Scientific proof that God exists?

[lolingera]

yes, god is not existing yet, because the definition of god is: "god is anything that is missing!" .... "from chewing gum to the creator of big bang" ...
i have checked your texts on this forum and the definition "holds the water" .... it is because as working the job oa a presumed secular god for 20 years,
i needed definition, so i trapped myself, i suggest civilisation to incept a secular god (myself, so far) with an attribute of owner of all universe's propriety,
then we could run economy with quadruple gdp of 280 trillion dollars, but, haha, if we instal the god it is out of definition, "it is not missing, it is not god",
now, we have a solution in a saying: "exemption that confirms the rule (definition)" .... so, i have started the life divine accounts balances for everyone ..
pm me and enter in it, if you want experoment and explore that gospel, lol, we simply write in our ledger brendon flanegam 370 000 divine dollars, and we go,
we trade, we exchange, we work, we talk, we walk the talk, we faucet we bet, we loan we lend, we invest we contest, and any other activities we can imagine,
just go over my profile's blog and paste your crypto deposit addres or fiat money processor account and you are in, i am in contact with many celebrities in hope
that they may join this movement, for example oprah is considering to buy all my 370 019 dd (i have alredy bought 19 dd from other users), then she will have her
ldab written as: opriah winefre 740019 0xabb2f9C3D77b7eD222B5b2a002475880bb1f26C1 opriahwinatgmaildotcom on my ledger on my blog, so be it, zik zikalkis on duty

[sirazimuth]

yes, god is not existing yet, because the definition of god is: "god is anything that is missing!" .... "from chewing gum to the creator of big bang" ...
i have checked your.....  snip... blah blah blah bunch of nonsensical gibberish....

[qwik2learn]

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.

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.

Maybe you just have too much pride to admit that YHWH has ordered a ritual of child sacrifice in the Bible?
Maybe you have too much pride to see that ritual child sacrifice is inexcusable in any circumstances.
Perhaps you criticize the PJs with empty rhetoric because you do not wish to comprehend them.
Understanding the Bible is not the same as understanding the human condition because no human was born with a Bible in his hand, nor was any human born with a belief in YHWH, all humans are born atheists and find GOD only through their moral compass:

Arguments from moral order are based on the asserted need for moral order to exist in the universe. They claim that, for this moral order to exist, God must exist to support it. The argument from morality is noteworthy in that one cannot evaluate the soundness of the argument without attending to almost every important philosophical issue in meta-ethics.

[qwik2learn]

Too many maybes and ifs and no proof of anything. What is the point of beveling in any of it. There is one thing that is true, we are all going to die. Evidence suggests that dying is the end, there is no afterlife, no heaven, no anything, just death. Why waste your time believing in nonsense which deep down you know it's not true.

Maybe because it's not about believing in afterlife .

Actually all the evidence suggests that consciousness is cyclical and that survival of the personality after death is a real phenomenon with implications for spirituality.
See for yourself over 100 points of evidence in support of the survival hypothesis:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg19301374#msg19301374

Skeptics have been known to ignore the evidence presented to them.
Using prejudice to make unwarranted conclusions is unscientific!

A famous paper recently showed that the claimed results of most scientific studies are simply false:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1182327/
So why should we BLINDLY trust mainstream opinion of scientists? Stick to hard evidence and you will be fine. I have disclosed the evidence, so anyone who doubts it can debate the facts with me.
In my opinion, the scientists who reject survival are also wrong, but the brightest scientists like Wallace did find evidence and cocncluded that survival is real.
What if you found written content that indicates a divine source, would you discard any such books if they are not in the mainstream? Why not consider the contents of the Phoenix Journals as divine communication meant to instruct mankind? In my opinion the content of this material explains Bible teaching much better than Bible alone.

Make sure you have read the important paper from Cunningham:
the content-source problem in modern mediumship research - Rivier University
and an explanation of the origin of the highly informative Phoenix Journals:
http://www.phoenixsourcedistributors.com/html/gch.html

[Astargath]

Too many maybes and ifs and no proof of anything. What is the point of beveling in any of it. There is one thing that is true, we are all going to die. Evidence suggests that dying is the end, there is no afterlife, no heaven, no anything, just death. Why waste your time believing in nonsense which deep down you know it's not true.

Maybe because it's not about believing in afterlife .

Actually all the evidence suggests that consciousness is cyclical and that survival of the personality after death is a real phenomenon with implications for spirituality.
See for yourself over 100 points of evidence in support of the survival hypothesis:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg19301374#msg19301374

Skeptics have been known to ignore the evidence presented to them.
Using prejudice to make unwarranted conclusions is unscientific!

