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.

 

Science for Religion A - proof of God Creation .

page: 5
6
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 20 2017 @ 12:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut
One example is that my first house was threatened by fire from an adjacent house and the water main pressure was insufficient to hose down the house. My wife & I prayed that we wouldn't loose the house and rain immediately began not to just fall, but to deluge down, putting out the fire next door. As soon as the deluge stopped, which it did as suddenly as it started, the fire engine arrived and the firemen were all looking up into the sky, which was cloudless and starry, saying "where did that come from?".


That's called confirmation bias. You don't know that the prayer is what caused that. It is assumed because the outcome was favorable. I've seen countless times where weather suddenly starts then stops. In some areas it's pretty common. What about all the times when prayer doesn't do anything and the outcome is not favorable? Do you consider that or do you only remember the times you THINK it worked rather than the times it didn't? If you prayed and your house caught on fire anyway, would you be using it as an example that prayer doesn't work? I'm not so sure of that.


edit on 6 20 17 by Barcs because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 20 2017 @ 12:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Barcs

originally posted by: chr0naut
One example is that my first house was threatened by fire from an adjacent house and the water main pressure was insufficient to hose down the house. My wife & I prayed that we wouldn't loose the house and rain immediately began not to just fall, but to deluge down, putting out the fire next door. As soon as the deluge stopped, which it did as suddenly as it started, the fire engine arrived and the firemen were all looking up into the sky, which was cloudless and starry, saying "where did that come from?".


That's called confirmation bias. You don't know that the prayer is what caused that. It is assumed because the outcome was favorable. I've seen countless times where weather suddenly starts then stops. In some areas it's pretty common. What about all the times when prayer doesn't do anything? Do you consider that or do you only remember the times you THINK it worked rather than the times it didn't?



Yes, rain always falls in deluges from cloudless skies putting fires out, starting immediately after a prayer and stopping immediately as soon as the fire is damped down?

There were also none of the usual atmospheric changes one expects with extreme weather. No wind or lightning.

I even considered that perhaps a cometary fragment had entered the atmosphere and melted to rain on the fire (but there were no particulates). It was not normal rain, it was like a tank load of water had been dropped.

There were multiple witnesses, some who were unaware that prayer was involved, the event and the prayers had a specific time frame and there was, after the fact, objective evidence that it had occurred.

But it could have been confirmation bias. As could most observations of non-repeatable events. At some point you have to try and evaluate; if your theories about an event sequence, or a confirmation bias clouding your judgement, are the the most probable.

edit on 20/6/2017 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2017 @ 04:20 PM
link   
nothing in this thread is proof of divine agency. more specifically, we will not convince anyone here that their alleged evidence does not constitute proof. this is a fools errand for those who dont have the humility and pragmatism to admit that they are unable to change someones mind against their will. i dont have the power to do that and there is no shame in it.

for the record...were you praying to thor for that rain shower? and if not, did you thank him anyway? because if you didnt, thats really not cool. it could also have been horus, chaac, indra, jupiter, or ran. any deity of rain or weather really. might want to thank them all just to be safe. keep in mind that just because you dont pray to them doesnt mean they are not listening.

edit on 20-6-2017 by TzarChasm because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2017 @ 06:25 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

So all the people that die in house fires each year didn't pray hard enough?



posted on Jun, 20 2017 @ 09:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: chr0naut

So all the people that die in house fires each year didn't pray hard enough?


Or probably not at all.

It is also statistically likely that they didn't have adequate smoke alarms, too. Some may have even been smoking in bed. Many may be totally innocent, simply caught up in the consequence of someone else's irresponsibility or culpability.

In my case, nobody was injured and fire investigators believe it was arson by the owners who had been unable to get a tenant for some time and had torched the house to claim the insurance. As I understand it, the evidence of arson was clear cut, the arsonist identified and the insurance company didn't pay.

I am just thankful that our house was spared.

edit on 20/6/2017 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2017 @ 10:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut
Yes, rain always falls in deluges from cloudless skies putting fires out, starting immediately after a prayer and stopping immediately as soon as the fire is damped down?

There were also none of the usual atmospheric changes one expects with extreme weather. No wind or lightning.


Yes it happens. I've seen it before. If you live near a large lake you know how fast weather patterns can change. What state / country did you live in back then? Again you are assuming the prayer and the rain are connected with no way to verify it.


I even considered that perhaps a cometary fragment had entered the atmosphere and melted to rain on the fire (but there were no particulates). It was not normal rain, it was like a tank load of water had been dropped.


