If you are religious... Read this

*Shakes his head in dismay*

*Sigh*

I don't know if there's any hope for you Gen-X. You are just going back on things that have been said before and you're getting nowhere.


You know I haven't got the necessary knowledge to prove whether a process is random. I think that it is reasonable that it is possible as I said. I don't need to prove everything before I place some belief in it - I don't do a structural check before I get on a plane, I don't go and do my own meteorological studies to check up on the weatherman's predictions, I don't study the tensile strength of the steel cables holding up an elevator before I use it, but I place some belief in the prospect of them all being totally sound (except the weather).

Quote:

---

Lets say everything IS random. What makes it random then?

---

The very fact that you are asking this shows clearly that you don't understand this subject. What do you mean 'what makes it random'? It's a fundamental ASSUMPTION that it's random, YOU CANNOT BLEEDING WELL ASK WHAT MAKES SOMETHING RANDOM WHEN YOU ARE ASSUMING IT'S RANDOM IN THE FIRST PLACE! And if you're not assuming it's random then what are you trying to prove? You certainly can't prove it's not random.

I think your definition of random is dodgy, random means 'no specific pattern' or at least it does in this case. The probablilities of different outcomes need not be equal.

Quote:

---

You said a die was random

---

No I didn't, I said there was no practical way of predicting it's result when it's rolled. I was assuming that it was random for the purpose of this example. You're not very good with this logic malarkey are you? You keep trying to prove things you've already assumed and you keep missing the assumptions.

Incidentally, in the case you described (where the dice isn't actually rolled at all), under the QR theory it would be ordered at a macroscopics scale, which is the scale you are working on. It does nothing to even hint at a fault in QR.

Quote:

---

You CHOOSE to continue to assume the world is random and ignore the evidence because of that fact.

---

Forgive my frankness but judging from your best efforts there is no evidence, only bullsh** and misunderstanding of the way to construct a proof.

Quote:

---

you keep assuming everything is random and prove random so Well done to you too. Random => Random.

---

I haven't proved anything and if you were aware of anything to do with proofs you would have noticed. I have assumed QR=True and have found no contradictions. This is not proof in any way. The point of this thread (now at least) seems to be for you to try and disprove QR, and in order to do that we MUST first assume QR=True. To do anything else would be just plain stupid and a waste of time. You're always going on about no proof only disproof, and to do that you need a contradiction, and to get contradiction you need to first ASSUME that which is to be disproven.

Quote:

---

Thats like proving there isn't a pattern in the molecular weights of atoms before we discovered the Neutron... They said there wasn't a pattern because it failed in a few cases. They did all this maths to prove it wrong but suddenly someone discovered the Neutron and when plugging it into the equations it worked perfectly.

Explain to me why this situation is any different?

---

Essentially it's not. There was a hypothesis that the universe is predetermined and there were some problems, the theory didn't quite fit. So an alternative hypothesis, quantum randomness, is now offered which doesn't give the previous anomalies. That's not to say anomalies won't show up in the future of course. For the moment we go with the most accurate model we have. You guessed it, quantum randomness.

Before we continue this entirely pointless argument, because it has evidently now stopped being a discussion, pause for a moment to consider whether what you're saying actually makes any sense please. Also, try not to cover every single point that has been covered previously but hasn't been mentioned for a little while. It gets very tedious reading the same previously-refuted 'evidence' over and over again. You just seem to view it as people ignoring your 'evidence' but in actual fact it's been seen for the crap that it is It was reasonable to bring it up the first time but once was enough. Please stop wasting everyone's time with it. Thank you.

Heres the bottom line

You accused me of doing the exact same thing that YOU are doing. Until you are willing to stop being hypocritical why bother talking?


But I will admit that I see your point about the assumption and my mistake in posting that... Thought I believe you are doing roughly the same thing.

We know there is order (or the perception of order) in our universe as a result of things being repeatable. We also know that certain things "appear" to be random, most of which are as a result of us not understanding what is going on.

That leaves us with 2 possiblities :

1. The universe is random and somehow a collection of randomness creates a sense of order.

2. The universe is deterministic and somehow a collection of determinism creates a sense of randomness.


How about we compile a list of PRO/CON for each of these?

