, quoran, etc. describe them.
ebrowne369 9 months ago
@ebrowne369 But I have witnessed the Lord heal people in deep emotional pain thousands of times. Follow me on twitter for periodic updates. On these occasions the healer identifies himself as Jesus, as the Father, as the God of the Bible.
keith1y 9 months ago
@keith1y i don't have twitter
ebrowne369 9 months ago
It's funny how you arrogantly assume that the "creator" is YOUR GOD, the one that revealed himself to Moses. All you did was prove his argument right. Even though other religions claim that THEIR god created the world, you dismiss those, and say that the law of thermodynamics proves it was YOUR god (which is where I stopped watching due to how ridiculously absurd that statement was.) Sorry buddy, but the law of thermodynamics doesn't prove your God nor anyone else's did a god damn thing.
TwoHandedSledge 10 months ago
You are not understanding the argument. The 2nd Law prooves that there has to be a source to all things, therefore any claim to be God has to pass that test. When you go looking at the gods available, only one makes that claim. Mohammed never claimed to have met god, so he only offers a second hand opinion.
keith1y 10 months ago
@keith1y actually, no religion meets the scientific worlds laws of physics. that is why so many scientists are atheists.
ebrowne369 10 months ago
@ebrowne369 your statement doesn't really make sense. The laws of physics exist. Therefore any world view which says it is limited to materialism must abide by those laws. Since I am not limited to materialism, I expect to find additional laws in operation in the non-material (and I do), but there is no need to contradict physical laws which apply only to the material. One might find additional laws at work at the interface between the material and the non-material, which scripture alludes to.
keith1y 10 months ago
@keith1y my statement did make sense. there are laws of physics, and most religions have gods that defy these laws, mainly because something must have created your creator, and also all of these tales of people flying and people surviving ovens go completely against biology and chemistry as well. also the story of the tower of babel completely goes against common history.
ebrowne369 10 months ago
@ebrowne369 look in the scripture, God does not defy laws of physics. How did the Red sea part? "A great wind blew up". See God works with the laws of physics, and why wouldn't he.
Why must something have created my creator? Only things which have a beginning need a creation. The ULTIMATE SOURCE of all things does not have a beginning by definition, and so neither does the creator.
The sooner you start thinking logically, the quicker you can meet God have a chat and we can all go home.
keith1y 10 months ago
@ebrowne369 also, in my video I use the scientific laws of physics as universal principles, which transcend physicality and as many universes as you like. The principle that you cannot get something from nothing should apply universally, even beyond physicality. The only logically valid way of looking at the universe is if it is a slice, glimpse or product of a greater reality of "everythingness". To say it came from nothingness defies everything we know about anything.
keith1y 10 months ago
@keith1y so bascially there is a physical section, and a spiritual section, and those sections can conflict with each other? this is just my opinion, but i don;t think that makes sense. also, something must have created the creater of the universe, because like you say, you can;t make something out of nothing, unless the creator isn't actually anything, but that defies the logic that we just have to live with.
ebrowne369 10 months ago
@TwoHandedSledge you might like to follow me on twitter to be kept up to date with things that God does in my life.
keith1y 10 months ago
You also need to consider your view on religion and Christianity would be very different, had you been born in a different country or in a different time frame. If you had been born in Saudi, you would currently be quoting the Koran and Allah would be your god
airwavesblue200 11 months ago
@airwavesblue200 possibly, but I started from the position of 22 years of atheism. Honest questioning got me here. Being born in saudi might have been a disadvantage if I were brainwashed by some other false teaching. One reason God hates religion, it gets in the way of people finding the truth. Jesus is the only man who ever lived who claimed to be The Truth. Islam doesn't offer any actual answers. Ask them if they go to heaven, they dont know,their god doesn't do or say anything, empty ritual.
keith1y 10 months ago
@keith1y brainwashed by some other false teaching, huh? Just another example of a biased Christian who refuses to believe that THEY TOO have been brainwashed by false teachings. Show me evidence that Jesus lived. Show me evidence that he rose from the dead. And do it without your fucking bible. Islam doesn't offer any actual answers? Neither does your Bible or YOUR religion, you hypocrite. Oh, and just so you know? Your god doesn't say or do anything either. Besides breed ignorance.