A famous paper recently showed that the claimed results of most scientific studies are simply false:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1182327/
So why should we BLINDLY trust mainstream opinion of scientists? Stick to hard evidence and you will be fine. I have disclosed the evidence, so anyone who doubts it can debate the facts with me.
In my opinion, the scientists who reject survival are also wrong, but the brightest scientists like Wallace did find evidence and cocncluded that survival is real.
What if you found written content that indicates a divine source, would you discard any such books if they are not in the mainstream? Why not consider the contents of the Phoenix Journals as divine communication meant to instruct mankind? In my opinion the content of this material explains Bible teaching much better than Bible alone.

Make sure you have read the important paper from Cunningham:
the content-source problem in modern mediumship research - Rivier University
and an explanation of the origin of the highly informative Phoenix Journals:
http://www.phoenixsourcedistributors.com/html/gch.html

When I said, evidence suggests that death is the end, I didn't base that on studies. There aren't really studies made for that. It's just what we know so far. Your body dies, your brain dies and your consciousness dies as well and there is nothing left. The ''soul'' hasn't been proved to exist so when you die, you die. Unless you can prove there is something more in our bodies, minds, etc there is no point in believing in after life.

I hope you are not saying that the delusional guy who wrote the phoenix journals is actually real. You guys believe in the stupidest shit just because you read books about it.

 

[qwik2learn]

Too many maybes and ifs and no proof of anything. What is the point of beveling in any of it. There is one thing that is true, we are all going to die. Evidence suggests that dying is the end, there is no afterlife, no heaven, no anything, just death. Why waste your time believing in nonsense which deep down you know it's not true.

Maybe because it's not about believing in afterlife .

Actually all the evidence suggests that consciousness is cyclical and that survival of the personality after death is a real phenomenon with implications for spirituality.
See for yourself over 100 points of evidence in support of the survival hypothesis:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg19301374#msg19301374

Skeptics have been known to ignore the evidence presented to them.
Using prejudice to make unwarranted conclusions is unscientific!

A famous paper recently showed that the claimed results of most scientific studies are simply false:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1182327/
So why should we BLINDLY trust mainstream opinion of scientists? Stick to hard evidence and you will be fine. I have disclosed the evidence, so anyone who doubts it can debate the facts with me.
In my opinion, the scientists who reject survival are also wrong, but the brightest scientists like Wallace did find evidence and cocncluded that survival is real.
What if you found written content that indicates a divine source, would you discard any such books if they are not in the mainstream? Why not consider the contents of the Phoenix Journals as divine communication meant to instruct mankind? In my opinion the content of this material explains Bible teaching much better than Bible alone.

Make sure you have read the important paper from Cunningham:
the content-source problem in modern mediumship research - Rivier University
and an explanation of the origin of the highly informative Phoenix Journals:
http://www.phoenixsourcedistributors.com/html/gch.html

When I said, evidence suggests that death is the end, I didn't base that on studies. There aren't really studies made for that. It's just what we know so far. Your body dies, your brain dies and your consciousness dies as well and there is nothing left. The ''soul'' hasn't been proved to exist so when you die, you die. Unless you can prove there is something more in our bodies, minds, etc there is no point in believing in after life.

I hope you are not saying that the delusional guy who wrote the phoenix journals is actually real. You guys believe in the stupidest shit just because you read books about it.

 

Like I mentioned already, some skeptics have chosen to simply ignore the evidence presented to them.
They are not able to rationally evaluate the idea that the personality survives death because they do not ever give an adequate response to the evidence. I brought up many examples of evidence for everyone in this thread to consider and study. For example I already proved that mind can move matter at a distance (telekinesis or TK) because the TK was recorded on video and confirmed on the EEG. This shows that mind is more powerful than is normally accepted, and Cunningham makes that same conclusion in his paper on mediumship.

[qwik2learn]

I hope you are not saying that the delusional guy who wrote the phoenix journals is actually real. You guys believe in the stupidest shit just because you read books about it.

I don't just read books, I follow up my studies with more research and critical thinking. I use the "Field Guide to Critical Thinking" to check that my conclusions are sound and reasonable. What specifically is so stupid about these writings? How come you can criticize the Bible all day long but refuse to give details about Seth or Hatonn?