Would that be more beneficial? Would it produce a better set of results?

(BTW, Sorry for losing it at you... I just get very insensed when someone keeps telling me I cannot do something then goes and does it themselves... hypocracy is my least tolerant thing)

Strange, I thought it was ignorance that was your biggest hate. Oh no it was blindness too. Oh then there's belief without evidence. Ah well it doesn't really matter anyway.

I really don't think I'm being hypocritical. I am not trying to prove that predeterminism is wrong. It's not something I think I really understand well enough to do anyway, but I can think of a couple of things that I have heard mentioned.

If we assume predetermined=True for a moment, then we get a contradiction in the anomalies of radioactive decay, and polarisation (? I have heard something like this mentioned but I don't know what it was relating to). There is my quick hypothesis implying that predetermined=False through contradiction.

Right, now I'm going to go back to assuming random=True. If you would like to try to prove random=False then I ask that you do the same. If you are going to disprove my hypothesis that implies predetermined=False then you can assume predetermined=True and show that radioactive decay and the polarisation thing (we can forget that if you like because I don't really know what was meant by it) are viable. If you can do that then we (or I at least) will be back to a point where the correct theory is indeterminate, and it will be down to your best guess which you choose to believe. Of course my best guess will be QR in that case and I suspect yours will be predeterminism. I can go no further in persuading you to change your mind on that, since I understand only the basics of the concept.

I am sorry you see my assumption of randomness to be hypocrisy but I assure you that it is necessary if we are looking at disproofs for randomness.

Thats nice dear

its obvious that you do not know the word of GOD (bible) intimately....all the answers are in there.

to answer your question briefly....

God has set this world in motion and he cannot intervene and click his fingers and all the baddies are gone.but he has made an escape door and his name is JESUS.
as GOD cannot change,he cannot go back on what he has decided will happen.yes....he does intervene if we call out to him.yes he can help...but not what people expext him to do....ie removing all evil from the world.
if he could then he would not be GOD.we cannot understand his reasons and ways.


john

Quote:

---

God has set this world in motion and he cannot intervene and click his fingers and all the baddies are gone

---

So much for being all-powerful.

Quote:

---

but he has made an escape door and his name is JESUS.

---

ANd then proceeded to place 3/4 of the worlds population far enough away from the door so that they would fry in hell regardless what they did.

That was smart

Quote:

---

as GOD cannot change,he cannot go back on what he has decided will happen.yes....he does intervene if we call out to him

---

Thats a nice contradiction. He can't change and he can't go back but he can intervene if we call out... So doesn't that mean he goes back on what he decided?

Quote:

---

if he could then he would not be GOD

---

He isn't God either way...

Quote:

---

we cannot understand his reasons and ways.

---

And that is the baby's pacifier that keeps you warm at night isn't it. The blanket that you can cling to that makes everything in the world all right and you able to get out of bed in the morning. Make it all mystical, make it all "beyond our comprehension" so that nobody can ever question the purpose... nobody can prove God wrong because you have this neat and tidy little package that says its impossible to ever prove him wrong.

If he is so much above our comprehension and understanding then how was he able to create the bible? Obviously "some" people can understand him if they are his words...

Guess its just another contradiction you will have a feable answer to just so you can go on breathing without falling into a puddle of anxiety.

GenX,
Your question is, of course, an old one. These things have been happening throughout the course of history, and as such, many scholars have asked and answered the question.
The answer goes back to the very nature of man. To keep my reply short, I'll put it this way. God does not enjoy robotic worship, he desires worship from the free will of man. He gives us all a free choice in the matter. God defined the way of living to Adam, and also defined the consequences for going against his wishes. "You will surely die." I think were his words. Adam made his choice, and now we all live with the consequences. The earth is full of disease, hatred, killing, etc. Not at God's choice, but at man's choice. Those who choose to follow God endure the same sufferings as those who do not choose to follow Him.
It seems easy to point the finger on Adam, but I'm sure I would have made the same choice if it were me. Man's nature is to hate God.
So you enjoy your freedom to reject God because He has made us creatures of choice, and at the same time, He knocks at the "door" of the conscience of others to draw them to himself. And it is written, "All who call on the name of the Lord will be saved." "Saved from what?", you may ask.... I will not patronize you concerning your decision to reject God and His son, Jesus. But I will say this: Amongst all the arguments and rhetoric I have read in this thread, it has not been pointed out that if you take a Bible of the shelf, and look at the prophecies therein, every one has come true. No other literary work can make this claim. There are some serious prophecies in the very last book of the Bible which point out the very thing from which we will be saved.
With respect and sincerity,
KFayal

