It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

If God created everything, why does religion contradicts so many things??

page: 8
9
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 08:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: vethumanbeing


originally posted by: Tangerine


originally posted by: vethumanbeing

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: veteranhumanbeing




Tangerine: Why the debate about what God created? The debate should start with the existence of God. Until there's testable evidence proving that God exists, the rest is tinsel on an imaginary tree.





VHB: Why not debate the BOSS, unless you think there were separate Gods creating differing things (tree god, cloud god, rock god etc). You are not about to blame this on the Earth God (it does exist) if only so as a place for us to STAND UPRIGHT UPON (we can't float). Discussing any proof God exists as a material being other by way of its EVIDENT creations is ridiculous; as it does not, It is simply an information gathering system (FORCE) of binary 1s and 0s data bits (not excluding strong and weak forces, magnetism and fields). This is highly theoretical and you know that, however I'm up to challenge if you are. Have you noticed how we are (as humans) actually treading in the same footprints of discovering what God is? We are mimicking it; and so doing will discover all of those things hidden.





Tangerine: God's evident creations? Hm. I see nothing evident. In fact, I see no creations. Where is the testable evidence that humans, for example, were created rather than evolved? Where is the testable evidence that a tree was created? Testable evidence, please.




Are you living in the physical world of matter and possess a reasoning ability, senses; self/free will and have the faculties to discriminate? I suppose the "tree" is a tricky one. Usually a seed is wind blown and naturally plants itself, or taken and planted by others, then it grows into a 'seedling' and if not eaten by native preditors (usually deer or rabbits) will grow into a mature plant ONLY IF the EARTH GOD waters it. I think the tree evolved from the Simian Ape specie but a unnatural glitch or MUTATION in one of the DNA strands caused it to grow ROOTS instead of feet.




In other words, you can't answer my question by providing an iota of testable evidence proving that humans or trees were created by a supernatural deity. Thank you.


Thanking you as well. In other words you cannot provide an iota of testable evidence proving that humans or trees were NOT created by a supernatural deity.




it's impossible to prove a negative. Moreover, the onus is on the person making the positive claim (ie. God exists and created you) to prove the claim via testable evidence. That's what I'm asking you to do.


Can you prove your family exists? Do they exist? Can you show testable evidence that they exist?


I didn't claim to have a family. You, on the other hand, claimed that God exists and created me. Prove it.




posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 08:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord


originally posted by: Tangerine


originally posted by: vethumanbeing




originally posted by: Tangerine




originally posted by: vethumanbeing



originally posted by: Tangerine



originally posted by: veteranhumanbeing








Tangerine: Why the debate about what God created? The debate should start with the existence of God. Until there's testable evidence proving that God exists, the rest is tinsel on an imaginary tree.









VHB: Why not debate the BOSS, unless you think there were separate Gods creating differing things (tree god, cloud god, rock god etc). You are not about to blame this on the Earth God (it does exist) if only so as a place for us to STAND UPRIGHT UPON (we can't float). Discussing any proof God exists as a material being other by way of its EVIDENT creations is ridiculous; as it does not, It is simply an information gathering system (FORCE) of binary 1s and 0s data bits (not excluding strong and weak forces, magnetism and fields). This is highly theoretical and you know that, however I'm up to challenge if you are. Have you noticed how we are (as humans) actually treading in the same footprints of discovering what God is? We are mimicking it; and so doing will discover all of those things hidden.









Tangerine: God's evident creations? Hm. I see nothing evident. In fact, I see no creations. Where is the testable evidence that humans, for example, were created rather than evolved? Where is the testable evidence that a tree was created? Testable evidence, please.








Are you living in the physical world of matter and possess a reasoning ability, senses; self/free will and have the faculties to discriminate? I suppose the "tree" is a tricky one. Usually a seed is wind blown and naturally plants itself, or taken and planted by others, then it grows into a 'seedling' and if not eaten by native preditors (usually deer or rabbits) will grow into a mature plant ONLY IF the EARTH GOD waters it. I think the tree evolved from the Simian Ape specie but a unnatural glitch or MUTATION in one of the DNA strands caused it to grow ROOTS instead of feet.








In other words, you can't answer my question by providing an iota of testable evidence proving that humans or trees were created by a supernatural deity. Thank you.




