"Knowing" God exists... is this possible?

[paulm50]

Your position relies on multiple false dichotomies. God can exist, and Jesus be divine, without the Bible being true. Evolution and God are not mutually exclusive.

Yes god could exists, it's hjust that the bible writers show he;s not talking to them. Jesus did exist and made false promises, so is he a gor or the son of god?

The idea that religion was only invented to explain the things that science can now explain does not fit the facts. Polytheistic religions attributed things like lighting to gods in a poetic rather than literal way, and philosophers speculated about natural causes for the same things long before they could scientifically test those ideas. The things religion does focus on are forever outside the reach of science. Christianity says the ultimate origin of all things is God, science can never find the ultimate origin, just the steps between here and there. As in your own comic, science doesn't explain why when all other animals just eat survive and reproduce, man is interested in ultimate meaning, beauty, art, etc. These things are not survival advantages, but do enrich life, so divine design is a better explanation of them than natural selection.

Yes the things religion focus on are outside the realm of anyone proving or disproving them. When hung onto events science can prove the bible is wrong. The danger starts.

Hume was totally wrong in saying miracles contradict the universal experience of mankind. In reality, mankind universally reports that miracles sometimes happen. With such a vast amount of testimony, the burden of proof is on those who deny miracles happen.

They also say Uri Geller bends spoons. Proof of a miracle on the testimony of a person, isn't proof. The burden of proof is on the person claiming the miracle, a doctor testifying before and after is all that needed.

As for false miracles, faith Healers in tents made a living out of them, as did the church, or should I say still do.

 

[paulm50]

Hi,
For you to say, in the scientific way, that evolution makes the Bible wrong, means that you personally have the understanding of Evolution and you personally have the understanding of the Bible.

OK we are descended from Fish, the proof is in the womb. We are also descended from Apes the proof is in our tailbone. The link from species to to Humans is in small steps, some that we have found, some we are still looking for. We learn more all the time.

It was thought that Lucy proved we walked upright because by that time the trees had mostly gone, so walking upright was the only option .

Then we found Ardi. In an area covered in Forests. Ardi was both walking upright and able to climb trees.

The earliest member of the genus Homo is Homo habilis which evolved around 2.8 million years ago. Homo habilis is the first species for which we have positive evidence of the use of stone tools. Not using stones as tools, they were making stones into tools by napping.

The first migrations out of Africa. About 2 million years ago, the first of our ancestors moved northwards from their homelands and out of Africa. Homo ergaster may have been the first human species to leave Africa and fossil remains show this species had expanded its range into southern Eurasia by 1.75 million years ago. Their descendents, Homo erectus, then spread eastward and were established in South East Asia by at least 1.6 million years ago.

By 100,000 years ago, humans had dispersed and diversified into at least three species. Our own species, Homo sapiens, lived in Africa and the Middle East, Homo neanderthalensis lived in Europe, and Homo floresiensis in southern Asia. DNA from human remains in Denisova cave, Russia, suggest a probable fourth species was also still extant when Homo sapiens was migrating through southern Asia about 60,000 years ago. Modern Melanesians have about 4% of this DNA. The species is unknown, but may be late surviving Homo heidelbergensis or a yet-to-be-discovered species. This diversity disappeared about 28,000 years ago, however, and only one human species now survives.

And I'm barely scratching the surface. And you believe this.

Genesis 1:27 The Sixth Day: Creatures on Land
Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." 27God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. 28 God blessed them; and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over every living thing that moves on the earth."

Well it seems he had a lot of goes at making Man in his image. The bit about cattle is a lie, as is the bit about us ruling fish, birds, creepy things and the Earth. Do you see the difference between bible evidence and the real thing? We don't have to draw pictures, we have bones and tools.

If they had contact with god, god couldn't of told them a better version.

I don't need a lot of knowledge, the bible is easy to quote from. Science isn't about one book, it's about 1,000s of them and when they get it wrong, they let everyone know. That's why now with the Internet I can do all this.