What backs up your claim that Hatonn is delusional?
Are his words in conflict with facts? You did not point to any such words. You are just choosing to disbelieve that he is who he claims to be; you do not give any serious reason.
Just like with Seth and Jane Roberts, the content has arguably validated the source.

Make sure you read the excellent parapsychology paper:
the content-source problem in modern mediumship research
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=

[Vod]

I was walking across a bridge one day, and I saw a man standing on the edge, about to jump off. So I ran over and said "Stop! don't do it!"
"Why shouldn't I?" he said.
I said, "Well, there's so much to live for!"
He said, "Like what?"
I said, "Well...are you religious or atheist?"
He said, "Religious."
I said, "Me too! Are you christian or Buddhist?"
He said, "Christian."
I said, "Me too! Are you catholic or protestant?"
He said, "Protestant."
I said, "Me too! Are you episcopalian or baptist?"
He said, "Baptist!"
I said,"Wow! Me too! Are you baptist church of god or baptist church of the lord?"
He said, "Baptist church of god!" I said, "Me too! Are you original baptist church of god, or are you reformed baptist church of god?"
He said,"Reformed Baptist church of god!"
I said, "Me too! Are you reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1879, or reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1915?"
He said, "Reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1915!"
I said, "Die, heretic scum", and pushed him off.

[Astargath]

Too many maybes and ifs and no proof of anything. What is the point of beveling in any of it. There is one thing that is true, we are all going to die. Evidence suggests that dying is the end, there is no afterlife, no heaven, no anything, just death. Why waste your time believing in nonsense which deep down you know it's not true.

Maybe because it's not about believing in afterlife .

Actually all the evidence suggests that consciousness is cyclical and that survival of the personality after death is a real phenomenon with implications for spirituality.
See for yourself over 100 points of evidence in support of the survival hypothesis:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg19301374#msg19301374

Skeptics have been known to ignore the evidence presented to them.
Using prejudice to make unwarranted conclusions is unscientific!

A famous paper recently showed that the claimed results of most scientific studies are simply false:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1182327/
So why should we BLINDLY trust mainstream opinion of scientists? Stick to hard evidence and you will be fine. I have disclosed the evidence, so anyone who doubts it can debate the facts with me.
In my opinion, the scientists who reject survival are also wrong, but the brightest scientists like Wallace did find evidence and cocncluded that survival is real.
What if you found written content that indicates a divine source, would you discard any such books if they are not in the mainstream? Why not consider the contents of the Phoenix Journals as divine communication meant to instruct mankind? In my opinion the content of this material explains Bible teaching much better than Bible alone.

Make sure you have read the important paper from Cunningham:
the content-source problem in modern mediumship research - Rivier University
and an explanation of the origin of the highly informative Phoenix Journals:
http://www.phoenixsourcedistributors.com/html/gch.html

When I said, evidence suggests that death is the end, I didn't base that on studies. There aren't really studies made for that. It's just what we know so far. Your body dies, your brain dies and your consciousness dies as well and there is nothing left. The ''soul'' hasn't been proved to exist so when you die, you die. Unless you can prove there is something more in our bodies, minds, etc there is no point in believing in after life.

I hope you are not saying that the delusional guy who wrote the phoenix journals is actually real. You guys believe in the stupidest shit just because you read books about it.

 

Like I mentioned already, some skeptics have chosen to simply ignore the evidence presented to them.
They are not able to rationally evaluate the idea that the personality survives death because they do not ever give an adequate response to the evidence. I brought up many examples of evidence for everyone in this thread to consider and study. For example I already proved that mind can move matter at a distance (telekinesis or TK) because the TK was recorded on video and confirmed on the EEG. This shows that mind is more powerful than is normally accepted, and Cunningham makes that same conclusion in his paper on mediumship.

You presented a study, which you yourself said shouldn't be trusted. That's not real evidence. Show the evidence that says our personality is a thing beyond our brain and I might believe you.

[qwik2learn]

Too many maybes and ifs and no proof of anything. What is the point of beveling in any of it. There is one thing that is true, we are all going to die. Evidence suggests that dying is the end, there is no afterlife, no heaven, no anything, just death. Why waste your time believing in nonsense which deep down you know it's not true.

Maybe because it's not about believing in afterlife .

Actually all the evidence suggests that consciousness is cyclical and that survival of the personality after death is a real phenomenon with implications for spirituality.
See for yourself over 100 points of evidence in support of the survival hypothesis:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg19301374#msg19301374

Skeptics have been known to ignore the evidence presented to them.
Using prejudice to make unwarranted conclusions is unscientific!

