Scientific proof that God exists?

[phreeksta]

No, there is no scientific proof for god and I doubt that there will be one. Only possibility is when god (if he exists) just show himself. Other then that, there is no way to proof the existence of god.

[qwik2learn]

Although it is not entirely proven that the messages came from GOD or even from a divine messenger, it seem very likely to me

It is not even suggested those messages came from an imaginary god.  How could they?

"if an idea is not testable, repeatable, observable, and falsifiable, it is not considered scientific"

There is no scientific proof that fairy tales are real.

Did you read Cunningham's paper?
'Kelly (2010) has observed that mediumship "is the only phenomenon directly relevnt to the survival problem that can be reproduced under conditions of experimental control"'.
And
'Theoretically, the content of a channeled text can and should stand on its merits, regardless of its source.'

Read more carefully next time.

[qwik2learn]

No, there is no scientific proof for god and I doubt that there will be one. Only possibility is when god (if he exists) just show himself. Other then that, there is no way to proof the existence of god.

So it is only scientific if everyone can see it for themselves? What if only a few are willing to recognize the mark of the Divine in an inspired text? That would mean that this evidence is only available to those with enough critical thinking skills and research abilities to see the experiments all the way through.

[qwik2learn]

If I would like to know about Mormonism I would read the mormon Bible. I suggest you should read it. Im fairly sure your pheonix journies are copy paste Mormonism.

How would it be a copy of an existing sect if the volume of material is many times greater, covers many more subjects, and openly acknowledges/unifies a variety of wisdom from many traditions? Perhaps you should search the site for 'Mormon' and see what you find, I bet that it will surprise you.

Quotting from your sources:

Jmmanuel smiled and answered, "I tell you there are greater masters of spiritual
powers than me, and they are our patriarchs who came out of the great space, and the
greatest among them is God and He is the spiritual ruler of the three human races. But
above Him, is The Creation whose Laws he faithfully follows and adheres to, and he,
God, is not omnipotent either as only The Creation Itself, can be omnipotent. Thus
there are limits for him who allows himself to be called God and who is above Kings
and emperors, as has been said. But man is ignorant and immature because he
considers God as the same as The Creation and follows the false teachings that were
adulterated by distorters and charlatans.

I Have never ever ever read the more fallable, corrupted self contradicting piece of bs in my life. 3 human races? Which one are Hindu? Which one are native indians... Oh come on....

Perhaps you could investigate, instead of merely dismissing the assertion like a pseudo-skeptic. Just a thought.

patriarchs of creation? God as one of them? Jesus not preaching the doctrine of one God? That is the dumbest thing I have ever heard.

It said right there that GOD is the spiritual ruler of man and the greatest of beings. It also says that GOD is just, that means that he has some limits in terms of just behavior. One GOD who acts justly, and obeys the laws of His Kingdom. This makes more sense than the evil Bible stories by far!

Do you believe in polytheism? No wonder you find bible corrupt. Hahahaha... you are funny.

Bible being distorted by charlatans? Wow.... are you speaking about charlatans from Pheonix Journal?

Many words written about the ONE GOD in PJs, just search for 'Mormon' and you will find some details. The text is not about many GODs but about the behavior required of the ONE who rules.

You think that the Bible was written by a "secret society" free from human corruption. Why not consider that the PJs are authentic? I demolished your objections and you already proved to this thread that you know little of Bible history. I claim that the content of PJs is better evidence of GOD than the Bible because it clarifies many more questions of great importance.

You are not claiming to portrait Jesus differently - you speak about someone completly else. How can you say the bible is corrupt when you do not even speak about the bible anymore.

I do not assume that the Bible authors are honest. I already showed that books were added which were opposed to the teachings of Jesus, and the evilbible site speaks volumes about the problems. You did not find a single sentence in PJs that opposes the authentic teachings of Jesus.

[phreeksta]

No, there is no scientific proof for god and I doubt that there will be one. Only possibility is when god (if he exists) just show himself. Other then that, there is no way to proof the existence of god.

