Evidence for God from Science

Because a careful study reveals they posit truth claims that aren't true. And, as has been explained to you but you didn't bother to remember, God's Word has perfectly defensible revelation that originates from the beginning: before any and all others.

Now you have declared yourself a believer in a quantum type of "spiritual" energy that is not God (e.g. your atheist claim). A magnificent blunder of ignorance to claim such a thing as you posit so let's get right to it. I want you to stop running around like a chicken with its head cut off and carefully answer the following questions as completely as possible:

1. Define this godless energy?

2. Does the godless energy follow the laws of physics or not follow them? In either case, does the godless energy transcend the laws of physics?

3. Does the godless energy have any intelligence in and of itself, is intelligence guiding it, or is it utterly without intelligence?

qqMOARpewpew wrote:I haven't. I probably should as it has influenced western society and 85% of americans a great deal. Currently I'm reading on Astral Projection and the Nature of Reality, so give me some time.

So, do you go to Muslim sites and put down their believs and the Quran without knowing about those things personally?

Scriptures have been around for thousands of years yes, but there were different ideas of god before and after and during that. Why don't you give credit to all the people who didn't experience your version of god?

As I said before, myself and others have studies other religions, at least enough to form a rational choice. Why don't you give US some credit! You speak of what you don't know. There are so many things you don't know, about how and why persons of other cultures and faiths come to the Christian faith, for instance. Why don't you read some of those testimonies?

As I have said before I am currently an Agnostic Atheist Spiritualist. I Don't claim to know whether or not a deity exists, I do not believe in any deities, and spirituality doesn't require a deity, it is a human thing.

You are posting disrespectful things that are meant to put down and/or convert. You are judging without knowing enough. You are asking us to accept other faiths as equal to ours without presenting why. If you choose to be disrepectful and do not wish to learn anything here, but just want to say how we don't know anything and love a bloodthirsty God, then there is no reason for you to be here.

I claim less knowledge than you do, yet you seem to think I am claiming all knowledge of the universe. You simply take what I say and twist it because my world view is different from what you accept. I don't want you to accept my world view btw.

I am not twisting it. I just want you to be respectful and explain yourself. You have put myself and others down, and then wonder why we question you??? If you claim less knowledge, then how can you judge (like say that we don't give other religious views "credit" - we actually do in ways, but you'd have to find out how, first. Why judge first???)? If you want to have a conversation, and not put down or sound proselytyizing, then ask some questions and converse.

cslewislover wrote:

qqMOARpewpew wrote:I haven't. I probably should as it has influenced western society and 85% of americans a great deal.

The anwser to your question just below is ^^^^^ That which is right above it. I live in the bible belt, not in the Quran belt. I have never met a muslim, never been to their temple. I have to deal with christians on the daily and as I am joining the navy I will be in even closer quarters with them. When I decide to move into Saudi Arabia I will do plenty of research.

So, do you go to Muslim sites and put down their believs and the Quran without knowing about those things personally?

Scriptures have been around for thousands of years yes, but there were different ideas of god before and after and during that. Why don't you give credit to all the people who didn't experience your version of god?

As I said before, myself and others have studies other religions, at least enough to form a rational choice. Why don't you give US some credit! You speak of what you don't know. There are so many things you don't know, about how and why persons of other cultures and faiths come to the Christian faith, for instance. Why don't you read some of those testimonies?

Fair enough I haven't been giving you all some credit, I'm sure many of you have studied world religions in college or in your own spiritual quest.

As I have said before I am currently an Agnostic Atheist Spiritualist. I Don't claim to know whether or not a deity exists, I do not believe in any deities, and spirituality doesn't require a deity, it is a human thing.

What exactly in the above part you have quoted (in Italics) did you find disrespectful, where do you think I was trying to put you down or convert anyone??????

You are posting disrespectful things that are meant to put down and/or convert. You are judging without knowing enough. You are asking us to accept other faiths as equal to ours without presenting why. If you choose to be disrepectful and do not wish to learn anything here, but just want to say how we don't know anything and love a bloodthirsty God, then there is no reason for you to be here.

