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.

 

Why can't God just show himself to us?

page: 12
5
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 1 2013 @ 04:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by danielsil18

Originally posted by RealTruthSeeker

Originally posted by danielsil18
reply to post by filledcup
 




Evolution is a scientific theory just like the theory of gravity. I still recommend you to learn about evolution. It's not as hard as you might think.
edit on 1-7-2013 by danielsil18 because: (no reason given)


I don't buy it. After all those theories were written by men right? I guess we should just take their word for it. But wouldn't that be blind faith?



I put a small video in a reply about evolution, watch it because evolution in not something out of this world.

It's not blind faith because it can be proven and recreated by science.
edit on 1-7-2013 by danielsil18 because: (no reason given)


let me explain to you something about science.. and no i havent watched your video yet because first off we havent made our deal yet
as well as it has darwin in preview. how did i know you were going to run to darwin. lol

but anyway..

we accept that science is a logical study and practice. meaning EVERYTHING must be able to be explained in a LOGICAL manner. and that is science. and what does science do?? it re-uses the building blocks already in place and arranges them in new ways to create new things. but what are they really creating.. if u can see it?

nothing.. because they have to use pre-existing materials to construct any new thing. and that is how logic works. logic can only assemble the parts when the parts are given to it. but logic.. CANNOT create the parts from scratch and assemble it itself. it requires.. 'Creativity' which possesses the power of creation, of forging and of invention to create something new.. it is creativity which created the atoms.. logic can only combine those atoms in various ways and discover new mechanics as a result of such combinations.

there is no way you can give a logic only brain [artificial intelligence robot if u ask me] the credit for a CREATION. it can only gain credit for ASSEMBLY in a unique or previously unobserved way. and that is why logic cannot explain away everything in existence. there is magic in this world. hear me.. logic when joined with creativity creates nothing less.. than magic!

there are simply places where science cannot tread my friend.




posted on Jul, 1 2013 @ 04:55 PM
link   
reply to post by RealTruthSeeker
 





I was joking. I know what evolution is. But explain this. What creature did monkeys sleep with in order to produce man? That one always makes my head hurt.


That one is easy to explain, but ill show you a very short video with Richard Dawkins explaining your question:




posted on Jul, 1 2013 @ 04:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by danielsil18
reply to post by filledcup
 


I think you only know about the carbon dating flaws from creationist websites, but you should also know that we assume the age of the Earth to be about 4.6 billion years from Radiocarbon dating, Potassium-Argon dating, and Uranium-Lead dating.


the problem here is that "we assume" it is not fact. Once again, you are taking man's word for it. The age of the earth will never be proven unless run across a time machine one day.



posted on Jul, 1 2013 @ 04:58 PM
link   
reply to post by filledcup
 


watch the video please, so we can understand ourselves better.

You might see Darwin in evolution videos since he was the one to give the idea of evolution. After that it was proven to be correct by scientists.



posted on Jul, 1 2013 @ 05:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by danielsil18

Originally posted by RealTruthSeeker

Originally posted by danielsil18
reply to post by filledcup
 




Evolution is a scientific theory just like the theory of gravity. I still recommend you to learn about evolution. It's not as hard as you might think.
edit on 1-7-2013 by danielsil18 because: (no reason given)


I don't buy it. After all those theories were written by men right? I guess we should just take their word for it. But wouldn't that be blind faith?



I put a small video in a reply about evolution, watch it because evolution in not something out of this world.

It's not blind faith because it can be proven and recreated by science.
edit on 1-7-2013 by danielsil18 because: (no reason given)


lols.. science cant replicate evolution in a lab. hopefully that is not what ur suggesting and ive missed something somewhere lol.

listen.. Darwin as great and indepth a thinker as he was.. u got to realize.. he formulated alot out of philosophy. and that's not very scientific whether science wants to admit it or not. but they will certainly take the credit for the final outcome. i'll view ur video shortly. and then i will bring the realization of God's existence to the atheist levels of thought. they are supposed to be grounded in logic.. so u should be able to follow me. altho learning requires imagination as well.. i will try my best.



posted on Jul, 1 2013 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by danielsil18
reply to post by RealTruthSeeker
 





I was joking. I know what evolution is. But explain this. What creature did monkeys sleep with in order to produce man? That one always makes my head hurt.


