Why I am a good proof that there is a God

[ppp]

I believe that is because I am stating them seriously in case you missed that and thought I was putting you on.

Flat earth. Lizard men. Astrology. Phrenology. People stating those beliefs seriously is not enough to take them seriously. Is "stating seriously" the best you have?

 

[Muffled]

Flat earth. Lizard men. Astrology. Phrenology. People stating those beliefs seriously is not enough to take them seriously. Is "stating seriously" the best you have?

I believe there are things I don't take very seriously like unicorns but I do take a serious approach to anyone who says they have experience with one. Of course I have never met or heard from such a person.

I believe I have had a number of people who have had experience with God.

I believe I did astrology. It might surprise you that it can be highly accurate.

 

[ppp]

I believe there are things I don't take very seriously like unicorns but I do take a serious approach to anyone who says they have experience with one. Of course I have never met or heard from such a person.

I believe I have had a number of people who have had experience with God.

I believe I did astrology. It might surprise you that it can be highly accurate.

The question was, Why should I take you beliefs (about a god) seriously? Not a one of those sentences, either individually or as a whole, addresses that query. I will let you off the hook. Have a lovely day.

 

[Sheldon]

I believe there are things I don't take very seriously like unicorns but I do take a serious approach to anyone who says they have experience with one. Of course I have never met or heard from such a person.

"In 1991, an Austrian biologist Antal Festetics claimed he saw a unicorn. According to him, that happened in the Harz Mountains in Germany."

Here's a YouTube video claiming to have filmed one.

Does have a video of the crucifixion?

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="

" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I believe I did astrology. It might surprise you that it can be highly accurate.

"Scientific testing has found no evidence to support the premises or purported effects outlined in astrological traditions. Where astrology has made falsifiable predictions, it has been falsified. The most famous test was headed by Shawn Carlson and included a committee of scientists and a committee of astrologers." <CITATION>

"Astrology is bs. NASA's scathing takedown perfectly explains why."

"Astronomers have spent years patiently trying to explain why zodiac signs are not science, and NASA finally seems fed up with the public's obsession with them. NASA just dropped the ultimate astrology smackdown in a Tumblr post that's since gone viral." <CITATION> <CITATION>

 

[Muffled]

"In 1991, an Austrian biologist Antal Festetics claimed he saw a unicorn. According to him, that happened in the Harz Mountains in Germany."

Here's a YouTube video claiming to have filmed one.

Does have a video of the crucifixion?

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="

" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>





"Scientific testing has found no evidence to support the premises or purported effects outlined in astrological traditions. Where astrology has made falsifiable predictions, it has been falsified. The most famous test was headed by Shawn Carlson and included a committee of scientists and a committee of astrologers." <CITATION>

"Astrology is bs. NASA's scathing takedown perfectly explains why."

"Astronomers have spent years patiently trying to explain why zodiac signs are not science, and NASA finally seems fed up with the public's obsession with them. NASA just dropped the ultimate astrology smackdown in a Tumblr post that's since gone viral." <CITATION> <CITATION>

I believe a scientist testing astrology really makes me laugh. That is like a person who likes betting on horse racing handicapping the horses. Quite often a person will do better simply because he likes the name of the horse.

I believe there is a degree of inspiration required to read astrology charts.

I believe I have my Sun and Jupiter in the ninth house of religion which means that I am personally blessed by religion.

 

[Sheldon]

I believe a scientist testing astrology really makes me laugh.

Laugh away, but the facts speak for themselves, and the fact you haven't even tried to address those facts after me posting them also gives a clear inference that you are blindly biased here.

I believe there is a degree of inspiration required to read astrology charts.

I posted objective evidence that demonstrated it was hokum, and you simply ignored that evidence, and are now simply restating your belief, what is it you expect me to do with that?

"When the Babylonians invented the constellations 3,000 years ago, they chose to leave out a 13th sign. So, we (NASA) did the math."

Constellations and the Calendar

Astronomers have spent years patiently trying to explain why zodiac signs are not science, and NASA finally seems fed up with the public's obsession with them. NASA just dropped the ultimate astrology smackdown in a Tumblr post that's since gone viral.

Ignoring this just makes it clear your belief in astrology is more important to you than the truth.

 

[Muffled]

Laugh away, but the facts speak for themselves, and the fact you haven't even tried to address those facts after me posting them also gives a clear inference that you are blindly biased here.



I posted objective evidence that demonstrated it was hokum, and you simply ignored that evidence, and are now simply restating your belief, what is it you expect me to do with that?

"When the Babylonians invented the constellations 3,000 years ago, they chose to leave out a 13th sign. So, we (NASA) did the math."

Constellations and the Calendar

Astronomers have spent years patiently trying to explain why zodiac signs are not science, and NASA finally seems fed up with the public's obsession with them. NASA just dropped the ultimate astrology smackdown in a Tumblr post that's since gone viral.

Ignoring this just makes it clear your belief in astrology is more important to you than the truth.

I believe the evidence posted falls into the category of what my brother once said: "Statistics don't lie but people do."

 

[Sheldon]

I believe the evidence posted falls into the category of what my brother once said: "Statistics don't lie but people do."

