Science Vs Religion

I don't hate religion, I actually believe in God, just not one that is professed by any institution

============

I condoned no organization in my post, when the seals were opened and the Word of God revealed as of I spoke the christian churches rejected Jesus Christ and were judged by Him as the Great Harlot, Rev.18....He is calling His people away from them...They have become the hold of devils the cage for every hatefull and un-clean bird.
When you turn down God 's visitation, there's nothing left but judgement.

No, I never spoke of any "institutions", I said the Sons of God.
 
Interesting debate.

Prisme:

I have read Kuhn. His major work discusses what he called scientific revolutions, which consist of a dominant paradigm being superceded by a new paradigm.

If you wish to compare science and religion, perhaps you can give me some examples of where similar paradigm shifts have occurred in a religion. Can you think of any example where a major point of religious belief has been relinquished in favour of a new belief, where the original belief was previously a core belief of the religion in question? I can't, but perhaps you can.

I suggest that this ability to change is one of the characteristic differences between science and religion.
 
God never started religion, man did....
Religion is the "carcass" thats left over from a move of God, after man has organized some truth thats been revealed and refuses to acept more.
It is dead. In creeds and traditions.
This is not of God. God is alive, His people follow Him as He moves, always revealing, unfolding more of Himself,
working towards molding in His children, the character that reflects back His image.
There are many times in a true move of God, His people change or adapts....
But God changes not...only our understanding of Him is what changes.
The following is an example of a move of God happening today.


With the coming of the Son of Man, we are entering a period called the "Dispensation of the fullness of times", when the "mystery of God (Christ in you, the hope of glory) should be completed"(read Rev 10:1-7) The dispensation alotted to the Gentiles is closing, and God will again any day turn back to the Jews. They (the Jews) lost the right to be called Bride...God put them away as an adulterous wife and is taking a bride from the Gentiles. But it doesn't end there. Just as the Jews missed their "day of visitation", when Jesus came the first time because they were expecting Him to fulfill the prophetcies of His second coming at His first, now it is the Gentiles who miss their "day of visitation", when Jesus comes the second time because they were expecting Him to fulfill the prophetcies of His third coming at His second. They (the Jews) were once blinded by God so that the Gentiles could be saved. Now it is the Gentiles who are blinded by God - ("Because they received not a love of the truth, I shall send them strong delusion, that they might believe I lie and be damned by it")-after which God shall turn back to the Jews. To the Gentiles at the end of this age, it was not prophetcied Jesus would come in physical form and put his feet on the ground. This happens after the tribulation. What the church has missed, is the form He is to come in to the Gentiles BEFORE the tribulation. He comes to call His people out of the worldly churches, who have become "Mystery Babylon, the Mother of Harlots, and Abominations of the earth" (Rev 18:1-4). He comes to reveal Himself as the Son of Man,-to RESTORE ALL THINGS- the true sayings of God, the meaning of which was lost because the worldly church in teaching for doctrine the comandments of men, made the Word of God of none-effect. It was never meant for them to understand in the first place. The understanding of the book has been "sealed" - (I thank thee Father, that thou hast hid these things from the eyes of the wise and prudent, and revealed them unto babes, such as are willing to learn"). He comes to reveal Himself to His Bride as the Word of God. He comes as the "Son of Man" to unite with His Gentile bride in the marriage of the lamb (Rev 19:11).
 
James R will have his wish

Major paradigm shifts in Religion:

Not an expert analysis, but scholars could definately give you more information on these events and changes. It is hard to identify what Kuhn would call a 'core belief' in certain situations, given my present knowledge, but I am sure that the Reforms would constitute paradigm shifts.

-

Old and new testament... something to do with the jews, I really do not know there history.
(but the debate still goes on about the scriptures and their validity within the Church and its scholars)

Discovery of Aristotle's writting (De anima, his physics and others) were quite problematic to the Church. Thomas of Aquinas (now a Saint) was hired by the Church to 'christianize' Aristotle.
Thus religion had to also re-ajust itself vis-a-vis Aristotle's thinking and conception of the world.
(Note that Islam also accepted Aristotle, it had the chance to do it first, thus the Quran is less 'primitive' than the Bible.)- at least to my standards.

Charlemagne (King of almost all of Europe), with the help of Alcuin, institutionalised on a national scale religion. For the first time, religion was incorporated in the state and was uniformely thought. The role, social function and duty of the Church was for ever changed.
(before this, it was not uncommon to visit neighboring towns and find out that the same church had different scriptures and religious laws)

Of course, there is the first reform. With the birth of protestant faith many laws were changed, some books of the bible were completly dropped. Henri the 8th adopted protestant faith and abandonned catholicism.

