Muffled
Jesus in me
I believe I don't.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Do you believe in a creator of the universe/universes?
- Thread starter Starlight
- Start date
I believe I don't.
The laws of cause and effect, if any, cease existing when thermodynamics is not applicable. For instance, at fundamental level. Or in the microscopic world, in which there is no preferred direction of time. We have been knowing this since Boltzmann. More than a century ago.
Plants started growing billions of years after the Universe was already in place.
So, what is your point, really?
My personal recommendation is to desist from challenging science, or using incorrect science, in an attempt to safeguard some mythology we acquired via irrational reasons. Usually, a mythology that is strongly depending on our cultural milieu, and has the same evidence, and plausibility, of competing mythologies from other cultural milieus.
Ergo, just pray and trust, whomever you pray and trust, and do not think too much about it. Best way to keep one's faith, really.
Ciao
- viole
Last edited:
rational experiences
Veteran Member
Family, a world community of humanity, natural first.
No science status was ever first.
Science, thought upon however puts science first, by want of the gain of invention, for conversion to get energy to supply a source for their inventions.
Which in a human use common sense makes no sense. Unless that inventive reasoning does no harm to self living natural conditions.
Why common sense is a human learning condition, for self and about self.
The reason and motivation to argue.
So how do you argue against a human practice that was chosen by males as a group for their own titled, then entitled purpose. Whose motivation is to protect what they claim is the most important position.......their status in the control of the social condition that they implemented.
Family and nature and natural is first. Science is not first.
Why you are wrong. Science is just a choice.
So if you claim my family is important, my life is important, who do you scientist have to argue for your continued existence, as a basis of intelligent awareness, that first began naturally, before science was even proposed by human thinking?
You would depend on the natural love of that human family, the want to survive and own what conditions it knowingly has lost for the reason of life continuance.
And that is as basic a human understanding of self is without using false entitlements only expressed by humans in their living choices, in human reality.
When does science quote self wrong for having changed natural balances as their owned human choice?
For an argument about where we came from is not logical, for we do not come from it anymore, we are here.
The reason we can say to any theist oh I believe we came from such and such and then tell stories, is that they are just a human owning motivation of self, telling of a belief.
As a human you can quote, my parents and then every generation human before us were human, then science quotes when you were not a human. The words when you were not human mean no human. That is meant to be self expressive of a wisdom to claim, hence we are not there, therefore do not use that information.
If a human places an idea when humans did not exist, then if they apply a thesis to a state reactive invention included in that thesis then they already psyche confessed to cause conditions, by awareness and use of words and explanations, just human to make us not exist. Described as human rationality actually.
Words quotes the teaching science community are one. They only originally owned one description for one purpose. To understand an ability to theory.
Words therefore cannot be expressed unless a human is living doing all the explanations of word use.
Words he always quantified as that science self appraisal quantified my motivating psyche reasoning. So I owned a self confession before I chose the act. A self aware human teaching to their owned human self.
God was stated to be exact, complete, whole and perfect in its presence, stone O mass a planet. And stone said science by presence owned/released the body of its own spirits, the gases. That teaching owned no other cosmological inference.
So the history scientist human to theory had an argument and owned an argument with his brother about natural history. There is no argument about natural history....as we live on a naturally formed body. Arguments in science are therefore void of being realistic.
No science status was ever first.
Science, thought upon however puts science first, by want of the gain of invention, for conversion to get energy to supply a source for their inventions.
Which in a human use common sense makes no sense. Unless that inventive reasoning does no harm to self living natural conditions.
Why common sense is a human learning condition, for self and about self.
The reason and motivation to argue.
So how do you argue against a human practice that was chosen by males as a group for their own titled, then entitled purpose. Whose motivation is to protect what they claim is the most important position.......their status in the control of the social condition that they implemented.
Family and nature and natural is first. Science is not first.
Why you are wrong. Science is just a choice.
So if you claim my family is important, my life is important, who do you scientist have to argue for your continued existence, as a basis of intelligent awareness, that first began naturally, before science was even proposed by human thinking?
You would depend on the natural love of that human family, the want to survive and own what conditions it knowingly has lost for the reason of life continuance.
And that is as basic a human understanding of self is without using false entitlements only expressed by humans in their living choices, in human reality.
When does science quote self wrong for having changed natural balances as their owned human choice?
For an argument about where we came from is not logical, for we do not come from it anymore, we are here.
The reason we can say to any theist oh I believe we came from such and such and then tell stories, is that they are just a human owning motivation of self, telling of a belief.
As a human you can quote, my parents and then every generation human before us were human, then science quotes when you were not a human. The words when you were not human mean no human. That is meant to be self expressive of a wisdom to claim, hence we are not there, therefore do not use that information.
If a human places an idea when humans did not exist, then if they apply a thesis to a state reactive invention included in that thesis then they already psyche confessed to cause conditions, by awareness and use of words and explanations, just human to make us not exist. Described as human rationality actually.
Words quotes the teaching science community are one. They only originally owned one description for one purpose. To understand an ability to theory.
Words therefore cannot be expressed unless a human is living doing all the explanations of word use.
Words he always quantified as that science self appraisal quantified my motivating psyche reasoning. So I owned a self confession before I chose the act. A self aware human teaching to their owned human self.
God was stated to be exact, complete, whole and perfect in its presence, stone O mass a planet. And stone said science by presence owned/released the body of its own spirits, the gases. That teaching owned no other cosmological inference.
So the history scientist human to theory had an argument and owned an argument with his brother about natural history. There is no argument about natural history....as we live on a naturally formed body. Arguments in science are therefore void of being realistic.
Colt
Well-Known Member
Yes, mind created mind, a personality is the source of personality.
