Prove there's a god.

Posted in the Top Stories Forum

Comments (Page 29,434)

Showing posts 588,661 - 588,680 of683,052
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

“It's all about the struggle”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#619784
Apr 25, 2013
 
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, "rational" thinking is like wild guessing?
It IS easy....
Let's see....
You have no proof that you're a woman so I'm gonna assume you're a hermaphrodite.
He claims to be Alice, too.

“THE LORD IS MY SHEPHERD;”

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#619785
Apr 25, 2013
 
OCB wrote:
<quoted text>Hasw nothing to do with BELIEF.
The inconsistencies are there and speak for themselves.
AGAIN:
Jesus' lineage was traced through David's son Solomon. Mt.1:6.
Jesus' lineage was traced through David's son Nathan. Lk.3:31.
Lets deal with these individualy, since you have pasted so may of em..
So what does that prove to you?? Dont you think that Daivid had 2 sons in which it is possible to trace the linage history through?
The announcement of the special birth came before conception. Lk.1:26-31.
The announcement of the special birth came after conception. Mt.1:18-21.
So whats your argument for this so called contradiction??
Are you speaking of the Angel who came to mary or of matthew begining his writings in 1:18 with ''Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise''?
Jesus' parents were told of their son's future greatness. Mt.1:18-21; Lk.1:28-35.
Jesus' parents knew nothing of their son's potential. Lk.2:48-50.
The angel told Joseph. Mt.1:20.
The angel told Mary. Lk.1:28.
Of course the Gospel documents display some differences, even when describing the same events. Actually, this is evidence of ""literary independence""; it demonstrates a lack of ""collusion." " This circumstance most certainly does not demand historical unreliability.

So i guess you critics, would then grip and complain that all 4 gospels are identical, therfore you would say,,''they got together and got there stories straight''...

When Jesus was crucified, a superscription was placed above his head proclaiming,“This is Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews.” It was written in three tongues—Hebrew, Latin, and Greek. These languages represented the three dominate cultures of the Mediterranean world when the New Testament was produced.

It is not without significance that there is a Gospel record designed for each of these societal elements. Matthew was directed to the Hebrews, Mark was written for the Romans, and Luke was designed to address the Greeks. John’s narrative, however, was cosmopolitan in its thrust. Each of these works deserves careful reflection.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#619786
Apr 25, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Pokay wrote:
<quoted text> No, that's what *you* do because you have no way of defending yourself properly.
<quoted text> If they are not the same thing then kindly give us your definition of 'consciousness' and of 'sense of self'. And then explain to me why it matters, when we are talking about 'awareness coming into being' from a state of non-awareness.
So if you admit the nature of self is not testable then that means you cannot explain how awareness ever came into being which means you cannot claim that it is more probable that awareness comes from organized groups of molecules rather than from the quantum matter/energy that makes up those molecules. End of story. What more can you argue about? There should be no argument here except that, in your battle against the idea of an eternal consciousness or "God", there are no rules of etiquette or sportsmanship.
BTW, Just because a cat can't reason and thinks it's own reflection is another cat doesn't mean it has no 'sense of self'. When an object comes hurling at the cat, the cat will move out of the way. Why? Because the cat is aware of itself. Duhhh.
To put it simply, consciousness is the ability to think, self awareness is the ability to think about thinking - the ability to think that there is an "I" doing the thinking.

Why have you moved the goal posts so, so far? Now I have to prove how consciousness came into being to even suggest that it is associated with the physical systems that it appears to be associated with? I have already agreed with you that we do not know how consciousness works, but it does not follow that every observation we can make is therefore meaningless. You realize that this logic could be applied to everything in the universe? Everything we are able to observe might simply be the result of some deeper process that we have not yet uncovered, but to say that this renders all current observations meaningless is lunacy. That is not to say that we should not be open to other explanations for things, though.

