Evidence for God from Science

abelcainsbrother wrote:Atheists like to play the Noah's ark card but first off no christian thinks all of the bible can be proven 100% so for atheists to expect us to is just not reasonable.But also it is much easier to believe in a world wide global flood than to believe somehow you can have this vast universe without God.Noah's flood is much much easier to believe even if it cannot be proven.No atheist can prove how you get this universe without God and yet they reject God as a cause for the universe.They have no cause and forget all things are caused by something else it makes no difference what you're talking about all things are caused by something else an God is the most logical and reasonable cause for the matter that makes up the universe.Something caused the matter to be caused,nothing happens without a cause and God is the cause.

Since you seem go with bible, could you quote chapter and verse that justifies
your seemingly unconscionable habit of making up things with which to try to belittle people you dont know?

Kurieuo wrote:

Audie wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:I'd be happy to see the argument laid out.

That because we believe differently to Mormons, our beliefs are therefore wrong.

It may make sense to you Audie, but I'm still confused by your logic.

I said nothing of the sort. You are confusing yourself.

Yes, I see that I was confused here by some exchanges.
Perhaps mixing in another thread also.

I often looked confused you know?
People sometimes ask what's wrong? "I am Christian you know."

My beliefs are a perfect match for me, making complete sense but often appear confusing to others.
Ah, well... gone a little off topic. Sorry that I got confused.

Its chronic but not incurable.

PaulSacramento wrote:

Audie wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:There are, TECHNICALLY, degrees of death of course.
There is brain dead in which the body can be kept alive BUT the person has NO brain activity, This state of death is the most telling in regards to NDE's because there is NO BRAIN activity so there is NO possibility of any "dream" or Hallucination or anything like that.
Then there is "clinically dead".
This is when a person has stooped breathing AND blood has stopped circulating.
A person can sometimes be revived and the brain is still active for some time ( no one knows for sure how long or how active, but it is still active).

The tricky part for NDE's that happen when a person is only clinically dead ( silly to use the term only, I know) it can be argued that because there is some brain activity that the person MAY be hallucination or whatever.

No apparent brain activity.

Im not saying its impossible that NDE's are as billed.

You do know of course, tho, that it has been widely believed that dreams involved the soul leaving the body.

No Audie, we have discussed this before, NO brain activity is just that, NO brain activity.
It is NOT no "apparent" brain activity.
Ask any neurologist and they will tell you the same thing.
It is not some "best guess" that leads to the proclamation that a person is brain dead, and to insinuate anything else is just silly.
It is a comprehensive evaluation, don't make it seem to be anything other than that.
When a person is declared as brain dead it means that there is NO electrical activity and has NOT been for some time and no activity means no neuron are firing and no neurons means no activity anywhere.
Period.

No known or detected, or PROVEN to be none?

Are you suggesting something gets detached, has adventures and then fits itself back into the neurons, just so?

Audie wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote:Atheists like to play the Noah's ark card but first off no christian thinks all of the bible can be proven 100% so for atheists to expect us to is just not reasonable.But also it is much easier to believe in a world wide global flood than to believe somehow you can have this vast universe without God.Noah's flood is much much easier to believe even if it cannot be proven.No atheist can prove how you get this universe without God and yet they reject God as a cause for the universe.They have no cause and forget all things are caused by something else it makes no difference what you're talking about all things are caused by something else an God is the most logical and reasonable cause for the matter that makes up the universe.Something caused the matter to be caused,nothing happens without a cause and God is the cause.

Since you seem go with bible, could you quote chapter and verse that justifies
your seemingly unconscionable habit of making up things with which to try to belittle people you dont know?

First off,don't take what I say personal.But I see a lot of atheists bashing Noah's flood,the stories in the bible,Jesus,etc but I'm just pointing out that every story in the bible is far easier to believe than what I see atheists believing and promoting.

I can give can give quotes from the bible that show how science confirms things the bible said and point out that if we compare it to other holy books? They are wrong.I've noticed here lately you bringing up YEC's and the flood and I've already heard a lot of why atheists say it did not or could not have happened.You don't seem to be like a lot of the other atheists out there bashing God and the bible,so I apologize if you felt compared to them.

I just present what I know to be true and am kind of bold in the way I present it.

No known or detected, or PROVEN to be none?

Are you suggesting something gets detached, has adventures and then fits itself back into the neurons, just so?

I am not suggesting anything, I am stating what it means to be declared brain dead, period.
It means there is NO brain activity.
It does not mean that they can't find any or that they can't detect any, it means that there is NO electrical impulses and firing neurons at all.

Not sure why you are having such a hard time with this.

If the heart does NOT beat, no blood is pumping, is the heart active ??
No, of course not.

