My Kidney Challenge

[katerinah1947]

That is a claim, not an explanation.

Hi,

It is both.

By the way, did you know that when I finished diagnosing my Narcissist at work, and the one closest to me in my family, the sociopathic one also outside of my immediate family, all of whom are brighter than the average American, each of them had their intelligence blunted by, scheming.

Each of them when faced with the actual answers ran away from that, but we're very willing to display virtuousness and tell others how to be virtuous, correctly.

The problems with running away are multiple, probably.
1.) Enough people notice.
2.) They actually do not have the correct answers.
3.) Professionals, notice.
4.) The Narcissist thinks he won.

Several times enough, when dealing with Narcissists, never is their intelligence at fault. It is what they do with it.

They really can't hide.

Later, I found out the roughly 12, other ways that people learn things. There might be 23 or more.

What. I found out, is there are other ways to discover science things like gravity and yes Narcissism, without using the standard research methods that I use.

In case you didn't know anything about them, you now do.

They also think deviousness is intelligence, as it is their tool.

The rest of the world thinks solutions are intelligence, as it is what they expect.

LOVE,

 

[bhsmte]

Hi,

It is both.

By the way, did you know that when I finished diagnosing my Narcissist at work, and the one closest to me in my family, the sociopathic one also outside of my immediate family, all of whom are brighter than the average American, each of them had their intelligence blunted by, scheming.

Each of them when faced with the actual answers ran away from that, but we're very willing to display virtuousness and tell others how to be virtuous, correctly.

The problems with running away are multiple, probably.
1.) Enough people notice.
2.) They actually do not have the correct answers.
3.) Professionals, notice.
4.) The Narcissist thinks he won.

Several times enough, when dealing with Narcissists, never is their intelligence at fault. It is what they do with it.

They really can't hide.

Later, I found out the roughly 12, other ways that people learn things. There might be 23 or more.

What. I found out, is there are other ways to discover science things like gravity and yes Narcissism, without using the standard research methods that I use.

In case you didn't know anything about them, you now do.

They also think deviousness is intelligence, as it is their tool.

The rest of the world thinks solutions are intelligence, as it is what they expect.

LOVE,

Quite the rant, but still no explanation to the original question.

 

[katerinah1947]

Quite the rant, but still no explanation to the original question.

Hi, (in edits) (done now)

Do you really want to Narcissistically say that you cannot understand how math, especially algebra, and the standard logic used in math and in science also, are used to find the Realities or non Realities of God, or are you really saying that you cannot understand, so all the similarities between you and Narcissism, in your responses is not Narcissism, rather it is not being able to understand?

Objectively, and pre God for me, the idea of God existing or not existing, logically, did not make sense without proof.

Now:

Can you understand, that without any proof, no matter what you say, about God, factually, also says, logically that you are not factual in other areas of your life, but using logic there also, as you might just have a quirk in that area of your life and no others??????, logically, I cannot make that claim without proof also?

Logically, if man, made That Book, should it not be like all other man made books???? Should I not be able to find a provable error?

Algebra.

If a word is found to have a definition, it is then possible to put that definition in place of every one of those words.

Additionally, proofs, are either there for substitutions or they are not,.

For instance:

If these are all true,

Jesus is talked about in the Old Testament
The Holy Spirit had David say, The Lord said to my Lord
Psalms 2, has The Lord in there.

By taking a guess, of what The Lord and my Lord might mean, and substituting, it is then possible to see if the guess made sense or not.

In Psalms 2, if you take the guess, that The Lord there, is God The Father, and my Lord is Jesus, and guessing again that The Holy Spirit is having David say those words, the results are indeed clear and proven, that the guess is correct.

Math substitutions, called Algebra, to figure out an unknown, makes Psalms 2, not abstruse, but a third grade read now.

LOVE,

 

[bhsmte]

Hi, (in edits) (done now)

Do you really want to Narcissistically say that you cannot understand how math, especially algebra, and the standard logic used in math and in science also, are used to find the Realities or non Realities of God, or are you really saying that you cannot understand, so all the similarities between you and Narcissism, in your responses is not Narcissism, rather it is not being able to understand?

