Bitcoin Forum
November 16, 2024, 04:33:07 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 28.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Poll
Question: Do you believe in god?
Yes - 362 (65.9%)
No - 139 (25.3%)
Other - 48 (8.7%)
Total Voters: 549

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 [36] 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 ... 189 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Do you believe in god?  (Read 316068 times)
Katewind
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 121
Merit: 92


View Profile
January 05, 2017, 05:45:53 PM
 #701

Yes, I do. I trust in my god. When I work or go to anywhere, I always say prayer to God and then I feel peaceful.
I believe The God is real and I say thank to God because God had created the human kind and give us everything in the world.
QuestionAuthority
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2156
Merit: 1393


You lead and I'll watch you walk away.


View Profile
January 05, 2017, 05:58:35 PM
 #702

What do you not understand about fossils that are older than 6000 years  Cheesy

Why do you believe God wrote the Bible?
Because someone told you so?

Well, we're telling you otherwise  Cheesy

Here's a reasonable answer to that. God made it to appear older to us even tho is not to test our faith in him.

The furthest we can go back with any certainty is 4,500 years. The rest is guesswork. You will see this when you delve into what the basic archaeologists say. Everything that is not archaeology - like astronomy, meteors, geology - is based in theory. It is not known to be fact. the best we have is the Bible record.

God directed the writing of the Bible because, it could not come into being without god directing it. Check into the history of how the Bible came into being, and you will see that the whole operation of its being written could not have happened according to the laws of probability.

Do the research first, before you make up your mind decisively. It is important to your salvation.

Cool

So counting of tree rings to 9700+ does not count?


No because back in the olden days trees grew five rings a year. LOL

 Christians just make shit up as they go along.


I became silent within and meditated on the subject and pressing question of the tree rings and then I had a revelation that came to me from the Lord of the Tree Rings. Wanna know what He whispered in my ear? (He said it's OK I can share the secret - it'll be out anyways soon enough) - ONLY ONE RING PER YEAR   He had divinely ordained this to be an Infallible Universal Constant. There you have it.  Cheesy


We can stop worrying now, the lord of the rings has spoken. ROFL

I think it is in the Bible: Leviticus 20:13

"If a man puts one ring on his trunk and lies with a male as with a woman once per year, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them."

It is of course up to interpretation...Some Christian and Muslim scholars think "it really means that trees add one ring per year, and it is ok to cut trees during full moon (as aligned with the menstrual cycle of your female slaves)"

But when in doubt, you have to consult with BADecker, he is an in-house guru on Bible interpretations and has broad Bronze Age knowledge in general.


That's because BADecker is from the Bronze Age. I have a theory about that.

Doctor Who went back to the Bronze Age chasing Daleks and used the chameleon circuit in the Tardis to make it look like a preteen girl. BADecker walked by the Tardis. While he was attempting to rape the girl (which was actually the Tardis) to give her an immaculate conception he fell in the Tardis and was transported to our time by accident.

Not really understanding anything about modern society, BADecker was placed in a mental institution after he was caught helping a couple of 60 year old gray haired catholic priests rape some teenaged boys. The hospital he resides in has a computer therapy program that allows him to access this forum where he continues to rape by buggering the logic and reasoning out of the brains of forum members.

daiyuba1971
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 255
Merit: 250



View Profile
January 05, 2017, 06:00:46 PM
 #703

Yes, I do. I trust in my god. When I work or go to anywhere, I always say prayer to God and then I feel peaceful.
I believe The God is real and I say thank to God because God had created the human kind and give us everything in the world.

Very often criminals kill the servants of the Church. I doubt that you say prayers more often than they do. However, this did not save them from killing maniacs. Isn't that proof that God does not exist?
QuestionAuthority
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2156
Merit: 1393


You lead and I'll watch you walk away.


View Profile
January 05, 2017, 06:08:02 PM
 #704


What do you not understand about fossils that are older than 6000 years  Cheesy

Why do you believe God wrote the Bible?
Because someone told you so?

Well, we're telling you otherwise  Cheesy

Here's a reasonable answer to that. God made it to appear older to us even tho is not to test our faith in him.

The furthest we can go back with any certainty is 4,500 years. The rest is guesswork. You will see this when you delve into what the basic archaeologists say. Everything that is not archaeology - like astronomy, meteors, geology - is based in theory. It is not known to be fact. the best we have is the Bible record.

God directed the writing of the Bible because, it could not come into being without god directing it. Check into the history of how the Bible came into being, and you will see that the whole operation of its being written could not have happened according to the laws of probability.

Do the research first, before you make up your mind decisively. It is important to your salvation.

Cool

So counting of tree rings to 9700+ does not count?


No because back in the olden days trees grew five rings a year. LOL

 Christians just make shit up as they go along.


