Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
As a musician, I have witnessed the spiritual habitually. All evidence of the spiritual is the result of the physical. The composer exists first before their spirit lives in their music.There is no evidence of the spiritual existing independent of the physical. In all cases, the physical exists first and then the spiritual is created by the physical. I have proven this over and over to you but you refuse to accept spiritual evidence as spiritual evidence.The only way to objectively evaluate the existence of something spiritual, is to examine spiritual evidence. Physical evidence is great, but it can never prove spiritual existence alone, and it's illogical and irrational to expect this. Some people have closed their minds to the possibility of spiritual nature, therefore, they simply reject all spiritual evidence. Now think about it... if you reject physical nature, how can you prove something physical in nature? You can't! You have to first acknowledge the physical evidence exists, and the same applies with spiritual evidence, if you are unable to acknowledge it, you can't examine spiritual evidence.
We need not define god in specific terms, to prove that a spiritual power greater than self exists. We do not have to specifically define anything, to prove existence. We do, however, need to come to mutual understanding on words like "exist" and how the word means different things, depending on whether you are talking about physical or spiritual existence. You see, those who reject spiritual nature, have no way to conceptualize spiritual existence, the term is an oxymoron. God obviously doesn't exist physically, or God would be a physical entity, proven by physical evidence of physical existence, and that is not a debatable question.
So it all boils down to whether or not you accept spiritual evidence and believe in spiritual nature. If you do not, then the question of god's existence can surely never be proven to you. However, if you can open your mind to the possibility of spiritual nature, and willingly accept the spiritual evidence, you will find it is overwhelming and undeniable. Which explains why the non-believers absolutely refuse to allow spiritual evidence.
Yes there is evidence but people like yourself who have never witnessed it, believe people who have witnessed it are insane. I guess you believe the same for the priests and pastors as well.
There is no evidence of the spiritual existing independent of the physical. In all cases, the physical exists first and then the spiritual is created by the physical. I have proven this over and over to you but you refuse to accept spiritual evidence as spiritual evidence.
There is nothing even remotely spiritual about you, and yet you exist. You are living proof that the physical can exist without the spiritual. There is no proof that the spiritual can exist without the physical.There is no evidence of the spiritual existing independent of the physical. In all cases, the physical exists first and then the spiritual is created by the physical. I have proven this over and over to you but you refuse to accept spiritual evidence as spiritual evidence.
The spiritual is not created by the physical, it doesn't matter how many times you explain it. You most certainly haven't "proven" this to be the case, you just keep repeating it as if it were. In essence, your argument is; Reality doesn't exist, it is merely the result of human perception. If humans lacked our five senses, there would be no perception of reality, therefore, it doesn't exist, it is only a sensory perception we experience.
This purely existential argument can also be applied to spiritual nature, but if spiritual nature doesn't exist, do any of us actually exist? Smoke another bowl of chronic, and get back to me on that one!
I'm not lying ....best explanation ever .(place irony here!)Reality is you lie and are a fraud.
[ame=http://youtu.be/L6Ii7pfcGzk]Creationism - Penn & Teller Bullshit! - YouTube[/ame]
Hey Daws here is your chance to correct the mistake. What am I lying about ? Explain why you're not lying ?
As a musician, I have witnessed the spiritual habitually. All evidence of the spiritual is the result of the physical. The composer exists first before their spirit lives in their music.There is no evidence of the spiritual existing independent of the physical. In all cases, the physical exists first and then the spiritual is created by the physical. I have proven this over and over to you but you refuse to accept spiritual evidence as spiritual evidence.
Yes there is evidence but people like yourself who have never witnessed it, believe people who have witnessed it are insane. I guess you believe the same for the priests and pastors as well.
(COMMENT)The only way to objectively evaluate the existence of something spiritual, is to examine spiritual evidence.
(COMMENT)Physical evidence is great, but it can never prove spiritual existence alone, and it's illogical and irrational to expect this. Some people have closed their minds to the possibility of spiritual nature, therefore, they simply reject all spiritual evidence.
(COMMENT)Now think about it... if you reject physical nature, how can you prove something physical in nature? You can't! You have to first acknowledge the physical evidence exists, and the same applies with spiritual evidence, if you are unable to acknowledge it, you can't examine spiritual evidence.