TwoHandedSledge 10 months ago
@TwoHandedSledge My God says things all the time, and he heals all the time in my experience. It doesn't look like you have read any of my previous comments to know my experiences of God doing things and saying are repeatable.
keith1y 10 months ago
Comment removed
airwavesblue200 11 months ago
Comment removed
airwavesblue200 11 months ago
I don'rt know if tour take on the cards carries much weight. For example if I believe in Zeus, I sort the religion cards based on whether he uses lightning, changes shape, rapes women, rules other gods and lives on top of a mountain. That fits with the idea of the gods being born from the titans, presumably the original creaters of the Universe now overthrown and/or destroyed. After all, even if there was a creator of the Universe, he or she might no longer be alive. How can we know?
geniusrepairman1 11 months ago
@geniusrepairman1 "he or she might no longer be alive. How can we know?"
First define alive.
The biblical definition of alive is to be in connection with God who is life, to exist without God is death.
keith1y 11 months ago
@keith1y I'm defining life in the usual sense we all know. If you breathe you are alive. If you are not breathing and are decomposing, you are definitely dead!
geniusrepairman1 11 months ago
@geniusrepairman1 "If you breathe you are alive. If you are not breathing" ridiculous to apply this concept of life to the necessary source of all things, which is outside of and transcends time and space. If I am not breathing, I am definitely not dead, my mind and spirit live on, I won't even notice the passing of my mortal body.
keith1y 11 months ago
@keith1y Can spirits hurt and kill eachother in the After World? I suppose they can in Hell. I just mean, how do you know the original creator of the universe could not have been killed by a pack of demons or godlings in the Spirit Universe?
geniusrepairman1 11 months ago
@geniusrepairman1 Hurt yes, kill no. When you see how small demons are, you will wonder how they managed to do anything. In this world they manifest as little more than evil thoughts. However if you believe those thoughts they are able to affect the world through you.
keith1y 11 months ago
@keith1y Ok, now I see.
geniusrepairman1 11 months ago
There are similarities between spiritual feelings and the feeling of God,which lead to a conclusion that you probably werent intending to make.Spiritual feelings are real; just as real as love, which numerous studies have shown they can be mapped to different patterns of brain activity. However the feeling of God does not indicate the existence of a separate being. One is an emotion,the other a hypothetical deity. God exists as a feeling in some peoples minds which they’ve decided to call “God”.
SmileSatanLovesU 1 year ago 6
@SmileSatanLovesU spiritual feelings don't talk, don't teach, don't make an argument, don't claim to the the creator. don't challenge you to behave better, etc etc.
keith1y 1 year ago
@SmileSatanLovesU God exists as a being with whom it is easy to converse with. In my experience more than 80% of people I pray for are able to hear God speak in a conherent manner. Check my website for case studies in the future
keith1y 11 months ago
@SmileSatanLovesU There are similarities between spiritual feelings and the feeling of God
You think? God is a sentient being, whenever people encounter God in scripture he speaks, in understandable language. He can have a conversation with you. Spiritual feelings cant talk.
keith1y 7 months ago
@keith1y
"whenever people encounter God in scripture he speaks, in understandable language. He can have a conversation with you. Spiritual feelings cant talk."
you're a whack job, plain and simple..of course someone will have an experience of being talked to if they are reading something someone else wrote lol..especially if the writer is supposedly the god who created u and who loves u..scripture is supposedly his word,so of course while reading scripture u will experience talking to god.
itzahazylife 7 months ago
@itzahazylife I never said I was reading anything. When God speaks to me I am usually washing up.
You appear to be missing the point, God is a real sentient, non-physical being, whose very nature is Love. He speaks to everyone regularly, if they are listening.
The easiest place to hear him is in the emotional place where you you are feeling most hurt and unloved, since that is where the encounter with God, and the truth he speaks will have the greatest healing effect.
keith1y 7 months ago
Spirits affect the mind, commonly through specific emotive destructive thoughts e.g suicidal thoughts.Further investigation may result in a vision
When people see visions they don't usually see them with their eyes they often have their eyes closed, yet they see clearly and can describe what they see in detail.A surprising number of people can express a visual representation of their feelings.Many visions are repeatable without the use of drugs or hypnosis and so can be investigated in detail
keith1y 1 year ago
Astrology also gives a framework for 'understanding the world'.