The inquisition took place and was latter abandonned.
(Thus the duty of the Church to control the populace changed)

This eventually instigated the second reform. The catholic Church being in crisis, they made great efforts to re-conquer Europe and the favor of Kings. Once again, laws had to be modified. There was a time where their were 3 Popes in Europe, the reforms remedied this.

Then the Church opposed the French revolution. Having eventualy lost, Christianity was obliged to accept democracy as a valid form of state. Doing so made the Church, for the first time, accept atheists - they no longer persecuted them.

Slowly, the Church accepted that its role in hospitals and schools were to be replaced by the services of the state. The state becomes secular.

Church acceps broad science.
(Earth is round, no physical devils in the center of the Earth)

Today, religion is a choice, not a national identity in our modern world. The Church has undoubtedly adapted itself to this phenomena.
(No more going to Hell threats if you don't get baptized, the Church has a new "come in please" policy)


This is most likely oversimplifying our history, but it represents undenyable shifts in the Church's policies, rules and overall faith.
Keep in mind that I didn't mention the history of oriental religions such as Hindouism, Boudhism and Islam.


Prisme
 
Last edited:
As for that experiemtn in the 60's... the cells that consist of the basis of one single protein cell that consitute us never took full form. It was an utter failure.
Science has never created a man from nothing and never will. (although I think you agree with that, sorry your post is unclear to your intentions)

==============

Prisme, I wasn't refering to a scientific experiment in the 60's.

This was a prophet, a seer of God.....who before he died displayed with many witnesses the power of the spoken word of God.
The revelation of Jesus Christ, the son of man...who is The Word of God is what makes this posible.
The revelation of God to each individual son of God, causes the removal of all doubt.....sin is unbelief.
Without unbelief.....
All things are posible, only "believe".......

This character of God, incoruptable, and undefiled, is what will be, and is now being, restored to the Sons of God in the kingdom that was to come, being set up now.
This is a direct visitation from God today, not a religion or some new belief.
This is what was promised to happen in the second coming of Christ
 
Re: James R will have his wish

Thanks for the detailed reply, Prisme.

<i>It is hard to identify what Kuhn would call a 'core belief' in certain situations, given my present knowledge, but I am sure that the Reforms would constitute paradigm shifts.</i>

This is really the crux. I'm not sure that the reforms you mention really do constitute paradigm shifts within a single religion.

<i>Old and new testament... something to do with the jews, I really do not know there history.</i>

If you're talking about the split between Judaism and Christianity, I wouldn't call that a paradigm shift. It was the creation of two mutually-exclusive systems of belief.

<i>Charlemagne (King of almost all of Europe), with the help of Alcuin, institutionalised on a national scale religion. For the first time, religion was incorporated in the state and was uniformely thought. The role, social function and duty of the Church was for ever changed.</i>

Yes, but I don't think any core beliefs of the religion changed.

<i>Of course, there is the first reform. With the birth of protestant faith many laws were changed, some books of the bible were completly dropped. Henri the 8th adopted protestant faith and abandonned catholicism.</i>

Again, this split resulted not in a change of paradigm within one belief system, but a split into two mutually-exclusive belief systems.

<i>Then the Church opposed the French revolution. Having eventualy lost, Christianity was obliged to accept democracy as a valid form of state. Doing so made the Church, for the first time, accept atheists - they no longer persecuted them.</i>

I don't think the church has ever accepted atheists. It may tolerate them, but it always tries to convert people to the true faith.

<i>The state becomes secular.</i>

Again, that involves no shift in the core beliefs of the Church.

<i>Church acceps broad science.</i>

It would argue that it always did, so far as science existed as an independent enterprise prior to the 17th century.

<i>Today, religion is a choice, not a national identity in our modern world. The Church has undoubtedly adapted itself to this phenomena.</i>

Yes, but no <b>core</b> beliefs have changed.

I realise this all depends on what you'd call a "core" belief. I would argue that core beliefs in science can and do change, whilst those of particular religions do not. In science, such change is regarded as inevitable. In religion, it is most often regarded as a threat.
 
Sorry I'm replying to some old posts (2 or 3 days) but I haven't been on for a while.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I can use the bible to debate with you because you believe the bible to be the word of god, not me.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then you must also accept that God is the creator, even though you think He is bad.

Let me say this in a few simple sentences, so that even you can understand. He uses the Bible because you believe in it. He is debating the Christian God, which you believe in. By pointing out inconsistencies in the Bible, he shows your God does not exists. Simple. Easy. Understand???

