Scientific proof that God exists?

[username18333]

Which part of my post indicates that confusion?

Likewise, merely achieving stable representations in an artificial neural network, for instance, will not make this network conscious in any sense – this is the problem pointed out by Clark and Karmiloff-Smith (1993) about the limitations of what they called first-order networks: In such networks, even explicit knowledge (e.g., a stable pattern of activation over the hidden units of a standard back-propagation network that has come to function as a “face detector”) remains knowledge that is in the network as opposed to knowledge for the network. In other words, such networks might have learned to be informationally sensitive to some relevant information, but they never know that they possess such knowledge. Thus the knowledge can be deployed successfully through action, but only in the context of performing some particular task.

Today's machine learning would not be learning if learning necessarily entailed conscious (i.e., non-preprogrammed) reason. (Hence, I quoted a portion of the text that [at least, implicitly] implied that an unconscious "artificial neural network" [Cleeremans 3, 6] has learned.)

[1714634909]

1714634909

[1714634909]

1714634909

[1714634909]

1714634909

[1714634909]

1714634909

[1714634909]

1714634909

[1714634909]

1714634909

[Astargath]

What can you mean by, "We do not know who wrote it." Of course we don't know them. They are long gone.

We do know, however, that the Bible was barely changed. The Dead Sea Scrolls show that the variations are minor, even from the Bible of today.

The Roman Catholic Church doesn't maintain the Bible. God does.

The Bible "copies" that have been changed by people to use false writings to control people, have fallen away. Just because science (which many people worship) has changed greatly in the last 300 years, as shown by its writings, doesn't mean the Bible has. In fact the evidence of the "sameness" of the Bible is so much greater than that of scientific writings that it blows science right out of the water regarding accuracy.

I mean that we don't know who wrote it.  nothing more and nothing less, but that's a huge thing all the same.

while the Dead Sea Scrolls may be the most ancient version we have of the Old Testament, we do not know when it was written, really ( the scrolls 300 BC-100AD most likely) or by whom, although it is assumed to be a copy of earlier texts in any case, so we don't know when it was originally written, or by whom, or what their motives were.

Further to that, the scrolls have nothing to do with what most people think of as the Bible, and what I was talking about in the first place, which is the New Testament.

I've simply seen too much manipulation by 'men of God' to think they didn't bend things more than a little bit when putting these materials together.  

My mistrust of the media and politicians goes back well beyond the current era, as I do not think the crazy things we see today are new games at all, really.  I think men are corrupt and will do anything to grab and hold power and I think that has always been the case.  

There are three basic ways that I see that we can test how authentic the Bible is.

1. Read it and see how it makes sense (or not) regarding life. One need remember that the Bible was written for all people, but was also written for the people who lived at the times that it was written. Thus, it has many different customs and ideas in it that don't fit our times and customs completely, and certainly not exactly. Yet there is content that fits all human beings because all people are basically similar.

2. We need to look at the traditions of the nation of Israel regarding what they think about the Bible. When we do this, we need to know enough about this nation to see that they officially incorporate into "their" Bible, the Talmud and other writings, that we don't consider to be part of the Bible... and the whys for these differences. In addition, much of Jewry doesn't consider the New Testament to be truth at all.

3. Since most of us are not scholars of the history of the Bible, we need to see what the scholars say. We need to look at the real scholars, not simply the Internet scholars (like myself?) who produce second hand scholarly info, or who neglect the sense of the Bible in the documentation of its history. We need to examine the consensus of the best Bible scholars. And, that might take a bit of work.

My though is to read the Bible, especially the New Testament, slowly, not trying to pick it apart the first few times reading it, just to get the feel of what it seems to speak to one's heart. BibleGateway - https://www.biblegateway.com/ - has loads of English translations and multitudes of other language translation so that one can read the Bible right online if so desired.

The bible is real because it exists, what is wrote in the bible is not because it never happened and there are no proofs of it other than the bible, if you cant prove what it says in the bible its true you cant use the own bible as an argument or proof of anything since the bible itself is already not proven to be true

[Buffer Overflow]

We need to examine the consensus of the best Bible scholars.

