Context is the key to literacy, context knows any experience within reliving anything which is what philosophers have been doing for along time before the good book was created by an artist/poet, Sigmound Frued didnt want to become the One either, and Jesus Christ is the biggest fraud ever used to control society, which was written by one man, Plato, and this can be proved, that Jesus is just an allegoric fable, 1806 bibles are not the same as the newer ones which have been alteredin stupidity
Thinking in reason is not critical; thinking within reason knows any experience within any articulative agility to connnect on any plane of any physical truth, which why philosphers battle with attmepting to provide an intrinsic world view, much as Einstien suggested within his many comments regarding reality and perception, one would have to be within any mode of recovery which is much harder than anyone can imagine, facing any and all fears of social transgression;
7) Beloved, let us love one another: for love is God; and everyone that loveth, is born of God, and knoweth God. 8) He that loveth not, knoweth not God for God is love. 12 No man has ever seen god at any time, if we love one another, God dwelleth in us and his love is perfect in us. Love is understanding…
@DrFruedienslip 18 There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear; because fear hath torment He that feareth in not made perfect in love.
20 If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother he is a liar for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen how can he love God who he hath not seen?
You dont know who I am when you dont know who you are, we all want to be philosophers and poets, a poet wrote the good book while attempting to fruition a world view, so if you havent learned anything you dont know much within what you think you know trying to fit into any world of no continuity, Paul Corinth II, is all about being one mind of your own, if you dont know that you are conditioned within capitalism; The exorcist wants you to know something about yourself, your in a dream world
We are not made, we have evolved from the chemistry of any earth, we are no more no less the same thing as any living creature and the difference being that humankind has physical agilities which have been used to create his technological world as physical mediums of human extensions, clothing is an extention of the skin, its technology, and one day its all going to run out, and you dont know what that would mean do you?
Persons believe in the any afterlife though they dont know what that would mean to actuallly experience life after life, so they make up things like Gods and saviours thinking that someone else will change the way they think, the world is perverted within all the impressions, reprobated minds want you to know something regarding being assimulated within capitalism in the game of vanity and stature; Stature is earned, ask god about that one next time you feel inferior to anyone
The gospels were historical narratives and so their authors name is not all that important, and the were seemingly left anonymous for this reason. There are plenty of contextual clues of authorship for those that care.
HNs just record events like a newspaper reporter. Their veracity is guaged by other marks of historical literature like publishing them within the lifetimes of eyewitnesses and in the case of the NT, we have public events published before hostile eyewitnesses
Here is a question; Why does any argument exist regarding god, if not within how we are all being controlled within laws which make no sense created out of fear within any retaliation, it would be due within any cause that social economic principles are within question the main reason someone wrote the good book, so where does any worship get anyone, and why are persons so defensive if they only know what they believe and have no ability to exemplify within any valid experience.
We are made to be drawn to what we think is best. God is best and acts of worship help our minds to catch up with this reality. What you worship will control you. So choose carefully the object of ur worship.
@j919or You dont know anything of this God invented in the image of mans own image worship is nothing more than any excuse within any lack of courage to stand up for oneself within any face of fear within any subjective behaviour, worshipping any god is fake and senseless and does nothing to increase any awareness, people fear death as much as life; If you dont know that Plato wrote the bibles both testaments then you havent taken the right approach in reading between the lines.
@DrFruedienslip What you just typed is pure drivel, with blather on top. Say something rational and logical and until then my suggestion is to learn how to thinking critically.
You just gave me ur opinion without support, or logical argument. Typical!
@j919or What you just typed is pure drivel, with blather on top. Say something rational and logical and until then my suggestion is to learn how to thinking critically.
You just gave me ur opinion without support, or logical argument. Typical!
@IHeartAardvarks no one in the world has ever claimed that the universe was self-creating. That's a strawman fallacy allowing you to make your argument ignorance seem like a more appealing option. Spare us educated people your pseudo logic please
@IHeartAardvarks Why don't you have a nobel prize yet, professor? Ever noticed that every discovery the scientific community has made is in conflict with your groundbreaking theorm? How do you explain that? The scientists are wrong, right? And you're right, guided by a 2000 year old mythological text and the feeling of bliss you get when you telepathically communicate with Sky Stalin. You've got to be kidding if you can believe the words you say. Thanks for the lecture, Professor Fruitloop.
@IHeartAardvarks that's how you think. I mean,..stars and gallaxies become complex without any entity, they all form with physical laws (laws of nature) life, planets, almost everything in the universe do,..what makes you think they universe didn't form that way either?
"yeah science isn't there to prove anything outside of reality." how do u anything exists outside of reality, and how do u know that? i'm not denying reality, i'm just asking you to prove your claim that ur god and jesus christ from the bible created the universe 13.5 billion years ago.? plus how do u know the universe was created by some alien civilizaiton that survived an other universe? what makes you think there aren't other universes out there and our is just one of billions.?
.the universe is evidence that the universe exist, not proof for god creating it. do you ever wonder why science doesn't say anything about the universe being created by a god? Also, atheism isn't a worldview,it's a response to a claim. you claim that the universe was created by a god,..I ask you to prove it. you said u need no proof. prove that, supernatural event,happen u said..the universe, but the it works according to laws of nature
@IHeartAardvarks "the historicity of the bible has been proven over and over countless of times" it's still a book,..just like the quran, and other holybooks out there. Also,. you claimed that the bible have been shown in the bible. Define the supernatural, and tell me where you've seen it happened
(cont.)he said that if he didnt have proof then there no reason for beliveing in something. then i said well if humans are prone to these mistakes like misinterpreting things and seeing things that arent there then science is also effected by this because science is conducted by humans. then i said if science cannot prove or disprove the paranormal or god it just means we dont understand it doesnt mean it doesnt exist.
@MrYounggun74 That's a dumb position to begin with. If you have no prove of something, how the hell do you know it's there? Tell me. Do you know why the moon rotate around the earth? Well, science think it's gravity, but it's wrong. The moon revolve around the sun because giant invisible creatures that resemble earthly elephants, guide its path. These elephants existed outside of space, time, and nature and their existence cannot be proven. But I just know that they're there.
I had an arguement with an athiest, he said that i had no basis for my claim ( see below comment) whatever that means. then i brought up paranormal experiences. then he said humans are not good eye witneses and are not perfect so witnessing something is not proof. well i said just because something doesnt have evidence does not diminish the fact that its there.
If God is outside of nature?? then science can neither prove nor disprove its existence. Atheism itself must therefore be considered a form of blind faith, in that it adopts a belief system that cannot be defended on the basis of pure reason.
@MrYounggun74 This is beyond stupidity. If atheism is blind faith, then, not collecting stamp is a hobby. As a matter of fact, atheism is not a belief system, it's a rejection of claims, it's the only based on reason and that requires NO FAITH. Faith is the ACCEPTANCE of claims and ideas without any proof, or in spite of evidence to disprove them. Atheism does none of that. It's not a belief system; it rejects belief system.
Science cannot, even in principle, disprove the existence of anything. Its why it irratates me when these to biguts try to use science to disprove the existence of God, they’re using science illegitimately. They’re misusing it, and this just makes science look bad.
Take this in reference to the philosophical proof that one cannot prove an absolute negation, and the inductive method appears clearly inadequate to either confirm or deny any propositions concerning metaphysics. Thus, at best, the naturalist can only lay claim to a metaphysical agnosticism.
Additionally, if the supernatural does exist, science cannot be the method with which to test it. In that science cannot prove the supernatural exists, concurrently according to the Principle of Falsifiability, the supernatural cannot be falsified and refuted. We could not even imagine what this would look like from a naturalist position.
Further, science cannot test mental events such as intuition, or psychological hypothetical constructs such as ambition, greed, guilt, or fear. There are sixteen schools of psychotherapy which have not been proven scientifically to be the panacea psychologists long for.
Dr. Stephen Hawkings, world renown mathematician has admitted that science cannot go beyond the first moment of the big-bang, and there is the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.
The empirical method of induction utilized through the scientific method has, indeed, yielded a vast wealth of valuable results for humanity. Science and technology are, for example, beyond value estimation in the medical field.
However, there are places that the scientific method simply cannot go. Science cannot test history. Science cannot prove that John Hancock signed the Constitution, or that Alexander the Great lived and conquered.
@hempartist420 " it's a very stupid thing to say science is unable to find a cause, if that was the case, there would be no use for crime investigators would there?" crime scene investigators dont find cause(why), science finds the effect(how). Its a vary stupid thing to confuse the why with the how.
@ezetsnd1 I do believe in a creator, call it whatever you want..This is a good question, any answer i give would be opionated and byist.. But i would probably put it this way. I would rather live in a world where the masses believe in a (GOD) and have like minded individuals around me ..rather than, the opposite. Take away technologies and what do you have?? We'd be living in north korea..where dictators permit everything. I am a patriot and a strong believer in the bill of rights. That is all
@petion2010 simple, the fact that we are having this conversation is a miracle in it self. According to te scietific method ths conversation is an imposiblity.
Result: Again, nothing. Some believe that the big bang precludes God but others say "Where did the material come from for the big bang? It had to come from somewhere! God spoke and bang it was there - no conflict."
I believe that science can prove some things to my satisfaction. I have no trouble with the explanations of inertia for instance. The problems come when science claims to disprove one thing by proving another.
Claim: There is no intelligent life "out there".
Science: There are a billion planets that can support life
Result: Nothing. Yet science fans tend to presume that there is life without evidence of it - only the possibility.
Most people read the very first verse in the Bible, without giving it another though. However a closer examination of this verse reveals that the author of Genesis verbalized exactly the same sophisticated principle that scientists would use thousands of years later. Science expresses the universe in five terms: time, space, matter, power and motion. So does Genesis 1.
@MrYounggun74 "In the beginning (time) God created (power) the Heaven (space) and the Earth (matter)... And the Spirit of God moved (motion) upon the face of the waters." [Genesis 1:1,3 … written some 3450 years ago].
@MrYounggun74 more bullshit. So you think that the world is as old as the universe, and that everything was created with magic power in 6 days. You like taking liberty with biblical interpretation do you? How the hell Genesis 1st explained the big bang? While you at it, can you use it to explain dark matter, dark energy, dark flow, or the subatomic and particle world?
