Religion and Ethics Forum
Religion and Ethics Discussion => Christian Topic => Topic started by: floo on September 09, 2016, 09:17:28 AM
-
deleted
-
Floo,
If the Biblical god really exists, and is not a figment of the imagination, why does it not make its presence clear without equivocation?
By not revealing its presence in a way that is irrefutable, it would be most unjust if unbelief resulted in dire consequences as some would have you believe.
To which someone will no doubt reply, "He did that 2,000 years ago by sending his son here" or some such and round we go again. All you have to do is to believe the story in a book, and there's your "evidence".
Faith eh - doncha love it?
-
Maybe we're not AS important as certain religions would have us believe !?!?!?
Nick
-
Well supposedly outside the universe and time.
;)
-
What Rose said but why are you asking, floo, being as you have already asked a million times before and there is no answer that will satisfy. If you don't believe in God, it hardly matters.
-
If there is a god but it fails to reveal itself to humans in a way which cannot be denied, and there are serious consequences for unbelief, of course the question matters.
-
If the Biblical god really exists, and is not a figment of the imagination, why does it not make its presence clear without equivocation?
So, to use your own words, what would be for you "clear without equivocation"?
-
Floo
THIS is precisely WHY the Bible was written-invented to soothe people as to why God's not at all interested in us......anymore !!!!
Nick
-
I thought you believed in God, trippy. Not in the same way as Christians maybe but belief nevertheless. Your business of course, I'm not putting you on the spot, I just got that impression.
-
If there is a god but it fails to reveal itself to humans in a way which cannot be denied, and there are serious consequences for unbelief, of course the question matters.
I've not known anyone who has had an experience of God involving literally hearing him and/or seeing him/her and would be extremely worried about my health if I heard a voice or had a vision! That sort of thing I've read about but not experienced and am quite sceptical of some of the stories that circulate. Most of us don't look for that, frankly. There are personal revelations, times when things fall into place; I've heard it described as, "Walking through a door" which fits for me too.
Sword asked: "So, to use your own words, what would be for you "clear without equivocation"?"
I presume you would want tangible, physical proof. You aren't going to get it, floo.
It's not my belief that there are dire consequences for someone who honestly cannot believe. Having been like that myself for many years, though I was always open to belief and wanted it, it was all too difficult, a real struggle. The Lord wouldn't have condemned me for that.
-
I thought you believed in God, trippy. Not in the same way as Christians maybe but belief nevertheless. Your business of course, I'm not putting you on the spot, I just got that impression.
Belief in gods wouldn't be so bad if these so called believers kept it to themselves, unfortunately and on and on?
ippy
-
B
I DO believe in other worldly spirits etc but more from a Hindu POV as they don't seem to make excuses all the time !!!
Nick
-
That's what I thought trippy.
-
Well supposedly outside the universe and time.
;)
'Outside' of space and time makes no sense I think. Saying God is outside of space and time is like saying god could make a piece of string that is longer than infinity. You can't have such a piece of string, not because God isn't up to it, but because the concept defies its own definition. In other words, it is a meaningless claim.
-
It's not my belief that there are dire consequences for someone who honestly cannot believe. Having been like that myself for many years, though I was always open to belief and wanted it, it was all too difficult, a real struggle. The Lord wouldn't have condemned me for that.
Or maybe he would. In Luke 14:26, Jesus says we must even abandon our family to become disciples :
“If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters—yes, even their own life—such a person cannot be my disciple"
-
'Outside' of space and time makes no sense I think. Saying God is outside of space and time is like saying god could make a piece of string that is longer than infinity. You can't have such a piece of string, not because God isn't up to it, but because the concept defies its own definition. In other words, it is a meaningless claim.
According to scientists, space-time was created along with the universe. It didn't exist before the Big Bang. So whatever generated the Singularity, is beyond space-time. It could be someone or something from a parallel universe, a set of engineers producing a simulation, a multiverse...whatever.
They are all beyond space-time (and the laws of physics) as we know it in this universe.
-
Almighty God is the personification of all that energy that created rhe universe and which certainly existed before the big-bang, in fact it created the big-bang. By following the laws laid down by Jesus Christ we are following scientific laws far in advance of our intellect so its best not to get too cheeky...especially with Wormwood looming ever closer towards our planet.
-
Wb Sparkalot, nice to see you posting again ;)
-
Thanks torridon
-
Almighty God is the personification of all that energy that created rhe universe and which certainly existed before the big-bang, in fact it created the big-bang. By following the laws laid down by Jesus Christ we are following scientific laws far in advance of our intellect so its best not to get too cheeky...especially with Wormwood looming ever closer towards our planet.
All 'personification' is idolatry, at base. It is anthropocentrism, a product of the narcissism of human mind.
-
Personification here torri is the living form of the being that understands fully the mechanics of the universe...hence the Holy Bible. Don't let the simple fact that it was writen in a way that early man could understand it better than scientists of today who think everything came from nothing,whch, incedently, goes aganst their own laws of energy conservation, fool you. Embrace Almighty God and his much loved son Jesus Christ...repent..pay back for.your sins...and partake in a science that offers repair, resurrection and everlasting life..The alternative is Wormwood
-
Personification here torri is the living form of the being that understands fully the mechanics of the universe...hence the Holy Bible. Don't let the simple fact that it was writen in a way that early man could understand it better than scientists of today who think everything came from nothing,whch, incedently, goes aganst their own laws of energy conservation, fool you. Embrace Almighty God and his much loved son Jesus Christ...repent..pay back for.your sins...and partake in a science that offers repair, resurrection and everlasting life..The alternative is Wormwood
If God came from nothing, I see no reason to rule anything else out as coming from nothing ... the Universe, Multiverse, anything.
Nice to see you're still up and about, Sparks!
-
Good to know there's still some dynamic energy about Nick, welcome back.
You invariably get most things misguidedly wrong but without a bad thought, deed or expression in your manner, you're a toff.
ippy
-
Dear Nicholas,
God is in his Heaven all is right with the world, long live the Science of Righteousness ;)
Gonnagle.
-
Whoa there Sparky - nice to see you back here after all this time.
How are the experiments in your garden shed going? Do you still wear the tinfoil hat and have one of those twin aerial thingies with the blue flames running up it?
Keep on keeping on my friend - this was a duller place without you.
-
Blimey be careful what you wish for, I was only thinking about NM yesterday, and here he is! Welcome back, pistols at dawn. :D
-
Hi johnjil, ippy, Gonnagle bluehillside...
Thank you for your kind if slightly sarky greetings. As you know I am on a mission. Wormwood isn't far away and it is imperative that you repent, and quickly. Jesus didn't die just to show you that dying is a piece of cake...he wanted you and me to know that if you harness God's indestructible force in the way he did then every eventuality is covered and to live by his science is far better than the chaos that will exist if we allow evil yo take over...Ho...but you should already know that because it already has.
Not to worry...Wormwood will have the last say...according to Revelation...anyway.
-
Hi Floo I trust you are well and had your winter jab against the illness your name suggests.
I fear that we may be on the last hurdle of salvation and wouldn't want you to miss out. But, of course, it is up to you. Invoke the science or leave yourself wide open to the impending danger that the Holy Bible warns against. Don't be fooled by iniquity, whether delivered by a church or relatives and which are full of errors get your inspiration directly from the man who died for you so that you can achieve what is in your best interest.
-
Hi Floo I trust you are well and had your winter jab against the illness your name suggests.
I fear that we may be on the last hurdle of salvation and wouldn't want you to miss out. But, of course, it is up to you. Invoke the science or leave yourself wide open to the impending danger that the Holy Bible warns against. Don't be fooled by iniquity, whether delivered by a church or relatives and which are full of errors get your inspiration directly from the man who died for you so that you can achieve what is in your best interest.
I hope you are well too? My husband and I will have our jabs as soon as our surgery gears up for them, either at the end of this month, or the beginning of next.
We will never see eye to eye about religion, but it is good to have you back you liven things up a bit and have been missed. :)
-
Sparky,
Hi johnjil, ippy, Gonnagle bluehillside...
Thank you for your kind if slightly sarky greetings. As you know I am on a mission. Wormwood isn't far away and it is imperative that you repent, and quickly. Jesus didn't die just to show you that dying is a piece of cake...he wanted you and me to know that if you harness God's indestructible force in the way he did then every eventuality is covered and to live by his science is far better than the chaos that will exist if we allow evil yo take over...Ho...but you should already know that because it already has.
Not to worry...Wormwood will have the last say...according to Revelation...anyway.
"Wormwood" eh? The stuff they make absinthe from? The Dr Who spin off series? What?
Nicholas Marks, meet David Icke; David, meet Nicholas. I have a feeling you two are going to get on famously...
-
Dear Nicholas,
Sarky!! As President and high heid yin of the NicholasMarks fan club I resemble that remark :P but great to see you posting again old friend ;)
Gonnagle.
-
Re the OP, has anyone found Him yet? I've looked behind the sofa, but no luck yet...
-
Re the OP, has anyone found Him yet? I've looked behind the sofa, but no luck yet...
Cheap, and unfunny.
-
BA,
Cheap, and unfunny.
How dare you Sir - it's real leather!
-
BA,
How dare you Sir - it's real leather!
I didn't realise it was real leather. My faux pas..... see what I did there!
-
It strikes me bluehillside that Almighty God was staring straight back at you.
So ok...your sofa may be the product of a cow but that cow grew it by means of some very skillful electric work and guess what...that electric nature of the universe which fires up all the stars and all the sciences that stem from those stars are part of the spiritual personification of Almighty God, so why look behind your sofa when he was already staring back at you...as if he was sitting upon it all the time...
Oh boy...you've got a lot to learn...I hope we are in time.
-
Nick some humour there, is that permitted by your man in the sky, funny but I'm really pleased to see you back posting.
I hope this time we atheists will be able to straighten you out and perhaps find new ways from you on how to reduce our utility bills.
ippy
-
Dear Nicholas,
Sarky!! As President and high heid yin of the NicholasMarks fan club I resemble that remark :P but great to see you posting again old friend ;)
Gonnagle.
I'm sorry if I offended you Gonnagle...it wasn't my intention. My reply was to a number of greeters and there was a lot of light-hearted sarcasm involved...so I gave a bit of light hearted banter back...but I always try to be polite.
-
Sparky,
It strikes me bluehillside that Almighty God was staring straight back at you.
So ok...your sofa may be the product of a cow but that cow grew it by means of some very skillful electric work and guess what...that electric nature of the universe which fires up all the stars and all the sciences that stem from those stars are part of the spiritual personification of Almighty God, so why look behind your sofa when he was already staring back at you...as if he was sitting upon it all the time...
Oh boy...you've got a lot to learn...I hope we are in time.