Same for the brain, if there are no neurons firing, no electrical activity of any sort, then it is dead.

abelcainsbrother wrote:

Audie wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote:Atheists like to play the Noah's ark card but first off no christian thinks all of the bible can be proven 100% so for atheists to expect us to is just not reasonable.But also it is much easier to believe in a world wide global flood than to believe somehow you can have this vast universe without God.Noah's flood is much much easier to believe even if it cannot be proven.No atheist can prove how you get this universe without God and yet they reject God as a cause for the universe.They have no cause and forget all things are caused by something else it makes no difference what you're talking about all things are caused by something else an God is the most logical and reasonable cause for the matter that makes up the universe.Something caused the matter to be caused,nothing happens without a cause and God is the cause.

Since you seem go with bible, could you quote chapter and verse that justifies
your seemingly unconscionable habit of making up things with which to try to belittle people you dont know?

First off,don't take what I say personal.But I see a lot of atheists bashing Noah's flood,the stories in the bible,Jesus,etc but I'm just pointing out that every story in the bible is far easier to believe than what I see atheists believing and promoting.

I can give can give quotes from the bible that show how science confirms things the bible said and point out that if we compare it to other holy books? They are wrong.I've noticed here lately you bringing up YEC's and the flood and I've already heard a lot of why atheists say it did not or could not have happened.You don't seem to be like a lot of the other atheists out there bashing God and the bible,so I apologize if you felt compared to them.

I just present what I know to be true and am kind of bold in the way I present it.

I dont take it personally. You dont have the capacity to say anything that would hurt my feelings, as you dont know a thing about me.

You do NOT "just present what you know to be true". You are deceiving yourself if you think that. You do not know. You interpret, you make mistakes, you make things up. The easiest person to deceive is yourself. Dont be easy.

The "flood" is NOT an "atheist / Christian" issue. The "flood" is a belief-on-faith of a subset of Christians.
Educated Christians, people of other faiths, people of no religion, people of ordinary common sense see that there was no such event.

It would be of tremendous interest to everyone, if it had happened, and the signs of it would be everywhere, it wouldnt be he exclusive province of a cult to possess such knowledge as would be universally evident.

Your statement about 'atheists" is about all atheists, and exclusively about them, disregarding that atheists are a tiny minority and only a minority of them care to even discuss such a crazy topic. Disregarding that the "flood believers" are themselves a tiny minority of the earth's population.

Now, what YOU find easy to believe, and what YOU think "atheists promote and believe" is what YOU think.
Presenting it as a fact is dishonest. You neglected to quote the chapter and verse justification I asked for.
Why do you think it is ok to make up things and say them as true? If you dont know why you do it, some introspection is called for. If you cant admit to yourself that you do it, a lot more introspection is called for.

Again you state, and I put it in bold, that it is "atheists" who point out that your "flood' did not happen.
Sure, a god COULD do anything. Its just that he didnt.

Even you must somewhere inside your head realize that your idea about the polar ice being held from floating because its frozen to bedrock is absurd.

a) because the ice is MOVING. GLACIERS MOVE. They are not stuck down. You want to claim they are?
b) under deep ice, its not even frozen, the glacier sits on, yes, water.
c) EVEN IF the glacier were frozen to bedrock, the adhesion of the ice is a weak force, and the billions of tons of upward pressure would rip it loose.'


But yet you can claim that "it is easier to believe" that there was a flood? Seriously?

Maybe that is the key to it tho. Easy. Just read the book assume you read it right and think not. Ignore the obvious, disregard common sense. I dont find it easy, I dont find it possible to just go with what is so 'easy". Why do you7

You claim to be interesting in learning, to not have your mind totally made up on things, but I dont believe it.
Here is your chance to show us if you really are, or if you are fooling.

I handed you the key to freeing your mind from this nonsensical idea with which you've burdened yourself (and with which you insult such god as there may be, by claiming he did such a thing).

Its incredibly simple. You are going to resist it tho, but if you just face it squarely, the resistance is going to shatter, sooner or later. The polar ice is far far older than any date for a biblical flood. If the ice had gone under water it would have floated, Ocean currents holding it in place and setting it back down just precisely so, as you proposed, is seriously silly. If it floated, it would have drifted away, broken up, and be gone.


But there it sits. You know the polar ice proves there was no flood. Are you going to run away, or face it?

Noted that the above is OT, and i wont say more here that is OT.

PaulSacramento wrote:

No known or detected, or PROVEN to be none?

Are you suggesting something gets detached, has adventures and then fits itself back into the neurons, just so?

I am not suggesting anything, I am stating what it means to be declared brain dead, period.
It means there is NO brain activity.
It does not mean that they can't find any or that they can't detect any, it means that there is NO electrical impulses and firing neurons at all.