And why this has been done 1,000s of times. By real scientists, we don't need to do another one.
1. Prove the Bible is wrong on your own.
2. Present your findings.
3. Wait for peer review on your findings.
4. Analyse the feedback.
5. Do controlled experiments.
6. Summarize the results of your controlled experiments on The Bible.

And yes in science some are cleverer than other. Otherwise they wouldn't of needed Oppenheimer or Von Braun. Anyone in the field could do it.

Your turn to link to your evidence.

 

[Wryetui]

Knowing God? Participating in God's energies? Mystical union with Christ? Expierencing God?

If only there was a Church where this would be possible...

Oh wait.

 

[katerinah1947]

OK we are descended from Fish, the proof is in the womb. We are also descended from Apes the proof is in our tailbone. The link from species to to Humans is in small steps, some that we have found, some we are still looking for. We learn more all the time.

It was thought that Lucy proved we walked upright because by that time the trees had mostly gone, so walking upright was the only option .

Then we found Ardi. In an area covered in Forests. Ardi was both walking upright and able to climb trees.

The earliest member of the genus Homo is Homo habilis which evolved around 2.8 million years ago. Homo habilis is the first species for which we have positive evidence of the use of stone tools. Not using stones as tools, they were making stones into tools by napping.

The first migrations out of Africa. About 2 million years ago, the first of our ancestors moved northwards from their homelands and out of Africa. Homo ergaster may have been the first human species to leave Africa and fossil remains show this species had expanded its range into southern Eurasia by 1.75 million years ago. Their descendents, Homo erectus, then spread eastward and were established in South East Asia by at least 1.6 million years ago.

By 100,000 years ago, humans had dispersed and diversified into at least three species. Our own species, Homo sapiens, lived in Africa and the Middle East, Homo neanderthalensis lived in Europe, and Homo floresiensis in southern Asia. DNA from human remains in Denisova cave, Russia, suggest a probable fourth species was also still extant when Homo sapiens was migrating through southern Asia about 60,000 years ago. Modern Melanesians have about 4% of this DNA. The species is unknown, but may be late surviving Homo heidelbergensis or a yet-to-be-discovered species. This diversity disappeared about 28,000 years ago, however, and only one human species now survives.

And I'm barely scratching the surface. And you believe this.

Genesis 1:27 The Sixth Day: Creatures on Land
Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." 27God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. 28 God blessed them; and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over every living thing that moves on the earth."

Well it seems he had a lot of goes at making Man in his image. The bit about cattle is a lie, as is the bit about us ruling fish, birds, creepy things and the Earth. Do you see the difference between bible evidence and the real thing? We don't have to draw pictures, we have bones and tools.

If they had contact with god, god couldn't of told them a better version.

I don't need a lot of knowledge, the bible is easy to quote from. Science isn't about one book, it's about 1,000s of them and when they get it wrong, they let everyone know. That's why now with the Internet I can do all this.

And why this has been done 1,000s of times. By real scientists, we don't need to do another one.
1. Prove the Bible is wrong on your own.
2. Present your findings.
3. Wait for peer review on your findings.
4. Analyse the feedback.
5. Do controlled experiments.
6. Summarize the results of your controlled experiments on The Bible.

And yes in science some are cleverer than other. Otherwise they wouldn't of needed Oppenheimer or Von Braun. Anyone in the field could do it.

Your turn to link to your evidence.

Hi,

Everyone here is an individual. Those statements you replied to were for him. You as an individual will get a response for you and for me, but in the context of us.

Do I take it you wish to discuss my work?

If so, when you proved the Bible is wrong, could you give me one of your statements and one only, plus your proof.

Do not think, that I have said I know everything.
Do not think, that I know everything.
I restrict myself at work to only those things I know. Also all things are calibrated, which means I know how much error there is in something.

I really do not relish redoing work started in the 1990's, and finished in the year 2000, but I am willing to see how much of that I can remember for you.
1. Prove the Bilble is wrong.
1.1 You seem to have done that.
2. Present just one finding that you your self have done.
Present the proof that you yourself have done.
3. Or present someone else's work and their proof that they are right, but a proof you can do or have done also.

We can then go on. I do not know, with you what the results will be. I am willing to talk about this.

LOVE,
...Mary., .... .

