There is no evidence for God, so why do you believe?

[KWED]

Obviously not. Combining two chemicals to get a third isn't chemicals creating themselves.

Some elements and compounds will form new elements or compounds spontaneously, without anyone there to combine them. Some elements decay naturally to form new elements. They are essentially creating themselves.

This is the thing that the scientifically illiterate fail to grasp. An awful lot of stuff happens naturally, without any need for anyone to intervene. The idea that everything only happens because god makes it happen was ditched centuries ago.

 

[KWED]

Actually I didn't. Two others guys did.

Well, you've certainly been perpetuating the discussion.

 

[KWED]

No it's not. It didn't come into being by non living material. I said all along that we need food to nourish what already exists.

You still aren't getting it.
As an animal grows from a fertilised egg, it builds new cells. Cells that did not exist before. It is not simply "nourishing" the existing cells.

 

[KWED]

Life begets life. We all came to be from other life.

This raises an important point that you seem to be avoiding.
Life on earth started at some point. At time T there was life. At time T-1, there was no life.
Therefore life on earth came from no life.
Whether this was by natural process or magic, it is still life from non-life.
Therefore your assertion is disproved.
QED.

 

[KWED]

By mentioning Kevin Connor and circular reasoning I can tell you don’t know what exegesis means. What’s he got to do with exegesis?

You do realise that Conner was a renowned exegete?

Exegesis...

 

[KWED]

According to who and what’s your basis for that, what is your definition of life?

1. Life on earth exists.
2. Life on earth started to exist. At one point there was no life, later, there was life.
3. Therefore life came from no life.
QED.

Even if we accept the "seeding by aliens" hypothesis, we only move the problem back a stage and need to explain life on the alien planet.

 

[KWED]

Which is … by faith in the theory.

There is no Theory of Abiogenesis. Only hypotheses.

However, any hypothesis based on natural processes is superior to a hypothesis based on magic, because we have mountains of evidence for natural processes but zero evidence for magic.

 

[KWED]

Lol, go ahead and look up the definition from any source you want, but eisegesis is more your style.

I agree that most exegesis is actually eisegesis, but most exegetes would deny this.

 

[KWED]

I don't even know that there was a Big Bang. I know that some say there was. And they conjecture about it, as to how, what, when and why. But they (and I) don't KNOW that. I do believe, just like Paul wrote, that the composition of stars differ one from the other, same with planets (as we can see from exploration), moons differ from each other, and so forth. You do know, don't you, that Paul wrote that "There are also heavenly bodies and earthly bodies. But the splendor of the heavenly bodies is of one degree, and the splendor of the earthly bodies is of another. 41The sun has one degree of splendor, the moon another, and the stars another; and star differs from star in splendor." 1 Corinthians 15. So evidently by inspiration, Paul wrote that the composition of stars, moons and other celestial objects differ one from the other.

This all rests on your definition of "know".
If you mean, "proven to a level of 100% absolute certainty", then you are correct. However, science doesn't work like that. It never claims absolute, immutable truth. It merely presents the best explanations based on the evidence. The Big Bang is about as close to 100% fact as you get in science. Like evolution, there is so much evidence supporting it that it is almost inconceivable that it is fundamentally wrong. The details may be refined, but the basic premises are sound.

Ironically, if you demand 100%, incontrovertible, hard evidence, with no other possible explanation before accepting something, why the **** are you a Christian?

 

[KWED]

Glad you can see that as a possibility although it certainly makes me wonder how ANYONE would know what the first element in the universe was.
Except God and Jesus, of course. And maybe anyone else they desire to tell.

By your standards of evidence, how do you know god and Jesus exist at all?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

This all rests on your definition of "know".
If you mean, "proven to a level of 100% absolute certainty", then you are correct. However, science doesn't work like that. It never claims absolute, immutable truth. It merely presents the best explanations based on the evidence. The Big Bang is about as close to 100% fact as you get in science. Like evolution, there is so much evidence supporting it that it is almost inconceivable that it is fundamentally wrong. The details may be refined, but the basic premises are sound.

Ironically, if you demand 100%, incontrovertible, hard evidence, with no other possible explanation before accepting something, why the **** are you a Christian?

A note. Because of "proven to a level of 100% absolute certainty" also applies to whether the world is natural, that is not a fact. In effect it is assumed as methodological naturalism.
Just as you can't prove God or prove there is no God, you can't prove that the world is natural or that it is not.

