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.

 

Wanted: Honest intelligent productive thinking to resolve the issue God exists or not.

page: 127
23
<< 124  125  126    128  129  130 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 12 2020 @ 01:34 PM
link   
a reply to: cooperton



He proved this by walking on water, calming the storm, moving the boulder, and so on

And this is self evident how?



posted on Sep, 12 2020 @ 03:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: spy66

Essentially suggesting we should be thankful for the gift of life, like it or not we are all creations of the universe, if you think otherwise then you haven’t been paying attention. To dismiss consciousness as a random occurrence to me at least is disrespectful, the manifestation of your being is at the very least an attempt for the universe to reflect upon itself, without eyes it’s beauty would be wasted.



No i dont think otherwise. I know that we are all a part of the properties of the singularity that was formed.

Neither you or i would have been created if it was not preplanned within the singualrity when it was formed. You have been preplanned... And there is no way you can deny it..... There is no way you can state that you are a property of chanse...Or stated in a different way: randomness.... Our time line is a one liner.... You do exist and you can't deny it.... You cant argue: what if my mother and fater dident meet... BUT... They did... YOu have no argument.



If you have such understanding of science why wont this make sense to you...? At least if you have faith in evolution.... There is only one timeline and that is our recorded history....anything else is fiction.


There is only one book that tell us about our future..... Why would you ignore it...When all the evidence are unfolded according to our timeline and recorded history... Peopel of faith are not the idiots...... they have nothing to loose. They cant loose even if the timeline is different.
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2020 @ 06:37 PM
link   
Mono




Dear everyone, have you noticed that my opponents have not answered my challenge to them, to produce their definition of what is evidence in the least number of words they can manage with.

On the other hand, I am still with my definition of evidence in just only 13 words.

:: From Pachomius: Evidence is anything at all existing leading man to know another thing existing. (13 words)


And I am the only poster here that is all the time coherent and consistent with my repetition on my concept of what is evidence, but all the other posters they either fear to present their definition of evidence, or they already stop posting about what they did earlier (and now keep busy with derails), because they cannot explain what their definition of evidence is all about.


So, dear readers, let you ask them these two questions, in re concept of evidence:

1. What is the use of evidence in regard to the existence or no existence of God?
2. Is evidence something that is in existence outside and independent of man's mind or not?


You see, dear readers, atheists talk a lot of nonsense, all inside their mind, like categorical statements, for example, that God is a flying spaghetti monster.



First thing you must accept to be into rational discourse, is that there is existence, period.

Next thing you must accept is that ultimately existence is of two kinds:


When faced with atheists, just ask them, what are ultimately the two kinds of existence, and they will get lost altogether.

.

Here are the ultimately two kinds of existence:


    1. Existence from oneself, and the only example is God in concept as the creator cause of man and the universe and everything with a beginning.

    2. Existence from another, and the examples are everything that has a beginning, namely, a beginning from God, the only entity that exists from itself, God in concept as the creator cause of man and the universe and everything with a beginning.




Annex

Pachomius posted on Sep, 11 2020 @ 03:36 PM
- - - - - - - - - -

MONO



. . . I ask everyone posting here to present your concept of evidence, within these (see quote following) requirements:


    on Sep, 9 2020 @ 05:41 AM originally posted by Pachomius

    [. . . .]

    1. State right away what is evidence, Is it a bird, or a kite, or anything at all existing?
    2. Reduce to the maximum of just 15 words or less your draft of your concept of evidence.


.

For the rest of ye all posters here, if you care to work with me as to for us all to arrive at a concurred on concept of what is evidence, please observe the two requirements from me, so that you will be into honest intelligent productive thinking, instead of useless posting.

So, do honest intelligent productive thinking, and draft your concept observing the requirements above, otherwise you are not capable of honest intelligent productive thinking.


Here is my concept of evidence:

:: From Pachomius: Evidence is anything at all existing leading man to know another thing existing. (13 words)

.



Disclaimer: Please bear with me, my citations of previous materials might not be verbatim, but they are all coherent and consistent with all my thoughts from since the OP.


posted on Jun, 25 2020 @ 01:12 PM
www.abovetopsecret.com...
- - - - - - - - - - -

On the assumption that mankind sincerely seeks knowledge, I submit that it is possible for any person to come to resolve the issue God exists or not, with honest intelligent productive thinking, i.e., thinking on truths, facts, logic, and the history of ideas. Now, honest intelligent productive thinking on the said issue must start with working together to concur on the concept of God. What do you dear colleagues here say?