I don't know why you say I am trying to convert when I have said specifically that I don't want you to believe what I believe, and that I am not trying to convert anyone. Look at what you have quoted me saying just below: Underlined: You keep telling me to read your posts more clearly but it is clear to me you read only what you want to hear from me, you want me to be your enemy and to be trying to convert you, but this is not true of me.

I claim less knowledge than you do, yet you seem to think I am claiming all knowledge of the universe. You simply take what I say and twist it because my world view is different from what you accept. I don't want you to accept my world view btw.

I am not twisting it. I just want you to be respectful and explain yourself. You have put myself and others down, and then wonder why we question you??? If you claim less knowledge, then how can you judge (like say that we don't give other religious views "credit" - we actually do in ways, but you'd have to find out how, first. Why judge first???)? If you want to have a conversation, and not put down or sound proselytizing, then ask some questions and converse.

You said I claimed the knowledge of god when I claimed hardly any knowledge. If that is not twisting my words I don't know what would be in your world.

I am not trying to judge, at least no more than anyone on this forum has tried to pass judgment on me.

"He also made blood sacrifice the only way to cover sins . . . that alone to us is not really understandable. Yet it is so true, that Jesus shed His blood to cover our sins. If it wasn't necessary in a way that we can't fathom right now, why would God do it? God "could just change creation later" to suit Him or us. Really? Apparently not. That's why we have order in the universe. God made things a certain way, including "life being in the blood,""

When I said bloodthirsty I did not mean to offend I was referencing this part of you post from before. There was alot of blood going on in the paragraph.

ageofknowledge wrote:Because a careful study reveals they posit truth claims that aren't true. And, as has been explained to you but you didn't bother to remember, God's Word has perfectly defensible revelation that originates from the beginning: before any and all others.

Now you have declared yourself a believer in a quantum type of "spiritual" energy that is not God (e.g. your atheist claim). A magnificent blunder of ignorance to claim such a thing as you posit so let's get right to it. I want you to stop running around like a chicken with its head cut off and carefully answer the following questions as completely as possible:

1. Define this godless energy?

2. Does the godless energy follow the laws of physics or not follow them? In either case, does the godless energy transcend the laws of physics?

3. Does the godless energy have any intelligence in and of itself, is intelligence guiding it, or is it utterly without intelligence?

Its a hypothetical energy force. Where exactly did I "Declare" myself a believe in the energy force that could have possibly been one possible starting point for this universe?

Please carefully answer the following questions as completely as possible:

1. Define this godless energy?

2. Does the godless energy follow the laws of physics or not follow them? In either case, does the godless energy transcend the laws of physics?

3. Does the godless energy have any intelligence in and of itself, is intelligence guiding it, or is it utterly without intelligence?[/quote]

ageofknowledge wrote:Please carefully answer the following questions as completely as possible:

1. Define this godless energy?

2. Does the godless energy follow the laws of physics or not follow them? In either case, does the godless energy transcend the laws of physics?

3. Does the godless energy have any intelligence in and of itself, is intelligence guiding it, or is it utterly without intelligence?

[/quote]

I will if you answer this, please go back and find the words I used and copy them and paste them into your next post, as I could not find that post of mine myself.
Where exactly did I "Declare" myself a believe in the energy force that could have possibly been one possible starting point for this universe?

You say i said I believe in it, but I don't so i don't see why I am answering these but here goes:

1. It would be the source of the universe. What all energy and matter has come from. It is a creator but without consciousness driving it.

2. It follows all the laws of nature, although it might be connected to another dimension or some plane that is higher than this world.

3. No intelligence, that's what I meant by exactly like a deity only lacking consciousness, or whatever i said. It is like a deity in that it explains creation, but it is not a force that has an agenda or intent, it is like the leaf falling from the tree.

qqMOARpewpew wrote:

cslewislover wrote:

qqMOARpewpew wrote:I haven't. I probably should as it has influenced western society and 85% of americans a great deal.