Something like that is not out of the the question. Airplanes occasionally drop things. Are you saying that it was raining while there were no clouds in the sky or just that it changed fast from sunny to rainy?


There were multiple witnesses, some who were unaware that prayer was involved, the event and the prayers had a specific time frame and there was, after the fact, objective evidence that it had occurred.


I feel this is a bit disingenuous. Yes, objective evidence showed that it rained and put out a fire, not that your prayer caused the rain. Big difference.



posted on Jun, 20 2017 @ 11:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Barcs

originally posted by: chr0naut
Yes, rain always falls in deluges from cloudless skies putting fires out, starting immediately after a prayer and stopping immediately as soon as the fire is damped down?

There were also none of the usual atmospheric changes one expects with extreme weather. No wind or lightning.


Yes it happens. I've seen it before. If you live near a large lake you know how fast weather patterns can change. What state / country did you live in back then? Again you are assuming the prayer and the rain are connected with no way to verify it.


Granville, Sydney, NSW, Australia, in April. I think there was a large moon because I recall there was plenty of natural light. The timer (we think) that started the fire went off at midnight.

I wasn't particularly looking skywards until after the rain but, as an astronomer, I am a tad familiar with the night sky. I did make note of how good the 'seeing' was after everything had calmed down.


Something like that is not out of the the question. Airplanes occasionally drop things.


Granville's not particularly on a flight path and away from the airport. There was also, I estimate, significantly more water than a plane could carry.


Are you saying that it was raining while there were no clouds in the sky or just that it changed fast from sunny to rainy?


I'm pretty sure it was close to a full moon because afterwards the sky was obviously cloudless, horizon to horizon. If there had been cloud, it would have been lit by the moon and, as I said it was good seeing, no haziness, fog or cloud.


I feel this is a bit disingenuous. Yes, objective evidence showed that it rained and put out a fire, not that your prayer caused the rain. Big difference.


You may have your doubts, fair enough, but I was there and don't.




posted on Jun, 21 2017 @ 08:07 AM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

There is nothing to doubt, as there is no solid connection in the first place, just a presumptive claim based on assumption. You being there, doesn't change the fact that it's confirmation bias and cherry picking to assume that prayer caused the rain. You, yourself, don't even know that. But yeah, I'm sure god is out there making sure people who pray at the right time will not lose their property, but lets thousands of children die from cancer every year despite thousands praying for them. You can't logically only consider the times you believe it worked, while ignoring every time it had no effect. There is no logic involved in that. It is pure cherry picking.
edit on 6 21 17 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2017 @ 02:15 PM
link   
Science has looked for God by looking into brains of believers. There is nothing unique about religious belief in these brain structures compared to none belief. Instead we see these networks are overlap with those that mediate political beliefs, moral beliefs and areas of the brain that identifies "self." This is how so many varying beliefs can be grafted and assimilated in your mind. Studies have shown that people with traumatic brain injuries affecting the right parietal lobe,the right side of the brain is associated with "self," showed an increased feeling of closeness to a higher power. When this part of your brain is destroyed both you "self awareness" and God are effectively none existent.

edit on fMonday172572f251202 by flyingfish because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2017 @ 05:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: JDeLattre89
Yeah, it is called the clockwork theory in Philosophy.

The proof of a higher being/god creating the Universe is the fact that the Universe is so perfect and works like a clock.

It gets its name from the analogy of:

Suppose you are walking along the beach and find a starfish missing a leg, you would then think, 'Oh what a pretty thing made by nature.'

Now suppose you are walking along the same beach and find a pocket watch, you would simply assume that it was created by someone or something with a purpose.

The same applies to the universe. It seems to be so perfect that it must have been created that way.



Now the problem with this theory is that it also proves itself false. For if this is the case then in order for there to be a creator, there must have been a creator of the creator and so forth. It gets really tedious and redundant and I have a hard time remembering my freshman philosophy but . . . there you have it.


You needed to have studied your freshman philosophy just a bit harder! You attempt to refute the proposition that a perfect universe requires a creator to make it perfect by introducing a total red herring that any student of religion will tell you is self-evidently false - namely, that a creator needed to have been created by another creator, leading to an infinite regress. By definition, God is the First Cause and is not part of Creation but stands outside it, so to speak. This means that God was not created and so does not need another Creator.