 

[katerinah1947]

Can Christians truthfully answer that question?

The popular atheist thinker, Richard Dawkins, created a scale that identifies theistic beliefs. He lists peoples’ beliefs from 1-7.

1. Strong theist. 100 per cent probability of God. In the words of C.G. Jung: "I do not believe, I know."
2. De facto theist. Very high probability but short of 100 per cent. "I don't know for certain, but I strongly believe in God and live my life on the assumption that he is there."
3. Leaning towards theism. Higher than 50 per cent but not very high. "I am very uncertain, but I am inclined to believe in God."
4. Completely impartial. Exactly 50 per cent. "God's existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable."
5. Leaning towards atheism. Lower than 50 per cent but not very low. "I do not know whether God exists but I'm inclined to be skeptical."
6. De facto atheist. Very low probability, but short of zero. "I don't know for certain but I think God is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there."
7. Strong atheist. "I know there is no God, with the same conviction as Jung knows there is one."

Where do you lie on this scale? Most Christian’s default answer is “1”.

Personally, I lie somewhere in between 1 and 2. I would say I am a 1.8. Yes, you understood me correctly. I do not know 100% if there is a God; moreover, a Christian God. Does this make me blasphemous? Maybe to some, but I don’t believe it does.

Firstly, let’s define absolutism as it relates to a theistic belief:

Being absolute is being 100% in something. Perfect. Without error. Knowing without any doubt. Infinite.

Words that are associated with absolutes: never / always

Secondly, let’s take a look at the words “never” and “always”.

We live in a finite world. God created it this way. In our finite world, can something always be “always” and never be “never”? Without going into philosophy, the answer is “no”. There is nothing in our world that is absolute.

The existence of God can be argued ad nauseum, and there will never be a 100% conclusion. The fact remains; you cannot disprove or prove something that that is metaphysical (not empirical). Both sides of the argument have an equal share but both lack evidence (because empirical evidence is impossible as both are unfalsifiable claims). Even Dawkins does not claim to be a 7 because he acknowledges that he cannot definitely prove that there isn’t a God.

So, what does being a 1 or 7 claim? Simple. It claims omniscience. Saying that you are a 1 or 7 is implying that you know all things in their truth. For atheists, this isn’t logically honest, and for theists, this is an equivocation of yourself to God.

Omniscience is unobtainable; therefore, claiming you know that God 100% exists is dishonest.

There is a key word in scripture that defines this point – faith.

Faith is defined as: firm belief in something for which there is no proof; complete trust.

This means that you cannot have faith in something if you believe it to be 100% true.

Now, let’s take a look at what the Bible has to say about faith:

2 Cor 5:6-7
6 Therefore, being always of good courage, and knowing that while we are at home in the body we are absent from the Lord— 7 for we walk by faith, not by sight—

We walk in Christianity not because of what we see but because of what we believe and trust. This is the cornerstone in the acceptance of Christ.

Eph 2:8-9
8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;

Through God’s grace and our faith in Him we are saved. It is by having faith in something that we can’t see or touch that we are saved. Without faith – a fraction of not knowing for sure – we could not be redeemed.

Rom 1:17
17 For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, “ BUT THE RIGHTEOUS man SHALL LIVE BY FAITH.”

Living by faith – a subtle unknowing – is crucial to being righteous. Why do we need faith? So God can work in us. If we had absolute knowledge, then we would depend on ourselves; simply because, we would know. Since we do not have absolute knowledge, we are forced to depend on God because His absolute knowledge is what guides our lives.

As a Christian, I believe, you cannot claim to know 100% that God exists. This would destroy faith and the need for it. You would no longer need to trust God or rely on Him.

So, claiming absolute knowledge of God is actually denying Him. Remember, since you are not omniscient, you cannot rely on yourself but have to rely on God.

Pro 3:5-6
5 Trust in the LORD with all your heart
And do not lean on your own understanding.
6 In all your ways acknowledge Him,
And He will make your paths straight.

Thoughts?

