Bitcoin Forum

For athiest there is no God ,everthing is creation or the existance with cause and effect.We create our own heaven or  hell,not in hereafter ,but on earth,in our lifetime by the compassion we give our fellow beings and which we receive in return.
 His thinking is free from all the prejudices and fear created by the flagbearers of different religions fundamentalists and not influenced by any relgion and beyond its restrictions.His only holy sacrament is compassion because he recognizes that the individual life is precious to him and accord the same value to the life of all other beings including beings who opposes our religions and political belief. Do you agree?

We are all free thinkers, we have the right to choose right or wrong. I know there are many atheists who are very humane, good people. But what if you are not seeing 100% of the truth as an atheist? What if there's something you still haven't seen? The purpose of life is not just to be a good person but to live enjoying it while honoring and obeying God. Remember not all theists are influenced, I have no religion however I know as a fact God exists. Have you seen a miracle? Have you ever seen something happen that is medically impossible. (there are many fake videos out there from very immoral people masked as Christians) Just pm me if you are interested and I will show some real miracles.

What does miracle means when no solution to the problem whether medical or othewise is available to the man and that is corrected is in common language called miracle though it has a logic behind it, not known at the time of occurance but later come to surface by scientific research  but we should keep in mind that it is all the game originated  from the humane mind.

Free thinking doesn't always equate with better.

Imagine that a child uses his free thinking with the idea that he will jump to the moon. So he thinks real hard and jumps to the moon... and dies in the coldness and airlessness of outer space.

Better to use free thinking to not be free beyond bounds.

8)

Which one?  There are over 3000+ Gods to choose from.  What selection criteria did you use to select your God?

BTW, I am interested in some real miracles.  Post them here.

How did you determine they are the real miracles?

Similar answer is that free thinking does always can not be equated with negativity or worse as most of the people lives mechanical life and have a pre occupied mind  and they do not have time to invest in deep thinking and they follow the traditions or conventions whether these  have any utility or beneficial for society in modern age so the free thinking is helpful for them to overcome it.

The pope himself said - better be an athiest than a fake christian..

You are biased, if you were truly honest about not believing in God you would accept a miracle as evidence if the miracle is real. God gave man the capacity to create medicine or to be able to find it in plants and so on. You can see this in all civilizations, indigenous civilizations are the perfect example. This is similar to the coconut tree if you find yourself in a deserted island. You will have shadow, food, wood to make fire or build a shelter, leaves that are useful for a lot of utensils, oil to protect the skin and drinkable water when all there is around is salty water. All from one tree. He has thought of everything huh?

I believe you, this world has got lots of things science can't explain. This world is not only a materialistic world, there is mind too, which some consider to be even more important than the physical matter.

When we talk of God, we are talking about the creator of this universe, all the other gods who did not create this world are not what we are discussing here

John Lennox studied about ancient gods, he clearly explained how all those ancient gods such as greek gods, roman gods, hindu gods have theogony, which means they all have a creation story. The God we are talking about has no creation story, for this God is eternal. The ancient gods descended down from the heavens, God the creator created the heavens, this is the difference, and it is major one.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tr3ghb6JG6A&t=742s

No creation story yet he created the universe.  Well,...

It is your overactive imagination filling in the blanks in your knowledge.
Psychological comfort. That is all.

Come back to me if you have anything other than your own assumptions and conjectures.

Knowledge without thought is useless. Thought without knowledge is dangerous.

Thinking is fine. But when thinking drags one into atheism, it is like thought without knowledge, or worse: thought with denial.

8)

Nothing wrong with the idea of God not being created or made or having a beginning. After all, creating something is part of the properties that this universe does and harbors. For God to create the universe, he had to NOT be part of it. So, the source of God is not necessarily like the source of anything in the universe... which include, beginning, end, and time. God is eternal, whatever His source may be... if He had one.

However, Solomon says in Ecclesiastes 3:11:
So, relax. None of us will ever figure everything out. So how can we even begin to understand God except by His revelation of Himself to us?

8)

You were asking what criteria to use for deciding who is God.

That creation story is the story of the creation of the universe. The God we are talking about has no creation story of his own. How was God created? From where did he come from?

God does not have one because he is not created, he always exist.

Ok, I am going to ask one last time.

How do you know that he exists, that he created anything, what he is and that he is a he?

When I see nature, I see intelligent design. Intelligent design implies an intelligent designer who I refer to as God.

I do not believe that life and consciousness came about spontaneously. I don't believe our universe came about spontaneously from nothing.

I don't think God is a "he", in fact I think God has no gender. I use the pronoun "he" because that is the conventional pronoun for God.

That is what I thought.  You pulled it out of your ass.  You see it, therefore it is true.  You have some insane logic.

Who designed the intelligent designer?  Another intelligent designer?

No. You've just created a total fake stereotype.

In reality, athiests are as varied as people are. Some for example would laugh at your arguments, and a very few would agree.

Some are full of hate and bigotry.

Very few have an open mind.

No ,Most of the people live in the shackles of old aged traditions and conventions , does not bother about their deep rooted logics and their utilities in modern era ,whether these logics are having any
relevance today ,Athiest atleast comeover these and give proper thinking and their arguments are  helpful in the growth of the society.

What answer could I have given you that would have been satisfactory?  :)

Ask your God for pin numbers of my ATM cards and post it here.

or a youtube video with you and your God chatting about how he created the universe.

or ask God to join our conversation in this thread.