 

[KWED]

If there is no evidence of God’s existence, I wonder why He says, “Come now, and let us reason together,” Says the Lord...
Isaiah 1:18

If there is no evidence for Captain America's existence, I wonder why he says "Avengers assemble!"?

Seems to me that an infinite God, Creator of heaven and earth is more than capable of providing adequate evidence or proof of His existence to anyone who truly wants to know and seeks.

And yet, he hasn't.

Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you... Matthew 7:7

And yet, millions ask and seek, yet receive and find nothing (cue: No True Scotsman fallacy).

Have you never wondered why god bothers to answer the prayers of the person taking an exam (even though they didn't need his help because they had revised anyway), yet refuses to answer the prayer of the parents of a child dying in agony? What kind of a twisted sociopath would do that?

 

[KWED]

A note. Because of "proven to a level of 100% absolute certainty" also applies to whether the world is natural, that is not a fact. In effect it is assumed as methodological naturalism.
Just as you can't prove God or prove there is no God, you can't prove that the world is natural or that it is not.

As usual, you seem to be ignoring things like balance of probability, rational thought, critical analysis, evidence, etc.
Just because we can't prove with 100% absolute certainty that existence is not a computer simulation, doesn't mean we should consider it likely or even a reasonable possibility.
If you consider every possible claim as potentially as valid as any other, you will end up one confused puppy. Just saying'

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

As usual, you seem to be ignoring things like balance of probability, rational thought, critical analysis, evidence, etc.
Just because we can't prove with 100% absolute certainty that existence is not a computer simulation, doesn't mean we should consider it likely or even a reasonable possibility.
If you consider every possible claim as potentially as valid as any other, you will end up one confused puppy. Just saying'

That is subjective and you are not an universal we for all humans. If you were you would be God. OMG, you are God and you have proven God. You can speak for all humans for all times and only God could do that, so you are God.

 

[rational experiences]

Humans don't believe in the big bang as we live exact.

Theorising is egotism. A choice by a human living as the human. Human behaviour only.

Stone rock planet heavens doesn't exist when you claim big bang. To consciousness it's not believable as your exact human thought theme says no human no earth no heavens no sun.

Fake use of human only used information.

Actually if you used or owned common just a human sense instead of wanting self noterity. Human behaviour notated the need for a legal system.

Humans said the experience of manifested presence gave the ideal notification that the body that had created creation had owned a pre existing spirit past.

So for a human to conclude we came from a very spiritual position. Experiencing by inheritance a lower karmic cause owns a lot of human experiences.

The only reason to own claims.

To form a human argument. Of a humans natural awareness was versus human men who built all science terms about earths a planet mass as science. Men then built a machine built by science.

Actually. Reason to argue was against machine science only. Not human spiritual awareness.

A humans status is natural first versus men with an earth built machine. In life is factually in human life higher. In correct observed advice than yourselves as earth body to machine to machine product thesis.

As not only hadn't you human brother formed any of the earth's substances by your human calculus. If you didn't touch convert them they would still be earths natural first forms.

You live first the human look at the substance earths type and proposed a humans only thesis to any status you thought upon.

Whereas natural life aware conscious innate knew exactly how to live in communion with every other variable existing first. We knew.

So medical first isn't actually science.

Most of your occult science thesis today uses medical and tried to claim it scientific. Yet medical science is its owned fallacy once just another money making human scheme.

So logically you aren't supported by biology in exact presence as any science. It never was first your theories.

Acutely aware living and in full knowledge life was heavenly recorded. Human records proved that the origin of biology life came direct out of the eternal body.

As earths heavens is not owning any empty space in it. States water you can pass through as you can pass through and be inside a cold gas.

As unlike mass a solid with no space incorporated a gas already owns the condition space within.

So we can't have come out of the space within a gas as the space allows the form gas to exist.

I had a complete human recorded memory visionary experience of our human mother. I never understood what it meant until I had experienced other heavenly paranormal causes just humans experiences.

Born human babies witnessed as human sex. Human life then human death proved we never were anything else. Already by the whole experience.

If you Inherit the cause of change to a once higher body. We proved we had. As the actual humans experience.

