The thing is more like, do you believe the words of jesus because it's wrote so in the bible, or because the words make sense to you ?
In first case it become more like idolatry of a man.
In the second case it's more like recognition of truth through your own spirit.
It's very important distinction emphasized by plato or socrates.
Topic: Scientific proof that God exists? - page 146. (Read 845809 times)
Quote
It's invisible as well, that's why you didn't see it and it doesn't usually live here because it can teleport through space.
If its invisible how do you know its unicorn let alone having 3 horns?
Quote
In regards to bible mistakes:
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_scientific_errors
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_scientific_errors
That is a nitpicking here. Insects might be reffered as having 4 legs and 2 arms. They use those 2 frontal legs like arms sometimes. Just like Gorrilas sometimes uses only 2 legs not 4. Its nitpicking.
Who cares if someone that is not a matematician had wrote pi number not so precise. God had not wrote the book, it was only inspired.
And yes. Not only the flat earthers thinks the firnament is semisolid. The people that believe the earth is concave like me thinks the same. Before you laugh you must really get to know more about it. It really stand up up to science verification, wheter you believe it or not.
I am such a person that I think everything could be possible until proven wrong, and yes unicorns teleporting are a really easy absurd to be debunked, just like evolution.
Quote
Plato is not a dogma.
Philosophy in the platonic sense of dialog is not dogmatic.
It's more a litterature style rather than anything.
More a method of reflection and gain wisdom through interaction between two characters.
When they speak of philosophy in the bible they speaks of sophists , not about plato or Pythagoras.
God was existing before the new testament was written. It's clear Judaism inspired plato, and platonists and stoics influenced Christianism.
For me the new testament make much more sense in the view of platonic teaching.
The old testament still seem to pick up certain elements of previous culture like egyptian and babylonian, while rejecting only the corruption of knowledge by kings and corrupted priesthood orders.
To me it looks a lot like what Jews did with the old testament is similar to what budhist did on hinduism. A sort of purification or synthèses of mesh of various cult to re extract the essential from them.
Pharisee are not all Jews culture, and it's same with babylonian and philosophy, need to be careful about the term used in detail.
Born again is only through water and spirit.
Philosophy in the platonic sense of dialog is not dogmatic.
It's more a litterature style rather than anything.
More a method of reflection and gain wisdom through interaction between two characters.
When they speak of philosophy in the bible they speaks of sophists , not about plato or Pythagoras.
God was existing before the new testament was written. It's clear Judaism inspired plato, and platonists and stoics influenced Christianism.
For me the new testament make much more sense in the view of platonic teaching.
The old testament still seem to pick up certain elements of previous culture like egyptian and babylonian, while rejecting only the corruption of knowledge by kings and corrupted priesthood orders.
To me it looks a lot like what Jews did with the old testament is similar to what budhist did on hinduism. A sort of purification or synthèses of mesh of various cult to re extract the essential from them.
Pharisee are not all Jews culture, and it's same with babylonian and philosophy, need to be careful about the term used in detail.
Born again is only through water and spirit.
Its not about the dogma. Its about degrading the message of christ by putting him in the grinder of hermeneutics.
Christ message is not cryptic. You don't have to do that. For you it might make more sense when you use hermeneutics. I don't deny that. Maybe its worth so little that you have to put labels on it to be worth anything. For me it makes a lot less sense that way.
By the way its important not to add or take from the message. By doing hermeneutics or comparing him with someone - you are doing precisly that.
Then why give them free will if you are going to kill them when they do something wrong? Do you not see the problem in that? You are taking away the freedom from them so you could have just programmed them to be good in the first place if you are going to end up stealing their freedom anyways.
Freedom is not reached by ignoring law and rules.
The truth will set you free he said.
Faith is not about avoiding death and suffering in the flesh.
Everyone can reach full command of their spirit.
If you are so afraid of suffering in the flesh or death, you should take few teaching from the stoics
"Don't behave as if you are destined to live forever. What's fated hangs over you. As long as you live and while you can, become good now." — Marcus Aurelius
Tyranny and threats are powerless against Christian believers, he declares, because of the hope they have. “You can kill us, but you cannot hurt us.”
“Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words will never hurt me.”
I believe so no proof is needed.
Good! Continue on with your faith. But make sure that you are on God's side, because even demons believe, and are fearful of the wrath of God. Consider Jesus salvation.
Hopefully scientific proof will help some who won't believe without it. But if they won't believe even after the scientific proof, they are only making their self destruct more dynamic.
Normally even those who only believe in what they see should end believing, if they really are into what they see
I believe so no proof is needed.
Good! Continue on with your faith. But make sure that you are on God's side, because even demons believe, and are fearful of the wrath of God. Consider Jesus salvation.
Hopefully scientific proof will help some who won't believe without it. But if they won't believe even after the scientific proof, they are only making their self destruct more dynamic.
If religions are bad, then all things of people are bad. Why? Because some people simply focus on one thing, while others focus on other things. Tesla's religion of math and electronics was bad?
Jesus didn't say much after His crucifixion. But He said a lot before it. The things He said before don't entirely match the things He said after. Why not? There was a change made in the relationship between man and God at the crucifixion time. Even so, Paul's sayings are not going to match the things Jesus said before the crucifixion.
The Bible needs to be understood according to the whole theme of the relationship between God and man during the time that any of it was written... if one wants to understand it properly. Christians who apply O.T. stuff to themselves, often apply those things incorrectly, because they are not of O.T. times.
Yes !
Need to see the reaction of characters in the context.
In this sometime it looks written like platonic dialog. More like story with meaning to be understood through the interaction of two characters rather than mere accurate recollection of historical facts.
I don't agree with that. That makes you platonist before paulist before christian. Christ said clearly to follow him and await his return.