There are different ways to learn, state education is one, observing yourself and others is another.
That's what we learnt in physcology!!! :D

Reading from a 'book' supposedly written by an imaginary god is not a way to learn.

Why do you only attribute love to couples?
Passion may have nothing to do with love, one can be passionate about killing cows to make burgers, because it is pleasing to ones palate. Where is the love in that?
One could be committed to ones gang member friends, through fear, greed or vanity.
When a john pays a hooker for some intimate relations, is he really displaying love and affection?
Shit. I'm going to have to go into a detailed explaination.

Love is made up of three parts. TRUE love contains all three parts.

Passion, as you so aptly said, is not TRUE love. Having passion is called an infatuation. Passion is seen, as you so nicely put it, can be the passion between a hooker and a man. An yes, so can be infatuated with eating beef. That is also a type of 'LOVE' (not TRUE love, which is made up of committment, passion and intimacy)
Commitment, as you said, can be a gang members friend being committed through fear. This is certainly not TRUE love. Just having committment is 'hollow love'.

Do you know for sure, God doesn’t exist? If so can you prove it?
Prove to me gremlins and pink polka-dotted unicorns don't exist

You have the burden of proof, my dear. You made the outrageous claim that god exists. It is up to you to prove it, not up to me to disprove it. If I told you I had a martain under my bed, and you said you didn't believe me, and I said "Prove that I don't have a martain!" Would that be reasonable or fair? No, of course not.

Until this day, NOT ONE CULT has provided ONE SHRED OF EVIDENCE that their IMAGINARY god exists. So much for their existance claim.

What caused the tetonic plates to move?
What causes the particles in the air and on the ground to combine in such a way?
Nature, physcics, chemistry. Things which have been PROVEN, and are LOGICAL.
 
Until this day, NOT ONE CULT has provided ONE SHRED OF EVIDENCE that their IMAGINARY god exists. So much for their existance claim.

===============

Please.......

I've seen so many supernatural manifestations of God, I'd been typing till I had no fingers. I can't begin to remember them all.
They said of Jesus in His first coming,...He did so many miracles,
the world could not hold the books that could be written.
He has also visited us again in this day.
I've got pictures of the pillar of fire photographed in this generation hanging on my wall.
Your mocking a God you know nothing of.....
Even Michael brought not a railing accusation against Satan.
Someone with the slightest amount of wisdom would know.....
"Fools tred with hobnailed shoes, where Angels fear to trod."

Just because some osterich sticks their head in the sand, doesn't mean the rest of the world don't see him.

If I could show you documented evidence of someone raised from the dead.....,
I mean medical records, time of death ect....would you believe...?
The bible says you probably would not.

Luke 16:31 - And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.
 
Last edited:
Originally posted by TheVisitor
If I could show you documented eveidence of someone raised from the dead.....,
I mean medical records, time of death ect....would you believe...?
The bible says you probably would not.

can you proof your god raised your dead person?
 
I guess you are just one of the chosen ones, eh visitor?
The rest of us ,whom for whatever reason god decides to hide from simply don't cut it and will be punished severely for not believing the totally ridiculous unbelievable stories these "chosen ones" tell us:rolleyes:

Its not a matter of us sticking our heads in the sand, the reason we don't believe is because we do the opposite, we look at everything, we don't ignore anything, and when you do this you find alot of stuff, it all contradicts the bible and what people like you say. Nobody has any reason to believe what anybody "says", you should look at whats there and gather your own conclusions.
YOU are the one with your head in the sand, you seriously must be ignoring so many aspects of this planet we live in.
Your head is stuck in an ancient book of fiction and you are too scared to look sideways.
 
can you proof your god raised your dead person?

==============

Yes, there are records of many cases. One was a nurse who's husband died right in a meeting, was pronouned dead and prayed for.....came back alive.
A little mexican baby, dead for 24 hours..brought back.
A little boy in switzerland, hit by a truck, was dead, and documented...

I could get the records...the point is what difference would that make to someone who refuses to see God in the little things.
The Word is there the same for everyone to see.
They would mock His works, and say its of the devil, or a cheap magicians trick...
No, Jesus doesn't clown for no one.

You see, it's like the same one that said to Him, hanging in the cross, said, "Now, if You be the Son of God, come down and we'll believe it."
Jesus said, "I don't do nothing till the Father shows Me. And when the Father shows Me, that I do." Otherwise, He didn't clown for people. This is not a stage show, vaudeville act. It's the power of God unto salvation to those who believe. Now, but let them alone. Blind lead the blind, they'll fall in the ditch.
 