And assuming the Universe has a thing that caused the big bang does not imply that that thing is Omnipotent, All-Loving, Listens to prayers or appears as a burning bush.
It could simply be a fart from a metaphysical lizard-fairy that brought the universe into being.
I've never seen evidence of spiritual entities in their 'true form' - let alone a christian evocation of them. Where are they?
mindprism 1 year ago
@mindprism Your imaginary science defying, logic defying, quantum fluctuation did it all?
1) astrology is rubbish. 2) Actually the thing that caused the big bang does logically have to be all the things you say, (unless you don't believe in the laws of science) essentially you haven't followed the logic through.
How do you expect to "See" spiritual entities exactly? Oh you mean you haven't looked, or you don't know how to detect such things. In that case how do you know you haven't "seen" them?
keith1y 1 year ago
@keith1y {How do you expect to "See" spiritual entities exactly?}
Well your wording at 4:10 uses the word "saw", but then you seem to back up and move into "feelings" and then back into "met a spirit" then you say "show themselves in their true form" - so I suggest it is your wording at fault here that makes me think you are talking about visible entities.
I mean, wasn't God a burning bush after all?
How do you detect entities if they are mere feelings?
mindprism 1 year ago
@projectlevydelta No. Rather that they began to exist at the same time and that they are contingent on one another.
MajorYum 1 year ago
@MajorYum, the one thing you cannot logically say is that the source of all things does not exist, yet atheists insist on doing so, despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
keith1y 1 year ago
@MajorYum since the natural order of things is to decay at every opportunity (e.g. 2nd law of thermodynamics), any move in the contrary direction has to be due to an intentional act. Laws of information, also point to God having a mind and intelligence.
keith1y 1 year ago
@MajorYum scientifically the ultimate source of everything has to be there, and has to be intentional. There is a way to know God, talk to him about how you feel. Google for "4 keys to hearing Gods voice by Mark Virkler" I will send you a link to a video or two.
keith1y 1 year ago
@MajorYum The ONLY logical answer is that the creation was made for the purposes of the creator. Therefore any value of life is related to the purpose the creator had in mind. Since the creator knows the purpose, you can ask him and receive a definitive answer, which is in no way confusing, in fact it is liberating to know what's what.
Your purpose is to learn to love sacrificially, and to have a genuine freewill choice, as to whether you want to be in right relationship with God eternally.
keith1y 1 year ago
@MajorYum I heard God speak to me once 18 years ago, and atheism has no explanation apart from calling me nuts which is quite rude and makes no attempt to explain the coherence of the phenomena and its effect.
Put numbers to it, any materialistic attempt to put value on anything, the ultimate value is actually demonstrably 0. Any time any atheist makes any comparative statement of value it is not explainable or justifiable by his world view. Why are you alive? What value does life have?
keith1y 1 year ago
The universe is infinite and eternal. Your logic is excluding is theory and assuming there must've been a creator of the universe. But dismisses the logical method you used to dismiss it, to ignore the question then "then who created the creator". And I would like to point out, that it makes no sense that it would be a reasonable assertion that god is a "he", has human petty emotions, has never demonstrated himself at all as he did supposedly to moses, yet that doesnt bother you. Whatever
splicedenergy 1 year ago
@splicedenergy according to Hawkins the universe is neither infinite nor is it eternal.So back to the drawing board for you. The uncreated eternal and infinite creator, does not need a creator by definition. He created us in his image, so we and our emotions reflect his nature.You got it around the wrong way. He has demonstrated himself many times, including to myself personally. So far you are wrong on all counts.
keith1y 1 year ago
you also have no basis for purpose or morality just because you say its god, you need ro show this and anyways, i dont know why im bothering, you are a closeminded fool, just like ALL christians
blazereef 1 year ago
@blazereef I was an atheist until the age of 23, hence I reject your accusation that I am closed minded. I think your apparent willingness to insult me should cause you to question your basis for lack of morals?
keith1y 1 year ago
You sent me a PM which, among other things, indicates that you are a faith healer. This disgusts me. Either you are a charlatan or deluded. Either way, you are preventing people from getting actual help. Please stop.