I don't say that Paul was not inspired by God. Cyrus was inspired by God as well. God uses the followers of christ and non followers alike to further his plans.
Plans of Paul as a Pharisee was to divide and weaken the Pharisee, to confuse them and to spread the "light" version of christianity that I would call paulianism, so that the message would not die. The method was to presserve the message not to further it. God only knows if not the Paul the message of christ would not be forgotten.
The role of a Paul was to make as much babilonian like people to know about it and be interested in it, so that even the worst pagan would know about Jesus. It was to presserve the word of God.
Its a clear message not to confuse the message of philosophy and the Bible in the Bible words. Catholics the apostate does that. Why do they do it? Because they are graven image worship Paulians, not christians.
You have to born again christian, leave all dogmas and love Jesus.
Thats my opinion.
Quote
Saying that god helped tesla is meaningless when you haven't even proved his existence.
Well... Its not meaningless for Tesla. lol.
You just demand impossible, for you to be able to justify your hiding in your atheist closet. Ok. Im fine with it. Be closed in your atheist closet if thats your free will.
As I had already told you. Atheism is not a default possition. Atheism is a point of view that requires YOU to have a proof that god does not exist. You claim there is no god. Where is your proof? If you have none you are an agnostic.
A movie about atheism as belief system https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwMIe_AU02c
I also don't have proof that Super Unicorns with 3 horns that can teleport through space exist, does that mean I should believe they exist until someone proves they don't? I already proved how the god from the bible doesn't exist because they bible is filled with mistakes and nonsense.
What mistakes in the bible? Creation? You have not proven that passage wrong.
Snake being a symbol? How have you proven it wrong?
Virginity of Mary is nowhere near there in the bible. That not even the need to be proven wrong - its not biblical
Have you answered what is life? So why do you think ressurection is impossible if you do not even know what you are talking about what life is? Do you mean that the life cease to exist with the beating of a heart? Do you know there is a substance that makes people into a very big coma where the beating of heart is so unable to be recognised that you would think that the person is dead while he is not.
How about cryogenics. Technicly dead frozen bodies being ressurected to life? How about Izraelis torturing Palestinians by chocking them and them ressurecting them? If you think that ice can presserve the life. Why do you think that GOD CAN NOT PRESSERVE it? If everything is in him? Why ice is better?
Give me break. Define life and death first.
I can prove that super unicorns with 3 horns does not exist on earth. We have satelites so one would have seen it. Unless they burrow deep down underground. But then, they would not look like a horse and would have no horns.
Its highly unlikely that a creature that looks like a horse could live anywhere else than on the surface of the earth, eating grass.
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_scientific_errors
https://www.thoughtco.com/scientific-historical-errors-mistakes-in-bible-248627
https://infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/contradictions.html
You would expect a book that's the only thing that ''proves'' god would have no mistakes, would be so perfectly written that people would not interpret it in different ways. There is also the problem with the description of God. All knowing all powerful yet he fails several times. He even had to kill almost everyone because of his failures, how does a god fail? How does a god get angry?
Since many others have proven that the Bible does not have mistakes, perhaps it is YOU who are mistaken.
Youtube search on "Uri Harel." He was a recent Jewish rabbi who investigated the Old Testament Ancient Hebrew thoroughly. He found that there were only 12 "cosmetic unknowns" in the whole O.T. These unknowns take absolutely nothing away from any theme of the O.T. There are no mistakes in the Bible that are worse than cosmetic... "typos."
At the same time, the things of science that seem to contradict the Bible, do so because of the interpretations that scientists and others place on them. Science has to place these interpretations there, because there is no proof for any of these contradictions at all.
To say it another way... Bible religion is not religion; it is fact and truth. Science is the religion.
If the bible was inspired by god you would expect no mistakes or possibility of anyone interpreting in any other way. There is no interpretation when it says that god commanded people to kill other people for whatever reason. It is not a bad interpretation all the contradictions there are in the bible. https://infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/contradictions.html
If you are a god and the only thing you leave to humans to prove your existence is a simple book, wouldn't you make sure it has no errors?
When you are a God of true love and power like God is, you are the best thing that exists. When you are the best thing that exists, being love, you want to give other beings the ability to, also, experience and be the best. If while making them the best - making them like you are - they corrupt the "bestness" you have placed in them (they can do the corruption because they have the power of yourself you placed into them), what are your choices?
Because you have made them like yourself in their core being, you can't coerce them into doing anything. You are willpower, and so are they, because you made them that way. But the very fact that they have turned against "Godness," is their own self destruction. The best you can do is save the few who can be reached in a way where they voluntarily decide to step out of their self destruction.
The benefit to those others - the ones who are continuing onward with their self destruction - is to destroy them early. Why? Two reasons. One, they won't make their own destruction worse if they don't have a longer lifetime to do so, and two, they won't distract any of the saved ones back into self destruction if they are not around to do it.
You have been missing the point because there are not many God-religion teachers who understand... and because you are one of those who are of the self destruction theme. You have a chance to change, now. But you have to do it voluntarily. Nobody can force you, because God placed His willpower into the core of your being.
Change while you have time. And stop directing this thread towards religion all the time, when it is a science thread.
Then why give them free will if you are going to kill them when they do something wrong? Do you not see the problem in that? You are taking away the freedom from them so you could have just programmed them to be good in the first place if you are going to end up stealing their freedom anyways.
How many times do I have to tell you. It isn't God who killed them. It is they who killed themselves. It is self destruction. When they have locked themselves into self destruction, they are going to die, period. Killing them a little faster and sooner than they have killed themselves, simply keeps them from a greater torment in their destruction that they brought on themselves. So, God is actually doing them a favor by bringing about their death a bit sooner.