KFayal

Quote:

---

God does not enjoy robotic worship, he desires worship from the free will of man. He gives us all a free choice in the matter

---

That answer has been given before and yet every time the flaws in that answer are shown people refuse to see them.

1. God created us
2. God gave us free will
3. God knows the entire future to come

So is it TRUELY free will if he not only knows what choice we will make but we are composed only of that which he gave us? To me that is not free will at all.

Can you answer that question?

Quote:

---

God defined the way of living to Adam, and also defined the consequences for going against his wishes. "You will surely die." I think were his words

---

Adam was not told of this before eating the apple... in fact he was not told of ANY consequences, just simply not to do it.

Secondly, if he was told he would surely die then why did he live until he was nearly a thousand years old... surely if it was his wrongdoing that plunged the whole of humanity into sin then he should have lived far shorter than those people who were not born and had nothing to do with the original sin.

Thirdly, How can God be a "forgiving and loving" God if the very first time someone broke one of his laws they were punished for all eternity and every person that ever followed regardless of their actions were also punished for this same thing?

These are just a few blatant contradictions that refute everything you are saying and show them for falsehoods. The only answer to these you can give are unsupported and only make sense to people who already believe because that is what they choose to do... believe (lookup the definition of faith).

Quote:

---

The earth is full of disease, hatred, killing, etc. Not at God's choice, but at man's choice.

---

So all diseases are made by man??? That is the implication of your statement.

Quote:

---

Man's nature is to hate God.

---

So God created a creature in his image and instilled withim him the desired nature of hating him? That is some God... I didn't realise he was that masochistic ;)

Quote:

---

Amongst all the arguments and rhetoric I have read in this thread, it has not been pointed out that if you take a Bible of the shelf, and look at the prophecies therein, every one has come true

---

Actually it has been pointed out several times that this is not the case. It has also been suggested that prophesy in itself is not an indication of Godliness otherwise there would be a religion for Nostrodamous. Thirdly, anyone can write something and make it so ambiguous and open to be taken a thousand ways and have someone liken it to an event in history.... Just because I say the world will end in "fire" doesn't mean I correctly predicted nuclear war... it means I can write flamboiant and colloqueal text that has a thousand applications depending on what you WANT the answer to be.

Quote:

---

There are some serious prophecies in the very last book of the Bible which point out the very thing from which we will be saved.

---

Then point them out. If you are so sure every SINGLE prophecy in the Bible has come true then state specifically the details of this last book and exactly what the thing from which we will be saved is.

I would be interested to actually here someone make such an audacious claim "BEFORE" the event rather than "AFTER" which is the only way you get your prophecies to hold true

quote:
----------------------------------------------
1. God created us
2. God gave us free will
3. God knows the entire future to come
... Can you answer that question?
----------------------------------------------

First of all, I didn't know you held to this opinion, but I'm assuming that you really don't because you have made it plain that you don't serve God at all. If you are using this as an argument then I don't know where you are coming from, because it is plainly obvious that you are making an obvious choice NOT to serve God, and I am making the choice TO serve God with all that I am. It sounds to me as if you are trying to throw me into a For Next..Loop with this comment. ;)

quote:
----------------------------------------------
Adam was not told of this before eating the apple... in fact he was not told of ANY consequences, just simply not to do it.
----------------------------------------------

Ok, GenX, I've been reading your posts and been giving you the benefit of the doubt, but this statement is just plain wrong. You haven't read this account have you? Here's what the bible says..

Gen 1:16,17 ..And the LORD God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die."

I don't know if you think that expiration is a strong enough consequence, but I think it's about as plain as you can get.

And the point is, that Adam did die. He was created to live forever. Did you know that?

In addition, who said anything about God being a 'loving and forgiving God'? God forgave throughout history due to a repeated animal sacrifice being made to Him at His command. There are a lot of scriptures portraying God's anger toward man.