Last edited:
That wouldn't prove "god" did anything.
Just today in the news a dog got hit by a car, then shot by a policemen in the head and then put in a freezer for 2 hours, someone saw it moving in the freezer, took it out put in hospital and now after treatment it is ok.
Did god do that? no, it was remarkable sure, but there is no reason to think anything other than what is known and the same is with these cases.
In africa tribes were claiming to have people walking around their villages that had raised from the dead. Mothers would say "that is my son who died and got buried 6 months ago" and everyone would believe. Studies were done and it was found that these "zombies" were just retarded people that resembled someone that died a while ago.

In the end, no god was seen raising these people from the dead, so there is no reason to assume a god did.
Even if someone burst out of their grave and hovered in the air 6 feet above it speaking in hebrew saying "god has risen me from the dead" this would by no means be proof that god did.
Is it possible you are just gullible?
 
Originally posted by TheVisitor
can you proof your god raised your dead person?

==============

Yes, there are records of many cases. One was a nurse who's husband died right in a meeting, was pronouned dead and prayed for.....came back alive.
A little mexican baby, dead for 24 hours..brought back.
A little boy in switzerland, hit by a truck, was dead, and documented...

I could get the records...the point is what difference would that make to someone who refuses to see God in the little things.
The Word is there the same for everyone to see.
They would mock His works, and say its of the devil, or a cheap magicians trick...
No, Jesus doesn't clown for no one.

You see, it's like the same one that said to Him, hanging in the cross, said, "Now, if You be the Son of God, come down and we'll believe it."
Jesus said, "I don't do nothing till the Father shows Me. And when the Father shows Me, that I do." Otherwise, He didn't clown for people. This is not a stage show, vaudeville act. It's the power of God unto salvation to those who believe. Now, but let them alone. Blind lead the blind, they'll fall in the ditch.

my question was..can you proof your god raised the dead person...not if you can proof a dead person was raised
 
Im just about to rush out for a meeting, (no, not a church meeting :D ), but when i'm back i will make some replies.

I just wanted to offer a challenge. I want everyone to put £10/$10 on the table and give it to The Visitor if he can make one post that does not waffle on about Jesus or Satan. I will add an extra £10 if he also shows the attitude that he is in fact not the chosen one sent to bore us all to death with groundless propoganda and pointless speech with nothing in the way of evidence to support.... whatever it is he's saying. :rolleyes:
 
Proof of the existence of God through logic

This should make you happy snakelord... i dont know about these "choson one" people... wierdos. And for you sound-minded athiests, please ignore the idiotic rambling of ignorant religous radicals. There ARE some logically driven theists out there.

Proof of the existence of God through logic:

Alot of people find it hard to understand how God could have existed forever. Never ending, Never beginning.

I will explain, are you ready for it?

God created time. God does not exist in Time. God can step into and out of Time. But God does not exist in the dimension of Time. If you remove Time then guess what happens... There is no beginning or end. Remember something: Our brains cannot comprehend anything outside of Time. Time is a creation, and our brains our products of TIME. There is no way for us to think outside of time. This is why we have problems understanding how something can be eternal, "alpha and omega" first and last, never-ending never-beginning. But we can understand this concept: Remove time and there is no TIME. No beginning, no end.

I will also prove why the existence of God is Logically necessary:

How can we live on earth? Random Chance? ok. I would accept that. But how can we have a galaxy. Random Chance? ok. How can we have a universe... big bang? hmm. ok... where did that come from?.... How can we have existence?... hmm.... existence.... where did that come from? Where did our universe come from? If it was a big bang, what could have possibly caused that? Some type of energy, maybe? How did that energy get there? There has to be a beginning point. The only possible way for us to have existence is for existence to be put here by something eternal. You see, that ends the infinite paradox of "where did that come from? then where did that come from? then where did that come from? then where did that come from? If you equate the existence of the universe to a stack of coins, then the question arises: "What is the bottom coin that is holding everything else up?" Thus the bottom coin HAS to be eternal and constant because if it wasnt always there, then the rest of the coins would have never been able to stack on top of the first "Super Coin" that is holding everything else up. Secondly, the rest of the coins are (metaphorically: "us") obviously non-eternal, and have a beginning and an end. This means that the "Super Coin" had to have been able to duplicate itself in some (lesser) way and create an enviroment (a place of existence) for the rest of the coins to stack on top of itself.

anyways, perhaps some of this was unecessary, but it is truth. i hope you guys can use this information to refute athiesm and anti-theism wish is actually reletively easy for the properly informed to do. God Bless and have fun.

I would be interested to hear your retorts. Please, i don't want to hear any personal attacks. Just logical, freindly arguements against the material i have put forth here. thank you.
 
