Religion… What do you think?

Avatar image for hulkbusterx9
HulkBusterx9

2574

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@iron_tiger how hard is it to post something, ANYTHING, with evidence that confirms his stance if there is so much out there, like he claims?

Avatar image for dshipp17
dshipp17

5973

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@dshipp17: Still no links with evidence.

What's so hard to understand; the clips are in this thread; start with post 27520 and start trying to validate your assertion that the presenter is twisting science to provide proof and evidence of God; and, then, from there, you have a high hill to climb trying to do that with the other clips, and the other information that these clips are sampling. I doubt if you could demonstrate in excess of three points are twisting science in just that one clip, yet along everything else.

Avatar image for hulkbusterx9
HulkBusterx9

2574

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27554  Edited By HulkBusterx9

@dshipp17: Do you not possess the ability to post a link with evidence?

Avatar image for iron_tiger
Iron_Tiger

2124

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@hulkbusterx9: Not hard, whatsoever. We've given him so many chances, and he's failed every single time.

Avatar image for iron_tiger
Iron_Tiger

2124

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27556  Edited By Iron_Tiger

@dshipp17: No one needs to go back and read your numerous posts with quotes from the bible and vids of opinions when you're more than capable of posting newer items of proof (since you claim there's an abundance). If that's true, then it shouldn't take you more than 5 minutes to collect them.

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8113

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@hulkbusterx9: @iron_tiger:

https://biblehub.com/1_john/1-5.htm

Here is a link showing that DShips God is light.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light

Here is a link showing that light is real

Avatar image for dshipp17
dshipp17

5973

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@dshipp17: Do you not possess the ability to post a link with evidence?

I referred you to a post with the evidence; apply your sense and play the YouTube clip; the discussion is the point where you should be showing that the presented evidence is a twist of science; the evidence for God is numerous; there is no single piece of evidence; you have to understand the nature of the question that you're asking better in order to know that you've been presented evidence; what do you think evidence of God would be?

Avatar image for dshipp17
dshipp17

5973

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#27559  Edited By dshipp17

@dshipp17: No one needs to go back and read your numerous posts with quotes from the bible and vids of opinions when you're more than capable of posting newer items of proof (since you claim there's an abundance). If that's true, then it shouldn't take you more than 5 minutes to collect them.

The issue with that is you both told me that there was no evidence of God, plus the state where the discussion currently lies; I'm not here to anyway help you make your case for your uninformed assertion that there is no evidence of God and that God doesn't exist, when so many people believe otherwise; the burden of proof is on you to examine the evidence that we think we have and try to refute it to us to convince us to your side or point of view. That's clearly what's going on here.

Avatar image for hulkbusterx9
HulkBusterx9

2574

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@dshipp17: Still trying to weasel your way out of posting links containing the evidence you claim is out there?

Avatar image for iron_tiger
Iron_Tiger

2124

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@dshipp17: So, again, you can't prove God is real/exists. Gotcha.

Avatar image for mrdecepticonleader
mrdecepticonleader

19693

Forum Posts

2501

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

Haven't been on here in awhile, man used to post on this thread a fair bit, ha , nice to see it's still going heh

Avatar image for cable_extreme
Cable_Extreme

17008

Forum Posts

324

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@dshipp17: So, again, you can't prove God is real/exists. Gotcha.

God is real and I can prove it.

Here's how you do it:

Flip your hand where your palm is facing away from you, chant "show yourself" and bring your pinky finger down, do this again for your thumb, and again for your ring and index finger.

Avatar image for iron_tiger
Iron_Tiger

2124

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8113

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Avatar image for dshipp17
dshipp17

5973

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#27566  Edited By dshipp17

@hulkbusterx9 said:

@dshipp17: Still trying to weasel your way out of posting links containing the evidence you claim is out there?

You're still weasel out of your claim that the presenters in my clips are twisting science by proving God'as existence; you still have to demonstrate how they are twisting science.

@iron_tiger said:

@dshipp17: So, again, you can't prove God is real/exists. Gotcha.

I sent you on the path for finding proof of God's existence, but you haven't taken some basic steps to locate it nor just played a video clip right before your eyes.

