It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
“Because the thing which can be known about God is evident in them, because God made it known to them.” (Romans 1:19)
When we witness to people, we don’t have to worry about proving God’s existence. According to this verse, God makes Himself evident, open, and plain to everyone. He literally placed evidence “in them.” Apparently God placed a knowledge of Himself within all men—inside their minds, in their hearts, in the very core of their being.
The verb is present tense. God did not reveal Himself in the past and then stop. He continues to reveal Himself within us now.
So when people like Epicurus try to appease their conscience and justify their sin, they must suppress their knowledge of God. They grab at straws to patch together a cage around the truth. But God’s truth breaks free, like a tiger ill-suited for captivity.
The King of Heaven does not rely on petty heralds to share who He is. Nor does He post little notes on bulletin boards, hoping we’ll see them. God Himself takes a personal interest in making sure that each one of us has knowledge of Him.
God knows that all people fight against this knowledge. Jesus could say to everyone what He once said to Saul, a zealous Pharisee, “It is hard for you to kick against the pricks” (Acts 9:5). He pricks every heart, letting each person know about Him.
No evil? We'll see if you feel that way in ten years when you have to operate on an abused victim....
God makes Himself evident, open, and plain to everyone.
Those who have never heard are willfully guilty for rejecting God because God has revealed Himself clearly in the wonders of creation.
God is angry with us. Notice why. God’s anger swells up because men are “suppressing the truth.
God seethes with anger because unbelievers attempt to “imprison” the truth by their wicked lives.”
Our sin against what we know about God has reached the point that it would be immoral for God not to act.
God directs this wrath against two things—“impiety” and “injustice.” Impiety, or ungodliness, refers to mankind’s failure to fulfill his obligation to his Creator.
When we witness to people, we don’t have to worry about proving God’s existence.
Apparently God placed a knowledge of Himself within all men—inside their minds, in their hearts, in the very core of their being.
So when people like Epicurus try to appease their conscience and justify their sin
God knows that all people fight against this knowledge.
The AiG Statement of Faith
Section 1: Priorities
1. The scientific aspects of creation are important, but are secondary in importance to the proclamation of the gospel of Jesus Christ as Sovereign, Creator, Redeemer, and Judge.
2. The doctrines of Creator and creation cannot ultimately be divorced from the gospel of Jesus Christ.
Section 2: Basics
1. The 66 books of the Bible are the written Word of God. The Bible is divinely inspired and inerrant throughout. Its assertions are factually true in all the original autographs. It is the supreme authority in everything it teaches. Its authority is not limited to spiritual, religious, or redemptive themes but includes its assertions in such fields as history and science.
By definition, no apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the scriptural record. Of primary importance is the fact that evidence is always subject to interpretation by fallible people who do not possess all information.
The only legitimate marriage is the joining of one man and one woman. God has commanded that no sexual activity be engaged in outside of marriage. Any forms of homosexuality, lesbianism, bisexuality, incest, fornication, adultery, pornography, etc., are sinful perversions of God’s gift of sex.
Originally posted by elysiumfire
As a personal observation of the comments quoted of Missner, a number of them raise objections to his conclusions.
Using the formula for alternate linear arrangements of these amino acids indicates that there are about 10 650 permutations possible, but only one of them is hemoglobin.
Is he stating that other permutations repeat a result, unlike the permutation in which hemoglobin only occurs; or am I right in thinking that any one of the permutations only produces a specific result, and is not repeated or found to occur by any other permutation? If this is the case, then surely it makes the hemoglobin permutation equally as valid as any other permutation. In other words, the result of any permutation is equal in both potential and occurrence as any other.
This is still a pretty good finite approximation for infinity! The likelihood of this specific sequence occurring by chance is clearly absurd.
I can't help feeling that there is something of error in this statement, because without being able to measure infinity as a whole, how can one arrive at a approximation of it...how is he able to gain a reference point to approximate infinity?
As for the likelihood of a 'specific sequence occurring by chance', again not knowing the true measure of infinity...one is not able to quantify the 'chance' potential.
(In speculating about obtaining this precise sequence by 10 500+ random trials, remember that there have been only about 10 17 seconds in the generally accepted age of the universe, so you would have had to work rather quickly. Also, realize that there are only about 10 66 atoms in the universe, so you can't waste material on false tries!)
So, through speculation he arrives at a figure stating the age of the universe in seconds (10 to the power of 17 = 3.16887646 × 10,000.000.000 years). This huge figure is for the universe we know of and observe, and does not take into account the larger volume of the universe that we don't know...that existing beyond our ability to detect and observe. The same principle applies to his figure of atoms.
If someone claims to be an atheist, ask him to prove it. It must include a claim to know everything - since God could be hiding behind any area of knowledge the claimant has overlooked.
Equally (and the more probable), is that God isn't hiding behind any area of knowledge simply because there is no knowledge empirically observed behind which God has been found to be hiding, and thus, there is no need to claim to know everything.