Last edited:
Re: Proof of the existence of God through logic

Originally posted by KenshiSoro
This should make you happy snakelord... i dont know about these "choson one" people... wierdos. And for you sound-minded athiests, please ignore the idiotic rambling of ignorant religous radicals. There ARE some logically driven theists out there.
There are people who are mostly logical and indulge in theism for sure, but since the assumption of the existence of "god" is an emotional decision, you cannot logically justify it.
Originally posted by KenshiSoro

Proof of the existence of God through logic:

Alot of people find it hard to understand how God could have existed forever. Never ending, Never beginning.

I will explain, are you ready for it?

God created time. God does not exist in Time. God can step into and out of Time. But God does not exist in the dimension of Time. If you remove Time then guess what happens... There is no beginning or end. Remember something: Our brains cannot comprehend anything outside of Time. Time is a creation, and our brains our products of TIME. There is no way for us to think outside of time. This is why we have problems understanding how something can be eternal, "alpha and omega" first and last, never-ending never-beginning. But we can understand this concept: Remove time and there is no TIME. No beginning, no end.
While interesting I do believe the association of the word "god" with this reasoning is superfluous.
Originally posted by KenshiSoro

I will also prove why the existence of God is Logically necessary:

How can we live on earth? Random Chance? ok. I would accept that. But how can we have a galaxy. Random Chance? ok. How can we have a universe... big bang? hmm. ok... where did that come from?.... How can we have existence?... hmm.... existence.... where did that come from? Where did our universe come from? If it was a big bang, what could have possibly caused that? Some type of energy, maybe? How did that energy get there? There has to be a beginning point. The only possible way for us to have existence is for existence to be put here by something eternal. You see, that ends the infinite paradox of "where did that come from? then where did that come from? then where did that come from? then where did that come from? If you equate the existence of the universe to a stack of coins, then the question arises: "What is the bottom coin that is holding everything else up?" Thus the bottom coin HAS to be eternal and constant because if it wasnt always there, then the rest of the coins would have never been able to stack on top of the first "Super Coin" that is holding everything else up. Secondly, the rest of the coins are (metaphorically: "us") obviously non-eternal, and have a beginning and an end. This means that the "Super Coin" had to have been able to duplicate itself in some (lesser) way and create an enviroment (a place of existence) for the rest of the coins to stack on top of itself.

anyways, perhaps some of this was unecessary, but it is truth.
No, it's not TRUTH, it's "logical presumption". You assume that your reasoning is applicable to the scenario. It may or may not be but you have provided no "proof". Technically you contradict yourself with your assertions above regarding time. You say "maybe there's stuff that time doesn't really apply to" and then apply time to the universe in a linear manner. Doesn't add up to me.
Originally posted by KenshiSoro

i hope you guys can use this information to refute athiesm and anti-theism wish is actually reletively easy for the properly informed to do. God Bless and have fun.

I would be interested to hear your retorts. Please, i don't want to hear any personal attacks. Just logical, freindly arguements against the material i have put forth here. thank you.

It's somewhat pointless to add these types of requests since people who are going to do that are going to do it regardless of your request.

Further, welcome to sciforums and stuff! Good to see you've been thinking!
 
Part 1 of 2....