Then you clearly haven't read and or understood, what I linked. Astrology is based on an ancient understanding of the cosmos that was deeply flawed, and the link explains this based on astronomy, and the mathematics that underpin it.

It is of course absurd to imagine that NASA would misrepresent their understanding of astronomy, or get away with misrepresenting it, and not be exposed by other scientists. You seem to care more about preserving your mistaken belief in the efficacy of astrology, than in bending what you believe to the objective evidence.

The superstition of astrology comes from the ancient Babylonians over 3,000 years ago. They divided the zodiac into 12 equal parts, but even according to the Babylonians’ own ancient stories, there were 13 constellations in the zodiac. So they picked one, Ophiuchus, to leave out. Even then, some of the chosen 12 didn’t fit crossed over into the next one. When the Babylonians first invented the 12 signs a birthday between about July 23 and August 22 meant being born under the constellation Leo. Now, 3,000 years later, the sky has shifted because Earth’s axis (North Pole) doesn’t point in quite the same direction.

The constellations are different sizes and shapes, so the sun spends different lengths of time lined up with each one. The line from Earth through the sun points to Virgo for 45 days, but it points to Scorpius for only 7 days. To make a tidy match with their 12-month calendar, the Babylonians ignored the fact that the sun actually moves through 13 constellations, not 12. Then they assigned each of those 12 constellations equal amounts of time.

No duplicity or stats are needed, astrology is hokum, and this demonstrates its errancy mathematically.

 

[Muffled]

Then you clearly haven't read and or understood, what I linked. Astrology is based on an ancient understanding of the cosmos that was deeply flawed, and the link explains this based on astronomy, and the mathematics that underpin it.

It is of course absurd to imagine that NASA would misrepresent their understanding of astronomy, or get away with misrepresenting it, and not be exposed by other scientists. You seem to care more about preserving your mistaken belief in the efficacy of astrology, than in bending what you believe to the objective evidence.

The superstition of astrology comes from the ancient Babylonians over 3,000 years ago. They divided the zodiac into 12 equal parts, but even according to the Babylonians’ own ancient stories, there were 13 constellations in the zodiac. So they picked one, Ophiuchus, to leave out. Even then, some of the chosen 12 didn’t fit crossed over into the next one. When the Babylonians first invented the 12 signs a birthday between about July 23 and August 22 meant being born under the constellation Leo. Now, 3,000 years later, the sky has shifted because Earth’s axis (North Pole) doesn’t point in quite the same direction.

The constellations are different sizes and shapes, so the sun spends different lengths of time lined up with each one. The line from Earth through the sun points to Virgo for 45 days, but it points to Scorpius for only 7 days. To make a tidy match with their 12-month calendar, the Babylonians ignored the fact that the sun actually moves through 13 constellations, not 12. Then they assigned each of those 12 constellations equal amounts of time.

No duplicity or stats are needed, astrology is hokum, and this demonstrates its errancy mathematically.

I believe this is off topic. I don't even think astrology qualifies for a religious debate unless one wishes to argue whether it is a sin or not.

 

[Sheldon]

I believe this is off topic. I don't even think astrology qualifies for a religious debate unless one wishes to argue whether it is a sin or not.

That's just evasion, it wasn't "off topic" when you were making bombastic claims about it, but now astrology has been demonstrated as naught but hokum, you're suddenly not prepared to discuss it as its off topic.

 

[Muffled]

That's just evasion, it wasn't "off topic" when you were making bombastic claims about it, but now astrology has been demonstrated as naught but hokum, you're suddenly not prepared to discuss it as its off topic.

I believe you make assumptions without evidence. I am willing to discuss it in another post. When I did a search I found some on General Religious Debates so evidently some think it is religious.

 

[Muffled]

I believe first and foremost God is real because He abides in me.

My testimony to that affect should be enough but people need to know there are discernable affects that indicate god is present.

1. God speaks to me.
2. God gives me dreams and visons.
3. God heals my diseases.
4. God keeps me from sin.
5. God helps me to understand scripture
6. God speaks through me.

I believe also a testimony that God is real is that He changed my life. Before receiving Jesus as Lord and Savior I was a selfish person. Afterwards I became a person who loved other people.

 

[Sheldon]

I believe you make assumptions without evidence.

That's extremely dishonest, as I linked the evidence debunking astrology, and you refused to address it at all, claiming it was suddenly off topic. Here it is again then:

"The superstition of astrology comes from the ancient Babylonians over 3,000 years ago. They divided the zodiac into 12 equal parts, but even according to the Babylonians’ own ancient stories, there were 13 constellations in the zodiac. So they picked one, Ophiuchus, to leave out. Even then, some of the chosen 12 didn’t fit crossed over into the next one. When the Babylonians first invented the 12 signs a birthday between about July 23 and August 22 meant being born under the constellation Leo. Now, 3,000 years later, the sky has shifted because Earth’s axis (North Pole) doesn’t point in quite the same direction.