Thanking you as well. In other words you cannot provide an iota of testable evidence proving that humans or trees were NOT created by a supernatural deity.








it's impossible to prove a negative. Moreover, the onus is on the person making the positive claim (ie. God exists and created you) to prove the claim via testable evidence. That's what I'm asking you to do.




Can you prove your family exists? Do they exist? Can you show testable evidence that they exist?




I didn't claim to have a family. You, on the other hand, claimed that God exists and created me. Prove it.


So your claiming you dont have a family, now thats just dumb moronic drivel.
edit on 28-1-2015 by FormOfTheLord because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 08:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord


originally posted by: Tangerine


originally posted by: vethumanbeing




originally posted by: Tangerine




originally posted by: vethumanbeing



originally posted by: Tangerine



originally posted by: veteranhumanbeing








Tangerine: Why the debate about what God created? The debate should start with the existence of God. Until there's testable evidence proving that God exists, the rest is tinsel on an imaginary tree.









VHB: Why not debate the BOSS, unless you think there were separate Gods creating differing things (tree god, cloud god, rock god etc). You are not about to blame this on the Earth God (it does exist) if only so as a place for us to STAND UPRIGHT UPON (we can't float). Discussing any proof God exists as a material being other by way of its EVIDENT creations is ridiculous; as it does not, It is simply an information gathering system (FORCE) of binary 1s and 0s data bits (not excluding strong and weak forces, magnetism and fields). This is highly theoretical and you know that, however I'm up to challenge if you are. Have you noticed how we are (as humans) actually treading in the same footprints of discovering what God is? We are mimicking it; and so doing will discover all of those things hidden.









Tangerine: God's evident creations? Hm. I see nothing evident. In fact, I see no creations. Where is the testable evidence that humans, for example, were created rather than evolved? Where is the testable evidence that a tree was created? Testable evidence, please.








Are you living in the physical world of matter and possess a reasoning ability, senses; self/free will and have the faculties to discriminate? I suppose the "tree" is a tricky one. Usually a seed is wind blown and naturally plants itself, or taken and planted by others, then it grows into a 'seedling' and if not eaten by native preditors (usually deer or rabbits) will grow into a mature plant ONLY IF the EARTH GOD waters it. I think the tree evolved from the Simian Ape specie but a unnatural glitch or MUTATION in one of the DNA strands caused it to grow ROOTS instead of feet.








In other words, you can't answer my question by providing an iota of testable evidence proving that humans or trees were created by a supernatural deity. Thank you.




Thanking you as well. In other words you cannot provide an iota of testable evidence proving that humans or trees were NOT created by a supernatural deity.








it's impossible to prove a negative. Moreover, the onus is on the person making the positive claim (ie. God exists and created you) to prove the claim via testable evidence. That's what I'm asking you to do.




Can you prove your family exists? Do they exist? Can you show testable evidence that they exist?




I didn't claim to have a family. You, on the other hand, claimed that God exists and created me. Prove it.


So your claiming you dont have a family, now thats just dumb moronic drivel.


You seem to have a reading comprehension problem, possibly due to not reading carefully. I didn't claim that I don't have a family. I didn't claim that I do have a family.

If the video you have posted contains testable evidence proving that God exists and created me then you, who have presumably watched the video, will be able to cite that testable evidence. Please do so.
edit on 28-1-2015 by Tangerine because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 08:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Tangerine

You asked for proof, proof was provided per your request, so watch it. If you find a problem with it, then address the problems you find. You can't demand a source and when a source is provided to you, not research said source. That's disingenuous in debate.



posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 08:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: NOTurTypical
a reply to: Tangerine

You asked for proof, proof was provided per your request, so watch it. If you find a problem with it, then address the problems you find. You can't demand a source and when a source is provided to you, not research said source. That's disingenuous in debate.



You watch it. I'm not going to do your research for you. If you watched it, cite the testable evidence it contained. It's not up to me to do your work for you.

I can't tell you how many times fundamentalists have posted videos and the names of books they swear contained testable evidence proving the God exists and created the universe, humans, etc.. I've read some of those books and watched some of those videos. Not a one contained anything close to testable evidence. I have been talking to fundamentalists long enough to realize that they can't distinguish between belief and fact and have no idea what testable evidence even means. Why should I watch an entire video when the claimant can simply cite one simple piece of testable evidence?



posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 08:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Tangerine




I'm not going to do your research for you.