SnakeLord,

Maybe it's just me but i do not regard that as having love. If i had 2 children and let one off and punished one when they'd been bad i would be showing true bias- not neccesarily through love. I speak as a mortal.
Before we move any further, it is imperative we understand Who and What, God is. The Bible is the word of God, in that, it is written by, men of God, to glorify God. The situations in which we read about the acts of God, in the bible, are very isolated, in that they occur in specific times, places and circumstances, and with specific people. We can still understand the Personality of God through it, but it is a lot harder.
There is no mention of any interactions with people of S.E. Asia, N. Europe, Africa, ect. It is all based around the middle east, the only reference is that He created mankind, which means everybody, throughout the world.
God does not speak about Himself, other than His actions and reactions pertaining to specific situations. In the NT, His exhalted son/devotee, talks more on the science (knowledge) and philosophy of God, but as we know, for some reason, there is a large chunk of his life not accounted for, so there may be a lot more information than we are privy to. The only scripture where God actually talks fully about Himself is the “Bhagavad Gita”, which when translated means, “The Song of God”. If it is alright with you, I will in future refer to the Personality of God, from that source. It is up to you.
When she does something wrong i find an alternative and non-violent/aggressive solution to the problem.
I fully understand your point, but your daughter doing something wrong, and the whole of mankind having nothing but “evil” intent, are two entirely different things. In the case of the biblical text in question, “evil” means, that there is no way, the souls of mankind would be fit for anything other than the darkest regions of hell, a place where there is no way out.
God creates this cosmic manifestation, it has rules and laws, that is the way it is. Why? Because there are beings who thrive eternally, in hellish conditions, It is not created to ensnare or trap souls, it happens that souls are attracted to it, in the same way some people are attracted to the bright lights of a big city. It is not that the city is evil, it is just the way it is.
If your daughter, decides, “dad, regardless of what you say, I’m going to hang out in Johanesburg,” or some other dangerous city, what could you do, short of physically forcing her to stay. Where love is involved, there can be no question of force, so we have to accept our condition, because we have chosen it. Sometimes our conditions are favourable and sometimes not, that is the material world, but ultimately they are all unfavourable.
When we enter into this world, we have to accept suitable bodies. When I say “we” I mean our selves or souls. The souls are not material, they are exactly like God, spirit, they are minute particles of His Self. In Ezekiel 18, He ramarks, “all the souls are mine”.
When God kills, it is not done in the same manner you or I would nesaccerily kill, it is out of love for His children (souls), He knows our real identity, which, like Him, cannot be slain, killed or feel any pain. He does not want to see any soul suffer under the illusion of Hell, but at the same time, He will not stop you if you are determined to go there, because it is your desire. So seeing the state of “all mankind”, He knew that, at that rate, every single living being, would eventually end up in that place, and as such, would have no desire or inclination to realise they are there, or to leave.
God created everything. He put man on the planet and provided for him. This could be seen as love.
Do you provide everything you can for your child?
Do you do it out of love?

Love

Jan Ardena.

P.S. Sorry about the length ot the post. :p
 
What we must also see and understand is 'why' god created us. Throughout this portion of the bible it is very apparent we were created as nothing more than servents.
That is a good point. We are servants, period. From the moment we accept responsibilities, we serve. We serve our parents, our friends, our lovers, our employers, our children, our houses, our society, our government, our monarchies, our pets, our country and our senses. Our constitutional position is one of servitude, this we cannot escape, the only Master is God, and He chooses to serve His devotees, because the exchange is one of, pure conditional love. It was only because Jesus prayed to Him, on the cross, why everyone who conspired in his murder, lived. Such is the power of a great devotee of the Lord.
We are to this day, according to many, being punished for failing the test we could never have passed. Love does not make slaves and love does not make tests we can only fail.
How hard is it to obey God. He asked Adam not to eat from a certain tree, but gave him every other comfort, but he forewent that command and ate from the one tree he was asked not to. God told him what would happen if he ate, but he still disobeyed. The thing is, God had to put that temptation there, because the decision to obey or not, had to come from Adam. So Adam failed, not God. There was no smoke and mirrors, no innuendoes, everything was up front. God knows that it is in mans nature to disobey Him, and knew that Adam would disobey Him, but He still had to give him every chance, because he has a small amount of independence, and had to have the right to use it.
Please tell me what is 'seriously not good progeny' that it requires someone with love in their heart to annihilate an entire species
Seriously not good progeny, is when the mother and father of a child or children is completely devoid of God-consciousness.
Adam and Eve show signs of free will in the very beginning and were punished for it. Mankind showed free will afterwards and was punished time and again for doing so.
One cannot show freewill, freewill is constitutional, it is a part of your make up, like your hair or skin. Mankind is punished because of the choices he makes. As I have said, there are rules and regulations and if you violate them, then you have to accept the same violations are going to come upon you, this is natural. In all societies, there are systems which punish unlawful acts, this has to be, otherwise there would be complete havoc. We make our bed, we must lie in it.
Nowhere does it actually say what mankind did that was so bad it deserved complete destruction.
It does, it says, all of mankind had evil intent. Maybe you don’t understand what evil intent means.
However if we assume we have some freedom of choice, which is apparent with current society, then we could never have deserved entire anihilation.
Lets say an evil person, committed the most heinous, murderous and brutal crimes and it was proven beyond doubt, that he was the perpetrator of these acts, which numbered in tens or more. Lets say this person got a lot of pleasure from inflicting his will on others, and watching the fear and suffering of others, and was not in the least remorseful. And his crimes were against babies and children, to give it a personal dimension. Would you honestly mind if this person was sentenced to a death penalty by the authorities? Or do you think he should be allowed to do as he likes, as it is his choice?
Now, bear in mind, that he did this out of his own freewill.
Now imagine every single person on the face of the planet with that frame of mind.
If we have no free will then man is but a slave born into servitude. If that's the case love has no relevance.
What is the difference between work and service? In this world we have to work, there is no getting away from it. There is not one person who can survive without some kind of work or service, otherwise how would they eat, where would they live, how would the defend themselves. Even the president of the US of A, the most powerful nation in the land, has to work and serve. We are servants, make no bones about it.
We love, according to our consciousness, but love is always there, because we are, in our natural form, spirit and therefore spiritual, which is love.
She wouldn't have known until after she'd eaten the fruit that she was in fact doing something dodgy.
No, she knew that she wasn’t supposed to eat the fruit, that is why she had to be convinced, but why did she go against God’s Will, this is the question.
What i mean by this is that truth should not be spread over different texts created by different religions all jumbled up into one gigantic puzzle.
You wouldn’t teach advanced level mathematics, to infants, because their consciousness is not yet developed to the level where they can comprehend it, but it doesn’t mean that, in time, they wont be able to grasp it. You can only teach people what their consciousness can understand. But the truth remains as one, in every scripture, just as mathematics is one.
If it is done like that there's nothing to suggest sumerian text isn't real and that alien beings really did create mankind.
If they mean, aliens, alien to man, then that is correct, from theirs, or any religious or spiritual point of view.
So if you don't want your creation to create why give them the ability to create?
Her intention was to become God, she was envious of God Greatness, and as a result, chatted foolishness upon the birth of her firstborn. This is the position of “some” ungodly men, they want to kill God, by becoming God.
Cain attacked Abel thanks to gods rejection of his offering. Jealousy is an integral part of being human. God would know that- he made us.
Jealousy is an integral part of ignorance, there is no justification for it, within the realm of proper intelligence. God knew Abel’s intent, because God knew his nature.
Ah mercy perhaps. Mercy and love do not belong in the same sentence. He 'let off' a guy who hadn't given him something worthy of attention and who killed his sibling. However the punishment is instinctively evil in itself: God forced him to suffer a life with his guilt. That alone could be worse and more devised evil than just killing the guy and done with it.
Cain had committed an awful crime, which I’m sure you would agree, is punishable. It would be better to suffer the remainder of ones life, with the guilt, and die having atoned your actions, than to go to hell and suffer, in full awareness, as that would be the universal, natural punishment, for murdering ones younger brother, through an act of violent jealousy.
I think he got off rather lightely.
And all worshipping idols, false gods, daemons, and exactly the same thing we were probably doing back then. That is how mankind has lived throughout history- each with unique beliefs and faiths. And what could you ever benefit from killing every creature and bird?
Nature is like a machine, it just keeps going, round and round, this has happened, innumerable times in the past, it’s happening now, and it will keep on happening. As long as there are conditioned souls, there has to be material nature.
The law of nature is such, that everything and everyone, becomes anihilated, in some form or other. If you study spirituality, on a deeper level, you will understand it teaches that the soul and body are different, the body comes into being and eventually dies, whereas the soul does not come into being, and does not die, it is spirit and therefore eternal.