And I did not say that cats definitively do not have a sense of self, I specifically said that based on the best tests we can devise they do not appear to have a sense of self. Certain animals pass these tests, certain animals do not. And it is not simply a matter of a cat "thinking it's reflection is another cat." Read up on the mirror test if you want to know how it works.

And really? A cat jumping out of the way proves it has a sense of self? I'm really beginning to think that you do not understand the distinction we are dealing with.

“THE LORD IS MY SHEPHERD;”

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#619787
Apr 25, 2013
 
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
Atheists know the bible better thank at Christians.
Sad but true, but then again Satan also knows the scripture.

Kinda like owning a tool but dont know how to use it.. Its worthless!



Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#619788
Apr 25, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Pokay wrote:
<quoted text>How's is this a pertinent answer to 'how awareness came into being'?
And just because we know mass is associated with gravity we can't say that mass causes gravity because we don't know the fundamental cause or mechanism of gravity. Same with awareness. Just because molecules are a part of the organism that displays awareness doesn't mean that molecules are the cause, especially when the quantum state is more fundamental than the molecular state.
You have no way of approaching the question of how awareness came into being, so KMA.
I did not say that mass necessarily causes gravity, I said that it is clearly associated with it based on the evidence we have. Where there is mass, there is gravity. Where there is consciousness, there is a neural net. My point is, you cannot discount the observations that we have because there "might be something deeper."

"The quantum state is more fundamental than the molecular state." So? What's your point? What do you mean by quantum consciousness? I still have no idea what you mean by this other than you use it as a substitute for the word "magic." And why would a quantum consciousness, whatever that means, imply an eternal consciousness?

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Since: Jun 11

Sacramento

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#619789
Apr 25, 2013
 

Judged:

1

top2m wrote:
God is everywhere.
God is dead....

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#619790
Apr 25, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Dumb ass.
War is an act of nations or states, not individuals.
And nations are collections of people. Or do you think nations are special, somehow?

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#619791
Apr 25, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Pokay wrote:
When I am on my death bed, I still won't seriously consider that "God" assumes a name (like "Jehovah" or "Allah"), but I bet most atheists will break down and consider that there might be some sort of higher power/consciousness, and will quickly humble themselves. But maybe too late to make a difference.....in the "direction" their conscious energy is allowed to take, after the transition of "death".
So, now your "eternal consciousness" nonsense shows it's true colors. It is ego worship and the desire to see others "judged" for their arrogance hidden behind pseudo science. "Direction their consciousness will take..." I wonder what that could be a euphemism for.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#619792
Apr 25, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Einstein explained gravity with GR , which does explain the cause and mechanism of gravity.
Well, it models the effects of gravity/distortions in spacetime very well, but we still don't know exactly how gravity is "communicated."

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#619793
Apr 25, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you serious?!?!
So you have a 6 month old baby that's decided to throw a meaningless temper tantrum because you're trying to have dinner with your man and the baby's not getting enough attention...
What do you do?
Woah. RR, do you think that babies like, think in the same way that adults do?

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#619794
Apr 25, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Al Garcia wrote:
<quoted text>
You ever watch Star Wars? Here's a tongue in cheek example of something that is "logically impossible" consider the dramatic revelation in Star Wars: Episode V (The Empire Strikes Back). Luke's reaction to the revelation that Darth Vader is his father is disbelief: that it is impossible. Whatever emotions drove this reaction, it is likely that this was his reaction to the fact that the assertion contradicted his mental model of Darth Vader and Anakin Skywalker being seperate individuals, one of whom literally killed the other, as Ben Kenobi described in Episode IV. Relative to this model of reality, it was logically impossible for Darth Vader to be Anakin Skywalker, because it violated an assumption used in constructing the model. But if we accept what is asserted or demonstrated by the later Star Wars films, it was in fact actually possible, and indeed true.
Yes I know that it's just a movie, but it does show that something can be logical and yet impossible.
No. It was not "logically impossible" for darth vader to be lukes father. That is not what is meant by "logically impossible."

