Evidence for God from Science

crochet1949 wrote:I have no idea How the critique is going to proceed. It depends on Who you are talking to and about what aspect Of is being discussed and etc, etc,. I'm simply saying --- the attitude of the person would probably determine the rest of it.

Attitude is a detail but science runs on data.

When someone has data to show Einstein got something wrong,
people sit up.

You know, people go into resesrch mainly because they are curious and want
to learn things. Same with you, is it not so, you investigate what interests you?

Sure, individuals get set ideas. But not every scientist or historian from
Beijing to Boston is in on it. Uncover new information, there will be an audience for it.

And we all know that scientific data can only be interpreted one way

Audie wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:

Audie wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:And what's the content of that post prove Auds.

Why it proves that the bible gets the best results, what else?

Just measuring results by wealth sounds a lot like pretentiousness rearing its ugly head.

Of course it can be taken that way. Would you introduce some other tangible parameters?

First, I don't think that survey says anything much really, we know little about how it was conducted
-- the process of how it was conducted is just as important as the result.

Nonetheless, I'd say look at the telos of each, the beliefs and goals of each.

Christianity says you can't serve two masters, money and God.
Build up your treasure in heaven whether neither moth nor rust destroy it says.

Christ said, "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God." Such was his contempt for wealthy people who think themselves fine and needing nothing. Rev 3:17 "You say, ‘I am rich; I have acquired wealth and do not need a thing.’ But you do not realize that you are wretched, pitiful, poor, blind and naked."

Indeed, Christ has a very different take on the objective in life, which would run counter to the many wolves who have often surrounded you. Consider how they'd puzzle at Christ's following words, their smug smiles:

• Luke 6:20-22: “Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God.
  21 “Blessed are you who are hungry now, for you shall be satisfied.
  “Blessed are you who weep now, for you shall laugh.
  22 “Blessed are you when people hate you and when they exclude you and revile you and spurn your name as evil, on account of the Son of Man!

Perhaps the reason why you don't care for Christianity, because you find fulfillment in life already. If you're feeling full, then why go looking for something you don't need. Jesus came for the poor and weak, the hungry, downtrodden and outcast. In terms of Christianity, you are poor and those who have Christ are rich.

Well, yeah..if a person starts in thumpin' the bible like its a scene for a chick tract, that is not going to get much traction.

Why not? It has worked for millions of people.

Audie wrote:

crochet1949 wrote:I have no idea How the critique is going to proceed. It depends on Who you are talking to and about what aspect Of is being discussed and etc, etc,. I'm simply saying --- the attitude of the person would probably determine the rest of it.

Attitude is a detail but science runs on data.

When someone has data to show Einstein got something wrong,
people sit up.

You know, people go into resesrch mainly because they are curious and want
to learn things. Same with you, is it not so, you investigate what interests you?

Sure, individuals get set ideas. But not every scientist or historian from
Beijing to Boston is in on it. Uncover new information, there will be an audience for it.

A person's Attitude is Extremely important. I can have an abundance of Facts to present in an organized manner but if the person I'm talking to just isn't interested Then it won't matter What I'm trying to share.

I tried to share the concept of miracles to a self-proclaimed atheist -- shared actual settings Of the miracles -- and he was Determined that there Had to be another explanation -- he did not care about data.

Uncovering new information ----- there are those who aren't interested in the new information -- it will get 'buried' because it doesn't agree with the 'already proven thought' that is already 'out there'.
And there are those who'd say that That fits Me beautifully. It most definitely works Both ways.

crochet1949 wrote:

Audie wrote:

crochet1949 wrote:I have no idea How the critique is going to proceed. It depends on Who you are talking to and about what aspect Of is being discussed and etc, etc,. I'm simply saying --- the attitude of the person would probably determine the rest of it.

Attitude is a detail but science runs on data.

When someone has data to show Einstein got something wrong,
people sit up.

You know, people go into resesrch mainly because they are curious and want
to learn things. Same with you, is it not so, you investigate what interests you?

Sure, individuals get set ideas. But not every scientist or historian from
Beijing to Boston is in on it. Uncover new information, there will be an audience for it.

A person's Attitude is Extremely important. I can have an abundance of Facts to present in an organized manner but if the person I'm talking to just isn't interested Then it won't matter What I'm trying to share.

I tried to share the concept of miracles to a self-proclaimed atheist -- shared actual settings Of the miracles -- and he was Determined that there Had to be another explanation -- he did not care about data.

Uncovering new information ----- there are those who aren't interested in the new information -- it will get 'buried' because it doesn't agree with the 'already proven thought' that is already 'out there'.
And there are those who'd say that That fits Me beautifully. It most definitely works Both ways.

If you feel you have experienced miracles, you do. You cannot, though,
provide anything but anecdotal evidence. Sorting any real one from all the phony
ones has not been possible.

Anyone who thinks anything is alresdy proven is
no scientist. It is intellectual incompetence, dishonesty.

Audie:
Attitude is a detail but science runs on data.

When someone has data to show Einstein got something wrong,
people sit up.

