Scientific proof that God exists?

[calme]

Too late; I'd already thought of it. In the future, perhaps consider telling me in advance instead of trying to brainwash me retroactively.

[1715402541]

1715402541

[1715402541]

1715402541

[1715402541]

1715402541

[1715402541]

1715402541

[1715402541]

1715402541

[Decksperiment]

Too late; I'd already thought of it. In the future, perhaps consider telling me in advance instead of trying to brainwash me retroactively.

Um, where did you come into it? Did I ever refer to you, or are you just assuming, noting that assumption is the mother of all fuck up's?

[calme]

I'm sorry. You are the one who is right. It is I who is wrong. Thankfully, Jesus will forgive me.

[Decksperiment]

I'm sorry. You are the one who is right. It is I who is wrong. Thankfully, Jesus will forgive me.

Wow.. pray tell me, what is the opposite of right, just remind me?

Edit: It's easier for me to say this is not the conversation I'm into, where I live, your not right or wrong, just perhaps mistaken

[calme]

I'm sorry. You are the one who is right. It is I who is wrong. Thankfully, Jesus will forgive me.

Wow.. pray tell me, what is the opposite of right, just remind me?

http://www.thesaurus.com/browse/right/adjective

[Decksperiment]

I'm sorry. You are the one who is right. It is I who is wrong. Thankfully, Jesus will forgive me.

Wow.. pray tell me, what is the opposite of right, just remind me?

http://www.thesaurus.com/browse/right/adjective

I dunno if your aware of my previous threads (not tonights), but I dont do external links.. I dont have facebook, twitter, or any other account online except email, and even thats gone thanks to nsa weirdos who like to spy on my priv msg's.. at least face to face still works here lol

I was gambling on two things, left or wrong.

Just to distract the misunderstanding and move on

[calme]

Giving the response "wrong" seemed like a potential trap, so I linked to antonyms for "right," which of course lists "wrong."

[Decksperiment]

Giving the response "wrong" seemed like a potential trap, so I linked to antonyms for "right," which of course lists "wrong."

To technical for me m8, it's 7.15am, but I'll say I wwould have said left.. ah well.. it did'nt work..

[calme]

No problem. Jesus still loves you. Be sure to freshen up a bit before church this morning!

[BADecker]

Unfortunately, people who have steeped themselves in a particular religion, mostly find it difficult to set it aside when they find out it is a false religion.

Can you compile a list for us all of all these false religions?
How do you recognise a false religion?

No, I probably couldn't. I would probably miss at least a few. Besides, I don't have the time that it would take to investigate and compile. You could probably search Wikipedia for a list of main ones.

Well, with Christianity all around you, and with all the talk about the Bible I have been doing in this thread, start there, the Bible, and ask God to direct you on your journey into this kind of religious seeking.

But you have to be sincere in your testing for God. Ask Him to prove Himself to you if He really exists. But do it from the standpoint of really asking sincerely. He doesn't cater to people who are simply playing around or attempting to mock Him.

I would be particularly interested to hear you respond *directly* to his question about how you are able to recognize a false religion.

The direct instructions for such would probably be similar to the instructions Moses gave the people of Israel for determining if a prophet was a prophet of the Lord, or a false prophet. This would be to match the things that he said with what happened. You could say similar about matching a religion with the way things work.

In fact, in this and other threads, I have been pointing out that the things we call science don't always match all the scientific ideas that should be applied to them. A lot of what we call science (I'm not talking about pure science, or the scientific method, here) simply doesn't have enough information behind it to say that it is absolute truth, or often very near the truth.

The Bible is full of prophecies that were fulfilled. There are others that have not been fulfilled yet. Other religions have few prophecy listings, and few that are fulfilled. One of the greatest prophesies of the Bible that has been fulfilled is that of the fall of Israel as a nation because they disobeyed God. The fall lasted around 1,900 years. They have only come back according to other prophesy, and not with the glory that they held in the past.

Are you joking? Those "prophecies" are general and anyone with an IQ over 83 can make them. The roman empire fell, the byzantine empire fell, etc and etc, all of which were far, far more powerful than Israel could ever dreamed of being back then. All empires eventually fall, so that prophecy about Israel falling is laughable(I actually made a smirk when I was reading what you typed).