So it is only scientific if everyone can see it for themselves? What if only a few are willing to recognize the mark of the Divine in an inspired text? That would mean that this evidence is only available to those with enough critical thinking skills and research abilities to see the experiments all the way through.

Well, that is not how science works :-)

There is no scientific way to proof the existence of god ... there is no possibility to proof it by doing an experiment. You can't just magically summon god. And as long he doesn't appear in any way, there can't be a scientific proof.
And no ... I don't take the bible as proof. We are talking about a book that was written a long time ago, where people also believed in witches and other crazy stuff.

In the end, to be honest I don't care what a person believes in. If a person believes in god and it helps him to master his life ... great! I was raised catholic and at some point I started to think about religion and realized that it doesn't make sense for me. But if it works for you ... awesome!

[qwik2learn]

No, there is no scientific proof for god and I doubt that there will be one. Only possibility is when god (if he exists) just show himself. Other then that, there is no way to proof the existence of god.

So it is only scientific if everyone can see it for themselves? What if only a few are willing to recognize the mark of the Divine in an inspired text? That would mean that this evidence is only available to those with enough critical thinking skills and research abilities to see the experiments all the way through.

Well, that is not how science works :-)

There is no scientific way to proof the existence of god ... there is no possibility to proof it by doing an experiment. You can't just magically summon god. And as long he doesn't appear in any way, there can't be a scientific proof.
And no ... I don't take the bible as proof. We are talking about a book that was written a long time ago, where people also believed in witches and other crazy stuff.

In the end, to be honest I don't care what a person believes in. If a person believes in god and it helps him to master his life ... great! I was raised catholic and at some point I started to think about religion and realized that it doesn't make sense for me. But if it works for you ... awesome!

Physical appearance is not required in science, for example neutrinos are studied by their effects on other matter, and that is the only way to do so. The effect of a discarnate being is the communication that takes place through the medium, the content is used to validate the source because the statements can be analyzed for their plausibility.

Did you read Cunningham's paper?
'Kelly (2010) has observed that mediumship "is the only phenomenon directly relevnt to the survival problem that can be reproduced under conditions of experimental control"'.
And
'Theoretically, the content of a channeled text can and should stand on its merits, regardless of its source.'
Therefore, the content can be tested against existing knowledge and alternative hypotheses. For example, the content of the Bible story called "Binding of Isaac" indicates that YHWH ordered the ritual sacrifice of a child, since this act is contrary to moral law, anyone can see that the being YHWH behaves contrary to human ethics, therefore we cannot call YHWH "good" and therefore he is not GOD.

[qwik2learn]

There simply can't exist a proof that god exists! It just doesn't work that way. God can only exist for people who believe he/she/it does. All those 'scientific' proofs are bogus, if you ask me!

"YOU CREATE YOUR OWN REALITY", having knowledge is the key to using your abilities.
The existence of discarnate entities implies that atheists are wrong about the survival of the personality. There is a lot of evidence for survival, and it is a key teaching of authentic spirituality, but humanists reject the idea, in spite of the evidence.

[phreeksta]

No, there is no scientific proof for god and I doubt that there will be one. Only possibility is when god (if he exists) just show himself. Other then that, there is no way to proof the existence of god.

So it is only scientific if everyone can see it for themselves? What if only a few are willing to recognize the mark of the Divine in an inspired text? That would mean that this evidence is only available to those with enough critical thinking skills and research abilities to see the experiments all the way through.

Well, that is not how science works :-)

There is no scientific way to proof the existence of god ... there is no possibility to proof it by doing an experiment. You can't just magically summon god. And as long he doesn't appear in any way, there can't be a scientific proof.
And no ... I don't take the bible as proof. We are talking about a book that was written a long time ago, where people also believed in witches and other crazy stuff.

In the end, to be honest I don't care what a person believes in. If a person believes in god and it helps him to master his life ... great! I was raised catholic and at some point I started to think about religion and realized that it doesn't make sense for me. But if it works for you ... awesome!