Love

Jan Ardena.
 
Last edited:
This should make you happy snakelord... i dont know about these "choson one" people... wierdos. And for you sound-minded athiests

I'm not an athiest.

God created time. God does not exist in Time. God can step into and out of Time. But God does not exist in the dimension of Time. If you remove Time then guess what happens... There is no beginning or end. Remember something: Our brains cannot comprehend anything outside of Time. Time is a creation, and our brains our products of TIME. There is no way for us to think outside of time. This is why we have problems understanding how something can be eternal, "alpha and omega" first and last, never-ending never-beginning. But we can understand this concept: Remove time and there is no TIME. No beginning, no end.

You have proof of this? And thus begins the single problem with the whole affair; It is nothing but opinion and groundless heresay. It might very well be logical to assume we cannot comprehend time yada yada but it is not logical to instantly assign truth to something with less validity than the existence of unicorns. There might be something out there like a god/s but there might not be. I might also be able to fly if i jump off the roof. How could i ever assume i can fly without ever jumping off the roof? I won't deny it's possibility but i do understand i cannot speak with certainty until i have done it. Thus in saying: "God did it" is extremely premature. You even go so far as to say 'Proof of..'. I see no proof of anything here.

How can we live on earth? Random Chance? ok. I would accept that. But how can we have a galaxy. Random Chance? ok. How can we have a universe... big bang? hmm. ok... where did that come from?.... How can we have existence?... hmm.... existence.... where did that come from? Where did our universe come from? If it was a big bang, what could have possibly caused that? Some type of energy, maybe? How did that energy get there?

This is open admittance of our lack of understanding. We all should know by now we don't know much on the grand scale of things. However where does it even show evidence of a god? The fact is you dont know, i dont know, nobody knows. To continue with the line of questioning i will ask how god got there, what created him, if he has always been there how? Why did he decide to make trillions of planets with just one inhabited by beings he chose to worship him? Why did he make bacteria? And basically any other question you could think of to ask.