I truly do not think that you can support these assertions with logic and reason.

Note that I'm not arguing against your hypothesized Meritorious Position, just against your imputing heroic and honorable natures to the personalities of those holding the Meritorious Position.

I don't have power over God to be giving Him orders, God is not my slave.

It is ultimately God's choice to decide whether to reveal Himself to anyone, not my choice.

So you failed to convince me that your God exists.

Have you noticed that he only reveals himself to deluded people?

So, you have failed to recognize the fact that you are setting yourself up as god by suggesting that He doesn't exist, in the face of all the logic that shows that He DOES exist.

Actually, this is tremendously free thinking. It's like freely walking the plank without being forced. Not many people are willfully strong enough to do this (except from the diving board plank). So, atheists are very free thinkers to be so willful.

If the atheist wants to be the ultimate free thinker, he will turn from his atheistic ways, and freely use the logic around him to see that God exists. I mean, who is stronger? The guy who fights and wins? Or the guy who is strong enough to fight and win, but uses his strength to willingly step into slavery, instead?

In this case, it is the slavery of becoming a slave to Christ. Were you a slave to the silliness of not recognizing God? Saint Paul says, 1 Corinthians 7:21,22:
Turn while you have time.

8)

I am stating what I believe.


On the contrary, John Lennox, who I admire as a great modern thinker of our time, does not seem the least bit deluded to me  :)

There is an inherent flaw in atheism that most people don't seem to realize. Personally I have more respect for Agnostics. At least they admit that they don't know. Atheism is just yet another iteration of a religion. Atheism is the BELIEF that there is no God. There is no proof of the existence or nonexistence of a deity. People choose to believe one over the other, but it is just yet another system of beliefs.

Atheists exhibit a lot of the same patterns found in other religions. They think their beliefs are the best and everyone else is wrong. They proselytize. They fund-raise. They gather in groups to discuss and spread their beliefs. Their priests are "scientists", and their God is the government.

Yes but please don't say that to Astargath  ;D

Atheism is a lack of belief that there is a God.

It is not the same as a belief that there is no God.

Apple and oranges. 

PS. Most atheists are not making claims.  Although, some, myself included, are convinced that there is no God due to the lack of any physical evidence.

Watch some miracles man:

https://www . y outube.c om/watch?v=S_0vnBhz-Co

You were one of the guys that asked to see a limb grow in previews threads if I can remember right so here you go:

https://www . y outube.c om/watch?v=_360JitiBA0

https://www . y outube.c om/watch?v=UbTy3Nr59WM
 
https://www . y outube.c om/watch?v=CSQVR5FWo2o

You are dumb as fuck.

What miracles?

Post a video of an amputee growing a leg, then it will be a miracle.

Prosthetic legs are amazing tbf, I have seen amputees breakdancing (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-nV8S_gWI0) and doing amazing things even people with both legs can't do. With the invention of prosthetic legs, amputees can now walk or move like any regular person.

This reminds me of the story where a person who was drowning asked God to save him (https://truthbook.com/stories/funny-god/the-drowning-man).

God sent a rowboat, a motor boat, a helicopter, but the man did not see it as God's help, and consequently drowned.

Prosthetic legs, in my opinion, is God's way of giving legs to amputees.

You are so ignorant you don't even know.  Prosthetic legs were invented and designed by doctors and engineers.

Don't change the subject.  Show a video of an amputee growing a leg in real-time or shut the fuck forever about your imaginary friend.

You are just a troll, you have nothing concrete to add to the conversation, just your assumptions and conjectures.

We are done here.

I am sorry you feel that way

No need to feel sorry; you lost that argument fair and square.

Translating to your grammatical constructs:

The atheist saw the tools of logic and reason that God gave him; the theist remained blind.

No to me right now...this is false. I could be wrong

Free thinking is sometimes subjective or objective depending on how smart you are and how motivated you are to find the truth.

Free thinking is obviously a choice .. be subjective or be objective. Or perhaps you believe you are being objective when you are being subjective....then again you could not be caring too much about being objective and be purely subjective and still reach the correct conclusion :)

Depending on your intelligence and access to information and motivation (drastic effect subconsciously) you can reach the opinion of NO god or there is a GOD as a free thinker... or even undecided

I mean that is accepting the OP definition of atheist anyway that there is no god.

I would guess that claiming to KNOW either way is kind of hard to prove hence the requirement of faith.

Faith to me can not exist in it's accepted form if there is no gap in your chain of facts leading to an observable truth.

Of course you can always go deeper and say you need faith in your own senses and reality.... but

For example I am crossing a road and I see a red car coming. I do not require faith that there is a red car coming.
However as a blind man crossing a road I would require faith in my best friend who just told me there is a red car coming.

I could be wrong but that is where I am at right now thinking about this stuff

Yeah, some argument we had lol

I never once argued with him. He is free to express himself however he wishes and whatever he believes, I respect them all.

But when I speak my opinions...

I thought this thread is proclaiming that atheists are "free thinkers"  :D

People don't live in a vacuum in their thinking. The closest that anybody can come to non-belief about God is, when he hasn't had the thought about God at all. Once a person has a thought about God, only then might he not believe. But at the same time he is believing in the opposite direction.