We've all got a lot to learn my friend. Your problem here though is to explain why you have something to teach rather than just some fairly barmy ramblings with no argument or evidence to validate them.
Good luck with that though.
-
If the Biblical god really exists, and is not a figment of the imagination, why does it not make its presence clear without equivocation?
By not revealing its presence in a way that is irrefutable, it would be most unjust if unbelief resulted in dire consequences as some would have you believe.
If Almighty God is the personification of all the stars in the heavens and all the mechanics that directly involve us,and is all around us all the time, then, by default there must be a presence of God that reaches into every aspect of the universe...something like dark matter but with a much greater bite. Harnessing his force is the hard part and for this we must 'truly' repent.
-
If Almighty God is the personification of all the stars in the heavens and all the mechanics that directly involve us,and is all around us all the time, then, by default there must be a presence of God that reaches into every aspect of the universe...something like dark matter but with a much greater bite. Harnessing his force is the hard part and for this we must 'truly' repent.
God is a human creation and not a very good one at that, imo.
-
According to scientists, space-time was created along with the universe. It didn't exist before the Big Bang. So whatever generated the Singularity, is beyond space-time. It could be someone or something from a parallel universe, a set of engineers producing a simulation, a multiverse...whatever.
They are all beyond space-time (and the laws of physics) as we know it in this universe.
Unfortunately, as torridon suggests, the 'outside of space-time' cannot really be grasped meaningfully at all. You yourself are suggesting that space-time was created, which immediately suggests a time element, as does your use of 'generated', and 'didn't exist before the Big Bang'.
And, even if one tacitly accepts that someone/something from a parallel universe(outside of space-time) generated(generates?) the Singularity, then you are still left with the problem of who created(creates) this non space-time parallel universe, presumably out of some other non space-time state. And so on, ad infinitum.
-
If Almighty God is the personification of all the stars in the heavens and all the mechanics that directly involve us,and is all around us all the time, then, by default there must be a presence of God that reaches into every aspect of the universe...something like dark matter but with a much greater bite. Harnessing his force is the hard part and for this we must 'truly' repent.
The 'if' in this post of yours, now that is an improvement Nick.
ippy
-
God is a human creation and not a very good one at that, imo.
He is still the one that sent Jesus Christ to teach us his ways...he is still the one that has showed us, through Jesus Christ, that righteousness isn't the same as the laws of scientists, or as common sense or indeed as all con-men and scammers would have us believe...and he is also the one who says that unless we listen to and act upon the teaching of Jesus, accurately...then the electric powers of Wormwood that is a part of the Nemesis solar system which isn't so very far off now, will spiritually suck us into its fabric, leaving us very sorry for not paying attention to God's accurate teaching.
You see, spiritually, we will be either condemned or saved and 'the lake of fire and brimstone' just doesn't appeal to me or strike me as a place of everlasting happiness.
-
Unfortunately, as torridon suggests, the 'outside of space-time' cannot really be grasped meaningfully at all. You yourself are suggesting that space-time was created, which immediately suggests a time element, as does your use of 'generated', and 'didn't exist before the Big Bang'.
And, even if one tacitly accepts that someone/something from a parallel universe(outside of space-time) generated(generates?) the Singularity, then you are still left with the problem of who created(creates) this non space-time parallel universe, presumably out of some other non space-time state. And so on, ad infinitum.
Space-time is measured by the various bits of activity that occurs in the high-speed expanding universe but beneath all of this high-speed activity is a static dimension...A pre-big-bang dimension where nothing was really moving except the slow build up of many huge clouds of electric plasma...clouds of galaxy proportions. So we can safely say that within the static dimension prior to the big-bang, time stood still...or, put another way...A day is like a thousand years and a thousand years a day.
-
God is a human creation and not a very good one at that, imo.
If this is what you think, then it's hardly surprising that you have the problem here (first page):
If the Biblical god really exists, and is not a figment of the imagination, why does it not make its presence clear without equivocation?
So I'll ask again: What would be for you "clear without equivocation"?
-
If this is what you think, then it's hardly surprising that you have the problem here (first page):
So I'll ask again: What would be for you "clear without equivocation"?
What problem do I have?
Surely an omnipotent deity could devise a method of revealing itself to all humanity in a way that would end any doubt of its existence, instead of playing hide and seek!
-
Surely an omnipotent deity could devise a method of revealing itself to all humanity in a way that would end any doubt of its existence, instead of playing hide and seek!
Except you are unable to define what that method is! :)
If you can't define what it is you are expecting to see, how will you know if/when you have found it?
-
Except you are unable to define what that method is! :)
If you can't define what it is you are expecting to see, how will you know if/when you have found it?
Surely your God should know what would convince me?
If not, why not?
-
Surely your God should know what would convince me?
Since it appears you are unable to state what would convince you, I would suggest the problem could be that there is nothing that would convince you?
If I'm wrong here, why didn't you state what it is that would convince you?
-
Surely your God should know what would convince me?
If not, why not?
Exactly, it shouldn't be a problem if god exists and is an almighty deity.
-
Exactly, it shouldn't be a problem if god exists and is an almighty deity.
Again, this assumes that you want to be convinced. If you do, then why can't you say what would convince you?
-
Again, this assumes that you want to be convinced. If you do, then why can't you say what would convince you?
I have said what I think!
-
I have said what I think!
You're said that God should be able to convince you, but why can't you articulate to anyone following this thread a single example of what that might be?
Incidentally, I noticed elsewhere you stating that there is no evidence for God, so a similar type of question applies: What would you consider as evidence for God?
I'm persisting with this, to try and break the circularity
God doesn't exist, so there is no evidence for His existence;
There is no evidence of God's existence so He doesn't exist
-
You're said that God should be able to convince you, but why can't you articulate to anyone following this thread a single example of what that might be?
Incidentally, I noticed elsewhere you stating that there is no evidence for God, so a similar type of question applies: What would you consider as evidence for God?
I'm persisting with this, to try and break the circularity
God doesn't exist, so there is no evidence for His existence;
There is no evidence of God's existence so He doesn't exist
YAWN, give it a rest!
-
Sword,
You're said that God should be able to convince you, but why can't you articulate to anyone following this thread a single example of what that might be?
Incidentally, I noticed elsewhere you stating that there is no evidence for God, so a similar type of question applies: What would you consider as evidence for God?
I'm persisting with this, to try and break the circularity
God doesn't exist, so there is no evidence for His existence;
There is no evidence of God's existence so He doesn't exist
Surely it would be a problem for "God" rather than for the sceptical enquirer to devise a method that would distinguish "His" presence from that of, say, very advanced aliens isn't it? You're just shifting the burden of proof again.
-
YAWN, give it a rest!
Here is one of God's problems...He has a world full of evil and hatred. Many are opposed to evil and hatred but they don't know how to express it effectively...and evil and hatred use all kinds of instruments to maintain their path, like lies and deceit so that those who want goodness are left without the where-with-all to compete against them so Almighty God himself devises a cunning plan. He knows Wormwood is coming and soon everyone else will know it too and so he lets those trained in righteousness know that they can be saved but those who are behind all that evil, he, let's say, doesn't. They are trapped in their deceit because by it they have built riches and domains which they cannot turn away from and taking in the accurate teaching of Jesus Christ is turning away from the the things that he opposes.
-
Here is one of God's problems...He has a world full of evil and hatred. Many are opposed to evil and hatred but they don't know how to express it effectively...and evil and hatred use all kinds of instruments to maintain their path, like lies and deceit so that those who want goodness are left without the where-with-all to compete against them so Almighty God himself devises a cunning plan. He knows Wormwood is coming and soon everyone else will know it too and so he lets those trained in righteousness know that they can be saved but those who are behind all that evil, he, let's say, doesn't. They are trapped in their deceit because by it they have built riches and domains which they cannot turn away from and taking in the accurate teaching of Jesus Christ is turning away from the the things that he opposes.
Hey Nickolodium!
I see that you have a new toy to play with - i.e. Wormwood. ::)
So, what- exactly - is it?
Sadly Ialso see that you are using your old favourites 'soon' 'not far away' etc
So just to be clear, how soon is 'soon'?
Definition of soon
a; obsolete : at once : immediately
b : without undue time lapse : before long <soon after sunrise>
Origin and Etymology of soon
Middle English soone, from Old English sōna; akin to Old High German sān immediately
-
Again, this assumes that you want to be convinced. If you do, then why can't you say what would convince you?
The boot could be put on the other foot. How do you recognise the actions of the devil? It does say that such is able to come across as being that of the "light", like God, and coming out with wondrous signs.
-
You're said that God should be able to convince you, but why can't you articulate to anyone following this thread a single example of what that might be?
Incidentally, I noticed elsewhere you stating that there is no evidence for God, so a similar type of question applies: What would you consider as evidence for God?
I'm persisting with this, to try and break the circularity
God doesn't exist, so there is no evidence for His existence;
There is no evidence of God's existence so He doesn't exist
None. Which pretty much stymie's God; if It exists.
To make a judgement on any evidence one has to have had experience of that type of evidence before. The way evidence works is that it is repeatable numerously so that we can get to the point where we make an inductive assessment that this is the norm; with provisional conditions that future events may counter this judgement. Can't see where God would fit into this.
-
None. Which pretty much stymie's God; if It exists.
To make a judgement on any evidence one has to have had experience of that type of evidence before. The way evidence works is that it is repeatable numerously so that we can get to the point where we make an inductive assessment that this is the norm; with provisional conditions that future events may counter this judgement. Can't see where God would fit into this.
If you don't allow righteous teaching into your life why should Almighty God let you know he exists??
You would only argue against every point he makes and tell him plainly that your aggression against goodness is far superior to his more gentle attitude which fits neatly into his gentle science of repair and resurrection.
Best to just follow Jesus Christ knowing that faith in him incorporates a wonderful science in our daily lives.
.
-
Hey Nickolodium!
I see that you have a new toy to play with - i.e. Wormwood. ::)
So, what- exactly - is it?
Sadly Ialso see that you are using your old favourites 'soon' 'not far away' etc
So just to be clear, how soon is 'soon'?
Definition of soon
a; obsolete : at once : immediately
b : without undue time lapse : before long <soon after sunrise>
Origin and Etymology of soon
Middle English soone, from Old English sōna; akin to Old High German sān immediately
Hi Seb...'soon', here, means, 'no one knows the hour or the day but Almighty God who resides in Heaven'. But we know that it is linked in with Wormwood...the lake of fire and brimstone...and this force appears to be a part of the Nemesis star system whose presence has suddenly come into sharp focus and is being blamed for global warming, magnetic disturbances and all the serious climate disturbance involving millions of people...but don't get concerned because you don't seem to want to change 'soon' enough...and your salvation demands that you do.
-
Since it appears you are unable to state what would convince you, I would suggest the problem could be that there is nothing that would convince you?