I became silent within and meditated on the subject and pressing question of the tree rings and then I had a revelation that came to me from the Lord of the Tree Rings. Wanna know what He whispered in my ear? (He said it's OK I can share the secret - it'll be out anyways soon enough) - ONLY ONE RING PER YEAR   He had divinely ordained this to be an Infallible Universal Constant. There you have it.  Cheesy


We can stop worrying now, the lord of the rings has spoken. ROFL

I think it is in the Bible: Leviticus 20:13

"If a man puts one ring on his trunk and lies with a male as with a woman once per year, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them."

It is of course up to interpretation...Some Christian and Muslim scholars think "it really means that trees add one ring per year, and it is ok to cut trees during full moon (as aligned with the menstrual cycle of your female slaves)"

But when in doubt, you have to consult with BADecker, he is an in-house guru on Bible interpretations and has broad Bronze Age knowledge in general.


That's because BADecker is from the Bronze Age. I have a theory about that.

Doctor Who went back to the Bronze Age chasing Daleks and used the chameleon circuit in the Tardis to make it look like a preteen girl. BADecker walked by the Tardis. While he was attempting to rape the girl (which was actually the Tardis) to give her an immaculate conception he fell in the Tardis and was transported to our time by accident.

Not really understanding anything about modern society, BADecker was placed in a mental institution after he was caught helping a couple of 60 year old gray haired catholic priests rape some teenaged boys. The hospital he resides in has a computer therapy program that allows him to access this forum where he continues to rape by buggering the logic and reasoning out of the brains of forum members.


Edit: Dr Who fans will know what I'm talking about.

ImHash
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 924
Merit: 506


View Profile
January 05, 2017, 06:15:18 PM
 #705

Beside the usual butt hurts and pissing contest now is it really time for a 6000 years old earth? not to mention the idiots flat earthers Smiley
I don't know what they've learned in school, I blame their teachers.
CoinCube
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055



View Profile
January 05, 2017, 07:08:49 PM
 #706

Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem:
The #1 Mathematical Discovery of the 20th Century

https://www.perrymarshall.com/articles/religion/godels-incompleteness-theorem/
Quote from: Perry Marshal
In 1931, the young mathematician Kurt Gödel made a landmark discovery, as powerful as anything Albert Einstein developed.

Gödel’s discovery not only applied to mathematics but literally all branches of science, logic and human knowledge. It has truly earth-shattering implications.

Oddly, few people know anything about it.

Allow me to tell you the story.

Mathematicians love proofs. They were hot and bothered for centuries, because they were unable to PROVE some of the things they knew were true.

So for example if you studied high school Geometry, you’ve done the exercises where you prove all kinds of things about triangles based on a list of theorems.

That high school geometry book is built on Euclid’s five postulates. Everyone knows the postulates are true, but in 2500 years nobody’s figured out a way to prove them.

Yes, it does seem perfectly reasonable that a line can be extended infinitely in both directions, but no one has been able to PROVE that. We can only demonstrate that they are a reasonable, and in fact necessary, set of 5 assumptions.

Towering mathematical geniuses were frustrated for 2000+ years because they couldn’t prove all their theorems. There were many things that were “obviously” true but nobody could figure out a way to prove them.

In the early 1900’s, however, a tremendous sense of optimism began to grow in mathematical circles. The most brilliant mathematicians in the world (like Bertrand Russell, David Hilbert and Ludwig Wittgenstein) were convinced that they were rapidly closing in on a final synthesis.

A unifying “Theory of Everything” that would finally nail down all the loose ends. Mathematics would be complete, bulletproof, airtight, triumphant.

In 1931 this young Austrian mathematician, Kurt Gödel, published a paper that once and for all PROVED that a single Theory Of Everything is actually impossible.

Gödel’s discovery was called “The Incompleteness Theorem.”

If you’ll give me just a few minutes, I’ll explain what it says, how Gödel discovered it, and what it means – in plain, simple English that anyone can understand.

Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem says:

“Anything you can draw a circle around cannot explain itself without referring to something outside the circle – something you have to assume but cannot prove.”

You can draw a circle around all of the concepts in your high school geometry book. But they’re all built on Euclid’s 5 postulates which are clearly true but cannot be proven. Those 5 postulates are outside the book, outside the circle.

You can draw a circle around a bicycle but the existence of that bicycle relies on a factory that is outside that circle. The bicycle cannot explain itself.

Gödel proved that there are ALWAYS more things that are true than you can prove. Any system of logic or numbers that mathematicians ever came up with will always rest on at least a few unprovable assumptions.

Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem applies not just to math, but to everything that is subject to the laws of logic. Incompleteness is true in math; it’s equally true in science or language or philosophy.

And: If the universe is mathematical and logical, Incompleteness also applies to the universe.

Gödel created his proof by starting with “The Liar’s Paradox” — which is the statement

“I am lying.”

“I am lying” is self-contradictory, since if it’s true, I’m not a liar, and it’s false; and if it’s false, I am a liar, so it’s true.

