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.
And here we return to the spiritual where there is no physical/objective material.Your religious beliefs are subjective.
Keep in mind, my knowledge is objective to me, because I have witnessed it. My belief is subjective to you, because you have not seen/experienced what I have. As I said, testimony, not physical evidence.I have more respect for Christians like you who don't appeal to reason and admit that their belief is based upon a subjective experience.
And yet God can be known through the light of human reason by studying what he created. Why would you dismiss that? It's the only tangible evidence at our disposal.I have more respect for Christians like you who don't appeal to reason and admit that their belief is based upon a subjective experience.
This question is always posed by people who read the story but never studied it. They expect everyone to see the story as literally as they do.
And yet God can be known through the light of human reason by studying what he created. Why would you dismiss that? It's the only tangible evidence at our disposal.
Again... God can be known through the light of human reason by studying what he created. Why would you dismiss that? It's the only tangible evidence at our disposal.There's nothing in the physical world that points to a personal deity as asserted by Christians. If you're an eclectic new-ager I really have nothing to debate with you about. My criticism is directed at those who appeal to "inerrant" holy books and religious dogma as "rational proof" of their beliefs. They claim to have faith but then claim to have objective, empirical evidence for their faith, in the form of an "inerrant holy book" and other supposed scientific proof. They have no evidence for their Christian mythology. None. Zero.
If you're a "spiritual" person, a new ager, or an eclectic mystic, I don't even waste my time debating such people. You can believe the moon is made out of swiss cheese if you want to. When you start claiming that there is scientific evidence that the moon is made out of swiss cheese, then I will feel compelled, and motivated to step into the ring, otherwise, believe whatever nonsense you want to believe in. Do you want to believe in a personal GOD individual or being and in an afterlife? Be my guest. Believe.
Again... God can be known through the light of human reason by studying what he created. Why would you dismiss that? It's the only tangible evidence at our disposal.
I don't need mythology, fairy tales, or religious dogma, to be a moral, good person. I don't even need it to feel at peace and come to terms with the possibility that there isn't life after death. Life is still worth living and beautiful, even without an afterlife. I love life, that is my highest value. Life.
There are too many assumptions in your statement. You presuppose that what exists is created by a super-entity or personal GOD and yet that may not be the case at all. You can't even prove that GOD is an individual person or a disembodied mind..etc. We don't know if there is a GOD and we don't know what or who he is, assuming he exists.
If there is a necessary or non-contingent reality behind this material world, that caused this universe to exist with all of its laws.etc, that doesn't imply that it resembles the Christian, biblical deity.
Retrocausality in Quantum Mechanics (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
plato.stanford.edu
Maybe the future is causing or at least influencing the past from God's perspective and God Himself is a person only when persons are created through a natural process within the space-time continuum. So in a way, the GOD PERSON or SUPER-ENTITY, emerges in the future, when a trillion-trillion minds unite as ONE, then what emerges from that union is GOD THE PERSON. Now what exists, within space and time, isn't a divine, individual SUPER-ENTITY, but rather a God that is evolving, unfolding, growing, expanding..etc. We are part of that GOD.
As I expressed in one of my previous posts, that would be a form of pantheism. All of the potential and whatever is actualized of that potential is GOD. GOD is EVERYTHING, EXISTENCE ITSELF. That which actually IS, IS GOD. God is the state of being alive and existing. God is the potential behind the actual as well, so God is both the potential and the actual. In the future maybe God will be the SUPER-ENTITY and person but that is far from the Christian idea about God. Silly, shallow Christian theology asserts that God was in the past, "before" the universe, as a fully evolved person with Jesus, and the Holy Spirit, playing cards or something.
God wasn't a creator or a king of a kingdom, he was just a father, and Jesus was the son and the spirit was just there with them. It's just primitive, silly mythology. What I just said about a possible God is more scientific. The natural precedes the spiritual. The natural world comes before the spiritual world. Before the physical, there is only potential. A power and system of principles, that are necessary or a so called "brute fact". That simple, necessary deity isn't necessarily a person in the Christian sense, but simply a type of divine nervous system.
My body right now is functioning, and it will continue to function even if I'm asleep and unconscious. My heart beats, my liver and kidneys are functioning, and my hair and nails are growing. I don't have to be a person or conscious for that to happen. So maybe GOD, in the beginning, is just a type of divine nervous system. God exists, but not as a person in the Christian sense. In order for the divine person to exist there has to be a process of natural creation and evolution ("natural selection"), within the parameters of the laws of physics/natural laws and the space-time continuum. Nature precedes the existence of the conscious Spirit or divine personhood of GOD.
GOD THE PERSON emerges in the future, from a body of trillions upon trillions of minds united in selfless love. God is the alpha and omega. The alpha is simple, the omega is complex. God is both the simple alpha point and the complex omega point. In both points of existence there is no space or time. Space and time only exists in the process from one point to another. God is essentially EVERYTHING, and God the person is pulling the past to Himself, that it may become actualized in the "omega-point-complex" or in the complex point of omega.
All of the above is just speculation. I don't know if it is true, hence I don't really affirm or even believe it, but a part of me says "maybe that's possible". So unlike Christians who can tell you what color tie God wears and whether he likes his eggs sunny side up or scrambled for breakfast, I don't have that level of understanding and the claim that they do, on the basis of their "bible book" is just absurd. I'm an atheist because I don't have enough information to conclude anything about God. What I just wrote above about GOD is just my imagination. I don't know if it is true. It's just a mere "suspicion" (no verdict). The case is thrown out of court. Not enough evidence. Interesting but, no verdict, no conviction, hence I'm an atheist.