There might be quite a large number of atheists out there... people who have never heard anything whatsoever about something called God. But as soon as they hear enough to think that they are an atheist, they hold beliefs as well as non-beliefs regarding God. Nobody lives in a vacuum regarding something in his thinking. Not even the vegetable.

8)

I'm not here to convince any of you, you can make fun as much as you like. Maybe these videos above are kind of casual, you may say its a lie or whatever but anyone who is a critic would at least accept them as possible evidence, since miracles are performed in front of skeptical people, in front of people of diverging religions, in front of witnesses and its all recorded. I have experienced miracles myself, I'm 100% sure what I believe is real. I'm not so sure though you can say the same since you are stuck in believing in theories and stuff. I have seen scientists, smarter people than you accept for a fact the existence of God.

You are free to believe whatever you like.

I know a guy that went right into the heart of darkness (A "miracle maker" well known, on stage) and debunked the scam and con game, in public, as the scam was being performed.

He did that at considerable personal risk.

Not impressed with your blabbing about miracles, dude. The way that progress is made is to look at the alleged "miracle" and ask how it could have been a scam. Then, clue by clue, reconstruct the way it was done. Then reveal it publicly, and call the people out as scammers, as appropriate.

Houdini debunked a lot of this crap, also. Many others have. But then, new suckers are born every minute.

That would be another irrefutable hypothesis...

However it remains that debunking the liars and the cheats who prey on the gullible in the name of religion, is a contribution that all the magical thinking and fantasy world religiosos should appreciate.

And it is as far as I am aware, always the work of athiests.

Yes, Atheism by its definition makes the claim that there is no God. This is a belief based on JUST AS MUCH empirical data on the belief that there is a God, that being no empirical data. It is not apples and oranges it is oranges and oranges.

You are free to believe what you want, I won't bother to try to change your mind. Whatever you want to believe is fine.

You've made a serious claim, when you make such a claim you must have arguments to backup what you say. You must agree with me it's kind of foolish to say every seller is a scammer if you are scammed by one seller. That analogy is not smart. Second of all, please let us know how clue by clue you can reconstruct the "tricks" this pastor is performing, I'd love to read that. Specially when he has random people he approaches perform the miracles he performs by just repeating his words? Oftentimes friends of the person the healings are performed on? I wanna read your thoughts on it.

It's not for you to say. It makes no difference to my what you try.

Pretty funny, actually, for you to say it is I that make the serious claim, when in fact it is the one purporting to do miracles that makes the serious claim.

When you assume the posture of the moral high ground, try not to engage in rampant lying. That is what you do when you impute to me, the phrase "every seller is a scammer." That's your words, made up in your fantasies. But then, perhaps you were simply in error.


Start with the basics, then. Are you familiar with the scientific method?

But carefully think this over before continuing, because you have already lost this argument, and I don't care to make you look foolish.

I like Lennox's explanation for how God and science are perfectly compatible.

"The success of science sometimes leads people to think that because we can understand the mechanisms of the universe, then we can safely conclude that there was no God who designed and created the universe in the first place. This reasoning commits a logical error in that it confuses mechanism and agency.

Consider a Ford motor car. It is conceivable that someone who was seeing one for the first time and who knew no science might imagine that there is a god (Mr. Ford) inside the engine, making it go. Of course, if he were subsequently to study engineering and take apart the engine, he would discover that there is no Mr. Ford inside it. He would also see that he did not need to introduce Mr. Ford as an explanation for its working; his grasp of the impersonal principles of internal combustion would be enough to do that. However, if he then decided that his understanding of the principles of how the engine worked made it impossible to believe in the existence of a Mr. Ford who designed the engine in the first place, this would be patently false. Had there never been a Mr. Ford to design the mechanisms, none would exist for him to understand. It is equally mistaken to suppose that our scientific understanding of the impersonal principles according to which the universe works makes it either unnecessary or impossible to believe in the existence of a personal Creator who designed, made, and upholds it."

-John Lennox

I know what I say will make no difference, that's why I'm not gonna try to convince you of anything. Fanatics do not reach conclusions, they are drawn by enthusiasm, they have a lot of interest in the liking of a particular group that's why they are closed to do logical reasoning. I'm not lying, this is just an analogy to the explanation you made trying to prove wrong the person doing the miracles, my point was you can't make this type of claims based on the fact someone else was proven wrong. Since you stated you had to deconstruct the miracle to prove it as a scam, I gave you the opportunity to deconstruct what the pastor was doing and you still haven't said a word about it. You talk about the scientific method when you are basing your WHOLE believe system in a theory that you haven't proved to be true. You are just following the crowd, you believe whatever you are told when you yourself haven't done any experimentation, that's not difficult to do, you don't have to be very smart to do this. You can attempt to make me look foolish, I don't care, my arguments will do the job of proving you wrong, it's easy to make a fool of yourself when you have no arguments to win a discussion. And believe me I'm not trying to insult you, this is not my intention, I'm just trying to make you see your error.

(A)  You did not answer my rather simple question. Regarding my question, you must have an understanding of the scientific method before you can understand how a miracle may be falsified. Here is a brief explanation.

Reference https://explorable.com/falsifiability

Falsifiability is the assertion that for any hypothesis to have credence, it must be inherently disprovable before it can become accepted as a scientific hypothesis or theory.