My research? What research?? I didn't demand proof, you did, you asked for a source. Are you feeling okay tonight?



posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 08:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: NOTurTypical
a reply to: Tangerine



You asked for proof, proof was provided per your request, so watch it. If you find a problem with it, then address the problems you find. You can't demand a source and when a source is provided to you, not research said source. That's disingenuous in debate.





Now he cant watch the video lol this is dude is corny as ever, he asks for evience then wont look at the evidence when its provided.
Deny ignorance indeed.
edit on 28-1-2015 by FormOfTheLord because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 09:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord

originally posted by: NOTurTypical
a reply to: Tangerine



You asked for proof, proof was provided per your request, so watch it. If you find a problem with it, then address the problems you find. You can't demand a source and when a source is provided to you, not research said source. That's disingenuous in debate.





Now he cant watch the video lol this is dude is corny as ever, he asks for evience then wont look at the evidence when its provided.
Deny ignorance indeed.


You're full of video links but damn short on testable evidence. I decided to watch the first video (I've already seen the Carlin video) and, as expected, it contained not a jot of testable evidence. Claims, claims, claims. Zip testable evidence. If you dispute that, point out which part of the video cites the testable evidence and why it constitutes testable evidence and not just another empty claim?



posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 09:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: vethumanbeing

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: vethumanbeing
originally posted by: Tangerine
originally posted by: veteranhumanbeing


Tangerine: Why the debate about what God created? The debate should start with the existence of God. Until there's testable evidence proving that God exists, the rest is tinsel on an imaginary tree.



VHB: Why not debate the BOSS, unless you think there were separate Gods creating differing things (tree god, cloud god, rock god etc). You are not about to blame this on the Earth God (it does exist) if only so as a place for us to STAND UPRIGHT UPON (we can't float). Discussing any proof God exists as a material being other by way of its EVIDENT creations is ridiculous; as it does not, It is simply an information gathering system (FORCE) of binary 1s and 0s data bits (not excluding strong and weak forces, magnetism and fields). This is highly theoretical and you know that, however I'm up to challenge if you are. Have you noticed how we are (as humans) actually treading in the same footprints of discovering what God is? We are mimicking it; and so doing will discover all of those things hidden.



Tangerine: God's evident creations? Hm. I see nothing evident. In fact, I see no creations. Where is the testable evidence that humans, for example, were created rather than evolved? Where is the testable evidence that a tree was created? Testable evidence, please.


Are you living in the physical world of matter and possess a reasoning ability, senses; self/free will and have the faculties to discriminate? I suppose the "tree" is a tricky one. Usually a seed is wind blown and naturally plants itself, or taken and planted by others, then it grows into a 'seedling' and if not eaten by native preditors (usually deer or rabbits) will grow into a mature plant ONLY IF the EARTH GOD waters it. I think the tree evolved from the Simian Ape specie but a unnatural glitch or MUTATION in one of the DNA strands caused it to grow ROOTS instead of feet.


In other words, you can't answer my question by providing an iota of testable evidence proving that humans or trees were created by a supernatural deity. Thank you.

Thanking you as well. In other words you cannot provide an iota of testable evidence proving that humans or trees were NOT created by a supernatural deity.


it's impossible to prove a negative. Moreover, the onus is on the person making the positive claim (ie. God exists and created you) to prove the claim via testable evidence. That's what I'm asking you to do.

You just proved it. "ITS IMPOSSIBLE TO PROVE A NEGATIVE". There is no creation if exists as a negative mute point. Systems are designed to profligate through positives (GROW ITSELF into a better awareness/being).I make no claims, I leave those distinctions to the God Creator to explain itself TO YOU PERSONALLY via a 'knock knock' Who's there? "candy gram" (Great White land shark delivery service). Why has your being in the state of un enlightenment become my or anyone else's problem?
edit on 28-1-2015 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 09:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: vethumanbeing

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: vethumanbeing

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: vethumanbeing
originally posted by: Tangerine
originally posted by: veteranhumanbeing


Tangerine: Why the debate about what God created? The debate should start with the existence of God. Until there's testable evidence proving that God exists, the rest is tinsel on an imaginary tree.