The earliest existing reference to Moses in Greek literature occurs in the Egyptian history of Hecataeus of Abdera (4th century BC). All that remains of his description of Moses are two references made by Diodorus Siculus, wherein, writes historian Arthur Droge, "he describes Moses as a wise and courageous leader who left Egypt and colonized Judaea."Among the many accomplishments described by Hecataeus, Moses had founded cities, established a temple and religious cult, and issued laws.
Since humans stepped out of the caves, we were constantly expanding our circle of love to include more people. We now reject genocide, racism, incest, etc; things that were common centuries ago. We are in a crucial point in our development. Becoming completely spiritual by rejecting all evil is the next step. Atheism rejects Jesus, which represents 100% love, as a role model,which is a step back for consciousness. The time has come to raise our consciousness to the next level, is now or never.
Jesus Christ (pbuh) is not God !!! He was a Messenger of God !!!
In fact Jesus (pbuh) said :
"I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgement is just; because I seek not my own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me."
It sounds as if you were taught some extremely defective principals of hemanuetics when it comes to studying the Bible. To talk of fictional Holy Books while conflating the Bible w/the Quran, Book of Mormon, etc is clearly nonsensical& contrived itself; they all make vastly dis-similar truth claims regarding meaning & purpose (which is evident in reading them). If you are so concerned w/the pragmatism of the BIble, try reading & following the man-made laws of most county/state statutory codes.
Is there any reason why anyone should accept the nonsense in your particular little magic book as any more "true" than that in any other cult's? It makes claims that are self-evidently false on a number of points, it contradicts itself over and over again, and it isn't supported by any standard of logic or evidence.
• I think it may also prove helpful to some of the viewers here to try to evaluate many of the more strident claims of the anti-theist critique ("brights") from a ideological/ metaphysics perspective. Check out the recent article by Jackson Lears in the May 16, 2011 issue of the The Nation entitled "Same Old New Atheism" .The article offers a compelling analysis of Sam Harris' works. Consideration is given to general secular social perspectives
How can you explain a miraculous event like a resurrection with reasonable, logical thinking? YOU CAN'T Yet anyone taking an honest look will find some level of a miracle. THIS WHOLE LINE OF THINKING IS FLAWED as it is bound to knowledge we THINK is CURRENTLY true. You are looking to PROVE God's existence while at the same time the God you are looking or has said He won't be found in this manor. Ironically, your continual inability to find him is evidence He's real and what He said is true.
@ARealWiseGuys "Ironically, your continual inability to find him is evidence He's real and what He said is true." The inability to demonstrate something exists is NEVER proof that it in fact exists. NEVER. In any case. "How can you explain a miraculous event like a resurrection with reasonable, logical thinking?" You can't; that's why miracles DON'T EXIST.
@MrRyanwilliamson YOU SAID "You can't; that's why miracles DON'T EXIST" I SAY I understand that if you have not witnessed a miracle they do not exist "TO YOU", that was part of my point. The only way you can prove a miracle beyond a shadow of a doubt is to see it yourself. If you witnessed one right now, how would you "prove" it? What makes your statement false is that miracles do exist as Myself & others HAVE SEEN A MIRACLE, without doubt. The God providing the miracle is fact in-lew of it.
@ARealWiseGuys It's not called a miracle merely because you simply don't UNDERSTAND something. That's an argument from ignorance. That's the same fallacy behind "I don't know ..... thus God!". Even if you could PROVE a miracle, there is still an enormous gap between "Miracles exist" and "Miracles exist....thus God". Your argument is this: "I witnessed something I can't explain, thus it MUST be a miracle, and thus there must be a GOD who performed it." The argument is irrationally flawed.
@MrRyanwilliamson YOU SAID ".. called a miracle merely because you simply don't UNDERSTAND something." I SAY I'm not saying I don't understand it, all I am saying is I've seen one, apparently you have not & proving it is impossible by today's standards, for me, you or anyone. Therefor for you to say they miracles don't exist because of lack of experience is deceiving for you and anyone who believes what you say. To invalidate what I'm proclaiming, you will need to prove miracles don't exist.
@ARealWiseGuys "To invalidate what I'm proclaiming, you will need to prove miracles don't exist." Incorrect. We call this "Shifting the burden of proof". The burden of proof is ALWAYS on the person MAKING the claim otherwise you would have to believe ANYTHING anyone ever said until you could PROVE them wrong. You have it exactly backwards. Until you can demonstrate the existence of miracles or God you are being dishonest by asserting they exist.
@MrRyanwilliamsonYOU SAID lower cs "Until you can demonstrate the existence of (INSERT ANYTHING) you are being dishonest by asserting IT exist" I SAY "Then" I unknowingly lied to you, deepest apologizes. Please enlighten my vocabulary so I won't do it again. Assuming you witnessed the following first hand and you had no doubt it took place, what would you call the spontaneous, unexplainable, regeneration of an unhealthy, deformed part of the human body to normal form & healthy? 1 word please.
@ARealWiseGuys I would say I witnessed something I can't explain. Simply because you can't explain something, doesn't mean that it has no explanation so it would be presumptuous to assume so. Also since you can't explain it, you certainly can't demonstrate that it was the result of any supposed God. Even if you wholeheartedly believe that what you experienced was a miracle, there is still no evidence for the claim "God performed this miracle" or one step further that "God exists".
@MrRyanwilliamson YOU SAID "The burden of proof is ALWAYS on the person MAKING the claim" I SAY You seem to be blind to the fact that when you say "miracles don't exist" YOU ARE MAKING A CLAIM. What you should be saying is something like "I don't believe miracles exist, NOT they Don't exist. All I'm saying is I believe they do exist. You can't turn around and say "they don't exist" without providing PROOF the don't by your own standards. (my question of needed proof for God still stands)
@ARealWiseGuys If you claim X exists, you have the responsibility to prove it. If you offer no proof yet continue to assert the claim & the other person responds that X does not exist, it is simply a reaction to your prior claim. You still must prove your 1st claim before requiring it of the latter.
"I don't believe X exists" is better but I see you didn't mention believing until at least several posts. "All I'm saying is I believe they do exist" is a hurried typo, at best.
@Strangerinasland Jesus tell his disciples to boil water before they drink it. What a leap of it would have been for humanity if the lord son of god with all knowledge at his disposal taught us how to make vaccines and antibiotics to combat. He could have abolished slavery, give gender equality etc. no, he preferred to walk around telling people that they have to eat his flesh and drink his blood to live, and he scarred them to death about the end of the world being near.
@ARealWiseGuys How you define miracle? If by that you mean events that violated the laws of nature performed by a supernatural deity. A rare natural event wouldn't be a miracle, and something unexplained wold simply mean that we don't yet understand it, and not attributed to the supernatural. We have no proof of miracles. we have no instance of amputees growing missing limbs after they pray to a deity. No starving people in a 3rd world country or even here being fed by food falling from the
@petion2010 YOU SAID "We have no proof of miracles. we have no instance of amputees growing missing limbs after they pray to a deity" I SAY Who is "We" in "We have no proof"? I have proof meeting the criteria you've described. I admit, the proof is not transferable, only those who witnessed this miracle have proof. So all I'm saying is your statement is VERY DECEPTIVE as I read it, most people who read it will tend to think "We" is everyone in the world but me as if proof is in the majority.
@petion2010 YOU SAID "By we,I'm talking about skeptics" I SAY Thank you, so since this is a public forum with many readers, what you meant to say, if I may... "Skeptics don't believe miracles exist". I appreciate the clarification, seriously I'm not making fun of this at all. (TBC)
@petion2010 YOU SAID "if you do have such prove please provide them" (<-grammar?) I SAY- Realizing there is nothing I can say you "should" believe (as an Atheist). If I were to provide proof of miracles, that they originate from God as in the Christian Bible. Would you be willing to openly confess your un-Godly actions? (sin) Would you be willing to stop your un-Godly actions? Would you be willing to publicly worship Him? Honestly.?.? Perhaps this is the real issue making proof irrelevant.
@ARealWiseGuys What makes you think that there's nothing you can tell me? As far of your proof for miracle, it would have to meet standard of evidence. Rare occurring events would not count, since rare occurrences don't violate the laws of nature. For instance, if you were to tell me of a case where prayer cure cancer, I would reject that because cancer goes on remission with no medical treatment sometime. It's been observe not only in human. The same goes for AIDS as for cases of people with
@ARealWiseGuys immunities. Don't bring me biblical, koranic, or any other holy book you might subscribe to. You'll only get laughter from me. These are accounts from primitive bronze and iron age people with no understanding of natural laws, and in these men were also fanatical and had many reason to lie. Personal experiences are out since they can't be verified, emotional feelings can be explain naturally, and the mind and the perception of reality can be faulty. Now, if you can show me
@petion2010 In what is probably the oldest book of the Bible, Job, (written probably 2000 years ago during the time period known as the time of the patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob) living in an ancient culture that knew nothing about space or planets, asserted that God hung the earth on nothing (1500 B.C.) or, in other words, the earth free floats in space:
"He stretches out the north over empty space; he hangs the earth on nothing [Job 26:7]
@petion2010 The fact that air has weight was proven scientifically only about 300 years ago. The relative weights of air and water are needed for the efficient functioning of the world’s hydrologic cycle, which in turn sustains life on the earth.
When He imparted weight to the wind and meted out the waters by measure [Job 28:25] [Emphasis Added]
@petion2010 Science has discovered that stars emit radio waves, which are received on earth as a high pitch. God mentioned this in Job 38:7: "When the morning stars sang together..." In fact…
The galaxy is full of objects that emit radio waves, including black holes and stars of various kinds
@petion2010 In the book of Job (written some 3,500 years ago), God asks Job if he had entered into “the treasures of the snow” [38:22]. However with the advent of the microscope man discovered that each and every single snowflake is uniquely a symmetrical "treasure."
@MrYounggun74 Can you be more full of it. If the bible so accurately portrait all those scientific facts, how come Christians weren't showing them to the world before scientists explained them? Why weren't Christians making antibiotics? You people wait for a scientific discovery and either claim that god reveals it to scientists or you find one passage and claim our bible said it. Your claim for the bible inheritance to be the word of god are a few verses about rain cycle. First of all, the
@MrYounggun74 Can you disprove the leprechaun, fairy, Zeus? No, you can't ask to disprove a negative statement. As far as job, no it wasn't written 4000 years ago. It's been edited many many times.
@petion2010 asking a question with a question....hmm
labeling oneself an ATHEIST is rejecting a belief in a diety, How can one person reject somthing u CANNOT DISPROVE, assuming you know all there is to know. I keep an open mind, considering all possibilities< Its a simple yes or no answer< k here we go CAN YOU DISPROVE 100% THE EXISTANCE OF A DIETY(GOD)?? And the book of job was edited you say?? by whom?