A famous paper recently showed that the claimed results of most scientific studies are simply false:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1182327/
So why should we BLINDLY trust mainstream opinion of scientists? Stick to hard evidence and you will be fine. I have disclosed the evidence, so anyone who doubts it can debate the facts with me.
In my opinion, the scientists who reject survival are also wrong, but the brightest scientists like Wallace did find evidence and cocncluded that survival is real.
What if you found written content that indicates a divine source, would you discard any such books if they are not in the mainstream? Why not consider the contents of the Phoenix Journals as divine communication meant to instruct mankind? In my opinion the content of this material explains Bible teaching much better than Bible alone.

Make sure you have read the important paper from Cunningham:
the content-source problem in modern mediumship research - Rivier University
and an explanation of the origin of the highly informative Phoenix Journals:
http://www.phoenixsourcedistributors.com/html/gch.html

When I said, evidence suggests that death is the end, I didn't base that on studies. There aren't really studies made for that. It's just what we know so far. Your body dies, your brain dies and your consciousness dies as well and there is nothing left. The ''soul'' hasn't been proved to exist so when you die, you die. Unless you can prove there is something more in our bodies, minds, etc there is no point in believing in after life.

I hope you are not saying that the delusional guy who wrote the phoenix journals is actually real. You guys believe in the stupidest shit just because you read books about it.

 

Like I mentioned already, some skeptics have chosen to simply ignore the evidence presented to them.
They are not able to rationally evaluate the idea that the personality survives death because they do not ever give an adequate response to the evidence. I brought up many examples of evidence for everyone in this thread to consider and study. For example I already proved that mind can move matter at a distance (telekinesis or TK) because the TK was recorded on video and confirmed on the EEG. This shows that mind is more powerful than is normally accepted, and Cunningham makes that same conclusion in his paper on mediumship.

You presented a study, which you yourself said shouldn't be trusted. That's not real evidence. Show the evidence that says our personality is a thing beyond our brain and I might believe you.

I already pointed out about 100 points of evidence supporting the survival hypothesis, there was the chessmaster experiment by Eisenbeiss that was very strong and you could not show any evidence that it was invalid. Just like with Jane Roberts and Seth, the content of the experimental results can be used to validate the existence of a discarnate source personality.

[qwik2learn]

Materialism is a failure.

Nagel insists that we know some things to exist even if materialism omits or ignores or is oblivious to them . . . It doesn’t explain, for example, why the world exists at all, or how life arose from nonlife. Closer to home, it doesn’t plausibly explain the fundamental beliefs we rely on as we go about our everyday business: the truth of our subjective experience, our ability to reason, our capacity to recognize that some acts are virtuous and others aren’t. These failures, Nagel says, aren’t just temporary gaps in our knowledge, waiting to be filled in by new discoveries in science. On its own terms, materialism cannot account for brute facts. Brute facts are irreducible, and materialism, which operates by breaking things down to their physical components, stands useless before them. “There is little or no possibility,” he writes, “that these facts depend on nothing but the laws of physics.”

[Astargath]

Too many maybes and ifs and no proof of anything. What is the point of beveling in any of it. There is one thing that is true, we are all going to die. Evidence suggests that dying is the end, there is no afterlife, no heaven, no anything, just death. Why waste your time believing in nonsense which deep down you know it's not true.

Maybe because it's not about believing in afterlife .

Actually all the evidence suggests that consciousness is cyclical and that survival of the personality after death is a real phenomenon with implications for spirituality.
See for yourself over 100 points of evidence in support of the survival hypothesis:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg19301374#msg19301374

Skeptics have been known to ignore the evidence presented to them.
Using prejudice to make unwarranted conclusions is unscientific!

A famous paper recently showed that the claimed results of most scientific studies are simply false:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1182327/
So why should we BLINDLY trust mainstream opinion of scientists? Stick to hard evidence and you will be fine. I have disclosed the evidence, so anyone who doubts it can debate the facts with me.
In my opinion, the scientists who reject survival are also wrong, but the brightest scientists like Wallace did find evidence and cocncluded that survival is real.
What if you found written content that indicates a divine source, would you discard any such books if they are not in the mainstream? Why not consider the contents of the Phoenix Journals as divine communication meant to instruct mankind? In my opinion the content of this material explains Bible teaching much better than Bible alone.