So Gödel, in one of the most ingenious moves in the history of math, converted the Liar’s Paradox into a mathematical formula. He proved that any statement requires an external observer.

No statement alone can completely prove itself true.

His Incompleteness Theorem was a devastating blow to the “positivism” of the time. Gödel proved his theorem in black and white and nobody could argue with his logic.

Yet some of his fellow mathematicians went to their graves in denial, believing that somehow or another Gödel must surely be wrong.

He wasn’t wrong. It was really true. There are more things than are true than you can prove.

A “theory of everything” – whether in math, or physics, or philosophy – will never be found. Because it is impossible.

OK, so what does this really mean? Why is this super-important, and not just an interesting geek factoid?

Here’s what it means:

  • Faith and Reason are not enemies. In fact, the exact opposite is true! One is absolutely necessary for the other to exist. All reasoning ultimately traces back to faith in something that you cannot prove.
  • All closed systems depend on something outside the system.
  • You can always draw a bigger circle but there will still be something outside the circle.

  • Reasoning inward from a larger circle to a smaller circle is “deductive reasoning.”

Example of a deductive reasoning:
1. All men are mortal
2. Socrates is a man
3. Therefore Socrates is mortal

  • Reasoning outward from a smaller circle to a larger circle is “inductive reasoning.

Examples of inductive reasoning:
1. All the men I know are mortal
2. Therefore all men are mortal

1. When I let go of objects, they fall
2. Therefore there is a law of gravity that governs falling objects

Notice than when you move from the smaller circle to the larger circle, you have to make assumptions that you cannot 100% prove.

For example you cannot PROVE gravity will always be consistent at all times. You can only observe that it’s consistently true every time. You cannot prove that the universe is rational. You can only observe that mathematical formulas like E=MC^2 do seem to perfectly describe what the universe does.

Nearly all scientific laws are based on inductive reasoning. These laws rest on an assumption that the universe is logical and based on fixed discoverable laws.

You cannot PROVE this. (You can’t prove that the sun will come up tomorrow morning either.) You literally have to take it on faith. In fact most people don’t know that outside the science circle is a philosophy circle. Science is based on philosophical assumptions that you cannot scientifically prove. Actually, the scientific method cannot prove, it can only infer.

(Science originally came from the idea that God made an orderly universe which obeys fixed, discoverable laws.)

Now please consider what happens when we draw the biggest circle possibly can – around the whole universe. (If there are multiple universes, we’re drawing a circle around all of them too):

  • There has to be something outside that circle. Something which we have to assume but cannot prove
  • The universe as we know it is finite – finite matter, finite energy, finite space and 13.7 billion years time
  • The universe is mathematical. Any physical system subjected to measurement performs arithmetic. (You don’t need to know math to do addition – you can use an abacus instead and it will give you the right answer every time.)
  • The universe (all matter, energy, space and time) cannot explain itself
  • Whatever is outside the biggest circle is boundless. By definition it is not possible to draw a circle around it.
  • If we draw a circle around all matter, energy, space and time and apply Gödel’s theorem, then we know what is outside that circle is not matter, is not energy, is not space and is not time. It’s immaterial.
  • Whatever is outside the biggest circle is not a system – i.e. is not an assemblage of parts. Otherwise we could draw a circle around them. The thing outside the biggest circle is indivisible.
  • Whatever is outside the biggest circle is an uncaused cause, because you can always draw a circle around an effect.

We can apply the same inductive reasoning to the Origin of Information:

  • In the history of the universe we also see the introduction of information, some 3.5 billion years ago. It came in the form of the Genetic code, which is symbolic and immaterial.
  • The information appears to have come from the outside, since information is not known to be an inherent property of matter, energy, space or time
  • All codes we know the origin of are designed by conscious beings.
  • Therefore whatever is outside the largest circle is a conscious being.

My book Evolution 2.0: Breaking the Deadlock Between Darwin and Design explores the Origin of Information question in depth.

When we add information to the equation, we conclude that not only is the thing outside the biggest circle infinite and immaterial, it is also conscious.

Isn’t it interesting how all these things sound suspiciously similar to how theologians have described God for thousands of years?

So it’s hardly surprising that 80-90% of the people in the world believe in some concept of God. Yes, it’s intuitive to most folks. But Gödel’s theorem indicates it’s also supremely logical. In fact it’s the only position one can take and stay in the realm of reason and logic.

The person who proudly proclaims, “You’re a man of faith, but I’m a man of science” doesn’t understand the roots of science or the nature of knowledge!

Interesting aside…

If you visit the world’s largest atheist website, Infidels, on the home page you will find the following statement:

“Naturalism is the hypothesis that the natural world is a closed system, which means that nothing that is not part of the natural world affects it.”

If you know Gödel’s theorem, you know that all logical systems must rely on something outside the system. So according to Gödel’s Incompleteness theorem, the Infidels cannot be correct. If the universe is logical, it has an outside cause.