Now everyone reading this can fully conclude that everything you've said has been bullshit with this statement: "One of the greatest prophesies of the Bible that has been fulfilled is that of the fall of Israel as a nation because they disobeyed God. The fall lasted around 1,900 years"

Thank you for typing that.

You poor child. Having a bad day, right? You have just found out about Bible prophesy, and since there isn't anything you can say to contradict it, you simply yammer.

Why?

Imagine a scenario for a moment, one that doesn't have anything to do with this thread. Imagine that you had used the product, Duralube, in the past, and found that it didn't work. Next, let's say that you just found out that there was a special way you had to add it to your car, and that if you did this simple little "trick," it would literally triple your mpg. If you were an average driver, and if you tested it and found out it worked, wouldn't you use it? I mean, maybe you are the kind of person who loves to help support the gasoline companies. So, maybe you personally wouldn't use Duralube, even if it worked this well. So, what's your problem with Bible prophesy?

Here, I have found for you, a method that you can use to virtually prove to yourself that God is real, because nobody can make prophesy that is as accurate as that which is in the Bible. And all you have to do is Google "Bible prophesy" to prove to yourself that you can trust the God of the Bible for your own salvation to eternal life in Heaven with Him and many others, and you would rather throw it away?

God has left that up to you, of course. But it doesn't make any sense. Come. Join us in accepting the salvation that God offers through Jesus, that can virtually be found in no other place besides the miraculous Bible. Prove it to yourself that the Bible is the real deal, by checking out Bible prophesy in detail.

[BADecker]

Unfortunately, people who have steeped themselves in a particular religion, mostly find it difficult to set it aside when they find out it is a false religion.

Can you compile a list for us all of all these false religions?
How do you recognise a false religion?

No, I probably couldn't. I would probably miss at least a few. Besides, I don't have the time that it would take to investigate and compile. You could probably search Wikipedia for a list of main ones.

Well, with Christianity all around you, and with all the talk about the Bible I have been doing in this thread, start there, the Bible, and ask God to direct you on your journey into this kind of religious seeking.

But you have to be sincere in your testing for God. Ask Him to prove Himself to you if He really exists. But do it from the standpoint of really asking sincerely. He doesn't cater to people who are simply playing around or attempting to mock Him.

I would be particularly interested to hear you respond *directly* to his question about how you are able to recognize a false religion.

The direct instructions for such would probably be similar to the instructions Moses gave the people of Israel for determining if a prophet was a prophet of the Lord, or a false prophet. This would be to match the things that he said with what happened. You could say similar about matching a religion with the way things work.

In fact, in this and other threads, I have been pointing out that the things we call science don't always match all the scientific ideas that should be applied to them. A lot of what we call science (I'm not talking about pure science, or the scientific method, here) simply doesn't have enough information behind it to say that it is absolute truth, or often very near the truth.

The Bible is full of prophecies that were fulfilled. There are others that have not been fulfilled yet. Other religions have few prophecy listings, and few that are fulfilled. One of the greatest prophesies of the Bible that has been fulfilled is that of the fall of Israel as a nation because they disobeyed God. The fall lasted around 1,900 years. They have only come back according to other prophesy, and not with the glory that they held in the past.

Responding in order:

1) Logic fail.  You're shooting yourself in the foot again.  Let me get this straight - you think that the way to determine whether a religion is true or false is to first assume Christianity is true and then look to it for a method of distinguishing true religions from false ones?  What the heck kind of logic is that?  You're putting the cart way, way, WAY before the horse. 

The point here is that you can't just assume Christianity is true before you've subjected it to a method to determine whether it is true or false.  The result is that you are self-evidently using an illogical approach to determine whether Christianity is true rather than a logical one.

2) Stop contorting what science is.  When you say things like, "...A lot of what we call science (I'm not talking about pure science, or the scientific method, here)..." you are just talking out your rear.  The word 'science' has several concrete, established definitions.  When you start making up new definitions on the fly, you are simply demonstrating an inability to effectively communicate with others.

Type in "science definition" into Google and check the result.  The definitions that pop up are the only definitions applicable to 'science.'  When you use the word 'science,' it must be used according to those definitions.  If you don't, then you're simply not talking about science.  Period.