Objectively, and pre God for me, the idea of God existing or not existing, logically, did not make sense without proof.

Now:

Can you understand, that without any proof, no matter what you say, about God, factually, also says, logically that you are not factual in other areas of your life, but using logic there also, as you might just have a quirk in that area of your life and no others??????, logically, I cannot make that claim without proof also?

Logically, if man, made That Book, should it not be like all other man made books???? Should I not be able to find a provable error?

Algebra.

If a word is found to have a definition, it is then possible to put that definition in place of every one of those words.

Additionally, proofs, are either there for substitutions or they are not,.

For instance:

If these are all true,

Jesus is talked about in the Old Testament
The Holy Spirit had David say, The Lord said to my Lord
Psalms 2, has The Lord in there.

By taking a guess, of what The Lord and my Lord might mean, and substituting, it is then possible to see if the guess made sense or not.

In Psalms 2, if you take the guess, that The Lord there, is God The Father, and my Lord is Jesus, and guessing again that The Holy Spirit is having David say those words, the results are indeed clear and proven, that the guess is correct.

Math substitutions, called Algebra, to figure out an unknown, makes Psalms 2, not abstruse, but a third grade read now.

LOVE,

The usual off topic and insulting rant aside, still no explanation.

 

[katerinah1947]

The usual off topic and insulting rant aside, still no explanation.

Hi,

Quite on topic. Quite a perfect explanation.

Are you not the non scientist?

Logic and math are science items.

Controlled experiments. You could not understand those either.

All of those things, are easy to scientists.

What are you hoping to get out of talking to a scientist and not being able to understand the answers?

I have never met anyone with your interest before, and a total inability to understand.

Normally, people like that go to things they do understand.

It is not that science is really difficult, it is not, it's that you have to have the ability, and the desire.

Both have to be true. You might have the desire. You have shown no ability so far.

Why are you asking questions, that you can't understand the answers to?

LOVE,

 

[Kylie]

Hi,

No I did not say that. Logic works with God also.

LOVE,

Very well. Please show me how logic can be used to discover God.

 

[Kylie]

Yes.

Really.

So do I.

So if you find it so disgusting when there are kids starving in Africa while God does nothing...

...why do you worship him?

 

[katerinah1947]

Very well. Please show me how logic can be used to discover God.

Hi,

The form of logic for this is the kind used in math and science.

Math and science is about proofs, and pretty much irrefutable and universal proofs, as used in the scientific community.

Disallowed, here for now are all Phiosophicsl definitions and perhaps all religious ones also, as they seem quite similar to me.

1). God is a Theory, that everyone, NORMALLY, starts out with no knowledge of.

2.) To study that theory, one has to gather and test all that can be found on that theory.

Is that logical so far?

I hope it is.

3.) As tests are set up to verify any provable statements from each religion, God is not expected to be found, nor is God expected not to be found.

4.) Tests are performed, and you collect data.

Results.

In my case there was a book that I could find no scientific errors in.

Science then is what I knew.

Logically, not finding an error is meaningless. And this finding was just that. It was meaningless.

In my profession, like driving a car is routine, something called Controlled experiments is routine.

When run, Controlled experiments on testable Biblical items, all of them gave the same results, which can happen.

The data had no variance. That cannot happen in the Real world.

Additionally more came out of the experiments than was put in, thus The Conservation of energy was violated.

Both variance, the lack of it, and the anomalous more Energy out than energy put in, did not affect the results and were ignored, as the meaning of each of those items, was unknown, and were no part of the design of the experiments.

The results showed The Bible not to be a work of man, but a work of God.

All of the techniques and methods used, are standard scientific methods, which only come from math and logic. The scientific types of math and logic.

In the above way, is how math logic and proofs, can be and were used in finding God.

The Bible that was under study, passed, and this is what was learned about it.,

Understanding, what is really in there and really meant, The Bible is Real, where the definition of Real, is That It Is True where It Says It Is True and It Is False where It Says It Is False.

