first of all we all know that human are a live proof of God Exist. Not a single person explain that from where we come to this earth and after death where we will go. so its prooven that there is something misterious.
all reliegions on this planet believe in god because there i no answer of this mistery.
I'm having a difficult time deciphering what that says... Is BADecker the only Christian apologist on this forum with proper spelling and grammar? It's hard to take someone seriously when they misspell every other word... I'll cut you a little slack because I'm guessing English is not your primary language |
|
|
|
You know the whole story is ridiculous. I truly believe religious people suffer from some sort of psychosis. I'm sure in the future, this mental handicap will be better understood so that treatments can be developed.
It is fun to pick on all the inconsistencies in their religious dogma. I try to avoid picking on religious beliefs the same way I would not want to pick on someone who suffers from schizophrenia but some of them think they have a moral or ethical ground to stand on AND on top of that they try to mix up science into their dogma. This is where I draw the line.
Their missionary activities are most damaging as they spread their insanity.
Healthy people should confront this religious nonsense especially when is presented as some sort of truth.
I encourage you to pick on them... make them feel foolish for believing such nonsense without evidence... hopefully, a few of them will begin to question their beliefs and why they ever believed such nonsense (though don't expect to see results from BADecker... he only hears what he wants to hear) Reading the comments of this video, someone claimed this single-handedly turned them into an Atheist! (13+million views ain't half bad either) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_a6RjR_AHYthis video made me an atheist...i'm not joking i was struggling with religion and was agnostic at the time and this video made me a fucking atheist |
|
|
|
Hahaha... I believed in all this until I was... ... 8 God looked at them and said to himself, 'they are so wicked, I will have to wipe them off the face of the Earth'...
Really?... Really? Straight to genocide?
What happened to 1 verbal and 2 written warnings?
Straight to the annihilation of the entire human race? Question: If God knew ahead of time exactly what would happen... why did he create millions (billions?) of people only to kill them all with a flood? Couldn't he have skipped all the murder and started with Noah instead of Adam? |
|
|
|
I always wondered if a black hole sucked all the matter into the black hole
and when the black hole become to full with matter it would explode and rip open in some other part of the universe making a new galaxies.
I always wondered if our universe was really just the event horizon of a 4-D black hole... The event horizon of a 3-D black hole is a 2-D plane... so it follows that a 4-D black hole would have a 3-D event horizon "The big bang" could just be a 4-D star being swallowed by the 4-d black hole... the matter would be torn into it's most fundamental components as it crosses the event horizon into our universe Wow so its like it repeats the cycle.. spits it out and draws it back? wow that is good thought? I like that one Basically... In that scenario, matter would be sucked into the 4-D black hole... but, the inside of the black hole is the 3-D universe we live in Perhaps there are 2-D creatures living inside our 3-D black holes? |
|
|
|
|
I only exist because a couple stars turned hydrogen into more complex elements...
Eventually going supernova and spreading these atoms in every direction where they could turn into planets and people
I heard there were at least 2 supernovas in Earth's vicinity, making it possible that the atoms in your left hand are from a different star than the atoms in your right hand
|
|
|
|
I always wondered if a black hole sucked all the matter into the black hole
and when the black hole become to full with matter it would explode and rip open in some other part of the universe making a new galaxies.