Make sure you have read the important paper from Cunningham:
the content-source problem in modern mediumship research - Rivier University
and an explanation of the origin of the highly informative Phoenix Journals:
http://www.phoenixsourcedistributors.com/html/gch.html

When I said, evidence suggests that death is the end, I didn't base that on studies. There aren't really studies made for that. It's just what we know so far. Your body dies, your brain dies and your consciousness dies as well and there is nothing left. The ''soul'' hasn't been proved to exist so when you die, you die. Unless you can prove there is something more in our bodies, minds, etc there is no point in believing in after life.

I hope you are not saying that the delusional guy who wrote the phoenix journals is actually real. You guys believe in the stupidest shit just because you read books about it.

 

Like I mentioned already, some skeptics have chosen to simply ignore the evidence presented to them.
They are not able to rationally evaluate the idea that the personality survives death because they do not ever give an adequate response to the evidence. I brought up many examples of evidence for everyone in this thread to consider and study. For example I already proved that mind can move matter at a distance (telekinesis or TK) because the TK was recorded on video and confirmed on the EEG. This shows that mind is more powerful than is normally accepted, and Cunningham makes that same conclusion in his paper on mediumship.

You presented a study, which you yourself said shouldn't be trusted. That's not real evidence. Show the evidence that says our personality is a thing beyond our brain and I might believe you.

I already pointed out about 100 points of evidence supporting the survival hypothesis, there was the chessmaster experiment by Eisenbeiss that was very strong and you could not show any evidence that it was invalid. Just like with Jane Roberts and Seth, the content of the experimental results can be used to validate the existence of a discarnate source personality.

You pointed out a few ''convincing stories'' which all have insane amount of problems and after all are just stories: http://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=22550

I can make up a ton of stories to prove ghosts, I guess you would believe me.

[viiriinika]

Scientists take a look at the sun and what we can learn from it. Its majesty and marvel couldn't have possibly come from some big bang, but from the hand of an Intelligent Designer. From the comments I feel the need to address these:

*The Bible doesn't teach that the earth is flat. Isaiah 40:22 says that God sits above the 'circle' of the earth. That's a round planet right there.

*Jesus is God, not just a man, and is worthy of worship. The statement "why do you call me good, no one is good but God" is not a denial of His deity, because elsewhere He says He is the 'Good' Shepherd, and I'm a witness that He indeed is! Daniel 7:14 clarify without doubt that the Messiah is worth of glory.

*Jesus Christ is the only way to receive forgiveness for our sins. His message is one of love, love and then some more love. Receive His love today!

Peace to you all!

Here is more of this subject
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5b9PssoJfLg

[Vod]

*The Bible doesn't teach that the earth is flat. Isaiah 40:22 says that God sits above the 'circle' of the earth. That's a round planet right there.

Revelation 7:1 - After this I saw four angels standing at the four corners of the earth

The bible isn't contradicting itself as usual, is it?

[Astargath]

*The Bible doesn't teach that the earth is flat. Isaiah 40:22 says that God sits above the 'circle' of the earth. That's a round planet right there.

Revelation 7:1 - After this I saw four angels standing at the four corners of the earth

The bible isn't contradicting itself as usual, is it?

And circle of the earth can clearly be a flat earth because the flat earth would be a circle.

[compak_comunity]

yes I totally agree with the above article but the question becomes more clear who among the early humans with the prophet adam created on earth?

[BADecker]

yes I totally agree with the above article but the question becomes more clear who among the early humans with the prophet adam created on earth?

Nobody. Only Adam made first. Then God took a rib of Adam and made Eve. Filled up ribcage with flesh.

Eve probably looked like a small (rib-size) Adam with curves and long hair.

Big people come from Adam. Small people come from Eve.

[Przemax]

yes I totally agree with the above article but the question becomes more clear who among the early humans with the prophet adam created on earth?

Nobody. Only Adam made first. Then God took a rib of Adam and made Eve. Filled up ribcage with flesh.

Eve probably looked like a small (rib-size) Adam with curves and long hair.

Big people come from Adam. Small people come from Eve.

Mastery of sarcasm there.

Materialism is a failure.

Yay. You learn quick2learn. Good. Good.

I was walking across a bridge one day, and I saw a man standing on the edge, about to jump off. So I ran over and said "Stop! don't do it!"
"Why shouldn't I?" he said.
I said, "Well, there's so much to live for!"
He said, "Like what?"
I said, "Well...are you religious or atheist?"
He said, "Religious."
I said, "Me too! Are you christian or Buddhist?"
He said, "Christian."
I said, "Me too! Are you catholic or protestant?"
He said, "Protestant."
I said, "Me too! Are you episcopalian or baptist?"
He said, "Baptist!"
I said,"Wow! Me too! Are you baptist church of god or baptist church of the lord?"
He said, "Baptist church of god!" I said, "Me too! Are you original baptist church of god, or are you reformed baptist church of god?"
He said,"Reformed Baptist church of god!"
I said, "Me too! Are you reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1879, or reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1915?"
He said, "Reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1915!"
I said, "Die, heretic scum", and pushed him off.

