Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
3sigma asked:
kenblaster answered:
For those who missed it, this little Q&A went like this:
3sigma: "Who can believe without evidence?"
kenblaster: "Those who believe."
...
That is pretty silly, huh. I was not paying attention to all the words.
Anyhow, do not ignore the rest of my posts. I have shown evidence of God's existence.
I propose that through my experience with Him I know He exists. You cannot take that as evidence because you call into question whether I am lying or not. Why would I lie?
I am not a lawyer.
And perhaps you should read [post=53979254]this[/post] post to see what sort of evidence I consider acceptable. I provided some examples of sound, objective evidence and some examples of evidence that I consider worthless. The evidence you think youve presented all falls into the worthless category.Really, sigma needs to see the definition of evidence and admit that I and others have presented evidence.
Oh no, I don't feel picked on at all, I just figured based off of previous posts that you didn't really feel like talking science (although I do have to wonder why you are in the science forums). All I was saying as that in the same way I do not consider you to have presented evidence I am sure that you would not consider any evidence that I have to give so the discussion is rather pointless. And while you may believe that the heavens and the earth are proof of creation, I don't even believe in heaven so really the point falls on the wrong audience.I just gave you the proof of evidence. But, I did not mean to pick on you. I really enjoy talking with you. You do for others if you have the mean to. Really, sigma needs to see the definition of evidence and admit that I and others have presented evidence. Now I have shown and attested that I know that God exists. "God did it" is real to me. I read it all the time in the bible.
Genesis 1:1
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
Is there a heaven. Is there an earth.
Proof that these exist and evidence that God created them. That is, Genesis gives a record of this event.
Who or what made the process that way, assuming you are correct?
Like I said previously you do indeed hold to unprovable philosophical assumptions just like I as a religious person do, difference is that i'm willing to admit it while it seems you are not. This does rather remind me of dealing with creationists who think they don't interpret the bible, they just read it.Because until you can show me non-empirical, sound, objective evidence that can be used to verify the existence of something then empirical evidence is all I can use.
In particular, can you show me any sound, objective evidenceempirical or non-empirical
To get this thread back on track, can you or any other Christian provide a single instance, ever, where God did it has been tested and verified as the true explanation for anything at all?
You guys sound smart. I bet your mommies are very proud of you.
That would seem to be a lesson you have never taken to heart.
Why does an omnipotent deity have to have flawed humans argue with emotion that He's real? Seems both inefficient and insufficient...We always have to show you God. It is alot easier to help someone who will try to help himself.
Been there, done it, and it didn't work. Again, I ask why an omnipotent and loving God chooses not to reveal Himself to those who seek Him when He clearly promised He would?If any of you were sincere and diligent enough to seek after Him, He would be faithful to His word and meet you there.
Ummm, I don't mean to nitpick, but how is it that you've seen any such thing?I have seen God writing the commandments with lightning from His fingertips and Jesus Christ opening up the book of life.
And you know this how? You really come off as condescending and pompous. I hope that's working out for you.Guess what? Your name is not written in there.
Lie? I don't know about that. It's possible that you believe every single word you say and type wholeheartedly. Still, that doesn't mean it's true for anyone aside from you. You're using your own personal experience as "evidence," which nobody can verify because it's only your own personal experience.You cannot take that as evidence because you call into question whether I am lying or not. Why would I lie?
This is nothing more than mealy-mouthed, equivocating nonsense. I do not hold the same kind of beliefs religious believers do. Religious believers, including you, believe that things such as your God and Satan are realthat they actually existwithout a shred of sound, objective evidence to support those beliefs. I do not. I think your God, Satan, angels, heaven and hell are purely imaginary. Many religious believers think they will have eternal life. I do not. I think that is a fanciful hope driven by a fear of death.Like I said previously you do indeed hold to unprovable philosophical assumptions just like I as a religious person do, difference is that i'm willing to admit it while it seems you are not.
Of course I wont accept personal testimony as evidence that something such as your God exists and I even said as much in that post to which you linked. I keep asking you to show me non-empirical evidence that is sound, objective evidence, but you keep evading that request. Personal testimony is not objective and is unlikely to be free from error, fallacy or misapprehension as well.So by non-empirical you mean you would now accept [post=53979254]personal testimony[/post]? Since that is after all non-empirical.
Really? So you dont believe that your God created man in its image; you think the Bible is wrong about that? You dont believe that your God does things like answer prayers? If you think your God answers prayers then you think God did it.I wouldn't try to use 'goddidit' as a scientific explanation since I'm not a creationist.
Could you please provide a testable experiment so we can see "God's hand" during the development of an embryo? All the tests we have done so far have concluded that the timing in the expression of certain genes is what controls embryonic development. If God is the puppeteer pulling the strings then there must be a way to observe it, right? So again, please provide a testable explanation as to how God actively controls the formation of the embyro.
the timing in the expression of certain genes is what controls embryonic development.
So all you need to show is that raw chemicals understand timing
and have a vested interest in being alive.
A person with faith, diligence, and a seeker. As opposed to someone who thinks he has shown that angels, God, the devil, etc. do not exist. God has proven Himself to me. That is all that matters. I have seen demons, as well as an angel. I have seen God writing the commandments with lightning from His fingertips and Jesus Christ opening up the book of life. Guess what? Your name is not written in there.
You just said it
So all you need to show is that raw chemicals understand timing and have a vested interest in being alive.
In the entire rest of the Cosmos, we see no such evidence. Oh we HAVE looked. Spent Billions in the search too. Nada. Zip. Zilch.
I wanted to hear you say it.
So what kind of test would should we develop to see whether or not the genes "understand" timing?
I agree, zero evidence in support of a deity.
...they start with a basic template and the mutations form from there.
There are no documented mutations that create adults from baby stock.
They don't. The components of a watch don't understand timing either, but they do just fine in keeping time.
They don't. They are, as you said, merely chemicals. They have no vested interest in anything, they just undergo their chemical reactions. Do an acid and base have a vested interest in neutralizing each other and forming water and a salt when mixed? No, but it happens anyway.
You just said it
So all you need to show is that raw chemicals understand timing and have a vested interest in being alive. In the entire rest of the Cosmos, we see no such evidence. Oh we HAVE looked. Spent Billions in the search too. Nada. Zip. Zilch.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?