I always wondered if our universe was really just the event horizon of a 4-D black hole... The event horizon of a 3-D black hole is a 2-D plane... so it follows that a 4-D black hole would have a 3-D event horizon "The big bang" could just be a 4-D star being swallowed by the 4-d black hole... the matter would be torn into it's most fundamental components as it crosses the event horizon into our universe |
|
|
|
...God, Who science proves to exist, actually did examine science before He set it in place
Yet another claim pulled directly from your ass Prove it It is a logical conclusion based on the things that god's witnesses in the bible said and say. It is a hearsay (at best). Oh, because the bible says so? The bible also says that rabbits chew their cud like a cow The bible says unicorns exist The bible condones slavery in no less than 5 different books The entire old testament is filled with murder and genocide The bible places Jesus in cities hundreds of miles apart on the same day The bible says the earth has four corners (implying the earth is flat) The bible says God created light... 3 days before he created the sun and stars... The bible is wrong on so many things... Literally hundreds of provable errors and contradictions I will gladly provide dozens of links to scholarly sources on the subject if you are interested The one thing that annoys me the most is that "everyone can understand bible in their own way" or such the cases that you've said can be understood differently from person to person or completely ignored. Ignoring the bad parts and counting just he good ones, The Evolution of Bible. Therefore bible is as much as a blank papers bounded together, it's just a great hitorical artifact, nothing else absolutely. This is why the real Bible, the original written in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek, was written in those languages, which are meaning specific in the things that they say. Once again proving your ignorance... If the Hebrew Bible is so meaning specific, why has there been 2000+ years of scholarly rabbinic debate about the texts? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talmudhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillel_and_ShammaiThe Jews have been debating over the meaning of the words in the bible since they were first written! It is only Christians who think God wrote the bible... The Jews literally debate every word of the bible... which is where Lilith comes from... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LilithThe Jews noticed the discrepancy between the creation story in the first chapter of Genesis and the nearly identical creation story in the second chapter of Genesis (yeah, God repeated himself... oops) Basically, Lilith is Adams first wife, created out of the dust of the ground at the same time as Adam... So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them Eve is Adams second wife, created out of his rib Then the Lord God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man Have you even heard of The Council of Nicea? (circa 325-331 CE) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_NicaeaThis is where/when the Christian church leaders voted on which books to include in the bible... (hint: they did not ask God who wrote each book) |
|
|
|
noun, plural theories.
1. a coherent group of tested general propositions, commonly regarded as correct, that can be used as principles of explanation and prediction for a class of phenomena:
Einstein's theory of relativity.
Synonyms: principle, law, doctrine.
...
Notice the word "propositions" in #1. Did you notice the words, coherent, tested and correct? What about the synonyms, principle, law, doctrine? Theory might be law. It is not known to be law, except that it matches the law of what a theory is. Law is always law, never theory. No questionability in law. But theory is always questionable. Perhaps some day you will understand... Theory and law are 2 different categories of things... A hypothesis becomes a law when it is proven via mathematics A hypothesis becomes a theory when it is confirmed via induction, makes accurate predictions of future events, withstands peer review, and is accepted by the scientific community as fact, truth, and an accurate representation of reality A law can never become a theory and a theory can never become a law... You are saying the equivalent of, "When this cat gets older it becomes a dog" Correct. A theory can never become a law. It either is a law or it isn't. Correct, a dog is always a dog, and never a cat
The fact that it is a theory shows that scientists don't know for a fact whether or not it is a law.
Incorrect... A theory does not become a law... for the same reason that a dog does not become a cat That's why a theory does not become law. It either is law already or it is not. Theory means that we simply haven't figured it out yet. For example. An abstract form of evolution theory might suggest that some ancient form of dog could evolve into a cat, or that some ancient form of cat could evolve into a dog. Theoretically speaking, we don't know if this could happen or not. But as you have been saying, a dog is always a dog. It never becomes a cat. Law trumps theory. Wrong again... Theory means we have figured it out... hypothesis means we have not figured it out... It starts as a hypothesis, and once it is confirmed as fact, becomes a theoryYou are also wrong about evolution... no dog has ever or will ever evolve into a cat... it won't happen For the same reason that no human has evolved from a chimp... this is another common Christian misconception... humans and chimps share a common ancestor, which was neither human nor chimpFirst, you are wrong about theory. It's in the dictionary definitions I provided earlier. Also, "hypothesis" is a synonym for theory. Check the definitions. Now you are just arguing in circles... I already refuted your claim about your dictionary definition in the text you quoted! (for the 15th time, and counting) Yes, we all understand words can have multiple meanings... but theory has only a single definition when used in a scientific context (times explained to you = 16) Same as faggot can mean multiple things... If someone is throwing a faggot on the fire, I assume it is a faggot of wood, not a homosexual (or perhaps a cigarette butt if the person is from the UK)... context is important! |
|
|
|
noun, plural theories.
1. a coherent group of tested general propositions, commonly regarded as correct, that can be used as principles of explanation and prediction for a class of phenomena:
Einstein's theory of relativity.
Synonyms: principle, law, doctrine.
...