And, when you say "...the things we call science don't always match all the scientific ideas that should be applied to them..." I would remind you that you continue to demonstrate that you have no idea what science is (because you continually invent definitions for it).  It's pretty hard for the "things we call science" to match the "scientific ideas that should be applied to them" when you change the definition of what 'science' is but not the definition of 'pure science' or 'the scientific method.'  Your reasoning here is shockingly terrible.

3)  Talking about prophecies is irrelevant if you can't subject Christianity to the same method used to determine whether a religion is true or false. 

Lol.  A fall that lasted 1900 years?  Haha what the hell?  Are you joking?  Do you have any idea how stupid this sounds?

You finally came up against something that shows you what God is all about, and you just can't take it. I can accept that.

[BADecker]

If a priest believes what he is teaching to be true, does that make it the truth? Not necessarily. A lie is a lie even if it is told in good faith. So, we are back to square one.

What is your standard for truth,  BADecker?

Your response to the evidence for rebirth (silence)
is a lie (Concealment) told in bad faith
because just like others in this thread
You did not provide a simple and plausible explanation for this evidence.

Accordingly, i discern that the survival hypothesis is the simplest and most valid and rebirth is likely to be fact; in my opinion this is so unless you provide a simpler explanation as I have requested.

Be sure to take a close look at evidence (Eisenbeiss and AECES); once you have seen all the evidence, then you can make judgment, but not before.
It really helps to have an open mind in any intellectual inquiry, so I hope you will engage this evidence instead of writing it off.

The problem with any mediums is that neither the medium, nor anyone else, really knows where the info is coming from.

If medium info doesn't match that of the Bible, it is false info. If it matches the Bible, why do you need the medium? You don't.

[BADecker]

Here you tell us to look favorably upon the doctrine of Saul even as you attack the truth in favor of the lie. If the doctrine of Saul is different from the truth then surely no amount of good intentions will help Saul's lie! In the end, good intentions were used to validate the lie, as you can see below, you exalt the good intentions of one who was never a "follower" of Emmanuel; why did you tell us this if you knew that good faith is no excuse for a lie? All I want is for you and I to have an open appraisal of the truth about Saul.

Paul continually says that he supports Jesus, is in favor of Jesus, is trying to do the work that Jesus did, is trying to do the work Jesus told him to do, and is trying to extend God's kingdom the same as Jesus was.


You know that I believe the Bible is the Word of God. I understand that you don't think the Bible is the Word of God, or at least not all of it. So, why do you keep on questioning me about things regarding Paul and Jesus? We don't have the same sources for our beliefs and opinions. Do you simply like to play with words? Do you like to find people to argue with?

Oh I get it. You have been reading the Phoenix Journals and they are driving you crazy.

I recognize the wisdom in the Bible, but you call me crazy because I have read more wisdom than you?

Your other wisdom doesn't have the strength of the Bible, by a long shot. This being the case, why water down your spirituality with this other crap? It will only tend to draw you further and further from the salvation that Jesus offers.

[BADecker]

Imagine if you were raised a Christian, you felt you knew the truth and was very passionate about your beliefs. Then you find out most of the Beliefs of the Christian religion are based on older versions of Paganism, Astrology and other Secret Orders.

Actually, the first 5 books of the Bible are, among other things, a summary of the things that happened in and prior to the formation times of the ancient Israel. The first 5 books are the most solid understanding that we have of what happened in the beginnings of the world.

[BADecker]

I'm sorry. You are the one who is right. It is I who is wrong. Thankfully, Jesus will forgive me.

Not only will He forgive you, but, at His request, His Father, God almighty, has already forgiven you.

There is only one thing that God doesn't forgive. Some people think that this thing is "unbelief." This is not true. If it were, none of us would be forgiven. Why not? Because we ALL were and are in unbelief to some extent.

No. The thing that is not forgiven is the sin of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. This sin is the sin of locking one's self into unbelief so strongly that even the Holy Spirit can't get in and at least have a chance at changing the person's mind.

In this life, few people can really block the Holy Spirit this strongly, although there are some that might be able. This is why Decky and the others have the strength that they do. The forgiveness of Jesus is maintaining them, even in their unbelief.

If they don't change, a time will come that they will be locked into their unbelief unchangeably. This will be at the time that they die. Once they have died, there is no way that they can change from unbelief to faith, or vice versa. They are out of the reach of the Holy Spirit. They are locked into whatever position they were in at the time of death.