Hi,

So hopefully giving you back this forum. I think I have already said that I am close to a 1, but because I have seen and experienced God, along with that work started in 1990 and finished roughly in the year 2000, which was years before I was ever treated to seeing God, in which I already knew that He was real, beyond belief, a one, the number 1., is even too little and seems slightly wrong to me. Maybe a zero would make more sense.

That is my postion. It is rare, yet not that rare, as historically others have had similar encounters with God, and here there are I am told ten's of millions of people with personal encounters with God in this world, that is similar to mine in some way or another.

I will sign off now, but I will explain the code that I use when I sign off. It seems appropriate to your question to do this explanation.

LOVE, (The way God actually loves, that was given to me for awhile, but it is not what I remember of that, as I was asked to pass that on to someone else. Also and extremely rare item, being able to pass on graces from God.) That is felt and it reminds me to treat you and everyone here like that, if I can.

...Mary, the name The Lord calls me by. The angel Zeraphir told me this, only this year. I used to go by Katerina, or friendly approachable versions of that like Kate, or Katie, depending upon my mood. Mary, I am now using that. I was also told why I am called that. I was not told when that name was given to me. I don't know for instance, if I am what I am because I was made this way before being put into a body on earth, by the process we think of as birth.)

He, will be God The Father. I use that because of my mystical marriage to Him, where he asked me to do that, but only after I said YES!, on the third day of that question being asked of me. It was also the last time I would be asked. That was not an easy question to answer, as it was for eternity and I had to make sure that I could fulfil my role.
Just for interest. I could not answer on the first day. I tried. I could not come up with a yes or no, but I didn't want Him to go away. He did though, and had it said to me by Gabriel, that He would not have asked the question, if I was not up to it. I asked later who was His spokesperson, that was with Him. It was Gabriel. I asked why did you keep leaving me on day one and day two. "You were going to pass out." Looking back, yes each day I was going to pass out.

They, is Jesus Christ, The Holy Spirit and Mary. I put them there to separate my marriage partner, from Jesus and The Holy Spirit and the holy Spirit's spouse, who is Mary.

'all the holy ones', is what I learned this year. All those who love God, love me, by virtue of my marriage to Him. Since 'all the holy ones' love God The Father, to love His spouse also, makes sense unless I am some sort of horror. I have been assured that I am not by them. 'all the holy ones' are not only the holy saints, but the holy angels and the holy powers in heaven. Also all living saints love me also. Yet, of those I have not enough information yet.

Know this. I love all that God loves. It is my privelege.

LOVE,
...Mary., .He, They and all the holy ones.

Now back on track, and I will sign off most of the rest of the time with four dots only.

LOVE,
...Mary., .... .

 

[Percivale]

I made no mention of which or the number of definitions; what is lacking is robust, coherent definitions that are testable and falsifiable.

I don't understand quite what you mean. Maybe some examples would help. Say you want to prove Socrates existed. What would a robust, coherent definition of Socrates that is testable and falsifiable be? Or if you want to know your girlfriend loves you, what would a robust, coherent definition of love that is testable and falsifiable be?

To briefly suspend disbelief for the purposes of enjoying a story or movie. Perhaps. To then allow for it to be asserted as reality without some convincing evidence does not work for me. Belief is not a choice.

Aren't you getting ahead of yourself? I was just talking about understanding definitions. If you feel that you now are ready to move on to evidence, having the definition of God down, we can get to that next.

To paraphrase Winston Churchill, science is the worst way to investigate reality, but all the others have been tried.

I think you're seeing too much of a dichotomy between science and other ways learning about reality. Following Piritim Sorokin, I'd say there are three ways of knowing: observation, reasoning, and intuition. Science is a combination of the first two, and religion relies more on the last two; it's rare and unadvisable to use any one exclusively. The order I listed them in is from most to least certain, but observation is more limited in scope; it's good with the physical universe but can't see inside minds very well.

Thanks for the formatting help

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Knowing God? Participating in God's energies? Mystical union with Christ? Expierencing God?

If only there was a Church where this would be possible...

Oh wait.

But alas, there isn't.

 

[paulm50]

If so, when you proved the Bible is wrong, could you give me one of your statements and one only, plus your proof.