If I'm wrong here, why didn't you state what it is that would convince you?
I don't know what would.
Does your God know or is this something he cannot do?
-
Hi Seb...'soon', here, means, 'no one knows the hour or the day but Almighty God who resides in Heaven'.
So Nichorless, you have completely refined the common usage of a word.
Why would you do that, it's not very honest of you is it?
Have you done it to put a false sense of urgency in your little dramas?
So next time why not be completely honest and don't use 'soon' or 'imminant' or any other overly dramatic language.
-
But we know that it is linked in with Wormwood...the lake of fire and brimstone...and this force appears to be a part of the Nemesis star system..........
In what way does it appear to be part of an as yet mythical star system?
whose presence has suddenly come into sharp focus
Suddenly?
When and by what means?
and is being blamed for global warming, magnetic disturbances and all the serious climate disturbance involving millions of people...
Who is blaming it and by what means have they proved that they are correct?
.but don't get concerned because you don't seem to want to change 'soon' enough.
Who says that I need to change anything?
But never mind, because if I use your meaning of soon, then soon enough could be anytime, couldn't it? ::)
-
In what way does it appear to be part of an as yet mythical star system?
Suddenly?
When and by what means?
Who is blaming it and by what means have they proved that they are correct?
Who says that I need to change anything?
But never mind, because if I use your meaning of soon, then soon enough could be anytime, couldn't it? ::)
It's all in the Holy Bible Seb. It's an electric universe and requires special electric observance to compete in the violent power that it can exert. A righteous spirit would be a good start because it meets the promises of that Holy Book. You will get my meaning 'soon' enough.
-
Here is one of God's problems...He has a world full of evil and hatred. Many are opposed to evil and hatred but they don't know how to express it effectively...and evil and hatred use all kinds of instruments to maintain their path, like lies and deceit so that those who want goodness are left without the where-with-all to compete against them so Almighty God himself devises a cunning plan. He knows Wormwood is coming and soon everyone else will know it too and so he lets those trained in righteousness know that they can be saved but those who are behind all that evil, he, let's say, doesn't. They are trapped in their deceit because by it they have built riches and domains which they cannot turn away from and taking in the accurate teaching of Jesus Christ is turning away from the the things that he opposes.
Evil and hatred is what the god of the Bible thrives on, it is all evil if the deeds attributed to it were true.
-
If you don't allow righteous teaching into your life why should Almighty God let you know he exists??
You would only argue against every point he makes and tell him plainly that your aggression against goodness is far superior to his more gentle attitude which fits neatly into his gentle science of repair and resurrection.
Best to just follow Jesus Christ knowing that faith in him incorporates a wonderful science in our daily lives.
.
That's just an argument for blindness and circularity How do we correctly identify which 'righteous' teaching to follow ? All you say is follow yours because you are correct, seemingly. Any devout muslim will say that your teaching is far from righteous, including elements that are offensive to God. My tip, for what it's worth, is not to be a follower at all, be your own man (or woman), be true to what seems true to you rather than to those who claim special privileged knowledge.
-
I've not known anyone who has had an experience of God involving literally hearing him and/or seeing him/her and would be extremely worried about my health if I heard a voice or had a vision! That sort of thing I've read about but not experienced and am quite sceptical of some of the stories that circulate. Most of us don't look for that, frankly. There are personal revelations, times when things fall into place; I've heard it described as, "Walking through a door" which fits for me too.
That analogy works both ways. Frankly, things started to make a whole lot more and simpler sense for me when I gave up trying to be a believer and accepted that there probably was no God. No longer all those tortuous rationalisations trying to explain away the hiddenness of God, or why he permits evil or why he answers trivial prayers of some believers whilst ignoring dire suffering in others. It all falls into place when you realise he isn't there.
-
That analogy works both ways. Frankly, things started to make a whole lot more and simpler sense for me when I gave up trying to be a believer and accepted that there probably was no God. No longer all those tortuous rationalisations trying to explain away the hiddenness of God, or why he permits evil or why he answers trivial prayers of some believers whilst ignoring dire suffering in others. It all falls into place when you realise he isn't there.
Here is an answer I posted to another disbeliever on another site...it may help....
Your refusal to accept that we are living in an electric/spiritual universe where all the laws of physics have at their root electric/spiritual laws means you will have difficulty with anything I say. The fact that any religion exists at all is testimony that people suspect they have an electric/spiritual nature and try to express it in many different ways...but...the laws of physics that unify all the electric spiritual fundamental laws leads us to just one conclusion...the accurate teaching of Jesus Christ is the accurate teaching.
-
Evil and hatred is what the god of the Bible thrives on, it is all evil if the deeds attributed to it were true.
You exhibit a good deal of hatred yourself with your denunciation of anyone who offends you as "scum."
-
Here is an answer I posted to another disbeliever on another site...it may help....
Your refusal to accept that we are living in an electric/spiritual universe where all the laws of physics have at their root electric/spiritual laws means you will have difficulty with anything I say. The fact that any religion exists at all is testimony that people suspect they have an electric/spiritual nature and try to express it in many different ways...but...the laws of physics that unify all the electric spiritual fundamental laws leads us to just one conclusion...the accurate teaching of Jesus Christ is the accurate teaching.
I agree many people suspect they have a spiritual nature and I agree religions exist. I don't endorse your conclusion from that though, there are other possibilities. For instance, these phenomena might be aspects of human psychology that had to develop to support our evolution across the bridge from dumb ape to sentient ape becoming increasingly aware of his mortality. Or put another way, early hominids that did not espouse such habits of mind would have eliminated themselves from the gene pool through depression etc; contemporary religious beliefs can hence be understood as examples of survivor bias. For me, this is a bell that rings truer than all your electrical stuff.
-
You exhibit a good deal of hatred yourself with your denunciation of anyone who offends you as "scum."
Trying to help the very people you tell me that I regard as scum tells me that you are misinterpreting what I am saying else you think that the evil component that clearly exists in this world is not scum.
-
Trying to help the very people you tell me that I regard as scum tells me that you are misinterpreting what I am saying else you think that the evil component that clearly exists in this world is not scum.
Nick, BA was replying to Floo not you. Anyway good to see you posting again.
-
I agree many people suspect they have a spiritual nature and I agree religions exist. I don't endorse your conclusion from that though, there are other possibilities. For instance, these phenomena might be aspects of human psychology that had to develop to support our evolution across the bridge from dumb ape to sentient ape becoming increasingly aware of his mortality. Or put another way, early hominids that did not espouse such habits of mind would have eliminated themselves from the gene pool through depression etc; contemporary religious beliefs can hence be understood as examples of survivor bias. For me, this is a bell that rings truer than all your electrical stuff.
You are stuck on that old evolution thing which gives us no clues what-so-ever to how the human being sprung from the loins of a monkey. Better to believe what the Holy Bible says, that Almighty God made us and made us fit for the the environment that had already supported life but had become void with darkness on the face of the watery deep. Then we can say that every expression we make is a spiritual/electric expression and this is what guides us...but Jesus Christ, who is far more advanced than us, guides us best.
-
Nick, BA was replying to Floo not you. Anyway good to set you posting again.
Sorry about that Nearly Sane and thank you for your kind greeting.
It was in using a phrase I had used earlier that I got my lines crossed.
-
You are stuck on that old evolution thing which gives us no clues what-so-ever to how the human being sprung from the loins of a monkey. Better to believe what the Holy Bible says, that Almighty God made us and made us fit for the the environment that had already supported life but had become void with darkness on the face of the watery deep. Then we can say that every expression we make is a spiritual/electric expression and this is what guides us...but Jesus Christ, who is far more advanced than us, guides us best.
Why is it better to believe in less than credible tales about a god, which are found in the Bible than the much more credible theory of evolution?
-
Why is it better to believe in less than credible tales about a god, which are found in the Bible than the much more credible theory of evolution?
Simple really...because the Holy Bible is written in a simplistic form by a very advanced authority. An authority who in the times of its writing was achieving the sciences that our scientists only stumble towards because they refuse to take in its first law which is that the entire universe is a spiritual/electric phenomenon owned by Almighty God.
-
Simple really...because the Holy Bible is written in a simplistic form by a very advanced authority. An authority who in the times of its writing was achieving the sciences that our scientists only stumble towards because they refuse to take in its first law which is that the entire universe is a spiritual/electric phenomenon owned by Almighty God.
That is your opinion NM, but surely an omnipotent god would be above all human faults and failings instead of coming over as a very nasty psycho? The Bible is a very human production, with no input from any god, imo.
-
That is your opinion NM, but surely an omnipotent god would be above all human faults and failings instead of coming over as a very nasty psycho? The Bible is a very human production, with no input from any god, imo.
Like me, Floo, you have a closed mind on the subject but they are total opposites. Mine has led into a totally new understanding about the mechanics of the universe exposing false scientific concepts and how it effects every single human being on this planet whilst yours says you must follow the concepts of majority opinion often led by iniquitous thinking and those who sit in privilege they don't deserve...all masking a tyrant that the Holy Bible calls Satan.
We have the time it takes for Wormwood to reach us to sort ourselves out, and, to the consternation of Seb...it will be soon.
-
Like me, Floo, you have a closed mind on the subject but they are total opposites. Mine has led into a totally new understanding about the mechanics of the universe exposing false scientific concepts and how it effects every single human being on this planet whilst yours says you must follow the concepts of majority opinion often led by iniquitous thinking and those who sit in privilege they don't deserve...all masking a tyrant that the Holy Bible calls Satan.
We have the time it takes for Wormwood to reach us to sort ourselves out, and, to the consternation of Seb...it will be soon.
NM your understanding is totally at odds with that of most of the posters on this forum, including that of other Christians.
-
Dear Floo,
Not me!! I love the Science of Righteousness, it is out there, like the Wigs is out there, only probably at different spectrum's of out there, out there, if you know what I mean :o :o
Gonnagle.
-
Dear Floo,
Not me!! I love the Science of Righteousness, it is out there, like the Wigs is out there, only probably at different spectrum's of out there, out there, if you know what I mean :o :o
Gonnagle.
Define the 'science of righteousness'.
-
NM your understanding is totally at odds with that of most of the posters on this forum, including that of other Christians.
But is it at odds with Biblical teaching, Floo? You would need to read it yourself to come to that conclusion and though you have said before you have read it many times you obviously want to disprove it rather than accept that a wonderful man, who knows that our abusive ways towards our inner spiritual/electric generating engine, is what is causing us all so much distress and is being manipulated by the unscrupulous to gain power, privilege and copious amounts of wealth all at the expense of their fellow men...This is why righteous laws seem so scary to you. But they aren't scary at all...they are what will give the new heavens and the new Earth the power to succeed, for all eternity...providing we know accurately, what those righteous laws are.