The claim is that God is omnipresent, and therefore, if God truly exists, there would be no knowledge behind which he isn't hiding...God would in fact be present in all knowledge, which clearly is not the case. This reasoning presents evidence (allbeit circumstantial) that the blindness and fallacies are maintained by the believers (not the atheists) by their ignoring the contradictions of their claims.
Discrediting a 'website' by ignoring the truth presented within is lazy...and mis-directed logic
Originally posted by Welfhard
......I don't need a sermon, it completely detracts from the discussion. Deal with the what Epicurus and nothing else.
[edit on 29-9-2009 by Welfhard]
Originally posted by John Matrix
I'm not sure I can compete with you. ....
Originally posted by sirnex
....Or more aptly, explain where you got the idea that I thought you were talking about the big bang specifically.....
Originally posted by sirnex
I'm starting to think that you think I'm confusing because your confusing yourself which is confusing me and that in turns causes you to become further confused which then some how leads to the miraculous appearance of a tickle me Elmo right above an active before it goes kaboom just as a bird was about to fly over an go poop on it.
What scientific evidence do we have that God exists? Most skeptics would say "none." A crucial doctrine of Christianity is that God listens to and answers prayers. So why not test this doctrine scientifically, using a double-blind, clinical trial? This is the exact premise that groups of medical doctors used in double-blind "drug" studies of the efficacy of Christian prayer on healing. Papers are available online.
A Report on the Papers:
"Positive Therapeutic Effects of Intercessory Prayer in a Coronary Care Unit Population"2
"A Randomized, Controlled Trial of the Effects of Remote, Intercessory Prayer on Outcomes in Patients Admitted to the Coronary Care Unit"3
Effects of remote, retroactive intercessory prayer on outcomes in patients with bloodstream infection: randomised controlled trial.4
1. "Positive Therapeutic Effects of Intercessory Prayer in a Coronary Care Unit Population"
MethodsCardiac patients from the San Francisco General Medical Center were randomly divided (using a computer-generated list) into two groups. The names of the patients in the "test" group were given to a group of Christians, who prayed for them while they were in the hospital. The intercessory prayer team members were chosen on the following basis:
Born again Christians on the basis of John 3:35
Led an active Christian life on the basis of
daily devotional prayer
fellowship in a local Christian church
The "placebo" group received no prayer. Neither the "test" nor the "placebo" group of patients knew if they were receiving prayer. Likewise, the hospital staff, doctors, or nurses were "blinded" since they did not know which patient belonged to which group.
ResultsStatistics were acquired from the prayer and placebo groups both before and after prayer, until the patients were discharged from the hospital. There were no statistical differences between the placebo and the prayer groups before prayer was initiated. The results demonstrated that patients who were prayed for suffered "less congestive heart failure, required less diuretic and antibiotic therapy, had fewer episodes of pneumonia, had fewer cardiac arrests, and were less frequently intubated and ventilated." Statistics demonstrated the the prayer group had a statistically significantly lower severity score based upon the hospital course after entry (p < 0.01). Multivariate analysis of all the parameters measured demonstrated that the outcomes of the two groups were even more statistically significant (p < 0.0001). In science, the standard level of significance is when a "p value" is less than 0.05. A value of 0.01 means that the likelihood the result is because of chance is one in 100. A p value of 0.0001 indicates that in only one study out of 10,000 is the result likely to be due to chance. Table 2 from the study is reproduced below. The remarkable thing which one notices is that nearly every parameter measured is affected by prayer, although individually many categories do not reach the level of statistical significance due to sample size. However, multivariate analysis, which compares all parameters together produces a level of significance seldom reached in any scientific study (p < 0.0001). The author points out that the method used in this study does not produce the maximum effect of prayer, since the study could not control for the effect of outside prayer (i.e., it is likely many of the placebo group were prayed for by persons outside of the study). It is likely that a study which used only atheists (who had no Christian family or friends) would produce an even more dramatic result. However, since atheists make up only 1-2% of the population, it would be difficult to obtain a large enough sample size.
Originally posted by sirnex
reply to post by OldThinker
Read everything in it's entirety before you reply to it. This includes reading the *LINKED to post that was in reply*
You posted something saying I was describing something I wasn't describing. I replied with a wordy response indicating why I was not describing what you thought I was describing. It's not a hard concept. We just need to work with you a little more, then your reading comprehension skills will be up there. Just have patience and try, try, try again till you finally got it!
Maybe bookmark, for when you are more OPEN
Scientific Studies that Show a Positive Effect of Religion on Health
by Rich Deem
Scientific studies over the last four decades have examined the role of both public and private religious expression on health and longevity. The studies have shown that the practice of religious activity improves health and increases longevity. The effect is seen even when other social/psychological differences are taken into account. For example, one 16-year study examined mortality rates in 11 religious vs. 11 secular kibbutzim in Israel. Although both communities were demographically-matched and provided similar levels of social support, three time more people died in the secular kibbutzim compared to the religious kibbutazim. The following is a short list of some recent studies that have shown the positive influence of religion on health and longevity.