Oh, like when, in 1931, when Einstein briefly considered the Steady State of the Universe model, but then realized that theoretical calculations of his and others, like Hubble, also showed that a static universe was impossible under general relativity. He realized that 1) the universe is expanding and 2) that it had a beginning. And, for Einstein, the implication was unavoidable - that there IS a creator and designer, but he didn't believe in a personal God:

"In the view of such harmony in the cosmos which I, with my limited human mind, am able to recognise, there are yet people who say there is no God. But what makes me really angry is that they quote me for support for such views." (The Expanded Quotable Einstein, Princeton University Press, p. 214)

abelcainsbrother wrote:

Well, yeah..if a person starts in thumpin' the bible like its a scene for a chick tract, that is not going to get much traction.

Why not? It has worked for millions of people.

Try to keep up with the conversation:

"What critique (of science) is going to work on campus (with scientists)

You are doing "how to further dupe the ignorant masses".

Philip wrote:

Audie:
Attitude is a detail but science runs on data.

When someone has data to show Einstein got something wrong,
people sit up.

Oh, like when, in 1931, when Einstein briefly considered the Steady State of the Universe model, but then realized that theoretical calculations of his and others, like Hubble, also showed that a static universe was impossible under general relativity. He realized that 1) the universe is expanding and 2) that it had a beginning. And, for Einstein, the implication was unavoidable - that there IS a creator and designer, but he didn't believe in a personal God:

"In the view of such harmony in the cosmos which I, with my limited human mind, am able to recognise, there are yet people who say there is no God. But what makes me really angry is that they quote me for support for such views." (The Expanded Quotable Einstein, Princeton University Press, p. 214)

Is this presented as a counterexample plus snark, or are you agreeing with me?

Kurieuo wrote:

Audie wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:

Audie wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:And what's the content of that post prove Auds.

Why it proves that the bible gets the best results, what else?

Just measuring results by wealth sounds a lot like pretentiousness rearing its ugly head.

Of course it can be taken that way. Would you introduce some other tangible parameters?

First, I don't think that survey says anything much really, we know little about how it was conducted
-- the process of how it was conducted is just as important as the result.

Nonetheless, I'd say look at the telos of each, the beliefs and goals of each.

Christianity says you can't serve two masters, money and God.
Build up your treasure in heaven whether neither moth nor rust destroy it says.

Christ said, "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God." Such was his contempt for wealthy people who think themselves fine and needing nothing. Rev 3:17 "You say, ‘I am rich; I have acquired wealth and do not need a thing.’ But you do not realize that you are wretched, pitiful, poor, blind and naked."

Indeed, Christ has a very different take on the objective in life, which would run counter to the many wolves who have often surrounded you. Consider how they'd puzzle at Christ's following words, their smug smiles:

• Luke 6:20-22: “Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God.
  21 “Blessed are you who are hungry now, for you shall be satisfied.
  “Blessed are you who weep now, for you shall laugh.
  22 “Blessed are you when people hate you and when they exclude you and revile you and spurn your name as evil, on account of the Son of Man!

Perhaps the reason why you don't care for Christianity, because you find fulfillment in life already. If you're feeling full, then why go looking for something you don't need. Jesus came for the poor and weak, the hungry, downtrodden and outcast. In terms of Christianity, you are poor and those who have Christ are rich.

I know what the bible says.

I think the reason you interpret my words as you do is that you do
not think from outside a Christian perspective.

And of course, you dont know me nor pause to consider what I've said.

I drive an old Corolla. Its not like I cant afford a Porsche. I dont care, I am not interested.
I am not striving after wealth. Your sayings are about those whose self indulgence
drives away all of spiritual worth. If you think that applies to me you are wrong.

You did not come up with any tangible parameters btw. That was the topic.

bippy123 wrote:And we all know that scientific data can only be interpreted one way

Do we all know the word "facile"?

Audie -- you certainly don't like people contradicting you. As for the existence of miracles -- they Do happen. In fact, people have acknowledged that God saved them from certain death -- That has happened after accidents on the news-- after storms -- or their tumor disappeared -- That happened to a man in our church. He'd had a brain tumor -- it was beginning to take it's toll on him. They prayed over him - laid hands on him. Shortly after that was the next appt. and they could Not find a trace of that tumor. And they thanked God for His healing. And some times it's used fasciciously -- "That sure was a miracle -- that I passed the test ".
In fact --one of my brother-in-laws was on the operating table and he started to bleed-out. The surgeons were doing all they Could and said after the fact that they 'watched as God worked His miracle' -- they said that there was No reason he should have survived that surgery. Now --there Are people who would say that the surgeon was incompetent and try to get him for malpractice Rather than be thankful for God's working His miracle. I chose to include that last sentence because there are possibly those who Would say that themselves. So I'm saving 'them' the time / trouble.
Now, if someone doesn't really believe in God -- they won't be accepting the existence of the supernatural, either.

Error has been allowed to perpetuate IN SPITE OF being retracked by the author.

Audie wrote:
I drive an old Corolla.

A Japanese car?

Oh the horror!!!

Your ancestors must be rolling over in their graves!

RickD wrote:

Audie wrote:
I drive an old Corolla.

A Japanese car?

Oh the horror!!!

Your ancestors must be rolling over in their graves!

I have family members who were there when theJapanese invaded Hong Kong.