VHB: Why not debate the BOSS, unless you think there were separate Gods creating differing things (tree god, cloud god, rock god etc). You are not about to blame this on the Earth God (it does exist) if only so as a place for us to STAND UPRIGHT UPON (we can't float). Discussing any proof God exists as a material being other by way of its EVIDENT creations is ridiculous; as it does not, It is simply an information gathering system (FORCE) of binary 1s and 0s data bits (not excluding strong and weak forces, magnetism and fields). This is highly theoretical and you know that, however I'm up to challenge if you are. Have you noticed how we are (as humans) actually treading in the same footprints of discovering what God is? We are mimicking it; and so doing will discover all of those things hidden.



Tangerine: God's evident creations? Hm. I see nothing evident. In fact, I see no creations. Where is the testable evidence that humans, for example, were created rather than evolved? Where is the testable evidence that a tree was created? Testable evidence, please.


Are you living in the physical world of matter and possess a reasoning ability, senses; self/free will and have the faculties to discriminate? I suppose the "tree" is a tricky one. Usually a seed is wind blown and naturally plants itself, or taken and planted by others, then it grows into a 'seedling' and if not eaten by native preditors (usually deer or rabbits) will grow into a mature plant ONLY IF the EARTH GOD waters it. I think the tree evolved from the Simian Ape specie but a unnatural glitch or MUTATION in one of the DNA strands caused it to grow ROOTS instead of feet.


In other words, you can't answer my question by providing an iota of testable evidence proving that humans or trees were created by a supernatural deity. Thank you.

Thanking you as well. In other words you cannot provide an iota of testable evidence proving that humans or trees were NOT created by a supernatural deity.


it's impossible to prove a negative. Moreover, the onus is on the person making the positive claim (ie. God exists and created you) to prove the claim via testable evidence. That's what I'm asking you to do.

You just proved it. "ITS IMPOSSIBLE TO PROVE A NEGATIVE". There is no creation if exists as a negative mute point. Systems are designed to profligate through positives (GROW ITSELF into a better awareness/being).I make no claims I leave those distinctions to the God Creator to explain itself TO YOU PERSONALLY via a candy gram (land shark knocks on your door). Why has your being in the state of un enlightenment become my problem?


Mute? LMAO. AS expected, you couldn't cite an iota of testable evidence and, having been embarrassed, you're now posting pure gibberish.



posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 09:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: vethumanbeing

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: vethumanbeing

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: vethumanbeing
originally posted by: Tangerine
originally posted by: veteranhumanbeing


Tangerine: Why the debate about what God created? The debate should start with the existence of God. Until there's testable evidence proving that God exists, the rest is tinsel on an imaginary tree.



VHB: Why not debate the BOSS, unless you think there were separate Gods creating differing things (tree god, cloud god, rock god etc). You are not about to blame this on the Earth God (it does exist) if only so as a place for us to STAND UPRIGHT UPON (we can't float). Discussing any proof God exists as a material being other by way of its EVIDENT creations is ridiculous; as it does not, It is simply an information gathering system (FORCE) of binary 1s and 0s data bits (not excluding strong and weak forces, magnetism and fields). This is highly theoretical and you know that, however I'm up to challenge if you are. Have you noticed how we are (as humans) actually treading in the same footprints of discovering what God is? We are mimicking it; and so doing will discover all of those things hidden.



Tangerine: God's evident creations? Hm. I see nothing evident. In fact, I see no creations. Where is the testable evidence that humans, for example, were created rather than evolved? Where is the testable evidence that a tree was created? Testable evidence, please.


Are you living in the physical world of matter and possess a reasoning ability, senses; self/free will and have the faculties to discriminate? I suppose the "tree" is a tricky one. Usually a seed is wind blown and naturally plants itself, or taken and planted by others, then it grows into a 'seedling' and if not eaten by native preditors (usually deer or rabbits) will grow into a mature plant ONLY IF the EARTH GOD waters it. I think the tree evolved from the Simian Ape specie but a unnatural glitch or MUTATION in one of the DNA strands caused it to grow ROOTS instead of feet.


In other words, you can't answer my question by providing an iota of testable evidence proving that humans or trees were created by a supernatural deity. Thank you.