Notice the word "propositions" in #1. Did you notice the words, coherent, tested and correct? What about the synonyms, principle, law, doctrine? Theory might be law. It is not known to be law, except that it matches the law of what a theory is. Law is always law, never theory. No questionability in law. But theory is always questionable. Perhaps some day you will understand... Theory and law are 2 different categories of things... A hypothesis becomes a law when it is proven via mathematics A hypothesis becomes a theory when it is confirmed via induction, makes accurate predictions of future events, withstands peer review, and is accepted by the scientific community as fact, truth, and an accurate representation of reality A law can never become a theory and a theory can never become a law... You are saying the equivalent of, "When this cat gets older it becomes a dog" Correct. A theory can never become a law. It either is a law or it isn't. Correct, a dog is always a dog, and never a cat
The fact that it is a theory shows that scientists don't know for a fact whether or not it is a law.
Incorrect... A theory does not become a law... for the same reason that a dog does not become a cat That's why a theory does not become law. It either is law already or it is not. Theory means that we simply haven't figured it out yet. For example. An abstract form of evolution theory might suggest that some ancient form of dog could evolve into a cat, or that some ancient form of cat could evolve into a dog. Theoretically speaking, we don't know if this could happen or not. But as you have been saying, a dog is always a dog. It never becomes a cat. Law trumps theory. Wrong again... Theory means we have figured it out... hypothesis means we have not figured it out... It starts as a hypothesis, and once it is confirmed as fact, becomes a theoryYou are also wrong about evolution... no dog has ever or will ever evolve into a cat... it won't happen For the same reason that no human has evolved from a chimp... this is another common Christian misconception... humans and chimps share a common ancestor, which was neither human nor chimp |
|
|
|
...God, Who science proves to exist, actually did examine science before He set it in place
Yet another claim pulled directly from your ass Prove it It is a logical conclusion based on the things that god's witnesses in the bible said and say.  It is a hearsay (at best). Oh, because the bible says so? The bible also says that rabbits chew their cud like a cow The bible says unicorns exist The bible condones slavery in no less than 5 different books The entire old testament is filled with murder and genocide The bible places Jesus in cities hundreds of miles apart on the same day The bible says the earth has four corners (implying the earth is flat) The bible says God created light... 3 days before he created the sun and stars... According to the bible, the earth is around 5-7000 years old The bible is wrong on so many things... Literally hundreds of provable errors and contradictions I will gladly provide dozens of links to scholarly sources on the subject if you are interested Our courts follow the Bible principle. The strongest judgments are a product of, and based on, eye witness reports. Wrong again... testimony is the least credible source of evidence allowed in courthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Testimony#LawObjections to testimony include, but are not limited to: argumentative asked and answered best evidence rule calls for speculation calls for a conclusion compound question or narrative hearsay inflammatory incompetent witness (e.g., child, mental or physical impairment, intoxicated) irrelevant, immaterial lack of foundation leading question privilege vague ultimate issue testimony non-responsive If you are talking about biblical law... only 2 out of the 613 commandments are laws... Do not kill, Do not steal... the other 611 commandments are not laws... |
|
|
|
...God, Who science proves to exist, actually did examine science before He set it in place
Yet another claim pulled directly from your ass Prove it It is a logical conclusion based on the things that god's witnesses in the bible said and say. It is a hearsay (at best). Oh, because the bible says so? The bible also says that rabbits chew their cud like a cow The bible says unicorns exist The bible condones slavery in no less than 5 different books The entire old testament is filled with murder and genocide The bible places Jesus in cities hundreds of miles apart on the same day The bible says the earth has four corners (implying the earth is flat) The bible says God created light... 3 days before he created the sun and stars... According to the bible, the earth is around 5-7000 years old The bible is wrong on so many things... Literally hundreds of provable errors and contradictions I will gladly provide dozens of links to scholarly sources on the subject if you are interested |
|
|
|
noun, plural theories.
1. a coherent group of tested general propositions, commonly regarded as correct, that can be used as principles of explanation and prediction for a class of phenomena:
Einstein's theory of relativity.
Synonyms: principle, law, doctrine.
...
Notice the word "propositions" in #1. Did you notice the words, coherent, tested and correct? What about the synonyms, principle, law, doctrine? Theory might be law. It is not known to be law, except that it matches the law of what a theory is. Law is always law, never theory. No questionability in law. But theory is always questionable. Perhaps some day you will understand... Theory and law are 2 different categories of things... A hypothesis becomes a law when it is proven via mathematics A hypothesis becomes a theory when it is confirmed via induction, makes accurate predictions of future events, withstands peer review, and is accepted by the scientific community as fact, truth, and an accurate representation of reality A law can never become a theory and a theory can never become a law... You are saying the equivalent of, "When this cat gets older it becomes a dog" Correct. A theory can never become a law. It either is a law or it isn't. Correct, a dog is always a dog, and never a cat
The fact that it is a theory shows that scientists don't know for a fact whether or not it is a law.