Not sure why you are having such a hard time with this.

If the heart does NOT beat, no blood is pumping, is the heart active ??
No, of course not.

Same for the brain, if there are no neurons firing, no electrical activity of any sort, then it is dead.

Ok your belief is that if nothing is detected, with current technology, then it is not there. We should apply that standard to your "god".

But then the presence of some undetected brain activity can actually be demonstrated, if a person comes out of that state and can report on things that occurred while in that state. A lot more than can be said for your god, which is immune to all known forms of detection.

You seem to want to have this both ways.

I didnt get a response to my question about how a person's body can be said to be dead, if every single cell in the body is alive.

I dont know why Im having a hard time with this either. Id think I could get anyone to see that "dead" and "clinically dead" are not precisely the same thing, and that far from anyone being able to prove that there is no brain activity, the NDE proves that there was.

I guess its all in how invested a person is in trying to prove there is a soul.

Ok your belief is that if nothing is detected, with current technology, then it is not there. We should apply that standard to your "god".

Sure, IF we have technology that can detect what is outside our known universe.
Know of such technology?

But then the presence of some undetected brain activity can actually be demonstrated, if a person comes out of that state and can report on things that occurred while in that state. A lot more than can be said for your god, which is immune to all known forms of detection.

That doesn't make any sense.
Are you suggesting that NDE are evidence OF brain activity that is not detectable ?

You seem to want to have this both ways.

You are trying to make it seem so, when I am simply going with science.

I didnt get a response to my question about how a person's body can be said to be dead, if every single cell in the body is alive.

You did get a response, there are types of death in the clinical sense:
Clinical death (no breathing and no blood circulating which means the cells are dead too) and brain dead ( no brain activity BUT the body can be kept alive via an outside source).

I dont know why Im having a hard time with this either. Id think I could get anyone to see that "dead" and "clinically dead" are not precisely the same thing, and that far from anyone being able to prove that there is no brain activity, the NDE proves that there was.

No, NDE prove there is SOMETHING beyond death, they do NOT prove there is brain activity in brain dead people.

I guess its all in how invested a person is in trying to prove there is a soul.

Define soul.

Audie wrote:

1over137 wrote:

Audie wrote:

1over137 wrote:Joseph Smith - one prideful guy claiming something https://carm.org/joseph-smith-quotes
Apostles, prophets - all humbly testify of one God

A few million believers would not agree with this opinion aka statement of facts not in evidence.

And therefore...? Can you continue with your thought and write little bit more?

Just that I see people making distinctions without a difference between the religious figures they favour and the ones they do not.

People making distinctions without a difference? What does that mean? Without a difference...

I remember telling my believing friends something like: I cannot easily believe. I could easily end up in a sect. Who has truth?

Well, I suspect people who boast, or make money, or fill their need to rule or some other personal need and proclaim various things.

...Id think I could get anyone to see that "dead" and "clinically dead" are not precisely the same thing, and that far from anyone being able to prove that there is no brain activity, the NDE proves that there was

They are the same thing. If you want to say the body is only considered dead when all the cells die then people would still be alive in their graves.

PaulSacramento wrote:

Ok your belief is that if nothing is detected, with current technology, then it is not there. We should apply that standard to your "god".

Sure, IF we have technology that can detect what is outside our known universe.
Know of such technology?

But then the presence of some undetected brain activity can actually be demonstrated, if a person comes out of that state and can report on things that occurred while in that state. A lot more than can be said for your god, which is immune to all known forms of detection.

That doesn't make any sense.
?

You seem to want to have this both ways.

You are trying to make it seem so, when I am simply going with science.

I didnt get a response to my question about how a person's body can be said to be dead, if every single cell in the body is alive.

You did get a response, there are types of death in the clinical sense:
Clinical death (no breathing and no blood circulating which means the cells are dead too) and brain dead ( no brain activity BUT the body can be kept alive via an outside source).

I dont know why Im having a hard time with this either. Id think I could get anyone to see that "dead" and "clinically dead" are not precisely the same thing, and that far from anyone being able to prove that there is no brain activity, the NDE proves that there was.

No, NDE prove there is SOMETHING beyond death, they do NOT prove there is brain activity in brain dead people.

I guess its all in how invested a person is in trying to prove there is a soul.

Define soul.

Ok so if no brain activity is detected with current technology that is proof of no activity. You say you do science?

Are you suggesting that NDE are evidence OF brain activity that is not detectable

You find that possibility unacceptable? Impossible? Less likely than all the supernatural trappings you guys attach?

No, NDE prove there is SOMETHING beyond death, they do NOT prove there is brain activity in brain dead people.