Antifides 1 year ago
@Antifides rubbish, there is no faith healing in those emails at all. The videos demonstrate what happens when someone who is believing a lie, has a realisation of the truth in response to prayer. You can do this in the bath on your own if you like with or without prayer. There is no blind faith in this process at all, since it has been shown to be at least 90% reliable over 10 years.
keith1y 1 year ago
@Antifides people tend to come to me AFTER they have tried all other avenues, which do not work. Google for "rape trauma" and see what help/hope is offered and what levels of success are expected. What is the official prognosis of genuine recovery for someone with Schizophrenia, SAD, or OCD. I expect and see 100% recovery. I don't see why anyone who does not see people fully recover can be qualified to comment or even practice.
keith1y 1 year ago
Who are you to make the spurious claim that the universe began to exist? Scientists don't know what happened before fraction of a second after the Big Bang. So, there's absolutely no way you can assert you know that the universe began to exist. If your God can be forever, why can't the universe?
Antifides 1 year ago
@Antifides the 2nd law of thermodynamics, indicates that EVERY process within the universe contributes to its overall inevitable decay. Therefore there is NO process within the physicality of the universe capable of initiating things, or bouncing things back from a previous state. The 2nd law in principle transcends physical dimensions too. Latest proposal (horizon bbc last week) is that the universe started as, and I quote, "a wave". In Scripture God creates by his Word speaking it into being.
keith1y 1 year ago
...so Moses got there first, (scripture is a collection of evidence too) he told us that when the Logos of God speaks from his dimension, light is the first result which emerges as the physical stuff we see (i.e. the universe). What does the "speech" of a pandimensional supreme being look like? Some kind of nD wave perhaps?
Ok that accounts for the origin of matter/energy, what about the origin of information?Coherent information always ultimately originates from an intelligent creative mind.
keith1y 1 year ago
... i.e. the initial wave cannot have been a simple sin wave or random whitenoise. It must have contained the blue-print of the universe, i.e. it contains coherent data, the selection of precise cosmological parameters, template of the laws of nature, the design of the periodic table, the design of water, etc etc. Also, if with his first breath a universe generating wave is the result. There is no reason why there should not be 6 examples of "speaking" things into being plus a well deserved rest
keith1y 1 year ago
@keith1y What nonphysical dimensions are there?
The cause of the universe is not necessarily bound by the laws of our universe.
"Latest proposal is that the universe started as a wave."
Umm, I can propose that the universe started as a cucumber. I don't see what a proposal has to do with what is currently known.
Antifides 1 year ago
The principles of conservation and entropy apply everywhere even across a universe of universes, you cant just open a new universe and abandon common sense. You say that the cause of the universe is not necessarily bound by the laws of our universe, but I thought you were arguing against Gods existence. The definition of God is "the ultimate source of all things which is not bound by the laws of our universe".
Hey the wave idea is from you non-believing guys.
keith1y 1 year ago
@keith1y "Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen." - Albert Einstein
I pay as little heed as I can to common sense.
We got the laws of thermodynamics from our universe, we don't have any idea what laws govern outside our universe.
I don't care where an idea is from. Isaac Newton believed in God and alchemy, both of which I consider nonsense. Regardless, his ideas and observations about gravity were quite good.
Antifides 1 year ago
@Antifides the principle that you can't get a cup of hot water and a cup of cold water out of a cup of warm water stands whichever universe(s) you are in, unless someone decides to switch on the kettle, adding energy.
Deciding requires mind, consciousness, motive. However you trust your worldview and life to some law breaking (supernatural) entity outside of our universe the only property of which you know is your assumption that "it" cant be mindful.
We are mindful beings so why not "it"?
keith1y 1 year ago
@keith1y I made no claim to know what preceded the big bang, I only said you cannot make that claim.
Antifides 1 year ago
@Antifides I can and I do, because I have met Jesus and he said it was him. All his claims are logically consistent, with the logically necessary attributes of the ultimate, mindful source of all things., who decided to create this universe for a specific reason. Having taken notes on over 2500 occasions when people have heard him speak, you get to know what he is like, and whether he can be trusted.
keith1y 1 year ago
@keith1y I wonder how many Hindus think Krishna speaks to them. I wonder how many ancient Greeks thought Hermes spoke to them. I wonder how many other religions have a deity that personally spoke to many of their followers.