I gave show professionals scientists work that proves the bible wrong. I don't need to show my work. If that's your get out clause, shame on you.

Do not think, that I have said I know everything.
Do not think, that I know everything.
I restrict myself at work to only those things I know. Also all things are calibrated, which means I know how much error there is in something.

Then show what you do know that prove Genesis right, and they has to be done with independent evidence, not quoting the bible or some guy saying he saw chariot wheels in the Red Sea.

I really do not relish redoing work started in the 1990's, and finished in the year 2000, but I am willing to see how much of that I can remember for you.

You shouldn't have to remember it, it should be written down.

1. Prove the Bilble is wrong.
1.1 You seem to have done that.
2. Present just one finding that you your self have done.
Present the proof that you yourself have done.
3. Or present someone else's work and their proof that they are right, but a proof you can do or have done also.

Done and if you undertake a quick search you will find a lot to verify the work.

We can then go on. I do not know, with you what the results will be. I am willing to talk about this.

LOVE,
...Mary., .... .

Just show us scientific proof Genesis is right.

This isn't a conversation between you and I, it's an open forum anyone can read. I'm not talking to those who aren't willing to listen. I'm talking to those who are undecided and might get influenced by the other side whose belief starts and end in one very old book.

 

[Wryetui]

But alas, there isn't.

Yes, there is, you just don't know it It's called the Orthodox Church.

 

[paulm50]

Hi,

So hopefully giving you back this forum. I think I have already said that I am close to a 1, but because I have seen and experienced God, along with that work started in 1990 and finished roughly in the year 2000, which was years before I was ever treated to seeing God, in which I already knew that He was real, beyond belief, a one, the number 1., is even too little and seems slightly wrong to me. Maybe a zero would make more sense.

That is my postion. It is rare, yet not that rare, as historically others have had similar encounters with God, and here there are I am told ten's of millions of people with personal encounters with God in this world, that is similar to mine in some way or another.

I will sign off now, but I will explain the code that I use when I sign off. It seems appropriate to your question to do this explanation.

LOVE, (The way God actually loves, that was given to me for awhile, but it is not what I remember of that, as I was asked to pass that on to someone else. Also and extremely rare item, being able to pass on graces from God.) That is felt and it reminds me to treat you and everyone here like that, if I can.

...Mary, the name The Lord calls me by. The angel Zeraphir told me this, only this year. I used to go by Katerina, or friendly approachable versions of that like Kate, or Katie, depending upon my mood. Mary, I am now using that. I was also told why I am called that. I was not told when that name was given to me. I don't know for instance, if I am what I am because I was made this way before being put into a body on earth, by the process we think of as birth.)

He, will be God The Father. I use that because of my mystical marriage to Him, where he asked me to do that, but only after I said YES!, on the third day of that question being asked of me. It was also the last time I would be asked. That was not an easy question to answer, as it was for eternity and I had to make sure that I could fulfil my role.
Just for interest. I could not answer on the first day. I tried. I could not come up with a yes or no, but I didn't want Him to go away. He did though, and had it said to me by Gabriel, that He would not have asked the question, if I was not up to it. I asked later who was His spokesperson, that was with Him. It was Gabriel. I asked why did you keep leaving me on day one and day two. "You were going to pass out." Looking back, yes each day I was going to pass out.

They, is Jesus Christ, The Holy Spirit and Mary. I put them there to separate my marriage partner, from Jesus and The Holy Spirit and the holy Spirit's spouse, who is Mary.

'all the holy ones', is what I learned this year. All those who love God, love me, by virtue of my marriage to Him. Since 'all the holy ones' love God The Father, to love His spouse also, makes sense unless I am some sort of horror. I have been assured that I am not by them. 'all the holy ones' are not only the holy saints, but the holy angels and the holy powers in heaven. Also all living saints love me also. Yet, of those I have not enough information yet.

Know this. I love all that God loves. It is my privelege.

LOVE,
...Mary., .He, They and all the holy ones.

Now back on track, and I will sign off most of the rest of the time with four dots only.

LOVE,
...Mary., .... .