That joke does not make sense. If you would know anything at all you would know that Jesus said it is good to not agree on everything within the body of Christ. If anyone acts as if he think its bad not agree on everything, he should reconcile if he belongs to the body of Christ.

Maybe you just have too much pride to admit that YHWH has ordered a ritual of child sacrifice in the Bible?

Every belief has it's rite of passage. He could not give the rites of passage to Izaak by baptising him because the passover of Jews from Egypt had not happened. The walk off the waters had not any meaning.

Many rites of passage are waaaaaaaay more humiliating, brutal, and such. I bet you have some in your new age belief, that you are not yet aware of. Maybe you have not yet been allowed to have rites of passage. I have heard that in masonic temples people literally are killed by chocking and being reanimated. That is cruel. God had not done anything like that.

It has more meaning of going out of the world that kills babies to the world of mercy by the rites of passage. God have made us like so. The other rites of passage that are not of God are of the Satan like Jesus is saying about the seed.

Maybe you have too much pride to see that ritual child sacrifice is inexcusable in any circumstances.

That is why God have taken Abraham out of it by the rites of the passage. It is more important what you leave behind in the rites of passage. For example Abraham had left behind human traditions of cruelty towards children. Masons are leaving self reliance into group thinking. etc etc.

Perhaps you criticize the PJs with empty rhetoric because you do not wish to comprehend them.

No. I criticize it with merits. A lot of merits actually, you just fail to see it.  

Understanding the Bible is not the same as understanding the human condition because no human was born with a Bible in his hand, nor was any human born with a belief in YHWH, all humans are born atheists and find GOD only through their moral compass:

Understanding the Bible is understanding that human being is sinful and what he might not percieve as evil he might have seen by the gift of wisdom. You should pray for this gift with your prayers, if you do them.

And no. No people are born atheist. It is a myth. Children are born extremely faithful but to their parents, not any diety. And children at some age are extremely evil by their own. They do everything that they can not do. You would not call children good if you would have one. Believe me. Not that they deserve punishment. They do not. They just need a emotionaly stable father to show the children their boundaries, just like our father in heaven is the most patient, stable and unchanging father.

You pointed out a few ''convincing stories''

Astargath. Can I have one of my stories to the mountain of stories of God and science?

Ok. I will. There were studies that was measuring IQ of of brothers according wheter they had been born first or not.
Those studies had shown that people that were born first had a statistical superiority in their IQ. But what was the most shocking and interesting was another observation.

When the oldest brother died the second brother was becoming the first one his iq were becoming higher to reflect that he is the first born now.

That is why there is so much talking about the first born this or first born that. It is a title and a gift from God to protect your younger siblings. God proves again that he knows his creation very well.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4203966/First-born-children-really-smarter-says-new-study.html

[Astargath]

yes I totally agree with the above article but the question becomes more clear who among the early humans with the prophet adam created on earth?

Nobody. Only Adam made first. Then God took a rib of Adam and made Eve. Filled up ribcage with flesh.

Eve probably looked like a small (rib-size) Adam with curves and long hair.

Big people come from Adam. Small people come from Eve.

Mastery of sarcasm there.

Materialism is a failure.

Yay. You learn quick2learn. Good. Good.

I was walking across a bridge one day, and I saw a man standing on the edge, about to jump off. So I ran over and said "Stop! don't do it!"
"Why shouldn't I?" he said.
I said, "Well, there's so much to live for!"
He said, "Like what?"
I said, "Well...are you religious or atheist?"
He said, "Religious."
I said, "Me too! Are you christian or Buddhist?"
He said, "Christian."
I said, "Me too! Are you catholic or protestant?"
He said, "Protestant."
I said, "Me too! Are you episcopalian or baptist?"
He said, "Baptist!"
I said,"Wow! Me too! Are you baptist church of god or baptist church of the lord?"
He said, "Baptist church of god!" I said, "Me too! Are you original baptist church of god, or are you reformed baptist church of god?"
He said,"Reformed Baptist church of god!"
I said, "Me too! Are you reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1879, or reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1915?"
He said, "Reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1915!"
I said, "Die, heretic scum", and pushed him off.