That one is easy to explain, but ill show you a very short video with Richard Dawkins explaining your question:



i dont know about anyone else here.. but im no frickin ape LOL

and ur asking me to watch these guys' videos as tho i havent already studied them. i would not speak of anything i dont know about.. in fact.. if i dont have knowledge on something u would quickly find me silent. i have seen much of their dialogue and i tell u it leaves much to be desired.

swift and keen as he might be.. if he had to sit in a room with my line of questioning id have him questioning all he was always so cocksure about.
edit on 1-7-2013 by filledcup because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2013 @ 05:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by RealTruthSeeker

Originally posted by danielsil18
reply to post by filledcup
 


I think you only know about the carbon dating flaws from creationist websites, but you should also know that we assume the age of the Earth to be about 4.6 billion years from Radiocarbon dating, Potassium-Argon dating, and Uranium-Lead dating.


the problem here is that "we assume" it is not fact. Once again, you are taking man's word for it. The age of the earth will never be proven unless run across a time machine one day.


You are right, it's not a fact and to be truly proven we might have to go back in a time machine. But there is something you don't know. Science agrees with you.

Science doesn't show us our past as a fact. What it shows is that the Earth is about 4.6 billion years, take or add a few million years. Science is not perfect but it's the best explanation.

We know the Earth to be about 4.6 million years with different dating methods. They all came to about 4.6 billion years, which enforces our confidence that it's right.



posted on Jul, 1 2013 @ 05:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by danielsil18
reply to post by RealTruthSeeker
 





I was joking. I know what evolution is. But explain this. What creature did monkeys sleep with in order to produce man? That one always makes my head hurt.


That one is easy to explain, but ill show you a very short video with Richard Dawkins explaining your question:



OMG, don't make me start on this guy. I'll leave this alone. Dawkins has already been blasted and re-blasted again and again. Don't make me post videos on him. But like i said, I'll leave this alone. You go ahead and keep believing all those man made teachings, lol.



posted on Jul, 1 2013 @ 05:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by danielsil18

Originally posted by RealTruthSeeker

Originally posted by danielsil18
reply to post by filledcup
 


I think you only know about the carbon dating flaws from creationist websites, but you should also know that we assume the age of the Earth to be about 4.6 billion years from Radiocarbon dating, Potassium-Argon dating, and Uranium-Lead dating.


the problem here is that "we assume" it is not fact. Once again, you are taking man's word for it. The age of the earth will never be proven unless run across a time machine one day.


You are right, it's not a fact and to be truly proven we might have to go back in a time machine. But there is something you don't know. Science agrees with you.

Science doesn't show us our past as a fact. What it shows is that the Earth is about 4.6 billion years, take or add a few million years. Science is not perfect but it's the best explanation.

We know the Earth to be about 4.6 million years with different dating methods. They all came to about 4.6 billion years, which enforces our confidence that it's right.



LOOOL!! dont u just love that spin??? science agrees with us now hoorraaay..

no my friend.. science is being a hypocrit!



posted on Jul, 1 2013 @ 05:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by danielsil18

Originally posted by RealTruthSeeker

Originally posted by danielsil18
reply to post by filledcup
 


I think you only know about the carbon dating flaws from creationist websites, but you should also know that we assume the age of the Earth to be about 4.6 billion years from Radiocarbon dating, Potassium-Argon dating, and Uranium-Lead dating.


the problem here is that "we assume" it is not fact. Once again, you are taking man's word for it. The age of the earth will never be proven unless run across a time machine one day.


You are right, it's not a fact and to be truly proven we might have to go back in a time machine. But there is something you don't know. Science agrees with you.

Science doesn't show us our past as a fact. What it shows is that the Earth is about 4.6 billion years, take or add a few million years. Science is not perfect but it's the best explanation.

We know the Earth to be about 4.6 million years with different dating methods. They all came to about 4.6 billion years, which enforces our confidence that it's right.



Those methods were created by man, so I guess I have to trust them. For thousands of years man has been telling us that God exist. So how come that can't enforce confidence that it is most likely true?
edit on 1-7-2013 by RealTruthSeeker because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2013 @ 05:08 PM
link   
reply to post by RealTruthSeeker
 





OMG, don't make me start on this guy. I'll leave this alone. Dawkins has already been blasted and re-blasted again and again. Don't make me post videos on him. But like i said, I'll leave this alone. You go ahead and keep believing all those man made teachings, lol.