The anwser to your question just below is ^^^^^ That which is right above it. I live in the bible belt, not in the Quran belt. I have never met a muslim, never been to their temple. I have to deal with christians on the daily and as I am joining the navy I will be in even closer quarters with them. When I decide to move into Saudi Arabia I will do plenty of research.

So, do you go to Muslim sites and put down their believs and the Quran without knowing about those things personally?

The point of the above quote is the first two words: you haven't read the bible. I should've just pulled those two words out (I thought you'd remember what they referred to). The point is, Would you do that at a Muslim site - go and say all kinds of things about their faith without even having studied the Quran, or at least commentaries of it? That's what I was asking. I don't know why I'm even bothering responding . . .

As I have said before I am currently an Agnostic Atheist Spiritualist. I Don't claim to know whether or not a deity exists, I do not believe in any deities, and spirituality doesn't require a deity, it is a human thing.

You are posting disrespectful things that are meant to put down and/or convert. You are judging without knowing enough. You are asking us to accept other faiths as equal to ours without presenting why. If you choose to be disrepectful and do not wish to learn anything here, but just want to say how we don't know anything and love a bloodthirsty God, then there is no reason for you to be here.

What exactly in the above part you have quoted (in Italics) did you find disrespectful, where do you think I was trying to put you down or convert anyone??????

I asked somewhere else where you got the verses that you "researched." From an atheist site? You are avoiding the overall issue of how you come across. You have told me a number of times that I don't understand something, and not in a way that is pleasant of helpfully informative. In one of your last posts, which I didn't respond to fully because I had to leave, it seemed to me like you even made something up to defend yourself! You felt sorry for me not understanding something (!), and then claiming you didn't say that. As for the conversion aspect, you keep defending what you believe while not trying to learn. Atheists and other people come on here to do that. Otherwise, why would we be very interested in knowing that all truth is just whatever someone makes it, and then hear your version of this? What good does it do? This is a Christian site and not one for trying to lead people away from what we know as truth.

I don't know why you say I am trying to convert when I have said specifically that I don't want you to believe what I believe, and that I am not trying to convert anyone. Look at what you have quoted me saying just below: Underlined: You keep telling me to read your posts more clearly but it is clear to me you read only what you want to hear from me, you want me to be your enemy and to be trying to convert you, but this is not true of me.

This isn't so. I do read your posts. Most of what I had responded with you about are things to get you to think about you're saying, and to respond with an answer. It's not that I don't know or don't understand, although I don't understand you overall. How could I? Me, and others too, have been trying to flush more meaningful information out of you. Some of us here have been doing this a long time and have seen a great deal from many people.

You said I claimed the knowledge of god when I claimed hardly any knowledge. If that is not twisting my words I don't know what would be in your world.

I am not trying to judge, at least no more than anyone on this forum has tried to pass judgment on me.

Because you claim to know truth!! And all kinds of things, even though you say it's from your own mind. When you say that truth is what each one of us believes--so then why should I take what you say as truth? It's a contradiction. Why should I listen to YOU? But you'd probably say you shouldn't. But then I'd scratch my head and say, "well . . . where does that leave us? I think I'll go watch a movie . . . "

"He also made blood sacrifice the only way to cover sins . . . that alone to us is not really understandable. Yet it is so true, that Jesus shed His blood to cover our sins. If it wasn't necessary in a way that we can't fathom right now, why would God do it? God "could just change creation later" to suit Him or us. Really? Apparently not. That's why we have order in the universe. God made things a certain way, including "life being in the blood,""

When I said bloodthirsty I did not mean to offend I was referencing this part of you post from before. There was a lot of blood going on in the paragraph.

We will have to talk about the blood thirsty part of your religion another time another place I feel like people might not take too kindly around these parts.

What did you mean by this then? You're the one who called it bloodthirsty, which is just so absurd anyway. Jesus put an end to the sacrificial system . . . we're the opposite of bloodthirsty. Not disrepectful? Really?