Tully J, Viner RM, Coen PG, Stuart JM, Zambon M, Peckham C, Booth C, Klein N, Kaczmarski E, Booy R. 2006. Risk and Protective Factors for Meningococcal Disease in Adolescents: Matched Cohort Study. BMJ 332: 445-450.
A study of meningococcal disease in adolescents in the UK showed that religious observance was as effective as meningococcal vaccination for preventing meningococcal disease.
O'Connor P.J., N.P. Pronk, A. Tan, and R.P. Whitebird. 2005. Characteristics of adults who use prayer as an alternative therapy. Am. J. Health Promot. 19:369-375.
A study of prayer use by patients showed that 47% of study subjects prayed for their health, and 90% of these believed prayer improved their health. Those who prayed had significantly less smoking and alcohol use and more preventive care visits, influenza immunizations, vegetable intake, satisfaction with care, and social support, and were more likely to have a regular primary care provider. The study concluded that those who pray had more favorable health-related behaviors, preventive service use, and satisfaction with care.
Krucoff, M. W., et al. 2005. Music, imagery, touch, and prayer as adjuncts to interventional cardiac care: the Monitoring and Actualisation of Noetic Trainings (MANTRA) II randomised study. Lancet 366:211-217.
This double blind study used prayer in combination with music, imagery, and touch in four randomly assigned groups of cardiac patients. Intercessory prayer groups included Christian, Muslim, Jewish, and Buddhist religious traditions. Overall, the study found no significant effect of prayer. However, major adverse cardiac events were reduced in the prayer group (23% to 27%), as were death and readmission rates (33% to 35%). The inclusion of intercessors of multiple religious traditions may have reduced the effectiveness of prayer, especially since Buddhists (who do not believe in God) were included in the study.
D'Souza, R.F. and A. Rodrigo. 2004. Spiritually augmented cognitive behavioural therapy. Australas Psychiatry 12: 148-152.
This study used spiritually augmented cognitive behavior therapy in a mental health study. The study demonstrated that spiritually augmented cognitive behavior therapy helped reduce hopelessness and despair, improved treatment collaboration, reduced relapse, and enhanced functional recovery.
Palmer, R. F., D. Katerndahl, and J. Morgan-Kidd. 2004. A Randomized Trial of the Effects of Remote Intercessory Prayer: Interactions with Personal Beliefs on Problem-Specific Outcomes and Functional Status. J. Alt. Compl. Med. 10: 438-448.
A randomized clinical trial found a significant reduction in the amount of pain in the intercessory prayer group compared to controls. In addition, the amount of concern for baseline problems at follow-up was significantly lower in the prayer group when the subject initially believed that the problem could be resolved. Those who did not believe that their problem could be resolved did not differ from controls. Better physical functioning was observed in the prayer group for those with a higher belief in prayer. However, better mental health scores were observed in the control group with lower belief in prayer scores.
Krucoff, M. W., S. W. Crater, C. L. Green, A. C. Maas, J. E. Seskevich, J. D. Lane, K. A. Loeffler, K. Morris, T. M. Bashore, and H. G. Koenig. 2001. Integrative noetic therapies as adjuncts to percutaneous intervention during unstable coronary syndromes: Monitoring and Actualization of Noetic Training (MANTRA) feasibility pilot. Am. Heart J. 142: 760-767.
A pilot study8 (limited to 150 patients) examining the efficacy of noetic (non-pharmacological) therapies (stress relaxation, imagery, touch therapy, and prayer) found that "Of all noetic therapies, off-site intercessory prayer had the lowest short- and long-term absolute complication rates." The results did not reach statistical significance due to the small sample size, but a full study is planned.
Pargament, K. I., H. G. Koenig, N. Tarakeshwar, J. Hahn. 2001. Religious Struggle as a Predictor of Mortality Among Medically Ill Elderly Patients A 2-Year Longitudinal Study. Arch. Intern Med. 161: 1881-1883.
A study examined the effect of "religious struggle" (defined by such things as being angry at God or feeling punished by God) was predictive of poorer physical recovery and higher mortality. According to the authors, "Our findings suggest that patients who indicate religious struggle during a spiritual history may be at particularly high risk for poor medical outcomes. Referral of these patients to clergy to help them work through these issues may ultimately improve clinical outcomes; further research is needed to determine whether interventions that reduce religious struggles might also improve medical prognosis."
Hughes M. Helma, Judith C. Haysb, Elizabeth P. Flintb, Harold G. Koeniga and Dan G. Blazera. 2000. Does Private Religious Activity Prolong Survival? A Six-Year Follow-up Study of 3,851 Older Adults. The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences 55: M400-M405.
A six year study of 3,851 elderly persons revealed that those who reported having rarely to never participating in private religious activity had an increased relative hazard of dying over those who participated more frequently in religious activity. Whereas most previous studies showed a positive effect for organized religious activities, this study showed that personal religious activity was also effective at reducing mortality.
Scientific Studies that Show a Positive Effect of Religion on Health