We only had to argue against machine science scientist brothers as machines are the only unnatural status that had never existed. Their argument Satanism never involved why we existed.

And nor did it own a spiritual argument as presence isn't a humans thesis.

It is just their human egotism that they use to claim that spiritual hasn't a place in human belief. When it was never a belief. Their pretend manifested machine is their belief.

Manifested position human said a pre owned spirit already existed that personally changed to be a human. Wasn't any recording it was pre physical.

A physical substance manipulated by a human became an invention only.

Manifestation says only from a pre existing higher physical position into change.

 

[ElishaElijah]

You do realise that Conner was a renowned exegete?

Exegesis...

Why do you insist on using eisegesis? Why you bring Connor into the conversation, avoiding your error in interpretation of the Bible and also my comments.

 

[ElishaElijah]

There is no Theory of Abiogenesis. Only hypotheses.

However, any hypothesis based on natural processes is superior to a hypothesis based on magic, because we have mountains of evidence for natural processes but zero evidence for magic.

So you have a hypothesis ( this is by faith). Then you look at what was already created by God as He said in Genesis, By the way He said Creation would continue by natural process example seed bearing plants, human beings - be fruitful and multiply, fill the Earth. He set the seasons, night and day etc. He is the engineer, architect, lawmaker, In Christ all things hold together. Then you say see the mountains happened or the tree grew, or the butterfly changed colors, or the offspring is shorter, taller, smarter, a little different than their parents, by the process God put in motion at the beginning. So God is into variety and you call it natural selection.
Not following your logic.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

So you have a hypothesis ( this is by faith). Then you look at what was already created by God as He said in Genesis, By the way He said Creation would continue by natural process example seed bearing plants, human beings - be fruitful and multiply, fill the Earth. He set the seasons, night and day etc. He is the engineer, architect, lawmaker, In Christ all things hold together. Then you say see the mountains happened or the tree grew, or the butterfly changed colors, or the offspring is shorter, taller, smarter, a little different than their parents, by the process God put in motion at the beginning.
Not following your logic.

He thinks differently than you. Learn the limit of logic and how that influences thinking. If you want to claim logic, learn the limit of logic.

In the end it works like this. You think X is Y and not Z. I think X is Z and not Y. But in effect we both can act differently in the everyday world.
So if you say everything is logical, I just say no! And both cases are a part of the everyday world.

 

[ElishaElijah]

1. Life on earth exists.
2. Life on earth started to exist. At one point there was no life, later, there was life.
3. Therefore life came from no life.
QED.

Even if we accept the "seeding by aliens" hypothesis, we only move the problem back a stage and need to explain life on the alien planet.

God is Eternal, this life came from Him.

 

[joelr]

He doesn’t want to convince you that He is real. He wants you to ask Him for yourself if He’s real.

Ok, in meditation I cleared my mind of any preconceived notions and removed all extra thoughts. I asked for some confirmation that wasn't just my normal thoughts and feelings because that would just be me. Any type of sensation that could be a clue. Why a God can't actually speak to people (?) seems a bit weird but I wasn't concerned with that.
So, He's definitely not real. I asked.
What seems to be real is the fact that you have convinced yourself you have an imaginary friend. Just like billions of Hindu believe they have a relationship with Krishna (yet they don't) and billions of Muslims believe Allah speaks to them (he doesn't) you also believe a fictional character contacts you.

No one else can do that for you. It’s your relationship with Him that needs building and only you and He can do that together.

YEs that's because he is fiction so of course only we can do that together. One needs to learn to create feelings that they associate with answers from the deity. It's a skill you get better at. I was Christian. I had pretend communications with Jesus. Now I understand it's a psychological skill. I can take a photo of Thor and work my mind up into believing Thor is watching over me and can hear my prayers. It's kind of fun, feels like someone cares and wants you to have a good life. I see the appeal.

He’s sorry about any disappointments of the past and you need to try again. He misses you.

Well then he's a huge failure. In the OT he's everywhere. Appearances, revelations, miracles..I know that's all fiction but if he were real and he can't get someones attentions that's pretty lame. You are saying he told you he misses me, he misses who? What did he say my name was? He must know I've moved, where did he say I'm at now?
I had a GF I went to church with weekly and Bible study. I wonder if he misses her? Please tell me her name? Your God probably knows peoples names right? Does he want a relationship with her again as well?