(COMMENT)We need not define god in specific terms, to prove that a spiritual power greater than self exists. We do not have to specifically define anything, to prove existence.
(COMMENT)We do, however, need to come to mutual understanding on words like "exist" and how the word means different things, depending on whether you are talking about physical or spiritual existence. You see, those who reject spiritual nature, have no way to conceptualize spiritual existence, the term is an oxymoron. God obviously doesn't exist physically, or God would be a physical entity, proven by physical evidence of physical existence, and that is not a debatable question.
(COMMENT)So it all boils down to whether or not you accept spiritual evidence and believe in spiritual nature. If you do not, then the question of god's existence can surely never be proven to you. However, if you can open your mind to the possibility of spiritual nature, and willingly accept the spiritual evidence, you will find it is overwhelming and undeniable. Which explains why the non-believers absolutely refuse to allow spiritual evidence.
meaningless analogy but great example of brown nosingHere is why the Big Crunch Theory now exists... Because the Big Bang Theory didn't sufficiently contradict an intelligent designer. The findings in the universe, constantly expanding, had proven that this Big Bang thing had happened, but if physical universe was not in existence yet, what caused it to go boom? Since believing in creation was not an option, they began to ponder how to cycle back to where the bang completes a revolution, and they developed this theory, along with discovery of black holes, that maybe the universe contracts as well, and we simply haven't been around long enough to know?
Make no mistake, if this theory had ever been tested and proven, we wouldn't be having this conversation. So there's simply no peer-reviewed evidence to consider, no published findings in science journals, not a damn thing in the universe to support this theory that the universe contracts and regenerates, as the cute little illustration depicts. Not a goddamn thing!
Yet... here it is, presented as if this is the scientific FACT that no one can refute or question! The really astonishing thing is, even if they are entirely correct, and the universe operates in a systematic way, like the freaking cycles on a washing machine... does that somehow "disprove" an intelligent designing force? Or is it more evidence OF such a force?
Peer reviews don't carry a lot of weight with me if the majority was correct most of the time vegas would be out of business.
There is nothing even remotely spiritual about you, and yet you exist. You are living proof that the physical can exist without the spiritual. There is no proof that the spiritual can exist without the physical.There is no evidence of the spiritual existing independent of the physical. In all cases, the physical exists first and then the spiritual is created by the physical. I have proven this over and over to you but you refuse to accept spiritual evidence as spiritual evidence.
The spiritual is not created by the physical, it doesn't matter how many times you explain it. You most certainly haven't "proven" this to be the case, you just keep repeating it as if it were. In essence, your argument is; Reality doesn't exist, it is merely the result of human perception. If humans lacked our five senses, there would be no perception of reality, therefore, it doesn't exist, it is only a sensory perception we experience.
This purely existential argument can also be applied to spiritual nature, but if spiritual nature doesn't exist, do any of us actually exist? Smoke another bowl of chronic, and get back to me on that one!
the·o·ryNot exactly, the oldest farthest extremes of the universe are found to be accelerating away from us, but that does not necessarily mean they are expanding. They could also be accelerating towards a super massive universal black hole and therefore be contracting.The expansion of the universe is proven to be accelerating.
There will be no Big Crunch.
There are some theories that are speculative and not supported by any science at the moment but that 'work around' the accelerating universe problem, but so far all the concepts tossed out essentially to support an infinitely lasting universe have been proven wrong, and I don't see any reason to suppose this will stop. It seems that atheists are so desperate to believe the universe is of infinite duration that they propose fanciful things that science consistently knocks down.
You seem to have an infinitely expanding universe confused with a cyclic universe.
Must we remind ourselves what a Theory is.
You are simply proving that there is nothing even remotely spiritual in your existence.As a musician, I have witnessed the spiritual habitually. All evidence of the spiritual is the result of the physical. The composer exists first before their spirit lives in their music.Yes there is evidence but people like yourself who have never witnessed it, believe people who have witnessed it are insane. I guess you believe the same for the priests and pastors as well.