I also don't have proof that Super Unicorns with 3 horns that can teleport through space exist, does that mean I should believe they exist until someone proves they don't? I already proved how the god from the bible doesn't exist because they bible is filled with mistakes and nonsense.
No. Absolutely don't believe that these unicorns exist without proof. But also don't believe that they don't exist until you have proof that they don't. Rather, be open to the idea that they might exist, and stop thinking about it if it isn't important to you.
Same with God. You don't have proof that He exists. You don't have proof that He doesn't exist. You don't know either way. So, rather than trying to be an atheist (someone who tries to force himself to believe when he knows he doesn't know) against your own knowledge of the fact that you don't know, be honest. Be what you are... ignorant about this point... until you get proof one way or the other.
If you find yourself curious, however, examine the evidence with pure curiosity, rather than with preconceived notions.
The problem is that people believe in specific gods from specific religions. I'm indeed open to the idea of a being or beings that may have created the universe, however if they exist, they are not the ones from religion.
Religion is not the topic of this thread. Religious posts are made accidentally, because people are religious beings.
The science that shows that God exists is based on ONE simple thing. It is based on the fact that science does not really have a clue about how the universe started... that there is not one real shred of evidence in the universe that explains how the universe could come about and exist. (God of the gaps argument?)
So, where do we go to START investigating for a source? We include all the aspects of the universe. We include things like energy, laws of physics, chemical reactivity, energy and material cross reactivity, complexity, certainly cause and effect which is wide-spread through everything we understand, entropy to show that there was a beginning, life, spirits of people and animals, potentially the soul of man, the mind of man, and multitudes of other things.
Next, based on anything and everything that we see in the universe, we realize that whatever caused all the universe to exist, must have had the components in "mind" before the existence of the universe happened. Why mind? Because mind is part of what exists within the universe. So, it must have existed in a far greater form to be able to make mind available within the universe. (That's all conjecture, ''it must have'' You don't know any of that, you are just making it up.)
Anything able to plan and hold and carry out the making of the universe, matches intelligence combined with spirit combined with power combined with a whole lot of other great things. And, it matches our basic definitions of "God" in our dictionaries and encyclopedias. (Still conjecture.)
Big Bang does not include all these things in its theory. BB relies on all kinds of other theory to fill in the gaps within itself. The whole of BB theory - including the reliance on other theory - is a quagmire of unproven things that are constantly being contradicted as science finds out more and more. However, if Big Bang ever were the cause of the universe, then BB would be God. (Big bang theory relies on evidence like observing the universe and understanding that it's expanding http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/0/20932483) (You can't say that the creator of the universe has a mind and is intelligent and then say that the big bang is god if it created the universe because that would not match your definition of god.
The evidence that BB relies on is self-inclusive evidence. In other words, like evolution, BB doesn't take into account multitudes of things of reality that would suggest that BB is exceedingly incomplete, and therefore inaccurate. For example. BB theory doesn't have a place within itself for spirit and mind. It relies on outside theories for these, or doesn't include them at all. BB theory is entirely useless because of this.
The only way there is conjecture about aspects of God has to do with the fact that God exists outside the universe. There is no way understand anything without, because even the phrase "extremely different" is far too inadequate to express the difference outside. The best we have is to look at what exists within, and to realize that applying it to that which is without will always be "off" to some great extent.
The best understanding that we might have other than simply to say "God," might be Big Bang. But BB is so incomplete real-world-wise, that it is entirely useless in reality.
I believe so no proof is needed.
If religions are bad, then all things of people are bad. Why? Because some people simply focus on one thing, while others focus on other things. Tesla's religion of math and electronics was bad?
Jesus didn't say much after His crucifixion. But He said a lot before it. The things He said before don't entirely match the things He said after. Why not? There was a change made in the relationship between man and God at the crucifixion time. Even so, Paul's sayings are not going to match the things Jesus said before the crucifixion.
The Bible needs to be understood according to the whole theme of the relationship between God and man during the time that any of it was written... if one wants to understand it properly. Christians who apply O.T. stuff to themselves, often apply those things incorrectly, because they are not of O.T. times.
Yes !
Need to see the reaction of characters in the context.
In this sometime it looks written like platonic dialog. More like story with meaning to be understood through the interaction of two characters rather than mere accurate recollection of historical facts.
I don't agree with that. That makes you platonist before paulist before christian. Christ said clearly to follow him and await his return.
I don't say that Paul was not inspired by God. Cyrus was inspired by God as well. God uses the followers of christ and non followers alike to further his plans.
Plans of Paul as a Pharisee was to divide and weaken the Pharisee, to confuse them and to spread the "light" version of christianity that I would call paulianism, so that the message would not die. The method was to presserve the message not to further it. God only knows if not the Paul the message of christ would not be forgotten.
The role of a Paul was to make as much babilonian like people to know about it and be interested in it, so that even the worst pagan would know about Jesus. It was to presserve the word of God.
Its a clear message not to confuse the message of philosophy and the Bible in the Bible words. Catholics the apostate does that. Why do they do it? Because they are graven image worship Paulians, not christians.
You have to born again christian, leave all dogmas and love Jesus.
Thats my opinion.
Quote
Saying that god helped tesla is meaningless when you haven't even proved his existence.
Well... Its not meaningless for Tesla. lol.
You just demand impossible, for you to be able to justify your hiding in your atheist closet. Ok. Im fine with it. Be closed in your atheist closet if thats your free will.
As I had already told you. Atheism is not a default possition. Atheism is a point of view that requires YOU to have a proof that god does not exist. You claim there is no god. Where is your proof? If you have none you are an agnostic.