@MrYounggun74 Complete Nonsense! How can you believe in something you cannot prove then? You know you're not being truthful and you're just paying lip service to your belief when you say you keep an open mind. In that case, why considering just god? Why not, for instance, a universe that was created by super advance alien race out of an experiment? Keeping an open mind doesn't mean considering every possibility with equal merit. Accepting something to be true still must be relied on evidence
@petion2010 You canot prove a number of things< yet they exist and we take them for granted...
1. Logic and Mathematics
2. Metaphysical truths
3. Ethical beliefs
4. Aesthetic judgments
5. Science itself
Those are just 5 examples. I consider a creator< call it what you will. I have accepted there are many things that CANNOT be explained. "danger close knows no atheist" thank you, that is all.
@MrYounggun74 Can you be any more ridiculous? Logic is a method by which we use to explain things based on reason or reasoning. Mathematics that the language of science. Metaphysical truths, let's put that in the category of nonsense and BS people make up. Ethical beliefs are developed through generations and shaped by our common experiences. Aesthetic judgments are strongly shaped by our environment. And science is method by which we explain the natural world by using evidence.
Science can't prove mathematics or logic. These are presumptions to the scientific method. Science presumes them to be true and has not proven them to be true.
Don't agree? Try to prove these. Take away logic and mathematics and try to prove them. Try to prove logic to be true without using logic.
@MrYounggun74 These are not material things to prove. Math is really the language of science. It's like asking if we can prove the alphabet is true. The alphabet is not a thing, it's made up character that we use to represent language. Math is also experimental, that mean you can test its claim to see if they're correct. How much more can you prove something? As far as logic, it's a method by which we analyse claims. What's so difficult to understand. The problem is that you have your brain
@petion2010 "These are not material things to prove. Math is really the language of science." -Its still an assumption. "As far as logic, it's a method by which we analyse claims" -also an assumption. that is all. It cant be proven using the scientific method, that is all
@MrYounggun74 bury so far in religious concept that they become the only way you can explain the world. You go ad nauseum with the same claims over and over. This is a problem. I feel like I'm talking to Ray Comfort or Kent Hovind. And even if I granted you all your claims, how would science not being able to explain them prove that your god exist. You would still need to prove your god. It's just ridiculous trig to prove god existence by default.
@petion2010 nah my professor in college was Dr.William Lane Craig. you should listen to him. Then you can come talk to me. When your alittle more open minded. "It's just ridiculous trig to prove god existence by default" -Agreed. But i am open minded to a creator existance it makes since to me. you may have been an accident but i was not.
@MrYounggun74 I don't care if he was your professor. He's intellectually dishonest. He make claim about science that no scientists ever make. He misrepresent facts about evolution, the big bang, or abiogenesis all the time. And frankly, his cosmological argument is unimpressive, for all the premises rely solely on intuition without a single proof.
Science can't prove the metaphysical. One of the more talked about metaphysical elements is the supernatural. Science deals with nature. The supernatural is outside of nature and therefore outside the abilities of science to take a look at.
Science can't prove the scientific method itself. It presumes it. How can something use it's own process to prove it's own process? It can't. To even try is circular reasoning.
@MrYounggun74 Are you serious? What is there to prove about the scientific method? There's no presumption about the scientific method. It's been tried and proven through experiment and continue to yield result. You just don't make any effort to even understand basic thing and simply reject them because they would force you to justify your claims of the supernatural. Do you understand what the scientific method is?
@petion2010 4."Ethical beliefs are developed through generations and shaped by our common experiences."
Yet they cannot be proven. In using the scientific method. Hitler believed what he was doing was the right thing to do when he murdered 50 million jews. So according to you thats mererly objective?? or subjective??
@MrYounggun74 Actually you're dead wrong. You can read some of Sam Harris stuff on that. Even here on youtube, you can check qualisoup channel, he said a lot on that. Right and wrong are not just personal opinion. We can measure the consequence and impact of our actions on our environment to see whether or not they are positive or harmful. No deity is needed for ethical beliefs, for as I aforementioned, it takes time, knowledge, and better understanding to adjust and improve our practice
@petion2010 5."Aesthetic judgments are strongly shaped by our environment."?? NON SENSE, what you consider to be beautiful I may not. There is no scientific evidence to support your claim.
@MrYounggun74 Actually even with your and my personal taste, what's beautiful is strongly based by our environment. We learn our idea of beauty based on that.
"Metaphysical truths, let's put that in the category of nonsense and BS people make up." So you dont love your mother, father, wife, son daughter..that just bs??? huh you make no sense and your argument is not valid.
@MrYounggun74 What is there to prove about any of these things? They're all concepts or methods, which mean they're used to prove or study other things. Your argument is complete nonsense. Are you claiming that god is a concept and not a being? So what that there are things that cannot be explained, that's no reason to fill in the gap with whatever you want. What cannot be explained are simply that. This attitude is why our ancestors created so many myths. All natural phenomena were ascribed to
@MrYounggun74 a god. However, later generations would find the correct answers for those phenomena, and as it turned out, all the supernatural claims were wrong. What you can't explained today is no evidence for god, and future generations might indeed explain them and I doubt our supernatural claim for them will be valid. You have to prove your god, not simply pointing out stuff and say, "ha! you can't explain this, it must be god then." As far as your claim that danger knows no atheists.
@MrYounggun74 My answer is so what. I served for about 6 years in the Army. I was a 19D Cavalry Scout stationed in Fort Hood, TX. I've been on multiple combat tours, and guess what. God, christianity, or any religion didn't spare soldiers from getting killed in actions.One of the most religious soldiers I knew, a First Sergeant, died inside Camp Cuervo in a Rocket attack in 2004 yet a staunch atheist survived IED. You think that somehow believers have special place. It makes no difference
@MrYounggun74 As for the book of job, no one knows whom wrote it, but based on writing style and content, the book has been edited about 4 times. Each time, something new was added to the story and with a new perspective. For instance, the oldest version has no mention of job conversation with his friends and to story is roughly the first two and last two chapters. Then again, you might be one of those fundamental Christians who believe that the bible is the absolute words of god, that 40
If the supernatural does exist, science cannot be the method with which to test it. In that science cannot prove the supernatural exists, concurrently according to the Principle of Falsifiability, the supernatural cannot be falsified and refuted.
@ARealWiseGuys Now, bring evidence of something that can't occur naturally that was achieve by prayer, like an amputee growing a limb. It doesn't have to be a full one; it could be a finger, eye, or a third degree burn skin. How about a genetic condition like down syndrome. You can provide proof for a prophesy, and I don't mean a vague statement either. It has to be a specific date, time, and event. You can't play to odd game either by throwing 50000 stuff and pick the ones that stick.
@ARealWiseGuys For instance, on March 21, 2012, a 8.6 earthquake will hit the city of Dragon at 8:30 AM and kill 200000 people. It would then send tsunamis waves to the island of Unicorn and create such devastation. That would be specific. As far as worshiping god publicly, why yours? Don't you think that you have to bring the evidence first? Don't even think about making proof irrelevant. No! Without proof all we have are speculations and superstition. Would you make proof irrelevant if I told
@petion2010 Do you plan on ignoring my questions selectivity while requiring me to jump to every benchmark you set? I noticed my questions have been ignored. Just pointing out what has happened. As I seriously consider everything you say, I would appreciate the same from you. I believe we can BOTH learn from this exchange if we can bother to listen (an art being lost). Did you even think through what I meant?
@petion2010 Best I can tell, the entire concept of my set of questions, all asking the same basic thing, were overlooked in your reply. Since this format is so limited; may I ask we keep our points in order; one or two at a time preferably?
@petion2010 It's been almost a week as I continue to hope for your answer. Here is the questions one more time; It's about the condition of your (nonphysical) heart. If I were to provide proof of miracles, that they originate from God as in the Christian Bible. Would you be willing to openly confess your un-Godly actions? (sin) Would you be willing to stop your un-Godly actions? Would you be willing to publicly worship Him? Honestly.?.? Perhaps this is the real issue making proof irrelevant.
@ARealWiseGuys What's non-physical heart? Do you think I'm stupid and expect me to just believe in a non-physical heart? what's this non-physical heart does? You keep saying you'll provide proof for the godly origin of miracle then let's see them or don't bother me with such nonsense again. You want me to publicly worship god while you're making proof irrelevant, isn't that convenient. If you had any proof of god, you'd never never ask me to believe, you'd show them.
@petion2010 YOU SAID "want me to publicly worship god " I SAY What is likely, is u r hiding behind your insistence for proof because of a fear of what it would mean to you, facing God as you are. I've asked u 5 times now, and each time u have avoided my question-">>THAT IS MY POINT!<< Iv"e not claimed provision of proof, just the opposite but I do have non-transferable proof of miracles. Answers=A non-physical heart is emotions. NO I don't think u r stupid, but I hope u believe emotions exist.
@ARealWiseGuys Ha! Ha! You're as typically arrogant as religious people classifying people. No, I don't fear your invisible sky fairy daddy who was conjured up by ignorant bronze age nomadic savages. I'm not scared of him for the same reason that I don't worry about vampires, ghosts, evil spirits, or zombies. I asked for proof for this reason. You, theists, are making the claim that there's something other than the natural world, the invisible spiritual world. You're all claiming that this
@ARealWiseGuys invisible world is inhabited by a god, that this god, created everything, and he had us in mind when he did. This perfect god wants us to worship him. Yet, this god failed to reveal his true plan to us. He wrote many books that contradict each other, that have contradiction, errors, mistakes and so on. For every supernatural claim made by them, we've now discovered the real natural reason for nature's phenomena. That's not even mentioning the atrocities and immorality support by
@ARealWiseGuys those holy books. There's nothing remotely convincing in any holy book that they're anything more than societies fabrications. What is a non-transferable proof? How is proof non-transferable? This is the mental zigzag I, and I presume other atheists, have to deal with when talking to theists. You come up with these scenario that under any other circumstances would be laughable, but, when it come to your god or religious claims, you wanna have special treatment. As far as
@ARealWiseGuys I will not accept the Christian, Islamic, Jewish, Hindu, or any other claim of the supernatural until such religion provides proof for that. I'm not gonna accept the existence of heaven, reincarnation, after life etc without evidence. What's so hard that if a religion has been making a claim for thousands of years to just bring the damn evidence for it. Emotion comes from your brain not your heart. There's no such thing as a non-physical heart. Stop taking those liberties
@petion2010 Could you please apply your intelligence & think about what I have said and not just react? You have ignored my point for 6 exchanges. My point is proof is irrelevant in a discussion about God if once proof is established the reality is ignored. My interest = "Would you act on the proof you have asked for repetitively IF you got it? Would you confess your sin? Would you change sinful ways in your life? Would you thank and worship God? If not, isn't proof irrelevant???