Thus atheism violates the laws of reason and logic.

Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem definitively proves that science can never fill its own gaps. We have no choice but to look outside of science for answers.

The Incompleteness of the universe isn’t proof that God exists. But… it IS proof that in order to construct a rational, scientific model of the universe, belief in God is not just 100% logical… it’s necessary.

Euclid’s 5 postulates aren’t formally provable and God is not formally provable either. But… just as you cannot build a coherent system of geometry without Euclid’s 5 postulates, neither can you build a coherent description of the universe without a First Cause and a Source of order.

Thus faith and science are not enemies, but allies. It’s been true for hundreds of years, but in 1931 this skinny young Austrian mathematician named Kurt Gödel proved it.

No time in the history of mankind has faith in God been more reasonable, more logical, or more thoroughly supported by science and mathematics.

“Without mathematics we cannot penetrate deeply into philosophy.
Without philosophy we cannot penetrate deeply into mathematics.
Without both we cannot penetrate deeply into anything.”

-Leibniz

“Math is the language God wrote the universe in.

Mersedes
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 223
Merit: 250



View Profile
January 05, 2017, 07:15:00 PM
 #707

I do not believe that God exists. If he was and could really influence the situation in the world is it would be in a world of so many wars and injustice? I'm not talking about the fact that eve was made from Adam's rib.
popcorn1
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218
Merit: 1027


View Profile
January 05, 2017, 07:57:05 PM
 #708

Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem:
The #1 Mathematical Discovery of the 20th Century

https://www.perrymarshall.com/articles/religion/godels-incompleteness-theorem/
Quote from: Perry Marshal
In 1931, the young mathematician Kurt Gödel made a landmark discovery, as powerful as anything Albert Einstein developed.

Gödel’s discovery not only applied to mathematics but literally all branches of science, logic and human knowledge. It has truly earth-shattering implications.

Oddly, few people know anything about it.

Allow me to tell you the story.

Mathematicians love proofs. They were hot and bothered for centuries, because they were unable to PROVE some of the things they knew were true.

So for example if you studied high school Geometry, you’ve done the exercises where you prove all kinds of things about triangles based on a list of theorems.

That high school geometry book is built on Euclid’s five postulates. Everyone knows the postulates are true, but in 2500 years nobody’s figured out a way to prove them.

Yes, it does seem perfectly reasonable that a line can be extended infinitely in both directions, but no one has been able to PROVE that. We can only demonstrate that they are a reasonable, and in fact necessary, set of 5 assumptions.

Towering mathematical geniuses were frustrated for 2000+ years because they couldn’t prove all their theorems. There were many things that were “obviously” true but nobody could figure out a way to prove them.

In the early 1900’s, however, a tremendous sense of optimism began to grow in mathematical circles. The most brilliant mathematicians in the world (like Bertrand Russell, David Hilbert and Ludwig Wittgenstein) were convinced that they were rapidly closing in on a final synthesis.

A unifying “Theory of Everything” that would finally nail down all the loose ends. Mathematics would be complete, bulletproof, airtight, triumphant.

In 1931 this young Austrian mathematician, Kurt Gödel, published a paper that once and for all PROVED that a single Theory Of Everything is actually impossible.

Gödel’s discovery was called “The Incompleteness Theorem.”

If you’ll give me just a few minutes, I’ll explain what it says, how Gödel discovered it, and what it means – in plain, simple English that anyone can understand.

Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem says:

“Anything you can draw a circle around cannot explain itself without referring to something outside the circle – something you have to assume but cannot prove.”

You can draw a circle around all of the concepts in your high school geometry book. But they’re all built on Euclid’s 5 postulates which are clearly true but cannot be proven. Those 5 postulates are outside the book, outside the circle.

You can draw a circle around a bicycle but the existence of that bicycle relies on a factory that is outside that circle. The bicycle cannot explain itself.

Gödel proved that there are ALWAYS more things that are true than you can prove. Any system of logic or numbers that mathematicians ever came up with will always rest on at least a few unprovable assumptions.

Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem applies not just to math, but to everything that is subject to the laws of logic. Incompleteness is true in math; it’s equally true in science or language or philosophy.

And: If the universe is mathematical and logical, Incompleteness also applies to the universe.

Gödel created his proof by starting with “The Liar’s Paradox” — which is the statement

“I am lying.”

“I am lying” is self-contradictory, since if it’s true, I’m not a liar, and it’s false; and if it’s false, I am a liar, so it’s true.

So Gödel, in one of the most ingenious moves in the history of math, converted the Liar’s Paradox into a mathematical formula. He proved that any statement requires an external observer.

No statement alone can completely prove itself true.

His Incompleteness Theorem was a devastating blow to the “positivism” of the time. Gödel proved his theorem in black and white and nobody could argue with his logic.