This isn't so. I do read your posts.

Because you claim to know truth!! And all kinds of things.

*facepalm* When and where did I claim to know truth? I have stated more than 10 times and probably at least 3 different ways that I don't claim to know truth. I was arguing with three different people about this for two pages. So.... Before I continue anything else it is clear you're not reading what I say as i say it or you are not understanding what I am trying to say.

What makes you think that I did claim knowledge of truth?

The point of the above quote is the first two words: you haven't read the bible. I should've just pulled those two words out (I thought you'd remember what they referred to). The point is, Would you do that at a Muslim site - go and say all kinds of things about their faith without even having studied the Quran, or at least commentaries of it? That's what I was asking. I don't know why I'm even bothering responding . . .

I have read the bible. I have studied the bible. You asked me if I had read the bible in my adult life, being nineteen, and not having read the bible in the past two years the answer to your question is no.

I understand the way I have been poking questions at god seems to offend you, if it is going to do that do not talk to me, I don't want to offend anybody thats not why I'm here. Other religious forums are filled with atheists, deists and a handful of christians, I wanted to get anwsers about christianity from christians, thats why I am here and not there still.

What did you mean by this then? You're the one who called it bloodthirsty, which is just so absurd anyway. Jesus put an end to the sacrificial system . . . we're the opposite of bloodthirsty. Not disrepectful? Really?[/quote]

Bloodthirsty: marked by the shedding of blood

The christian religion is based around blood, almost all the churchs I have attended have communion, a ritual practice of metaphorically drinking blood and eating flesh.
Sins used to paid off through blood sacrifice.
They are now paid for via the blood of jesus.

qqMOARpewpew wrote:

What did you mean by this then? You're the one who called it bloodthirsty, which is just so absurd anyway. Jesus put an end to the sacrificial system . . . we're the opposite of bloodthirsty. Not disrepectful? Really?

Bloodthirsty: marked by the shedding of blood

The christian religion is based around blood, almost all the churchs I have attended have communion, a ritual practice of metaphorically drinking blood and eating flesh.
Sins used to paid off through blood sacrifice.
They are now paid for via the blood of jesus.[/quote]

Communion is simply a commemoration of the Last Supper, the final meal that Jesus Christ shared with his disciples before his arrest and eventual crucifixion. Unless you're Catholic, there's nothing "bloodthirsty" about it.

You're correct though that by the new covenant, "we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all." (Hebrews 10:10).

ageofknowledge wrote:

qqMOARpewpew wrote:

What did you mean by this then? You're the one who called it bloodthirsty, which is just so absurd anyway. Jesus put an end to the sacrificial system . . . we're the opposite of bloodthirsty. Not disrepectful? Really?

Bloodthirsty: marked by the shedding of blood

The christian religion is based around blood, almost all the churchs I have attended have communion, a ritual practice of metaphorically drinking blood and eating flesh.
Sins used to paid off through blood sacrifice.
They are now paid for via the blood of jesus.

Communion is simply a commemoration of the Last Supper, the final meal that Jesus Christ shared with his disciples before his arrest and eventual crucifixion. Unless you're Catholic, there's nothing "bloodthirsty" about it.

You're correct though that by the new covenant, "we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all." (Hebrews 10:10).[/quote]

I see, I knew only the catholic church took communion as literal blood (wine), I assumed other faiths took it metaphorically.

qqMOARpewpew wrote:

ageofknowledge wrote:Communion is simply a commemoration of the Last Supper, the final meal that Jesus Christ shared with his disciples before his arrest and eventual crucifixion. Unless you're Catholic, there's nothing "bloodthirsty" about it.

You're correct though that by the new covenant, "we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all." (Hebrews 10:10).

I see, I knew only the catholic church took communion as literal blood (wine), I assumed other faiths took it metaphorically.

The literal body and blood is not indigenous to Catholicism but even at that, it is not the actual flesh and blood that Catholics eat and drink, it is the body and blood of Christ under the appearance of the accident of bread and wine.