A movie about atheism as belief system https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwMIe_AU02c
I also don't have proof that Super Unicorns with 3 horns that can teleport through space exist, does that mean I should believe they exist until someone proves they don't? I already proved how the god from the bible doesn't exist because they bible is filled with mistakes and nonsense.
What mistakes in the bible? Creation? You have not proven that passage wrong.
Snake being a symbol? How have you proven it wrong?
Virginity of Mary is nowhere near there in the bible. That not even the need to be proven wrong - its not biblical
Have you answered what is life? So why do you think ressurection is impossible if you do not even know what you are talking about what life is? Do you mean that the life cease to exist with the beating of a heart? Do you know there is a substance that makes people into a very big coma where the beating of heart is so unable to be recognised that you would think that the person is dead while he is not.
How about cryogenics. Technicly dead frozen bodies being ressurected to life? How about Izraelis torturing Palestinians by chocking them and them ressurecting them? If you think that ice can presserve the life. Why do you think that GOD CAN NOT PRESSERVE it? If everything is in him? Why ice is better?
Give me break. Define life and death first.
I can prove that super unicorns with 3 horns does not exist on earth. We have satelites so one would have seen it. Unless they burrow deep down underground. But then, they would not look like a horse and would have no horns.
Its highly unlikely that a creature that looks like a horse could live anywhere else than on the surface of the earth, eating grass.
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_scientific_errors
https://www.thoughtco.com/scientific-historical-errors-mistakes-in-bible-248627
https://infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/contradictions.html
You would expect a book that's the only thing that ''proves'' god would have no mistakes, would be so perfectly written that people would not interpret it in different ways. There is also the problem with the description of God. All knowing all powerful yet he fails several times. He even had to kill almost everyone because of his failures, how does a god fail? How does a god get angry?
Since many others have proven that the Bible does not have mistakes, perhaps it is YOU who are mistaken.
Youtube search on "Uri Harel." He was a recent Jewish rabbi who investigated the Old Testament Ancient Hebrew thoroughly. He found that there were only 12 "cosmetic unknowns" in the whole O.T. These unknowns take absolutely nothing away from any theme of the O.T. There are no mistakes in the Bible that are worse than cosmetic... "typos."
At the same time, the things of science that seem to contradict the Bible, do so because of the interpretations that scientists and others place on them. Science has to place these interpretations there, because there is no proof for any of these contradictions at all.
To say it another way... Bible religion is not religion; it is fact and truth. Science is the religion.
If the bible was inspired by god you would expect no mistakes or possibility of anyone interpreting in any other way. There is no interpretation when it says that god commanded people to kill other people for whatever reason. It is not a bad interpretation all the contradictions there are in the bible. https://infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/contradictions.html
If you are a god and the only thing you leave to humans to prove your existence is a simple book, wouldn't you make sure it has no errors?
When you are a God of true love and power like God is, you are the best thing that exists. When you are the best thing that exists, being love, you want to give other beings the ability to, also, experience and be the best. If while making them the best - making them like you are - they corrupt the "bestness" you have placed in them (they can do the corruption because they have the power of yourself you placed into them), what are your choices?
Because you have made them like yourself in their core being, you can't coerce them into doing anything. You are willpower, and so are they, because you made them that way. But the very fact that they have turned against "Godness," is their own self destruction. The best you can do is save the few who can be reached in a way where they voluntarily decide to step out of their self destruction.
The benefit to those others - the ones who are continuing onward with their self destruction - is to destroy them early. Why? Two reasons. One, they won't make their own destruction worse if they don't have a longer lifetime to do so, and two, they won't distract any of the saved ones back into self destruction if they are not around to do it.
You have been missing the point because there are not many God-religion teachers who understand... and because you are one of those who are of the self destruction theme. You have a chance to change, now. But you have to do it voluntarily. Nobody can force you, because God placed His willpower into the core of your being.
Change while you have time. And stop directing this thread towards religion all the time, when it is a science thread.
Then why give them free will if you are going to kill them when they do something wrong? Do you not see the problem in that? You are taking away the freedom from them so you could have just programmed them to be good in the first place if you are going to end up stealing their freedom anyways.
I am very suspicious when people still believe that the existence of God 
But are you as suspicious when science proves it?
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10718395
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.16803380
If religions are bad, then all things of people are bad. Why? Because some people simply focus on one thing, while others focus on other things. Tesla's religion of math and electronics was bad?
Jesus didn't say much after His crucifixion. But He said a lot before it. The things He said before don't entirely match the things He said after. Why not? There was a change made in the relationship between man and God at the crucifixion time. Even so, Paul's sayings are not going to match the things Jesus said before the crucifixion.
The Bible needs to be understood according to the whole theme of the relationship between God and man during the time that any of it was written... if one wants to understand it properly. Christians who apply O.T. stuff to themselves, often apply those things incorrectly, because they are not of O.T. times.
Yes !
Need to see the reaction of characters in the context.
In this sometime it looks written like platonic dialog. More like story with meaning to be understood through the interaction of two characters rather than mere accurate recollection of historical facts.
I don't agree with that. That makes you platonist before paulist before christian. Christ said clearly to follow him and await his return.
I don't say that Paul was not inspired by God. Cyrus was inspired by God as well. God uses the followers of christ and non followers alike to further his plans.
Plans of Paul as a Pharisee was to divide and weaken the Pharisee, to confuse them and to spread the "light" version of christianity that I would call paulianism, so that the message would not die. The method was to presserve the message not to further it. God only knows if not the Paul the message of christ would not be forgotten.
The role of a Paul was to make as much babilonian like people to know about it and be interested in it, so that even the worst pagan would know about Jesus. It was to presserve the word of God.
Its a clear message not to confuse the message of philosophy and the Bible in the Bible words. Catholics the apostate does that. Why do they do it? Because they are graven image worship Paulians, not christians.