Thanking you as well. In other words you cannot provide an iota of testable evidence proving that humans or trees were NOT created by a supernatural deity.


it's impossible to prove a negative. Moreover, the onus is on the person making the positive claim (ie. God exists and created you) to prove the claim via testable evidence. That's what I'm asking you to do.

You just proved it. "ITS IMPOSSIBLE TO PROVE A NEGATIVE". There is no creation if exists as a negative mute point. Systems are designed to profligate through positives (GROW ITSELF into a better awareness/being).I make no claims I leave those distinctions to the God Creator to explain itself TO YOU PERSONALLY via a candy gram (land shark knocks on your door). Why has your being in the state of un enlightenment become my problem?


Mute? LMAO. AS expected, you couldn't cite an iota of testable evidence and, having been embarrassed, you're now posting pure gibberish.

You are not answering my questions. YOU COULDNT CITE AN IOTA OF TESTABLE EVIDENCE PROVING GOD DOES NOT EXIST. Tell me something I do not already know. Your ignorance of the universe and how it works through a creator being is NOT MY BURDEN to bear (its all on you to humble yourself, put in some time discovering what mechanism allowed for the how and why you incarnated).
edit on 28-1-2015 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 09:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: vethumanbeing

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: vethumanbeing

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: vethumanbeing

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: vethumanbeing
originally posted by: Tangerine
originally posted by: veteranhumanbeing


Tangerine: Why the debate about what God created? The debate should start with the existence of God. Until there's testable evidence proving that God exists, the rest is tinsel on an imaginary tree.



VHB: Why not debate the BOSS, unless you think there were separate Gods creating differing things (tree god, cloud god, rock god etc). You are not about to blame this on the Earth God (it does exist) if only so as a place for us to STAND UPRIGHT UPON (we can't float). Discussing any proof God exists as a material being other by way of its EVIDENT creations is ridiculous; as it does not, It is simply an information gathering system (FORCE) of binary 1s and 0s data bits (not excluding strong and weak forces, magnetism and fields). This is highly theoretical and you know that, however I'm up to challenge if you are. Have you noticed how we are (as humans) actually treading in the same footprints of discovering what God is? We are mimicking it; and so doing will discover all of those things hidden.



Tangerine: God's evident creations? Hm. I see nothing evident. In fact, I see no creations. Where is the testable evidence that humans, for example, were created rather than evolved? Where is the testable evidence that a tree was created? Testable evidence, please.


Are you living in the physical world of matter and possess a reasoning ability, senses; self/free will and have the faculties to discriminate? I suppose the "tree" is a tricky one. Usually a seed is wind blown and naturally plants itself, or taken and planted by others, then it grows into a 'seedling' and if not eaten by native preditors (usually deer or rabbits) will grow into a mature plant ONLY IF the EARTH GOD waters it. I think the tree evolved from the Simian Ape specie but a unnatural glitch or MUTATION in one of the DNA strands caused it to grow ROOTS instead of feet.


In other words, you can't answer my question by providing an iota of testable evidence proving that humans or trees were created by a supernatural deity. Thank you.

Thanking you as well. In other words you cannot provide an iota of testable evidence proving that humans or trees were NOT created by a supernatural deity.


it's impossible to prove a negative. Moreover, the onus is on the person making the positive claim (ie. God exists and created you) to prove the claim via testable evidence. That's what I'm asking you to do.

You just proved it. "ITS IMPOSSIBLE TO PROVE A NEGATIVE". There is no creation if exists as a negative mute point. Systems are designed to profligate through positives (GROW ITSELF into a better awareness/being).I make no claims I leave those distinctions to the God Creator to explain itself TO YOU PERSONALLY via a candy gram (land shark knocks on your door). Why has your being in the state of un enlightenment become my problem?


Mute? LMAO. AS expected, you couldn't cite an iota of testable evidence and, having been embarrassed, you're now posting pure gibberish.

You are not answering my questions. YOU COULDNT CITE AN IOTA OF TESTABLE EVIDENCE PROVING GOD DOES NOT EXIST. Tell me something I do not already know. Your ignorance of the universe and how it works through a creator being is NOT MY BURDEN to bear (its all on you to humble yourself, put in some time discovering what mechanism allowed for the how and why you incarnated).