As a musician, you may have witnessed spiritual inspiration. The composer does have to first exist, before he/she can be spiritually inspired. What they produce, is not spiritual, it is physical in nature... they produce a song, a record, music... all physical things, not spiritual. It may be spiritually inspired, or you may realize a spiritual connection to the composer when you hear it, and also become spiritually inspired. This anecdote only supports the very real spiritual nature, which is very much a part of our universe.
why would he want to be reminded of his own short comings?I grow tired of your ad hobelim attacks.No, I believe a logical person would read genesis and conclude immediately based on known scientific facts that either the story is complete bull or it is an allegorical story that coveys hidden meaning.
You might as well have tattooed a big penis on your forehead.
aye and there's the rub. no continuity and subject to interpretation..."Would that God require human beings to believe in things that contradict known truths about this reality created by him to be saved?"
What Does God require us to believe that contradicts known truths ?
That's my point. PEOPLE who claim to believe scripture read genesis and wrongly think the story is about the creation of the universe, even though scientific discoveries make the literal interpretation of that story impossible to be true and a complete contradiction of known truths.
according to some PEOPLE believing the story is a literal depiction of the creation of the universe is a required belief foundational to salvation even though such an assertion is false.
The story of genesis is about the giving of the law, and the creation of Adam and Eve about the elevation of people from among the wild beasts of the field into a 'living being' aware of right and wrong and bound to the consequences of their actions..
The law is the light which separates the darkness and before the light was given, "the earth was without form and void; and darkness covered the face of the deep' which has further allegorical meaning.
Nonsense. Angels and devils and all the wild beasts of the wilderness described in scripture from dogs and pigs to serpents and vultures are allegorical descriptions of well known types of people that allude to the heights and depths of human potential. The story is just a fairy tale. try to learn what it teaches.
[Let's assume all the theories of how the universe got here and this planet was developed to support life and then miraculously life was spontaneously generated with no aid but naturalism were true. does that not defy logic by our current knowledge ?
We have no viable explanation for origins of anything. Reality shows us that living organisms are produced by other living organisms and they are produced by other organisms that are of the same kind.
You believe a logical person would believe a living organism was produced by non-life ?
No, I believe a logical person would read genesis and conclude immediately based on known scientific facts that either the story is complete bull or it is an allegorical story that coveys hidden meaning.
And after being shown how the story can be interpreted allegorically without contradicting reality a logical person would renounce their superstitious delusions forever and cut the ties that bind them in ignorance without ever looking back.
Interpreting Genesis as though it were just one narrative is your first error, as it has several different storylines in it about totally different people and eras.
You are projecting your expectations of Genesis onto it as much as any YEC fundamentalist.
Most of its stories have been found in other cultures of the region, so it would seem to be more than you think it is.
Again you show not only your complete ignorance of science, you show you are incapable of even learning. It has already been pointed out that all the energy of the universe already existed and is what went bang at the Big Bang. Energy physically exists and can be measured. James Prescott Joule proved with a repeatable experiment that energy can neither be created nor destroyed. There is nothing spiritual about physical energy. All you have done is redefine the physical nature of energy as being spiritual.There is nothing even remotely spiritual about you, and yet you exist. You are living proof that the physical can exist without the spiritual. There is no proof that the spiritual can exist without the physical.The spiritual is not created by the physical, it doesn't matter how many times you explain it. You most certainly haven't "proven" this to be the case, you just keep repeating it as if it were. In essence, your argument is; Reality doesn't exist, it is merely the result of human perception. If humans lacked our five senses, there would be no perception of reality, therefore, it doesn't exist, it is only a sensory perception we experience.
This purely existential argument can also be applied to spiritual nature, but if spiritual nature doesn't exist, do any of us actually exist? Smoke another bowl of chronic, and get back to me on that one!
Sure it can... it's what created the Big Bang! Nothing of the physical universe caused it, because the physical universe didn't exist. Now, Dorito claims the universe always existed and always will, it is eternal and everlasting. Like God... but... the universe supposedly operates like a machine, running through various cycles, expansion then contraction, and then it all starts over again.... but this theory leads me to believe even more in a spiritual energy force, which designed the system itself, and controls every aspect. So far, you haven't disproved this.
bullshit! you've never won anything!I have made my choice that is correct. If you are not an atheist you are not far from it with the way you think.
Well, according to the way I think I'm certain that if even one tenth of the bible is true at the judgment it will be better to have been an atheist than to have pretended to believe that God was wearing diapers on Christmas morn....
maybe you should put that in your pipe and smoke it before you go running for a touchdown.... into the wrong end zone.