.



posted on Sep, 12 2020 @ 06:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Pachomius

You



Dear everyone, have you noticed that my opponents have not answered my challenge to them, to produce their definition of what is evidence in the least number of words they can manage with.




evidence
Pronunciation /ˈevədəns/ /ˈɛvədəns/

Translate evidence into Spanish
NOUN

1The available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.
‘the study finds little evidence of overt discrimination’

www.lexico.com...


There you go, definition of evidence.
edit on 12-9-2020 by neutronflux because: Added and fixrc



posted on Sep, 12 2020 @ 07:48 PM
link   
Mono



Dear Neutron, shame on you, you don't have any definition except from the dictionary, hey Neutron, use your brain and stock knowledge and information, and produce your very own personally drafted definition of evidence.

I am not going to engage in discussion with posters who rush to dictionaries, because they have no stock knowledge and don't do any honest intelligent productive thinking at all.


Let you dear readers witness whether Neutron can and will engage in a sustained exchange with me, I tell you, the man will take to flight sooner than later.

His preferred refuge, derails.





Neutron posted on Sep, 13 2020 @ 08:44 AM
a reply to: Pachomius
- - - - - - - - - -

You

    From Pachomius
    Dear everyone, have you noticed that my opponents have not answered my challenge to them, to produce their definition of what is evidence in the least number of words they can manage with.


evidence
Pronunciation /ˈevədəns/ /ˈɛvədəns/

Translate evidence into Spanish
NOUN

1The available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.
‘the study finds little evidence of overt discrimination’

www.lexico.com...


There you go, definition of evidence.

- - - - - - - - - -
edit on 12-9-2020 by neutronflux because: Added and fixrc


.



posted on Sep, 12 2020 @ 07:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Pachomius

A dictionary definition is evidence that a concept has been commonly adopted by a major plurality of honest intelligent productive thinking people.

That is what you want from us isn't it?



posted on Sep, 12 2020 @ 08:05 PM
link   
Randomness basically means there is no way to determine a parameter from our perspective.
To me it's seems a huge leap of logic to make this the explanation of the ordered systems clearly present in the universe.

Only systems in a sort of resonance hold together, the random ones dissipate.
The nature of harmonics, which are not man made, seems like a highly structured and generative force.
For a harmonic to have so many overtones it truly profound.

To not consider the nature of the paradox divine, seems illogical to me.
God is a word that is used as a proxy for what we have no way of understanding.



posted on Sep, 12 2020 @ 10:29 PM
link   
MONO




Dear athena:

As you are a learned and intelligent thinker and writer in English, it is expected of you that you can and do know right away upon anyone asking you, from your stock knowledge and information you should present what is the definition or concept of evidence.

So, shame on you, you have to go to dictionaries.


Okay, without dictionaries, please just produce from your English stock knowledge and information on what is evidence, of course as accommodated to the context of the present thread, which is on the issue God exists or not, in particular in re the demand from atheists that there has got to be evidence for the existence of God.

Try again, and reduce your definition to not more than 15 words, including at the start of your concept you tell readers what is evidence: Is it a bird, a plane, a meteor, a rose, a baby, anything at all that exists, etc.?

Here is my oft repeated definition of evidence:

:: From Pachomius: Evidence is anything at all existing leading man to know another thing existing. (13 words)


'


pthena posted on Sep, 13 2020 @ 09:57 AM
a reply to: Pachomius
- - - - - - - - - - - -

A dictionary definition is evidence that a concept has been commonly adopted by a major plurality of honest intelligent productive thinking people.

That is what you want from us isn't it?

- - - - - - - - - - - -
I never really expected to be living in the future but here I am!

I should change my signature. Yeah...maybe tomorrow.



.

PS: From Pachomius, don't play dummy or possum.

.



posted on Sep, 12 2020 @ 11:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Pachomius

A bird in the hand
is evidence that the bird
is real, and that it (15 words)



posted on Sep, 12 2020 @ 11:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: pthena
a reply to: Pachomius

A dictionary definition is evidence that a concept has been commonly adopted by a major plurality of honest intelligent productive thinking people.

That is what you want from us isn't it?


What would we call 'dictionary definitions' : if there were no dictionaries ?

What percentageish of 'dictionary definitions' , and 'words' : might be made-up ?

Might honest intelligent productive thinking people : make-up dictionaries ?

What's the difference between a dictionary : and a fictionary ?

Why all of the questions ?

Why not ?




posted on Sep, 13 2020 @ 12:13 AM
link   
a reply to: Nothin



What would we call 'dictionary definitions' : if there were no dictionaries ?

I looked up dictionary in the wikipedia encyclopedia (what's an encyclopedia?)
so the oldest known dictionary is a bilingual Sumerian–Akkadian wordlist, dated roughly 2300 BCE. I'm sure the whole question about the gods could be answered by simply learning the Sumerian/and or the Akkadian language.