Yesterday, I said part of the process is becoming Christian, first. Behold, exhibit number 1:

Kanye West on receiving a $68 million tax refund: “God is using me to show off”

Avatar image for cable_extreme
Cable_Extreme

17008

Forum Posts

324

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Avatar image for iron_tiger
Iron_Tiger

2124

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27568  Edited By Iron_Tiger

@dshipp17: Telling people they need to find proof of God's existence themselves is not proving God's existence, dude. That's not how this works. We've wasted our precious time by giving you plenty of chances, and you've failed each one. This is quite a sad moment for you.

Avatar image for dshipp17
dshipp17

5973

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@dshipp17: Telling people they need to find proof of God's existence themselves is not proving God's existence, dude. That's not how this works. We've wasted our precious time by giving you plenty of chances, and you've failed each one. This is quite a sad moment for you.

That's not what really happened; you're twisting the sequence of events that was shown several times already; you told me that there was no evidence for God and that He didn't exist; I told you that there was evidence of God; you said where; I said that the evidence is abundant with just some basic, commonsense footwork on your part; I also pointed to the video clips that I've posted in this thread spanning for years now; but, you're refusing to view the clips; I also said that, given the amount of evidence for God, you're suggestion makes no sense, because there isn't just a single piece of evidence to present; you have to understand the nature of the question you're asking, first (e.g. my example with the atom) in order to show that you're really looking for evidence, as it then intersects with my essentially allowing me to help you try to make your case for you, something that I'm onto and wont be doing. Since you won't play the clips, you're wasting our time, as someone apart of a small crowd trying to convince the majority of the human population who believe that God exists that He doesn't exist; and, you haven't taken a basic step to just view a clip and, with this post, even though I seceded and posted a link in the post that this is responding to, you're still spinning facts and wouldn't even click the link. You're to egotistical for your own good; you need to develop some maturity and then understand what I've shown you and told you about the existence of God and the abundance of evidence for His existence; that's the only real problem now.

Avatar image for iron_tiger
Iron_Tiger

2124

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@dshipp17: "I sent you on the path for finding proof of God's existence, but you haven't taken some basic steps to locate it," <-- is telling me to go find your proof for you. It's not twisting it when it's cooy-pasted directly from your post. You're saying, in other words, "I'm not going to get it." So, it has come down to you now refusing.

Avatar image for cable_extreme
Cable_Extreme

17008

Forum Posts

324

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27571  Edited By Cable_Extreme

@iron_tiger said:

@dshipp17: "I sent you on the path for finding proof of God's existence, but you haven't taken some basic steps to locate it," <-- is telling me to go find your proof for you. It's not twisting it when it's cooy-pasted directly from your post. You're saying, in other words, "I'm not going to get it." So, it has come down to you now refusing.

Proof for the Christian God does not exist. He cannot provide it for you. Just like other pre-requisites for other religions, belief is founded upon faith. He is attempting to convince others to take on belief through faith, that what the bible says is true. No facts needed, nor wanted I assume.

Avatar image for dshipp17
dshipp17

5973

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#27572  Edited By dshipp17

@cable_extreme said:
@iron_tiger said:

@dshipp17: "I sent you on the path for finding proof of God's existence, but you haven't taken some basic steps to locate it," <-- is telling me to go find your proof for you. It's not twisting it when it's cooy-pasted directly from your post. You're saying, in other words, "I'm not going to get it." So, it has come down to you now refusing.

Proof for the Christian God does not exist. He cannot provide it for you. Just like other pre-requisites for other religions, belief is founded upon faith. He is attempting to convince others to take on belief through faith, that what the bible says is true. No facts needed, nor wanted I assume.

How do you derive that from everything that I said? There is an abundance of proof for God's existence; you just have to take the basic steps on your own to find it; you have to reconcile what you consider proof with the reality of the proof that you're asking for (e.g. proof of an atom, example); what you say here isn't how Christians have evidence of God's existence, thus, your lack of understanding is the breakdown in your ability to understand evidence, even it it were brought to you on a silver platter by someone which won't be me. And, with this sentence, you've extracted the parts that you prefer to believe which isn't the proof that I've continually been providing, even providing a link to this person, which he still won't/isn't read; he's clearly only spreading talking points and trying to save face.

Avatar image for hulkbusterx9
HulkBusterx9

2574

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27573  Edited By HulkBusterx9

@dshipp17: At this point your inability to post links with evidence is only re-enforcing the idea that god doesn't exist. I'm done wasting my time with you. We've asked many times for you to post evidence, and you still can't. All you've done is made yourself and your fellow christians look bad.

