Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

HI SOMEONE12, FEDERALE

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • "And yet the bottom line is we live in a universe which completely frustrates any attempt to explain its origin and content by natural processes alone.

    The best evidence for the possible existence of a supernatural creator lies in the total lack of any scientific evidence in these key areas. Can God be scientifically proven? No, it would be nice but his existence cannot be proven scientifically.

    The reason is God is supernatural; he exists outside the natural, scientific world. While our scientific tools cannot prove God exists, they do provide us with evidence we can use to determine if there is a better explanation for what has taken place besides the existence of a supernatural creator.

    It is interesting how atheists reject any notion of the supernatural because of what they perceive to be a lack of evidence when they could use that same objectivity to reject their naturalistic world view.

    Most atheists are not even honest enough to apply the same burden of proof for naturalism that they demand of supernaturalism.

    The laws of science falsify the notion that this physical, living world came to be through natural means. These laws provide very credible evidence for the possible existence of a supernatural being.

    Atheism violates these basic laws of science. Atheism requires not only a tremendous amount of faith but also a belief in miracles. And not only miracles but natural miracles, an oxymoron.

    Both naturalism and supernaturalism require faith and which one you place your faith in is one of the two most important choices you will ever make."

    http://www.anointed-one.net/atheism.html

    Comment


    • <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by iperson:
      <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Rough Neighbor:
      "And yet the bottom line is we live in a universe which completely frustrates any attempt to explain its origin and content by natural processes alone.

      The best evidence for the possible existence of a supernatural creator lies in the total lack of any scientific evidence in these key areas. Can God be scientifically proven? No, it would be nice but his existence cannot be proven scientifically.

      The reason is God is supernatural; he exists outside the natural, scientific world. While our scientific tools cannot prove God exists, they do provide us with evidence we can use to determine if there is a better explanation for what has taken place besides the existence of a supernatural creator.

      It is interesting how atheists reject any notion of the supernatural because of what they perceive to be a lack of evidence when they could use that same objectivity to reject their naturalistic world view.

      Most atheists are not even honest enough to apply the same burden of proof for naturalism that they demand of supernaturalism.

      The laws of science falsify the notion that this physical, living world came to be through natural means. These laws provide very credible evidence for the possible existence of a supernatural being.

      Atheism violates these basic laws of science. Atheism requires not only a tremendous amount of faith but also a belief in miracles. And not only miracles but natural miracles, an oxymoron.

      Both naturalism and supernaturalism require faith and which one you place your faith in is one of the two most important choices you will ever make."

      http://www.anointed-one.net/atheism.html </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

      Is this a quote from somebody? Well, I completely disagree with this point of view as it is based on one of the above weak fallacies and I see a couple straw men there as well.
      But it is a good point of discussion, quite a lengthy one but it can be resolved using logic, as everything else.
      First of all, it is absolutely not naturalism versus supernaturalism, the latter being a biblical assumption that something supernatural exists (unproven). Which is contradicted by logic -- only existence can exist, there is nothing that exists beyond nature (Spinoza). The exact quote is the following: "Good and Evil don't exist in Nature, and nothing exists outside of Nature."

      The rest of that text is full of such unproven false statements (opinions). Physics, science can explain how nature works very well, and it never brushes against anything supernatural, which doesn't exist. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

      Wrong, morality does exist outside nature. If I would follow Spinoza good and evil does not exist. Murdering someone would be completely ok. Where do Atheist base morality?

      Moreover, show me Gravity. Have you ever seen it? I want to see it.
      “...I may condemn what you say, but I will give my life for that you may say it”! - Voltaire

      Comment


      • <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by iperson:
        <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kollerkrot:

        Wrong, morality does exist outside nature. If I would follow Spinoza good and evil does not exist. Murdering someone would be completely ok. Where do Atheist base morality?
        </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

        No, morality is relative through mankind, as all value judgements are.
        Tell me, do you really care if some creatures on other planets kill each other, or not? I don't care, because it is irrelevant to me, and so logically do not other people on other planets care if we kill each other or not.
        Murdering someone is only not ok to us. I would go further with this, but on this forum.

        <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Moreover, show me Gravity. Have you ever seen it? I want to see it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

        Jump. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

        This is hogwash!

        Me jumping up doesn't show me gravity. I want to see it. I can bounce a ball or drop a rock I see the ball or the rock I don't see gravity. Show me Gravity I want to see it!
        “...I may condemn what you say, but I will give my life for that you may say it”! - Voltaire

        Comment


        • <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by iperson:
          Originally posted by Kollerkrot:


          <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> This is hogwash!