You have to born again christian, leave all dogmas and love Jesus.
Thats my opinion.
Quote
Saying that god helped tesla is meaningless when you haven't even proved his existence.
Well... Its not meaningless for Tesla. lol.
You just demand impossible, for you to be able to justify your hiding in your atheist closet. Ok. Im fine with it. Be closed in your atheist closet if thats your free will.
As I had already told you. Atheism is not a default possition. Atheism is a point of view that requires YOU to have a proof that god does not exist. You claim there is no god. Where is your proof? If you have none you are an agnostic.
A movie about atheism as belief system https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwMIe_AU02c
I also don't have proof that Super Unicorns with 3 horns that can teleport through space exist, does that mean I should believe they exist until someone proves they don't? I already proved how the god from the bible doesn't exist because they bible is filled with mistakes and nonsense.
What mistakes in the bible? Creation? You have not proven that passage wrong.
Snake being a symbol? How have you proven it wrong?
Virginity of Mary is nowhere near there in the bible. That not even the need to be proven wrong - its not biblical
Have you answered what is life? So why do you think ressurection is impossible if you do not even know what you are talking about what life is? Do you mean that the life cease to exist with the beating of a heart? Do you know there is a substance that makes people into a very big coma where the beating of heart is so unable to be recognised that you would think that the person is dead while he is not.
How about cryogenics. Technicly dead frozen bodies being ressurected to life? How about Izraelis torturing Palestinians by chocking them and them ressurecting them? If you think that ice can presserve the life. Why do you think that GOD CAN NOT PRESSERVE it? If everything is in him? Why ice is better?
Give me break. Define life and death first.
I can prove that super unicorns with 3 horns does not exist on earth. We have satelites so one would have seen it. Unless they burrow deep down underground. But then, they would not look like a horse and would have no horns.
Its highly unlikely that a creature that looks like a horse could live anywhere else than on the surface of the earth, eating grass.
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_scientific_errors
https://www.thoughtco.com/scientific-historical-errors-mistakes-in-bible-248627
https://infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/contradictions.html
You would expect a book that's the only thing that ''proves'' god would have no mistakes, would be so perfectly written that people would not interpret it in different ways. There is also the problem with the description of God. All knowing all powerful yet he fails several times. He even had to kill almost everyone because of his failures, how does a god fail? How does a god get angry?
Since many others have proven that the Bible does not have mistakes, perhaps it is YOU who are mistaken.
Youtube search on "Uri Harel." He was a recent Jewish rabbi who investigated the Old Testament Ancient Hebrew thoroughly. He found that there were only 12 "cosmetic unknowns" in the whole O.T. These unknowns take absolutely nothing away from any theme of the O.T. There are no mistakes in the Bible that are worse than cosmetic... "typos."
At the same time, the things of science that seem to contradict the Bible, do so because of the interpretations that scientists and others place on them. Science has to place these interpretations there, because there is no proof for any of these contradictions at all.
To say it another way... Bible religion is not religion; it is fact and truth. Science is the religion.
If the bible was inspired by god you would expect no mistakes or possibility of anyone interpreting in any other way. There is no interpretation when it says that god commanded people to kill other people for whatever reason. It is not a bad interpretation all the contradictions there are in the bible. https://infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/contradictions.html
If you are a god and the only thing you leave to humans to prove your existence is a simple book, wouldn't you make sure it has no errors?
When you are a God of true love and power like God is, you are the best thing that exists. When you are the best thing that exists, being love, you want to give other beings the ability to, also, experience and be the best. If while making them the best - making them like you are - they corrupt the "bestness" you have placed in them (they can do the corruption because they have the power of yourself you placed into them), what are your choices?
Because you have made them like yourself in their core being, you can't coerce them into doing anything. You are willpower, and so are they, because you made them that way. But the very fact that they have turned against "Godness," is their own self destruction. The best you can do is save the few who can be reached in a way where they voluntarily decide to step out of their self destruction.
The benefit to those others - the ones who are continuing onward with their self destruction - is to destroy them early. Why? Two reasons. One, they won't make their own destruction worse if they don't have a longer lifetime to do so, and two, they won't distract any of the saved ones back into self destruction if they are not around to do it.
You have been missing the point because there are not many God-religion teachers who understand... and because you are one of those who are of the self destruction theme. You have a chance to change, now. But you have to do it voluntarily. Nobody can force you, because God placed His willpower into the core of your being.
Change while you have time. And stop directing this thread towards religion all the time, when it is a science thread.
I also don't have proof that Super Unicorns with 3 horns that can teleport through space exist, does that mean I should believe they exist until someone proves they don't? I already proved how the god from the bible doesn't exist because they bible is filled with mistakes and nonsense.
No. Absolutely don't believe that these unicorns exist without proof. But also don't believe that they don't exist until you have proof that they don't. Rather, be open to the idea that they might exist, and stop thinking about it if it isn't important to you.
Same with God. You don't have proof that He exists. You don't have proof that He doesn't exist. You don't know either way. So, rather than trying to be an atheist (someone who tries to force himself to believe when he knows he doesn't know) against your own knowledge of the fact that you don't know, be honest. Be what you are... ignorant about this point... until you get proof one way or the other.
If you find yourself curious, however, examine the evidence with pure curiosity, rather than with preconceived notions.
The problem is that people believe in specific gods from specific religions. I'm indeed open to the idea of a being or beings that may have created the universe, however if they exist, they are not the ones from religion.
Religion is not the topic of this thread. Religious posts are made accidentally, because people are religious beings.
The science that shows that God exists is based on ONE simple thing. It is based on the fact that science does not really have a clue about how the universe started... that there is not one real shred of evidence in the universe that explains how the universe could come about and exist. (God of the gaps argument?)