No, the "loving" you are speaking of is portrayed in His Son, Jesus. Who came, as many of my brothers and sisters have stated it plainly, to end the sacrifice once and for all. God was appeased with the sacrifice of his own Son. Talk about harsh.. and I'm a Christian.

quote:
---------------------------------------------
Thirdly, anyone can write something and make it so ambiguous and open to be taken a thousand ways and have someone liken it to an event in history
---------------------------------------------

Again, it is plain to me that you haven't read the prophecies you are commenting on. For example, before Jesus was even born, not by one, but my many men, each prophesied about some small part of the coming, crucifixion, and resurrection of Christ. Every prophesy was fulfilled, leaving none unfulfilled. And historically, in the book of Daniel, each nation coming into world power from the Medes to the Roman empire was predicted perfectly BEFORE it happened. This only leaves one portion of the Bible unfulfilled. Let's just pick a small one. Well, it's not really small in the scheme of things, but for the sake of example... The antichrist. It specifically says that he will be personally held responsible for peace in the middle east (and the world for that matter), become a world recognized figure and that he will have suffered a critical wound to the head and come back to life. I don't know how much more specific you can get with that. It also says that he will lull Israel into peace and after 3 1/2 years he will go back on his promises to Israel.

So getting back to your original question:

quote:
----------------------------------
What kind of a depraved and SICK deity would allow that kind of attrocity to occur in their world to someone who never did anything wrong to anyone?
----------------------------------

It sounds to me GenX, that you are asking the question as if you want an exact answer. As if we could know the mind of God. Whether you see him as a depraved and SICK deity or a 'masochistic' God, He is still God, and you can deny it all you want. It's like the clay pot created by a master potter denying he was made, it makes no sense.

My answer? Yes, because of a man's decision, there is disease, death, destruction, mayhem, disaster, atrocities and injustices in the world. They are the snowballing effect of sin in the world and nothing man can do will save him from this. It only gets worse from here. And those 2 children you spoke of. Well, I don't think they are fretting at ALL where they are, because I believe they are actually LIVING in another dimension.

I see that many other people have stated the GOOD news here, so I won't bore you with that. Personally, I find it rather exciting to be able to exit a decaying planet some day simply because I humbly accepted a gift I never deserved, and could never earn.

Again, with all respect,
KFayal

God is an allegory. Forget ALL the rest.

KFayal

Quote:

---

First of all, I didn't know you held to this opinion, but I'm assuming that you really don't because you have made it plain that you don't serve God at all

---

Do you understand what rational logic is? Its where you lay out all the facts and then see if they contradict each other. I layed them out and showed that not ALL of them could be true which proves at least one of them is invalid.

I was not trying to joke with you I was seriously asking you to tell me how it is possible for us to have both free will and for got to know the entire of history to come and everything that will happen.

If he knows everything that will happen then our decision was already made and therefor we did not have free will to start with.

Is this kind of simple and direct question too hard for you to answer?

Quote:

---

I don't know if you think that expiration is a strong enough consequence, but I think it's about as plain as you can get.

---

Do you have children? Have you ever told them that if they were to stick a fork in a power point they would electricute themselves to death? When they did it out of the natural curiosity of a child (which considering Adam's lifespan and time on earth he was a babe) did you then put your child out of the house and banish him from your home forever? No? Why not? Well obviously you are more forgiving than God is in this matter.

I noticed you avoided altogether that fact.

Quote:

---

The antichrist. It specifically says that he will be personally held responsible for peace in the middle east (and the world for that matter), become a world recognized figure and that he will have suffered a critical wound to the head and come back to life. I don't know how much more specific you can get with that. It also says that he will lull Israel into peace and after 3 1/2 years he will go back on his promises to Israel.

---

So give me dates, times, places, names.

If someone makes peace in the middle east you will say "It isn't the antichrist.. its the wrong one, more is to come" and if the guy had a mosquito bite on his forehead you will go "See! See! The head wound and came back to life".

Notice how all your prophecies while "supposedly" given before the event are actually told as HISTORY ~2000 years AFTER the event? You are looking at a historical reference (which you cannot validate) and claiming its truth based on the fact it has everything right in it.