I'm not sure I like the sound of this. They are human, and humans are corruptible.
The church could pull the strings what they said easily, just a few little quiet brown envelopes would see to that. A wise investment with a good potential return for the church.
Also if the scholars had "caught" religion themselves, their opinion would be immediately bias and highly suspect.

I mean listen to what they have to say sure, but take it with a large pinch of salt to be on the safe side.

[Pentax]

What can you mean by, "We do not know who wrote it." Of course we don't know them. They are long gone.

We do know, however, that the Bible was barely changed. The Dead Sea Scrolls show that the variations are minor, even from the Bible of today.

The Roman Catholic Church doesn't maintain the Bible. God does.

The Bible "copies" that have been changed by people to use false writings to control people, have fallen away. Just because science (which many people worship) has changed greatly in the last 300 years, as shown by its writings, doesn't mean the Bible has. In fact the evidence of the "sameness" of the Bible is so much greater than that of scientific writings that it blows science right out of the water regarding accuracy.

I mean that we don't know who wrote it.  nothing more and nothing less, but that's a huge thing all the same.

while the Dead Sea Scrolls may be the most ancient version we have of the Old Testament, we do not know when it was written, really ( the scrolls 300 BC-100AD most likely) or by whom, although it is assumed to be a copy of earlier texts in any case, so we don't know when it was originally written, or by whom, or what their motives were.

Further to that, the scrolls have nothing to do with what most people think of as the Bible, and what I was talking about in the first place, which is the New Testament.

I've simply seen too much manipulation by 'men of God' to think they didn't bend things more than a little bit when putting these materials together.  

My mistrust of the media and politicians goes back well beyond the current era, as I do not think the crazy things we see today are new games at all, really.  I think men are corrupt and will do anything to grab and hold power and I think that has always been the case.  

There are three basic ways that I see that we can test how authentic the Bible is.

1. Read it and see how it makes sense (or not) regarding life. One need remember that the Bible was written for all people, but was also written for the people who lived at the times that it was written. Thus, it has many different customs and ideas in it that don't fit our times and customs completely, and certainly not exactly. Yet there is content that fits all human beings because all people are basically similar.

2. We need to look at the traditions of the nation of Israel regarding what they think about the Bible. When we do this, we need to know enough about this nation to see that they officially incorporate into "their" Bible, the Talmud and other writings, that we don't consider to be part of the Bible... and the whys for these differences. In addition, much of Jewry doesn't consider the New Testament to be truth at all.

3. Since most of us are not scholars of the history of the Bible, we need to see what the scholars say. We need to look at the real scholars, not simply the Internet scholars (like myself?) who produce second hand scholarly info, or who neglect the sense of the Bible in the documentation of its history. We need to examine the consensus of the best Bible scholars. And, that might take a bit of work.

My though is to read the Bible, especially the New Testament, slowly, not trying to pick it apart the first few times reading it, just to get the feel of what it seems to speak to one's heart. BibleGateway - https://www.biblegateway.com/ - has loads of English translations and multitudes of other language translation so that one can read the Bible right online if so desired.

I've got no issues with people pointing to the bible or the Quran or whatever as a general guide for moral behavior, although that can be a slippery slope also, and leads to 'interpretations' that can often be nothing but manipulations to support a given viewpoint or purpose.

Anyhow, without getting to far into parsing any particular book, plenty of people would likely agree that the basic underpinnings of 'love thy neighbor' and 'don't kill that other guy', etc. are fine as generalities.  I've got no problems there, and wish our societies could find some moral balance between "if you do that you'll burn in hell" and "there is no hell so I'll just screw everyone for my own benefit"

the problem for me arises when people point to it as "THE WORD OF GOD"- and this goes for all religions and holy books.  

I think this is extremely dangerous for a lot of reasons, chief among them that we don't know that this or that is indeed the word of this God or that prophet instead of manipulations of some long ago A-holes that wanted to scare the crap out of people to keep them in line and/or subjugate them.  