-
But is it at odds with Biblical teaching, Floo? You would need to read it yourself to come to that conclusion and though you have said before you have read it many times you obviously want to disprove it rather than accept that a wonderful man, who knows that our abusive ways towards our inner spiritual/electric generating engine, is what is causing us all so much distress and is being manipulated by the unscrupulous to gain power, privilege and copious amounts of wealth all at the expense of their fellow men...This is why righteous laws seem so scary to you. But they aren't scary at all...they are what will give the new heavens and the new Earth the power to succeed, for all eternity...providing we know accurately, what those righteous laws are.
'Spiritual/electric generating engine'? Funny I don't remember coming across that in the Bible, but then maybe my imagination isn't as vivid as yours. :D
-
'Spiritual/electric generating engine'? Funny I don't remember coming across that in the Bible, but then maybe my imagination isn't as vivid as yours. :D
It is using modern engineering logic plus scientific insight to make Jesus' teaching 21st century. We know that electric energy requires a generating force and we know that all the behaviour, both thought and physical activity, in life, burns electric energy...and because there is common understanding between these things and what Jesus tells us we can deduce that our spiritual/electric nature is the same substance generated from an indestructible source...providing we keep our replicating body cells in good order...or under repair when in bad order.
Which ever way you turn we need the accurate teaching of Jesus Christ...as he alone taught it.
-
If there is such a thing as a god, then it is probably kept quite busy listening to the constant prayers and hymns of the nunnery I heard mentioned on a BBC World Service programme during the night. It was about a group of Moslem students, from the Moslem College in Cambridge, who went on a visit to Rome.
-
If there is such a thing as a god, then it is probably kept quite busy listening to the constant prayers and hymns of the nunnery I heard mentioned on a BBC World Service programme during the night. It was about a group of Moslem students, from the Moslem College in Cambridge, who went on a visit to Rome.
According to my understanding prayer must be sent on a particular radio frequency compatible with Jesus Christ's accurate teaching...ie...humble, righteous, in meekness and with respect to the authority tuning into those prayers. Prayers made from a quiet place out of earshot of others. Mass chanting and repetition without these requirements, sadly, are not heard...but God knows that the only requirement needed from prayer is the strength and understanding to cope with our calamities and this is freely available, by return, in the form of God's righteous strength, achieved by studying righteousness and righteous prayer.
-
According to my understanding prayer must be sent on a particular radio frequency compatible with Jesus Christ's accurate teaching...ie...humble, righteous, in meekness and with respect to the authority tuning into those prayers. Prayers made from a quiet place out of earshot of others. Mass chanting and repetition without these requirements, sadly, are not heard...but God knows that the only requirement needed from prayer is the strength and understanding to cope with our calamities and this is freely available, by return, in the form of God's righteous strength, achieved by studying righteousness and righteous prayer.
Radio frequency for prayer? Oh NM, you are funny. :D
-
If there is such a thing as a god, then it is probably kept quite busy listening to the constant prayers and hymns of the nunnery I heard mentioned on a BBC World Service programme during the night. It was about a group of Moslem students, from the Moslem College in Cambridge, who went on a visit to Rome.
I really should listen to the radio during the night, SD. I am often up, or get up, and it would be better than pottering about. I quite like contemplative meditative-type singing, it soothes and 'transports' me, and the programme you mention sounds interesting - though I doubt anyone said, "Moslem". At least, Muslims don't use that word, they find it offensive.
-
Simple really...because the Holy Bible is written in a simplistic form by a very advanced authority. An authority who in the times of its writing was achieving the sciences that our scientists only stumble towards because they refuse to take in its first law which is that the entire universe is a spiritual/electric phenomenon owned by Almighty God.
How can you or anyone else know your bible was written by a "very advanced authority", you don't know, you believe it was written by a very advanced authority, which is worlds apart from you asserting this is so.
If you do reply to this post Nick, is there any possibility that your repost relates to this post.
ippy
-
You are stuck on that old evolution thing which gives us no clues what-so-ever to how the human being sprung from the loins of a monkey.
You really need to do some reading into what evolutionary theory says based on that comment.
-
If you don't allow righteous teaching into your life why should Almighty God let you know he exists??
You would only argue against every point he makes and tell him plainly that your aggression against goodness is far superior to his more gentle attitude which fits neatly into his gentle science of repair and resurrection.
Best to just follow Jesus Christ knowing that faith in him incorporates a wonderful science in our daily lives.
.
Putting in a slice of emotion; presupposing the interlocutors temperament, into your prose does nothing for your argument. One can not process what one is not geared to process, so anything from this God of yours would not come across as being from a God. No doubt it would come across from a megalomaniac who has mega psychological inflation.
-
Mass chanting and repetition without these requirements, sadly, are not heard...
How do you know that?
What research have you done to confirm it?
there is additional power in group prayer that is not there when you just pray for yourself. There is more power in group prayer than in the single power of you praying for yourself.
http://pastorrick.com/devotional/english/the-power-in-group-prayer
-
We have the time it takes for Wormwood to reach us to sort ourselves out, and, to the consternation of Seb...it will be soon.
And for those of us who use English ...
We have the time it takes for Wormwood to reach us to sort ourselves out, and, to the consternation of Seb...it will be soon sometime in the future, no one, and that includes Nicknick, no one knows the hour or the day but Almighty God who resides in Heaven and anyone who tries to scare you by pretending that he has some insight to that time by using words which do not fit that definition is a dishonest person.
-
It's all in the Holy Bible Seb. It's an electric universe and requires special electric observance to compete in the violent power that it can exert. A righteous spirit would be a good start because it meets the promises of that Holy Book. You will get my meaning 'soon' enough.
How does that answer any of the questions I asked Nicky boy?
Lets try again;
In what way does it appear to be part of an as yet mythical star system?
Suddenly?
When and by what means?
Who is blaming it and by what means have they proved that they are correct?
Lets hope that you are not going to repeat your old slippery suit tactics again, are you? ::)
-
You are stuck on that old evolution thing which gives us no clues what-so-ever to how the human being sprung from the loins of a monkey. Better to believe what the Holy Bible says, that Almighty God made us and made us fit for the the environment that had already supported life but had become void with darkness on the face of the watery deep. Then we can say that every expression we make is a spiritual/electric expression and this is what guides us...but Jesus Christ, who is far more advanced than us, guides us best.
Oh, I don't know no clues what-so-ever, we have a considerable amount of data from palaeontology and DNA analysis now illustrating the routes of our evolutionary origins. We didn't just spring, fully formed, like magic, from the loins of a monkey, it is a process that has taken around 35 million years since the last common ancestor with monkeys. So, whilst I agree it might not be fair on your grandmother to call her a monkey, it would be quite properly fair to call your great-great great-great-great-great great-great-great-great great-great-great-great great-great{..one million four hundred thousand more greats..}-great-great grandmother a monkey because she was one. Sometimes it is useful to step back and try to glimpse the bigger picture.
-
How do you know that?
What research have you done to confirm it?
there is additional power in group prayer that is not there when you just pray for yourself. There is more power in group prayer than in the single power of you praying for yourself.
http://pastorrick.com/devotional/english/the-power-in-group-prayer
I know because it is in the Gospels. Jesus says that when we pray we should find a quiet place out of ear shot...You really should read your Holy Bible, Seb. Also it tells us that God answers all prayers with an appropriate response and the appropriate respnse is to have the strength to cope delivered by special mechanics of the universe which only a very advanced authority would know about.
-
Radio frequency for prayer? Oh NM, you are funny. :D
Funny or not...it's a key principle of Jesus Christ's teaching...he tells us that righteousness responds to our attitude towards his teaching and this allows us to reach Almighty God who is in Heaven The electric/spiritual universe works through such radio oscilations so why not in prayer.
-
How can you or anyone else know your bible was written by a "very advanced authority", you don't know, you believe it was written by a very advanced authority, which is worlds apart from you asserting this is so.
If you do reply to this post Nick, is there any possibility that your repost relates to this post.
ippy
It is the product of a very advanced authority because it tells us so. Try reading it sometime ippy and read the very advanced and skillful way it is written. Also realise that the universe is a place that is made from a wonderful dynamic energy such as the stuff that science is just coming to terms with whilst the Bible student has known about for over4000 years.
-
Sparky,
I know because it is in the Gospels.
But how do you know that the Gospels are infallible rather than just some ancient folk tales? You seem to have a serious Messiah complex here - essentially anything you care to spout must be true because you've spouted it, rather than because it's supported by any sort of argument or evidence. It's all madder than a box of frogs, yet you expect others just to take your word for it. Why?
Incidentally, evolutionary theory does not posit our species "springing from the loins of a monkey" at all. Rather the evidence shows that we and monkeys share a common ancestor. If you want to critique something, you need to have at least a rudimentary understanding first of what it actually entails.
-
Sparky,
It is the product of a very advanced authority because it tells us so.
Well that's a slum dunk then.
Did you know that Harry Potter can fly on a broomstick by the way? I know this because the HP books tell us so.
-
You really need to do some reading into what evolutionary theory says based on that comment.
Evolution will be a valid science when we are in receipt of the wonderful electric forces that are involved. There is a terrific leap between righteous man and the monkey. Here is how it goes..planet Earth became void and all life lost but Almighty God wouldn't leave it that way. Knowing all the key elements were alreay within the planet he restarted it then reached into the dirt and took a hand full of dna already in the earth...doctored it and started a new era..a new beginning...you must read the Holy Bible.
-
It is the product of a very advanced authority because it tells us so. Try reading it sometime ippy and read the very advanced and skillful way it is written. Also realise that the universe is a place that is made from a wonderful dynamic energy such as the stuff that science is just coming to terms with whilst the Bible student has known about for over4000 years.
Harry Potter is very skilfully written book that doesn't make it a factual book, try reading it sometime Nick and read the very advanced and skilful way it is written. Also realise that the universe is a place that is made from a wonderful dynamic energy such as the stuff that science is just coming to terms with whilst the Harry Potter book student has known about for over, does it really matter, it's still fiction even if it were to be 8000 years old.
You keep missing the point Nick, there's no proof this book of yours comes from where you think it does.
By the way Nick, thank goodness the dynamic energy's back.
ippy
-
Sparky,
But how do you know that the Gospels are infallible rather than just some ancient folk tales? You seem to have a serious Messiah complex here - essentially anything you care to spout must be true because you've spouted it, rather than because it's supported by any sort of argument or evidence. It's all madder than a box of frogs, yet you expect others just to take your word for it. Why?
Incidentally, evolutionary theory does not posit our species "springing from the loins of a monkey" at all. Rather the evidence shows that we and monkeys share a common ancestor. If you want to critique something, you need to have at least a rudimentary understanding first of what it actually entails.