Yet some of his fellow mathematicians went to their graves in denial, believing that somehow or another Gödel must surely be wrong.

He wasn’t wrong. It was really true. There are more things than are true than you can prove.

A “theory of everything” – whether in math, or physics, or philosophy – will never be found. Because it is impossible.

OK, so what does this really mean? Why is this super-important, and not just an interesting geek factoid?

Here’s what it means:

  • Faith and Reason are not enemies. In fact, the exact opposite is true! One is absolutely necessary for the other to exist. All reasoning ultimately traces back to faith in something that you cannot prove.
  • All closed systems depend on something outside the system.
  • You can always draw a bigger circle but there will still be something outside the circle.

  • Reasoning inward from a larger circle to a smaller circle is “deductive reasoning.”

Example of a deductive reasoning:
1. All men are mortal
2. Socrates is a man
3. Therefore Socrates is mortal

  • Reasoning outward from a smaller circle to a larger circle is “inductive reasoning.

Examples of inductive reasoning:
1. All the men I know are mortal
2. Therefore all men are mortal

1. When I let go of objects, they fall
2. Therefore there is a law of gravity that governs falling objects

Notice than when you move from the smaller circle to the larger circle, you have to make assumptions that you cannot 100% prove.

For example you cannot PROVE gravity will always be consistent at all times. You can only observe that it’s consistently true every time. You cannot prove that the universe is rational. You can only observe that mathematical formulas like E=MC^2 do seem to perfectly describe what the universe does.

Nearly all scientific laws are based on inductive reasoning. These laws rest on an assumption that the universe is logical and based on fixed discoverable laws.

You cannot PROVE this. (You can’t prove that the sun will come up tomorrow morning either.) You literally have to take it on faith. In fact most people don’t know that outside the science circle is a philosophy circle. Science is based on philosophical assumptions that you cannot scientifically prove. Actually, the scientific method cannot prove, it can only infer.

(Science originally came from the idea that God made an orderly universe which obeys fixed, discoverable laws.)

Now please consider what happens when we draw the biggest circle possibly can – around the whole universe. (If there are multiple universes, we’re drawing a circle around all of them too):

  • There has to be something outside that circle. Something which we have to assume but cannot prove
  • The universe as we know it is finite – finite matter, finite energy, finite space and 13.7 billion years time
  • The universe is mathematical. Any physical system subjected to measurement performs arithmetic. (You don’t need to know math to do addition – you can use an abacus instead and it will give you the right answer every time.)
  • The universe (all matter, energy, space and time) cannot explain itself
  • Whatever is outside the biggest circle is boundless. By definition it is not possible to draw a circle around it.
  • If we draw a circle around all matter, energy, space and time and apply Gödel’s theorem, then we know what is outside that circle is not matter, is not energy, is not space and is not time. It’s immaterial.
  • Whatever is outside the biggest circle is not a system – i.e. is not an assemblage of parts. Otherwise we could draw a circle around them. The thing outside the biggest circle is indivisible.
  • Whatever is outside the biggest circle is an uncaused cause, because you can always draw a circle around an effect.

We can apply the same inductive reasoning to the Origin of Information:

  • In the history of the universe we also see the introduction of information, some 3.5 billion years ago. It came in the form of the Genetic code, which is symbolic and immaterial.
  • The information appears to have come from the outside, since information is not known to be an inherent property of matter, energy, space or time
  • All codes we know the origin of are designed by conscious beings.
  • Therefore whatever is outside the largest circle is a conscious being.

My book Evolution 2.0: Breaking the Deadlock Between Darwin and Design explores the Origin of Information question in depth.

When we add information to the equation, we conclude that not only is the thing outside the biggest circle infinite and immaterial, it is also conscious.

Isn’t it interesting how all these things sound suspiciously similar to how theologians have described God for thousands of years?

So it’s hardly surprising that 80-90% of the people in the world believe in some concept of God. Yes, it’s intuitive to most folks. But Gödel’s theorem indicates it’s also supremely logical. In fact it’s the only position one can take and stay in the realm of reason and logic.

The person who proudly proclaims, “You’re a man of faith, but I’m a man of science” doesn’t understand the roots of science or the nature of knowledge!

Interesting aside…

If you visit the world’s largest atheist website, Infidels, on the home page you will find the following statement:

“Naturalism is the hypothesis that the natural world is a closed system, which means that nothing that is not part of the natural world affects it.”

If you know Gödel’s theorem, you know that all logical systems must rely on something outside the system. So according to Gödel’s Incompleteness theorem, the Infidels cannot be correct. If the universe is logical, it has an outside cause.

Thus atheism violates the laws of reason and logic.

Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem definitively proves that science can never fill its own gaps. We have no choice but to look outside of science for answers.

The Incompleteness of the universe isn’t proof that God exists. But… it IS proof that in order to construct a rational, scientific model of the universe, belief in God is not just 100% logical… it’s necessary.