If there were no dictionaries then we wouldn't call dictionary definitions anything. "Wait! That word you just said, what does it mean?" "I don't know. Joe said it. Let's ask him." So "that thing that Joe said."



What percentageish of 'dictionary definitions' , and 'words' : might be made-up ?

There are a few Onomatopoeia words derived from real sounds. As for percentage, I don't know, but probably low. The rest are made up.



Might honest intelligent productive thinking people : make-up dictionaries ?

They might. I just watched a youtube posted on another thread that explained the process. But liars may also coin words that sound like they could be truthish in order to deceive.



What's the difference between a dictionary : and a fictionary ?

The dictionary may be cited in such a way, (okay, my definition needs some work) . The fictionary is something referred to as if it existed. Okay, that proposed definition just exploded too after I picked up a pen and wrote "This is a fictionary" on a piece of paper. This is getting tough.



Why all of the questions ?

Because questions stimulate thought, which clarifies ideas, which leads to clarity of concepts witch[sic] ends all confusion. (I am so confused that I don't know what the hell that sentence means. I shall add that to my new fictionary.)



Why not ?

I don't know.



posted on Sep, 13 2020 @ 12:30 AM
link   
MONO




Dear Pthena:

I hate to say this to you, but you are really out of your depths.

Up to now, aside from dictionary concept whatever of what is evidence, left to yourself, you have not at all given any concept of what is evidence, from your stock knowledge and information as a learned and intelligent English thinker and writer.

I have to tell you although it is ad hominem, but it is really addressed to you as a homo sapiens, namely, that when you define a word, like say 'bird', you don't use the word 'bird' in the drafting of your definition of 'bird', why?

Why? Simple, because the reader does not know what is bird yet, that is why he is asking folks who know to tell him what is bird.

Perhaps you just want to play dummy and possum, to be funny like the court's jester, but all indications so far is that you are seeking refuge with playing the fool here in this thread - whenever you are challenged to do honest intelligent productive thinking and writing.


Here is what for you is your definition what is evidence:


    A bird in the hand
    is evidence that the bird
    is real, and that it (15 words)



At most that could pass for an example but wrongly of evidence, because the reader has not yet known what is evidence, so he cannot determine whether it is bird or hand that is the target of evidence, namely, that proves the existence of bird or of hand.

Dear everyone, here is my definition again on what is evidence:

"Evidence is anything at all existing leading man to know another thing existing." (13 words)

The photo of a bird is an example of evidence to the existence of the bird, or the photo of a hand is an example of evidence to the existence of the hand.


So, everyone, let us all discuss what is evidence, okay?


Try to comprehend this line from me:

The existence of evidence proves the existence of the target of evidence, because they are connected, scil. the evidence and its target.

For example, the nose on our face is evidence to the existence of God, because they are connected, scil. nose and God.


Disclaimer: Humor intended, though it takes honest intelligent productive thinking to see the humor and the fact, truth, logic, and the history of useful ideas to insight into the humor, that is why only homo sapiens can appreciate humor.

Beware: examine yourselves and also I do that, whether we are examples of homo sapiens or what, robots!?
.






Pthena posted on Sep, 13 2020 @ 01:03 PM
a reply to: Pachomius
- - - - - - - - - -

A bird in the hand
is evidence that the bird
is real, and that it (15 words)

= = = = = = = = = = = =
I never really expected to be living in the future but here I am!
I should change my signature. Yeah...maybe tomorrow.


.



posted on Sep, 13 2020 @ 01:25 AM
link   
MONO




Dear Rom12345:

You seem to have some ideas about random chance, and that for atheists it is the creator cause of man and the universe and everything with a beginning.

So, for atheists, instead of God, they postulate random chance, but what exactly is random chance for atheists.


From my limited stock knowledge and information, I know that random chance cannot and will not ever cause even the nose on our face to come to existence at all, and persists in existence on our nose.


Now, dear evolution experts here in this thread, I seem to understand that with you guys, random chance causes the rise of newer species which can better survive in existence than older species of life, that is the so-called principle of the survival of the fittest.


What I know for a fact is that random chance does not have any feature of what I call stability.


Let us say that owing to random chance a new species rises above current species, but how long will that newer species stay around?

Not very long at all, it can be devastated i.e. destroyed by what we might call the forces of nature.


Long question short: Are evolutionists not overly optimistic that a good turn with random chance will continue in safety in the midst of continuous un-remitting perturbation of natural forces?

Unless to avail myself of one code word with atheists, there is a magician around, to keep the new species safely absconded in a totally guarded environment that ensures its survival.


But, hey, that is a gratuitous assumption, which spells fallacious thinking altogether.