@ARealWiseGuys So you know my sinful way. Please tell me what they are. Did god reveal them to you. So far, you're just ranting about sin, confession, repenting my sinful way and blah blah blah. Wasn't my position clear enough for you, that unless you have proof for your god, whichever one that is, and unless you're can prove that your holy book was divinely inspired, that I'm not interested in any proposition you make? I remember even specifically giving you examples of what would constitute
@ARealWiseGuys sufficient empirical evidence. But no, you have one thing in mind, that is making a convert. You actually think that whatever you're telling me is original. You think that I've never heard them from Christians of various denominations and Muslims. The one thing all theistic claims share is the failure to provide any evidence to support them. Let me be clear to you, no, I'm not interested of confessing my sin, whatever that means, to any god. I'm not one bit interested and
@petion2010 YOU SAID "I' not..interested..in worshiping..god based solely on your claim" I SAY I'm sorry, I have not been able to ask this question in a way understandable (as a result, so far almost everything you've said is off the topic I'm posing) What I'm asking is, IF you did have ABSOLUTE PROOF of the Christian God, would you worship Him? Would you confess your sin to Jesus (as He has defined sin & yes you have sinned, I don't need to know you, everyone has sin) Would you change for God?
@ARealWiseGuys Not just your claim, but everyone's claim, and not just your religion, but everyone's religion. Now, let's decipher your response. First, I don't regard your bible as a source of morality. It's actually vile. The book that supposed to be inspired by a just and benevolent god, yet condones genocide, rape, racism, discrimination, sexism, and slavery. Jesus' message had many element of things that I consider immoral too. The idea of turning the cheek, I think is quit repulsive when
@ARealWiseGuys an atrocity is going on. Should the world have turned the other cheeks to Hitler or now to Islamic fundamentalist? The idea of Jesus forgiving our sin is immoral and disgusting. No one should forgive anyone on behalf of someone else. Josef Fritzl imprisoned his daughter in a basement for 24 years and raped. Now, do you think that's moral for christ to forgive Josef on his daughter's behalf. I believe that people can misbehave toward society and each other. I don't call that
@ARealWiseGuys sin because I see no reason to believe that somewhere there's an all powerful being, who decide to not intervene, while taking offense at people action. When I misbehaved, I make amend, I don't pray nor confess to anyone. The last thing on sin is the stupidly ridiculous idea of thought crime. The bible has no provision for gender equality, freedom of expression, and many ideas that make up our modern society. It carries very little weight as a source of divine morality.
@ARealWiseGuys You bring those proofs, I'll do you one better. I'll become a minister. It won't matter though because you will never bring the proof. That's why you're asking to confess my sin in priori. Remember, the evidence has to be empirical. If any god's and religious claim had any proof, faith would never be a requirement.
@petion2010 I have asked, 8 X now; a yes or no question.You've responded with text of about 10,000 characters, but no answer. This alone indicates at the very least, avoidance.An "Evidential" exam of our exchange would conclude that in reality"Proof" of God would not ultimately alter your response. How can one "HONESTLY" study origins without the willingness to accept what evidences directs us towards? I'm willing to change my beliefs if they can be dis-proven, apparently your not. "Dangerous!"
@ARealWiseGuys Didn't I just tell you that I'll become a minister if you're prove your particular Judeo-Christina god to me. I don't know if by origin you mean life or the cosmos, but in either case, you must be joking if you think that you're gonna convince me that you know enough about either to prove your god's existence. What makes you think you have to assume that they have to be the work of a god? How do you disprove a belief, something by very essence doesn't rely on evidence? If I make
@ARealWiseGuys a case that life was started by advanced alien race, you can't disprove that either. Nor can you disprove the Greek, Babylonian, Mayan, Norse, Scientology claim of the supernatural. It's up to each of those making the claim to prove that those claims are true. I don't have a PhD in science, I might never go for one, but I know enough to dismiss the Judeo-Christian claim of creations of both our cosmos or humanity. How about you started again but this time with no assumption.
@petion2010 YOU SAID "..disprove the Greek, Babylonian, Mayan" I SAY THANK YOU! That is exactly the point I was hoping we realize. "Demands" for "proof" are "absurd & hopeless"; they will never be realized;.locking one into a "belief" system that prohibits the full enrichment & understanding of the universe. From what has been expressed so far It's evident the understanding of the Bible is limited & distorted. We can't begin to understand origins with a prejudicial, self-limited mind can we?
@ARealWiseGuys I found this laughable at best. This might be a very long post to make my point. First when a claim is being made, it's up to the claim maker to prove it. If I said the following, "the universe was born out of an experiment conducted 150 billion years ago by an super advanced alien race, with the goal of creating life on Earth." It isn't up to you to disprove this statement. I'm require to demonstrate that it's accurate, and also prove that the alien race does exist. Saying that
@ARealWiseGuys these aliens send me secret coded email messages that no one else can decipher doesn't qualify as proofs. Now to make your position plausible, we have to accept that the universe was created, that the creator is a supernatural being, that the supernatural being is a god, and that this god is the Judeo-Christian one. Even if we could prove that there was a supernatural force behind the formation of the universe, we still would have to determine who or what it is. I reject the
Context is the key to literacy, context knows any experience within reliving anything which is what philosophers have been doing for along time before the good book was created by an artist/poet, Sigmound Frued didnt want to become the One either, and Jesus Christ is the biggest fraud ever used to control society, which was written by one man, Plato, and this can be proved, that Jesus is just an allegoric fable, 1806 bibles are not the same as the newer ones which have been alteredin stupidity
DrFruedienslip 1 week ago
Thinking in reason is not critical; thinking within reason knows any experience within any articulative agility to connnect on any plane of any physical truth, which why philosphers battle with attmepting to provide an intrinsic world view, much as Einstien suggested within his many comments regarding reality and perception, one would have to be within any mode of recovery which is much harder than anyone can imagine, facing any and all fears of social transgression;
DrFruedienslip 1 week ago
The First Epistle general of John IV
7) Beloved, let us love one another: for love is God; and everyone that loveth, is born of God, and knoweth God. 8) He that loveth not, knoweth not God for God is love. 12 No man has ever seen god at any time, if we love one another, God dwelleth in us and his love is perfect in us. Love is understanding…
DrFruedienslip 1 week ago
@DrFruedienslip 18 There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear; because fear hath torment He that feareth in not made perfect in love.
20 If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother he is a liar for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen how can he love God who he hath not seen?
DrFruedienslip 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You dont know who I am when you dont know who you are, we all want to be philosophers and poets, a poet wrote the good book while attempting to fruition a world view, so if you havent learned anything you dont know much within what you think you know trying to fit into any world of no continuity, Paul Corinth II, is all about being one mind of your own, if you dont know that you are conditioned within capitalism; The exorcist wants you to know something about yourself, your in a dream world
DrFruedienslip 1 week ago
Comment removed
DrFruedienslip 1 week ago
We are not made, we have evolved from the chemistry of any earth, we are no more no less the same thing as any living creature and the difference being that humankind has physical agilities which have been used to create his technological world as physical mediums of human extensions, clothing is an extention of the skin, its technology, and one day its all going to run out, and you dont know what that would mean do you?
DrFruedienslip 1 week ago
Persons believe in the any afterlife though they dont know what that would mean to actuallly experience life after life, so they make up things like Gods and saviours thinking that someone else will change the way they think, the world is perverted within all the impressions, reprobated minds want you to know something regarding being assimulated within capitalism in the game of vanity and stature; Stature is earned, ask god about that one next time you feel inferior to anyone
DrFruedienslip 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The gospels were historical narratives and so their authors name is not all that important, and the were seemingly left anonymous for this reason. There are plenty of contextual clues of authorship for those that care.
HNs just record events like a newspaper reporter. Their veracity is guaged by other marks of historical literature like publishing them within the lifetimes of eyewitnesses and in the case of the NT, we have public events published before hostile eyewitnesses
j919or 1 week ago
Here is a question; Why does any argument exist regarding god, if not within how we are all being controlled within laws which make no sense created out of fear within any retaliation, it would be due within any cause that social economic principles are within question the main reason someone wrote the good book, so where does any worship get anyone, and why are persons so defensive if they only know what they believe and have no ability to exemplify within any valid experience.
DrFruedienslip 2 weeks ago
@DrFruedienslip ""where does any worship get anyone""
We are made to be drawn to what we think is best. God is best and acts of worship help our minds to catch up with this reality. What you worship will control you. So choose carefully the object of ur worship.
j919or 1 week ago
@j919or You dont know anything of this God invented in the image of mans own image worship is nothing more than any excuse within any lack of courage to stand up for oneself within any face of fear within any subjective behaviour, worshipping any god is fake and senseless and does nothing to increase any awareness, people fear death as much as life; If you dont know that Plato wrote the bibles both testaments then you havent taken the right approach in reading between the lines.
DrFruedienslip 1 week ago
@DrFruedienslip What you just typed is pure drivel, with blather on top. Say something rational and logical and until then my suggestion is to learn how to thinking critically.
You just gave me ur opinion without support, or logical argument. Typical!
j919or 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@j919or What you just typed is pure drivel, with blather on top. Say something rational and logical and until then my suggestion is to learn how to thinking critically.
You just gave me ur opinion without support, or logical argument. Typical!
DrFruedienslip 1 week ago
The only facts in the bible are the page numbers..
xXDISASTERPIECE934Xx 3 weeks ago
@SinnersBurnInHell "According to Christ the bible is 100% true" CHRIST IS IN THE BIBLE!!! That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard.
xXDISASTERPIECE934Xx 3 weeks ago
"yeah science isn't there to prove anything outside of reality" I'm fine with that. God isn't of reality. :D
Warkiam 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I went to the library and the bible was in the fiction section lol
ArkticFyer 1 month ago
@IHeartAardvarks no one in the world has ever claimed that the universe was self-creating. That's a strawman fallacy allowing you to make your argument ignorance seem like a more appealing option. Spare us educated people your pseudo logic please
messakg123 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I like smart people, they give me hope.