Euclid’s 5 postulates aren’t formally provable and God is not formally provable either. But… just as you cannot build a coherent system of geometry without Euclid’s 5 postulates, neither can you build a coherent description of the universe without a First Cause and a Source of order.

Thus faith and science are not enemies, but allies. It’s been true for hundreds of years, but in 1931 this skinny young Austrian mathematician named Kurt Gödel proved it.

No time in the history of mankind has faith in God been more reasonable, more logical, or more thoroughly supported by science and mathematics.


Without philosophy we cannot penetrate deeply into mathematics.
WHY?..




-Leibniz

“Math is the language God wrote the universe in.

So who is your god?..
The god we all read in the bible?..No1
Something made all this so must be a god?..I.E you made your own god up?..No2

What is it 1 or 2..

See the trouble is your reading olden day thinkers..
WHAT WE THINKS YESTERDAY IS NOT WHAT WE THINKS TODAY Grin..
No time in the history of mankind has faith in God been more reasonable, more logical, or more thoroughly supported by science and mathematics. YESTERDAY THINKING..

Without philosophy we cannot penetrate deeply into mathematics.
No need to philosophy it either adds up or it doesn't mathematics.
CoinCube
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055



View Profile
January 05, 2017, 08:10:35 PM
 #709

So who is your god?..
The god we all read in the bible?..No1
Something made all this so must be a god?..I.E you made your own god up?..No2

What is it 1 or 2..

See the trouble is your reading olden day thinkers..
WHAT WE THINKS YESTERDAY IS NOT WHAT WE THINKS TODAY Grin..
No time in the history of mankind has faith in God been more reasonable, more logical, or more thoroughly supported by science and mathematics. YESTERDAY THINKING..

Without philosophy we cannot penetrate deeply into mathematics.
No need to philosophy it either adds up or it doesn't mathematics.

Personally I believe Ethical Monotheism is true.

I also agree with the criticisms in the link above of all three faiths Judaism, Islam, and Christianity.

Klima
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 240
Merit: 250



View Profile
January 05, 2017, 08:20:51 PM
 #710

So who is your god?..
The god we all read in the bible?..No1
Something made all this so must be a god?..I.E you made your own god up?..No2

What is it 1 or 2..

See the trouble is your reading olden day thinkers..
WHAT WE THINKS YESTERDAY IS NOT WHAT WE THINKS TODAY Grin..
No time in the history of mankind has faith in God been more reasonable, more logical, or more thoroughly supported by science and mathematics. YESTERDAY THINKING..

Without philosophy we cannot penetrate deeply into mathematics.
No need to philosophy it either adds up or it doesn't mathematics.

Personally I believe Ethical Monotheism is true.

I also agree with the criticisms in the link above of all three faiths Judaism, Islam, and Christianity.
I did not understand the philosophy to mathematics? Philosophy is the science which teaches us to argue. A philosopher can be any. But mathematics is an exact science of numbers. There will not be able to go different ways. Any mistake leads to collapse.
CoinCube
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055



View Profile
January 05, 2017, 08:31:27 PM
 #711

I did not understand the philosophy to mathematics? Philosophy is the science which teaches us to argue. A philosopher can be any. But mathematics is an exact science of numbers. There will not be able to go different ways. Any mistake leads to collapse.

Klima that is a deep question and one I am not really qualified to answer but I believe you will find the following link helpful.

PHILOSOPHY, MATHEMATICS AND STRUCTURE
http://web.maths.unsw.edu.au/~jim/interview.html

Klima
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 240
Merit: 250



View Profile
January 05, 2017, 08:41:56 PM
 #712

So who is your god?..
The god we all read in the bible?..No1
Something made all this so must be a god?..I.E you made your own god up?..No2

What is it 1 or 2..

See the trouble is your reading olden day thinkers..
WHAT WE THINKS YESTERDAY IS NOT WHAT WE THINKS TODAY Grin..
No time in the history of mankind has faith in God been more reasonable, more logical, or more thoroughly supported by science and mathematics. YESTERDAY THINKING..

Without philosophy we cannot penetrate deeply into mathematics.
No need to philosophy it either adds up or it doesn't mathematics.

Personally I believe Ethical Monotheism is true.

I also agree with the criticisms in the link above of all three faiths Judaism, Islam, and Christianity.

I used to believe in God (because my parents, my teachers told me), then I turned 12.

You can believe whatever you want, it will not make it true.

Just don't tell me there is some wisdom in Bronze Age or 6th century "holy" books, or that the Earth is 6000 years old, and the universe was created in 6 days.  That should offend anyone with half a brain.

We all know why these books were written.

Do a test: ask your all powerful God to appear in front of you.  See what happens.