Physical appearance is not required in science, for example neutrinos are studied by their effects on other matter, and that is the only way to do so. The effect of a discarnate being is the communication that takes place through the medium, the content is used to validate the source because the statements can be analyzed for their plausibility.

Did you read Cunningham's paper?
'Kelly (2010) has observed that mediumship "is the only phenomenon directly relevnt to the survival problem that can be reproduced under conditions of experimental control"'.
And
'Theoretically, the content of a channeled text can and should stand on its merits, regardless of its source.'
Therefore, the content can be tested against existing knowledge and alternative hypotheses. For example, the content of the Bible story called "Binding of Isaac" indicates that YHWH ordered the ritual sacrifice of a child, since this act is contrary to moral law, anyone can see that the being YHWH behaves contrary to human ethics, therefore we cannot call YHWH "good" and therefore he is not GOD.

Yeah, well the was my mistake for not clarifying it. You are right, you don't need to actually "see" something, to be able to proof its existence. What I meant was, that god would need to show himself "in some form". An when he does, I will start believing in him ... until then I am not :-)

I don't really know the bible that well, but doesn't contain it the Noah's ark story? The story makes god basically a mass murderer.

[Przemax]

Perhaps you could investigate, instead of merely dismissing the assertion like a pseudo-skeptic. Just a thought.

Investigating what? Investing based on what? You act like flat earth cult. They say investigate - they mean watch their nonsensical movies. Ok I will read your PJ to laugh a bit and comment it here if you like.

For you investigate means to read your Pheonix Journals. You do not know how to even quote properly in your "Journals". You just use quote but you do not end qoute. People reading your Journal can have no idea when you qoute and when you do not quote. How can I believe you, that know about anything, if you do not know hot to even write properly?

But then again you propose Luciferian doctrine of creation being more powerful than God.

Yeah I heard what masons believe in. Sorry I do not have stomach for such a things. Yes, masons call Adonai the evil God, that is in heaven but Lucifer (the good guy for them) is going to take the Adonai place. That is something that you would symphatise with.

I don't really know the bible that well, but doesn't contain it the Noah's ark story? The story makes god basically a mass murderer.

That sums you up perfectly. I do not know the bible but my PJ's told me it's bad so I believe it.

[phreeksta]

Perhaps you could investigate, instead of merely dismissing the assertion like a pseudo-skeptic. Just a thought.

Investigating what? Investing based on what? You act like flat earth cult. They say investigate - they mean watch their nonsensical movies. Ok I will read your PJ to laugh a bit and comment it here if you like.

For you investigate means to read your Pheonix Journal. You do not know how to even quote properly in your "Journals". You just use quote but you do not end qoute. People reading your Journal can have no idea when you qoute and when you do not quote. How can I believe you know about anything else if you do not know hot to even write properly?

But then again you propose Luciferian doctrine of creation being more powerful than God.

Yeah I heard what masons believe in. Sorry I do not have stomach for such a things. Yes, masons call Adonai the evil God, that is in heaven but Lucifer (the good guy for them) is going to take the Adonai place. That is something that you would symphatise with.

I don't really know the bible that well, but doesn't contain it the Noah's ark story? The story makes god basically a mass murderer.

That sums you up perfectly. I do not know the bible but my PJ's told me it's bad so I believe it.

Ohh right. It seems you figured me out, because of this one sentence .. and because I am an atheist ...

I know the Noah's ark story and I don't need anyone to tell me, that it is bad, when the whole world is flooded and all people (and animals) on earth die because of it.

[Astargath]

Perhaps you could investigate, instead of merely dismissing the assertion like a pseudo-skeptic. Just a thought.

Investigating what? Investing based on what? You act like flat earth cult. They say investigate - they mean watch their nonsensical movies. Ok I will read your PJ to laugh a bit and comment it here if you like.