I refer you to a good high school science class and a logic class. You will learn that it is impossible to prove a negative. Well, maybe you won't learn it but it will be taught. Good luck to you.



posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 11:13 PM
link   
I love this! I read the whole thread. Joining late. My position is I am a Christian who came to Christ of my own free will and I don't attend a church or subscribe to any doctrines that may or may not be true. I AM right and you are wrong. That is my stance on believe/not believe. I'm sure you have the same stance so I won't say it again and don't expect you to reiterate that to me. Having said that, I feel this is more a philosophical debate rather than a theosophical one simply because not one person who is reading these words will be able to prove the other wrong. If they could, it would have been done already and this topic never would have been brought up. NOTurTypical keeps trying to defend his?her position about evil. I say God created all things. I believe in science and many scientists also believe in God. Does that mean that scientists can't be good Christians or that Christians can't be good scientists? I don't think so. People say God didn't create Good/Evil Love/Hate because it has no material or substance. Not so. It is scientifically proven that thought has weight. Feelings can be measured with technology that has been around for decades. So you ask "WHY?" I don't know. I am not God. Neither are you. The KJV of the bible gives us reasons and answers to that question. I believe the words of the KJV of the bible and have yet to find contradictions. It's people interpretations of the bible that I find all the contradictions. You can read into the separate meanings of different languages if you want but the lessons are the same. It's very convenient for a believer or a non believer to take a certain meaning out of a few words and misrepresent them while making their case, but it is unproductive. Now that is my integration into this thread. My first question is this. If human beings are not meant to be spiritual beings, why do have pineal gland smack dab in the middle of our brains?

One example of misinterpretation of bible scripture. Earlier someone asked about contradictions in the book of Genesis, asking why it says God created trees before man and then later says he created man before trees. The answer is simple and I saw it immediately and realized he doesn't have case nor will ever with that sort of questioning. The story specifically gives the order in which things were created. Nature-Man-Garden of Eden- The nature IN the Garden of Eden. Simple. But yet such small misrepresentations are made for the sake of Atheism all the time.

Getting back to religions in society; I have a feeling that OP doesn't really care about that and just wants to spout his version of a Mother Earth Jesus. Religion is what religion is. Smart people know when they are being had, not so smart people, not so much. Establishment religion is just like establishment government. There are some good people but there are also bad people. When you give people power over other people it doesn't matter what you believe, eventually they are going to start viewing themselves as holier than thou.



posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 11:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Tangerine
If that is true and you really do believe that, I have a question. What is Anti-matter? And why are scientists so bent on proving it exists? The burden of proof is always on the one making the challenge. If you challenge my belief in God I expect you to prove me wrong. If I challenge your non-belief I would try to prove you wrong. I will not challenge a non-believer because I have learned in the past that no amount of proof would convince you otherwise. I have a feeling you watched Ken Ham debating Bill Nye on the subject? Well I watched it and I shook my head during the whole dang thing. I know people that would have annihilated Bill Nye. But I didn't find Ken Ham's views on certain things all that convincing either. I will say this, though, there is proof. What exactly would it take for you to change your mind? I think your answer will be "Nothing".



posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 11:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kusinjo
a reply to: Tangerine
If that is true and you really do believe that, I have a question. What is Anti-matter? And why are scientists so bent on proving it exists? The burden of proof is always on the one making the challenge. If you challenge my belief in God I expect you to prove me wrong. If I challenge your non-belief I would try to prove you wrong. I will not challenge a non-believer because I have learned in the past that no amount of proof would convince you otherwise. I have a feeling you watched Ken Ham debating Bill Nye on the subject? Well I watched it and I shook my head during the whole dang thing. I know people that would have annihilated Bill Nye. But I didn't find Ken Ham's views on certain things all that convincing either. I will say this, though, there is proof. What exactly would it take for you to change your mind? I think your answer will be "Nothing".



You clearly don't understand how this works. The one making the positive claim (ie. God exists and created humans) has the onus to prove the claim. If I claim that Zorks exist and you can't prove they don't (you can't), does that prove that Zorks exist? Of course not.

You won't challenge a non-believer because no amount of proof will convince a non-believer otherwise? How do you know that? Not an iota of testable evidence has been presented to date to put that to the test. Of course, if you have some and wish to cite it, we can put it to the test.