If that does not work, ask him to post in this thread. :-)



Not a God in any way because it is not. If you believe in God, then tell me do you keep all the commandments? Don't believe it. I am sure that there. You yourself said that you believe only because you were taught by parents since the age of 12. And their opinions don't you?
CoinCube
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055



View Profile
January 05, 2017, 08:50:58 PM
 #713

I used to believe in God (because my parents, my teachers told me to), then I turned 12.

You can believe whatever you want, it will not make it true.

Just don't tell me there is some wisdom in Bronze Age or 6th century "holy" books, or that the Earth is 6000 years old, and the universe was created in 6 days.  That should offend anyone with half a brain.

We all know why these books were written.

Do a test: ask your all powerful God to appear in front of you.  See what happens.

If that does not work, ask him to post in this thread. :-)


You may find my recent posts in the Economic Devastation thread helpful regarding the relationship between freedom and knowledge.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=355212.msg17390583#msg17390583

popcorn1
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218
Merit: 1027


View Profile
January 05, 2017, 09:01:13 PM
 #714

So who is your god?..
The god we all read in the bible?..No1
Something made all this so must be a god?..I.E you made your own god up?..No2

What is it 1 or 2..

See the trouble is your reading olden day thinkers..
WHAT WE THINKS YESTERDAY IS NOT WHAT WE THINKS TODAY Grin..
No time in the history of mankind has faith in God been more reasonable, more logical, or more thoroughly supported by science and mathematics. YESTERDAY THINKING..

Without philosophy we cannot penetrate deeply into mathematics.
No need to philosophy it either adds up or it doesn't mathematics.

Personally I believe Ethical Monotheism is true.

I also agree with the criticisms in the link above of all three faiths Judaism, Islam, and Christianity.
I did not understand the philosophy to mathematics? Philosophy is the science which teaches us to argue. A philosopher can be any. But mathematics is an exact science of numbers. There will not be able to go different ways. Any mistake leads to collapse.
Ethical monotheism means two things:

1. There is one God from whom emanates one morality for all humanity.
2. God's primary demand of people is that they act decently toward one another.

So how does god make you act decently toward one another..Does he tell you himself or a human?..
Remember it's your belief Ethical monotheism..

Have you ever been hurt?..would you like to do it to someone else?..
You learn off your pain and make sure your off spring don't feel it Wink..AM I GOD..

You learn off your pain and give it to your off spring YOUR AN ASS HOLE..

That's how we learn to be nice and respect each other..
The pain from the past helps us to stop the pain for the future  Wink..

The same goes for happiness we learn how to be happy and pass that happiness on to the future..
CoinCube
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055



View Profile
January 05, 2017, 09:15:05 PM
 #715

Ethical monotheism means two things:

1. There is one God from whom emanates one morality for all humanity.
2. God's primary demand of people is that they act decently toward one another.

So how does god make you act decently toward one another..Does he tell you himself or a human?..
Remember it's your belief Ethical monotheism..

...

popcorn1 to understand how a belief in God leads us to act decently towards one another I recommend the following very short (5 minute) video clip.

Freedom and Moral Self-Control


BADecker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3976
Merit: 1382


View Profile
January 05, 2017, 09:27:46 PM
 #716

I used to believe in God (because my parents, my teachers told me to), then I turned 12.

You can believe whatever you want, it will not make it true.

Just don't tell me there is some wisdom in Bronze Age or 6th century "holy" books, or that the Earth is 6000 years old, and the universe was created in 6 days.  That should offend anyone with half a brain.

We all know why these books were written.

Do a test: ask your all powerful God to appear in front of you.  See what happens.

If that does not work, ask him to post in this thread. :-)


You may find my recent posts in the Economic Devastation thread helpful regarding the relationship between freedom and knowledge.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=355212.msg17390583#msg17390583


Internet was definitely disruptive.  We are experiencing the ripple effects of that.  Knowledge is shared instantaneously.
It does increases our choices in life, and it does help us understand the world around us better.  Governments are behind
the ball on this one.

Another disruptive technology that is just emerging is AI.  Once our brains are fully mapped and duplicated in silicon, that is when the real fun will begin.  If we play it right, we might survive it as a human species and live in some hybrid form,
otherwise we'll go straight to silicon and holograms.

The biggest problem we face is not whether the supernatural daddy exists, but the exponential population growth.
We need new sources of energy pronto!  So put away your Quran and Bible, and read Physics and Calculus textbooks.

Religion will not solve our future problems.  Science might.



The Internet disruption is saving us from becoming slaves to the people who pull the strings in Government. We must remain watchful, or they will use the Internet against us. They are trying to do this by labeling true news as fake news, even though their news is the fake news.

Cool

Covid is snake venom. Dr. Bryan Ardis https://thedrardisshow.com/ - Search on 'Bryan Ardis' at these links https://www.bitchute.com/, https://www.brighteon.com/, https://rumble.com/, https://banned.video/.
BADecker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3976
Merit: 1382


View Profile
January 05, 2017, 09:30:54 PM
 #717

What do you not understand about fossils that are older than 6000 years  Cheesy

Why do you believe God wrote the Bible?
Because someone told you so?