For you investigate means to read your Pheonix Journal. You do not know how to even quote properly in your "Journals". You just use quote but you do not end qoute. People reading your Journal can have no idea when you qoute and when you do not quote. How can I believe you know about anything else if you do not know hot to even write properly?

But then again you propose Luciferian doctrine of creation being more powerful than God.

Yeah I heard what masons believe in. Sorry I do not have stomach for such a things. Yes, masons call Adonai the evil God, that is in heaven but Lucifer (the good guy for them) is going to take the Adonai place. That is something that you would symphatise with.

I don't really know the bible that well, but doesn't contain it the Noah's ark story? The story makes god basically a mass murderer.

That sums you up perfectly. I do not know the bible but my PJ's told me it's bad so I believe it.

Ohh right. It seems you figured me out, because of this one sentence .. and because I am an atheist ...

I know the Noah's ark story and I don't need anyone to tell me, that it is bad, when the whole world is flooded and all people (and animals) on earth die because of it.

You will never convince przemax that the bible is evil, he will defend even slavery and condemn homosexuality as being a sin and mocking god. That's how deluded these people are, they go to such extreme lengths just to defend their belief because otherwise they would have to accept that there is no god, no heaven and death is the end.

[phreeksta]

Perhaps you could investigate, instead of merely dismissing the assertion like a pseudo-skeptic. Just a thought.

Investigating what? Investing based on what? You act like flat earth cult. They say investigate - they mean watch their nonsensical movies. Ok I will read your PJ to laugh a bit and comment it here if you like.

For you investigate means to read your Pheonix Journal. You do not know how to even quote properly in your "Journals". You just use quote but you do not end qoute. People reading your Journal can have no idea when you qoute and when you do not quote. How can I believe you know about anything else if you do not know hot to even write properly?

But then again you propose Luciferian doctrine of creation being more powerful than God.

Yeah I heard what masons believe in. Sorry I do not have stomach for such a things. Yes, masons call Adonai the evil God, that is in heaven but Lucifer (the good guy for them) is going to take the Adonai place. That is something that you would symphatise with.

I don't really know the bible that well, but doesn't contain it the Noah's ark story? The story makes god basically a mass murderer.

That sums you up perfectly. I do not know the bible but my PJ's told me it's bad so I believe it.

Ohh right. It seems you figured me out, because of this one sentence .. and because I am an atheist ...

I know the Noah's ark story and I don't need anyone to tell me, that it is bad, when the whole world is flooded and all people (and animals) on earth die because of it.

You will never convince przemax that the bible is evil, he will defend even slavery and condemn homosexuality as being a sin and mocking god. That's how deluded these people are, they go to such extreme lengths just to defend their belief because otherwise they would have to accept that there is no god, no heaven and death is the end.

What annoys me most is, when the people really get salty and aggressive. There is absolutely no need for that. Like I said, I don't care when ppl believe in god, when it helps them. 

[qwik2learn]

The existence of discarnate entities implies that atheists are wrong about the survival of the personality. There is a lot of evidence for survival, and it is a key teaching of authentic spirituality, but humanists reject the idea, in spite of the evidence.

After 400 pages it has been concluded that anomalous information is the KEY means by which to show evidence of GOD.
Even though the existence of a separate source (non-human or discarnate) is hard to test, Cunningham reports some exciting progress in this field, the process he applies to Jane Roberts and Seth can also be applied to Doris and Hatonn who together produced Phoenix Journals not by mediumship but by "translation":

the fact is that this Grandmother managed to write a 200-page book EVERY 3 WEEKS FOR YEARS, hundreds of books in total.  How was this prodigious output, covering such a wide range of topics, possible?

The content of a channeled text can and should stand on its merits, regardless of its source. YHWH from the Bible cannot stand on its own merits, but Seth and Hatonn display a variety of merits.
The content of the communications can be tested against existing knowledge and alternative hypotheses. For example, the content of the Bible story called "Binding of Isaac" indicates that YHWH ordered the ritual sacrifice of a child, since this act is contrary to moral law, anyone can see that the being YHWH behaves contrary to human ethics, therefore we cannot call YHWH "good" and therefore he is not GOD.