Antifides 1 year ago
@Antifides many of them have personal spiritual experiences that's the whole point, remember Mo'hd says he met an "angel". Please watch my video again, spiritual experiences do happen, given some understanding of cause and effect in the spiritual realm is possible,you can evaluate such experiences.The Bible actually teaches how to check that an angel, or the source of a dream or vision is genuine, and Mo'md didn't do this, not many people do.Being God is a tough act to live up to= ultimate etc.
keith1y 1 year ago
@Antifides quoting Einstein as an authority on common sense is hilarious.
keith1y 1 year ago
@Antifides The spiritual dimension, encountered by some in clear visions, contains entities which pictorially represent emotions, and other metaphysical concepts. Looking at this the other way around, entities which exist in the spiritual dimension, may be felt in the here and now. Some are more sensitive that others. It gets interesting when you find that these entities have a will, intelligence, and can hold up a coherent conversation.
keith1y 1 year ago
@keith1y Regarding the scientific portion of our discussion, I'm no geologist, but I gather that talkorigins has refutations for both your "evidences."
"The spiritual dimension, encountered by some..." And there ends our conversation, because I can no longer take you seriously.
Antifides 1 year ago
Being human brings the framework for understanding or judging purpose and issues of morality...
EquinoxOfTheGods 1 year ago
I lol'd
MrJ1234 1 year ago
this dudes an idiot how can u say u the atheist is rediculous? christians view is a narrow minded way of living not a broad way? an uncreated creator source? hes saying we hope theres a god an ultimate creator, the atheist is saying dude you have no idea just like i have no idea. yes scatter the cards thats just as good as picking a religion cuz u gunna get the same result .....nothing,any of youseen god?jesus?moses? me either and never heard a peep out of any of em till i do i just say who dat
luked1211 1 year ago
the argument is the same all the time, christians all go back to the bible and quote it, now that being said ,the bible says the earth was made 6000 yrs ago in 6 days right? how do you explain 4.5 billion year old rocks found in deserts? Or how about Niagra falls being 10000 yrs OLD? All these things have been proven by scientist but nothing has been proven from the bible @keith1y is right Science is the answer and will be the answer cuz religion is just comfort for the mind to give people peace
luked1211 1 year ago
@luked1211 I didn't quote the bible once. The dates you quote depend upon chains of assumptions, which cannot be verified = bad science. I can do better, given the single assumption that radioactive decay of C-14 over "short" periods follows an exponential decay with a half life of 5730 years. How much C-14 would you expect to find in any sample of Diamond formed within the earths crust? If the earth is 4.5bn years old the answer should be Zero. It isn't, therefore 4.5bn years = fail.
keith1y 1 year ago
@keith1y When you see a diamond that registers as having carbon-14 in it, you say "aha, it was God!"
When I see a diamond that registers as having carbon-14 in it, I say, "how did it get there?"
Antifides 1 year ago
@Antifides please don't tell me what I say. I am asking the same question "how indeed did it get there", because in fact it is there. The difference between you and me is that as an engineer I expect science to be built on minimal assumptions and observable facts. I don't believe in fairytales of obscure mathematics (96% of the universe is missing! yeah right) or the engineering ability of chance + lots of time. Evidence #2 against 4.2bn year old earth= presence of helium in zirconium crystals.
keith1y 1 year ago
Unfortunately, what you call spiritual experiences aren't going to be taken seriously by a lot of people simply because they aren't individually evaluable. You may have some supernatural experience, but without the necessary evidence you will certainly not convince a smart person capable of critical thought. Gullible people, maybe, but thats as much as you'll get, which shouldn't be intellectually satisfying, unless you have one of the 398457238495 churches that raise funds for their own.
hellhammerz666 1 year ago
@hellhammerz666 you can evaluate any experience within a framework of analysis. In my experience enabling encounters with God is repeatable, and lends itself to scientific enquirey.
keith1y 1 year ago
@keith1y Then why is it so had to present such analysis to people who haven't had your same experiences? Of course, i could tell you last night i dreamed about a killer pie and his gang of angry pickles. You may believe i dreamed that, but i doubt you would consider my dream to be real in any way, right? The problem with these experiences is that they are personal and you can't really proof they are real with a conventional scientific analysis, since they aren't transmittable to another person.
hellhammerz666 1 year ago
@hellhammerz666 if 10 people dreamed of angry pickles you then have data which can be analyzed. The first observation of any phenomena is subjective, as is your dream.