So, where do we go to START investigating for a source? We include all the aspects of the universe. We include things like energy, laws of physics, chemical reactivity, energy and material cross reactivity, complexity, certainly cause and effect which is wide-spread through everything we understand, entropy to show that there was a beginning, life, spirits of people and animals, potentially the soul of man, the mind of man, and multitudes of other things.
Next, based on anything and everything that we see in the universe, we realize that whatever caused all the universe to exist, must have had the components in "mind" before the existence of the universe happened. Why mind? Because mind is part of what exists within the universe. So, it must have existed in a far greater form to be able to make mind available within the universe. (That's all conjecture, ''it must have'' You don't know any of that, you are just making it up.)
Anything able to plan and hold and carry out the making of the universe, matches intelligence combined with spirit combined with power combined with a whole lot of other great things. And, it matches our basic definitions of "God" in our dictionaries and encyclopedias. (Still conjecture.)
Big Bang does not include all these things in its theory. BB relies on all kinds of other theory to fill in the gaps within itself. The whole of BB theory - including the reliance on other theory - is a quagmire of unproven things that are constantly being contradicted as science finds out more and more. However, if Big Bang ever were the cause of the universe, then BB would be God. (Big bang theory relies on evidence like observing the universe and understanding that it's expanding http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/0/20932483) (You can't say that the creator of the universe has a mind and is intelligent and then say that the big bang is god if it created the universe because that would not match your definition of god.
Since many others have proven that the Bible does not have mistakes, perhaps it is YOU who are mistaken.
Youtube search on "Uri Harel." He was a recent Jewish rabbi who investigated the Old Testament Ancient Hebrew thoroughly. He found that there were only 12 "cosmetic unknowns" in the whole O.T. These unknowns take absolutely nothing away from any theme of the O.T. There are no mistakes in the Bible that are worse than cosmetic... "typos."
At the same time, the things of science that seem to contradict the Bible, do so because of the interpretations that scientists and others place on them. Science has to place these interpretations there, because there is no proof for any of these contradictions at all.
To say it another way... Bible religion is not religion; it is fact and truth. Science is the religion.
Youtube search on "Uri Harel." He was a recent Jewish rabbi who investigated the Old Testament Ancient Hebrew thoroughly. He found that there were only 12 "cosmetic unknowns" in the whole O.T. These unknowns take absolutely nothing away from any theme of the O.T. There are no mistakes in the Bible that are worse than cosmetic... "typos."
At the same time, the things of science that seem to contradict the Bible, do so because of the interpretations that scientists and others place on them. Science has to place these interpretations there, because there is no proof for any of these contradictions at all.
To say it another way... Bible religion is not religion; it is fact and truth. Science is the religion.
To me it seem logical to think jew knew about this principle of non contradiction, that was coined after as the logos.
As their first concern was with deuteronomy , it imply this principle of coherent set of laws and axioms to define the good and bad behavior.
The principle of legal matter imply this concept of non contradiction and global coherence between all statement.
It's very likely it's this anti sollipism stance that is at the root of monotheism and deuteronomy. And also of science as in logical development of axioms leading to principle of logos, one truth, one god mind, logos etc.
I also don't have proof that Super Unicorns with 3 horns that can teleport through space exist, does that mean I should believe they exist until someone proves they don't? I already proved how the god from the bible doesn't exist because they bible is filled with mistakes and nonsense.
No. Absolutely don't believe that these unicorns exist without proof. But also don't believe that they don't exist until you have proof that they don't. Rather, be open to the idea that they might exist, and stop thinking about it if it isn't important to you.
Same with God. You don't have proof that He exists. You don't have proof that He doesn't exist. You don't know either way. So, rather than trying to be an atheist (someone who tries to force himself to believe when he knows he doesn't know) against your own knowledge of the fact that you don't know, be honest. Be what you are... ignorant about this point... until you get proof one way or the other.
If you find yourself curious, however, examine the evidence with pure curiosity, rather than with preconceived notions.
The problem is that people believe in specific gods from specific religions. I'm indeed open to the idea of a being or beings that may have created the universe, however if they exist, they are not the ones from religion.
Religion is not the topic of this thread. Religious posts are made accidentally, because people are religious beings.
The science that shows that God exists is based on ONE simple thing. It is based on the fact that science does not really have a clue about how the universe started... that there is not one real shred of evidence in the universe that explains how the universe could come about and exist.
So, where do we go to START investigating for a source? We include all the aspects of the universe. We include things like energy, laws of physics, chemical reactivity, energy and material cross reactivity, complexity, certainly cause and effect which is wide-spread through everything we understand, entropy to show that there was a beginning, life, spirits of people and animals, potentially the soul of man, the mind of man, and multitudes of other things.
Next, based on anything and everything that we see in the universe, we realize that whatever caused all the universe to exist, must have had the components in "mind" before the existence of the universe happened. Why mind? Because mind is part of what exists within the universe. So, it must have existed in a far greater form to be able to make mind available within the universe.
Anything able to plan and hold and carry out the making of the universe, matches intelligence combined with spirit combined with power combined with a whole lot of other great things. And, it matches our basic definitions of "God" in our dictionaries and encyclopedias.
Big Bang does not include all these things in its theory. BB relies on all kinds of other theory to fill in the gaps within itself. The whole of BB theory - including the reliance on other theory - is a quagmire of unproven things that are constantly being contradicted as science finds out more and more. However, if Big Bang ever were the cause of the universe, then BB would be God.
I am very suspicious when people still believe that the existence of God
If religions are bad, then all things of people are bad. Why? Because some people simply focus on one thing, while others focus on other things. Tesla's religion of math and electronics was bad?