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 12:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: Kusinjo

a reply to: Tangerine

If that is true and you really do believe that, I have a question. What is Anti-matter? And why are scientists so bent on proving it exists? The burden of proof is always on the one making the challenge. If you challenge my belief in God I expect you to prove me wrong. If I challenge your non-belief I would try to prove you wrong. I will not challenge a non-believer because I have learned in the past that no amount of proof would convince you otherwise. I have a feeling you watched Ken Ham debating Bill Nye on the subject? Well I watched it and I shook my head during the whole dang thing. I know people that would have annihilated Bill Nye. But I didn't find Ken Ham's views on certain things all that convincing either. I will say this, though, there is proof. What exactly would it take for you to change your mind? I think your answer will be "Nothing".







You clearly don't understand how this works. The one making the positive claim (ie. God exists and created humans) has the onus to prove the claim. If I claim that Zorks exist and you can't prove they don't (you can't), does that prove that Zorks exist? Of course not.



You won't challenge a non-believer because no amount of proof will convince a non-believer otherwise? How do you know that? Not an iota of testable evidence has been presented to date to put that to the test. Of course, if you have some and wish to cite it, we can put it to the test.


You have yet to show us an iota of testable evidence that you or your family exists. In fact the universe in all its beauty is evidence of god. I posted a video full of evidence, what isnt testable in the video?
edit on 29-1-2015 by FormOfTheLord because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 12:13 AM
link   
It's a monitor to see how intelligent you are and how well you pay attention to detail!



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 12:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Tangerine

I actually understand quite well. And you didn't answer my question. Okay, I will humor you with an example of proof. Which I know you will refute and deny. You claim that you can't prove a negative but that is exactly what the big bang theory proposes. There was nothing and from nothing came everything. Yet you will expect people to believe that under that line of reasoning the earth just happened to float, over billions of years, the exact spot it needed to be to support life, by accident. AND the moon just happened to be in the right spot as well to have just the right amount of gravitational pull to keep the oceans from spilling over all the continents and washing back and forth destroying all life as we know it on a daily basis, again, by accident. Want more?....



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 12:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: arpgme


That may well be the case but do you care to explain the contradictions below pertaining to said book?

Genesis 1:11-12 and 1:26-27 Trees came before Adam. Genesis 2:4-9 Trees came after Adam.


this is interesting:

11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.

And THEN:

12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

So first God said " LET the earth..."
and then the earth "BROUGHT FORTH..."

Compare:

God: "Let the earth bring forth grass,.."
Earth: And the earth brought forth grass,

God: "...THE herb yielding seed,.."
Earth: AND herb yielding seed AFTER HIS KIND,

God: "...and the FRUIT tree yielding fruit AFTER HIS KIND,.."
Earth: and the tree yielding fruit,

God: who's seed IS in itself,
Earth: who's seed WAS in itself,

God: UPON THE EARTH:
Earth: AFTER HIS KIND:

God: And it was so.
Earth: And God saw that it was good.

That's a common theme and I believe it's intentional.



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 12:57 AM
link   
a reply to: lessthan1
Awesome! It is interesting and it IS scientific and testable. I'm sure some will disagree but...
Think about it. Have you ever thought to yourself: What if we had a book written by God himself and not just INSPIRED by God, written by man? Would you believe it? Would you be able to comprehend it? What if I told you that the scripture you reference actually alludes to such a book and only now are we even beginning to scratch the surface of what that book even says. If I showed you a Windows Notepad page full of computer code, would you assume that it started itself from a big explosion in the sky or would you recognize it for what it is? Computer code written by a programmer? What if you showed that code to a 3 year old? Would you expect that toddler to automatically know it was written and tested by a person? What is DNA if not computer code written by God? It is another accident? And why can we only read just a tiny fraction of it? "After it's/his kind" is alluding to DNA programming. It basically means that a dog is a dog and cannot be a cat. A tree is a tree and cannot be a potato. Why is it that in evolution you see all these species coming from the same beginnings but you cannot intermingle their DNA. We can create new breeds of dogs or cats but why haven't we seen any DOGCATS? If people have consciousness, why is it so hard to accept that we were created from consciousness?



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join