The best we can do for them is pray. I mean, I certainly would like to meet all these people in Heaven in friendship forever and ever.

[the joint]

Unfortunately, people who have steeped themselves in a particular religion, mostly find it difficult to set it aside when they find out it is a false religion.

Can you compile a list for us all of all these false religions?
How do you recognise a false religion?

No, I probably couldn't. I would probably miss at least a few. Besides, I don't have the time that it would take to investigate and compile. You could probably search Wikipedia for a list of main ones.

Well, with Christianity all around you, and with all the talk about the Bible I have been doing in this thread, start there, the Bible, and ask God to direct you on your journey into this kind of religious seeking.

But you have to be sincere in your testing for God. Ask Him to prove Himself to you if He really exists. But do it from the standpoint of really asking sincerely. He doesn't cater to people who are simply playing around or attempting to mock Him.

I would be particularly interested to hear you respond *directly* to his question about how you are able to recognize a false religion.

The direct instructions for such would probably be similar to the instructions Moses gave the people of Israel for determining if a prophet was a prophet of the Lord, or a false prophet. This would be to match the things that he said with what happened. You could say similar about matching a religion with the way things work.

In fact, in this and other threads, I have been pointing out that the things we call science don't always match all the scientific ideas that should be applied to them. A lot of what we call science (I'm not talking about pure science, or the scientific method, here) simply doesn't have enough information behind it to say that it is absolute truth, or often very near the truth.

The Bible is full of prophecies that were fulfilled. There are others that have not been fulfilled yet. Other religions have few prophecy listings, and few that are fulfilled. One of the greatest prophesies of the Bible that has been fulfilled is that of the fall of Israel as a nation because they disobeyed God. The fall lasted around 1,900 years. They have only come back according to other prophesy, and not with the glory that they held in the past.

Responding in order:

1) Logic fail.  You're shooting yourself in the foot again.  Let me get this straight - you think that the way to determine whether a religion is true or false is to first assume Christianity is true and then look to it for a method of distinguishing true religions from false ones?  What the heck kind of logic is that?  You're putting the cart way, way, WAY before the horse. 

The point here is that you can't just assume Christianity is true before you've subjected it to a method to determine whether it is true or false.  The result is that you are self-evidently using an illogical approach to determine whether Christianity is true rather than a logical one.

2) Stop contorting what science is.  When you say things like, "...A lot of what we call science (I'm not talking about pure science, or the scientific method, here)..." you are just talking out your rear.  The word 'science' has several concrete, established definitions.  When you start making up new definitions on the fly, you are simply demonstrating an inability to effectively communicate with others.

Type in "science definition" into Google and check the result.  The definitions that pop up are the only definitions applicable to 'science.'  When you use the word 'science,' it must be used according to those definitions.  If you don't, then you're simply not talking about science.  Period.

And, when you say "...the things we call science don't always match all the scientific ideas that should be applied to them..." I would remind you that you continue to demonstrate that you have no idea what science is (because you continually invent definitions for it).  It's pretty hard for the "things we call science" to match the "scientific ideas that should be applied to them" when you change the definition of what 'science' is but not the definition of 'pure science' or 'the scientific method.'  Your reasoning here is shockingly terrible.

3)  Talking about prophecies is irrelevant if you can't subject Christianity to the same method used to determine whether a religion is true or false. 

Lol.  A fall that lasted 1900 years?  Haha what the hell?  Are you joking?  Do you have any idea how stupid this sounds?

You finally came up against something that shows you what God is all about, and you just can't take it. I can accept that.

Is this in response to my post?  This isn't even relevant to anything I said.  I did not "come up with anything" in my post that shows me what God is all about, nor can't I take it, and so therefore you are "accepting" whatever you just imagined.

Care to respond directly to my points, or would you like to continue making up my point of view for me, ignoring me when I tell you that's not my point of view, and then believe you are the victor for winning (and somehow, still losing) an argument against yourself?

Please be specific about your ideas.  I truly have no idea what the hell your post was about.

[BADecker]

Unfortunately, people who have steeped themselves in a particular religion, mostly find it difficult to set it aside when they find out it is a false religion.

Can you compile a list for us all of all these false religions?
How do you recognise a false religion?

No, I probably couldn't. I would probably miss at least a few. Besides, I don't have the time that it would take to investigate and compile. You could probably search Wikipedia for a list of main ones.