OK we understand now, you and god and the angels talk to each other. What does god look like?

 

[katerinah1947]

I gave show professionals scientists work that proves the bible wrong. I don't need to show my work. If that's your get out clause, shame on you.
Then show what you do know that prove Genesis right, and they has to be done with independent evidence, not quoting the bible or some guy saying he saw chariot wheels in the Red Sea.
You shouldn't have to remember it, it should be written down.
Done and if you undertake a quick search you will find a lot to verify the work.
Just show us scientific proof Genesis is right.

This isn't a conversation between you and I, it's an open forum anyone can read. I'm not talking to those who aren't willing to listen. I'm talking to those who are undecided and might get influenced by the other side whose belief starts and end in one very old book.

Hi,
I gave show professionals scientists work that proves the bilble wrong? Whatever do you mean by that?
I don't need to show my work? Please I neve said that. I would never say that.
You have given me not what I have asked for yet.
LOVE,
...Mary., .... .

 

[paulm50]

Yes, there is, you just don't know it It's called the Orthodox Church.

Which Orthodox Church? There are so many of them claiming to have the 100% right answer, and they're all different. Does god talk to all of them and tell them all different stories?

And this is the proof that all the churches are Man made like their god. If they could talk to him, they would all be one church. Carlton has the UB church, then we have many RC churches, Coptic, Lutheran, CoE, Davidians, Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses, 7 Day Adventist, and a lot lot more. Ranging from nut jobs, to fairly normal. What do they prove?

Not that one god is talking to them.

Proof that Man still needs a club to cling to. Maybe.

and the one thing they will never answer is. Why is Genesis so wrong, no evidence of Moses, Exodus, Sodom and Gomorrah, scant evidence of David, no Evidence of Solomon's wealth. And so one. Even accounts of Jesus are flawed.

 

[katerinah1947]

OK we understand now, you and god and the angels talk to each other. What does god look like?

Hi,
I have seen the Essence of God, Yes. God is Spirit, thus what ever form He chooses to present as, is what He looks like. Abraham saw Him as a man. The angels also can appear in any form, but are really spirits. The Bible has statements like that also with Abraham.
I and God and the angels do not talk to each other, rather sometimes God talks to me. An angel has never talked to me, but I can see them some of the time, if I am supposed to.
I do have a friend who His angel has been given by Jesus, the ability to talk to him. The boy of 24 can see the angel. The angel can assume any form.
LOVE,
...Mary., .... .

 

[paulm50]

Hi,
I gave show professionals scientists work that proves the bilble wrong? Whatever do you mean by that?
I don't need to show my work? Please I neve said that. I would never say that.
You have given me not what I have asked for yet.
LOVE,
...Mary., .... .

I gave you a lot of evidence from professional scientists, I can give you a lot more. In science no one does everything in a vacuum, they use each others work to build on. I don't need to find the tailbone in a Humans body, the gills in a fetus in the womb, the 100s of dead scent glands we still have which are a relic from our distant past, the different Hominids that were here before and during Humans life on Earth. Others have done this work before, had it reviewed, had it accepted, and going on to discover more truth.

You do need to show your work to seem credible, especially now you claim to talk and meet god and angels. As you say, you will never show your work. Why should someone so blessed have to do anything for us mere mortals?

 

[Davian]

I don't understand quite what you mean. Maybe some examples would help. Say you want to prove Socrates existed. What would a robust, coherent definition of Socrates that is testable and falsifiable be? Or if you want to know your girlfriend loves you, what would a robust, coherent definition of love that is testable and falsifiable be?
Aren't you getting ahead of yourself?

I do not have an issue with accepting the existence of an ancient human philosopher, or the affections of a woman. I just do not casually, as you appear to try, switch my considerations over to a supposedly brainless intelligence that remains undetectable by any objective measure to date, yet is claimed to do have created this universe, govern what I should (or shouldn't) have on my head, with whom I can have sex, the fabrics I can wear, the food I eat, and polices the thoughts in my head. Or, are we talking about Kim Jong-il, Supreme Leader of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea?

I was just talking about understanding definitions. If you feel that you now are ready to move on to evidence, having the definition of God down, we can get to that next.