It is a key principle of righteousness that Almighty God and Jesus Christ don"t lie and the profound things they tell us means that they are far superior to you and I. I's good to know that in these terrible times we are forewarned about them and told how to deal with it...and also to warn others so that they can repent...pig headedness isn't doing anyone any favours.
-
Funny or not...it's a key principle of Jesus Christ's teaching...he tells us that righteousness responds to our attitude towards his teaching and this allows us to reach Almighty God who is in Heaven The electric/spiritual universe works through such radio oscilations so why not in prayer.
What the heck is an electric/spiritual universe when it is at home? Blimey NM your imagination really is something else. :D
-
Sparky,
It is a key principle of righteousness that Almighty God and Jesus Christ don"t lie and the profound things they tell us means that they are far superior to you and I. I's good to know that in these terrible times we are forewarned about them and told how to deal with it...and also to warn others so that they can repent...pig headedness isn't doing anyone any favours.
Then stop doing it. The question you were asked was about why you think the Gospels are infallible. Just telling us more of what they say ("Almighty God and Jesus Christ don"t lie" etc) is just evasion.
Again, regardless of what they happen to say, why do you think them to be infallible?
-
I know because it is in the Gospels. Jesus says that when we pray we should find a quiet place out of ear shot...You really should read your Holy Bible, Seb.
Well here is the Bible talking about praying together.
James 5;
14 Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord:
15 And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him.
16 Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.
-
ippy:/Floo/bluehillside:
You may have noticed that millions over many generations bave accepted the veracity in righteous teaching even iniquetous leaders have built it into there mode of manipulation in various forms...so to look aghast at someone who tells you things you should already know doesn't cut it with me. Your health, your life-style, your responsible attitude is finely tuned if we take Jesus seriously...the alternative sounds grim and it all seems to revolve around the fast approaching Nemesis solar system
-
Sparky,
You may have noticed that millions over many generations have accepted the veracity in righteous teaching even iniquetous leaders have built it into there mode of manipulation in various forms...
Millions have accepted all sorts of "teachings" from all sorts of faith beliefs. What you're attempting here is a basic mistake in reasoning called the argumentum ad populum.
...so to look aghast at someone who tells you things you should already know doesn't cut it with me.
What are you trying to say here? The question concerned why you think stories in a book to be infallible. Why do you keep avoiding it?
Your health, your life-style, your responsible attitude is finely tuned if we take Jesus seriously the alternative sounds grim...
That's called the argumentum ad conseqentiam - another basic failure of reasoning. That you don't like the consequences of something has nothing to do with whether or not it's true.
...and it all seems to revolve around the fast approaching Nemesis solar system
There is no such solar system, "fast approaching" or otherwise. It's just something you or someone you're daft enough to believe has made up.
-
Well here is the Bible talking about praying together.
James 5;
14 Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord:
15 And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him.
16 Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.
A wonderful Biblical chapter and though it doesn't quite say what I have said on this matter it doesn't say that mass prayer is beneficial either especially those led by iniquity. But Jesus did say what I said and in all instances his accurate teaching is paramount.Meek and righteous prayer as Jesus taught us is essential if we want the tighteous strength he offers us from an indestructible force that can also build stars and atoms.
-
ippy:/Floo/bluehillside:
You may have noticed that millions over many generations bave accepted the veracity in righteous teaching even iniquetous leaders have built it into there mode of manipulation in various forms...so to look aghast at someone who tells you things you should already know doesn't cut it with me. Your health, your life-style, your responsible attitude is finely tuned if we take Jesus seriously...the alternative sounds grim and it all seems to revolve around the fast approaching Nemesis solar system
At one time millions thought the world was flat! Just because a lot of people believe something to be true doesn't necessarily mean it is!
-
Sparky,
Millions have accepted all sorts of "teachings" from all sorts of faith beliefs. What you're attempting here is a basic mistake in reasoning called the argumentum ad populum.
What are you trying to say here? The question concerned why you think stories in a book to be infallible. Why do you keep avoiding it?
That's called the argumentum ad conseqentiam - another basic failure of reasoning. That you don't like the consequences of something has nothing to do with whether or not it's true.
There is no such solar system, "fast approaching" or otherwise. It's just something you or someone you're daft enough to believe has made up.
My strength comes from the fact that Jesus Christ lived, died and was resurrected telling us special things about this universe and when put under the microscope and pitted against modern science we find that science comes a poor second. The mass in the universe must have followed one pattern and one pattern alone to give us what is here now and putting all this together in one understandable teaching requires much of that wonderful strength, exposed by those mechanics, and that Jesus guides us to.
Wormwood and associated stellar bodies are well taught about in Revelation and a strike by such a body is argued to be the reason that governments are building their own protection against it surreptitiously, and at great expense. The Holy Bible tells us to follow Jesus accurately and know that the same mechanics that saved him will also be at our disposal...either with your approval, bluehillside, or without it.
-
Sparky,
My strength comes from the fact that Jesus Christ lived, died and was resurrected telling us special things about this universe and when put under the microscope and pitted against modern science we find that science comes a poor second. The mass in the universe must have followed one pattern and one pattern alone to give us what is here now and putting all this together in one understandable teaching requires much of that wonderful strength, exposed by those mechanics, and that Jesus guides us to. Wormwood and associated stellar bodies are well taught about in Revelation and a strike by such a body is argued to be the reason that governments are building their own protection from it surreptitiously, and at great expense. The Holy Bible tells us to follow Jesus accurately and know that the same mechanics that saved him will also be at our disposal...either with your approval, bluehillside, or without it.
That's nice for you. The question though (again) concerned why you think the book that contains these claims is infallible. Rather than just tell us more of what it says, why not finally at least attempt to answer the question?
Your entire position so far is, "because I Nicholas assert it to be so, it must therefore be so" with no effort at an argument or evidence of any kind to take you from assertion to fact. Does that not trouble you at all?
-
At one time millions thought the world was flat! Just because a lot of people believe something to be true doesn't necessarily mean it is!
Your right on the money there Floo. But not everyone lived, died, and was resurrected telling you about it. Now...the enormous following Jesus has had must scientifically have reasoning behind it just as the many other teachings. They can take over the minds of people and are often the result of demands from an iniquitous priesthood...but you will notice there is no such demand from the accurate word of Jesus Christ...you are free to believe or not believe...but it is definitely to our advantage if we follow his teaching accurately because he is the chief scientific officer over all universal mechanics.
-
A wonderful Biblical chapter and though it doesn't quite say what I have said on this matter it doesn't say that mass prayer is beneficial either especially those led by iniquity.
But Nick, it also does not say that it is not beneficial, does it?
-
Sparky,
Your right on the money there Floo. But not everyone lived, died, and was resurrected telling you about it. Now...the enormous following Jesus has had must scientifically have reasoning behind it just as the many other teachings. They can take over the minds of people and are often the result of demands from an iniquitous priesthood...but you will notice there is no such demand from the accurate word of Jesus Christ...you are free to believe or not believe...but it is definitely to our advantage if we follow his teaching accurately because he is the chief scientific officer over all universal mechanics.
Why must it, and do you think the same about the millions who have believed in different gods entirely?
-
Sparky,
That's nice for you. The question though (again) concerned why you think the book that contains these claims is infallible. Rather than just tell us more of what it says, why not finally at least attempt to answer the question?
Your entire position so far is, "because I Nicholas assert it to be so, it must therefore be so" with no effort at an argument or evidence of any kind to take you from assertion to fact. Does that not trouble you at all?
If my strength comes from a science that is built upon truth, righteousness and honesty as delivered to us by Jesus Christ then I would suggest that my enthusiasm and belief is all you really need to believe in a teaching that millions have also found great truth in and circular argument has no place in the teaching by 'the light of the world'.
-
Sparky,
Why must it, and do you think the same about the millions who have believed in different gods entirely?
More circular argument bluehillside...anything but accept that a higher authority that has your best interests at heart wants to save you from your own insistence that you want to fry in Wormwood.
-
It is a key principle of righteousness that Almighty God and Jesus Christ don"t lie
But how do you know that - I would assume because you believe they told you so.
In which case how do you tell the difference between someone who doesn't lie and someone who does lie, and one of the lies they tell is that they don't lie?
-
Wormwood and associated stellar bodies are well taught about in Revelation and a strike by such a body is argued to be the reason that governments are building their own protection against it surreptitiously, and at great expense..
Who is arguing it?
-
But how do you know that - I would assume because you believe they told you so.
In which case how do you tell the difference between someone who doesn't lie and someone who does lie, and one of the lies they tell is that they don't lie?
It's a little trick I learned from the Holy Bible...those that don't lie then die to prove their veracity that an indestructible force that created all the stars and atoms and can keep us safe from the worst atrocities is probably telling us the truth...especially when...as if to prove a point...they return and reclaim their mortally damaged body. Of course, if you repent at this late hour you probably wouldn't get your own vessel back because it will be severely in need of repair...but a new vessel as the Holy Bible indicates might be ok. But first you need a righteous spirit that is Wormwood proof...but it is still best to get your information from Jesus Christ's accurate teaching, Prof.
-
Who is arguing it?
Arguing is when there is a difference of opinion and the one will not concede to the other even if truth and veracity is on one of the sides. A veracity proven by the faith and dedication over many years by millions of believers...The same is true of any who want to conceal the truth of what should be revealed honestly and openly but use circular argument to conceal that truth.
-
It's a little trick I learned from the Holy Bible...those that don't lie then die to prove their veracity that an indestructible force that created all the stars and atoms and can keep us safe from the worst atrocities is probably telling us the truth...especially when...as if to prove a point...they return and reclaim their mortally damaged body. Of course, if you repent at this late hour you probably wouldn't get your own vessel back because it will be severely in need of repair...but a new vessel as the Holy Bible indicates might be ok. But first you need a righteous spirit that is Wormwood proof...but it is still best to get your information from Jesus Christ's accurate teaching, Prof.
Which is a rather long-winded way of saying that you believe they don't lie because they've told you they don't lie.
So once again I ask how you can tell the difference between:
A) Someone who doesn't lie
and
B) Someone who does lie and one of the lies they tell you is that they don't lie
-
Evolution will be a valid science when we are in receipt of the wonderful electric forces that are involved. There is a terrific leap between righteous man and the monkey. Here is how it goes..planet Earth became void and all life lost but Almighty God wouldn't leave it that way. Knowing all the key elements were alreay within the planet he restarted it then reached into the dirt and took a hand full of dna already in the earth...doctored it and started a new era..a new beginning...you must read the Holy Bible.
I haven't commented on the Bible. The commented on Evolution and showed a lack of understanding of it. You shouldn't comment on things you know nothing about.