For example, someone might claim "the earth is younger than many scientists state, and in fact was created to appear as though it was older through deceptive fossils etc.” This is a claim that is unfalsifiable because it is a theory that can never be shown to be false. If you were to present such a person with fossils, geological data or arguments about the nature of compounds in the ozone, they could refute the argument by saying that your evidence was fabricated to appeared that way, and isn’t valid.

Importantly, falsifiability doesn’t mean that there are currently arguments against a theory, only that it is possible to imagine some kind of argument which would invalidate it. Falsifiability says nothing about an argument's inherent validity or correctness. It is only the minimum trait required of a claim that allows it to be engaged with in a scientific manner – a dividing line between what is considered science and what isn’t. Another important point is that falsifiability is not any claim that has yet to be proven true. After all, a conjecture that hasn’t been proven yet is just a hypothesis.

(B) This is something (again) that you impute my having said that I did not say. In the previous case where I questioned whether you were lying, you responded "I'm not lying, this is just an analogy to the explanation you made trying to prove wrong the person doing the miracles." Is that the case here also?

Here is an example of a magician who as part of his act routinely performs "miracle healing."

https://www.secrets-explained.com/derren-brown/miracle

Through the power of God, Derren heals members of his audience from chronic pain, bad eyesight and other health problems.

Explanation:

This is done through a mixture of suggestion, social pressure, placebo effect, cold reading and magic. The most obvious example of using magic is his trickery with improving/impoverishing eyesight. For example, when Derren makes an audience member 'lose' his eyesight, he simply shows him a different page in the booklet than he showed to the camera and the audience. The words on that page are actually just gibberish and the participant reads them correctly, giving an illusion that he cannot read normally. With the lady who 'regains' her eyesight, Derren simply shows her really large letters.

Con artists doing miracle healing use the magician's tricks of "cold reading" and "hot reading" to put their scams over on the naive people in the audience.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot_reading

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_reading

Do you have any questions?

For the topic question, which I found a bit silly I would rather say not atheists are free thinkers but agnostics which take all possibilities into consideration.

That's pretty well articulated, but it is lacking. It shows for example how someone can go into science and keep their religious faith. It is lacking because it focuses on one narrow style of religious faith. May I propose an alternate?

"....It is equally mistaken to suppose that our scientific understanding of the impersonal principles according to which the universe works makes it either unnecessary or impossible to believe in the existence of three thousand gods under the all powerful Zeus who working both alone and in concert designed, made, and upholds it."

Let's not obfuscate fairly simple things with big sentences and long winded arguments. Okay?

Well if we are to entertain Lennox's quote, then we have to understand his world view. He studies ancient gods and claims that they all have theogeny, or an origin story, they are in effect "created gods". They are not eternal.

The "God" word in his definition (and mine) is the creator of this universe. The creator is himself not created, he is eternal. God also has no gender, I use the pronoun "he" because it is conventional. Whether there is more than one creator is not the point, for the sake of our discussion, let's equate God with "the creator of this universe". So it doesn't matter whether his name is Zeus or Jack or Daisy.

My point is I believe that there is an intelligent designer of this universe, this world didn't come from nothing, and I call this intelligent designer "God".

No questions, just that we are running in circles. Why run around the bush when you can give a concise answer?

Oh, I see. Well, perhaps that is your point now, but it was not with the prior post and quote. However, your prior post along with this belief are consistent. I certainly know scientists who are devout Christian/Muslim/whatever and do not see any conflict between their beliefs and science.

Yes, this world did come from pretty much nothing. It was all compressed into pretty much nothing before the Big Bang.

I'm an atheist and many of my friends and family are also.  I can assure you that very very few of them are 'free thinkers', though it is not uncommon for them to believe they are, and sometimes by virtue of their atheism itself.

Currently I find that some of the people I respect the most in terms of being 'free thinkers' are are least mildly religious.  They tend to be unafraid to 'admit' their religiosity, but at the same time they rarely lean on their beliefs to inform their thinking and rhetorical arguments.  Most of the time I don't know that they are religious for a long time.

I've come to feel that being mildly religious gives people a certain freedom from certain constraints and lets them analyze with at least a different if not a lesser burden of baggage.  It is abundantly clear why more totalitarian forms of government are adverse to organized religion, or at least religions that are outside of their control.  There is a strong correlation between atheism (and especially militant atheism) among my friends/family and obedience/affection for the socialist state apparatus.

Well, that's the fourth false thing you have said so far in this discussion.

There has been no such thing. Perhaps you don't understand or care to, and just wanted me to elaborate on the many scammers, present and past, that pose as preachers?

It's curious you wouldn't appreciate the good work such people do...

haha this guy is hilarious! Please someone explain to him something can't be created from nothing. Matter can't be destroyed or created but just modified. The big bang theory was founded by a catholic priest who was a creationist. Man you need to have less imagination and more deductive/critical thinking.

It was easier to say what in what he did was a trick or an illusion. I read what you sent, placebo and preassure and all that. But the guy is doing exactly the opposite. I was just hoping to see what was a scam on the miracles he performed.

Hi tvbcof, I'm honored to read a comment like yours, you are someone who is very honest, and able to admit reality even when it is not playing on his side. I respect you are an atheist even though I don't approve it. I was born with a different religion, but I was bold enough to recognize what I believed was wrong. But man, I'm curious, how did you become an atheist? Were you born an atheist or did you come to the conclusion yourself there was no God? Because I can tell you I have 100% certainty there is a God. I'm not telling this just out of faith don't get me wrong. We can have a friendly discussion you can pm me if you like.