Well, with Christianity all around you, and with all the talk about the Bible I have been doing in this thread, start there, the Bible, and ask God to direct you on your journey into this kind of religious seeking.

But you have to be sincere in your testing for God. Ask Him to prove Himself to you if He really exists. But do it from the standpoint of really asking sincerely. He doesn't cater to people who are simply playing around or attempting to mock Him.

I would be particularly interested to hear you respond *directly* to his question about how you are able to recognize a false religion.

The direct instructions for such would probably be similar to the instructions Moses gave the people of Israel for determining if a prophet was a prophet of the Lord, or a false prophet. This would be to match the things that he said with what happened. You could say similar about matching a religion with the way things work.

In fact, in this and other threads, I have been pointing out that the things we call science don't always match all the scientific ideas that should be applied to them. A lot of what we call science (I'm not talking about pure science, or the scientific method, here) simply doesn't have enough information behind it to say that it is absolute truth, or often very near the truth.

The Bible is full of prophecies that were fulfilled. There are others that have not been fulfilled yet. Other religions have few prophecy listings, and few that are fulfilled. One of the greatest prophesies of the Bible that has been fulfilled is that of the fall of Israel as a nation because they disobeyed God. The fall lasted around 1,900 years. They have only come back according to other prophesy, and not with the glory that they held in the past.

Responding in order:

1) Logic fail.  You're shooting yourself in the foot again.  Let me get this straight - you think that the way to determine whether a religion is true or false is to first assume Christianity is true and then look to it for a method of distinguishing true religions from false ones?  What the heck kind of logic is that?  You're putting the cart way, way, WAY before the horse. 

The point here is that you can't just assume Christianity is true before you've subjected it to a method to determine whether it is true or false.  The result is that you are self-evidently using an illogical approach to determine whether Christianity is true rather than a logical one.

2) Stop contorting what science is.  When you say things like, "...A lot of what we call science (I'm not talking about pure science, or the scientific method, here)..." you are just talking out your rear.  The word 'science' has several concrete, established definitions.  When you start making up new definitions on the fly, you are simply demonstrating an inability to effectively communicate with others.

Type in "science definition" into Google and check the result.  The definitions that pop up are the only definitions applicable to 'science.'  When you use the word 'science,' it must be used according to those definitions.  If you don't, then you're simply not talking about science.  Period.

And, when you say "...the things we call science don't always match all the scientific ideas that should be applied to them..." I would remind you that you continue to demonstrate that you have no idea what science is (because you continually invent definitions for it).  It's pretty hard for the "things we call science" to match the "scientific ideas that should be applied to them" when you change the definition of what 'science' is but not the definition of 'pure science' or 'the scientific method.'  Your reasoning here is shockingly terrible.

3)  Talking about prophecies is irrelevant if you can't subject Christianity to the same method used to determine whether a religion is true or false. 

Lol.  A fall that lasted 1900 years?  Haha what the hell?  Are you joking?  Do you have any idea how stupid this sounds?

You finally came up against something that shows you what God is all about, and you just can't take it. I can accept that.

Is this in response to my post?  This isn't even relevant to anything I said.  I did not "come up with anything" in my post that shows me what God is all about, nor can't I take it, and so therefore you are "accepting" whatever you just imagined.

Care to respond directly to my points, or would you like to continue making up my point of view for me, ignoring me when I tell you that's not my point of view, and then believe you are the victor for winning (and somehow, still losing) an argument against yourself?

Please be specific about your ideas.  I truly have no idea what the hell your post was about.

Keep on trying. You just might figure it out. Of course, nobody figures anything out that they don't want to, right?

[Decksperiment]

Dear BADecker: Oh Great One, whom we are all obliged to trust, announce unto us what is the gate of salvation.

Cat got your tongue bich?

What, it's cool to use my name in vain, but also ignore the evidence that if god is the light, then he is lucifer?

Still not figured out that america has less than 1000 days left before it looks like ukraine?

Dont worry god will save you... for the native americans

[stopsigningbitch]

BADecker seems like the perfect example of longterm drug use on the brain.

[Decksperiment]

BADecker seems like the perfect example of longterm drug use on the brain.

No, thats the effects of reading only one book.. sadly he forgot to practice it's teaching's.. so insults those that study them.