The other is that these things are then too easily manipulated, as there is no arguing "THE WORD OF GOD"  taken from any holy book, even if it is batshit crazy.  I guess what I'm driving at is that this sort of finality removes any common sense from any sort of analysis, which just opens the door on way too much manipulation by people that desire to manipulate others for their own ends.  

Without conclusive proof then that this is indeed THE WORD OF GOD this takes this general guidebook for basically not peeing all over everyone else and turns it into what may arguably be the deadliest weapon in the history of the planet.  

[BADecker]

What can you mean by, "We do not know who wrote it." Of course we don't know them. They are long gone.

We do know, however, that the Bible was barely changed. The Dead Sea Scrolls show that the variations are minor, even from the Bible of today.

The Roman Catholic Church doesn't maintain the Bible. God does.

The Bible "copies" that have been changed by people to use false writings to control people, have fallen away. Just because science (which many people worship) has changed greatly in the last 300 years, as shown by its writings, doesn't mean the Bible has. In fact the evidence of the "sameness" of the Bible is so much greater than that of scientific writings that it blows science right out of the water regarding accuracy.

I mean that we don't know who wrote it.  nothing more and nothing less, but that's a huge thing all the same.

while the Dead Sea Scrolls may be the most ancient version we have of the Old Testament, we do not know when it was written, really ( the scrolls 300 BC-100AD most likely) or by whom, although it is assumed to be a copy of earlier texts in any case, so we don't know when it was originally written, or by whom, or what their motives were.

Further to that, the scrolls have nothing to do with what most people think of as the Bible, and what I was talking about in the first place, which is the New Testament.

I've simply seen too much manipulation by 'men of God' to think they didn't bend things more than a little bit when putting these materials together.  

My mistrust of the media and politicians goes back well beyond the current era, as I do not think the crazy things we see today are new games at all, really.  I think men are corrupt and will do anything to grab and hold power and I think that has always been the case.  

There are three basic ways that I see that we can test how authentic the Bible is.

1. Read it and see how it makes sense (or not) regarding life. One need remember that the Bible was written for all people, but was also written for the people who lived at the times that it was written. Thus, it has many different customs and ideas in it that don't fit our times and customs completely, and certainly not exactly. Yet there is content that fits all human beings because all people are basically similar.

2. We need to look at the traditions of the nation of Israel regarding what they think about the Bible. When we do this, we need to know enough about this nation to see that they officially incorporate into "their" Bible, the Talmud and other writings, that we don't consider to be part of the Bible... and the whys for these differences. In addition, much of Jewry doesn't consider the New Testament to be truth at all.

3. Since most of us are not scholars of the history of the Bible, we need to see what the scholars say. We need to look at the real scholars, not simply the Internet scholars (like myself?) who produce second hand scholarly info, or who neglect the sense of the Bible in the documentation of its history. We need to examine the consensus of the best Bible scholars. And, that might take a bit of work.

My though is to read the Bible, especially the New Testament, slowly, not trying to pick it apart the first few times reading it, just to get the feel of what it seems to speak to one's heart. BibleGateway - https://www.biblegateway.com/ - has loads of English translations and multitudes of other language translation so that one can read the Bible right online if so desired.

I've got no issues with people pointing to the bible or the Quran or whatever as a general guide for moral behavior, although that can be a slippery slope also, and leads to 'interpretations' that can often be nothing but manipulations to support a given viewpoint or purpose.

Anyhow, without getting to far into parsing any particular book, plenty of people would likely agree that the basic underpinnings of 'love thy neighbor' and 'don't kill that other guy', etc. are fine as generalities.  I've got no problems there, and wish our societies could find some moral balance between "if you do that you'll burn in hell" and "there is no hell so I'll just screw everyone for my own benefit"

the problem for me arises when people point to it as "THE WORD OF GOD"- and this goes for all religions and holy books.  

I think this is extremely dangerous for a lot of reasons, chief among them that we don't know that this or that is indeed the word of this God or that prophet instead of manipulations of some long ago A-holes that wanted to scare the crap out of people to keep them in line and/or subjugate them.  