Incorrect... A theory does not become a law... for the same reason that a dog does not become a cat |
|
|
|
...God, Who science proves to exist, actually did examine science before He set it in place
Yet another claim pulled directly from your ass Prove it... Where is your evidence? |
|
|
|
Now you are just trolling...
We've been over this theory vs hypothesis = fact vs guess a dozen times already... if you don't understand it, you never will
Your response is the example of a troll's response. Why? All you do is say that I am trolling, but you don't give a logical explanation of of why something I say is trolling. The real proof that yo are the troll is, I show you the proof that God exists, and you can't show where I am scientifically wrong in the proof. All that is left for you is to troll, since you don't like the "God" idea, but can't refute it. I gave a logical response... you keep denying reality... you keep saying that a scientific theory is just a guess, and not based in fact... which is a false statement I provided links to sources the first dozen times I refuted your claim... shall we go for #13? From http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/theory?s=t, still the same as the last time I provided it: theory
[thee-uh-ree, theer-ee]
noun, plural theories.
1. a coherent group of tested general propositions, commonly regarded as correct, that can be used as principles of explanation and prediction for a class of phenomena:
Einstein's theory of relativity.
Synonyms: principle, law, doctrine.
...
Notice the word "propositions" in #1. Did you notice the words, coherent, tested and correct? What about the synonyms, principle, law, doctrine? Theory might be law. It is not known to be law, except that it matches the law of what a theory is. Law is always law, never theory. No questionability in law. But theory is always questionable. Perhaps some day you will understand... Theory and law are different categories of confirmed hypothesis... A hypothesis becomes a law when it is proven via mathematics A hypothesis becomes a theory when it is confirmed via induction, makes accurate predictions of future events, withstands peer review, and is accepted by the scientific community as fact, truth, and an accurate representation of reality A law can never become a theory and a theory can never become a law... You are saying the equivalent of, "When this cat gets older it becomes a dog" |
|
|
|
Proof means real things - faith means nothing. I believe Star Wars exists. Because I've seen it. No one has seen God.
This is why faith is important. Nobody can understand the things of God. We barely can understand that there are things of God. Faith is all we have regarding things of God. The proof that God exists makes our faith in the things God tells us, to be stronger faith. Faith, by definition, is belief without knowledge... If you had proof of God, it would no longer require faith... Religion without faith would be science, because it would then be based on fact, not fiction... Existence of God = scientifically proven. Attributes of God = not proven, therefore if held, held by faith. Faith in God = faith in proof. Existence of God = not proven scientifically Attributes of God = not proven, therefore if held, held by faith. Faith in God = faith in God. Okay. I guess we are down to it. You simply won't accept the proof that God exists. (Argumentum ad hominem removed) We are still waiting for you to provide this proof... Pseudoscience is often characterized by the following: contradictory, exaggerated or unprovable claims; over-reliance on confirmation rather than rigorous attempts at refutation; lack of openness to evaluation by other experts in the field; and absence of systematic practices when rationally developing theories Why are you waiting? I don't have the proof. Science does. God examine the science if you want to see the proof. "God examine the science"?... ... ... Are you high? I consulted the Science God, and she said the likelihood of the Christian God existing as described in the bible is around 0.00000%... With a margin of error no greater than 0.0000% |
|
|
|
Now you are just trolling...
We've been over this theory vs hypothesis = fact vs guess a dozen times already... if you don't understand it, you never will
Your response is the example of a troll's response. Why? All you do is say that I am trolling, but you don't give a logical explanation of of why something I say is trolling. The real proof that yo are the troll is, I show you the proof that God exists, and you can't show where I am scientifically wrong in the proof. All that is left for you is to troll, since you don't like the "God" idea, but can't refute it. I gave a logical response... you keep denying reality... you keep saying that a scientific theory is just a guess, and not based in fact... which is a false statement I provided links to sources the first dozen times I refuted your claim... shall we go for #13? From http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/theory?s=t, still the same as the last time I provided it: theory
[thee-uh-ree, theer-ee]
noun, plural theories.
1. a coherent group of tested general propositions, commonly regarded as correct, that can be used as principles of explanation and prediction for a class of phenomena:
Einstein's theory of relativity.