-
Arguing is when there is a difference of opinion and the one will not concede to the other even if truth and veracity is on one of the sides. A veracity proven by the faith and dedication over many years by millions of believers...The same is true of any who want to conceal the truth of what should be revealed honestly and openly but use circular argument to conceal that truth.
All very nice but who exactly is arguing it?
-
Your right on the money there Floo. But not everyone lived, died, and was resurrected telling you about it. Now...the enormous following Jesus has had must scientifically have reasoning behind it just as the many other teachings. They can take over the minds of people and are often the result of demands from an iniquitous priesthood...but you will notice there is no such demand from the accurate word of Jesus Christ...you are free to believe or not believe...but it is definitely to our advantage if we follow his teaching accurately because he is the chief scientific officer over all universal mechanics.
There is absolutely no evidence that Jesus resurrected either. People who are really dead don't come back to life.
-
All very nice but who exactly is arguing it?
Well...Seb...a guy who goes under the pen-name of 'Sebastian Toe' appears to be arguing it. Also...if we are talking about the approaching star system called Nemesis many star watchers are displaying many photo signs of its approach on the web, but, it seems, to spare us the hassle of worrying or preparing us for it they...certain knowing governments are destroying the facts with avoidance, confusion, and misinformation tactics, whilst they build various underground bunkers of massive proportions...That is...if you believe the evidence of those who have come to believe that global warming, severe magnetic-field disturbances, and the drastic climate change phenomena...in fact...all the great tribulations foretold from within the Holy Bible are a direct result of its approach.
So...your government wont tell you or save you but Almighty God will...but I'm afraid that salvation requires us to follow Jesus Christ accurately.
-
Well...Seb...a guy who goes under the pen-name of 'Sebastian Toe' appears to be arguing it. Also...if we are talking about the approaching star system called Nemesis many star watchers are displaying many photo signs of its approach on the web, but, it seems, to spare us the hassle of worrying or preparing us for it they...certain knowing governments are destroying the facts with avoidance, confusion, and misinformation tactics, whilst they build various underground bunkers of massive proportions...That is...if you believe the evidence of those who have come to believe that global warming, severe magnetic-field disturbances, and the drastic climate change phenomena...in fact...all the great tribulations foretold from within the Holy Bible are a direct result of its approach.
So...your government wont tell you or save you but Almighty God will...but I'm afraid that salvation requires us to follow Jesus Christ accurately.
This is just madness!
There is not star approaching us.
Our galaxy will 'collide' with Andromda but even that may not affect our solar system.
You are spouting complete madness.
Where are you getting this crazy stuff from?
Was it the Sky at night?
-
There is absolutely no evidence that Jesus resurrected either.
Can you prove that? What would you consider as evidence?
(or are you going to tell me to give it a rest again?)
Also what is your proof of this?
People who are really dead don't come back to life.
-
Can you prove that? What would you consider as evidence?
(or are you going to tell me to give it a rest again?)
Also what is your proof of this?
We do not need to prove that.
If you believe someone rose from the dead, then you have the burden of proof, as people do not come back from being dead in normal experience.
Over to you to demonstrate this then.
-
There is absolutely no evidence that Jesus resurrected either. People who are really dead don't come back to life.
It isn't evidence you require Floo it's faith...but even so, we are living in an age where an invisible, superabundant, virtually undetectable, indestructible energy, is present throughout this universe. It has been calculated, by scientists, to be sufficient to build...(93/7 =) over 13 more universes of the same mass as this one. It's relatively new to science but many thousands of years old to your Creator because, in the beginning, via his righteous word, he created the heavens and the Earth from it.
Now, the problem is, he foretold of a great tragedy that will befall this planet...but those who follow righteousness will have a distinct advantage over those that don't bother and they will only have themselves to blame.
-
as people do not come back from being dead in normal experience.
So you can categorically state as fact that no-one has ever risen from the dead, or been raised from the dead?
-
So you can categorically state as fact that no-one has ever risen from the dead, or been raised from the dead?
No I cannot, nor would I claim that it will not happen 76 times tomorrow.
What I can say is that we have no evidence for this, just words in a book, and that does not count.
If you believe someone did rise from the dead, then you have the burden of proof to provide the compelling evidence.
Do NOT use words in a book to help you here, as no words from any book will count.
-
So you can categorically state as fact that no-one has ever risen from the dead, or been raised from the dead?
Hope Sword Hope Sward Hope Sward Hope Sward Hope Sward Hope Sward Hope Sward, the only difference is that Hope does have the evidence, that the magical, mystical and supernatural happenings in the bible did actually happen, errrr, when do we get to see this elusive evidence?
ippy
-
So you can categorically state as fact that no-one has ever risen from the dead, or been raised from the dead?
You're committing the negative proof fallacy: if you think that there has been such a case then the burden of proof is yours.
-
Sparky,
But how do you know that the Gospels are infallible rather than just some ancient folk tales? You seem to have a serious Messiah complex here - essentially anything you care to spout must be true because you've spouted it, rather than because it's supported by any sort of argument or evidence.
Well, he has previously compared himself to St Paul.
-
So you can categorically state as fact that no-one has ever risen from the dead, or been raised from the dead?
The problem here is that if a man has been callously put to death and then resurrected from that death it should encourage others to find out more about it...both scientifically and by common sense. We then find that there is a lot more to the story and righteousness, goodness and good order is a part of that wonderful story...with plenty for science to go at working out how this could have possibly happened. Its all down to the indestructible nature of the spiritual force that created all the stars and atoms and we can participate with that science if we take righteousness seriously.
-
The problem here is that if a man has been callously put to death and then resurrected from that death it should encourage others to find out more about it...both scientifically and by common sense. We then find that there is a lot more to the story and righteousness, goodness and good order is a part of that wonderful story...with plenty for science to go at working out how this could have possibly happened. Its all down to the indestructible nature of the spiritual force that created all the stars and atoms and we can participate with that science if we take righteousness seriously.
Instead of spouting more nonsense, explain why you believe what is written in the bible is true.
-
Sparky,
If my strength comes from a science that is built upon truth, righteousness and honesty as delivered to us by Jesus Christ then I would suggest that my enthusiasm and belief is all you really need to believe in a teaching that millions have also found great truth in and circular argument has no place in the teaching by 'the light of the world'.
First there's no reason to think you have a "strength".
Second, even if you have (eg, the strength of your opinions, however potty) that "If" is important. It could just as well come from your belief in these things rather than in their supposed fact.
Third, you're trying an argumentum ad populum again. Whether one person or one million people have a faith belief says nothing whatever about whether that belief is true, and in any case it leaves you with the problem that millions of people have believed in other gods than your own. Are those gods therefore also all real in your view?
Fourth, the only circular argument here is yours: "the Bible is true because it says it's true; therefore the bible is true; the Bible is true because it says it's true" etc. What you're being asked to do but keep running away from is to break out of that circularity to explain WHY you think this book of all books to be true.
Why the coyness about answering?
-
Sparky,
More circular argument bluehillside...anything but accept that a higher authority that has your best interests at heart wants to save you from your own insistence that you want to fry in Wormwood.
The only circularity here is yours - see my last post. What you're being asked to do is to break out of it, but you seem not to be aware even of the problem.
-
Can you prove that? What would you consider as evidence?
(or are you going to tell me to give it a rest again?)
Also what is your proof of this?
You can't prove the guy came back from the dead. No one has ever come back to life once they were well and truly dead, so the resurrection story lacks any credibility.
-
Sword,
So you can categorically state as fact that no-one has ever risen from the dead, or been raised from the dead?
So can you state categorically that there isn't a teapot orbiting Earth just beyond the range of our instruments to see it?
What you're attempting here is the negative proof fallacy - a basic logical error. I'm glad that you've joined the mb, but you're an awful long way off the pace in terms of arguing your position. It might help if you looked at some of the previous discussions to see where you're going off the rails.
-
Instead of spouting more nonsense, explain why you believe what is written in the bible is true.
Prepare yourself for a circular argument whereby the conclusion is used to justify the means by which that conclusion is reached.
-
Here is how it goes..planet Earth became void and all life lost but Almighty God wouldn't leave it that way. Knowing all the key elements were alreay within the planet he restarted it then reached into the dirt and took a hand full of dna already in the earth...doctored it and started a new era..a new beginning...you must read the Holy Bible.
Well, if you yourself were to read the Bible, you would see that there is no record of God 'restarting' anything. The old tale certainly says he started everything off, and things progressed from there (that doesn't necessarily make the old tale true, of course, but you really must be a little more sure of the original texts, before you start your imaginative re-tellings)
All rather reminiscent of certain words of Jesus, but in this case the text would read: "Ye have heard it said by the men of old, but I, Nicholas Marks say unto you..."
-
Sparky,
Arguing is when there is a difference of opinion and the one will not concede to the other even if truth and veracity is on one of the sides.
No it isn't, at least not in this context. You're thinking of the term in its meaning of "row", "barney" etc.
An argument is also though a construction consisting of a premise or premises, a conclusion and some logic to link the two. In other words, it's the bit you're missing when you post your various assertions and claims with no supporting argument of any kind. We're simply asked to take your word for it, despite not only its lack of a supporting argument but also its flat contradiction of the evidence and argument that is available.
You are of course entitled to your personal opinions about anything at all, however bonkers. What you can't expect though is for anyone to take them seriously until and unless you finally provide a cogent argument to support them.
And no - to anticipate your reply, just repeating your assertions is not an argument of any kind.
-
Well...Seb...a guy who goes under the pen-name of 'Sebastian Toe' appears to be arguing it.
This goes back to you saying 'Wormwood and associated stellar bodies are well taught about in Revelation and a strike by such a body is argued to be the reason that governments are building their own protection against it surreptitiously, and at great expense.'
Seb was asking who is arguing that. You missed his point.
-
This goes back to you saying 'Wormwood and associated stellar bodies are well taught about in Revelation and a strike by such a body is argued to be the reason that governments are building their own protection against it surreptitiously, and at great expense.'
Seb was asking who is arguing that. You missed his point.
Well, Chapter 8 of Revelation also previously mentions a third of the trees on earth and all the grass being destroyed, as well as fiery mountains being uprooted and crashing into the earth - before the arrival of Wormwood. Are world governments building their own protection against such matters? After all, first things first.
-
So you can categorically state as fact that no-one has ever risen from the dead, or been raised from the dead?
It certainly looks as if your posts are going to have to be filed under the 'negative proof fallacy posts' heading - on my computer anyway.
-
Seb was asking who is arguing that. You missed his point.
To be fair, he misses a lot of points!
-
Dear Torridon,
So, whilst I agree it might not be fair on your grandmother to call her a monkey, it would be quite properly fair to call your great-great great-great-great-great great-great-great-great great-great-great-great great-great{..one million four hundred thousand more greats..}-great-great grandmother a monkey because she was one.