The other is that these things are then too easily manipulated, as there is no arguing "THE WORD OF GOD"  taken from any holy book, even if it is batshit crazy.  I guess what I'm driving at is that this sort of finality removes any common sense from any sort of analysis, which just opens the door on way too much manipulation by people that desire to manipulate others for their own ends.  

Without conclusive proof then that this is indeed THE WORD OF GOD this takes this general guidebook for basically not peeing all over everyone else and turns it into what may arguably be the deadliest weapon in the history of the planet.  

All you need to do is to look at a jury trial to find that among people there is often a disagreement about what evidence actually is proof.

Get into the Bible with sincere question to God about him showing you the proof of His existence. This is the only way. Proof among men differs.

[Buffer Overflow]

the problem for me arises when people point to it as "THE WORD OF GOD"- and this goes for all religions and holy books.  

I think this is extremely dangerous for a lot of reasons, chief among them that we don't know that this or that is indeed the word of this God or that prophet instead of manipulations of some long ago A-holes that wanted to scare the crap out of people to keep them in line and/or subjugate them.  

The other is that these things are then too easily manipulated, as there is no arguing "THE WORD OF GOD"  taken from any holy book, even if it is batshit crazy.  I guess what I'm driving at is that this sort of finality removes any common sense from any sort of analysis, which just opens the door on way too much manipulation by people that desire to manipulate others for their own ends.  

Without conclusive proof then that this is indeed THE WORD OF GOD this takes this general guidebook for basically not peeing all over everyone else and turns it into what may arguably be the deadliest weapon in the history of the planet.  

What an excellent post. My thoughts exactly. It is dangerous, very dangerous indeed. That's why I cringe inside when I read BADecker promoting it so casually (a few posts up unfortunately.)

It could be THE WORD OF GOD, but much more likely just THE WORD OF MAN. There is a third much more dangerous scenario however, it could be THE WORD OF THE DEVIL.

I'm steering clear at all costs.

[bl4kjaguar]

I like to rationally evaluate the likely origin of texts. I have some experience with reading inspired writings, so I will not hold back with what I understand to be the truth in this thread.

I can disagree with BADecker for the reason that the Bible lacks internal consistency; that makes that book invalid.

Good day to everyone; I am bumping this thread because I have posted a lot of truth here.

For some reason, the joint and BADecker have yet to respond to my posts.

I will not stop posting the truth about man and God in this thread; it is too important!

Those of you who hold back that which you know to be TRUTH, do a disservice to your fellow man. In your state of fear or false allegiance, you are simply among the many controlled puppets actually working FOR the "elite". Surely a few moments of quiet reflection would counsel the folly of such a path!

I say, here and now, that the ONLY way to regain ANY true freedom is to speak out and turn this mess around. Call upon God for assistance and protection AND YOU WILL HAVE IT! If you dwell upon fear, it will consume your life and, moreover, expedite the death of your physical body.

Dwell upon that which you know to be true, and share your unique knowledge with the world. Many wait until they are literally on their deathbed to speak out, for in their final moments they finally feel that they haven't anything left to lose.

Speak out NOW and do something TRULY meaningful with your life!

ONE PERSON CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE!

The joint,

You may wish to read my latest posts and references to better understand the form of the proof.

All atheists are humanists; also, the Eisenbeiss case strongly supports survival, which humanists reject, so I conclude that all atheists are mistaken.

Further, we now know that life is more than just complicated chemistry and this also undermines humanism.

BADecker,

I advise you not to call my GOD the devil until you know EXACTLY what is going on.

God's messenger Hatonn delivers a message that is both literal and rational; this is what a spiritual teaching should look like.

By the way, I still disagree with you about a "jealous/wrathful God"; God is love, and you have called my God the Devil without even so much as pointing out where God's messenger is telling you to do evil.

I am making this post so that others may also share TRUTH in this thread.