I understand you don't like him because he attacks your religion, but don't shoot the messenger.

The video shows what evolution says.

It's like a rapist holding a Bible and me saying "omg i wont read that bible because a rapist made it". It's completely illogical.

Plus what Richard Dawkins teach is science, something you can learn from any other Biologists. So go watch the video if you want to know the answer to your question.



posted on Jul, 1 2013 @ 05:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by danielsil18
reply to post by RealTruthSeeker
 





OMG, don't make me start on this guy. I'll leave this alone. Dawkins has already been blasted and re-blasted again and again. Don't make me post videos on him. But like i said, I'll leave this alone. You go ahead and keep believing all those man made teachings, lol.


I understand you don't like him because he attacks your religion, but don't shoot the messenger.

The video shows what evolution says.

It's like a rapist holding a Bible and me saying "omg i wont read that bible because a rapist made it". It's completely illogical.

Plus what Richard Dawkins teach is science, something you can learn from any other Biologists. So go watch the video if you want to know the answer to your question.



well let me tell you.. i laugh at all jokes. if something is funny then it is funny.. jesus jokes and memes on facebook.. im all over them.. y? because they were produced by idiots, and idiots are supposed to be entertaining. dawkins.. is an idiot.. LOL. and i dont take personal offence to anything he says about christians. it's like he's excercising bravery.. like "hey world look i can say all this and lightning hasnt struck me yet" lol

anyway.. im going to watch your videos as u said, so we can have a common ground. i think that is indeed a wise thing to do before we really start.



posted on Jul, 1 2013 @ 05:13 PM
link   
reply to post by RealTruthSeeker
 





Those methods were created by man, so I guess I have to trust them. For thousands of years man has been telling us that God exist. So how come that can't enforce confidence that is most likely true?


You are making a grave mistake by comparing religion and science.

In science, yes it was discovered by men. But if you wanted to see if it's real you could by studying and seeing for yourself if the dating methods are false.

All the dating methods were discovered by scientists and were evaluated to know if it works. You guys have very little knowledge how science works. It's nothing like religion.

It's not about giving confidence or believing in science, it's about studying and knowing it.



posted on Jul, 1 2013 @ 05:14 PM
link   
This thread is stupid. Let me get some facts right, especially for the religious zealots:

First, you have to define what "God" is. If you cannot, you are lost. I can. I know which theoretical and practical requirements are there to define Absolute. If it is Absolute, it can only be one, and it cannot be finite. Thus: The proper definition of God aka Absolute: "One intelligent infinity". That, which was prior to the big bang: THE VOID.
God = THE VOID.
It is the same under every condition, no matter what: It is self-congruent and self-consistent to itself to the infinite degree.

The first idea of Infinity: Finitude.

Finitude is self-congruent and self-consistent to itself... not to the infinite degree, but ON LIMITED TERMS.

Finitude is borrowing everything it has - from Infinity.

Finitude is claiming the limited terms for creation; thus claiming ownership. It is the fallen angel, Lucifer, who claims to be "as great as God" in religious terms. Depicture a point stretching forward itself, to a line, rotating to a circle, resulting in the famous "Flower of Life" drawing and you get an idea how Finitude operates, and in what way it claims to be the Creator.

So anyway, the requirements for the planck-world are there: An (almost) infinitely small dot was there in the beginning (the big bang), weighing 10^E-8 grams, having a temperature of 35 billion degrees, and expanding. Physics knows about the Planck scale and the Planck world, but never looked at it from the Gnostic viewpoint.

More than 99.999% of your atoms are pure void, and you keep only noticing the meager 0.001%.

So why are you not perceiving that everything was created by the void, is still being created by the void, and is being sustained by the void ?

That's very simple: Because society has molded and deformed you when you were a child.
Society has installed a fake Self in you that you know as the Ego, and which is chatting all the time to yourself whether you like it or not.
The power of the internal monologue has to be broken, which is a hard work called "Meditation".

Only when Meditation is successful, the internal monologue is broken; in this Absolute Silence, the perfect Unity-Consciousness is revealed that was always there, is there, and will be always there.

In practice this means that you will somehow feel like a child; the fake Ego-Center in the brain will be gone, the new "center" of your Being will be felt in the heart. The unity-love that runs through the fabric of space is being felt, since no thinking now blocks or distorts its perception.



posted on Jul, 1 2013 @ 05:16 PM
link   
reply to post by filledcup
 





LOOOL!! dont u just love that spin??? science agrees with us now hoorraaay..

no my friend.. science is being a hypocrit!