Jesus didn't say much after His crucifixion. But He said a lot before it. The things He said before don't entirely match the things He said after. Why not? There was a change made in the relationship between man and God at the crucifixion time. Even so, Paul's sayings are not going to match the things Jesus said before the crucifixion.
The Bible needs to be understood according to the whole theme of the relationship between God and man during the time that any of it was written... if one wants to understand it properly. Christians who apply O.T. stuff to themselves, often apply those things incorrectly, because they are not of O.T. times.
Yes !
Need to see the reaction of characters in the context.
In this sometime it looks written like platonic dialog. More like story with meaning to be understood through the interaction of two characters rather than mere accurate recollection of historical facts.
I don't agree with that. That makes you platonist before paulist before christian. Christ said clearly to follow him and await his return.
I don't say that Paul was not inspired by God. Cyrus was inspired by God as well. God uses the followers of christ and non followers alike to further his plans.
Plans of Paul as a Pharisee was to divide and weaken the Pharisee, to confuse them and to spread the "light" version of christianity that I would call paulianism, so that the message would not die. The method was to presserve the message not to further it. God only knows if not the Paul the message of christ would not be forgotten.
The role of a Paul was to make as much babilonian like people to know about it and be interested in it, so that even the worst pagan would know about Jesus. It was to presserve the word of God.
Its a clear message not to confuse the message of philosophy and the Bible in the Bible words. Catholics the apostate does that. Why do they do it? Because they are graven image worship Paulians, not christians.
You have to born again christian, leave all dogmas and love Jesus.
Thats my opinion.
Quote
Saying that god helped tesla is meaningless when you haven't even proved his existence.
Well... Its not meaningless for Tesla. lol.
You just demand impossible, for you to be able to justify your hiding in your atheist closet. Ok. Im fine with it. Be closed in your atheist closet if thats your free will.
As I had already told you. Atheism is not a default possition. Atheism is a point of view that requires YOU to have a proof that god does not exist. You claim there is no god. Where is your proof? If you have none you are an agnostic.
A movie about atheism as belief system https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwMIe_AU02c
I also don't have proof that Super Unicorns with 3 horns that can teleport through space exist, does that mean I should believe they exist until someone proves they don't? I already proved how the god from the bible doesn't exist because they bible is filled with mistakes and nonsense.
What mistakes in the bible? Creation? You have not proven that passage wrong.
Snake being a symbol? How have you proven it wrong?
Virginity of Mary is nowhere near there in the bible. That not even the need to be proven wrong - its not biblical
Have you answered what is life? So why do you think ressurection is impossible if you do not even know what you are talking about what life is? Do you mean that the life cease to exist with the beating of a heart? Do you know there is a substance that makes people into a very big coma where the beating of heart is so unable to be recognised that you would think that the person is dead while he is not.
How about cryogenics. Technicly dead frozen bodies being ressurected to life? How about Izraelis torturing Palestinians by chocking them and them ressurecting them? If you think that ice can presserve the life. Why do you think that GOD CAN NOT PRESSERVE it? If everything is in him? Why ice is better?
Give me break. Define life and death first.
I can prove that super unicorns with 3 horns does not exist on earth. We have satelites so one would have seen it. Unless they burrow deep down underground. But then, they would not look like a horse and would have no horns.
Its highly unlikely that a creature that looks like a horse could live anywhere else than on the surface of the earth, eating grass.
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_scientific_errors
https://www.thoughtco.com/scientific-historical-errors-mistakes-in-bible-248627
https://infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/contradictions.html
You would expect a book that's the only thing that ''proves'' god would have no mistakes, would be so perfectly written that people would not interpret it in different ways. There is also the problem with the description of God. All knowing all powerful yet he fails several times. He even had to kill almost everyone because of his failures, how does a god fail? How does a god get angry?
Since many others have proven that the Bible does not have mistakes, perhaps it is YOU who are mistaken.
Youtube search on "Uri Harel." He was a recent Jewish rabbi who investigated the Old Testament Ancient Hebrew thoroughly. He found that there were only 12 "cosmetic unknowns" in the whole O.T. These unknowns take absolutely nothing away from any theme of the O.T. There are no mistakes in the Bible that are worse than cosmetic... "typos."
At the same time, the things of science that seem to contradict the Bible, do so because of the interpretations that scientists and others place on them. Science has to place these interpretations there, because there is no proof for any of these contradictions at all.
To say it another way... Bible religion is not religion; it is fact and truth. Science is the religion.
If the bible was inspired by god you would expect no mistakes or possibility of anyone interpreting in any other way. There is no interpretation when it says that god commanded people to kill other people for whatever reason. It is not a bad interpretation all the contradictions there are in the bible. https://infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/contradictions.html
If you are a god and the only thing you leave to humans to prove your existence is a simple book, wouldn't you make sure it has no errors?
If religions are bad, then all things of people are bad. Why? Because some people simply focus on one thing, while others focus on other things. Tesla's religion of math and electronics was bad?
Jesus didn't say much after His crucifixion. But He said a lot before it. The things He said before don't entirely match the things He said after. Why not? There was a change made in the relationship between man and God at the crucifixion time. Even so, Paul's sayings are not going to match the things Jesus said before the crucifixion.
The Bible needs to be understood according to the whole theme of the relationship between God and man during the time that any of it was written... if one wants to understand it properly. Christians who apply O.T. stuff to themselves, often apply those things incorrectly, because they are not of O.T. times.
Yes !
Need to see the reaction of characters in the context.
In this sometime it looks written like platonic dialog. More like story with meaning to be understood through the interaction of two characters rather than mere accurate recollection of historical facts.
I don't agree with that. That makes you platonist before paulist before christian. Christ said clearly to follow him and await his return.