Colt
Well-Known Member
Yes, the Universal Father.
rational experiences
Veteran Member
Stone says a man scientist is the father of his creation. Science and machine. If stone did not exist. God philosophy he would not practice his designed sciences. God he quotes is my father science thoughts. My father told me. Then quotes God told me.
The son male man modern science. Thinking about origin science that had destroyed all life before. Earth core eruption. Everything fell into an opened earth.
Modern life human returned reincarnated says. My spiritual father did not do it. First human male adult not theist for science repractice.
How scientist adult son survived sacrifice. Removed human DNA. As life was re evolving healing as we lived.
Why he falsely believes he is safe by that info being known. Science man says. I can be sacrificed removed. However by holy father will save me.
False use of self information.
Why he quoted by naming God stone a male thesis. Or just observation mother earth. Using human owned quotes to a planet condition was observed to own falsification of scientific fact.
Was very dangerous actually.
Such as knowing all bodies power in all masses existed without our human being present.
A male thinks atom as a whole complete separate form. Then tried to coerce a human to believe they have atomic power inside their bio body.
We are just nearly water. Some mineral chemistry. Nothing like anything else.
Water however sealed the stone in radiation attack conversion. Previous law spatial vacuum had sealed stone.
Ground activation sun radiation. Mass of radiation advice. Not a sun but radiation X mass presence did it.
Point fission. Reaction sink hole. Father gone he says as thinker. Father human was not even there.
Falsification notification.
Second reaction from dust fission. A sink hole. Known ground law.
Science law began mountain top mass removal. Why brother ancient scientist was a liar.
He activated heart core destruction.
Nuclear fission. Male science ancient memory about core. Never a control of God.
No such status universal father.
God in mass O planet bodies are only Seen and observed.
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
Till infinity and beyond.
That is, unless you cut it short by actually providing a valid piece of evidence.
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
I agree it is not accurate.
Because clearly, you aren't being honest about not being able to provide said evidence.
Instead, you continue to claim that you can but fail to actually do so.
It seems like you are not willing to admit that you can't. That would make it dishonest instead.
rational experiences
Veteran Member
Science says searching for origins.
In science stone a planet not origins
Converted energy.
He says big bang energy began. Yet also quotes came from higher form.
Also not origin.
Says origin of God. Yet he quoted in science. God is stone. Not origins
Origin however stone is where he abstracts gods energy from. Stone
And so he now quotes am looking for it in space.
Closest form to space. Gas atmosphere. Yet we are not big bang blast. Where he says energy began.
Why he is researching Jesus as God for machine.
Anyone would wonder at his mentality.
Stephen Hawking said trying to burn us to death.
That mentality
Then he tries to convince everyone if I find origin genetics. I know he says that bio form came from eternal. I will have closest contacts.
As if we are energy to resource by that contact. You know God and great large mass. To build a machine.
Today he tries to convince everyone as the designer machine that the machine represents God. Hence our family history claiming bio mechanical themes.
Father said.
Humans are no longer origin DNA history. Nothing to trace. We barely survived Moses mutation. Origin DNA changed as higher origin life.
Nowhere does your own word invention give you contact to any statements origin.
Some words are descriptive only owning no coded number applied fairness.
Your fake machine ended as the design. As within its mass the gases to be a machine are inside it's mass.
You then want reaction.
Change stone mass again.. virtual says gases already abstracted from machine mass. As mass came from stone product.
You then heat up gases. Machine mass heats also.
Last night commentary I will understand gas history. What for he questions self in AI words.
Gases have very little amount of energy.
Yes I know. I want it a little amount of energy his actual want.
Natural awareness exists first before thesis. Conscious self warning.
Answer meaning. Only space would be left. No heavens present. Intent to abstract it for machine.
Stephen Hawking correct.
Science just wants space. To invent it. By removing our heavens.
Theme I will copy first science law.
First natural law vacuum.
Science. Human claim. I can copy anything. False.
In science stone a planet not origins
Converted energy.
He says big bang energy began. Yet also quotes came from higher form.
Also not origin.
Says origin of God. Yet he quoted in science. God is stone. Not origins
Origin however stone is where he abstracts gods energy from. Stone
And so he now quotes am looking for it in space.
Closest form to space. Gas atmosphere. Yet we are not big bang blast. Where he says energy began.
Why he is researching Jesus as God for machine.
Anyone would wonder at his mentality.
Stephen Hawking said trying to burn us to death.
That mentality
Then he tries to convince everyone if I find origin genetics. I know he says that bio form came from eternal. I will have closest contacts.
As if we are energy to resource by that contact. You know God and great large mass. To build a machine.
Today he tries to convince everyone as the designer machine that the machine represents God. Hence our family history claiming bio mechanical themes.
Father said.
Humans are no longer origin DNA history. Nothing to trace. We barely survived Moses mutation. Origin DNA changed as higher origin life.
Nowhere does your own word invention give you contact to any statements origin.
Some words are descriptive only owning no coded number applied fairness.
Your fake machine ended as the design. As within its mass the gases to be a machine are inside it's mass.
You then want reaction.
Change stone mass again.. virtual says gases already abstracted from machine mass. As mass came from stone product.
You then heat up gases. Machine mass heats also.
Last night commentary I will understand gas history. What for he questions self in AI words.
Gases have very little amount of energy.
Yes I know. I want it a little amount of energy his actual want.
Natural awareness exists first before thesis. Conscious self warning.
Answer meaning. Only space would be left. No heavens present. Intent to abstract it for machine.
Stephen Hawking correct.
Science just wants space. To invent it. By removing our heavens.
Theme I will copy first science law.
First natural law vacuum.
Science. Human claim. I can copy anything. False.