All we have are questions. Assigning it to anything or anyone as a definite is way way premature and groundless.

There has to be a beginning point. The only possible way for us to have existence is for existence to be put here by something eternal. You see, that ends the infinite paradox of "where did that come from? then where did that come from? then where did that come from? then where did that come from?

There doesn't have to be anything. You assume that from a basic human understanding. As for ending infinite paradoxes, that's exactly the reason man has god. It saves asking the questions.

If you equate the existence of the universe to a stack of coins, then the question arises: "What is the bottom coin that is holding everything else up?" Thus the bottom coin HAS to be eternal and constant because if it wasnt always there, then the rest of the coins would have never been able to stack on top of the first "Super Coin" that is holding everything else up. Secondly, the rest of the coins are (metaphorically: "us") obviously non-eternal, and have a beginning and an end. This means that the "Super Coin" had to have been able to duplicate itself in some (lesser) way and create an enviroment (a place of existence) for the rest of the coins to stack on top of itself.

Well coins don't really equate to the cosmos. I guess they might do, but we certainly have nothing of worth to suggest they do. My point is, we don't know. How can you even begin to say: "It was god because i dont know the answers"? It remains the 'quick, no questions asked' solution which some people can live with. Those who really want truth cannot just 'accept' that.

anyways, perhaps some of this was unecessary, but it is truth

Who's truth is it? If you claim it is total truth you must understand you need proof. Groundless hypothesis means nothing. From what you have said you believe in god because you cant explain the beginnings of existence.

"What came first; the chicken or the egg?"

"I don't know so it must be god."

Groundless.
 
Re: Proof of the existence of God through logic

Originally posted by KenshiSoro
There ARE some logically driven theists out there.

Yes there are, there are genius nobel laureates who are theists.

Originally posted by KenshiSoro
Alot of people find it hard to understand how God could have existed forever. Never ending, Never beginning.

I will explain, are you ready for it?

That is not the question I think a lot of people want answered, and personally I think that that is impossible to explain logically, but go ahead, I'm ready for it.

Originally posted by KenshiSoro
God created time. God does not exist in Time. God can step into and out of Time. But God does not exist in the dimension of Time. If you remove Time then guess what happens... There is no beginning or end. Remember something: Our brains cannot comprehend anything outside of Time.Time is a creation, and our brains our products of TIME.

No logic here at all really. You have that last sentence backwards. TIME is a product of our minds, so in a way humans created time.

Originally posted by KenshiSoro
There is no way for us to think outside of time. This is why we have problems understanding how something can be eternal, "alpha and omega" first and last, never-ending never-beginning. But we can understand this concept: Remove time and there is no TIME. No beginning, no end.

Right now I am not intelligent enough to even begin to comprehend infinity, niether are you appearently. I cannot understand how there could be a beginning to everything, and I don't think that saying God is the only thing that is eternal is at all a logical explaination for anything relating to the formation of the cosmos.

Originally posted by KenshiSoro
I will also prove why the existence of God is Logically necessary:

This deserves to be mocked, it is just such a topic that you couldn't even begin to make any sense out of. The next paragraph you posted is not really worth quoting. consequent Atheist said it best in another post where you put the same topic up. I will comment on your "stack of coins" theory, it is totally illogical. There is no backing to it whatsoever, at least none that I could read.

Originally posted by KenshiSoro
anyways, perhaps some of this was unecessary, but it is truth. i hope you guys can use this information to refute athiesm and anti-theism wish is actually reletively easy for the properly informed to do. God Bless and have fun.

Ummm, your entire post is a little weird, I mean: Using logic to prove the existance of God??? Logic is the atheist pen, yours is faith, you should really stick with it, it is a better argument.

And it is normally the informed that turn into atheists, not the other way around. Children don't turn into theists, they are brainwashed and told what to think until they gain an education and become informed, they thne form thier own opinion and refute theism. Once again an example of how your post is weird

Originally posted by KenshiSoro
I would be interested to hear your retorts. Please, i don't want to hear any personal attacks. Just logical, freindly arguements against the material i have put forth here. thank you.

(resisting urge to call your "logical" opinion a piece of crap)

Sorry, but ripping people a little is half the fun of internet boards for me. I mean, if you can't talk back to your boss at work, pretend he is some dude you meet on the internet and let the shit fly. Anyway good post, although take my advice to sticking with faith instead of logic... you total (insert hurtful expletive here)

ZERO MASS
 
Back
Top