Anyway, paging evolutionists here, please enlighten me, okay?





rom1234 posted on Sep, 13 2020 @ 10:05 AM
- - - - - - - - - - - -

Randomness basically means there is no way to determine a parameter from our perspective.
To me it's seems a huge leap of logic to make this the explanation of the ordered systems clearly present in the universe.

Only systems in a sort of resonance hold together, the random ones dissipate.
The nature of harmonics, which are not man made, seems like a highly structured and generative force.
For a harmonic to have so many overtones it truly profound.

To not consider the nature of the paradox divine, seems illogical to me.
God is a word that is used as a proxy for what we have no way of understanding.

= = = = = = = = = = = =
“Real knowledge is to know the extent of ones ignorance.” - Confucius

The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance - it is the illusion of knowledge.
Daniel J. Boorstin

.



posted on Sep, 13 2020 @ 05:19 AM
link   
It's hard to agree on the existence of God with people who think God is a bearded man on a cloud who evolved from dinosaurs.



posted on Sep, 13 2020 @ 05:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: spy66
a reply to: neutronflux




Still no evidence? Just faith.


Please share if you have any. You can not prove that God did not form our existing universe. Because you dont know what did. There is no science that can disprove the existance of God.

So what the hell is your faith...? It must be based on something fictional because you can not present evidence yourself.
You speak as there is no God... what are your evidence for such a claim..? I bet it is based on faith.



Again...

I don’t have to justify anything because I have faith.




John 20:24-29
New International Version
Jesus Appears to Thomas
24 Now Thomas(A) (also known as Didymus[a]), one of the Twelve, was not with the disciples when Jesus came. 25 So the other disciples told him, “We have seen the Lord!”

But he said to them, “Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side,(B) I will not believe.”(C)

26 A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace(D) be with you!”(E) 27 Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.”(F)

28 Thomas said to him, “My Lord and my God!”

29 Then Jesus told him, “Because you have seen me, you have believed;(G) blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”(H)


www.biblegateway.com...


Then, with faith comes a personal relationship with God. Then talking about what God has done for people personal.

I see lots pay lip service to God. Even Satan believes in God. Don’t see lots of glorifying God by those that claim they believe in God. Did God make the universe and walk away from his construction project like a building contractor offering no warranty?



posted on Sep, 13 2020 @ 05:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Pachomius

You


Dear Neutron, shame on you, you don't have any definition except from the dictionary, hey Neutron, use your brain and stock knowledge and information, and produce your very own personally drafted definition of evidence.


But you wanted this...



Dear everyone, have you noticed that my opponents have not answered my challenge to them, to produce their definition of what is evidence in the least number of words they can manage with.



So I gave you a long A long standing definition of evidence that has an economy of words.



evidence
Pronunciation /ˈevədəns/ /ˈɛvədəns/

Translate evidence into Spanish
NOUN

1The available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.
‘the study finds little evidence of overt discrimination’

www.lexico.com...


You don’t get to win the debate because you can change something’s core meaning.

Here is a definition for Pachomius that most would agree on. A hypocritical individual that falsely calls others religious to promote their own biases and dogmatic views.



posted on Sep, 13 2020 @ 06:04 AM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux
Are you here to win.....a debate?



posted on Sep, 13 2020 @ 06:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Itisnowagain

Neutron can only be right when everybody else is wrong. I don't see why he has to go in to Pacho that hard. Aren't we all pulling the same end of the rope?

Evolution doesn't disprove God. Nothing disproves God. They counter the arguments for a God but have nothing to give but evolution and random chance but no cause of existence whatsoever.

The ones believing in the God of the gaps simply do so because they want to be the center of the universe.

You're not allowed to believe in God. People don't like the imaginations around it.



posted on Sep, 13 2020 @ 11:39 AM
link   
a reply to: spy66

I’m a creationist. Philosophically I would be a Deist, which is confirmed by my understanding of science, I agree with most of your points, you must be confusing me with someone else.



posted on Sep, 13 2020 @ 12:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Pachomius



I hate to say this to you, but you are really out of your depths.

Out of Your Depth; def: not having the knowledge, experience, or skills to deal with a particular subject or situation.

Um, I'm having a tough time. I found out that time isn't a constant. I've lived my whole life as if time is a constant. My whole world is rather shattered.

What about the speed of light? Is that constant? I don't even know.
What if a spaceship is travelling at .9 speed of light, then launches a torpedo at .9 speed of light? Wouldn't the velocities be additive? Wouldn't the torpedo then be traveling at 1.8 speed of light?

I don't even know. If speed of light is the maximum, then a spaceship travelling 1.0 speed of light fires a torpedo, then the torpedo won't move at all and just blow the spaceship up.




top topics



 
23
<< 124  125  126    128  129  130 >>

log in

join