Prove to me that random chance and chaotic forces could have created a mathematically perfect universe and I will start taking atheism seriously. Until then, as I know you cannot prove it - either mathematically or with philosophical logic - I think God is the best explanation for why its design seems mathematically perfect.
And, by the way, you don't need to believe that the universe works like a clock in order to accept the proposition that a mathematically perfect universe needs a creator because it could not have arisen by chance. There is no contradiction in accepting that the universe is deterministic AND was designed by God.



posted on Jul, 3 2017 @ 06:00 PM
link   
a reply to: micpsi

Oh and I think you need to understand Science just a bit more too
Science deals with evidence (intelectual knowledge aka eídein) not what people feel (gnosis, or spiritual knowledge).

You also have the problem of proving that we are in a "perfect universe". Define such, measure such, then get back to me with your finding


Slan leat



posted on Jul, 3 2017 @ 06:26 PM
link   
a reply to: micpsi

First you need to demonstrate this God exist before you proclaim he created anything, then explain why is your god exempt from this first cause? By your own definition the Big bang could be the first cause or fluffy purple pixies for that matter. Besides your assertions, do you have any evidence there is an "outside" the universe let alone some creator genie? And what other universes have you seen to verifie ours is perfect and cannot arise by chance?



posted on Jul, 5 2017 @ 08:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: micpsi
Prove to me that random chance and chaotic forces could have created a mathematically perfect universe and I will start taking atheism seriously. Until then, as I know you cannot prove it - either mathematically or with philosophical logic - I think God is the best explanation for why its design seems mathematically perfect.


The reason we (the type of life that exists in our universe) think the conditions of the universe are perfect is because we are the type of life that the laws of physics of this universe allows. Our universe's laws of physics could be completely arbitrary, but that would not negate that it would be the place where our type of life can exist.

There could be other universes with very different physical properties (such as where gravity cannot exist, or light cannot exist -- but instead has other properties than cannot possibly exist in our universe) that still might give rise to some totally foreign form of life -- but life that could still ponder why their universe seems so mathematically perfect for them.

Their universe may be made up not matter, but instead some alternate matter-like material that cannot possibly exist in our universe with our universe's laws of physics...and (conversely) our matter could not possibly exist in that universe with its very different laws of physics.

However, even then, their universe that is so vastly different than ours would still seem so "mathematically perfect" to them.


edit on 5/7/2017 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 5 2017 @ 02:53 PM
link   
Nobody can even usefully define "God," so attributing anything to it is always going to be problematic.

Personally, I'm thinking that the universe is so big that life might have randomly arisen and evolved on Earth because it was probably bound to someplace sometime. At least this once. Whether it happened anywhere else has yet to be determined.



posted on Jul, 5 2017 @ 03:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Blue Shift

It comes down to the difference between Gnosis (Spiritual Knowledge that you just "know") and eídein (intellectual knowledge that you can measure). Gnosis can be true, but its not based on quantitative data, its based on gut or Imbas (inspiration from the Gods).

I have no issue with folks being all "God did it", as long as they also get that they can not (nor do they need too if they keep it personal) prove it. I say this as a deeply religious pagan (Prechristian European (Gaelic in my case) spiritualist) individual



posted on Jul, 5 2017 @ 04:07 PM
link   
a reply to: midnightstar

Thats Snowball Earth. It happened

And internal convection changed things - volcanoes erupted, pumping CO2 into the atmosphere. Earth warmed. And the Cambrian explosion occurred. life as we know it evolved.

Shows how CO2 can make a big difference



posted on Jul, 5 2017 @ 04:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

Aye


Or, to put it another way, assuming there are 10 billion planets and only one on which we could evolve, it is this one - because here we are. Why are we here? Beause we are here. We couldnt be on any one of the 10 billion other planets because this is the one - the only one - that was perfect for us.



posted on Jul, 8 2017 @ 05:10 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

Are you assuming that physical properties are somehow chosen by lottery instead of by deeper underlying physics? The argument about improbabilities doesn't seem to make sense unless you do.



posted on Jul, 8 2017 @ 05:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

Universe A, no life is possible; Universe B, no life is possible; ... Universe S, life is possible; universe T, no life is possible. Life is only possible in Universe S.

Any person alive is in Universe S. He says: "We are so lucky to be in a universe with laws that allow us to exist!"

How can you possibly conclude anything at all from this selection effect?



posted on Jul, 8 2017 @ 05:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Blue Shift

Try to define 'god' first, such as the gods the Greeks believed in. Once you can do that, assume someone who figured out what extrapolation and infinity was (some greek) projected that concept to "God". They you have your definition of God.




top topics



 
6
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join