EatMAndSml 2 months ago
@IHeartAardvarks Why don't you have a nobel prize yet, professor? Ever noticed that every discovery the scientific community has made is in conflict with your groundbreaking theorm? How do you explain that? The scientists are wrong, right? And you're right, guided by a 2000 year old mythological text and the feeling of bliss you get when you telepathically communicate with Sky Stalin. You've got to be kidding if you can believe the words you say. Thanks for the lecture, Professor Fruitloop.
Y2KillerSPOOBLY 2 months ago
@IHeartAardvarks a rock is a physical entity without intelligence or conscious will. You don't need a god for a rock to be created.
aierce 2 months ago
@IHeartAardvarks that's how you think. I mean,..stars and gallaxies become complex without any entity, they all form with physical laws (laws of nature) life, planets, almost everything in the universe do,..what makes you think they universe didn't form that way either?
Atheist603 2 months ago
"yeah science isn't there to prove anything outside of reality." how do u anything exists outside of reality, and how do u know that? i'm not denying reality, i'm just asking you to prove your claim that ur god and jesus christ from the bible created the universe 13.5 billion years ago.? plus how do u know the universe was created by some alien civilizaiton that survived an other universe? what makes you think there aren't other universes out there and our is just one of billions.?
Atheist603 2 months ago
.the universe is evidence that the universe exist, not proof for god creating it. do you ever wonder why science doesn't say anything about the universe being created by a god? Also, atheism isn't a worldview,it's a response to a claim. you claim that the universe was created by a god,..I ask you to prove it. you said u need no proof. prove that, supernatural event,happen u said..the universe, but the it works according to laws of nature
Atheist603 2 months ago
@IHeartAardvarks "the historicity of the bible has been proven over and over countless of times" it's still a book,..just like the quran, and other holybooks out there. Also,. you claimed that the bible have been shown in the bible. Define the supernatural, and tell me where you've seen it happened
Atheist603 2 months ago
@SinnersBurnInHell no i have no duty to obey anything from your imaginary friend. sorry
Atheist603 2 months ago
@SinnersBurnInHell prove it!
Atheist603 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Last thing and and im done here.
--There are MANY MANY writings in the bible that are historicly accurate and have been proven. They NO nothing of history
MrYounggun74 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
CANNOT BE SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN:
1.Logic and Mathematics
2.Metaphysical truths
3.Ethical beliefs
4.Aesthetic judgments
5.Science itself
THANK YOU< thats is all
MrYounggun74 2 months ago
(cont.)he said that if he didnt have proof then there no reason for beliveing in something. then i said well if humans are prone to these mistakes like misinterpreting things and seeing things that arent there then science is also effected by this because science is conducted by humans. then i said if science cannot prove or disprove the paranormal or god it just means we dont understand it doesnt mean it doesnt exist.
MrYounggun74 2 months ago
@MrYounggun74 That's a dumb position to begin with. If you have no prove of something, how the hell do you know it's there? Tell me. Do you know why the moon rotate around the earth? Well, science think it's gravity, but it's wrong. The moon revolve around the sun because giant invisible creatures that resemble earthly elephants, guide its path. These elephants existed outside of space, time, and nature and their existence cannot be proven. But I just know that they're there.
petion2010 2 months ago
I had an arguement with an athiest, he said that i had no basis for my claim ( see below comment) whatever that means. then i brought up paranormal experiences. then he said humans are not good eye witneses and are not perfect so witnessing something is not proof. well i said just because something doesnt have evidence does not diminish the fact that its there.
MrYounggun74 2 months ago
If God is outside of nature?? then science can neither prove nor disprove its existence. Atheism itself must therefore be considered a form of blind faith, in that it adopts a belief system that cannot be defended on the basis of pure reason.
MrYounggun74 2 months ago
@MrYounggun74 This is beyond stupidity. If atheism is blind faith, then, not collecting stamp is a hobby. As a matter of fact, atheism is not a belief system, it's a rejection of claims, it's the only based on reason and that requires NO FAITH. Faith is the ACCEPTANCE of claims and ideas without any proof, or in spite of evidence to disprove them. Atheism does none of that. It's not a belief system; it rejects belief system.
petion2010 2 months ago
@MrYounggun74 Do you have any evidence of anything that exist outside nature, at all.
petion2010 2 months ago
Science cannot, even in principle, disprove the existence of anything. Its why it irratates me when these to biguts try to use science to disprove the existence of God, they’re using science illegitimately. They’re misusing it, and this just makes science look bad.
MrYounggun74 2 months ago
Science, by its very nature, is never capable of proving the non-existence of anything.
MrYounggun74 2 months ago
Still waiting on the "Scietific Method" to prove 1-5 that i have previously mentioed.....
MrYounggun74 2 months ago
The great philosopher Bertrand Russell wrote a scathing diatribe against induction that is well worth checking out.
Something to think about...
MrYounggun74 2 months ago
Take this in reference to the philosophical proof that one cannot prove an absolute negation, and the inductive method appears clearly inadequate to either confirm or deny any propositions concerning metaphysics. Thus, at best, the naturalist can only lay claim to a metaphysical agnosticism.
MrYounggun74 2 months ago
Additionally, if the supernatural does exist, science cannot be the method with which to test it. In that science cannot prove the supernatural exists, concurrently according to the Principle of Falsifiability, the supernatural cannot be falsified and refuted. We could not even imagine what this would look like from a naturalist position.
MrYounggun74 2 months ago
Further, science cannot test mental events such as intuition, or psychological hypothetical constructs such as ambition, greed, guilt, or fear. There are sixteen schools of psychotherapy which have not been proven scientifically to be the panacea psychologists long for.
Dr. Stephen Hawkings, world renown mathematician has admitted that science cannot go beyond the first moment of the big-bang, and there is the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.
MrYounggun74 2 months ago
Just a couple of observations;
The empirical method of induction utilized through the scientific method has, indeed, yielded a vast wealth of valuable results for humanity. Science and technology are, for example, beyond value estimation in the medical field.
However, there are places that the scientific method simply cannot go. Science cannot test history. Science cannot prove that John Hancock signed the Constitution, or that Alexander the Great lived and conquered.
MrYounggun74 2 months ago
Science cannot account for everything. Everyhing has a cause.
MrYounggun74 2 months ago
@MrYounggun74 and how would we find that cause without science?
hempartist420 2 months ago
@hempartist420 you can not find cause with the scientific method..only effect. my opionion of coarse. that is all
MrYounggun74 2 months ago
@MrYounggun74 science doesn't rely on your opinion of what you think reality is, science relies on what is demonstrable through evidence.
it's a very stupid thing to say science is unable to find a cause, if that was the case, there would be no use for crime investigators would there?
hempartist420 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@hempartist420 " it's a very stupid thing to say science is unable to find a cause, if that was the case, there would be no use for crime investigators would there?" crime scene investigators dont find cause(why), science finds the effect(how). Its a vary stupid thing to confuse the why with the how.
MrYounggun74 2 months ago
@MrYounggun74 What is the cause for your god?
ezetsnd1 2 months ago
@ezetsnd1 I do believe in a creator, call it whatever you want..This is a good question, any answer i give would be opionated and byist.. But i would probably put it this way. I would rather live in a world where the masses believe in a (GOD) and have like minded individuals around me ..rather than, the opposite. Take away technologies and what do you have?? We'd be living in north korea..where dictators permit everything. I am a patriot and a strong believer in the bill of rights. That is all
MrYounggun74 2 months ago
@MrYounggun74 Oh Really, how do you come to that conclusion, that everything has a cause?
petion2010 2 months ago
@petion2010 simple, the fact that we are having this conversation is a miracle in it self. According to te scietific method ths conversation is an imposiblity.
MrYounggun74 2 months ago
Claim: God created everything with a word.
Science: Big bang.
Result: Again, nothing. Some believe that the big bang precludes God but others say "Where did the material come from for the big bang? It had to come from somewhere! God spoke and bang it was there - no conflict."
MrYounggun74 3 months ago
I believe that science can prove some things to my satisfaction. I have no trouble with the explanations of inertia for instance. The problems come when science claims to disprove one thing by proving another.
Claim: There is no intelligent life "out there".
Science: There are a billion planets that can support life
Result: Nothing. Yet science fans tend to presume that there is life without evidence of it - only the possibility.
MrYounggun74 3 months ago
what an excellent argument ....
mikesomething 3 months ago
the buybull
billbo1154 3 months ago
Most people read the very first verse in the Bible, without giving it another though. However a closer examination of this verse reveals that the author of Genesis verbalized exactly the same sophisticated principle that scientists would use thousands of years later. Science expresses the universe in five terms: time, space, matter, power and motion. So does Genesis 1.
MrYounggun74 3 months ago
@MrYounggun74 "In the beginning (time) God created (power) the Heaven (space) and the Earth (matter)... And the Spirit of God moved (motion) upon the face of the waters." [Genesis 1:1,3 … written some 3450 years ago].
MrYounggun74 3 months ago
@MrYounggun74 more bullshit. So you think that the world is as old as the universe, and that everything was created with magic power in 6 days. You like taking liberty with biblical interpretation do you? How the hell Genesis 1st explained the big bang? While you at it, can you use it to explain dark matter, dark energy, dark flow, or the subatomic and particle world?
petion2010 3 months ago
nope i cant, but you cant either. And this does not prove or disprove god. You cannot prove or disprove god. that is all
MrYounggun74 3 months ago
The earliest existing reference to Moses in Greek literature occurs in the Egyptian history of Hecataeus of Abdera (4th century BC). All that remains of his description of Moses are two references made by Diodorus Siculus, wherein, writes historian Arthur Droge, "he describes Moses as a wise and courageous leader who left Egypt and colonized Judaea."Among the many accomplishments described by Hecataeus, Moses had founded cities, established a temple and religious cult, and issued laws.
MrYounggun74 3 months ago
nvm xD
johnyvines 3 months ago
whats the song?
johnyvines 3 months ago
Fiction and mythology because it came from Sumerian and Egpytian mythology.
halolIlmao0 3 months ago
Fiction. Next.
rudygetsplenty 4 months ago 8
the bible is outer mysteries of christian teachings, never meant to be history
blackbat1339 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Since humans stepped out of the caves, we were constantly expanding our circle of love to include more people. We now reject genocide, racism, incest, etc; things that were common centuries ago. We are in a crucial point in our development. Becoming completely spiritual by rejecting all evil is the next step. Atheism rejects Jesus, which represents 100% love, as a role model,which is a step back for consciousness. The time has come to raise our consciousness to the next level, is now or never.
dejesusluisx 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Jesus Christ (pbuh) is not God !!! He was a Messenger of God !!!