If I were to pick up an Encyclopedia which listed all the major earthquakes and claimed to be written 100 years before the earthquakes happened would you say they MUST be true?

Quote:

---

As if we could know the mind of God

---

Well he gave us a mind to be able to reason and "supposedly" choose. Why then would he perform actions beyond our understanding but within our perception? That is called manipulation and deception... to do something and hide its meaning. Only the fools that follow him come up with the utterly pathetic line of "We cannot understand" because it gives you a perfectly plausible reason to not even bother attempting to find an answer.

Quote:

---

My answer? Yes, because of a man's decision, there is disease, death, destruction, mayhem, disaster, atrocities and injustices in the world

---

Nice to know that the decision of a SINGLE man some (how long was it? 2000 years? 10,000 years? 2 million years?) ago has been causing the punishment of every single child that was ever born.

I guess if I want to be more like God I should punish the son for the fathers sins and keep punishing all offspring for as long as I live... Then I will be more like God.

Quote:

---

Well, I don't think they are fretting at ALL where they are, because I believe they are actually LIVING in another dimension

---

So it only costs a little bit of excruciating agony and a earth-shatteringly painful starvation to get to a nice place?

Quote:

---

Personally, I find it rather exciting to be able to exit a decaying planet some day simply because I humbly accepted a gift I never deserved, and could never earn.

---

Then why don't you just sit in a corner and starve yourself to death and get there all the sooner?

Or you could arrange to have your mother lock you in a room so you are not responsible for your own starvation and you can be in this wonderful dimension.

Look at your malover...

Statement : Heaven is good
Argument : Why not kill yourself and go now
Reply : Not allowed to kill yourself

Statement : We have things to learn here first
Argument : So what about people who die early before learning
Reply : Oh but they are in heaven now and its a good place

And the thing goes over and over...

You have an answer to everything and that answer always comes back to a source that is not provable... A God that does not exist anywhere in this world but in the minds of those who hyper-developed an ancient concept used to explain all those things we couldn't explain.

I am sure if the writers of the Bible 2000 years ago could have dreamed what the evolution of their conditioning would become they would have been thrilled at how many people they suckered in.

Care to buy a bridge? ;)

GenX,

quote:
-----------------------------------------------------
Do you understand what rational logic is? Its where you lay out all the facts and then see if they contradict each other. I layed them out and showed that not ALL of them could be true which proves at least one of them is invalid.
-----------------------------------------------------

Of course I do! I'm a programmer, and a pretty good one at that. :) I also understand that the logic of man is what gets us in trouble. For example, you laid out a theorum (sp?) attempting to disprove that God can create us as creatures of free will and yet know what we will do before we do it. Well, logically, of course it sounds foolish. And what about this.. a God who is omnicient, omnipresent and omnipotent? How crazy! Oh, and I forgot things like how stupid it sounds to give up 10% of your hard earned cash to give to others or to "God" without expecting anything in return, devoting time to someone or something which you cannot see, hear, taste or touch, .. how utterly ridiculous this may sound! OH! How about losing your very life because of a simple belief? HA!!

So logically, I can see how you do not understand all this, and all the things Christians say or do. Heck, in your shoes, I would think this was all drivel and foolery myself.

But I know this: John 14:17
.. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you.

More.. Luke 6:22
Blessed are you when men hate you, when they exclude you and insult you and reject your name as evil, because of the Son of Man.

Still more... 1 Thessalonians 4:8
Therefore, he who rejects this instruction does not reject man but God, who gives you his Holy Spirit.

So there is this definite dividing line between us, not in logic, but in understanding Jesus, which He himself imparts to those who call out to him with a sincere and contrite heart.

It's the man not serving God who thinks he should be able to understand God. I mean, how else have intelligent people throughout the ages - for example, someone like Sir Isaac Newton, who was a devout Christian (and you can read about this in any biography of him) - be able to make heads or tails out of a statment by Jesus like this in Matthew 10:39: "Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it."

I submit to you that the answer is only by the drawing of a supreme and powerful God.