Avatar image for dshipp17
dshipp17

5973

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@dshipp17: "I sent you on the path for finding proof of God's existence, but you haven't taken some basic steps to locate it," <-- is telling me to go find your proof for you. It's not twisting it when it's cooy-pasted directly from your post. You're saying, in other words, "I'm not going to get it." So, it has come down to you now refusing.

This had nothing to do with anything, at all; you told me that there was no evidence of God nor is He real; I then pointed you in the direction of the evidence, including video clip samples; and, ever since, instead of examining the evidence, you've been spewing out similar talking points to this one; you aren't interested in the evidence, apparently, by your actual actions; you have to grow and mature, as this topic is too adult for you; you have to bury your ego; most of humanity believes in God; you just have to get with the program.

Avatar image for dshipp17
dshipp17

5973

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#27575  Edited By dshipp17

@hulkbusterx9 said:

@dshipp17: At this point your inability to post links with evidence is only re-enforcing the idea that god doesn't exist. I'm done wasting my time with you. We've asked many times for you to post evidence, and you still can't. All you've done is made yourself and your fellow christians look bad.

No, it's just that you won't watch some video clips and are unable to substantiate your blanket assertion that the presenters in the video clips are twisting science with their proof of God's existence, coupled with you inability to read and follow along, instead, opting to confuse people about what really happened with your talking points. And, by doing that, you just missed the link that I just posted in my last reply to you. You also failed to answer the question: what is evidence of God in your mind to demonstrate that you'd understand it, if evidence of God were presented to you (e.g. I can provide evidence of an atom, but you can only understand that evidence, after you've willingly set out to understand how to understand that evidence of the atom).

Avatar image for hulkbusterx9
HulkBusterx9

2574

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@dshipp17: I'm not even gonna read the pathetic excuses you've made in that post. But go ahead, keep beating around the bush.

Avatar image for cable_extreme
Cable_Extreme

17008

Forum Posts

324

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27577  Edited By Cable_Extreme

@dshipp17 said:
@iron_tiger said:

@dshipp17: "I sent you on the path for finding proof of God's existence, but you haven't taken some basic steps to locate it," <-- is telling me to go find your proof for you. It's not twisting it when it's cooy-pasted directly from your post. You're saying, in other words, "I'm not going to get it." So, it has come down to you now refusing.

Proof for the Christian God does not exist. He cannot provide it for you. Just like other pre-requisites for other religions, belief is founded upon faith. He is attempting to convince others to take on belief through faith, that what the bible says is true. No facts needed, nor wanted I assume.

How do you derive that from everything that I said? There is an abundance of proof for God's existence; you just have to take the basic steps on your own to find it; you have to reconcile what you consider proof with the reality of the proof that you're asking for (e.g. prof of an atom, example); what you say here isn't how Christians have evidence of God's existence, thus, your lack of understanding is the breakdown in your ability to understand evidence, even it it were brought to you on a silver platter by someone which won't be me. And, with this sentence, you've extracted the parts that you prefer to believe which isn't the proof that I've continually been providing, even providing a link to this person, which he still won't/isn't read; he's clearly only spreading talking points and trying to save face.

Here is the truth, it is all about the interpretation of our world around us. You claim that the universe, the atom, etc... is evidence/proof of your Christian God. I say we don't exactly know much other than the fact that we are here. People study their whole lives using whatever technologies are at their disposal, they even invent technologies in their search for answers. No one looked up at the sky and saw a galaxy through a telescope and said "this is the work of Yahweh". That conclusion comes solely from your religious text. You have to read the text and accept it as true for your "glass lens" world view to magically confirm your predetermined bias.

The problem with your method of listing evidence is it is from youtube where the sources cannot be peer-reviewed, it often times dances around the topic only to never really answer the specific questions, and they are above all, far too long. We simply want an answer to a question, not a hour and a half video from someone else who cannot be asked questions or be subjected to criticism.

Avatar image for dshipp17
dshipp17

5973

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#27578  Edited By dshipp17

@hulkbusterx9 said:

@dshipp17: I'm not even gonna read the pathetic excuses you've made in that post. But go ahead, keep beating around the bush.