Didnt say it proves there is brain activity in the head of a dead person.
Again, your sciency claim is belied by your words.
A NEAR death experience by your words can only be experienced by a dead person? Having it both ways again.
The claim that the person is dead at all is one thing I am contesting.

Did someone say how a person can be dead if every single cell in his body is alive?

side issue, but what is so special about "jesus" coming back to life, or others who needed supernatural assistance like Laz, if scores or ordinary Americans die and come back to life?

Anyway, comes down to two issues.

You say "dead", and I say they must notta been if they get up and walk about. That seems like common sense, something that tends to get trampled when religion comes into play.

You say 'no brain activity", I say no detectable activity. With present technology. I say dream like state, you have a detached soul going about having adventures with the maker of the universe. Then popping back into place and plugging its memories into the brains neurons.

In that sciency thing called Occams razor, which is the more likely?

Mallz wrote:

...Id think I could get anyone to see that "dead" and "clinically dead" are not precisely the same thing, and that far from anyone being able to prove that there is no brain activity, the NDE proves that there was

They are the same thing. If you want to say the body is only considered dead when all the cells die then people would still be alive in their graves.

I dont say that. I did tho ask how a person can be considered dead if every individual cell is alive.

As you may know, there is no known bright line distinction between living and non living things.
Some say virus are alive, others that they are not, for example.

Another might hold that a self duplicating organic molecule is alive.

There is as blurry line, one shades into the other, as night shades into day.

When a person dies, they do so by stages. IF there were such a thing a soul that could be detected leaving the body, even then you generally cant say the EXACT moment of death, no more than the exact time that night turns to day.

Now, on brain activity, or lack of, what do you think it is that has the adventures and records the information that is later reported by the one who had a NEAR death experience? A detached soul of some sort?
How do you see this working?

Audie wrote:...Ok, again noted in bold are facts not in evidence. You might find out, and you might not.
I might find out that the muz are right, and Im to hang by my hair in eternal fire for my sin of going absout without covering my hair.

do you do I does anyone know? No, the do not, so lets not pretend they do. Its a belief, a faith, a conviction.
Not knowledge.

Earlier, I said....If every single individual cell in the body lives, how can the body actually be dead?

Note the use of the word "clinically" used as a modifier for "dead". And the word "considerable" for the amount of time.

The workings of the human mind are of great interest. The bias involved in assuming that the person is actually "dead" and that what happens with the brain under some circumstances is evidence of a "soul" is not helpful in figuring out what is really going on.

To some spiritual beliefs, one's dreams are if anything, more real than ordinary waking life.
Is that true? What is really going on?

Regarding the above, I said, does anyone know? Your post is 100% unresponsive to my observations. All you did was claim to know that there is this god / afterlife thing, which you do not know.

You sound like and answer in the format I once used. I find it amusing.

WE have gone over what sin really is because what Jesus actually went through exposes what is inside each human heart, even yours. Audie, you admitted to not being perfect about the effects of betrayal, rejection, false witness, putting folks on personal trial (as you are doing so here), slaying hope and crucifying others hopes and dreams, stealing and breaking hearts, mocking, divide up the goodies and deny the true giver, point the finger of blame and falsify because folks will not conform. We've been done this road already and you certainly know you are not perfect as you practice these things, justify doing them and are doing them.

You cannot escape into your easy believism that there is nothing after death and thus escape consequences of your actions. You have God who is smarter and bigger than any of us leaving us a road map clearly marked out due to its uniqueness on a way back to Him as reconciled to receive and inheritance where there is no more sin, death, sickness... No other message from world's religions have the message that God saves by His grace by seeing what Jesus did upon the cross, exposing and dealing with sin once and for all, and raising from the dead Himself so we to can arise out of our trash heaps which we currently live.

Your brand of faith is mere easy believism. The Christian message is not easy believism, it is a reality of living and becoming acquainted with the God of the universe in a life altering way - that is much harder for folks like you to swallow. It is far easier to believe in NOTHING so you remain and always be NOTHING. Always seeking knowledge of the truth but never quite find it.

Audie, myself and others here on this form Know Jesus and He knows us. He wants you to get to know him. Just call out to him with an honest heart and He will show you.

That is all we can ask.

The length of hair is not the issue - the human heart is with all its abandonment, betrayal, rejection, abuse, mocking, etc and etc...

We all as human beings will one day encounter mortal death. None can escape that. I testify as well as others that there is life after death. You don't have to believe us because the true Christian message is not about making you conform but presenting a simple choice before you when before there was none. Make the right one.

We here are concerned over your eternal state...

Have a nice day
-
-
-

If you want to say the body is only considered dead ....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X90qKQAMh8A

to the point... you can stop this after 1 minute...