I just used the science of moral law to prove that this story is fabricated; however, is there any evidence AT ALL that the Phoenix Journals or Seth material are made up?

Important background information about inspired writings:
the content-source problem in modern mediumship research - Rivier University
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.rivier.edu/faculty/pcunningham/Publications/CunninghamJP_Fall-2012-Vol-76-(2)-295-319.pdf&ved=&usg=
About the 'author' of the Phoenix Journals:
http://www.phoenixsourcedistributors.com/html/gch.html

What annoys me most is, when the people really get salty and aggressive. There is absolutely no need for that. Like I said, I don't care when ppl believe in god, when it helps them. 

OK, here is a chill pill for this thread:
"that person's angels talk to my angels and the communication goes back and forth"
https://youtu.be/iXWQSKcKP_Q?t=1459

[Przemax]

New episode starring:

About the 'author' of the Phoenix Journals:
http://www.phoenixsourcedistributors.com/html/gch.html

Mister Klingon from the bulthari empire in planet zenox.

I am Commander of the “Phoenix Project”, serving the Command of that ONE whom you refer to as “The Messenger, Christos, God, etc.”  The “Command Fleet” is from the sector Pleiades from which originated your ancestral lineage.

I write through a “Translator”; communications through pulsed short-wave transmission.  This is not “psychic channeling nor hocus-pocus”. This is purely “physics” of frequency transmission, receiver termination of transmission and translation of the signal into the English language.

A fan of star treck. Beam me up Scotty.

I know the Noah's ark story and I don't need anyone to tell me, that it is bad,

A guy that knows almost nothing about God, but condamns it. Yet he finds it completly fine to worship such a God if one wants to.

You will never convince przemax that the bible is evil

And the guy that did not get what he wanted from a prayer, so he does not believe a God that would not attend to the gay parade, and the God that is protecting his people from slavery at times were noone had even a single thought about. Because of gay loving he would rather believe an aliens made humans or that, an ancestral invisible monkey that everyone is looking for did it.

You all agree that Bible is bad.... You have got a nice company there.

Aldous Huxley was right. Life give a stories that no story writer would create in their even the most inventive minds.

[qwik2learn]

The content of the communications can be tested against existing knowledge and alternative hypotheses. For example, the content of the Bible story called "Binding of Isaac" indicates that YHWH ordered the ritual sacrifice of a child, since this act is contrary to moral law, anyone can see that the being YHWH behaves contrary to human ethics, therefore we cannot call YHWH "good" and therefore he is not GOD.

I just used the science of moral law to prove that this story is fabricated; however, is there any evidence AT ALL that the Phoenix Journals or Seth material are made up?

Przemax,
I fail to see what is so hard to understand. Maybe you just do not understand moral law?

[BADecker]

The content of the communications can be tested against existing knowledge and alternative hypotheses. For example, the content of the Bible story called "Binding of Isaac" indicates that YHWH ordered the ritual sacrifice of a child, since this act is contrary to moral law, anyone can see that the being YHWH behaves contrary to human ethics, therefore we cannot call YHWH "good" and therefore he is not GOD.

I just used the science of moral law to prove that this story is fabricated; however, is there any evidence AT ALL that the Phoenix Journals or Seth material are made up?

Przemax,
I fail to see what is so hard to understand. Maybe you just do not understand moral law?

Maybe you just don't understand the concept of property ownership.

Having made all things, God is the owner of all things. One can rightly do with his own property as he wishes. Why would it be different with God?

Then, when God's property rebelled and took themselves into death, God rescued His property through the righteous life, the death, and the resurrection of His Son Jesus. Now God owns us twice.

Then God went so far as to give His property the opportunity to reject Him if they wanted. How much more freedom could anybody give to His property, and yet remain in justice with them?

Then God strengthened His property, Abraham and Isaac, through their little trial, so that they were firmly embedded with God in their faith. Almost no greater gift could anybody give to property that he owns.