Make excuse over what, exactly? I'd encourage you to read instead of relying on speculation; your preference for speculation is the reason you're apart from the majority of humanity who believe in God based on the proof they're seen of God, as well as to recognize the link that you've asked for, where I ceded a bit to provide for you; just view the clips and admit that you can't demonstrated that the presenters have been twisting science.

Avatar image for hulkbusterx9
HulkBusterx9

2574

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@dshipp17: No links and instead just more excuses. Btw, that Kanye West link contained absolutely no concrete evidence of his existence

Avatar image for cable_extreme
Cable_Extreme

17008

Forum Posts

324

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27580  Edited By Cable_Extreme

@dshipp17: What we want are peer-reviewed scholarly articles containing actual scientific theories supporting a Christian God that uses science without referencing the bible or other religious text.

Avatar image for hulkbusterx9
HulkBusterx9

2574

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@dshipp17: What we want are peer-reviewed scholarly articles containing actual scientific theories supporting a Christian God that uses science without referencing the bible or other religious text.

This.

Avatar image for dshipp17
dshipp17

5973

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#27582  Edited By dshipp17

@hulkbusterx9 said:

@dshipp17: No links and instead just more excuses. Btw, that Kanye West link contained absolutely no concrete evidence of his existence

That's because you simply don't understand what you're asking or haven't defined what you're asking, as you were previously told to do several times now; what you see as proof could be separate from what proof actually is in reality; this is on you to reconcile yourself with reality; this is concrete evidence of God, based on proximity and timing; this is something that happened soon after West became a Christian; it represents a personal experience for him; when combined with others with similar experiences, it;'s strong and concrete evidence of God in action, except you have to go beyond speculation to understand the evidence when you see it.

Avatar image for hulkbusterx9
HulkBusterx9

2574

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27583  Edited By HulkBusterx9

@dshipp17: Again, i'm not reading whatever you put in that post. Give me a link to a study with completely objective scientific data that supports his existence.

Avatar image for iron_tiger
Iron_Tiger

2124

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@hulkbusterx9: We're not going to get anything from him. He's too far gone into coocoo land.

Avatar image for dshipp17
dshipp17

5973

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@cable_extreme said:

@dshipp17: What we want are peer-reviewed scholarly articles containing actual scientific theories supporting a Christian God that uses science without referencing the bible or other religious text.

This.

That's his standard for evidence; this isn't your own, which you were asked to provided several time earlier; his standard is derived from his ignorance of the topic.

Avatar image for dshipp17
dshipp17

5973

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#27586  Edited By dshipp17
@cable_extreme said:

@dshipp17: What we want are peer-reviewed scholarly articles containing actual scientific theories supporting a Christian God that uses science without referencing the bible or other religious text.

These are available but you have to set out to find them; these are constantly and abundantly referenced in the video clips that I posted. However, the presence or lack of this doesn't establish one way or the other God's existence (e.g. I could ask you to provide this to establish that Abraham Lincoln existed, (e.g. substitute history books, autobiography, etc for the Bible, even though there is historical evidence of God beside the Bible, where the validity of the Bible as a reference source has not been thoroughly invalidated, anyway) but, in that context, the request would be nonsensical; you only know this, by having an objective desire to know what it is that you're asking for; you don't quite have this yet, concerning the evidence of God's existence).

Avatar image for cable_extreme
Cable_Extreme

17008

Forum Posts

324

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@dshipp17 said:
@cable_extreme said:

@dshipp17: What we want are peer-reviewed scholarly articles containing actual scientific theories supporting a Christian God that uses science without referencing the bible or other religious text.

This.

That's his standard for evidence; this isn't your own, which you were asked to provided several time earlier; his standard is derived from his ignorance of the topic.

Just simply accept that you cannot have your world view without the bible guiding your belief. You place your belief in the bible first, then unconsciously interpret evidence you encounter to support that belief. Why is it that the Mayans, or Egyptians (who were quite advanced in astronomy) at least agree on a monotheistic religion? Why is it that one group of people in the whole human population worship the correct "God of Israel" when they had nowhere near the knowledge of celestial bodies that more advanced civilizations did at the time? That should be enough to show that evidence without bias does not lead to a Christian God.

Avatar image for windshieldwiper
Windshieldwiper

133

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Religion is man, god is divine

Avatar image for dshipp17
dshipp17

5973

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@hulkbusterx9: We're not going to get anything from him. He's too far gone into coocoo land.