Synonyms: principle, law, doctrine.
...
Notice the word "propositions" in #1. Did you notice the words, coherent, tested and correct? What about the synonyms, principle, law, doctrine? |
|
|
|
...
The dictionary definition I used above, is standard regarding dictionary definitions of the word "theory" no matter how it is used
....
That is your problem. This is proof that you either did not take any science in school or slept all through science classes. Never too late to enroll in evening classes in some high school or community college. LOL!   Okay. I guess we are down to it. You simply won't accept the proof that God exists. (Argumentum ad hominem removed) 1) Words often have multiple meanings Example: Faggot could mean a homosexual person, of a bundle of sticks used for kindling... The context is important... Same goes for the word theory when used in the context of science, it means fact... This has been explained to you 14 times now... 2) Please provide this proof so we can refute your claim instead of ad hominem attack each other 3) When you refuse to provide a source or evidence to support your claim, you are engaging in pseudoscience: Pseudoscience is often characterized by the following: contradictory, exaggerated or unprovable claims; over-reliance on confirmation rather than rigorous attempts at refutation; lack of openness to evaluation by other experts in the field; and absence of systematic practices when rationally developing theories |
|
|
|
Proof means real things - faith means nothing. I believe Star Wars exists. Because I've seen it. No one has seen God.
This is why faith is important. Nobody can understand the things of God. We barely can understand that there are things of God. Faith is all we have regarding things of God. The proof that God exists makes our faith in the things God tells us, to be stronger faith. Faith, by definition, is belief without knowledge... If you had proof of God, it would no longer require faith... Religion without faith would be science, because it would then be based on fact, not fiction... Existence of God = scientifically proven. Attributes of God = not proven, therefore if held, held by faith. Faith in God = faith in proof. Existence of God = not proven scientifically Attributes of God = not proven, therefore if held, held by faith. Faith in God = faith in God. Okay. I guess we are down to it. You simply won't accept the proof that God exists. (Argumentum ad hominem removed) We are still waiting for you to provide this proof... Pseudoscience is often characterized by the following: contradictory, exaggerated or unprovable claims; over-reliance on confirmation rather than rigorous attempts at refutation; lack of openness to evaluation by other experts in the field; and absence of systematic practices when rationally developing theories |
|
|
|
Now you are just trolling...
We've been over this theory vs hypothesis = fact vs guess a dozen times already... if you don't understand it, you never will
Your response is the example of a troll's response. Why? All you do is say that I am trolling, but you don't give a logical explanation of of why something I say is trolling. The real proof that yo are the troll is, I show you the proof that God exists, and you can't show where I am scientifically wrong in the proof. All that is left for you is to troll, since you don't like the "God" idea, but can't refute it. I gave a logical response... you keep denying reality... you keep saying that a scientific theory is just a guess, and not based in fact... which is a false statement I provided links to sources the first dozen times I refuted your claim... shall we go for #13? Science theory is science fiction until it is proven to be fact. The science method doesn't have anything to do with believing science theory fiction to be truth when it is not known to be truth.
...believing the fictions of science theory anyway.
You simply do not understand the terminology of science... Or, more likely, you are intentionally using the terminology incorrectly as many Christians do... Most of the Christians who claim a scientific theory is "science fiction", fully understand that they are a liar... they are misrepresenting the truth because scientifically illiterate Christians are unlikely to know they are lying... Other Christians might believe the lie, and even propagate this lie on internet forums... Exactly like you are doing... Troll Another name for "scientific theory" is " scientific knowledge" (hint: knowledge is based in fact, not fiction) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theoryA scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method and repeatedly tested and confirmed through observation and experimentation
As with most (if not all) forms of scientific knowledge, scientific theories are inductive in nature and aim for predictive power and explanatory capability. Provide a source for your claim, "Science theory is science fiction", or admit you are nothing but a troll! |
|
|
|
Proof means real things - faith means nothing. I believe Star Wars exists. Because I've seen it. No one has seen God.
This is why faith is important. Nobody can understand the things of God. We barely can understand that there are things of God. Faith is all we have regarding things of God. The proof that God exists makes our faith in the things God tells us, to be stronger faith. Faith, by definition, is belief without knowledge... If you had proof of God, it would no longer require faith... Religion without faith would be science, because it would then be based on fact, not fiction... |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