What do you mean by "God"?

I think you're seeing too much of a dichotomy between science and other ways learning about reality. Following Piritim Sorokin, I'd say there are three ways of knowing: observation, reasoning, and intuition. Science is a combination of the first two, and religion relies more on the last two; it's rare and unadvisable to use any one exclusively.

For religion, you can add "rationalization". You just provided an example of that.

"In psychology and logic, rationalization or rationalisation (also known as making excuses[1]) is a defense mechanism in which controversial behaviors or feelings are justified and explained in a seemingly rational or logical manner to avoid the true explanation, and are made consciously tolerable – or even admirable and superior – by plausible means.[2] It is also an informal fallacy of reasoning." wiki

The order I listed them in is from most to least certain, but observation is more limited in scope; it's good with the physical universe but can't see inside minds very well.

I cannot parse this sentence. "Physical universe" implies there are other kinds of universes - what do you mean by that? How did you obtain this knowledge?

"It's good with the physical universe but can't see inside minds" implies that "minds" are not part of the "physical universe"; how so? The only "mind" I am aware of is a product of the brain. It is biology.

Thanks for the formatting help

You are very welcome.

 

[Wryetui]

Which Orthodox Church? There are so many of them claiming to have the 100% right answer, and they're all different. Does god talk to all of them and tell them all different stories?

And this is the proof that all the churches are Man made like their god. If they could talk to him, they would all be one church. Carlton has the UB church, then we have many RC churches, Coptic, Lutheran, CoE, Davidians, Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses, 7 Day Adventist, and a lot lot more. Ranging from nut jobs, to fairly normal. What do they prove?

Not that one god is talking to them.

Proof that Man still needs a club to cling to. Maybe.

and the one thing they will never answer is. Why is Genesis so wrong, no evidence of Moses, Exodus, Sodom and Gomorrah, scant evidence of David, no Evidence of Solomon's wealth. And so one. Even accounts of Jesus are flawed.

If you just say "they all claim the same so they can't be truth" you will go nowhere. Yes, they all claim the same, but only one of them claims them honestly and without lying. The only answer I can give to you is to study by yourself, to learn and to compare the theology by yourself and so you will find the answer.

By the way, the Orthodox Church is one It just carries the name of the countries it is in, but that doesn't divide it.

 

[katerinah1947]

I gave you a lot of evidence from professional scientists, I can give you a lot more. In science no one does everything in a vacuum, they use each others work to build on. I don't need to find the tailbone in a Humans body, the gills in a fetus in the womb, the 100s of dead scent glands we still have which are a relic from our distant past, the different Hominids that were here before and during Humans life on Earth. Others have done this work before, had it reviewed, had it accepted, and going on to discover more truth.

You do need to show your work to seem credible, especially now you claim to talk and meet god and angels. As you say, you will never show your work. Why should someone so blessed have to do anything for us mere mortals?

Hi,
Okay, if I understand you, Other scientists have proven the Bible wrong. Is that your point? And is your additional point that there is plenty of evidence out there on the internet that The Bible is wrong?
If it is, fine. But, you did not say that before. I will not look for what you said. I will look for someone who has proved the Bible is wrong.
LOVE,
...Mary., .... .

 

[Davian]

Yes, there is, you just don't know it It's called the Orthodox Church.

Which Orthodox Church?

His one, of course. Everyone else is wrong.

 

[katerinah1947]

Hi,
You provided general statements, when you were asked not for general statements but a statement that proves the Bible is wrong.
Now, going off your statements, I just looked and fould find no one who has proven the Bible is wrong yet.
Perhaps you could give me your source, where there is a provable statement, which proves the Bible wrong.
I will look more anyway, if you don't get to this.
LOVE,
...Mary., .... .

 

[Wryetui]

His one, of course. Everyone else is wrong.

Every atheist I know follows the same logic. No one wanting to ever research, to ever study or to ever get culturalized about it, no one perhaps even interested on why do I claim mine is right and theirs is wrong. I told you what to do if you think I lie, study, read, compare and get culturalized by yourself, if you don't believe me.