In fact Jesus (pbuh) said :
"I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgement is just; because I seek not my own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me."
[The Bible, John 5:30]
And the coming of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) the last and final messenger is mentioned in the Bible !!
I'm here for an intelligent discussion.
Can anyone tell that I'm wrong with proof?
goldenshazy 4 months ago
It sounds as if you were taught some extremely defective principals of hemanuetics when it comes to studying the Bible. To talk of fictional Holy Books while conflating the Bible w/the Quran, Book of Mormon, etc is clearly nonsensical& contrived itself; they all make vastly dis-similar truth claims regarding meaning & purpose (which is evident in reading them). If you are so concerned w/the pragmatism of the BIble, try reading & following the man-made laws of most county/state statutory codes.
shieldsff 4 months ago
@shieldsff
Is there any reason why anyone should accept the nonsense in your particular little magic book as any more "true" than that in any other cult's? It makes claims that are self-evidently false on a number of points, it contradicts itself over and over again, and it isn't supported by any standard of logic or evidence.
StaceyC123 4 months ago
Comment removed
shieldsff 4 months ago
• I think it may also prove helpful to some of the viewers here to try to evaluate many of the more strident claims of the anti-theist critique ("brights") from a ideological/ metaphysics perspective. Check out the recent article by Jackson Lears in the May 16, 2011 issue of the The Nation entitled "Same Old New Atheism" .The article offers a compelling analysis of Sam Harris' works. Consideration is given to general secular social perspectives
shieldsff 4 months ago
whats the name of the song played in this episode?
bekacynthia 5 months ago
@bekacynthia
"Bad Reputation", covered by Freedy Johnston.
StaceyC123 5 months ago
The explanation for that is called "faith" where faith is defined as a really special kind of stupidity!
fred10538 6 months ago
How can you explain a miraculous event like a resurrection with reasonable, logical thinking? YOU CAN'T Yet anyone taking an honest look will find some level of a miracle. THIS WHOLE LINE OF THINKING IS FLAWED as it is bound to knowledge we THINK is CURRENTLY true. You are looking to PROVE God's existence while at the same time the God you are looking or has said He won't be found in this manor. Ironically, your continual inability to find him is evidence He's real and what He said is true.
ARealWiseGuys 7 months ago
@ARealWiseGuys "Ironically, your continual inability to find him is evidence He's real and what He said is true." The inability to demonstrate something exists is NEVER proof that it in fact exists. NEVER. In any case. "How can you explain a miraculous event like a resurrection with reasonable, logical thinking?" You can't; that's why miracles DON'T EXIST.
MrRyanwilliamson 7 months ago
@MrRyanwilliamson YOU SAID "You can't; that's why miracles DON'T EXIST" I SAY I understand that if you have not witnessed a miracle they do not exist "TO YOU", that was part of my point. The only way you can prove a miracle beyond a shadow of a doubt is to see it yourself. If you witnessed one right now, how would you "prove" it? What makes your statement false is that miracles do exist as Myself & others HAVE SEEN A MIRACLE, without doubt. The God providing the miracle is fact in-lew of it.
ARealWiseGuys 7 months ago
@ARealWiseGuys It's not called a miracle merely because you simply don't UNDERSTAND something. That's an argument from ignorance. That's the same fallacy behind "I don't know ..... thus God!". Even if you could PROVE a miracle, there is still an enormous gap between "Miracles exist" and "Miracles exist....thus God". Your argument is this: "I witnessed something I can't explain, thus it MUST be a miracle, and thus there must be a GOD who performed it." The argument is irrationally flawed.
MrRyanwilliamson 7 months ago
@MrRyanwilliamson YOU SAID ".. called a miracle merely because you simply don't UNDERSTAND something." I SAY I'm not saying I don't understand it, all I am saying is I've seen one, apparently you have not & proving it is impossible by today's standards, for me, you or anyone. Therefor for you to say they miracles don't exist because of lack of experience is deceiving for you and anyone who believes what you say. To invalidate what I'm proclaiming, you will need to prove miracles don't exist.
ARealWiseGuys 7 months ago
@ARealWiseGuys "To invalidate what I'm proclaiming, you will need to prove miracles don't exist." Incorrect. We call this "Shifting the burden of proof". The burden of proof is ALWAYS on the person MAKING the claim otherwise you would have to believe ANYTHING anyone ever said until you could PROVE them wrong. You have it exactly backwards. Until you can demonstrate the existence of miracles or God you are being dishonest by asserting they exist.
MrRyanwilliamson 7 months ago
@MrRyanwilliamsonYOU SAID lower cs "Until you can demonstrate the existence of (INSERT ANYTHING) you are being dishonest by asserting IT exist" I SAY "Then" I unknowingly lied to you, deepest apologizes. Please enlighten my vocabulary so I won't do it again. Assuming you witnessed the following first hand and you had no doubt it took place, what would you call the spontaneous, unexplainable, regeneration of an unhealthy, deformed part of the human body to normal form & healthy? 1 word please.
ARealWiseGuys 7 months ago
@ARealWiseGuys I would say I witnessed something I can't explain. Simply because you can't explain something, doesn't mean that it has no explanation so it would be presumptuous to assume so. Also since you can't explain it, you certainly can't demonstrate that it was the result of any supposed God. Even if you wholeheartedly believe that what you experienced was a miracle, there is still no evidence for the claim "God performed this miracle" or one step further that "God exists".
MrRyanwilliamson 6 months ago
@MrRyanwilliamson YOU SAID "The burden of proof is ALWAYS on the person MAKING the claim" I SAY You seem to be blind to the fact that when you say "miracles don't exist" YOU ARE MAKING A CLAIM. What you should be saying is something like "I don't believe miracles exist, NOT they Don't exist. All I'm saying is I believe they do exist. You can't turn around and say "they don't exist" without providing PROOF the don't by your own standards. (my question of needed proof for God still stands)
ARealWiseGuys 7 months ago
@ARealWiseGuys If you claim X exists, you have the responsibility to prove it. If you offer no proof yet continue to assert the claim & the other person responds that X does not exist, it is simply a reaction to your prior claim. You still must prove your 1st claim before requiring it of the latter.
"I don't believe X exists" is better but I see you didn't mention believing until at least several posts. "All I'm saying is I believe they do exist" is a hurried typo, at best.
Strangerinasland 7 months ago
@Strangerinasland Jesus tell his disciples to boil water before they drink it. What a leap of it would have been for humanity if the lord son of god with all knowledge at his disposal taught us how to make vaccines and antibiotics to combat. He could have abolished slavery, give gender equality etc. no, he preferred to walk around telling people that they have to eat his flesh and drink his blood to live, and he scarred them to death about the end of the world being near.
petion2010 7 months ago
@ARealWiseGuys How you define miracle? If by that you mean events that violated the laws of nature performed by a supernatural deity. A rare natural event wouldn't be a miracle, and something unexplained wold simply mean that we don't yet understand it, and not attributed to the supernatural. We have no proof of miracles. we have no instance of amputees growing missing limbs after they pray to a deity. No starving people in a 3rd world country or even here being fed by food falling from the
petion2010 7 months ago
@petion2010 YOU SAID "We have no proof of miracles. we have no instance of amputees growing missing limbs after they pray to a deity" I SAY Who is "We" in "We have no proof"? I have proof meeting the criteria you've described. I admit, the proof is not transferable, only those who witnessed this miracle have proof. So all I'm saying is your statement is VERY DECEPTIVE as I read it, most people who read it will tend to think "We" is everyone in the world but me as if proof is in the majority.
ARealWiseGuys 6 months ago
@ARealWiseGuys By we,I'm talking about skeptics who demand to see such proof. And if you do have such prove please provide them to us.
petion2010 6 months ago
Comment removed
ARealWiseGuys 6 months ago
@petion2010 YOU SAID "By we,I'm talking about skeptics" I SAY Thank you, so since this is a public forum with many readers, what you meant to say, if I may... "Skeptics don't believe miracles exist". I appreciate the clarification, seriously I'm not making fun of this at all. (TBC)
ARealWiseGuys 6 months ago
@petion2010 YOU SAID "if you do have such prove please provide them" (<-grammar?) I SAY- Realizing there is nothing I can say you "should" believe (as an Atheist). If I were to provide proof of miracles, that they originate from God as in the Christian Bible. Would you be willing to openly confess your un-Godly actions? (sin) Would you be willing to stop your un-Godly actions? Would you be willing to publicly worship Him? Honestly.?.? Perhaps this is the real issue making proof irrelevant.
ARealWiseGuys 6 months ago
@ARealWiseGuys What makes you think that there's nothing you can tell me? As far of your proof for miracle, it would have to meet standard of evidence. Rare occurring events would not count, since rare occurrences don't violate the laws of nature. For instance, if you were to tell me of a case where prayer cure cancer, I would reject that because cancer goes on remission with no medical treatment sometime. It's been observe not only in human. The same goes for AIDS as for cases of people with
petion2010 6 months ago
@ARealWiseGuys immunities. Don't bring me biblical, koranic, or any other holy book you might subscribe to. You'll only get laughter from me. These are accounts from primitive bronze and iron age people with no understanding of natural laws, and in these men were also fanatical and had many reason to lie. Personal experiences are out since they can't be verified, emotional feelings can be explain naturally, and the mind and the perception of reality can be faulty. Now, if you can show me
petion2010 6 months ago 3
@petion2010 the book of job. that is all
MrYounggun74 3 months ago
@MrYounggun74 What about it
petion2010 3 months ago
@petion2010 In what is probably the oldest book of the Bible, Job, (written probably 2000 years ago during the time period known as the time of the patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob) living in an ancient culture that knew nothing about space or planets, asserted that God hung the earth on nothing (1500 B.C.) or, in other words, the earth free floats in space:
"He stretches out the north over empty space; he hangs the earth on nothing [Job 26:7]
MrYounggun74 3 months ago
@MrYounggun74 correction 2-4000 years ago the book of job was written.
MrYounggun74 3 months ago
@petion2010 The fact that air has weight was proven scientifically only about 300 years ago. The relative weights of air and water are needed for the efficient functioning of the world’s hydrologic cycle, which in turn sustains life on the earth.