That joke does not make sense. If you would know anything at all you would know that Jesus said it is good to not agree on everything within the body of Christ. If anyone acts as if he think its bad not agree on everything, he should reconcile if he belongs to the body of Christ.

Maybe you just have too much pride to admit that YHWH has ordered a ritual of child sacrifice in the Bible?

Every belief has it's rite of passage. He could not give the rites of passage to Izaak by baptising him because the passover of Jews from Egypt had not happened. The walk off the waters had not any meaning.

Many rites of passage are waaaaaaaay more humiliating, brutal, and such. I bet you have some in your new age belief, that you are not yet aware of. Maybe you have not yet been allowed to have rites of passage. I have heard that in masonic temples people literally are killed by chocking and being reanimated. That is cruel. God had not done anything like that.

It has more meaning of going out of the world that kills babies to the world of mercy by the rites of passage. God have made us like so. The other rites of passage that are not of God are of the Satan like Jesus is saying about the seed.

Maybe you have too much pride to see that ritual child sacrifice is inexcusable in any circumstances.

That is why God have taken Abraham out of it by the rites of the passage. It is more important what you leave behind in the rites of passage. For example Abraham had left behind human traditions of cruelty towards children. Masons are leaving self reliance into group thinking. etc etc.

Perhaps you criticize the PJs with empty rhetoric because you do not wish to comprehend them.

No. I criticize it with merits. A lot of merits actually, you just fail to see it.  

Understanding the Bible is not the same as understanding the human condition because no human was born with a Bible in his hand, nor was any human born with a belief in YHWH, all humans are born atheists and find GOD only through their moral compass:

Understanding the Bible is understanding that human being is sinful and what he might not percieve as evil he might have seen by the gift of wisdom. You should pray for this gift with your prayers, if you do them.

And no. No people are born atheist. It is a myth. Children are born extremely faithful but to their parents, not any diety. And children at some age are extremely evil by their own. They do everything that they can not do. You would not call children good if you would have one. Believe me. Not that they deserve punishment. They do not. They just need a emotionaly stable father to show the children their boundaries, just like our father in heaven is the most patient, stable and unchanging father.

You pointed out a few ''convincing stories''

Astargath. Can I have one of my stories to the mount of stories of God and science?

Ok. I will. There were studies that was measuring IQ of of brothers according wheter they had been born first or not.
Those studies had shown that people that were born first had a statistical superiority in their IQ. But what was the most shocking and interesting was another observation.

When the oldest brother died the second brother was becoming the first one his iq were becoming higher to reflect that he is the first born now.

That is why there is so much talking about the first born this or first born that. It is a title and a gift from God to protect your younger siblings. God proves again that he knows his creation very well.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4203966/First-born-children-really-smarter-says-new-study.html

We're forced to use the same anatomical structure for both ingestion and respiration. But when obstructed, airflow is blocked, which can lead to choking, and in some cases, death. Also, because we can't make all the vitamins we need, we carry a host of deadly bacteria in our bowels, which produce them for us. But when this process is disrupted, like a hole in the intestine, it can flare into peritonitis. The urinary tract in males passes through — rather than being routed around — the prostate gland, which can swell and block urinary function.
The Close Proximity of our Genitals to our Rectum. Not only is this aesthetically displeasing, it's also unhygienic. Combined with our short urethras — especially in women — this leads to frequent urinary tract and bladder infections. Speaking of which, human females have an unreasonably narrow birth canal, resulting in significantly increased risks to both mother and child during birth.

God proves again that he knows his creation very well.

[Przemax]

yes I totally agree with the above article but the question becomes more clear who among the early humans with the prophet adam created on earth?

Nobody. Only Adam made first. Then God took a rib of Adam and made Eve. Filled up ribcage with flesh.

Eve probably looked like a small (rib-size) Adam with curves and long hair.

Big people come from Adam. Small people come from Eve.

Mastery of sarcasm there.

Materialism is a failure.

Yay. You learn quick2learn. Good. Good.

I was walking across a bridge one day, and I saw a man standing on the edge, about to jump off. So I ran over and said "Stop! don't do it!"
"Why shouldn't I?" he said.
I said, "Well, there's so much to live for!"
He said, "Like what?"
I said, "Well...are you religious or atheist?"
He said, "Religious."
I said, "Me too! Are you christian or Buddhist?"
He said, "Christian."
I said, "Me too! Are you catholic or protestant?"
He said, "Protestant."
I said, "Me too! Are you episcopalian or baptist?"
He said, "Baptist!"
I said,"Wow! Me too! Are you baptist church of god or baptist church of the lord?"
He said, "Baptist church of god!" I said, "Me too! Are you original baptist church of god, or are you reformed baptist church of god?"
He said,"Reformed Baptist church of god!"
I said, "Me too! Are you reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1879, or reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1915?"
He said, "Reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1915!"
I said, "Die, heretic scum", and pushed him off.