Ignoring personal experiences, when you do have tools for examining them, collating them, correlating features of them, and measuring features within them, is just being scientifically lazy.
keith1y 1 year ago
@keith1y True. However, can you actually give an example about 10 people dreaming the exact same thing about angry pickles? What makes science work isn't that people have similar experiences, but that those experiences give pretty much the same feedback to them, and are replicable by anyone, not just people with special giftss . For instance, anyone can throw an apple up and they will see it fall, to test gravity like Newton did.
hellhammerz666 1 year ago
@hellhammerz666 cool so when can you start?
keith1y 1 year ago
@keith1y There relies the fundamental flaw of religion. The so called experiences involved in religious misticism aren't replicable as a scientific experiment, thus rendering them unprovable. It would be like me saying i saw the Loch Ness monster but i didn't have a videocam to film the evidence to present to other people. Without the necessary evidence to actually convince someone about my sighting, i wouldn't expect them to believe me, and even laugh at me.
hellhammerz666 1 year ago
@hellhammerz666 I agree repeatability is the key to bringing things into the arena for scientific study. For example I use a repeatable process which works for curing phobias, I repeated it 102 times on one person, curing 102 phobias.
We have two interesting differences to your loch ness analog. One your nessie is not callable on demand, and no footprints are left behind. We have both repeatable phenomena on demand, and lasting artefacts which can be measured.
keith1y 1 year ago
@keith1y Nessie and god aren't that different. Miracles don't happen on demand, in the same way nessie won't come to the shore if you call him. Mundane coincidences that happen to fit a person's needs aren't much of a miracle. If we could see for instance a guy growing up a severed limb, i would admit you had a point, but we don't see that kind of thing ever.
What would you define as "artifact", though?
hellhammerz666 1 year ago
@hellhammerz666 why do you suppose that someone with an interest in science scientist (i.e. me) would stop using a scientific approach when it comes to "trust" in God (faith is incorrect translation, and blind faith was never on the table). As far as I am concerned miracles aka God speaking is repeatable on demand, all you have to do is ask.
Artefact, any measured negative emotion changing to peace and calm, as a result of a vision, or word which results in a fresh perspective or insight.
keith1y 1 year ago
@keith1y Trust me, i used to "ask", and nothing happened. I must admit i was never a very religious person, but somehow clinging to the cozy feeling of a higher power taking care of me seemed alright. Eventually, the more i asked, the less i saw any sort of evidence for this guy. Its why i'm an atheist. I have absolutely no reasons to believe all the religious stuff is real. It's not even a matter of being angry at god, because it would be childish to be mad at something i don't think exists.
hellhammerz666 1 year ago
@hellhammerz666 ah ha, when you asked, something did happen every time, however whatever it was that happened, you failed to realize that it is the first word in a conversation. Usually the first thing that happens is a feeling, or a memory that you dismiss because you are busy trying to get an answer from God, the thing you most readily dismiss as not being from God is usually the first word in the conversation which will lead to the context in which the answer when it comes will apply.
keith1y 1 year ago
@keith1y Can you prove this feeling you describe comes from a god? I may as well assert this first feeling came from a magic midget bouncing on your head. This is one of the problems i find with theist mindsets. They think they have some sort of magic power that allows them to talk to their personal god. Under that scenario, it's impossible to prove or disprove them, hence the very typical "you can't disprove god" position many theists take when his existence is questioned.
hellhammerz666 1 year ago
@keith1y What they overlook, though, is the fact that the burden of proof is on them to provide evidence of their positive claim (god exists), and decide to turn around the table pretending the burden of proof lies on the unbeliever for not believing their fantastic claim. If i told you the magic midget is bouncing on your head, but he's so light you won't even feel it, would i need to provide proof to convince you? Or would you have to proof he isn't actually there to not believe me?
hellhammerz666 1 year ago
@hellhammerz666 sorry but logic is self-evident, do I have the burden of proof to prove logic exists before I use it. Self evident things do not require the burden of proof. Since the source of all things logically HAS to be there why is the burden of proof mine? The fantastic claim is the one that says the 2nd law breaks down. Before darwin, God was self evident. The burden of proof is with you to prove that he was correct, but the maths for that doesn't work.