When He imparted weight to the wind and meted out the waters by measure [Job 28:25] [Emphasis Added]
MrYounggun74 3 months ago
@petion2010 Science has discovered that stars emit radio waves, which are received on earth as a high pitch. God mentioned this in Job 38:7: "When the morning stars sang together..." In fact…
The galaxy is full of objects that emit radio waves, including black holes and stars of various kinds
MrYounggun74 3 months ago
@petion2010 In the book of Job (written some 3,500 years ago), God asks Job if he had entered into “the treasures of the snow” [38:22]. However with the advent of the microscope man discovered that each and every single snowflake is uniquely a symmetrical "treasure."
MrYounggun74 3 months ago
@MrYounggun74 Can you be more full of it. If the bible so accurately portrait all those scientific facts, how come Christians weren't showing them to the world before scientists explained them? Why weren't Christians making antibiotics? You people wait for a scientific discovery and either claim that god reveals it to scientists or you find one passage and claim our bible said it. Your claim for the bible inheritance to be the word of god are a few verses about rain cycle. First of all, the
petion2010 3 months ago
@petion2010 Job was written 4000 years ago. that is all
MrYounggun74 3 months ago
@MrYounggun74 Can you disprove the leprechaun, fairy, Zeus? No, you can't ask to disprove a negative statement. As far as job, no it wasn't written 4000 years ago. It's been edited many many times.
petion2010 3 months ago
@petion2010 asking a question with a question....hmm
labeling oneself an ATHEIST is rejecting a belief in a diety, How can one person reject somthing u CANNOT DISPROVE, assuming you know all there is to know. I keep an open mind, considering all possibilities< Its a simple yes or no answer< k here we go CAN YOU DISPROVE 100% THE EXISTANCE OF A DIETY(GOD)?? And the book of job was edited you say?? by whom?
MrYounggun74 3 months ago
@MrYounggun74 Complete Nonsense! How can you believe in something you cannot prove then? You know you're not being truthful and you're just paying lip service to your belief when you say you keep an open mind. In that case, why considering just god? Why not, for instance, a universe that was created by super advance alien race out of an experiment? Keeping an open mind doesn't mean considering every possibility with equal merit. Accepting something to be true still must be relied on evidence
petion2010 2 months ago
@petion2010 You canot prove a number of things< yet they exist and we take them for granted...
1. Logic and Mathematics
2. Metaphysical truths
3. Ethical beliefs
4. Aesthetic judgments
5. Science itself
Those are just 5 examples. I consider a creator< call it what you will. I have accepted there are many things that CANNOT be explained. "danger close knows no atheist" thank you, that is all.
MrYounggun74 2 months ago
@MrYounggun74 Can you be any more ridiculous? Logic is a method by which we use to explain things based on reason or reasoning. Mathematics that the language of science. Metaphysical truths, let's put that in the category of nonsense and BS people make up. Ethical beliefs are developed through generations and shaped by our common experiences. Aesthetic judgments are strongly shaped by our environment. And science is method by which we explain the natural world by using evidence.
petion2010 2 months ago
@petion2010
1.Mathematics and Logic
Science can't prove mathematics or logic. These are presumptions to the scientific method. Science presumes them to be true and has not proven them to be true.
Don't agree? Try to prove these. Take away logic and mathematics and try to prove them. Try to prove logic to be true without using logic.
MrYounggun74 2 months ago
@MrYounggun74 These are not material things to prove. Math is really the language of science. It's like asking if we can prove the alphabet is true. The alphabet is not a thing, it's made up character that we use to represent language. Math is also experimental, that mean you can test its claim to see if they're correct. How much more can you prove something? As far as logic, it's a method by which we analyse claims. What's so difficult to understand. The problem is that you have your brain
petion2010 2 months ago
@petion2010 "These are not material things to prove. Math is really the language of science." -Its still an assumption. "As far as logic, it's a method by which we analyse claims" -also an assumption. that is all. It cant be proven using the scientific method, that is all
MrYounggun74 2 months ago
@MrYounggun74 Do you even know what evidence mean. You're spewing nonsense just too support your belief.
petion2010 2 months ago
@MrYounggun74 bury so far in religious concept that they become the only way you can explain the world. You go ad nauseum with the same claims over and over. This is a problem. I feel like I'm talking to Ray Comfort or Kent Hovind. And even if I granted you all your claims, how would science not being able to explain them prove that your god exist. You would still need to prove your god. It's just ridiculous trig to prove god existence by default.
petion2010 2 months ago
@petion2010 nah my professor in college was Dr.William Lane Craig. you should listen to him. Then you can come talk to me. When your alittle more open minded. "It's just ridiculous trig to prove god existence by default" -Agreed. But i am open minded to a creator existance it makes since to me. you may have been an accident but i was not.
MrYounggun74 2 months ago
@MrYounggun74 I don't care if he was your professor. He's intellectually dishonest. He make claim about science that no scientists ever make. He misrepresent facts about evolution, the big bang, or abiogenesis all the time. And frankly, his cosmological argument is unimpressive, for all the premises rely solely on intuition without a single proof.
petion2010 2 months ago
@petion2010
2.The Metaphysical
Science can't prove the metaphysical. One of the more talked about metaphysical elements is the supernatural. Science deals with nature. The supernatural is outside of nature and therefore outside the abilities of science to take a look at.
MrYounggun74 2 months ago
@MrYounggun74 Science can't prove the metaphysical and supernatural, now, go ahead, prove their existence?
petion2010 2 months ago
@petion2010 Do you love your mother?
MrYounggun74 2 months ago
@petion2010
3.The Scientific Method
Science can't prove the scientific method itself. It presumes it. How can something use it's own process to prove it's own process? It can't. To even try is circular reasoning.
MrYounggun74 2 months ago
@MrYounggun74 Are you serious? What is there to prove about the scientific method? There's no presumption about the scientific method. It's been tried and proven through experiment and continue to yield result. You just don't make any effort to even understand basic thing and simply reject them because they would force you to justify your claims of the supernatural. Do you understand what the scientific method is?
petion2010 2 months ago
@petion2010 4."Ethical beliefs are developed through generations and shaped by our common experiences."
Yet they cannot be proven. In using the scientific method. Hitler believed what he was doing was the right thing to do when he murdered 50 million jews. So according to you thats mererly objective?? or subjective??
MrYounggun74 2 months ago
@MrYounggun74 Actually you're dead wrong. You can read some of Sam Harris stuff on that. Even here on youtube, you can check qualisoup channel, he said a lot on that. Right and wrong are not just personal opinion. We can measure the consequence and impact of our actions on our environment to see whether or not they are positive or harmful. No deity is needed for ethical beliefs, for as I aforementioned, it takes time, knowledge, and better understanding to adjust and improve our practice
petion2010 2 months ago
@petion2010 5."Aesthetic judgments are strongly shaped by our environment."?? NON SENSE, what you consider to be beautiful I may not. There is no scientific evidence to support your claim.
MrYounggun74 2 months ago
@MrYounggun74 Actually even with your and my personal taste, what's beautiful is strongly based by our environment. We learn our idea of beauty based on that.
petion2010 2 months ago
"Metaphysical truths, let's put that in the category of nonsense and BS people make up." So you dont love your mother, father, wife, son daughter..that just bs??? huh you make no sense and your argument is not valid.
MrYounggun74 2 months ago
@MrYounggun74 What that has to do with metaphysical truths
petion2010 2 months ago
@MrYounggun74 What is there to prove about any of these things? They're all concepts or methods, which mean they're used to prove or study other things. Your argument is complete nonsense. Are you claiming that god is a concept and not a being? So what that there are things that cannot be explained, that's no reason to fill in the gap with whatever you want. What cannot be explained are simply that. This attitude is why our ancestors created so many myths. All natural phenomena were ascribed to
petion2010 2 months ago
@MrYounggun74 a god. However, later generations would find the correct answers for those phenomena, and as it turned out, all the supernatural claims were wrong. What you can't explained today is no evidence for god, and future generations might indeed explain them and I doubt our supernatural claim for them will be valid. You have to prove your god, not simply pointing out stuff and say, "ha! you can't explain this, it must be god then." As far as your claim that danger knows no atheists.
petion2010 2 months ago
@petion2010 your opinion
MrYounggun74 2 months ago
@MrYounggun74 My answer is so what. I served for about 6 years in the Army. I was a 19D Cavalry Scout stationed in Fort Hood, TX. I've been on multiple combat tours, and guess what. God, christianity, or any religion didn't spare soldiers from getting killed in actions.One of the most religious soldiers I knew, a First Sergeant, died inside Camp Cuervo in a Rocket attack in 2004 yet a staunch atheist survived IED. You think that somehow believers have special place. It makes no difference
petion2010 2 months ago
@petion2010 you miss understand me< religion is non sense.
MrYounggun74 2 months ago
@MrYounggun74 As for the book of job, no one knows whom wrote it, but based on writing style and content, the book has been edited about 4 times. Each time, something new was added to the story and with a new perspective. For instance, the oldest version has no mention of job conversation with his friends and to story is roughly the first two and last two chapters. Then again, you might be one of those fundamental Christians who believe that the bible is the absolute words of god, that 40
petion2010 2 months ago
@MrYounggun74 40 people wrote it and that we know all the writers, and no one has ever tempered with it.
petion2010 2 months ago
So then can you prove:
1.Mathematics and Logic
2.The Metaphysical
3.The Scientific Method
MrYounggun74 3 months ago
If the supernatural does exist, science cannot be the method with which to test it. In that science cannot prove the supernatural exists, concurrently according to the Principle of Falsifiability, the supernatural cannot be falsified and refuted.
MrYounggun74 3 months ago
@petion2010 Either way the Bible accurately portrays of this cycle 2500 years before it was widely accepted. Note the following passages:
For He draws up the drops of water, they distill rain from the mist, which the clouds pour down, they drip upon man abundantly. [Job 36:27,28]
It has only recently been learned that most clouds are formed by ocean evaporation, but again the Bible had it right centuries ago:
MrYounggun74 3 months ago
History is fun!! This cunt and that self rightous bald bigut NO NOTHING OF IT.