Many so-called "miracles" are a scam. Then there's a push for your donations...

This is pretty simple. I don't know why you would resist it. Wait, it's because you are pushing Real Miracles. Well, keep at it. Just expect others to use scientific methods to debunk them. Wait, you'd have to understand the formulation of a scientific hypothesis to get it.....

Well, the Big Bang was a singularity of sorts, if not in space then certainly in time.

"Space" had no meaning at that moment. Let's say a way to understand it is that there were no dimensions. Length, width, height had no meaning.

In scientific phrases, that's not INCONSISTANT with your comment, if it is revised to the correct form, including both matter and energy thusly...

E=MC^2

PS: I shouldn't have cut you that much slack, sitting her watching a b grade movie about aliens taking over and humans fighting, and giving you about 1% of my attention. You are just plain wrong.

It's energy that's never created or destroyed. Not matter. The proof is in the equation. But it could run considerably deeper than that, and energy may not be conserved.

But what's all that to a good Christian?

Someone needs some science classes. Posting formulas won't make you look clever, eveyone knows Einstein's formula. Understand you can't get 1 as a result from adding just zeros. No matter how many zeros you add the result is going to be always ZERO. You can't create something from nothing. Math is strictly attached to reality when will you realize that?

<<
John 1 King James Version (KJV)
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

2 The same was in the beginning with God.

3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.>>

Thousands of years ago written and no inconsistencies found. Your science is wrong, real science doesn't contradict science.

BTW I was not talking about thermodynamics but mass conservation LAW.

Please continue this proof of the big bang, I would like to read it.

I agree that this world used to be nothing, but I find it difficult to believe that it could spontaneously come into existence by itself. I believe that God created it from nothing.

I don't mind doing up publicly if anyone cares.

I'm probably an atheist for several main reasons.  1) brain wiring, and 2) I was from an 'atheist family' so to speak.

What I've come to believe rather recently is that even if someone is an atheist they still grew up an environment shaped by the prominent religion there-of, and usually it had a significant influence on them.  Shrieks to the contrary, the U.S. actually is, or at least until recently was, a 'Christian Nation' for all intents and purposes, and my own ethics were to a noticeable degree shaped by this fact.  That suites me fine because as I study things I come to the conclusion that many of the messages ascribed to the teachings of Jesus Christ were among the most noble devised by mankind anywhere.  It's fun to troll the modern American peeps with such a message since it really gets under some of their skin, but it also happens to be the truth...as I currently see it.  And as I always say, it's almost impossible to do a good troll without saying the truth since that is what makes it good.  And effective.

I would also say that some people call themselves 'atheist' because they don't fit into one of the 'big [int]' religions.  When they say 'but I am spiritual', they are not 'atheist' in my opinion.  Not even 'agnostic'.  In the West at least they are usually kabbalahists/luciferians more closely related to modern Judaism than anything else, but usually the don't know it.  That's what all this new-age weirdness is all about as I see it.  Molding the masses in anticipation of a hoped-for 'turning.'  And doing a bang-up job of it to my consternation.

Abbreviated to actual content.

You've so far, said four or five things that were untrue, dodged real issues a number of times, and topped it off with a bunch of emotional and juvenile attempts at insults.

This is not the behavior of one who should imitate Christ.

How about let's have a real miracle here, and you see the light?

You seem like a person who's read a lot, what you say makes a lot of sense. The teachings of Jesus definitely were definitely very noble, the prophets of the Jews prophesized and described Jesus death and life but most of Jews don't know that. Read Psalm 22 as an example and you will see how mind blowing it is. Today's Jews believe the book of Psalms is real yet don't believe in Jesus. Please read it yourself and tell me if you think that can be faked. Jesus is more than just the representation of righteousness and a good ideology, He really was the son of God. Read Isaias 53. This will blow your mind.

Christ himself spoke like that against pharisees, I'm very sorry if I sounded too rude while defending a point but I in anyway have insulted you. I ask you for an apology though.

I recognize conversation tone got a little out of control, my bad.

Well, what does it matter to you what the facts are? We're not debating whether the Earth is six thousand years old, or other crackpot stuff. You simply didn't know the subject when I commented on things reducing to "pretty much nothing," and sought to change the subject and so forth.

There's no need to bring thermo in, or mass conservation, they have little relation to this subject. It would take some study to get it. It's easier just to toss out a few quotes from the Tower of Biblical, right?

We can debate both the Bible or science, I'm just saying matter cant be created or destroyed that's all that;s a law of physics. What do you mean I didn't know the subject?

Matter is created and destroyed all of the time. A highly energetic photon can create a matter/antimatter pair. Likewise a matter/antimatter pair can annihilate each other to create a photon. Furthermore, a proton can be converted into a neutron by emitting a positron and a neutrino via the weak force. The positron is then usually annihilated quickly by encountering a electron. This creates a gamma ray photon. The latter process that I explained is what is keeping the sun going.. In the end, the mass of a alpha particle (which is basically the nucleus of a helium 4 atom) is actually less than the four protons that were fused to create it and the two electrons annihilated. The mass is converted into the energy of the two gamma photons created when two of the protons were converted to the neutrons.