The constellations are different sizes and shapes, so the sun spends different lengths of time lined up with each one. The line from Earth through the sun points to Virgo for 45 days, but it points to Scorpius for only 7 days. To make a tidy match with their 12-month calendar, the Babylonians ignored the fact that the sun actually moves through 13 constellations, not 12. Then they assigned each of those 12 constellations equal amounts of time, astrology is hokum, and this demonstrates its errancy mathematically."

Astronomers have spent years patiently trying to explain why zodiac signs are not science, and NASA finally seems fed up with the public's obsession with them. NASA just dropped the ultimate astrology smackdown in a Tumblr post that's since gone viral.

<LINK>

First you claimed astrology was a fact, then you waved this evidence demonstrating it is nonsense away, then you decided it is off topic.

I am willing to discuss it in another post.

Just read the evidence.

When I did a search I found some on General Religious Debates so evidently some think it is religious.

Irrelevant, it is hokum, and NASA's astronomers have demonstrated this.

 

[Muffled]

I believe God has guided me:

One day I went out for a walk but as I exited the door, God said turn right, so I did and he kept on giving me directions until I ended up at a church. It was one that I wished to visit because I had a friend who attended but I didn't know exactly where it was because it was off the beaten track.

 

[ppp]

I believe God has guided me:

One day I went out for a walk but as I exited the door, God said turn right, so I did and he kept on giving me directions until I ended up at a church. It was one that I wished to visit because I had a friend who attended but I didn't know exactly where it was because it was off the beaten track.

Is there any place that you could have ended up that you would not have said God guided you?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I believe God has guided me:

One day I went out for a walk but as I exited the door, God said turn right, so I did and he kept on giving me directions until I ended up at a church. It was one that I wished to visit because I had a friend who attended but I didn't know exactly where it was because it was off the beaten track.

So...

- you didn't have any particular goal when you set out.
- you followed your intuition without any preconceived plan about when you'd stop.
- you kept going until you got to something you found significant.
- you retroactively decided after the fact that the thing you found was your goal from the outset.

Are all your interactions with "God" this uncompelling?

 

[Muffled]

Is there any place that you could have ended up that you would not have said God guided you?

No, but I could have been totally mystified as to why I was there. You see I am honest about these things.

 

[Muffled]

So...

- you didn't have any particular goal when you set out.
- you followed your intuition without any preconceived plan about when you'd stop.
- you kept going until you got to something you found significant.
- you retroactively decided after the fact that the thing you found was your goal from the outset.

Are all your interactions with "God" this uncompelling?

I believe that is true but I am a creature of habit. I usually walk the same circuit.

I believe you are incorrect. The voice I heard was the voice of God. I believe intuition is most likely the product of my own spirit and it was not that.

I believe that I kept going until God stopped giving me directions.

I believe you are in error again. I had no goal when I set out. I recognized that God had led me there because He was affirming a goal that I had many days previous to this outing.

I believe you are usually less than inspired by what I say no matter what it is.

 

[Muffled]

I believe first and foremost God is real because He abides in me.

My testimony to that affect should be enough but people need to know there are discernable affects that indicate god is present.

1. God speaks to me.
2. God gives me dreams and visons.
3. God heals my diseases.
4. God keeps me from sin.
5. God helps me to understand scripture
6. God speaks through me.

1. The first time God spoke t me was when I was 13. My parents took me to Sunday School but I was picked up afterwards and so did not get to attend church except n Christmas and Easter when the whole family attended. I also attended youth group events and experienced a prayer circle. My belief in God was out of innocence rather than proof.

One day I found that my mother had broken one of 45RPM records. She said it was an accident but I suspected she did it on purpose because she hated the record. I went to a solitary place to pray. I had never prayed before but since I had heard other people do it, I was willing to try. I called upon God to punish my mother. I had no reason to believe that I would get an answer but I was determined to wait for one and wait I had to do.

God answered the way Jesus usually did by asking a question:" Do you love your other?" I relplied , yes. Then He asked: "Do you love your mother more than the record?" I replied, yes. Then He asked if it mattered why the record was broken and I replied,no.

Jesus once said "he who is forgiven much, loves much. He could have said he who loves much forgives much.

 

[Sheldon]

1. The first time God spoke t me was when I was 13. My parents took me to Sunday School but I was picked up afterwards and so did not get to attend church except n Christmas and Easter when the whole family attended. I also attended youth group events and experienced a prayer circle. My belief in God was out of innocence rather than proof.

One day I found that my mother had broken one of 45RPM records. She said it was an accident but I suspected she did it on purpose because she hated the record. I went to a solitary place to pray. I had never prayed before but since I had heard other people do it, I was willing to try. I called upon God to punish my mother. I had no reason to believe that I would get an answer but I was determined to wait for one and wait I had to do.

God answered the way Jesus usually did by asking a question:" Do you love your other?" I relplied , yes. Then He asked: "Do you love your mother more than the record?" I replied, yes. Then He asked if it mattered why the record was broken and I replied,no.

Jesus once said "he who is forgiven much, loves much. He could have said he who loves much forgives much.

Despite such anecdotal claims for the efficacy of prayer, whenever it has been objectively tested, it has failed to produce any discernible result.

I have no way of being sure of course, but I suspect the voices in your head are your own, as are mine.