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#619795
Apr 25, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Al Garcia wrote:
Relax..... People....The previous post was more HUMOR than anything else....
Oh. Well then.. lol

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#619796
Apr 25, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
I know that atheist websites like to boast about inconsistencies in the bible, but there are none.
You just have to know how to apply a little creative "interpretation," am I right?

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#619797
Apr 25, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Spanking a child as discipline is not violence, IMO.
Striking a child, or anyone, out of anger is akin to raid rage.
I have never and will never spank my kids out of anger.
For a lawyer, you have a skewed vision of domestic violence. You sound like the typical Californian liberal.
A 6 month old does not understand the concept of "discipline." If you hit a 6 month old baby, all you are teaching them is that if they do what they were doing immediately preceding the beating, they will get hit. In this way, you will condition your child to fear crying. It will not understand "oh, I shouldn't cry unless something is *really* wrong," it will just connect the crying with the hitting.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#619798
Apr 25, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Pokay wrote:
<quoted text>That's the dipsh*t quote of the day. You don't even realize how stupid that makes you look. You obviously don't understand the material that you google. The quantum world is eternally active. So much so that 'absolute zero' may not be attainable, that is if it is defined as a total absence of any motion. And it's not even possible to determine a total lack of motion because detection has limits; we have no idea what the limits of reality are.
I think he meant that the macro world does not follow the same rules as the quantum world. As in, things do not pop in and out of existence and my couch is not a wavefunction, as far as I can tell.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#619799
Apr 25, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Al Garcia wrote:
<quoted text>
It's obvious that you disapprove this thing called religion, and if a believer is honest with themselves they would too.
I'm not sure what in your past has happened to piss you off, hurt you or turn you away from God and to harden that "pump" of yours but that's for a later time.
Ughhh. Goodness I hate that. "People who don't believe the same thing I do must be that way because they were 'hurt,' and therefore their objections can be written off as if they are over emotional children." No.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#619800
Apr 26, 2013
 
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>I don't know about typical.

But yes, I am a liberal and a Californian.

What happened to you?
He was dropped on his head when he was very small.

Since: Sep 10

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#619801
Apr 26, 2013
 
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
He was dropped on his head when he was very small.
RR, I got up earlier than you today.

Know why?

Aero, thanks for letting me use your post.

Off to the gym. You? And the cigs?

OCB

“What a GLORIOUS day!!!”

Since: Apr 12

Orlando but NYC born & raised

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#619802
Apr 26, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>Woah. RR, do you think that babies like, think in the same way that adults do?
Yes, that is apparently what RR thinks.

He thinks that 6 month old babies reason like adults, he thinks that 6 month old babies are capable of plotting and planning, he thinks that 6 month old babies will know why they are being spanked, he thinks that 6 month old babies have any concept of right and wrong, he thinks that 6 month old babies know what discipline is, he thinks that 6 month old babies know they are being punished....

Um....I think RR likes to bully anyone and everyone- including 6 month old babies.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#619803
Apr 26, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>Are you drunk?
No dear. I rarely drink.

But thank you for pointing out my typo.

I can't begin to tell you how much I value your posts.

Have a wonderful day.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 588,661 - 588,680 of683,052
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

527 Users are viewing the Top Stories Forum right now

Search the Top Stories Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Blaming Israel for carnage (Jul '06) 4 min Dang It 110,397
ye olde village pub (Jun '07) 11 min Ruby88 52,638
Windows Live XP Super SP3 2013 Free Download Fu... (Aug '13) 13 min Raghad Adel 24
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 14 min Catcher1 218,183
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 25 min Sister Kathryn Lust 168,975
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 26 min RoSesz 513,528
Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 49 min -Web 250,745
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 52 min BenAdam 596,818
Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 5 hr EdmondWA 89,782
•••
•••
•••