You can evaluate inspired writings by reading them entirely and evaluating their consistency; some writings have a better degree of consistency than others. The below papers are discussing the content-source problem and are helpful for understanding the problems involved in the evaluation of inspired writings and Scripture:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg11150396#msg11150396

[BADecker]

I like to rationally evaluate the likely origin of texts. I have some experience with reading inspired writings, so I will not hold back with what I understand to be the truth in this thread.

I can disagree with BADecker for the reason that the Bible lacks internal consistency; that makes that book invalid.

No internal inconsistency in the Bible. Often more than one discussion about the same topic. The discussions overlap, showing some info that is the same, and other info that is additional to each discussion, and other that is deleted fro each. In other words, some witnesses recall some points while other witnesses recall other points.

At times the Bible seems to talk about something that another part of the Bible seems to talk about differently. The Bible is a writing that does not cover every topic under the sun in detail. It also does not always say when it is talking about two similar points rather than the same point from two different views.

For example, the little bit that we see in the Gospels where Jesus' words are quoted, are certainly not the only things He ever said in His life. We simply do not know whether the things He says in one Gospel were always those things that were recorded in another Gospel, even though they look very similar. They could have been said twice, on different days.

[bl4kjaguar]

You are right that the Bible does not make some distinctions and is missing a lot of neeeed commentary; in my opinion this makes the Bible unclear. I point you to Phoenix Journals for a comprehensive text that discloses truth and news/history in literal/rational language of discourse and teaching suitable for this day and age.

Edit: By the way, I still disagree with you about a "jealous/wrathful God"; God is love, and you have called my God the Devil without even so much as pointing out where God's messenger is telling you to do evil.

[BADecker]

You are right that the Bible does not make some distinctions and is missing a lot of neeeed commentary; in my opinion this makes the Bible unclear. I point you to Phoenix Journals for a comprehensive text that discloses truth and news/history in literal/rational language of discourse and teaching suitable for this day and age.

Edit: By the way, I still disagree with you about a "jealous/wrathful God"; God is love, and you have called my God the Devil without even so much as pointing out where God's messenger is telling you to do evil.

Hurt your itty bitty feelings, did I? I explained it to you in the past, but I will do it briefly again.

If the Phoenix Journals had been written prior to the time of Jesus (prior to about 2,000 years ago), and if they had been Hebrew writings, then they would either be part of the Old Testament, or they would not... as judged by the people of Israel, the leaders of Israel, and the priests and prophets of Israel... who would have determined their position within, or outside of the Old Testament according to the instructions for determining such things given by Moses in books 2 thru 5 of the Old Testament.

If the Phoenix Journals had been written during the time that the New Testament was written, they would have been included in the Bible by the Council of Nicea if they were worthy.

Since the Revelation in the New Testament says that nothing is to be added to or subtracted from the book of Revelation, if the Phoenix Journals were written following the time of the New Testament (following the time of the Revelation), they would essentially be additions to the Revelation, because the Revelation covers all the Word of God from the time it was written to the entry into the New Heavens and the New Earth after this universe destroyed.

If the Phoenix Journals were part of the Word of God, they would not contradict the Bible in any way. If they were written by a man or men, they would be the Word of God only if they fit the descriptions in one of the above paragraphs. If they were done through some form of automatic writing, they fall into the classification of divination and witchcraft and are directly from the devil; Moses outlawed such in the Old Testament.

Several different things that you have told me about the Phoenix Journals in the past show that they are NOT part of God's Word according to the things written above. Since you told me that they claim to be God's Word, if they truly claim this, then they are lies, and are against the Bible, the only Word of God. That means that they are from the devil, just like the writings of Islam are.

[Vod]

Edit: By the way, I still disagree with you about a "jealous/wrathful God"; God is love, and you have called my God the Devil without even so much as pointing out where God's messenger is telling you to do evil.

http://dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot.com/2010/04/drunk-with-blood-gods-killings-in-bible.html

Do you deny the christian belief that your imaginary god collected all the animals on earth into a big boat for over a year, and maliciously killed everyone else?