          Me jumping up doesn't show me gravity. I want to see it. I can bounce a ball or drop a rock I see the ball or the rock I don't see gravity. Show me Gravity I want to see it! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

          Strawman. You don't have to see everything with your biocentrism oriented eyeb.a.l.ls to know whether something exists or doesn't. Can we see the billions of galaxies in our universe? Can we see atoms and electrons? No, yet we know they exist.
          This is Logic .000001 class, Koller. Please, next. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

          Oh, I didn't know that I don't have to see everything I believe in. Cool!
          “...I may condemn what you say, but I will give my life for that you may say it”! - Voltaire

          Comment


          • <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by iperson:
            <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ProudUSC:
            I believe the alternative would be evolution. I've struggled from time to time to try and understand how we could be descendents of both God and apes. The theories don't mesh (at least in my mind), but I choose to believe there is a God and must be an explanation for the theory of evolution as well. There's too much scientific proof that evolution did occur. Is it un-Christian to believe in both theories? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

            We are not descendant from apes, this is a mistake scientists made in the past. We are a separate species like all the rest of the natural world that evolved from a separate unique ancestor. This is quite brand new finding of the recent couple years.
            And evolution, Proudie is not a theory, it is a scientific FACT. Live with it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

            That is what I said.

            There's too much scientific proof that evolution did occur.

            Comment


            • <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by iperson:
              <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Rough Neighbor:
              The Second Law of Thermodynamics (Entropy) explained (Psalm 102:25-26). This law states that everything in the universe is running down, deteriorating, constantly becoming less and less orderly. Entropy (disorder) entered when mankind rebelled against God – resulting in the curse (Genesis 3:17; Romans 8:20-22). Historically most people believed the universe was unchangeable. Yet modern science verifies that the universe is “growing old like a garment” (Hebrews 1:11). Evolution directly contradicts this law. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

              Ha, quite a concoction you've written here RN.
              Evolution directly contradicts entropy? No, it does not, as evolution refers to changes within the organic nature, </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

              Evolution requires that physical laws and atoms organize themselves into increasingly complex and beneficial, ordered arrangements. Thus, over eons of time, billions of things are supposed to have developed upward, becoming more orderly and complex.

              However, this basic law of science (The Second Law of Thermodynamics) reveals the exact opposite. In the long run, complex, ordered arrangements actually tend to become simpler and more disorderly with time. There is an irreversible downward trend ultimately at work throughout the universe. Evolution, with its ever increasing order and complexity, appears impossible in the natural world.

              <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">not the inorganic universe, which does evolve as well but according to different sets of physical laws. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

              What sets of physical laws? Theories won't be accepted please.

              <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The universe will cease to exist at one point, it is inevitable. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

              That's what I said, look how you're contradicting yourself. You just confirmed the scientific and biblical law of entropy, moron.

              Repeat after me: The Second Law of Thermodynamics as confirmed by the Scriptures, that Atheists (or Evolutionists by default, the real ones, unlike someone who's just acting it out like you) tend to reject.

              <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Not many theists are willing to think about it, and answer the simple question: what will happen to their God when there is nothing again? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

              I'll address it now.

              A pseudo-atheist like you asks, "what will happen to God when there is nothing again?" God, by definition, is the uncreated creator of the universe, so the question is illogical. A better question would be, "If the universe needs a cause, then why doesn't God need a cause? And if God doesn't need a cause, why should the universe need a cause?" Everything which has a beginning has a cause.

              The universe had a beginning (Genesis 1:1) but God doesn't have, and has no end (Hebrews 1:10-12).

              Starting with the studies of Albert Einstein in the early 1900s and continuing today, science has confirmed the biblical view that the universe had a beginning. When the Bible was written most people believed the universe was eternal. Science has proven them wrong, but the Bible correct. Therefore, the universe has a cause.

              It is important to stress the words "which has a beginning." The universe requires a cause because it had a beginning. God, unlike the universe, had no beginning, so he does not need a cause. Einstein's general relativity shows that time is linked to matter and space.

              So, time itself would have begun along with matter and space at the beginning of the universe. Since God, by definition, is the creator of the whole universe, he is the creator of time and is independent and outside of time. He is not limited by the time dimension he created, so he has no beginning in time. And by logic, no end.

              Comment


              • Laws, not theories. Science and biblical truths, not speculative gobbledygook. And mind you, I am not starting yet. Why run away this early in the fight, eh? And oh, by any chance, did I address all your concerns? If not, just please say so.

                Comment


                • And another oh, I thought you said you won? Why is it that when I'm just testing if you really did, you cower from facing this very interesting topic with me here and now?

                  Comment


                  • No answer?

                    Ladies and gentlemen, I have a very important announcement to make.