This one issue is at the root of all other arguments between those who believe in God and those who don't. I noticed that what we were discussing was headed toward one of those long winded discussions where ideas can be passed back and forth, stated and re-stated for a long time. And what do they prove? That you still reject God, and that I still serve God, even in the face of man's logic.

Respectfully,
KFayal

KFayal

Quote:

---

Well, logically, of course it sounds foolish. And what about this.. a God who is omnicient, omnipresent and omnipotent? How crazy! Oh, and I forgot things like how stupid it sounds to give up 10% of

---

This proves that you do not understand logic :(

"foolish", "stupid", "crazy", "ridiculous"... these are not terms used to apply logic... they are subjective terms used by PEOPLE to determine opinion.

I simply asked you to tell me how it was possible for both completely contradictory things to exist simultaneously and you have yet to provide an answer.

On another point Omnipotent is a non-existing double-negative. To be "all powerful" means you should also have the power to create say a mountain that you are unable to move.... by being unable to move it you are therefor not all powerful and by not being able to create something you cannot do means again you are not all powerful.

So to use the term "Omnipotent" is in itself a false definition.

Quote:

---

But I know this: John 14:17
.. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you

---

Lets see if we can improve your logic a bit...

Hypothetical : I want to delude someone... I wish to manipulate them in such a way that it is impossible to doubt. Therefor I make a statement that personalizes it to the point where you acceptance in and of itself is the reward you seek. Therefor if you accept my deception you are in fact rewarding yourself for allowing yourself to be deceived.

The above verse is a perfect example of unreachable validation by stating it as fact that only those who have already accepted will believe when in fact the reason they accept is the belief they have already chosen.

Do you understand Hypnosis? They use these exact same concepts to convince people of things which only they can see or hear. Why then do you think you are any different?

Quote:

---

So there is this definite dividing line between us, not in logic, but in understanding Jesus, which He himself imparts to those who call out to him with a sincere and contrite heart.

---

Oh I understand alright... have seen and experienced it enough times to see exactly what it is... I have also seen that which you will not allow yourself to see, and that is the fact that you NEED this to be true and as a result of that need have MADE it true for yourself.

Let me ask you a simple question. Can you admit the "possiblity" that God does not exist? Even assign it the smallest of probabilities? Or do you find your senses reeling to even place the smallest portion of probability to this? What does that tell you?

Quote:

---

It's the man not serving God who thinks he should be able to understand God.

---

And it is the man SERVING God who thinks he is righteous and commits heinous crimes against humanity in his name. When that happens we blame the Man as if everything can be put down to the simple premise :

If God then Good
If Man then Bad

And likewise

If Good then God
If Bad then Man

You cannot even begin to use Logic when you are talking from "faith"... the 2 are mutually exclusive. Do me a favour... look up the word "faith" in a dictionary and tell me what it says.

Quote:

---

"Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it."

---

Yes, an intelligent person would find it easy to make heads and tails of that. Jesus is refering to the fact that you lose your "sinful" life to be reborn into a new life of Christianity. It could also be read as an implication that if you lose your "mortal" life for the sake of Jesus then you will find your "eternal" life within heaven.

What ever made you think that intelligence and religion were in fact mutually exclusive?

Quote:

---

I submit to you that the answer is only by the drawing of a supreme and powerful God.

---

And I submit to you that simply understanding the "culture" in which the context of the text was written gives you more than enough insight into determining what it means and the purpose for which it was written... to justify their cause

Quote:

---

And what do they prove? That you still reject God, and that I still serve God, even in the face of man's logic.

---

And because you do not have open eyes to see anything other than what you have chosen to believe you will never be any the wiser.

Let me ask you a question. How do you know that the Bible you are reading today was in fact the actual text written 2000 years ago? What proof or validation do you have that it was not tampered with somewhere over the last 2000 years?

Where was the Bible during the 5th century? Or the 12th? Or the 17th?

You follow a book that you cannot even validate as being authentic and you do so with such an unswerving faith (which by the way is a virtue... figure that deception out!!) that you are blinded to whatever reality may come.

If I came face to face with God I would be forced to believe as my eyes would not allow me a choice... If you came face to face with the TRUTH that God did not exist you would deny it as a trick or something false or even Satan and cling to your faith of his existance.

So who then has the greater open-mind? One who would change it given proof or one who would not change it no matter how much TRUTH was before them???