I don't say that Paul was not inspired by God. Cyrus was inspired by God as well. God uses the followers of christ and non followers alike to further his plans.
Plans of Paul as a Pharisee was to divide and weaken the Pharisee, to confuse them and to spread the "light" version of christianity that I would call paulianism, so that the message would not die. The method was to presserve the message not to further it. God only knows if not the Paul the message of christ would not be forgotten.
The role of a Paul was to make as much babilonian like people to know about it and be interested in it, so that even the worst pagan would know about Jesus. It was to presserve the word of God.
Its a clear message not to confuse the message of philosophy and the Bible in the Bible words. Catholics the apostate does that. Why do they do it? Because they are graven image worship Paulians, not christians.
You have to born again christian, leave all dogmas and love Jesus.
Thats my opinion.
Quote
Saying that god helped tesla is meaningless when you haven't even proved his existence.
Well... Its not meaningless for Tesla. lol.
You just demand impossible, for you to be able to justify your hiding in your atheist closet. Ok. Im fine with it. Be closed in your atheist closet if thats your free will.
As I had already told you. Atheism is not a default possition. Atheism is a point of view that requires YOU to have a proof that god does not exist. You claim there is no god. Where is your proof? If you have none you are an agnostic.
A movie about atheism as belief system https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwMIe_AU02c
I also don't have proof that Super Unicorns with 3 horns that can teleport through space exist, does that mean I should believe they exist until someone proves they don't? I already proved how the god from the bible doesn't exist because they bible is filled with mistakes and nonsense.
What mistakes in the bible? Creation? You have not proven that passage wrong.
Snake being a symbol? How have you proven it wrong?
Virginity of Mary is nowhere near there in the bible. That not even the need to be proven wrong - its not biblical
Have you answered what is life? So why do you think ressurection is impossible if you do not even know what you are talking about what life is? Do you mean that the life cease to exist with the beating of a heart? Do you know there is a substance that makes people into a very big coma where the beating of heart is so unable to be recognised that you would think that the person is dead while he is not.
How about cryogenics. Technicly dead frozen bodies being ressurected to life? How about Izraelis torturing Palestinians by chocking them and them ressurecting them? If you think that ice can presserve the life. Why do you think that GOD CAN NOT PRESSERVE it? If everything is in him? Why ice is better?
Give me break. Define life and death first.
I can prove that super unicorns with 3 horns does not exist on earth. We have satelites so one would have seen it. Unless they burrow deep down underground. But then, they would not look like a horse and would have no horns.
Its highly unlikely that a creature that looks like a horse could live anywhere else than on the surface of the earth, eating grass.
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_scientific_errors
https://www.thoughtco.com/scientific-historical-errors-mistakes-in-bible-248627
https://infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/contradictions.html
You would expect a book that's the only thing that ''proves'' god would have no mistakes, would be so perfectly written that people would not interpret it in different ways. There is also the problem with the description of God. All knowing all powerful yet he fails several times. He even had to kill almost everyone because of his failures, how does a god fail? How does a god get angry?
Since many others have proven that the Bible does not have mistakes, perhaps it is YOU who are mistaken.
Youtube search on "Uri Harel." He was a recent Jewish rabbi who investigated the Old Testament Ancient Hebrew thoroughly. He found that there were only 12 "cosmetic unknowns" in the whole O.T. These unknowns take absolutely nothing away from any theme of the O.T. There are no mistakes in the Bible that are worse than cosmetic... "typos."
At the same time, the things of science that seem to contradict the Bible, do so because of the interpretations that scientists and others place on them. Science has to place these interpretations there, because there is no proof for any of these contradictions at all.
To say it another way... Bible religion is not religion; it is fact and truth. Science is the religion.
Because religions are the one who deal with this topic. And they all speak of similar concept. Just like science also evolve with time. Science of antiquity is not same than science of renaissances, or the science of enlightment century , or modern science. Not all scientist agree on everything .. all discoveries from archeology or facts are also a request for interpretation. Not a single law of physics explain all facts.
I also don't have proof that Super Unicorns with 3 horns that can teleport through space exist, does that mean I should believe they exist until someone proves they don't? I already proved how the god from the bible doesn't exist because they bible is filled with mistakes and nonsense.
No. Absolutely don't believe that these unicorns exist without proof. But also don't believe that they don't exist until you have proof that they don't. Rather, be open to the idea that they might exist, and stop thinking about it if it isn't important to you.
Same with God. You don't have proof that He exists. You don't have proof that He doesn't exist. You don't know either way. So, rather than trying to be an atheist (someone who tries to force himself to believe when he knows he doesn't know) against your own knowledge of the fact that you don't know, be honest. Be what you are... ignorant about this point... until you get proof one way or the other.
If you find yourself curious, however, examine the evidence with pure curiosity, rather than with preconceived notions.
The problem is that people believe in specific gods from specific religions. I'm indeed open to the idea of a being or beings that may have created the universe, however if they exist, they are not the ones from religion.
I also don't have proof that Super Unicorns with 3 horns that can teleport through space exist, does that mean I should believe they exist until someone proves they don't? I already proved how the god from the bible doesn't exist because they bible is filled with mistakes and nonsense.
No. Absolutely don't believe that these unicorns exist without proof. But also don't believe that they don't exist until you have proof that they don't. Rather, be open to the idea that they might exist, and stop thinking about it if it isn't important to you.
Same with God. You don't have proof that He exists. You don't have proof that He doesn't exist. You don't know either way. So, rather than trying to be an atheist (someone who tries to force himself to believe when he knows he doesn't know) against your own knowledge of the fact that you don't know, be honest. Be what you are... ignorant about this point... until you get proof one way or the other.
If you find yourself curious, however, examine the evidence with pure curiosity, rather than with preconceived notions.
Jump to: