Evidence for God from Science

B. W. wrote:Jesus did so, paying a heavy price to do so for all, but many like yourself still refuse to believe...

I was expecting you to say that, but its not really true, is it? There's a really steep price to pay, salvation isn't really free, is it?

Lunalle wrote:

1over137 wrote:Have you yourself researched this?

No, I have not. I'm not very interested in medical science. I think it is a great thing, and extremely helpful, but it isn't a personal interest, so I don't spend much time on it.

1over137 wrote:To me you seems to really pick anti-god position. You say there are things we know not how to explain yet but in future you believe we will. Is this your position, right?

Personally, I do pick the anti-god position. In this example, the reason is because if everyone believes God did it, then we have no good reason to further investigate the occurrence(s). My father will never know what actually happened, because he is closed minded and believes it was "God and faith". Even if the doctors are still trying to figure it out (doubtful), and at some point they do (even more doubtful), my father would not believe them.

You're very close to my position. It is that there are things we do not know how to explain yet, HOPEFULLY in the future, we will be able to. We should keep trying until we can, and reject ANY (God or otherwise) answer not based on evidence, which causes us to stop investigating.

So I pick the anti-magic, anti-devil, anti-prayer, anti-(anything you can come up with, except a scientific theory) position, just as strongly as the anti-god one.

Then you closed the door to God.

Mmm, may I ask why you came here to the forum to ask us what evidence we have? Because you are persuaded that whatever we say it will be explained eventually by science. Whatever we say you will reject it. Am I right?

Lunalle wrote:

B. W. wrote:Jesus did so, paying a heavy price to do so for all, but many like yourself still refuse to believe...

I was expecting you to say that, but its not really true, is it? There's a really steep price to pay, salvation isn't really free, is it?

Lunalle, salvation is a free gift. Free to anyone who trusts Christ. That doesn't mean salvation wasn't at a cost.

If I meet you on the street and give you a tv as a gift, that says nothing about the price I paid for the tv, which for you is free.

RickD wrote:Lunalle, salvation is a free gift. Free to anyone who trusts Christ. That doesn't mean salvation wasn't at a cost.
If I meet you on the street and give you a tv as a gift, that says nothing about the price I paid for the tv, which for you is free.

Hey Rick, that's a beautiful analogy. I'm trying to be very careful not to be offensive, but I want to point something out about your analogy, and I'd ask you to apply the same concept to salvation. Of course, you have no obligation to, but I'd really, really, appreciate it if you took some time and gave this some serious thought.

If you meet me on the street, and give me a free TV as a gift, it's not really free. Sure, it might not cost me money to acquire the TV, but that's not the whole story. I have to transport that TV to my home. I don't have a license, so I probably have to pay for a taxi. I have to expend some effort to re-arrange my living room, to accommodate the new TV. I am going to have to pay a higher electricity bill every month.

Now, I don't want you to type an answer out, but I'd really like you to think about what salvation costs you. Look at the whole picture.

I usually don't like to appeal to the Bible, but I'd like to point out that Romans 10:9 starts with the word "if". That is to say there are requirements for salvation, everyone isn't saved by default.

Hope this helps, and I didn't offend anyone!

Cheers!

Hey GreyDeSilvisanctis

Sorry, am in the middle of my 'Work twelve hour days' week (Of night shifts, no less).

Will put your thread aside in a book mark and hopefully get back to it when time frees up for me.

Wishing you and yours all the very best.

Best cheers to all.

Lunalle wrote:
If you meet me on the street, and give me a free TV as a gift, it's not really free. Sure, it might not cost me money to acquire the TV, but that's not the whole story. I have to transport that TV to my home. I don't have a license, so I probably have to pay for a taxi. I have to expend some effort to re-arrange my living room, to accommodate the new TV. I am going to have to pay a higher electricity bill every month.

Lunalle, I just used the analogy to explain that while salvation is a gift given freely(all gifts are free to the recipient by definition of a gift), I'm not saying accepting a tv as a gift is the same as accepting the gift of salvation. For salvation, all one needs to do is trust in Christ. Trust in Him, that He has done everything needed for you to be saved. There's nothing you or I can do to gain or keep salvation. Christ has paid the price. You can accept the free gift by trusting who Christ is and what He has done, or you can reject the gift. There are no strings or conditions attached. Trust Christ and be saved. Period.

Now, I don't want you to type an answer out, but I'd really like you to think about what salvation costs you. Look at the whole picture.

I usually don't like to appeal to the Bible, but I'd like to point out that Romans 10:9 starts with the word "if". That is to say there are requirements for salvation, everyone isn't saved by default.

Trust in Christ. Believe who He says He is, and what He has done for your salvation, and you are saved. It's really as simple as that. Again, salvation costs me nada, it's a free gift. Of course discipleship has its cost, but one needs to be saved first. Don't conflate salvation with discipleship.

Lunalle wrote:Well, your statement is much stronger than mine. I'm not sure I can agree with it as written. At the end of my life, I may have failed to have made a significant impact, but I'm not going to kill myself, because I believe I'm not making a significant impact. I hope that makes sense. I believe I would kill myself, if I didn't believe it was possible for me to attempt to make a significant impact. Say, for example, I wouldn't want to be kept alive if I was "a vegetable." Another example would be if I had no way to communicate. Say I had no arms or legs, and I was blind, deaf, and mute. I believe nothingness (death) is preferable to either of those states. Hopefully that helps clarify.

It does, thanks!
Would you say that this stems from what you perceive as Human Dignity? What is Human Dignity for you and what is it based on?

Lunalle wrote:To some degree, yes, excepting brain damage, or "abnormal" physical development of the brain. I wouldn't say we have ALL of our moral impulses at birth (they can be changed), but we certainly have some. Yes, your environment is one of the factors that may change your moral impulses. Our morality (encompassing both morals and moral impulses), is in part psycho-social. I would argue it is more than that, but that is a big part of it. The main point I was trying to make is that our morals (what we believe is good or bad), does not necessarily have to align with our moral impulses (what we feel is good or bad). This is a really important point, and applies to more than just morals.

Understood.

Lunalle wrote:The "Golden Rule": Do unto others, as you would have them do unto you. (Please let me know if you disagree that this is the "Golden Rule".)

This would be the positive form of the Golden Rule.

Lunalle wrote:Hold on here, I am offended that you "know" its a silly question. This is not a silly question! This is a very important, if not the most important question a person can ask another person. If you had said that to me in person, I'd start cursing and chewing you out. This is also not a light question to ask. Unfortunately, it is usually viewed as such, but you are asking about what I think is a good way to treat people. That gives me pause to think. I do not agree with the golden rule at all. In fact, I think it is a terrible "rule"! Let me give you some examples why...

I see. I am sorry to have offended you for I meant not to. This may have been a result of the difference in our cultures. In mine, this question is sometimes brushed aside (by lay people at least). If you would like to discuss this further please use the Philosophy Forums: Moral and Ethical Affairs in this site. I couldn't give you a substantial answer to this as of now though but I thank you for sharing!

Lunalle wrote:I don't. I don't believe God exists, so I don't define it. However, I will give you the answer to a question that is close to yours, and hopefully that will suffice.

Q: How would you define a god, which you could be convinced to believe, exists?
A: Some sort of matter and force outside of our universe. Not a being, not an intelligence, but some sort of matter (or even antimatter, or some other something found outside our universe) and force (the capability of change in the "something", not necessarily force as we know it).

It suffices, thanks!

Lunalle wrote:Oh wow, really?! The antitheist gets to preach? Awesome! Out of respect, I'll try to keep the majority of my antitheistic views out of it. I'm not sure I can honestly answer the question without saying some things that most theists would find insulting, but I'll try.

Much appreciated!

Lunalle wrote:...Religion for me was much more than a belief, which made it even harder.

What was it for you?

Lunalle wrote: ...I'm being vague here, and probably fallacious, because I'm trying to minimize hurt feelings.

Are these your hurt feelings? Where do they come from? If this is a deeply personal thing, you may not reply to this here although I appreciate it if you can PM me.

Lunalle wrote:As I began to replace my religious model of determining truth, with my scientific one, people kept trying convince me to "come back to God."...

What was this religious model?

Lunalle wrote:...The more my model changed, the more I disliked my religion. Eventually, I came to see just how bad it really was, so now I fight against it. I thought I was fighting for the "underdog" before, but now that I've been on both sides, I assure you, this (antitheistic) side is much harder to convert people to.

This doesn't surprise me. We are more religious than we think. The search for meaning in life can attest to this.

Lunalle wrote:So that's the polite version of my "antitheistic testimony". Thank you very much for asking! Sharing this has greatly improved my day.

I'm glad it did!

Lunalle wrote:Oy! Supernatural is a "bad" word! I think a lot of things that are called supernatural, really aren't. I don't know what YOU mean by the term, so its tough to answer the question. If you mean that sometimes things happen that we expect not to happen, and we cannot explain them scientifically, then I believe that. Science does not, and probably never will, have ALL the answers. Personally, I call those miraculous events. I'll give you an example...
... I believe this kind of thing does happen, and I call them "miraculous events". I hope this answers your question sufficiently. if not, as always, try asking it a different way, and I'll try to provide a better answer...

The answer suffices. I was about to ask if you believed in miracles anyway so you took two down in this reply.

Lunalle wrote:Cheers, and thanks again for asking me to share!

You're welcome!
===================================================================

Thadeyus wrote:Hey GreyDeSilvisanctis

Sorry, am in the middle of my 'Work twelve hour days' week (Of night shifts, no less).

Will put your thread aside in a book mark and hopefully get back to it when time frees up for me.

Wishing you and yours all the very best.

Best cheers to all.

No rush. I'm on a tight schedule myself. (The reason I'm even online now is that my term paper deadline was moved one more week)
I thank you for leaving a note and I await your reply!

Cheers to you as well!

~Grey

Looking forward to what Thadyeus has to say! Thanks for the note, I was wondering if you disappeared!

RE: Lunalle's answer to "What would you not want to live without?"

GreyDeSilvisanctis wrote:Would you say that this stems from what you perceive as Human Dignity? What is Human Dignity for you and what is it based on?

No, I wouldn't say it has anything to do with dignity. Its simply a matter of preference. It boils down to a cost/benefit analysis.

Well, I don't think "Human Dignity" is anything special. Its a concept that humans deserve respect. Speaking human to human, its to say we should respect members of our own species. "What is it based on?" has a complicated answer. Its based on our feelings of superiority (from a neutral point of view). From a human to human view, its based on the way our brains work, which is a product of evolution. I'm not a neuro-scientist, but I have studied this. My studies were based more on empathy than dignity, but they go hand in hand.

RE: The golden rule. Yes, that's the positive form of it. I may take up discussion on it on the other forum, if I find myself with some more free time. Thanks!

Lunalle wrote:...Religion for me was much more than a belief, which made it even harder.

GreyDeSilvisanctis wrote:What was it for you?

It was a lot of things. Some were good, some were bad. It was a culture, it was my basis for my morality, it encompassed numerous experiences, with great emotional significance. It was a presupposition. It was a field of study. More abstractly it was faith, it was a way of life, it was a model of thought, and it was a tool to convince others to change their reality.

Lunalle wrote: ...I'm being vague here, and probably fallacious, because I'm trying to minimize hurt feelings.

GreyDeSilvisanctis wrote:Are these your hurt feelings? Where do they come from? If this is a deeply personal thing, you may not reply to this here although I appreciate it if you can PM me.

Oh, no, not my hurt feelings at all. Multiple people on this forum have accused me of numerous things, including being insensitive, being offending, and having nothing to say but vitriol. While I take those criticisms to heart, I believe what I have to say is important. The basis for this is somewhat personal, but I don't mind sharing publicly. I share this, not as an excuse, but as an explanation. I am, to some degree, autistic. A big part of that is that my emotional responses are both dulled, and have different triggers, in comparison to most people. If you would like me to answer any questions completely free and openly, I encourage you to PM me them, but please keep in mind my autistic condition.

Lunalle wrote:As I began to replace my religious model of determining truth, with my scientific one, people kept trying convince me to "come back to God."...

GreyDeSilvisanctis wrote:What was this religious model?

It was a model of unquestioning submission to authority figure(s).

Cheers!

RickD wrote: There are no strings or conditions attached. Trust Christ and be saved. Period.

Ok, let me try again. I'll use some formulas, and hopefully that will help.

Here is what the Bible (the passage I referenced) proposes:
Z or X. If X, then Y. Y = (good *∞), therefore X

Here is what you propose:
Z or X. X=0. If X, then Y. Y = (good * ∞), therefore X

Here is what I propose:
Z or X or Q. If X, then Y. Y = (good * ∞). Since Y is extremely improbable, X has demonstrated some really bad results, and Q is irrelevant, Z.

I'd like you to accept my proposal, but even more importantly, I'd like you to consider your proposal, very carefully, and when you see the flaw in logic, pull it off the table.

Please, just rethink your claim with an open mind. Thanks!

So many of you asking me questions!

1over1337 wrote:Then you closed the door to God. Mmm, may I ask why you came here to the forum to ask us what evidence we have? Because you are persuaded that whatever we say it will be explained eventually by science. Whatever we say you will reject it. Am I right?

I've closed the door to ignorance. If someone presents an answer that contains "stop trying to find another answer". I reject that answer outright. I don't believe that everything will be eventually explained by science. If what you say contains the clause (explicitly or implicitly) "stop trying to find another answer", I reject it outright. Otherwise, I do not.

I came here, first of all, to learn of, and meditate on the evidence this forum claims to have. I also came here to present additional information, an additional point of view (or at very least, an additional presupposition), and to ask people to consider all things with an open mind.

Hey Lunalle, autism runs in my family also (specifically aspergurs) along with a whole host of mental illnesses, we are a wacky bunch.

It took me years to grasp the concept of sarcasm and to recognise when it was being applied, I also recently have been learning how to better connect emotionally with others.

My biggest downfall is my mouth, my wife always tells me I am too honest, to the point of being brutal and I tend to say either insulting or inappropriate things.

The thing the Bible has taught me is that my condition is not an excuse for not considering the feelings of others just because the truth outweighed it. I now think before I speak and consider how the other person may react to my brutal honesty, God has taught me wisdom and shown me how to love and how to build better relations. I still struggle but as I age I am getting better at it, I still feel socially awkward and people still pick up on it but I don't seem to insult people as much lol.

Even though I have these difficulties, I can still rise above them if I try.

How is your experience with your condition and does your condition have a large effect on your worldview?

I know mine did when I was younger, I was all facts and figures, the world was black and white, but I have now found that deeper spiritual level which now seems to sit in harmony with the intellectual side, I guess my life experience taught me that not everything is quite black or white, there are now various shades of grey and my mind and spirit have expanded beyond that narrow frame of reference.

Dan

Hey Dan, thanks for sharing. I appreciate that. I agree we shouldn't excuse our behaviour, but I have a different reason why. That said, it is what it is, and those of us with the condition constantly need to try to improve our behaviour, because our "default" behaviour offends a lot of people.

Danieltwotwenty wrote:How is your experience with your condition and does your condition have a large effect on your worldview?

Well, it has pros and cons. The cons are on the social side. My social skills are terrible. I can't even walk out the door of my house without feelings of discomfort, anxiety, fear, and frustration. I have few friends (who all have a similar condition), and I wish it was easier for me to improve my social skills, and make new friends. That said, there are good things to. For example, my mind sees everything in black and white by default, so when I'm developing software, I can just let it run free (as software development is a world of black and white, no grey). Not to toot my own horn, but my critical thinking skills are above average as well, so I excel in science.

Does my condition have a large effect on my world view? I'm not sure. It certainly has a large bias on my world view. I try very hard, every day, to make a point of trying to see the grey. That is, to look at all presented points on a topic, and attempt to understand them. Self deception is a very easy trap to fall in to though. Sometimes, I'm not as nearly open minded as I think, or as I should be. It is a constant struggle. That has its "hidden blessings" too. I can emphasize with someone who has a disability, as I understand (to some degree), what it is like to constantly struggle with something.

Happy Friday to you too!

Cheers!

Lunalle wrote:

RickD wrote: There are no strings or conditions attached. Trust Christ and be saved. Period.

Ok, let me try again. I'll use some formulas, and hopefully that will help.

Here is what the Bible (the passage I referenced) proposes:
Z or X. If X, then Y. Y = (good *∞), therefore X

Here is what you propose:
Z or X. X=0. If X, then Y. Y = (good * ∞), therefore X

Here is what I propose:
Z or X or Q. If X, then Y. Y = (good * ∞). Since Y is extremely improbable, X has demonstrated some really bad results, and Q is irrelevant, Z.

I'd like you to accept my proposal, but even more importantly, I'd like you to consider your proposal, very carefully, and when you see the flaw in logic, pull it off the table.

Please, just rethink your claim with an open mind. Thanks!

Sorry Lunalle, you lost me at Z.


I prefer to keep things simple. And the gospel that saves, is simple:
John 3:16:
16"For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.


Believe(trust) in Christ, and you have eternal life.

Ok, what I ask is really simple too: Respect everybody else at least as much as you respect yourself.

Lunalle wrote:Ok, what I ask is really simple too: Respect everybody else at least as much as you respect yourself.

You have lost me completely now. I'm sorry, I really don't understand your point.