Your god is evil - he has killed a lot of people bro (almost 3 million by the text of your holy book) - he needs anxiety medication (made by humans btw).  

BTW - your same holy book says the devil has killed 10 (yep - ten) lol!

[BADecker]

Edit: By the way, I still disagree with you about a "jealous/wrathful God"; God is love, and you have called my God the Devil without even so much as pointing out where God's messenger is telling you to do evil.

http://dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot.com/2010/04/drunk-with-blood-gods-killings-in-bible.html

Do you deny the christian belief that your imaginary god collected all the animals on earth into a big boat for over a year, and maliciously killed everyone else?

Your god is evil - he has killed a lot of people bro (almost 3 million by the text of your holy book) - he needs anxiety medication (made by humans btw).  

BTW - your same holy book says the devil has killed 10 (yep - ten) lol!

Notice that the God of the Bible only destroys those who are against Him. The whole world was filled with people who were all wicked and evil, except for Noah and his family. God saved Noah and his family, but destroyed the evil wickedness.

It's kinda fun watching you condemn yourself along with the rest of the wicked, evil people.

[1986]

Notice that the God of the Bible only destroys those who are against Him. The whole world was filled with people who were all wicked and evil, except for Noah and his family. God saved Noah and his family, but destroyed the evil wickedness.

It's kinda fun watching you condemn yourself along with the rest of the wicked, evil people.

He hasn't killed vod . The world is plentiful of sinners and evil people but nothing happens to them. Meanwhile innocent babies die of horrible diseases. Saying god punishes those who are against him seem to be a bit of a cop out to me.

[Vod]

He hasn't killed vod . The world is plentiful of sinners and evil people but nothing happens to them. Meanwhile innocent babies die of horrible diseases. Saying god punishes those who are against him seem to be a bit of a cop out to me.

I killed god when I was 12 and realized he didn't exist.  All I had to do was run away from home Sunday mornings for a few months and when the brainwashed ebbed away I was able to see it was just BS they repeated to me over and over again each week.  (P.S.  I always came home in the afternoon!)

BADecker's imaginary god has no power over me.  He can have his fun now, for we all rot together in the ground later, no matter what we believe.  

I urge BADecker, if he is still able to understand common sense, to try stepping away from the constant brainwashing he subjects himself to every week.  He'll be amazed at the real world if he just takes his head out of the sand.

[Buffer Overflow]

Notice that the God of the Bible only destroys those who are against Him.

Err no, I've never noticed that one.

I have noticed, however, that man is eager to destroy/kill those that are against religion.

[Vod]

I have noticed, however, that man is eager to destroy/kill those that are against religion.

[Vod]

Notice that the God of the Bible only destroys those who are against Him.

So it's "worship me or I kill you and you'll burn in hell!"

Isn't that exactly like the abusive husband that tells his wife he'll kill (destroy) her if she leaves (is against) him?

We don't put up with that kind of behavior in society, why would we put up with it in religion?  Give a strong NO! to your god and go to a shelter (aka get an education).

Luckily, more and more people are doing that in record numbers every day.  

[XinXan]

Notice that the God of the Bible only destroys those who are against Him.

So it's "worship me or I kill you and you'll burn in hell!"

Isn't that exactly like the abusive husband that tells his wife he'll kill her if she leaves (is against) him?

We don't put up with that kind of behavior in society, why would we put up with it in religion?  Give a strong NO! to your god and go to a shelter (aka education).

Luckily, more and more people are doing that in record numbers every day.  

Furthermore, with the flood he destroyed almost everyone, so he either thought everyone was against him wich is stupid because probably 90% of people didnt even know he existed (if he did) or he just likes to kill people.

...or HE DOESNT EXIST.

[Buffer Overflow]

Notice that the God of the Bible only destroys those who are against Him.

A god that rules by anger and fear, is not worthy of my worship.

He must fear me, because I'm still here, not destroyed.

[QuestionAuthority]

BADecker you'll be happy to know that I found Jesus!








He was in a bar downtown for three days. His wife was pissed and my lawn needs to be mowed again.