I won the game many moons ago. You can believe as you wish.
Boss, et al,
Interesting enough.
(COMMENT)The only way to objectively evaluate the existence of something spiritual, is to examine spiritual evidence.
Interesting, in that it is spiritual, not material.
(COMMENT)Physical evidence is great, but it can never prove spiritual existence alone, and it's illogical and irrational to expect this. Some people have closed their minds to the possibility of spiritual nature, therefore, they simply reject all spiritual evidence.
What is "spiritual evidence?"
How do I recognize "spiritual evidence?"
(COMMENT)
Again, what is it I have to acknowledge?
Does the "spiritual evidence" interact with the material world?
(COMMENT)
What is an example of a "spiritual power greater than self exists?"
(COMMENT)We do, however, need to come to mutual understanding on words like "exist" and how the word means different things, depending on whether you are talking about physical or spiritual existence. You see, those who reject spiritual nature, have no way to conceptualize spiritual existence, the term is an oxymoron. God obviously doesn't exist physically, or God would be a physical entity, proven by physical evidence of physical existence, and that is not a debatable question.
So, the question concerning "God obviously doesn't exist physically, or God would be a physical entity" is:
Can a "Spiritual existence" manifest a "Physical existence?"
(COMMENT)So it all boils down to whether or not you accept spiritual evidence and believe in spiritual nature. If you do not, then the question of god's existence can surely never be proven to you. However, if you can open your mind to the possibility of spiritual nature, and willingly accept the spiritual evidence, you will find it is overwhelming and undeniable. Which explains why the non-believers absolutely refuse to allow spiritual evidence.
Does this exclude the impact of a VMAT2 Gene the predisposes the belief in a "spiritual existence?"
- Vmat2, or the God Gene: Reading Spirituality in the Human Genome Vmat2, or the God Gene: Reading Spirituality in the Human Genome | Serendip Studio
- Faith in God is down to your genes, says Researcher Faith in God is down to your genes, says Researcher
Most Respectfully,
R
humans are not born believers either.... if we were, there would be no atheists or agnostics.Boss, et al,
Interesting enough.
(COMMENT)The only way to objectively evaluate the existence of something spiritual, is to examine spiritual evidence.
Interesting, in that it is spiritual, not material.
(COMMENT)
What is "spiritual evidence?"
How do I recognize "spiritual evidence?"
Spiritual evidence is that which is produced by spiritual nature, and is recognized by those who accept the possibility of spiritual nature. For instance, we have to accept that 70,000 years of human behavior concerning this attribute of spiritual connection, is not the product of wild imaginations or delusions, but that these people are legitimately making a connection to something outside of our material world. If that were not the case, and it was all in our heads, the attribute would have waned over the years, especially with the advent of modern science. We find, the behavior is persistent and constant, across our entire existence as a species, regardless of how many unknowns we answer with science. If it were all a figment of imagination and delusion, the attribute would have been beaten out of man, through thousands of years of persecution and death. If man invented spirituality to cope with death, we'd see evidence of other similar upper primates, fabricating imaginary placebos and security blankets, so they could cope as well.
Most definitely, but you have to first acknowledge it exists. Does physical science interact with the material world? Of course it does, but this is of absolutely no use to someone who rejects physical science. You can't scientifically explain to me how rain happens, if I reject science and scientific explanations. You can try... you can talk about science until you're blue in the face, it gets you nowhere until I decide to believe in scientific evidence. If I reject science and call it nonsense and delusion, I will never be able to comprehend the scientific explanations of how rain happens. The same thing is happening with regard to this question about human spirituality. Until you can acknowledge the existence of spiritual nature, you can't possibly evaluate the spiritual evidence or make an informed decision.
What kind of nonsensical question is this? In the OP, I covered the definition of "existence" and I explained very clearly, if you do not believe in spiritual nature, you can not conceive spiritual existence, the term is an oxymoron to you. To "exist" can only mean in a material physical sense, because that is all you acknowledge. I have not argued that God is a material or physical entity, so this is of little use in answering the question.