MrYounggun74 3 months ago
Comment removed
MrYounggun74 3 months ago
@ARealWiseGuys Now, bring evidence of something that can't occur naturally that was achieve by prayer, like an amputee growing a limb. It doesn't have to be a full one; it could be a finger, eye, or a third degree burn skin. How about a genetic condition like down syndrome. You can provide proof for a prophesy, and I don't mean a vague statement either. It has to be a specific date, time, and event. You can't play to odd game either by throwing 50000 stuff and pick the ones that stick.
petion2010 6 months ago
@ARealWiseGuys For instance, on March 21, 2012, a 8.6 earthquake will hit the city of Dragon at 8:30 AM and kill 200000 people. It would then send tsunamis waves to the island of Unicorn and create such devastation. That would be specific. As far as worshiping god publicly, why yours? Don't you think that you have to bring the evidence first? Don't even think about making proof irrelevant. No! Without proof all we have are speculations and superstition. Would you make proof irrelevant if I told
petion2010 6 months ago
@petion2010 Do you plan on ignoring my questions selectivity while requiring me to jump to every benchmark you set? I noticed my questions have been ignored. Just pointing out what has happened. As I seriously consider everything you say, I would appreciate the same from you. I believe we can BOTH learn from this exchange if we can bother to listen (an art being lost). Did you even think through what I meant?
ARealWiseGuys 6 months ago
@ARealWiseGuys What part of your question was ignored?
petion2010 6 months ago
@petion2010 Best I can tell, the entire concept of my set of questions, all asking the same basic thing, were overlooked in your reply. Since this format is so limited; may I ask we keep our points in order; one or two at a time preferably?
ARealWiseGuys 6 months ago
@petion2010 It's been almost a week as I continue to hope for your answer. Here is the questions one more time; It's about the condition of your (nonphysical) heart. If I were to provide proof of miracles, that they originate from God as in the Christian Bible. Would you be willing to openly confess your un-Godly actions? (sin) Would you be willing to stop your un-Godly actions? Would you be willing to publicly worship Him? Honestly.?.? Perhaps this is the real issue making proof irrelevant.
ARealWiseGuys 6 months ago
@ARealWiseGuys What's non-physical heart? Do you think I'm stupid and expect me to just believe in a non-physical heart? what's this non-physical heart does? You keep saying you'll provide proof for the godly origin of miracle then let's see them or don't bother me with such nonsense again. You want me to publicly worship god while you're making proof irrelevant, isn't that convenient. If you had any proof of god, you'd never never ask me to believe, you'd show them.
petion2010 6 months ago
@petion2010 It's called a figurative heart. It's controlled by the prefrontal cortex, I believe.
spucy 6 months ago
@spucy What's so spiritual about the prefrontal cortex? That's anatomy, so there's no need to imply anything supernatural there.
petion2010 6 months ago
@petion2010 YOU SAID "want me to publicly worship god " I SAY What is likely, is u r hiding behind your insistence for proof because of a fear of what it would mean to you, facing God as you are. I've asked u 5 times now, and each time u have avoided my question-">>THAT IS MY POINT!<< Iv"e not claimed provision of proof, just the opposite but I do have non-transferable proof of miracles. Answers=A non-physical heart is emotions. NO I don't think u r stupid, but I hope u believe emotions exist.
ARealWiseGuys 6 months ago
@ARealWiseGuys Ha! Ha! You're as typically arrogant as religious people classifying people. No, I don't fear your invisible sky fairy daddy who was conjured up by ignorant bronze age nomadic savages. I'm not scared of him for the same reason that I don't worry about vampires, ghosts, evil spirits, or zombies. I asked for proof for this reason. You, theists, are making the claim that there's something other than the natural world, the invisible spiritual world. You're all claiming that this
petion2010 6 months ago
@ARealWiseGuys invisible world is inhabited by a god, that this god, created everything, and he had us in mind when he did. This perfect god wants us to worship him. Yet, this god failed to reveal his true plan to us. He wrote many books that contradict each other, that have contradiction, errors, mistakes and so on. For every supernatural claim made by them, we've now discovered the real natural reason for nature's phenomena. That's not even mentioning the atrocities and immorality support by
petion2010 6 months ago
@ARealWiseGuys those holy books. There's nothing remotely convincing in any holy book that they're anything more than societies fabrications. What is a non-transferable proof? How is proof non-transferable? This is the mental zigzag I, and I presume other atheists, have to deal with when talking to theists. You come up with these scenario that under any other circumstances would be laughable, but, when it come to your god or religious claims, you wanna have special treatment. As far as
petion2010 6 months ago
@ARealWiseGuys I will not accept the Christian, Islamic, Jewish, Hindu, or any other claim of the supernatural until such religion provides proof for that. I'm not gonna accept the existence of heaven, reincarnation, after life etc without evidence. What's so hard that if a religion has been making a claim for thousands of years to just bring the damn evidence for it. Emotion comes from your brain not your heart. There's no such thing as a non-physical heart. Stop taking those liberties
petion2010 6 months ago
@petion2010 Could you please apply your intelligence & think about what I have said and not just react? You have ignored my point for 6 exchanges. My point is proof is irrelevant in a discussion about God if once proof is established the reality is ignored. My interest = "Would you act on the proof you have asked for repetitively IF you got it? Would you confess your sin? Would you change sinful ways in your life? Would you thank and worship God? If not, isn't proof irrelevant???
ARealWiseGuys 6 months ago
@ARealWiseGuys So you know my sinful way. Please tell me what they are. Did god reveal them to you. So far, you're just ranting about sin, confession, repenting my sinful way and blah blah blah. Wasn't my position clear enough for you, that unless you have proof for your god, whichever one that is, and unless you're can prove that your holy book was divinely inspired, that I'm not interested in any proposition you make? I remember even specifically giving you examples of what would constitute
petion2010 6 months ago
@ARealWiseGuys sufficient empirical evidence. But no, you have one thing in mind, that is making a convert. You actually think that whatever you're telling me is original. You think that I've never heard them from Christians of various denominations and Muslims. The one thing all theistic claims share is the failure to provide any evidence to support them. Let me be clear to you, no, I'm not interested of confessing my sin, whatever that means, to any god. I'm not one bit interested and
petion2010 6 months ago
@petion2010 YOU SAID "I' not..interested..in worshiping..god based solely on your claim" I SAY I'm sorry, I have not been able to ask this question in a way understandable (as a result, so far almost everything you've said is off the topic I'm posing) What I'm asking is, IF you did have ABSOLUTE PROOF of the Christian God, would you worship Him? Would you confess your sin to Jesus (as He has defined sin & yes you have sinned, I don't need to know you, everyone has sin) Would you change for God?
ARealWiseGuys 6 months ago
@ARealWiseGuys Not just your claim, but everyone's claim, and not just your religion, but everyone's religion. Now, let's decipher your response. First, I don't regard your bible as a source of morality. It's actually vile. The book that supposed to be inspired by a just and benevolent god, yet condones genocide, rape, racism, discrimination, sexism, and slavery. Jesus' message had many element of things that I consider immoral too. The idea of turning the cheek, I think is quit repulsive when
petion2010 6 months ago
@ARealWiseGuys an atrocity is going on. Should the world have turned the other cheeks to Hitler or now to Islamic fundamentalist? The idea of Jesus forgiving our sin is immoral and disgusting. No one should forgive anyone on behalf of someone else. Josef Fritzl imprisoned his daughter in a basement for 24 years and raped. Now, do you think that's moral for christ to forgive Josef on his daughter's behalf. I believe that people can misbehave toward society and each other. I don't call that
petion2010 6 months ago
@ARealWiseGuys sin because I see no reason to believe that somewhere there's an all powerful being, who decide to not intervene, while taking offense at people action. When I misbehaved, I make amend, I don't pray nor confess to anyone. The last thing on sin is the stupidly ridiculous idea of thought crime. The bible has no provision for gender equality, freedom of expression, and many ideas that make up our modern society. It carries very little weight as a source of divine morality.
petion2010 6 months ago
@ARealWiseGuys You bring those proofs, I'll do you one better. I'll become a minister. It won't matter though because you will never bring the proof. That's why you're asking to confess my sin in priori. Remember, the evidence has to be empirical. If any god's and religious claim had any proof, faith would never be a requirement.
petion2010 6 months ago
@petion2010 I have asked, 8 X now; a yes or no question.You've responded with text of about 10,000 characters, but no answer. This alone indicates at the very least, avoidance.An "Evidential" exam of our exchange would conclude that in reality"Proof" of God would not ultimately alter your response. How can one "HONESTLY" study origins without the willingness to accept what evidences directs us towards? I'm willing to change my beliefs if they can be dis-proven, apparently your not. "Dangerous!"
ARealWiseGuys 6 months ago
@ARealWiseGuys Didn't I just tell you that I'll become a minister if you're prove your particular Judeo-Christina god to me. I don't know if by origin you mean life or the cosmos, but in either case, you must be joking if you think that you're gonna convince me that you know enough about either to prove your god's existence. What makes you think you have to assume that they have to be the work of a god? How do you disprove a belief, something by very essence doesn't rely on evidence? If I make
petion2010 6 months ago
@ARealWiseGuys a case that life was started by advanced alien race, you can't disprove that either. Nor can you disprove the Greek, Babylonian, Mayan, Norse, Scientology claim of the supernatural. It's up to each of those making the claim to prove that those claims are true. I don't have a PhD in science, I might never go for one, but I know enough to dismiss the Judeo-Christian claim of creations of both our cosmos or humanity. How about you started again but this time with no assumption.
petion2010 6 months ago
@petion2010 YOU SAID "..disprove the Greek, Babylonian, Mayan" I SAY THANK YOU! That is exactly the point I was hoping we realize. "Demands" for "proof" are "absurd & hopeless"; they will never be realized;.locking one into a "belief" system that prohibits the full enrichment & understanding of the universe. From what has been expressed so far It's evident the understanding of the Bible is limited & distorted. We can't begin to understand origins with a prejudicial, self-limited mind can we?
ARealWiseGuys 6 months ago
@ARealWiseGuys I found this laughable at best. This might be a very long post to make my point. First when a claim is being made, it's up to the claim maker to prove it. If I said the following, "the universe was born out of an experiment conducted 150 billion years ago by an super advanced alien race, with the goal of creating life on Earth." It isn't up to you to disprove this statement. I'm require to demonstrate that it's accurate, and also prove that the alien race does exist. Saying that
petion2010 6 months ago
@ARealWiseGuys these aliens send me secret coded email messages that no one else can decipher doesn't qualify as proofs. Now to make your position plausible, we have to accept that the universe was created, that the creator is a supernatural being, that the supernatural being is a god, and that this god is the Judeo-Christian one. Even if we could prove that there was a supernatural force behind the formation of the universe, we still would have to determine who or what it is. I reject the