Sociopaths and Downe's Syndrome babies have all that. I don't recall Communists ever being 'moral' or 'good persons', so obviously you're lying about needing mythology, fairy tales, or religious dogma; you're a cultist, and follow a cult that relies on mass murders and concentration camps as 'solutions' to its social and economic problems. lol Communists don't 'value life' any different than corporate cultures do; it's all about 'economic values' for them and Communists both. That's why all those giant multi-nationals fall all over themselves to do business with the Red Chinese and their Cadre partners. Both share a love for labor racketeering and pampered elites.
Again... God can be known through the light of human reason by studying what he created. Why would you dismiss that evidence? It's the only tangible evidence at our disposal.
The only tangible evidence we have available.... what was created. Specifically how the universe was created - from nothing - in an implausible way, how the universe is implausibly hardwired to produce life and intelligence, the physical laws of nature, the biological laws of nature and the moral laws of nature.In what way does the "light of reason" establish the existence of God? What "evidence" are you referring to?
The only tangible evidence we have available.... what was created. Specifically how the universe was created - from nothing - in an implausible way, how the universe is implausibly hardwired to produce life and intelligence, the physical laws of nature, the biological laws of nature and the moral laws of nature.
Red shift, cosmic microwave background radiation, Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations, the First Law of Thermodynamics and quantum mechanics tells us that space and time did have a beginning. If the universe is expanding then it must have a beginning. If you follow it backwards in time, then any object must come to a boundary of space time. You cannot continue that history indefinitely. Atheists have been uncomfortable with the idea of a beginning since the work of Friedman which showed that the solutions of Einstein's equation showed that the universe had a beginning.We still don't know exactly how the world came into existence or whether it came from "nothing", that's speculation. You don't know if the universe is "implausibly hardwired to produce life and intelligence" or whether the physical laws of our universe were established by a deity. Maybe, maybe not, we don't have enough information yet to conclude anything on this matter. There might be an infinite number of universes and only 1 in a trillion trillion has the properties that give rise to life. More, even if it could be established that this universe was caused by a divine person or entity, that doesn't imply that it is the Christian deity, or the God of the bible. It might be a God that is completely different from what Christians believe.
Furthermore, you don't have any evidence that we survive the death of our bodies. It's possible that there is an afterlife, but we don't have conclusive evidence "proving it".
you are collating evolution w/ origin which is not what is found in evolution theory ...
physiology is a metaphysical substance not native to planet earth and evolves through progressive chemical / physical reactions. the reason their test tube will be inconclusive for living beings is the physiology also has a spiritual content that is interdependent and necessary for the spark of life that is not provided in their test tube.
View attachment 763101
the above is the captured evidence of the spiritual content transforming the associate physiology from a land dweller to an avian being.
and is the same for all living beings on planet earth.
That would be EVOLUTION. You show a snapshot and declare EVOLUTION? Or better yet.........that insect will next become a Bird because it has wings? 
Red shift, cosmic microwave background radiation, Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations, the First Law of Thermodynamics and quantum mechanics tells us that space and time did have a beginning. If the universe is expanding then it must have a beginning. If you follow it backwards in time, then any object must come to a boundary of space time. You cannot continue that history indefinitely. Atheists have been uncomfortable with the idea of a beginning since the work of Friedman which showed that the solutions of Einstein's equation showed that the universe had a beginning.
In a closed universe the gravitational energy which is always negative exactly compensates the positive energy of matter. So the energy of a closed universe is always zero. So nothing prevents this universe from being spontaneously created. Because the net energy is always zero. The positive energy of matter is balanced by the negative energy of the gravity of that matter which is the space time curvature of that matter. There is no conservation law that prevents the formation of such a universe. In quantum mechanics if something is not forbidden by conservation laws, then it necessarily happens with some non-zero probability. So a closed universe can spontaneously appear - through the laws of quantum mechanics - out of nothing. And in fact there is an elegant mathematical description which describes this process and shows that a tiny closed universe having very high energy can spontaneously pop into existence and immediately start to expand and cool. In this description, the same laws that describe the evolution of the universe also describe the appearance of the universe which means that the laws were in place before the universe itself.
Simple; show us the scientific experiment based upon the scientific method that proves evolution to be a law/fact of physics. You can't demonstrate your origins, you can't demonstrate evolution to be a law........you show a single SPECIES adapting to its environment ...........all life was designed to adapt WITHIN SPECIES, if not humanity would have become extinct the first time man contracted a common cold. You present an INSECT from larva to maturity and CRY evolution, yet your insect began as an insect and it will remain an insect all throughout its life in the family of "Cicadidae", each and every generation of this life form will begin as an insect and remain an insect.....with no variation from the previous generation. Show us any animal that has changed species. Show me how a feline became a k-9, how a fish became a warm blooded land creature.
Or are you SUGGESTING that this winged insect will begin a new generation that can fly without experiencing a larva state that can't fly...it will be born with wings?
All life adapts/evolves........WITHIN SPECIES, just as Pasteur demonstrated........life can only be reproduced from pre-existing life within the same species. Demonstrate though the scientific method....how a-sexual life evolved to the point where genders were required to reproduce.
Question? If you have no foundation............you have no building, buildings do not float, how can something evolve if nothing is what you start with? Again........the convolution exists on the part of the Dogma presented by the Darwinian cultists. Regardless........you can't demonstrate EVOLUTION to be a fact of science, its a theory (an idea that does not possess the Empirical evidences to make it a fact/law of physics.
