Sci, can you be a little more straight-forward in your responses?
It is already written in plain language.
smallest basics —> complex, as now, to future complexities.
Sci, can you be a little more straight-forward in your responses?
It is already written in plain language.
smallest basics —> complex, as now, to future complexities.
Do think that empty space = quantum vacum?
jan.
So the arrow run from virtual particles to matter, to consciousness?
Hence a "being" would be introduced into reality through the process of time?
Is matter real (to consciousness) or illusory?
jan.
Atheists view the Bible as a total work of fiction.I'm sorry but that essentially devolves into: god exists because the bible says so and we know the bible is true because god dictated it.
Oops. Since the claims are made by theists it is up to them to prove it's correct.Atheists view the Bible as a total work of fiction.
They know not how to do the work, and are listening to others. The work of finding whether the Bible is truth or fiction is a long, rewarding personal process that involves just a few steps.
((1. Try to prove it wrong to yourself by yourself. Check and prove everything you can.
2. If you can prove it wrong, you are done. Stop here. It is a work of fiction based on your own work.
Controlled experiments? :shrug:4. Run 10 controlled experiments, on what you could not prove wrong, and collect the results.
Do you speak English?(My definition of Circular Logic. Circular logic is false because a false fact is stated as proven by some method, usually stated or implied and is not checked or is missed. In circular logic if the original statement is checked for accuracy, it is not. When this occurs, much, much, much rancor, words and even war can result, from something that was never true in the first place. The cure here is to check to see if what you are discussing is true or not, by yourself.)
Waffle waffle.Is it logical view?
My friend worked in the Applied Physics Lab at a Corporation, when she chanced upon an atheist. He is the one who used dog and maddog, when anyone talked about God. She was extremely concerned, because of the illogic of stating anything as true that is not proven to be so. In those days, he also, did not know if God was real or fiction.He also suspected the Bible as being false. So, he had no theological view. She had a logical view. She needed to know, if this guy was trustworthy in research matters.
She made some time one day. She asked him. "Can you say for certain that there is no possibility that a god exists?" He said "No!" I then asked "So what gives???"
(This was a statement of slang in the 70's and 80's, which means roughly: So why are you stating a view contrary to your knowlege?")
He replied: "My mother was a person in a religion. She is a hypocrite. I hate what she does and what she did." The religion is unimportant here. We talked some more. This man was known for his candor, veracity, and this was the only known anomoly. She could again trust him in research, without undue concern as this is his only diversion from statements which are not proven, or provable.
Wrong again. Claims have been made. They cannot be supported. If god cannot be proven to be real then why should I take any notice of the claims?Logic requires proof, and each of us is logical, whether we admit it or not. Therfore, it is not logical to say The Bible or God, is not real unless you can prove they are not real.
Logic requires proof, and each of us is logical, whether we admit it or not. Therfore, it is not logical to say The Bible or God, is not real unless you can prove they are not real.