No she wasn't, if you are going to spout evolution get it right, descended from monkey like, not a monkey, monkey like, we are distant cousins to monkeys, we are not descended from, a school boy error but I forgive you.
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0932663.html
The Relationship between Apes and Humans
Since scientists developed the ability to decode the genome and compare the genetic makeup of species, some people have been stunned to learn that about 98.5% of the genes in people and chimpanzees are identical. This finding means chimps are the closest living biological relatives to humans, but it does not mean that humans evolved from chimps. What it does indicate is that humans share a common ancestor with modern African apes (i.e., gorillas and chimpanzees), making us very, very distant cousins. We are therefore related to these other living primates, but we did not descend from them.
Gonnagle.
-
Dear Torridon,
No she wasn't, if you are going to spout evolution get it right, descended from monkey like, not a monkey, monkey like, we are distant cousins to monkeys, we are not descended from, a school boy error but I forgive you.
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0932663.html
Gonnagle.
Gonners you're coming on leaps and bounds. Keep up the good work ;)
-
Gonners,
No she wasn't, if you are going to spout evolution get it right, descended from monkey like, not a monkey, monkey like, we are distant cousins to monkeys, we are not descended from, a school boy error but I forgive you.
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0932663.html
I wouldn't get too excited about that though - we also share about 85% of our DNA with Zebra Fish, and quite a lot with banana plants and with ferns too. Why it's almost as if a blueprint had come about naturally rather than that a god of the omnis had conjured these things up afresh each time!
-
Dear Blue,
Ooops you did it again!! ( think Britney ) but I do get excited, another wonder of this thing we call life/Universe, I am connected to a fern and a Zebra fish ( banana plant, sounds a bit naff :P ) there is a blueprint and we are all connected and one day we may, I hope and pray, realise that, rip off the mask of nature to see reveal ( reveal sounds better ) the face of God.
Gonnagle.
-
Gonners,
Ooops you did it again!! ( think Britney ) but I do get excited, another wonder of this thing we call life/Universe, I am connected to a fern and a Zebra fish ( banana plant, sounds a bit naff :P ) there is a blueprint and we are all connected and one day we may, I hope and pray, realise that, rip off the mask of nature to see reveal ( reveal sounds better ) the face of God.
Or, better yet, of reality.
Incidentally, back to the chimps again apparently we share more of our DNA with them than dolphins share with porpoises. Remarkable innit?
-
Gonners you're coming on leaps and bounds. Keep up the good work ;)
I second that.
-
Dear Torridon,
No she wasn't, if you are going to spout evolution get it right, descended from monkey like, not a monkey, monkey like, we are distant cousins to monkeys, we are not descended from, a school boy error but I forgive you.
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0932663.html
Gonnagle.
What is obvious to me from my own studies of the mechanics of the universe is that Almighty God is involved in every behaviour and scientific manifestation that takes place within that universe. This is easiest to understand if we accept that a wonderful dynamic energy existed before the starting point we call the big-bang...so that every scientific principle begins and ends with the electric/spiritual behaviour pattern that came to life from that starting point, onward. The living cell is such an electric/spiritual entity and beneath its own replicating mechanics is an invisible electric phenomenon that comes together in two parts dragging the atomic mass it collects as dna with it. This means that every living cell has these same electric forces beavering away within them, it's just the dna arrangement that marks the difference between one species and another. Almighty God must have known all this when he made man as human rather than animal...the difference being that man can respond to righteous laws which contains the electric/spiritual pathway to our salvation...those who prefer to be monkeys need not apply.
-
Sparky,
What is obvious to me from my own studies of the mechanics of the universe is that Almighty God is involved in every behaviour and scientific manifestation that takes place within that universe. This is easiest to understand if we accept that a wonderful dynamic energy existed before the starting point we call the big-bang...so that every scientific principle begins and ends with the electric/spiritual behaviour pattern that came to life from that starting point, onward. The living cell is such an electric/spiritual entity and beneath its own replicating mechanics is an invisible electric phenomenon that comes together in two parts dragging the atomic mass it collects as dna with it. This means that every living cell has these same electric forces beavering away within them, it's just the dna arrangement that marks the difference between one species and another. Almighty God must have known all this when he made man as human rather than animal...the difference being that man can respond to righteous laws which contains the electric/spiritual pathway to our salvation...those who prefer to be monkeys need not apply.
Further assertions noted. Now then, any chance finally of some kind of argument to validate them just so, you know, the rest of us won't think this is all madder than a monkey on a tricycle?
In your own time old son.
-
NM appears to be obsessed with the word 'electric'.
-
NM appears to be obsessed with the word 'electric'.
ALways has been, always will be I'm afraid.
-
ALways has been, always will be I'm afraid.
To give credit where credit is due, NM doesn't appear to take offence when his posts are challenged, which they invariably are..
-
Sparky,
Further assertions noted. Now then, any chance finally of some kind of argument to validate them just so, you know, the rest of us won't think this is all madder than a monkey on a tricycle?
In your own time old son.
I'll try and explain myself bluehillside but I'm not hopeful...You see...modern science says that all those trillions upon trilllions of megatons of electric energy containred within all those vast amounts of solar electric furnaces in the heavens came from a singularity...a big-bang...I and the Holy Bible disagree...are you with me so far?
We say that there is/was an indestructible energy there first....a material not unlike dark matter but with much more bite. A bite so powerful that the entire mechancs of the universe can be traced back to it. Almighty God says it is very different to what you might normally expect and follows its own righteous laws...the very same laws Jesus taught us.
-
Sparky,
I'll try and explain myself bluehillside but I'm not hopeful...You see...modern science says that all those trillions upon trilllions of megatons of electric energy containred within all those vast amounts of solar electric furnaces in the heavens came from a singularity...a big-bang...I and the Holy Bible disagree...are you with me so far?
Leaving aside your somewhat eccentric description of what "science" says, yes I'm with you so far - you have a personal opinion that contradicts the evidence and reasoning that science provides.
We say that there is/was an indestructible energy there first....a material not unlike dark matter but with much more bite. A bite so powerful that the entire mechancs of the universe can be traced back to it. Almighty God says it is very different to what you might normally expect and follows its own righteous laws...the very same laws Jesus taught us.
Who's "we"? I'm pretty sure that you're all on your own in your opinions here.
Anyways, what you've done there is to state a personal belief. What you've been asked to do however is to explain why you hold it. That's the problem here. Imagine if, say, I pitched up and said something like, "the science of gravity is all wrong. My studies lead me to conclude that stuff is held down by invisible pixies holding everything in place with very thin string".
In response you might say something like, "well, okaaay - why do you think that? What reasoning or evidence do you have for this remarkable claim?" only every time you did so I'd just repeat my pixie conjecture with no attempt of any kind to validate it.
That's essentially what's happening here, only it's the other way around. You make the same assertions over and over again, but never once trouble yourself with telling us why you think any of these things to be true.
Do you see your problem now?
-
I'll try and explain myself bluehillside but I'm not hopeful...You see...modern science says that all those trillions upon trilllions of megatons of electric energy containred within all those vast amounts of solar electric furnaces in the heavens came from a singularity...a big-bang...I and the Holy Bible disagree...are you with me so far?
We say that there is/was an indestructible energy there first....a material not unlike dark matter but with much more bite. A bite so powerful that the entire mechancs of the universe can be traced back to it. Almighty God says it is very different to what you might normally expect and follows its own righteous laws...the very same laws Jesus taught us.
If god exists I wouldn't be surprised if it is sitting on its fluffy white cloud scratching its head like the rest of us, wondering how on earth you come up with your eccentric scenarios!
-
Sparky,
Leaving aside your somewhat eccentric description of what "science" says, yes I'm with you so far - you have a personal opinion that contradicts the evidence and reasoning that science provides.
Who's "we"? I'm pretty sure that you're all on your own in your opinions here.
Anyways, what you've done there is to state a personal belief. What you've been asked to do however is to explain why you hold it. That's the problem here. Imagine if, say, I pitched up and said something like, "the science of gravity is all wrong. My studies lead me to conclude that stuff is held down by invisible pixies holding everything in place with very thing string".
In response you might say something like, "well, okaaay - why do you think that? What reasoning or evidence do you have for this remarkable claim?" only every time you did so I'd just repeat my pixie conjecture with no attempt of any kind to validate it.
That's essentially what's happening here, only it's the other way around. You make the same assertions over and over again, but never once trouble yourself with telling us why you think any of these things to be true.
Do you see your problem now?
Ducking and diving wont help you here bluehillside...my first allegiance is to Almighty God and his son Jesus Christ and showing why they are better followed...by faith in the first instance but by science if you can get your head round it...as long as by faith we follow his accurate teaching not the messy version delivered by iniquity.
Of course there is no need to follow at all but all opposition will be silenced when Wormwood sweeps by because the electric/spiritual forces that will accompany it will certainly separate those truly repentant from those who truly love to argue against righteousness...and that is in the Holy Bible too.
-
Sparky,
Ducking and diving wont help you here bluehillside...
What ducking and diving? The only person doing it here is you when you continue to avoid telling us why you hold the opinions you have.
...my first allegiance is to Almighty God and his son Jesus Christ and showing why they are better followed...by faith in the first instance but by science if you can get your head round it...as long as by faith we follow his accurate teaching not the messy version delivered by iniquity.
Your personal opinion about this is noted. Again.
Of course there is no need to follow at all but all opposition will be silenced when Wormwood sweeps by because the electric/spiritual forces that will accompany it will certainly separate those truly repentant from those who truly love to argue against righteousness...and that is in the Holy Bible too.
Your personal opinion about this is noted. Again.
Just to avoid wasting more time chasing you all over this mb asking you finally to answer the question you've been asked several times now about why you believe as you do, would you at least tell us whether you intend always to avoid answering it - or, to use your term - do you intend to keep ducking and diving?
Ta.
-
What you're attempting here is the negative proof fallacy - a basic logical error.
Not really.
Can you prove that David Cameron is not the President of the United States?
Can you prove that the River Seine does not run through Central London?
Can you prove that 2+2<>5?
That's the way truth works! You can prove it in the affirmative, or prove it is false by showing that a converse is true.
What happens here however, is that there is a precommitment to natural causes and explanations. Is this worldview true, or not? By scientific standards, it should be falsifiable. It is not.
The problem with the Celestial Teapot (and all arguments based on it) is the assumption that religious belief has no evidence to support it. Therefore something made up is wrongly compared to religious belief. It's an incorrect comparison. What evidence is there that a teapot is orbiting in space? It is clearly made-up.
So what it comes down to is the worldview used to interpret the evidence. What scientific/empirical evidence do I have for the emotion of love or anger? Should I say that these don't exist because they cannot be measured scientifically?