Again, you just won't look at the evidence.

Avatar image for cable_extreme
Cable_Extreme

17008

Forum Posts

324

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@dshipp17 said:
@cable_extreme said:

@dshipp17: What we want are peer-reviewed scholarly articles containing actual scientific theories supporting a Christian God that uses science without referencing the bible or other religious text.

These are available but you have to set out to find them; these are constantly and abundantly referenced in the video clips that I posted. However, the presence or lack of this doesn't establish one way or the other God's existence (e.g. I could ask you to provide this to establish that Abraham Lincoln existed, (e.g. substitute history books, autobiography, etc for the Bible, even though there is historical evidence of God beside the Bible, where the validity of the Bible as a reference source has not been thoroughly invalidated, anyway) but, in that context, the request would be nonsensical; you only know this, by having an objective desire to know what it is that you're asking for; you don't quite have this yet, concerning the evidence of God's existence).

That is like me saying that Spider-man comics reference Obama, the statue of liberty, 1984 Yankies game etc.... Referencing world events does not validate supernatural claims. Videos are not evidence, they are simply an hour an a half long opinionated statement. Show me real evidence.

Example, you want evidence of the big bang? I can provide you theories like Hubble's law which measures the distance/ direction, and speed of distant stars/galaxies using light shifts and parallax. And the reversal of Hubble's law to indicate mathematically when the universe was thought to have been condensed 13.8 billion years ago by measuring the speeds and directions and reversing them. I can explain to you the theories I accept and why. You cannot provide real scientific/peer-reviewed articles that show actual scientific theories. Videos are worse than using Wikipedia in a research paper as they source is not confirmed to be trustworthy.

Avatar image for cable_extreme
Cable_Extreme

17008

Forum Posts

324

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@dshipp17 said:
@iron_tiger said:

@hulkbusterx9: We're not going to get anything from him. He's too far gone into coocoo land.

Again, you just won't look at the evidence.

Here is what evidence really is,

Ultimately, scientific ideas must not only be testable, but must actually be tested — preferably with many different lines of evidence by many different people. This characteristic is at the heart of all science. Scientists actively seek evidence to test their ideas — even if the test is difficult and means, for example, spending years working on a single experiment, traveling to Antarctica to measure carbon dioxide levels in an ice core, or collecting DNA samples from thousands of volunteers all over the world. Performing such tests is so important to science because in science, the acceptance or rejection of a scientific idea depends upon the evidence relevant to it — not upon dogma, popular opinion, or tradition. In science, ideas that are not supported by evidence are ultimately rejected. And ideas that are protected from testing or are only allowed to be tested by one group with a vested interest in the outcome are not a part of good science.

Berkly.edu

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8113

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@cable_extreme:

What kind of evidence would you want dshipp to provide?

Is the kind of evidence you use for the Big Bang the kind we can use to build the case for Bible God?

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8113

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@cable_extreme:

"""the acceptance or rejection of a scientific idea depends upon the evidence relevant to it — not upon dogma, popular opinion, or tradition. In science, ideas that are not supported by evidence are ultimately rejected. """

Lies

Avatar image for dshipp17
dshipp17

5973

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#27594  Edited By dshipp17

@cable_extreme said:
@dshipp17 said:
@cable_extreme said:

@dshipp17: What we want are peer-reviewed scholarly articles containing actual scientific theories supporting a Christian God that uses science without referencing the bible or other religious text.

These are available but you have to set out to find them; these are constantly and abundantly referenced in the video clips that I posted. However, the presence or lack of this doesn't establish one way or the other God's existence (e.g. I could ask you to provide this to establish that Abraham Lincoln existed, (e.g. substitute history books, autobiography, etc for the Bible, even though there is historical evidence of God beside the Bible, where the validity of the Bible as a reference source has not been thoroughly invalidated, anyway) but, in that context, the request would be nonsensical; you only know this, by having an objective desire to know what it is that you're asking for; you don't quite have this yet, concerning the evidence of God's existence).

That is like me saying that Spider-man comics reference Obama, the statue of liberty, 1984 Yankies game etc.... Referencing world events does not validate supernatural claims. Videos are not evidence, they are simply an hour an a half long opinionated statement. Show me real evidence.