I didn't mean that science agrees with religion, I meant science agrees with what realtruthseeker said about it not being a fact that Earth was about 4.6 billion years old.



posted on Jul, 1 2013 @ 05:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by danielsil18
I want to ask everyone why wouldn't God just show himself to us and make us all know he exists.

Christians can't say they know God, they can only say they believe in him and they have faith. But why can't God come and show himself to us, tell us that he is real and that he wants everyone to follow his rules. After that we would all know he is real and start following him. Why would he just leave us a book written by men?

One of the arguments Christians make is that God wanted us to have free will. He wanted us to have the choice to follow or rebel. But the story of Lucifer says that he and other angels rebelled...but they knew God existed. So why would it be any different with us?

So my question arises, why can't God just make us know, not believe or have faith, but know he is real?
edit on 1-7-2013 by danielsil18 because: (no reason given)


Huh? What so called "christian" have you been talking to has said we can't know God? Indeed we can. Jesus said we would not see him very much until the time is right. He undergoes periods of silence, it's been this way for thousands and thousands of years, it's why he gave us his Holy Spirit to dwell in us who speaks what he hears from the Lord. The scriptures were written by men but they were authored by him, meaning he was the one telling the prophets and his disciples what to write.

Satan's rebellion came from his pride. That was his sin, Pride. The Lord can make you know, his modus operandi for revealing himself to gentiles (the nations) has been the scripture, he shows himself there to those who have eyes to see and ears to hear. The big signs and miracles you speak of were done for the Israelites because they require signs to believe, but the gentiles never have required it. The day is coming where he will reveal himself to the world, and he will not be happy when he comes.



posted on Jul, 1 2013 @ 05:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sk8ergrl
Maybe what you quoted means that we the people need to look outside of the box at what our governments are doing. It could be a warning that what you see and hear from the tv, radio, newspapers are to get your attention while something else more sinister is happening elsewhere that is in your black-spot. I think that Satan is not a who but what and is in fact technology. Look at how technology has caused so many deaths and has been used for evil.


I agree, in a sense. I have absolutely no argument that Satan & co & co use technology to do these things you are saying.

IMO they are the masters of technology and have shown man to use it as a disadvantage for our race, and so all species of earth. God's plan for us was spiritual knowledge, not technical knowledge what we are using it to wipe life from earth. Same can be said for currency, and that which is of flesh.

King Solomon is a great example what he could do with symbolism alone. No guns needed.

If we could handle it (He knew man would not be able to) Eden would have been a diffent story. The first people failed Him and they didn't even have the tech we have today. So, one just used a stone to kill his brother.

It's not the tech that kill, but the way it is used that kill. Of course man got a helping hand thanks to those who are not part of Him, the deceivers.

Thanks to technology many lives have been saved, too. So there are ones who use it "wisely".

In the end, it is man who's to blame and it is up to man to take the stand and gain spiritual guidance so we may walk the path He wants. Easier said than done though.

Some argue that God had no right keeping wisdom from us (Eden). Looking at it today, I see why He chose not to give us such knowledge. I too believe if we would have proved ourselves back then we would have been a specie with superior technology and superior spiritual knowledge which we would have used for the good of humankind, and for all that is on this beautiful earth. But, the only way we will have the latter i mentioned will be when we are sitting by His side. We would have no need for technology in that realm.


edit on 09/02/2012 by KaelemJames because: Spelling

edit on 09/02/2012 by KaelemJames because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2013 @ 05:24 PM
link   
It is not that God is not showing itself; it is that we mostly haven't the consciousness to understand:

God is everywhere, everything, every atom of physicality and beyond.

Why doesn't the water show itself to the fish?



posted on Jul, 1 2013 @ 05:25 PM
link   
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 


I know the whole story, that doesn't answer any questions.



posted on Jul, 1 2013 @ 05:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by ecapsretuo
It is not that God is not showing itself; it is that we mostly haven't the consciousness to understand:

God is everywhere, everything, every atom of physicality and beyond.

Why doesn't the water show itself to the fish?


Just to make sure we understand each other, I'm talking about the God the the Bible describes.

and why doesn't water show itself to the fish?

I really don't get what kind of answer and point your are trying to get or show. That question is too illogical to answer.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join