Humans have a unique and defining attribute, human spiritual behavior. We've had this for all our existence, as best we can tell from archaeology. It is intrinsically hardwired into us as a species, and nothing has changed it through the years. We've adopted all sorts of "religious" beliefs around it, so it's obvious the connection is real and compelling. Those religions have changed and been altered over time, proving the attribute is strong and evokes passion. This goes so much deeper than casual examination of specific religions and religious incarnations of god, it's a fundamental aspect to our species of life. Darwin would even agree with this, it can't be logically denied.
Anything is certainly possible. Christians believe Jesus was a physical manifestation of God. I am not here to argue theology or theological concepts of god. I have no proof to support the Christian incarnation or any other specific incarnation of god. Evaluating whether a supreme spiritual force exists (or is present) in our universe, does not mean that I have to specifically define the attributes of that force, unless my argument is for that specific incarnation, which it's not. I have only argued human spirituality, and I have avoided debate regarding the aspects of what that spirituality inspires, regarding organized religions.
While human religion is certainly evidence that some spiritual nature is being connected to by humans, I believe much of it is predicated on man's misunderstanding of God. We are mortal human beings with no concept of God, and left with our connection to spirituality and our vivid imaginations, we have created all sorts of "religions" to attempt rationalizing this force that we most certainly are connecting to. Humans often do this, it's called "human nature" ...we ascribe human attributes to things, in order to appreciate them or in some cases, relate to them. People do this with their pets all the time, they treat them as if they are humans, and if you've ever watched the Dog Whisperer, you know that dogs are not humans, they think and behave differently. Still... millions of people prefer to relate to their pets as if they were human, with the same human emotions and way of thinking. We imagine "extraterrestrial life" as being some form similar to our own, except weirder. Our imaginations are often limited by our perceptions as humans living in a material physical world, where our 5 senses govern our perceptions of reality as we know it.
So to answer your question as best as a human can, yes... it's possible for a spiritual entity to manifest physically. Whether it has ever happened or not, is a matter of debate regarding theology and philosophy. This does not need to be confirmed or supported in order to prove existence of spiritual nature. If spiritual nature had a detectable, testable and measurable physical presence of existence, it would be "physical nature" and not spiritual nature. So there is a built-in logical dichotomy here, do you see it?
(COMMENT)So it all boils down to whether or not you accept spiritual evidence and believe in spiritual nature. If you do not, then the question of god's existence can surely never be proven to you. However, if you can open your mind to the possibility of spiritual nature, and willingly accept the spiritual evidence, you will find it is overwhelming and undeniable. Which explains why the non-believers absolutely refuse to allow spiritual evidence.
Does this exclude the impact of a VMAT2 Gene the predisposes the belief in a "spiritual existence?"
- Vmat2, or the God Gene: Reading Spirituality in the Human Genome Vmat2, or the God Gene: Reading Spirituality in the Human Genome | Serendip Studio
- Faith in God is down to your genes, says Researcher Faith in God is down to your genes, says Researcher
Most Respectfully,
R
I think it is fascinating what science discovers, but my philosophy toward science has always been, that science exists as a tool of exploration, not a concluder of questions, but a perpetual asker of questions. Science NEVER draws conclusion, it states probability and prediction, based on testable physical evidence and observation. MAN draws conclusions.
It doesn't surprise me if humans are genetically predisposed to spirituality, in fact, it makes perfect sense that god would have created us this way. Humans aren't born Atheists. Ask ANY Atheist, if they have been one since birth, and most will admit they haven't been. Our natural human inclination is to be spiritually aware, it's what makes us human beings.
No, they are making a connection to the spiritual nature WITHIN THE PHYSICAL WORLD. Without the physical there is no spiritual.Spiritual evidence is that which is produced by spiritual nature, and is recognized by those who accept the possibility of spiritual nature. For instance, we have to accept that 70,000 years of human behavior concerning this attribute of spiritual connection, is not the product of wild imaginations or delusions, but that these people are legitimately making a connection to something outside of our material world. If that were not the case, and it was all in our heads, the attribute would have waned over the years, especially with the advent of modern science. We find, the behavior is persistent and constant, across our entire existence as a species, regardless of how many unknowns we answer with science. If it were all a figment of imagination and delusion, the attribute would have been beaten out of man, through thousands of years of persecution and death. If man invented spirituality to cope with death, we'd see evidence of other similar upper primates, fabricating imaginary placebos and security blankets, so they could cope as well.