Additionally Real has the definition of, as though That Book Is Alive and A Real Person.

Do you see how only math, logic and even the concept of proofs were used in that work, as it was totally done from a scientific and research point of view, and no other?

LOVE,

 

[Dave-W]

The form of logic for this is the kind used in math and science.
Math and science is about proofs, and pretty much irrefutable and universal proofs, as used in the scientific community.
Disallowed, here for now are all Phiosophicsl definitions and perhaps all religious ones also, as they seem quite similar to me.

1). God is a Theory, that everyone, NORMALLY, starts out with no knowledge of.
2.) To study that theory, one has to gather and test all that can be found on that theory.

Is that logical so far?
I hope it is.

3.) As tests are set up to verify any provable statements from each religion, God is not expected to be found, nor is God expected not to be found.
4.) Tests are performed, and you collect data.

Results.
In my case there was a book that I could find no scientific errors in.
Science then is what I knew.
Logically, not finding an error is meaningless. And this finding was just that. It was meaningless.
In my profession, like driving a car is routine, something called Controlled experiments is routine.
When run, Controlled experiments on testable Biblical items, all of them gave the same results, which can happen.
The data had no variance. That cannot happen in the Real world.
Additionally more came out of the experiments than was put in, thus The Conservation of energy was violated.
Both variance, the lack of it, and the anomalous more Energy out than energy put in, did not affect the results and were ignored, as the meaning of each of those items, was unknown, and were no part of the design of the experiments.
The results showed The Bible not to be a work of man, but a work of God.
All of the techniques and methods used, are standard scientific methods, which only come from math and logic. The scientific types of math and logic.
In the above way, is how math logic and proofs, can be and were used in finding God.
The Bible that was under study, passed, and this is what was learned about it.,
Understanding, what is really in there and really meant, The Bible is Real, where the definition of Real, is That It Is True where It Says It Is True and It Is False where It Says It Is False.
Additionally Real has the definition of, as though That Book Is Alive and A Real Person.
Do you see how only math, logic and even the concept of proofs were used in that work, as it was totally done from a scientific and research point of view, and no other?

That path to knowledge of God is worthless. God requires FAITH, not knowledge.

Without faith it is impossible to please Him. Hebrews 11:6

Faith (not scientific knowledge) is required for salvation.

Rom 10.9 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved;
10 for with the heart a person believes, [not 'know in your mind'] resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation.

 

[AV1611VET]

So if you find it so disgusting when there are kids starving in Africa while God does nothing...

...why do you worship him?

So I won't end up worshiping your goddess (Mother Nature), who's starving them in the first place.

 

[katerinah1947]

That path to knowledge of God is worthless. God requires FAITH, not knowledge.

Without faith it is impossible to please Him. Hebrews 11:6

Faith (not scientific knowledge) is required for salvation.

Rom 10.9 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved;
10 for with the heart a person believes, [not 'know in your mind'] resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation.

Hi,

Perhaps you did not understand, because Absolutely all of your findings, are in the findings above.

All of them.

...me.,

 

[Dave-W]

Perhaps you did not understand, because Absolutely all of your findings, are in the findings above.

Not really. I see nothing about faith. True biblical faith (both for salvation and for christian living) can ONLY come one way:

Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God.

That REQUIRES one to actually HEAR God speaking to them. Where is that in your "findings?"

Do you see how only math, logic and even the concept of proofs were used in that work, as it was totally done from a scientific and research point of view, and no other?

That leaves no room for true biblical faith.

 

[katerinah1947]

Not really. I see nothing about faith. True biblical faith (both for salvation and for christian living) can ONLY come one way:

Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God.

That REQUIRES one to actually HEAR God speaking to them. Where is that in your "findings?"



That leaves no room for true biblical faith.

Hi

You are making assumptions. You are also telling me that the standard of understanding is you. You are saying to me that since you don't personally understand, then how could I be correct,

Do you understand?

In order to do that Science and Logic, stuff,
Hearing the Word of God, took place.,

It took place for eight and a half years.
That was for step one of that investigation alone.