Example, you want evidence of the big bang? I can provide you theories like Hubble's law which measures the distance/ direction, and speed of distant stars/galaxies using light shifts and parallax. And the reversal of Hubble's law to indicate mathematically when the universe was thought to have been condensed 13.8 billion years ago by measuring the speeds and directions and reversing them. I can explain to you the theories I accept and why. You cannot provide real scientific/peer-reviewed articles that show actual scientific theories. Videos are worse than using Wikipedia in a research paper as they source is not confirmed to be trustworthy.

“That is like me saying that Spider-man comics reference Obama, the statue of liberty, 1984 Yankies game etc.... Referencing world events does not validate supernatural claims. Videos are not evidence, they are simply an hour an a half long opinionated statement. Show me real evidence.”

You're diverting away from the point made in the very comment that you're referencing with a false equivalency. The key difference is that everyone has dismissed the Spider-Man comic as a known piece of fiction; they respect it, but for reasons separate from real life; there is also this separation of known fiction from reality in Biblical times, as well; the known fiction of that time also referenced real events that is now only reliable based on the way people treated that material; if people thought it was fiction, they would have treated it in such a way, in very clear terms. Everyone from Biblical times were not only treating the Bible as real history, but also as a sacred and Holy piece of material that needed to be preserved at all cost; they actual treated it as more important than documenting some famous leaders from the time.

The issue here, again, is both you're ignorance on the topic and your determination to rely on your speculation about the topic, because you prefer it not to be real for most people, opting instead that most of humanity see things your way. Your ego is forcing you to prefer things that you prefer to hear, without an independent and objective desire, on your own, to learn about the topic. But, this doesn't prove what's real is false; you're not gaining much traction as a member of your small sect of humanity who don't want the majority of people to believe in God, because everyone else is relying on what's real, and had decided to be objective in their effort to find out one way or the other, and found in the affirmative in most every case, in their objective effort to know the available information and effort.

“Example, you want evidence of the big bang? I can provide you theories like Hubble's law which measures the distance/ direction, and speed of distant stars/galaxies using light shifts and parallax.”

This shows that you've undertaken an investigation on this topic on your own, at least. Part of your investigation involved your learning about material that you could not have known before and material that is necessary for you to start understanding the topic. You clearly haven't put in this same effort towards learning whether or not God exists or not. It's apparent from the statement that I just addressed that your bias lead you to be receptive to information that would be necessary for you to try, at least, to arrive at an objective conclusion about that topic. But, on the other hand, you have to show this same willingness and effort to know whether or not there is evidence for God. You didn't automatically know this by instinct, you had to undertake a series of steps to find out this information.

With that said, surly you can now better understand my point the you go and get informed on the topic of God? Based on things that you say, anyone can tell that you're only speculating and relying on secondhand and third-hand information that was intended to be a joke about evidence for the existence of God.

The Hubble theory was derived from a postulate, after increased technology, arriving the the same conclusion as the Bible had done long before: that the universe had a beginning; a priest at the time pointed this out, but scientists just simply preferred that it be considered a separate finding or discovery, without more; previously, the preferred conclusion of those scientists was that the universe never had a beginning.

But, there are many parts of this scientific finding that is still a postulate and speculation. One would be that the universe necessarily just sprang into existence from some type of particle sized point. However, the Bible says that God created and then spread the created stars and universe out from His location. The latter makes a lot more sense, as the idea of the universe coming from suddenly appearing particle has left scientists struggling; the only valid conclusion is that the universe had a beginning. Both conclusions, the Bible and the scientific postulate that was quickly co-opted by a biased view against God, would end up valid from the same math and physics.

And, of course, I have no credible basis available that tells me that the Bible should be dismissed out of hand, as someone who put objective evidence into the topic of looking for and finding whether or not there was evidence for God's existence. However, I have plenty of bases available to me to hold that the Bible is very credible as a historical document, even though my personal experience had already fully validated God's existence for me before my objective search for evidence and information on this topic. With your prior statement, one of your presumptions appears to be that the Bible can just be dismissed as a document without any type of support, solid or otherwise, that your position on the Bible is valid to many people in this area of academia.

"You cannot provide real scientific/peer-reviewed articles that show actual scientific theories. Videos are worse than using Wikipedia in a research paper as they source is not confirmed to be trustworthy."