That in itself is enough to show the truth of it.

I have reviewed almost all of your posts on this site, and anything other than in the programming forums - there are a few exceptions - it appears that you find it intellectually stimulating to begin an idea for discourse and see if you can be the last one to post. And I can also accept your assessment of me with joy, DUE to my faith.
Of course I don't relate intelligence to faith. My point was that even intelligent people can be smitten with faith. As I said, I have been reading your posts to become more familiar with you, and you somehow equate "blindness" (a term you used) with idiocy, stupidity or weakness. I think that if my assessment is accurate concerning this that it is wrong as evidenced by many examples of people - who were and are far more intelligent than myself and you - throughout history who had faith in God.

Were those people idiots, stupid, wrong or inferior in any way? I really hope you answer this question honestly.

Your question about the Bible: I do not know where the Bible was in the 5th, 12th or 17th century. Nor do I really care! I have the Spirit within me, which tells me in a way that cannot be explained, that it is all 100% true as with thousands of other people before me, and thousands of other people will after me.

Neither do I concern myself about your definition of open-mindedness. This is not an attribute that I see in Jesus Christ. I'm not trying to fit any mold that you wish for me to fit, only that which Christ is leading me to.

In closing, I would like to say that if you could show me that God doesn't exist, I would gladly give up my life as a Christian. Since you know this is impossible, it has no bearing on who has more of an open mind.

With respect,
KFayal

GenX,
After further reading of your posts, I am truly interested in hearing your views on:

1. The origin of man, and if you agree with the concept that we were created.
2. Whether or not you agree with Steven Hawking on his view that the universe did not begin at a single point.
3. Death
4. Those goofy glasses where the eyeballs fall out on springs when you shake them :)

KFayal

Quote:

---

it appears that you find it intellectually stimulating to begin an idea for discourse and see if you can be the last one to post

---

You shoudl have noted then that at least 50% of the posts I start I do not have the last word and that the percentage of posts I reply to greatly favours those posts I do not create.

Quote:

---

you somehow equate "blindness" (a term you used) with idiocy, stupidity or weakness

---

This is where you mistakenly blend objectiveness with subjectiveness. I equate the analysis of their actions with "blindness" (this is an objective term), I then give my opinion that to have blindness is idiocy, stupidity or weakness (that is a subjective term).

Can you see the difference?

Quote:

---

I think that if my assessment is accurate concerning this that it is wrong as evidenced by many examples of people - who were and are far more intelligent than myself and you - throughout history who had faith in God.

---

You have not quite grasped it yet. My assessment of this failure is in your either not accepting or not actually looking up the definition of "faith".

Regardless of how intelligent you are, the decision to "Believe WITHOUT evidence" means you have chosen to specifically stop using your intelligence to make further decisions. So the fact they HAD faith in God means they were making a conscious choice to no longer use their ability to reason and logic and in place chose to accept things despite the evidence presented to them.

Quote:

---

Were those people idiots, stupid, wrong or inferior in any way? I really hope you answer this question honestly.

---

Honestly it is my opinion that they were stupid (a lack of intelligence), idiots (to believe without evidence is dangerous), wrong (they purposely chose to ignore evidence)... but I don't think they are "inferior" in any way.

I hope you believe me when I say that is as honest as is possible.

Quote:

---

I have the Spirit within me, which tells me in a way that cannot be explained, that it is all 100% true as with thousands of other people before me, and thousands of other people will after me

---

Now let me ask you a question. If you had been hypnotised would you not say exactly what the hypnotist told you that you were feeling? If he said that you could not feel your legs would you not report to everyone that you indeed could not feel your legs?

I hope you answer this question honestly ;)

Quote:

---

In closing, I would like to say that if you could show me that God doesn't exist, I would gladly give up my life as a Christian. Since you know this is impossible, it has no bearing on who has more of an open mind.

---

Actually I CAN show you that God doesn't exist... The problem is that what may be considered evidence for me is not evidence for you. So it has less to do with being able to show you and more with whether you would actually believe me if I did.

Let me ask you then... What "would" convince you there is no God? What piece of evidence would actually convince you?