How did you miss that Reading the Bible Critically, comparing many translations, up to five, weeding out bogus translations.,

How did you miss that as hearing the Word of God?

And, as far as your statements to someone else, not you then, who told you that God does not speak through His actions, during the experimental phase.?

Later, Your God spoke to me in His Personal Speaking Voice.

Jesus did.
God The Father did.
The Holy Spirit does.

I know Them personally, and intimately.

And you want to tell me, that math and logic, as used in science does not work in finding God? You want to say, that you cannot find God through science.

Why did you not know, that I am a-Vastly-In-The-Spirit-Type, if you also are????

In-The-Spirit-Types know their own.

Is it possible only one of us is truly In-The-Spirit, and the other one of us is not?

I hope you just made an error.

LOVE,

 

[bhsmte]

Very well. Please show me how logic can be used to discover God.

Good luck with that!

 

[AV1611VET]

Good luck with that!

It's theological.

 

[Dave-W]

How did you miss that Reading the Bible Critically, comparing many translations, up to five, weeding out bogus translations.,
How did you miss that as hearing the Word of God?

Reading the bible can lead to hearing His voice, but reading is not HEARING. How did you miss that? God speaking you YOU PERSONALLY. Maybe even calling you by name. It can lead to a conversation.

All your research is abstract. No different than researching some historical figure like Julius Caesar or Genghis Kahn. What I am talking about is RELATIONAL. Like sitting down and talking to my wife.

Can you converse with Caesar or Kahn?

Later, Your God spoke to me in His Personal Speaking Voice.

Jesus did.
God The Father did.
The Holy Spirit does.

I know Them personally, and intimately.

Ok that is a start in the right direction. But because that is entirely subjective, it cannot be recorded or reproduced in the lab. By hearing God speak to you, you have completely left the realm of science and math.

 

[katerinah1947]

Reading the bible can lead to hearing His voice, but reading is not HEARING. How did you miss that? God speaking you YOU PERSONALLY. Maybe even calling you by name. It can lead to a conversation.

All your research is abstract. No different than researching some historical figure like Julius Caesar or Genghis Kahn. What I am talking about is RELATIONAL. Like sitting down and talking to my wife.

Can you converse with Caesar or Kahn?

Ok that is a start in the right direction. But because that is entirely subjective, it cannot be recorded or reproduced in the lab. By hearing God speak to you, you have completely left the realm of science and math.

Hi,

My research was not abstact.

If you mix in Philosphy then you will get the wrong answers and the wrong impression, about science.

If you mix in even Theology, you will no longer understand, what the scientist is talking about.

If you mix in Liberal Arts, you will no longer understand, what the scientist is talking about, without seeing the parallels for yourself.

For you to say, the work is abstract, means that you do not understand what was done.

Controlled experiments, done properly are accepted and universally taken by all other scientists.

The normal procedure for things they do not understand, is to verify the work to themselves.

As an example, a new engineer was hired. He took over his area of expertise. He is extremely well educated and well heeled. (family background and money. I am not.)

Finally, he is in a meeting to inform him of what everyone else is doing. My turn comes up and he verbally tells me how all my work in his area of expertise is invalid.

Incredulously, as everyone looked on, I went at his error or arrogance, scientifically.

"I have the data"

That shut him up, even though to me, that was improper for him to leave it there.

Three days later, he comes back to me, as he had just confirmed that my work was correct.

No matter what you say, until you do the same work the same way, all your statements to the contrary are invalid, and they are false.

Accidentally, you put limits on God.

...me.,

 

[Dave-W]

Accidentally, you put limits on God.

Not accidentally - and the limits are there from HIMSELF.

If what you say is correct, then any atheist, any ANTI theist could do the same process and come to understand God's existence.

 

[katerinah1947]

Not accidentally - and the limits are there from HIMSELF.

If what you say is correct, then any atheist, any ANTI theist could do the same process and come to understand God's existence.

Hi,

Yes.

...me.,

 

[katerinah1947]

Hi,

Yes anyone can repeat this work, scientifically, meaning they do not mix in other disciplines, or even themselves.

...me.,