Clearly you haven't viewed the videos; the videos are discussing scientific findings that have been published in real scientific articles that were peer reviewed; however, the topic of God expands beyond this, just like many other things, naming how we accept rather or not someone like Alexander the Great existed; this topic isn't covered in scientific articles, is it's not applicable in that location; but, you need an objective search in order to find out on your own. This statement actually shows that you just don't know the nature of the topic such that you're able to understand rather or not evidence has been presented to you, as I earlier said to other posters and you. These videos are far more valid than Wikipedia; they just discuss the information in video rather written format; basically like a virtual professor teaching a topic, where many science class are now live streamed to students or available in YouTube clips; I've recently seen some, where I've been intermittently studying to prepare to take the GRE; but, I need to fresh my memory, as it's been a while.

Avatar image for dshipp17
dshipp17

5973

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#27595  Edited By dshipp17

Mark 9:21-29:

And he asked his father, How long is it ago since this came unto him? And he said, Of a child.

22 And ofttimes it hath cast him into the fire, and into the waters, to destroy him: but if thou canst do any thing, have compassion on us, and help us.

23 Jesus said unto him, If thou canst believe, all things are possible to him that believeth.

24 And straightway the father of the child cried out, and said with tears, Lord, I believe; help thou mine unbelief.

25 When Jesus saw that the people came running together, he rebuked the foul spirit, saying unto him, Thou dumb and deaf spirit, I charge thee, come out of him, and enter no more into him.

26 And the spirit cried, and rent him sore, and came out of him: and he was as one dead; insomuch that many said, He is dead.

27 But Jesus took him by the hand, and lifted him up; and he arose.

28 And when he was come into the house, his disciples asked him privately, Why could not we cast him out?

29 And he said unto them, This kind can come forth by nothing, but by prayer and fasting.

Loading Video...
Loading Video...

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8113

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@dshipp17:

Who do you worship more, Zarathustra or Mithra?

Avatar image for hulkbusterx9
HulkBusterx9

2574

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@dshipp17: m8 just admit you can't provide any scientific evidence of his existence, it is that simple.

Avatar image for cable_extreme
Cable_Extreme

17008

Forum Posts

324

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27598  Edited By Cable_Extreme

@dshipp17: if the videos reference scientific articles, then bypass the videos and link us the scientific articles. That would get us a lot further than a video of random people claiming something without linking any scientific evidence.

As far as putting my time towards reaching and learning about your God. I was raised a Christian, I have read the Bible about 16 times now, and have intensively studied biblical and theological theories. Everything from the 3 Abrahamic religions, Deism, Pantheism, poltheyism etc... I have probably already heard and countered most of your current arguments before with other people. The main problems with your view is that there is no evidence that the Bible is true in its claims of the supernatural. It claims to be true, but so does the Qur’an. Muslims will swear up and down that the Qur’an is perfect and has never been falsified. Christians will say the same thing about the Bible. From an outside viewpoint, there is no reason outside of bias to pick one over the other.

I have looked into scientific theories of the Big Bang because I have been introduced to those theories. I have asked people who are scientifically literate and they directed me towards those theories, explained the evidence, showed me how to look up data, and how to look up peer reviews from other qualified scientist to determine how trustworthy the source is that I am reading.

Provide me scientific theories that support your world view so I can start learning. Show me something that leads to the conclusion of a Christian god by looking at the natural universe. If you have something, it would be news to me. Biblical theories always reference the Bible first and then translate it to the real world. I have no actual reason to believe the Bible when it is not inherently clear.

Avatar image for cable_extreme
Cable_Extreme

17008

Forum Posts

324

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@spareheadone: I simply want scientific evidence supporting supernatural claims. Like a guy walking on water, or raising the dead.

You will most likely respond with it is outside of science or explanation. Well if it cannot be repeated, or observed, or even explained, then why believe it? The Bible makes many bold claims of the supernatural, why should I believe them? They are quite impossible by our advanced understanding of science.

Similar to people using Zeus to explain lightning. We now understand it is not Zues. The “God” explanation for the unexplained has never really worked once technology and education caught up with it.

Avatar image for hulkbusterx9
HulkBusterx9

2574

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@cable_extreme: One of his main counter arguments is "prove Alexander the Great existed". He's most likely gonna respond with that.