Edit:It appears the proton-proton chain is a little more complicated than I inferred. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton%E2%80%93proton_chain_reaction  :D However, in the end, you do get matter/antimatter being created and destroyed and mass being converted into energy.

I mean what I said, no big deal. It's not really the thing you came to discuss, although it's not exactly a detour.

For example, the Big Bang was not a gigantic version of a black hole, rather all space simultaneously shrinking to a singularity. Whether that was infinite space or finite, but that's a side issue. The reason is that at the moment the universe shrunk to a singularity, measurements could not exist. Terms like length and width did not exist and could not. Therefore, I summarized in the prior post "pretty much nothing." There's also an issue of time.

So you see? It was "pretty much nothing."

:)

Certainly a religious person could attribute that to the creation of everything from nothing. Science does not ATTRIBUTE causation, it's unnecessary. Also there is zero ability to prove such causation, if you think about it.

But as I previously noted, religion is about belief/faith, not facts and evidence. This is laid out explicitly in your bible. That is why I criticized the searching and posting of miracles and made note of how many times they are simply scams.

I've yet to sit down and actually study the Bible or any other religious text of antiquity.  It's on my list of things to do, but it's a fairly big undertaking...and I don't read to good.

I will say that people do pull some jaw-dropping things out of both the Bible and the Talmud on regular basis.  I enjoy these things a lot.  The reason the Babylonian Talmud stuff interests me is because it is clearly a driving force in my country (the U.S.) at the moment.  We will probably have Kushner as president fairly soon, and that husband/wife team are Chabad-Lubavitch who take the most objectionable things out of the Talmud and run with them.  Run hard.  The unabashed ethnic supremacy of these folks is staggering and as a goy I'm not real comfortable being under their thumb.  Did you know that all of us goyim who ever lived are not even as valuable as the fingernail of any Jew?   The last Lubavitcher Rebbe, who's grave Jared and Ivanka went to pray for the Donald to win POTUS at, said as much.

Rabbinical Jews will say that it is impossible to read the Talmud as a non-believing Goyim and one needs a lifetime of study to understand it.  Bullshit!  The stuff is as clear as a bell (if it is not invented of whole cloth by anti-semites) and it is also clear why Jesus stood up against them and why some of the Jews hold a grudge against the guy to this day.

There are a lot of itemized excuses for this and that in the Babylonian Talmud.  Trouble is, the concepts outlined in the Talmud explain the behavior of the zionists toward Palestinians (and every other group of goyim for that matter) that we see every day to a tee.  The proof is in the pudding so to speak.

Turns out that being distinctly NOT an ethic supremacist is a good way to gain a world-wide following which is what happened with Christ and Christianity by the looks of things.  Who would have thunk it?  Only some real idiot goyim will follow these ethnic supremacists with their '7 Noahide laws' and the rest of their bullshit.  That's the evangelical flock these days.  Not the mega-church pastors of course.  They are obviously on the dole and are very likely hard-core Lucifarians anyway.

TBH, I think most atheists are probably more agnostic than atheist.

Atheism is a firm belief that no god exists (it's almost a belief in itself), where-as agnostic is sort of undecided/uncaring/not knowing. I feel like most people get those confused.

"The law of conservation of matter or principle of matter conservation states that the mass of an object or collection of objects never changes over time, no matter how the constituent parts rearrange themselves.

The mass can neither be created nor destroyed."

I haven't read the talmud, as far as I'm concerned there's diabolic stuff in there, other gods other than the God of the Bible, I wouldn't bother reading something like that. Did you read the verses I pointed out to you? This will prove Christianity was more than a new doctrine. It proves the Bible is more than just a book because it predicts events in the future that happen exactly as described. It describes events that were out of the hands of Jesus himself to fulfill in case you are believing the books of the new testament are just inventions. This is prophesied in the books of the Jews (Torah) even though most of them don't consider Jesus as the Messiah.

That's from classical physics. You must account today for general relativity and quantum physics, resulting a the e=mc^2 equation and hold that the sum of mass and energy are thus related and bound in a closed system.

In the beginning there was no energy, no mass, no matter etc. Where did all this energy come from?

This is not what the "Big Bang theory" asserts.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronology_of_the_universe#Planck_epoch

Rather it considers there to be a transition from such things being "undefined" to their being "defined as energy, mass, etc."

"Undefined" is not "no energy, no mass." It is different than say the quantity 0. "Time" does not exist either, so there is no "before" and no "after."

Science does not have questions to ask of "undefined." As an example, take the case where the universe has shrunk to a single point, a singularity, and ask, "How big is that point?"

That is nonsense, of course. Science would ignore that issue (although as I have noted the words used in your question formulate a cause and effect scenario that has no meaning when "undefined" is taken into account. Thus, science may influence religious thought by improving phraseology, but excepting that it will not address the question you pose of "original causation."

So there was not nothing after all. There was something called undefined.

Is this something eternal? Is it always in existence, has no point of origin?

Big bang theory is just an invention, you should read it's origins.

I did.

All theories are inventions. What matters is whether the theory is an accurate reflection of reality. I am trying to understand how the BB theory is superior to the intelligent design theory.

Who knows? Let me know when we find signatures in DNA coded thusly, "Product of IDTheory Corp., Alpha Centauri."