keith1y 1 year ago
@keith1y That's precisely the problem. Your god is NOT evident. If it was, there wouldn't be thousands of religions spread throughout the history of mankind, each one claiming their personal god(s) is(are) the true one(s). If an ancient greek citizen somehow managed to step into our time and told you zeus was the lord of gods, would you believe him? If a viking broke into your house claiming oden would reward him for his conquest, would you believe him?
hellhammerz666 1 year ago
@keith1y In the same way you would most likely doubt about other religions' gods, i see your god as something that hasn't been proven, and is therefore an uncertainty. Richard Dawkins has stated people are atheists towards most gods, but atheists just go one god further. In the end, none of them has even been proven real. What you are doing by assuming yours is evident is an argument from ignorance:" I can't think of a better explaination for the universe, therefore, god did it!".
hellhammerz666 1 year ago
@keith1y The typical problem with darwinian evolution, is that it directly took out gods out of the equation of how the species developwed, hence the heavy opposition to it from creationist groups. However, no matter how much opposition it may have from religious people, it has been extensively proven beyond reasonable doubt, and provides a way more solid explaination than the cryptic bronze-age myths of the religious.
hellhammerz666 1 year ago
@hellhammerz666 "it directly took gods out" only applies if it is true, a big iff. You have no mechanism for creation of matter, you dont even know what matter it, no mech. for creation of information, no mechanism for biogenises, and not enough time or populations or enough generations for any mammal to evolve anything, no positive innovations have ever been observed. There is NO proof, the numbers don't add up. Conjecture built on conjecture is not science, its embarrasing.
keith1y 1 year ago
@keith1y True, there's no way to observe the origin of the universe. That's precisely why the right answer to the big question is simply "i don't know". The fact that you don't know how that specific event took place doesn't mean you can simply snap your personal god in the equation and pretend it's true. Ancient cultures did it with natural phenomena, and later we found how reality actually worked. Take the example of lightning: Greeks thought it was Zeus, vikings thought it was Thor's power.
hellhammerz666 1 year ago
@hellhammerz we are going in circles.The starting point is the characteristics that the ultimate source absolutely must have. It must be logical, coherent,real, non-physical,It must be eternal,it must be capable of "containing" the universe,it must have more energy than or be an infinite source of energy, it must be capable of directing and ordering things contrary to the 2nd law. It must be intelligent(all information comes from intelligence),it must be definitive in all fields e.g. justice.
keith1y 1 year ago
@keith1y I can understand and share the belief that everything needs a first cause. What i'm objecting to is the positive claim that it has to be your personal god, or any other god. What i'm saying is that even though this question exists, we don't have the answer for it yet, therefore "i don't know" is the only honest answer untill this can be properly explained without the need of ununderstandable, unprovable, comforting, supernatural arguments to be accepted by blind faith.
hellhammerz666 1 year ago
@hellhammerz666 Of course we have an answer, the answer is that "The Ultimate Source and First Cause" is God by definition. You can pray to "The Ultimate Source" if you wish, that will work, and as you pray ask for more insight which builds on what you already know. When someone says they met the one who says "hello I am The Ultimate Source and First Cause" he at least earns a hearing. Your problem is you are not prepared to give ANY source a hearing, let alone the one who says he is the "I AM".
keith1y 1 year ago
@keith1y We are indeed running in cricles here, aren't we? The problem here is you have problems accepting we don't possess the necessary knowledge to give a good explaination for the origins of the universe. Assuming from the get go there's a first cause only makes the problem a step more complex, bringing to the table the following question: Who was behind the first cause? You can go undefinitely asking this infinite times, and it would never be satisfied.
hellhammerz666 1 year ago
@hellhammerz666 I fully accept that "We" can't guess the origin of the universe, therefore I don't just give up. Since you know the cause of the universe is NOT measurable by physical means, to say it is not findable is just lazy. Its not that you don't know you haven't even looked, and by looked I mean you have to ask someone who knows where to look. I continued looking in the logical place.
No you cant go on indefinitely, because the first cause must be uncaused by definition.
keith1y 1 year ago