Now, through me, you are being shown this, so that you can find and strengthen your faith in God, Who holds your life in His hands. But it seems that you would rather continue to rebel as property of God, and remove yourself from His holding.

Know this, that if you rebel strongly enough, you will lose contact with the God that holds you alive, and will lose yourself not only to death, but to spiritual dissolution that will take an eternity to accomplish, and the doing of which will not be pleasurable in the least.


It's like chipping a tooth. Maybe there is no pain. Maybe it is simply unsightly. A dentist can do cosmetic "surgery" on the tooth and make it look good again.

But if the tooth gets a cavity, the dentist has to drill out the bad, and replace it with a good filling. Perhaps some minor pain.

But if the tooth goes really bad, the dentist might have to remove it. There is pain in that. Usually the pain cannot be avoided entirely. The pain goes to the root of the tooth.


The pain of losing your entire self by jumping out of God's hand into freedom that is totally away from God, will be throughout yourself, and will last as eternally as the eternity God set in your heart in the first place. Why? Because you cannot keep yourself alive and separate from your own dissolution... if God is not there to do it. The evidence of this is in the cemeteries of the world.

[Vod]

Having made all things, God is the owner of all things. One can rightly do with his own property as he wishes. Why would it be different with God?

Your fairy tale has no property.

[phreeksta]

A guy that knows almost nothing about God, but condamns it. Yet he finds it completly fine to worship such a God if one wants to.

First of all, I know enough god to decide, if I believe in him or not.

Second, of course it is completely fine to believe in a god. Why should I care? It is your life. But I'd rather see people believing in god and be happy, instead of being miserable.   

[Przemax]

A guy that knows almost nothing about God, but condamns it. Yet he finds it completly fine to worship such a God if one wants to.

First of all, I know enough god to decide, if I believe in him or not.

Second, of course it is completely fine to believe in a god. Why should I care? It is your life. But I'd rather see people believing in god and be happy, instead of being miserable.    

You are completly right. I have transgresed the comandments there by mocking you. It's all a misunderstanding. I thought you were the quick2learn( I was being tired ) as he told so much about the Bible and do not know anything about it. Later on I was too prideful to admitt to an error.

That sittuation had humbled my pride that led me to say upleasant thing to you. You are 100% right. It's a personal relationship with the creator.

Maybe you just do not understand moral law?

Yes we do have a moral compass in us. But also "the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth".

As we see at my example I was blinded by the pride. Why would you not assume you are wrong about the Bible? Maybe your pride is blinding you as well.

The rule to read the Bible is to read further if you do not understand something. You will understand later. It is hard for prideful average man to admitt he does not understand.

I know I can be evil when pride kicks in. I am not aware of being evil at that when im a subject of 7 major sins. Are you better than me? Are you not a subject of 7 major sins that blinds the vision?

[Astargath]

A guy that knows almost nothing about God, but condamns it. Yet he finds it completly fine to worship such a God if one wants to.

First of all, I know enough god to decide, if I believe in him or not.

Second, of course it is completely fine to believe in a god. Why should I care? It is your life. But I'd rather see people believing in god and be happy, instead of being miserable.    

You are completly right. I have transgresed the comandments there by mocking you. It's all a misunderstanding. I thought you were the quick2learn( I was being tired ) as he told so much about the Bible and do not know anything about it. Later on I was too prideful to admitt to an error.

That sittuation had humbled my pride that led me to say upleasant thing to you. You are 100% right. It's a personal relationship with the creator.

Maybe you just do not understand moral law?

Yes we do have a moral compass in us. But also "the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth".

As we see at my example I was blinded by the pride. Why would you not assume you are wrong about the Bible? Maybe your pride is blinding you as well.

The rule to read the Bible is to read further if you do not understand something. You will understand later. It is hard for prideful average man to admitt he does not understand.

A lot of garbage posts from you but we still don't see the scientific proof of god.