People make inventions, not corporations.     8)

atheism is like ultimate scanning of the world.

theism has advantages as you can more creatively interact with the world.

you can observe that on the jews, living in the united states and their high incomes.

if there is also humanis atheism, you get even huge trouble working with people, because of crazy perfectionism

regards

At this time, dimensions are defined. Time is defined. Therefore, we exist and can discuss these things. Science cannot and will not address the situation prior.

I don't care if religious people want to speculate about it, but the scientific view would be that no discussion was possible about a universe totally undefined, without time or dimensions.

It's possible to be in conflict with science. For example, suppose a person claimed that green rabbits ruled the Universe before the beginning of time. The scientist would reply, no, that's contrary to Undefined. That's impossible. The green rabbits could only exist after the beginning of time and space.

Keep in mind that historical concepts of infinite, finite, forever, eternal and so forth, should not be expected to be as precise as modern words. That's okay, really. They did a pretty darn good job with what they had.

String Theory Explained – What is The True Nature of Reality?
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/Da-2h2B4faU/hqdefault.jpg?sqp=-oaymwEjCPYBEIoBSFryq4qpAxUIARUAAAAAGAElAADIQj0AgKJDeAE=&rs=AOn4CLD2FzmW9KhH8HYrqQvn5MUHwo-Y6Q
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Da-2h2B4faU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Da-2h2B4faU)

 ;)

I agree, science cannot and will not address the situation prior because whatever existed prior to the universe must have existed outside of space and time.

Theists believe that God exists beyond space and time, while atheists believe something undefined exists beyond space and time.

No to the green rabbits / God outside or beyond space and time.

However you might note, it makes no practical difference whatsoever.

It would be good also noticing you yourself say yes to the green rabbits based on the way you've explained we came to existence.

To me, it makes all of the difference in the world.

Theists believe that something with infinite intelligence, which exists beyond space and time, created this universe.

Atheists believe that something with zero intelligence, which exists beyond space and time, created this universe.

Both theists and atheists recognize the fact that the universe did not simply come out from absolutely nothing, that is just logically impossible.

Actually, there are certainly variations in the opinions of theists, and you seem to have made up "what atheists believe" and "what both believe."

My issue with your opinions is that they are nonsensical. I am not saying that in a perforative sense but strictly logical. Look at this phrase.

"before space and time."

How can there be a "before" if no dimension of time?

I probably understand what you are trying to say, but as written it makes no sense.

You'd like to think there was something bigger, vaster then the universe, in which a Supreme Being resides. Sort of a Giant House in which he has a jar of marbles of which this universe is one marble?

Thousands of years ago there was only the place called Earth, and the place called Heavens. That was the Universe as we understood it. It's considerably bigger today. It will quite likely be considerably bigger tomorrow than today.

Thanks Spendulus, I made the correction, at least you understand what I meant ie. something that exists beyond space and time.

According to my understanding from what you said earlier, you also believe that something exists outside of space and time, however you choose to term it "undefined" because science wouldn't and couldn't address it.

Profiling people into one basket such as "atheist", "christian", "muslim", etc. is wrong on so many levels.

Just like every leftie, for example, is different, every blue eye person is different, etc. etc., I could go on for days with examples.

Generalization = SUBoptimal thinking of other people, limiting your view to the point that it's most probably totally invalid, meaning it has no weight.


Also, who made a term "atheists"?

Why do you want to describe a person by ONE personal choice? That's kinda stupid, lol, not to mention wrong.

This pic has a good point and I could probably find more.

http://www.humanreligions.info/atheism_and_rationalism.jpg


POINT: Labeling people based on ONE (or only few) attribute, personal choice or something similar is INCORRECT because it means you don't understand that people have hundreds of "attributes".

Honestly, labeling like that says more about the labeler -.-

When we speak of an "atheist", we are not making generalizations. We are saying that he/she does not believe in an intelligent creator of this universe. That is the entirety of the definition. No more generalization can be made. Atheists can range from kind, loving people to deranged serial killers. So are theists, they can also range from kind, loving people to serial killers as well.

Well, perhaps you, sir, are talking like that and that's a healthy view imho.

On the other hand, if I had to bet, I'd say the majority doesn't seperate those things so well as you do.

Why names for such things, btw? :)

I don't believe in God, but I'm open to possibilites, hell even "God", too.
I'd need some proof, ofc, but that's not the point.

Why label me "atheist" or "agnostic" or whatever the term is for "my case"? xD

If I say "I don't like dogs" (I do, cats too, most animals, really xD) I wouldn't be called "Doesn't like dogs person" xD

Thank you Kiir  :)

These are just terms, even for pet preferences there are labels such as he's a "cat person" or she's a "dog person" etc.

We use terms for specific meanings, please don't feel bad about it. It is just to make us understand each other easier.

Yeah, I get it. It can help, case by case basis. I guess some humans tend to ruin everything, even "neutral labeling" xD

Very true  :D

If you and I are ever walking down a dark downtown street and there's a couple guys up ahead, and I whisper, "Those guys look like bad news. Let's go this other way. Fast!"

My suggestion if you want to stay alive is not to start talking about baskets....

Of course, they were saying the same thing about you two. Did you meet them somewhere, again, the other way that you went?

 :D

I'd hope you would be saying that cause they are criminals or something of the sort. Their religion is irrelevant.

Christian criminal and muslim criminal is the same, cause only the "criminal" part matters.

Now if you weren't talking about that, I have no idea what you wanted to say xD

Spendulus was saying that sometimes it is beneficial to have heuristics, especially during times of "fight-or-flight".