Well, we're telling you otherwise  Cheesy

Here's a reasonable answer to that. God made it to appear older to us even tho is not to test our faith in him.

The furthest we can go back with any certainty is 4,500 years. The rest is guesswork. You will see this when you delve into what the basic archaeologists say. Everything that is not archaeology - like astronomy, meteors, geology - is based in theory. It is not known to be fact. the best we have is the Bible record.

God directed the writing of the Bible because, it could not come into being without god directing it. Check into the history of how the Bible came into being, and you will see that the whole operation of its being written could not have happened according to the laws of probability.

Do the research first, before you make up your mind decisively. It is important to your salvation.

Cool

So counting of tree rings to 9700+ does not count?


No because back in the olden days trees grew five rings a year. LOL

 Christians just make shit up as they go along.


I became silent within and meditated on the subject and pressing question of the tree rings and then I had a revelation that came to me from the Lord of the Tree Rings. Wanna know what He whispered in my ear? (He said it's OK I can share the secret - it'll be out anyways soon enough) - ONLY ONE RING PER YEAR   He had divinely ordained this to be an Infallible Universal Constant. There you have it.  Cheesy


We can stop worrying now, the lord of the rings has spoken. ROFL

I think it is in the Bible: Leviticus 20:13

"If a man puts one ring on his trunk and lies with a male as with a woman once per year, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them."

It is of course up to interpretation...Some Christian and Muslim scholars think "it really means that trees add one ring per year, and it is ok to cut trees during full moon (as aligned with the menstrual cycle of your female slaves)"

But when in doubt, you have to consult with BADecker, he is an in-house guru on Bible interpretations and has broad Bronze Age knowledge in general.


That's because BADecker is from the Bronze Age. I have a theory about that.

Doctor Who went back to the Bronze Age chasing Daleks and used the chameleon circuit in the Tardis to make it look like a preteen girl. BADecker walked by the Tardis. While he was attempting to rape the girl (which was actually the Tardis) to give her an immaculate conception he fell in the Tardis and was transported to our time by accident.

Not really understanding anything about modern society, BADecker was placed in a mental institution after he was caught helping a couple of 60 year old gray haired catholic priests rape some teenaged boys. The hospital he resides in has a computer therapy program that allows him to access this forum where he continues to rape by buggering the logic and reasoning out of the brains of forum members.


Edit: Dr Who fans will know what I'm talking about.

Well thank you, QuestionAuthority.

Of course, since you think I am from the Bronze age, that means that I have the most insight into what happened back then... At least in your thinking.

So, thanks for believing what I say.

 Grin

Covid is snake venom. Dr. Bryan Ardis https://thedrardisshow.com/ - Search on 'Bryan Ardis' at these links https://www.bitchute.com/, https://www.brighteon.com/, https://rumble.com/, https://banned.video/.
popcorn1
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218
Merit: 1027


View Profile
January 05, 2017, 09:57:39 PM
 #718

Ethical monotheism means two things:

1. There is one God from whom emanates one morality for all humanity.
2. God's primary demand of people is that they act decently toward one another.

So how does god make you act decently toward one another..Does he tell you himself or a human?..
Remember it's your belief Ethical monotheism..

...

popcorn1 to understand how a belief in God leads us to act decently towards one another I recommend the following very short (5 minute) video clip.

Freedom and Moral Self-Control


So god give us the 10 commandments so why did he hurt Jesus his own son?..

Very short 2.33 minute video clip.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n6NPq_kPSUM

21st century thinking..Learn something..https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jph2qWXJ-Tk
CoinCube
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055



View Profile
January 05, 2017, 10:09:15 PM
 #719


So god give us the 10 commandments so why did he hurt Jesus his own son?..

Very short 2.33 minute video clip.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n6NPq_kPSUM

21st century thinking..Learn something..https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jph2qWXJ-Tk

If you wish answers to questions of Christian theology you will need to seek them from someone more knowledgeable on that topic then I.

However, in regards to the Star Trek episode reason alone is an inadequate tool when it comes to morality because evil is often rational.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryA8PafooQ4


popcorn1
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218
Merit: 1027


View Profile
January 06, 2017, 12:02:35 AM
 #720


So god give us the 10 commandments so why did he hurt Jesus his own son?..

Very short 2.33 minute video clip.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n6NPq_kPSUM

21st century thinking..Learn something..https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jph2qWXJ-Tk

If you wish answers to questions of Christian theology you will need to seek them from someone more knowledgeable on that topic then I.

However, in regards to the Star Trek episode reason alone is an inadequate tool when it comes to morality because evil is often rational.FIGHT FIRE WITH FIRE Grin..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryA8PafooQ4


Your watching videos of a nutcase Wink..
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 [36] 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 ... 189 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!