If one starts with evidence, it doesn't always lead to truth. However, truth is always supported by evidence. Evidence can have a variety of forms, but ultimately it is the worldview used to interpret it that will determine the conclusion. Therefore it is essential that the correct worldview is employed.
-
Sword,
Not really.
Yes really.
Can you prove that David Cameron is not the President of the United States?
Can you prove that the River Seine does not run through Central London?
Can you prove that 2+2<>5?
That's the way truth works! You can prove it in the affirmative, or prove it is false by showing that a converse is true.
How would you propose to "prove" a negative exactly?
What happens here however, is that there is a precommitment to natural causes and explanations. Is this worldview true, or not? By scientific standards, it should be falsifiable. It is not.
No it isn't. It's actually what happens when someone doesn't understand what the negative proof fallacy entails.
The problem with the Celestial Teapot (and all arguments based on it) is the assumption that religious belief has no evidence to support it. Therefore something made up is wrongly compared to religious belief. It's an incorrect comparison. What evidence is there that a teapot is orbiting in space? It is clearly made-up.
You need to decide which horse you're backing here. If you want to go the evidence route, that's a naturalistic concept. By all means attempt to show some for "God" if you want to (you'll be the first ever to do so), but you need to accept thereby whose lawn it is that you've parked your tank on - ie, the naturalistic "worldview".
So what it comes down to is the worldview used to interpret the evidence. What scientific/empirical evidence do I have for the emotion of love or anger? Should I say that these don't exist because they cannot be measured scientifically?
No, you should look for the evidence (of which there's plenty by the way). And when the evidence is insufficient, then all you have is a causal or phenomenological "don't know" rather than a "they don't exist". What you don't have though is a, "they must be supernatural then".
If one starts with evidence...
More naturalism then eh?
...,it doesn't always lead to truth.
Actually it does, or at least to a truth: the truth according the available evidence.
However, truth is always supported by evidence.
Well, the categorisation of something as "probably true" perhaps (something could still be "true" even if no-one know's it's true), but OK...
Evidence can have a variety of forms, but ultimately it is the worldview used to interpret it that will determine the conclusion. Therefore it is essential that the correct worldview is employed.
And how do propose to decide which "worldview" is the "correct" one exactly?
Try my "ten people before breakfast" thought experiment that you ignored last time. Which of the ten "world views" would you suggest I adopt a priori, and why?
-
And how do propose to decide which "worldview" is the "correct" one exactly?
One that allows for natural and non-natural causes!
-
Sword,
One that allows for natural and non-natural causes!
For example...?
(Remember, just relying on naturalistic concepts like evidence and reason and logic and historicity and psychology and etc etc are - according to you - off the table for this purpose.)
-
Bluehillside has comprehensively answered your post but I’m hjust going to make one or two comments.
Can you prove that David Cameron is not the President of the United States?
This is a question dealing with a real person and a real country, so it would be fairl easy to show to a level as near as makes no difference that that is the case.
The problem with the Celestial Teapot (and all arguments based on it) is the assumption that religious belief has no evidence to support it.
It hasn’t … unless you can produce one testable fact. There are mountains of subjective ideas and beliefs which people believe to be proof, but none that stands up to scrutiny.
What scientific/empirical evidence do I have for the emotion of love or anger?
I subscribed to the New Scientist (audio version) for many years and listened to articles about the experiments that show reactions in the brain associated with certain emotions. Such emotions are not possible without a living brain to supply the chemicals etc needed to produce the reaction or behaviour.
-
Hi Susan,
This is a question dealing with a real person and a real country, so it would be fairl easy to show to a level as near as makes no difference that that is the case.
It would, but Sword's question was whether I could "prove" that - which of course I could not. How for example would I eliminate the possibility of waking from a coma only to find that DC was the POTUS?
The mistake though is to think that the absence of such a proof has anything whatever to say to whether DC is the POTUS.
-
bluehillside
Thank you for post. I wish we still had one of those *thumbs up* emoticons!
-
Not really.
Can you prove that David Cameron is not the President of the United States?
Can you prove that the River Seine does not run through Central London?
Can you prove that 2+2<>5?
I don't suppose for a second you're making these claims - but if you were then by this challenge you'd be committing the NPF (and gloriously so).
-
Bluehillside has comprehensively answered your post
He has comprehensively answered a post?
I'm off to get the Bunting up.
-
He has comprehensively answered a post?
I'm off to get the Bunting up.
And if you ever do the same - I have a sparkler ready to light , been saved in a drawer just for that occasion. I'm not sure it will work after 8 years though!
-
Vlad,
He has comprehensively answered a post?
I'm off to get the Bunting up.
This from the king of avoidance, evasion and distraction?
Blimey!
-
This is a question dealing with a real person and a real country, so it would be fairl easy to show to a level as near as makes no difference that that is the case.
Nevertheless, it shows that there are ways to prove a negative! :)
It hasn’t … unless you can produce one testable fact. There are mountains of subjective ideas and beliefs which people believe to be proof, but none that stands up to scrutiny.
Ok, let's start with Christianity. What scrutiny have you performed to establish whether or not Jesus Christ rose from the dead?
-
Hi Susan,
It would, but Sword's question was whether I could "prove" that - which of course I could not. How for example would I eliminate the possibility of waking from a coma only to find that DC was the POTUS?
In other words, a worldview is needed that can take the hypothesis, consider the things that would support it and consider the things that would go against it, before reaching a final conclusion that has to be taken on faith!
-
Sword,
Nevertheless, it shows that there are ways to prove a negative! :)
No it doesn't. How would you propose to prove that?
Ok, let's start with Christianity. What scrutiny have you performed to establish whether or not Jesus Christ rose from the dead?
The same scrutiny you'd apply to any other such claim - the commonality of superstitious tales at the time, the absence of contemporary records, the absence of any known means for it to happen, the propensity for stories to stick because of survivor bias, the heavy editing of the books that eventually did write the story down and the discrepancies between them etc etc.
The point though is that all these methods and others are naturalistic in character. Your complaint concerns use of the naturalistic "world view", so what methods would your propose we use instead?
-
Sword,
In other words, a worldview is needed that can take the hypothesis, consider the things that would support it and consider the things that would go against it, before reaching a final conclusion that has to be taken on faith!
Not in other words at all, no. You're conflating meanings of the word "faith" here - ie, "a realistic expectation based on experience and known parameters" vs "a strong feeling in my head that I think thereby to be an objective truth for other people". I have "faith" that my car will start in the morning; I don't have "faith" that there's a dragon asleep under the bonnet.
We've covered this before - you might want to read some previous threads to see where you've gone off the rails.
-
Your complaint concerns use of the naturalistic "world view",
Which assumes natural causes...
Not in other words at all, no. You're conflating meanings of the word "faith" here - ie, "a realistic expectation based on experience and known parameters" vs "a strong feeling in my head that I think thereby to be an objective truth for other people". I have "faith" that my car will start in the morning; I don't have "faith" that there's a dragon asleep under the bonnet.
No conflation. You have merely illustrated the difference between faith and blind faith.
-
Sword,
Which assumes natural causes...
Yes it does. What non-naturalistic method do you propose instead to test your claims of the supernatural?
No conflation. You have merely illustrated the difference between faith and blind faith.
Big conflation. What method would you propose to indicate that your faith in the supernatural isn't "blind"?
-
Sword,
Yes it does. What non-naturalistic method do you propose instead to test your claims of the supernatural?
The use of logic and reason.
The universe either popped out of nothing or it is eternal.
Either are unique, not subject to any law, generate no law nor are subject to scientific investigation.
Ta Da.
-
The use of logic and reason.
The universe either popped out of nothing or it is eternal.
Either are unique, not subject to any law, generate no law nor are subject to scientific investigation.
Ta Da.
This is nonsense. It's because of scientific work, that the notion of the Big Bang has emerged. How do you think they discovered it, by counting the pixies on the planet Zog?
-
Vlad,
The use of logic and reason.
Nope. Sword's complaint was the use of a naturalistic world view. Logic and reason are naturalistic methods, not non-naturalistic ones. By all means rely on these naturalistic methods if you want (and thereby risk Sword's opprobrium) but you'll keep losing the arguments when you do.
The universe either popped out of nothing or it is eternal.
Or various other options. None of which though say anything to the notion of "supernatural". "Don't know" and "supernatural" are not synonyms. Why is this so difficult for you?
Either are unique, not subject to any law, generate no law nor are subject to scientific investigation.
Uniqueness and non-investigability have nothing whatever to do with supernaturalism. All they tell you is that they happened just once and are not investigable.
Ta Da.
I think you meant "Ta doh!"
-
Wiggs,
This is nonsense. It's because of scientific work, that the notion of the Big Bang has emerged. How do you think they discovered it, by counting the pixies on the planet Zog?
Quite so. Vlad's weird thinking implies that a supernatural event stays supernatural, but only up to the time that someone has a big enough telescope or similar to explain it, at which time it magics into the natural. Whether it can magic back again if the explanation is wrong is anyone's guess, but there it is I guess.
Bonkers innit?
-
Vlad,
Nope. Sword's complaint was the use of a naturalistic world view.
Which assumes natural causes and explanations. That is my objection, because then how can such a worldview examine evidence of a non-natural cause?
-
Sword,
Which assumes natural causes and explanations. That is my objection, because then how can such a worldview examine evidence of a non-natural cause?
That's claims of a non-natural cause. It's your claim though, so what "world view" do you propose we use instead to examine these claims?
Why so coy?
-
Ok, let's start with Christianity. What scrutiny have you performed to establish whether or not Jesus Christ rose from the dead?
Sword
Aside from this being an instance of the dear old NPF: perhaps you'll have a go at this - I've asked this of several theists here but without reply. The question is a simple one: how have you excluded the risks of mistakes or lies in the anecdotal accounts of the resurrection of Jesus?
That people makes mistakes and tell lies is known human behaviour, so surely these risks are a problem in respect of any claim that is dependent on the veracity of anecdotal accounts of unknown provenance - so, what is your view on this aspect?
-
Which assumes natural causes and explanations. That is my objection, because then how can such a worldview examine evidence of a non-natural cause?
So all you need do now is provide an example of a non-natural cause and a method of demonstrating that this cause is mutually exclusive from any natural phenomena.
-
Gordon,
So all you need do now is provide an example of a non-natural cause and a method of demonstrating that this cause is mutually exclusive from any natural phenomena.
Yes he does, though he's ducked that and suggested that it's the job others to do that. It's just the old shifting the burden of proof thing, but so far at least Sword doesn't seem to have grasped the issue.
-
This is nonsense. It's because of scientific work, that the notion of the Big Bang has emerged.
But I think you'll agree the notion that the universe came ex Nihilo came hundreds of years before science. Science seems to provide evidence for that but some feel there is wriggle room for an eternal universe.