BADecker joked about it, which I think is hilarious XD

Not really.Check Jordan Peterson.

Ok, though I'm still not sure how having or not having heuristics is applied to what I said xD

Don't worry about it, what you said was absolutely correct  :)

Well, I guess that works for me, lolz xD

Put it this way. We could discuss the philosophical matter of improperly stereotyping. While running...

Or we could just run  ;D

Depends on the speed, hard to talk while running! xD

Or we could melt in the heat of Hell, and run down the drain.

 ;D

Or we could pray ;D

I don't know if that is a good idea, but how about this.

You pray, but just in case that does not work out well, give me that heavy bag of gold in your pocket? I'll run away really fast, and they won't catch me.

I promise to give it back to you if you wind up alive. Let's meet in two hours at The Snake Charmer Inn. I'll have two pitchers of beer on the table. You don't mind if I spend just a little bit of the gold for the beer, do you? We can discuss the injustice of stereotyping then.

Kind of looks like those guys are getting closer. Now just hand that bag of gold over. I'll take real good are of it.

Praying won't work at this point.     8)

Do not underestimate the power of prayer my friend. After praying, God made me see the light that those two dudes were good guys after all. They were not trying to mug us, in fact one of them invited me to The Snake Charmer Inn for a round of beers. I told them Spendulus would be waiting for us there.



Oh you mean the heavy gold coins I always keep in my pocket? Here, take them and go, but let me know if anybody would accept them as payment. I painted them myself, don't they look absolutely authentic?  ;)

I either misunderstood, or I didn't respond clearly. I meant once a person is in Hell or the grave, then prayer won't work for him... at least not the kind that will get him into Heaven.

2 Samuel 12:23:
8)

Aren't we all free thinkers since we have the right to choose and think for ourselves, if you see your religion is not doing any good you have every right to denounce.

As I would define the term 'free thinker', it would just mean that a person is free from constraints which limit the scope of their thought processes.

Atheists often assume that religion accomplishes this constraint in those who are religious.  While there may be a relatively large element of truth to this, it does NOT follow that it is the only blocking agent and that lack of religion implies 'free thought'.

Atheists are humans and are wired to outsource their thinking to others.  This takes for form of 'believing' some supposed 'expert' and using said's teachings (or reported teachings) as the blocking agent.

Atheists, who have a natural void due to their lack of 'faith', are prone to use 'science' as their prosthesis of choice.  Shrewd people have recognized this and attached themselves to 'science' which looks a hell of a lot like 'religion' when one scratches the surface.  In some scientific disciplines which support certain projects (geo-engineering, vaccination programs, etc) the corruption is deep and pernicious.

'Science' is taught liberally (pun intended) in many public education spheres in many parts of the world.  'Free thought', on the other hand, is roundly discourage.

More and more one can find themselves in jail for exploring certain thoughts (like whether it was 2 million of 6 million Jews who died in a particular event.)  You have a better chance of being jailed if you share your work in some of these 'blocked' fields of thought...but 'mind reading' technology progresses so who knows what the future will bring.  My guess would be that it will be a technologically enhanced version of the dark ages.  It sure feels to me like that is the way things are going, and especially in the last couple of years.

If they are not really gold then keep them. Maybe those guys will take them and you can get away. But you would have to stop praying to get away...

How about this? Go ahead and give me your car keys, and those tickets to the Lakers game you had for tonight with your girlfriend. I'll keep her company so she doesn't miss the game. Just call us and we'll come and pick you up. Unless it is in the middle of the game or too late of course. And you might ought to give me those tickets for the Cancun trip also...

How long will the prayer session continue, do you have any idea? Should I just mark down to pick you up in a week or two?

:)

Nowadays there is so much policy, indoctrination, political thinking, and falsity in what is called science, that the believers in science are often free from reality.

8)

My car keys? Sure you can take them. Drive it at your own risk though, I nicked it during an NBA match from some basketball fan, he was busy watching the Lakers and didn't notice his pockets being picked. Let's say cops are currently hunting for a car with license plate "$P3NDU7U5". There is also a sticker on the rear window that says "Let's Colonize the Moon"  ;)

Lakers tickets? Sorry I only buy NBA finals tickets :D

My girlfriend? You can take her even before taking my car keys, at least I would get to spend this weekend free from headaches. In fact, you can keep her, but I want my car keys back  ;D

Disclaimer: All statements I made are not true, I love my girlfriend. If she ever sees this post, it might be our last conversation together on BTC forum ***

Lol okay I'm thru...just making the point that praying might not be the best solution method in all circumstances...

Got it, thank you  :D

Pray is the last resort ,it should be attempted when we are exhausted of all our efforts and no way is found .

I don't think like that, on the contrary I doubt that atheists have ever thought of something that has never been seen.


I even doubt if an atheist has a brain in their head, because they believe they have even though they have never seen their own brain. can someone post here a picture of their brain.

Man, you can do better than this. You can use your Brain-head or at least try for a better argument. Even @BADecker would not agree with your statement.

Prayer is the first thing to do. After all, most of the bad stuff never happens, because prayer is there ahead of time.

8)

I am guessing this is the answer to the question in the other thread about the "hands-on" way to gain spirituality  :)

Every person has the inner power to set his future and everyone of us is the god and writer of their own story and beliefs.Religions are not required for that..