                    Iperson is officially an idiot.

                    Ah no, that's too harsh.

                    For the record, I'm taking that statement back.

                    Comment


                    • And RN is still just a little bit g.ay...well, alot g.ay...no, completely g.ay.

                      Comment


                      • And you're a simple tranny, and enough of it.

                        Comment


                        • <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by iperson:
                          If you really believe there is a God, Rough Neighbor, there is nothing I can talk to you about.
                          Only crazy or ignorant people believe in God, just didn't anticipate you belonged to them as well. That puts a big question mark over everything you've said over the course your posting at ilw, basically invalidating a lot of your statements.
                          I'm sorry I'm not going to waste my time dealing with immature insecure childish people. On this forum, this is the only way to talk to people like you, without going into complexities. I am not going into deep discussions with limited brains. Forget it, sorry.

                          Again, evolution is a study of changes in the organic world on planet earth, not of the universe. You set up so many reasonably sounding straw men for argument sake that the content doesn't have any real backing in reality. I can tell you have no real knowledge of the TOE, String Theory, logical scientific deduction, etc. otherwise you wouldn't be believing in a God.
                          And no, I don't need your God. I am doing fine without a Sky F.a.i.r.y. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

                          How was it that you were able to support President Obama? He is an avid believer. Plus, I am angry at you, I take stuff like that very personal - you calling me crazy, ignorant and childish.

                          String Theory
                          “...I may condemn what you say, but I will give my life for that you may say it”! - Voltaire

                          Comment


                          • <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by iperson:
                            I am sorry if I offended you and you take it personally, but you need to understand my point of view.
                            Any talk about God, a repeated one on top of that, I view as personally offensive to my intelligence, and I simply do not take well to proselytizing. I view such people as deeply ignorant, bible thumpers and I cannot find anything in common with them.
                            So, let's end it right here while we're still fairly civil. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

                            I accept your apology. This just as an FYI: Paul Klee's credo: "I cannot be grasped in the here and now, for my dwelling place is as much among the dead, as the yet unborn, slightly closer to the heart of creation than usual, but still not close enough.

                            I thought this very interesting.
                            “...I may condemn what you say, but I will give my life for that you may say it”! - Voltaire

                            Comment


                            • <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by iperson:
                              I am sorry if I offended you and you take it personally, but you need to understand my point of view.
                              Any talk about God, a repeated one on top of that, I view as personally offensive to my intelligence, and I simply do not take well to proselytizing. I view such people as deeply ignorant, bible thumpers and I cannot find anything in common with them.
                              So, let's end it right here while we're still fairly civil. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

                              It's a level playing field, is it not? That ilw.com is unmoderated is an added perquisite I suppose. You've got all the liberty to defend your position just as others who disagree with you have theirs. Don't blame me if I use offense sometimes as a defensive tool. You can't claim innocence in doing that either. Piece of advice, an intelligence that's easily offended means it's wanting or altogether non-existent. Having said that, I'm waiting for you to show me what you really got. C'mon, don't be shy. I'm here waiting. Silence would mean that your accusation of me being immature, insecure, and childish would come back to you by default.

                              Comment


                              • I actually liked the thread. I am not saying that proving that an intelligent designer exists or doesn't exist hasn't been an issue for as long as humanity existed. It is educational to me to listen to what everyone has to say about the issue. I actually think God doesn't mind at all that we are critical with physical or scientific matters or with him personally as they pertain to the issue. It will only help us to sort out what's really true in the end.

                                We, that's me included, most likely all had doubts at some points in our lives. So, I think it is acceptable to be critical until you are able to make that decision. This is what I like so much about the Bible it doesn't tell you what to believe until you truly made up your mind. Once that is done, it really, really talks to you. I am critical of the organized church and how it proclaims I have to believe in God. I am also critical of atheists and how they proclaim how I don't have to believe in God.

                                However, if you'd go around proclaiming "God is not Great!", and, thereby actually accepting that he does exists but denying him onto others - I think you'll have it coming.
                                “...I may condemn what you say, but I will give my life for that you may say it”! - Voltaire

                                Comment

                                Sorry, you are not authorized to view this page

                                Home Page

                                Immigration Daily

                                Archives

                                Processing times

                                Immigration forms

                                Discussion board

                                Resources

                                Blogs

                                Twitter feed

                                Immigrant Nation

                                Attorney2Attorney

                                CLE Workshops

                                Immigration books

                                Advertise on ILW

                                EB-5

                                移民日报

                                About ILW.COM

                                Connect to us

                                Questions/Comments

                                SUBSCRIBE

                                Immigration Daily



                                Working...
                                X