1. Origin of man
Obviously you haven't read many of my posts then. I have discussed ad nauseum my view on evolution not being as Darwin suggested and about my theory on "Natural Progression".

2. Single Point
I have to say I am not sure on this one. While I agree that via the doppler effect it "appears" that our universe is expanding we can hardly look at a localized part of the universe for our tiny corner and apply those findings to the rest of the universe. That would be like looking at a blade of grass and making predictions about the whole world.

Having said that, it seems feasible that our incarnation of the Universe began as a single point just as every other incarnation of the universe has and that it has been an eternal cycle of matter spreading out causing the creation of a finate yet infinate universe (Gravitational effect) only to eventually pull itself back in to repeat the process all over again.

3. Death
Do you mean death or what happens afterwards? ;)

I believe your actually meaning what happens afterwards and not what my view on the process of a living organism ceasing to function is.

I personally think that each person will go where they believe they are going, hence those who think they will go to Heaven do, those who believe they go do hell do, those who believe they will be reincarnated will and so on.

The reason I believe this is simply at a whim because after seeing the effect of Quantum Entanglement (and reading a book by Orson Scott Card called "Ender's Game" and its sequals) that the theory that there is a higher dimension to which we are simply the harmonic resonance within the 4th dimension is so far without flaw.

4. Goofy Glasses

They are perfectly alright (he says taking them off) :eek:

An ameoba will always be an ameoba.
Where did the ameoba begin?
A man will always be a man.
Where did man begin?

I look at my own hand and think, "This cannot have been a chance event." No, there exists a specific design. A design implies a designer. Creation implies a creation.

I didn't attend the "creation of man", so I can only go by the amazing and complex design of living things and match it to what I read in the Bible to base my beliefs on. And since no one else living today was at the event either, there is no way to disprove my belief that God exists and that he created man. How can you prove or disprove the existence of something you can't measure in any way?

With respect,
KFayal

Creation implies a CREATOR.. Woops..

Quote:

---

Actually I CAN show you that God doesn't exist

---

No you can't ;)

Quote:

---

Having said that, it seems feasible that our incarnation of the Universe began as a single point just as every other incarnation of the universe has and that it has been an eternal cycle of matter spreading out causing the creation of a finate yet infinate universe (Gravitational effect) only to eventually pull itself back in to repeat the process all over again.

---

This is the closed universe theory, which is exactly that, a theory. I'm not saying it's wrong, I'm just not convinced it's right.

KFayal

I agree. Creation DOES imply a Creator... its just such a pity that NOTHING was ever created.

Quote:

---

An ameoba will always be an ameoba.
Where did the ameoba begin?
A man will always be a man.
Where did man begin?

---

Actually an Ameoba was NOT always an ameoba, it was a proto-plasmic RNA molecule that before that was a protein string and before that was a collection of Hydrogen, Carbon, Oxygen and Nitrogen molecules.

A man was not ALWAYS a man... he too was the same proto-plasmic RNA molecule.

If you studied the origins of biology you would see how we actually came about, how all life came about and thus how a creator was NOT involved.

There is a reason why we are Carbon-Based, becaues Carbon is an element with the most amazing bonding properties which relate specifically to its place on the periodic table. This ability to bond in a multiple of ways under the right conditions lead to the combination of structured and inter-laced chains called RNA and protein and they built ontop of each other so the resulting molecule had properties of its own... Those built on others which built on others and over the span of several billion years they came to form us.

Now you may say that is amazing... I would say you obviously cannot grasp the concept of 10 billion years. Yes we are amazing, yes we are a marvelous construction and arrangement of atoms.... but that does NOT automatically imply a creator, it simply implies that our universe has form and structure which funny enough just happens to be an attribute of matter itself.

I can see how you would think as you do... but I see it as limited because you cannot get out of your head the word "create".

Do you think babies are actually "created"?

Harry

Quote:

---

No you can't

---

Hehehe... your right. The way I worded that you are absolutely right.

I should have said "I can show you evidence that suggests to ME that God doesn't exist" ;)

Quote:

---

This is the closed universe theory, which is exactly that, a theory. I'm not saying it's wrong, I'm just not convinced it's right.

---

What then is the point of evidence to you that invalidates this theory and what is the evidence to you that validates a God created universe?