That joke does not make sense. If you would know anything at all you would know that Jesus said it is good to not agree on everything within the body of Christ. If anyone acts as if he think its bad not agree on everything, he should reconcile if he belongs to the body of Christ.

Maybe you just have too much pride to admit that YHWH has ordered a ritual of child sacrifice in the Bible?

Every belief has it's rite of passage. He could not give the rites of passage to Izaak by baptising him because the passover of Jews from Egypt had not happened. The walk off the waters had not any meaning.

Many rites of passage are waaaaaaaay more humiliating, brutal, and such. I bet you have some in your new age belief, that you are not yet aware of. Maybe you have not yet been allowed to have rites of passage. I have heard that in masonic temples people literally are killed by chocking and being reanimated. That is cruel. God had not done anything like that.

It has more meaning of going out of the world that kills babies to the world of mercy by the rites of passage. God have made us like so. The other rites of passage that are not of God are of the Satan like Jesus is saying about the seed.

Maybe you have too much pride to see that ritual child sacrifice is inexcusable in any circumstances.

That is why God have taken Abraham out of it by the rites of the passage. It is more important what you leave behind in the rites of passage. For example Abraham had left behind human traditions of cruelty towards children. Masons are leaving self reliance into group thinking. etc etc.

Perhaps you criticize the PJs with empty rhetoric because you do not wish to comprehend them.

No. I criticize it with merits. A lot of merits actually, you just fail to see it.  

Understanding the Bible is not the same as understanding the human condition because no human was born with a Bible in his hand, nor was any human born with a belief in YHWH, all humans are born atheists and find GOD only through their moral compass:

Understanding the Bible is understanding that human being is sinful and what he might not percieve as evil he might have seen by the gift of wisdom. You should pray for this gift with your prayers, if you do them.

And no. No people are born atheist. It is a myth. Children are born extremely faithful but to their parents, not any diety. And children at some age are extremely evil by their own. They do everything that they can not do. You would not call children good if you would have one. Believe me. Not that they deserve punishment. They do not. They just need a emotionaly stable father to show the children their boundaries, just like our father in heaven is the most patient, stable and unchanging father.

You pointed out a few ''convincing stories''

Astargath. Can I have one of my stories to the mount of stories of God and science?

Ok. I will. There were studies that was measuring IQ of of brothers according wheter they had been born first or not.
Those studies had shown that people that were born first had a statistical superiority in their IQ. But what was the most shocking and interesting was another observation.

When the oldest brother died the second brother was becoming the first one his iq were becoming higher to reflect that he is the first born now.

That is why there is so much talking about the first born this or first born that. It is a title and a gift from God to protect your younger siblings. God proves again that he knows his creation very well.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4203966/First-born-children-really-smarter-says-new-study.html

We're forced to use the same anatomical structure for both ingestion and respiration. But when obstructed, airflow is blocked, which can lead to choking, and in some cases, death. Also, because we can't make all the vitamins we need, we carry a host of deadly bacteria in our bowels, which produce them for us. But when this process is disrupted, like a hole in the intestine, it can flare into peritonitis. The urinary tract in males passes through — rather than being routed around — the prostate gland, which can swell and block urinary function.
The Close Proximity of our Genitals to our Rectum. Not only is this aesthetically displeasing, it's also unhygienic. Combined with our short urethras — especially in women — this leads to frequent urinary tract and bladder infections. Speaking of which, human females have an unreasonably narrow birth canal, resulting in significantly increased risks to both mother and child during birth.

God proves again that he knows his creation very well.

Is this not wonderful that most of us does know what is hygiene and good manners of not eating while talking? That is why we have brains, and the commandment to honor the parents that teach us not to die by chocking on a precell.

If not all that, we would have probably talk, eat, have sex (maybe not shit because that would be smelly, but maybe that as well) at the same time.

I don't know what do you mean by not having all vitamins we need. That is called eating. And the bacterias we have in our bowels is the result of mutual benefits between us and the bacterias. It is possible to not have the very smelly poop. It is all doable, the problem is in us. We can screw our gut health all up and still not die.