Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Non-Mainstream and Controversial Science
Responses to Flat Earth Challenges
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Kaon" data-source="post: 75250407" data-attributes="member: 407930"><p>Evidence based on the 5 senses? Evidence, we are told often, can be <em>mimicked </em>by the brain - or even manufactured - by simple chemistry. Perception only goes so far, especially when there is an enemy that exploits this fault. </p><p></p><p>There is a most certainly an explanation for a sunrise/sunset perceived phenomenon if the earth is flat manifold - I have done the physics myself (and, you can too). Your knowledge base already conditions you to believe that the earth is globe and the sun rises and sets - from infancy to university. So, it isn't really as if it was your original idea based on an impartial foundation of knowledge. A lot of things don't make sense if you think about them; that doesn't mean they are wrong. Alarming, perhaps - but not necessarily wrong. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>We are just moving goal posts here: when has the Most High ever done anything that is outside the laws of nature? <strong>The laws of nature <em>as man understands them</em> does not equate to the laws of nature</strong> - which may still be rooted in rudimentary physics, chemistry, biology and mathematics (what we consider the paramount of modern knowledge). We (now) understand how many <em>miracles</em> can happen through our modern understanding of academics. It is still a miracle; when a spinal surgeon can heal your paralysis it is still a miracle. Science does not dissolve the miracle aspect of what is, in reality, <em>natural</em>. </p><p></p><p>I understand that the Most High works in ways beyond man's understanding, but He has never done anything that is beyond man's understanding. Meaning: there has always been someone who told us everything we need to know to know exactly why something befalls us. We usually always reject it as foolishness; then, we cry later as if no one informed us. </p><p></p><p></p><p>What I am saying is that we can't <em>adopt</em> academics as we know it for some things about the Word of the Most High, but then throw out the books and claim spirituality when it doesn't work with modern science. Either our interpretation is wrong, modern science is wrong, or both. At some point, one has to make a decision to improve on one or many of the flawed facets in order to come to spiritual enrichment: usually this means being a fool in the world. If you are using academic logic to explain spiritual phenomena, then you must be consistent and use the same logic to explain other spiritual phenomena. </p><p></p><p>We know how a sea can be parted for hundreds of people to walk and camp over it - these are phenomena of gravity and seismicity. We know how a resurrection could work - we have been participating in necromancy since the beginning of humanity. However, no one has been able to figure out how to get one's unique spirit in one's unique vessel: but, that doesn't mean resurrection isn't possible. Where there is a wall, we <em>innovate </em>or completely make up our own pathway (i.e. consciousness transfer and upload). </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>All <em>cannot</em> see Him spiritually because <em>all</em> do not come from spirit. This is why <em>all</em> cannot perceive Him now, even in the soup-stock of "evidence" around us. I am saying that <em>because</em> not all will perceive Him spiritually, He will (as He always does) make a way for the world to see Him in a way that is within their limitations: <em>naturally</em>. There are a lot of aspects of nature people are ignorant of because of the school of thought for which they subscribe. The enemy exploits this fault. </p><p></p><p>So, how will two people (one at the P.M., one at the Int'l DL) <em>naturally</em> see Him in a globe earth <em>at the same time? </em>And, if physics cannot explain it, why is physics (as humans know it in modernity) an acceptable school of thought for anything else we consider true? I think these are legitimate questions one should ask even if one isn't a believer in anything beyond <em>nature</em>.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Kaon, post: 75250407, member: 407930"] Evidence based on the 5 senses? Evidence, we are told often, can be [I]mimicked [/I]by the brain - or even manufactured - by simple chemistry. Perception only goes so far, especially when there is an enemy that exploits this fault. There is a most certainly an explanation for a sunrise/sunset perceived phenomenon if the earth is flat manifold - I have done the physics myself (and, you can too). Your knowledge base already conditions you to believe that the earth is globe and the sun rises and sets - from infancy to university. So, it isn't really as if it was your original idea based on an impartial foundation of knowledge. A lot of things don't make sense if you think about them; that doesn't mean they are wrong. Alarming, perhaps - but not necessarily wrong. We are just moving goal posts here: when has the Most High ever done anything that is outside the laws of nature? [B]The laws of nature [I]as man understands them[/I] does not equate to the laws of nature[/B] - which may still be rooted in rudimentary physics, chemistry, biology and mathematics (what we consider the paramount of modern knowledge). We (now) understand how many [I]miracles[/I] can happen through our modern understanding of academics. It is still a miracle; when a spinal surgeon can heal your paralysis it is still a miracle. Science does not dissolve the miracle aspect of what is, in reality, [I]natural[/I]. I understand that the Most High works in ways beyond man's understanding, but He has never done anything that is beyond man's understanding. Meaning: there has always been someone who told us everything we need to know to know exactly why something befalls us. We usually always reject it as foolishness; then, we cry later as if no one informed us. What I am saying is that we can't [I]adopt[/I] academics as we know it for some things about the Word of the Most High, but then throw out the books and claim spirituality when it doesn't work with modern science. Either our interpretation is wrong, modern science is wrong, or both. At some point, one has to make a decision to improve on one or many of the flawed facets in order to come to spiritual enrichment: usually this means being a fool in the world. If you are using academic logic to explain spiritual phenomena, then you must be consistent and use the same logic to explain other spiritual phenomena. We know how a sea can be parted for hundreds of people to walk and camp over it - these are phenomena of gravity and seismicity. We know how a resurrection could work - we have been participating in necromancy since the beginning of humanity. However, no one has been able to figure out how to get one's unique spirit in one's unique vessel: but, that doesn't mean resurrection isn't possible. Where there is a wall, we [I]innovate [/I]or completely make up our own pathway (i.e. consciousness transfer and upload). All [I]cannot[/I] see Him spiritually because [I]all[/I] do not come from spirit. This is why [I]all[/I] cannot perceive Him now, even in the soup-stock of "evidence" around us. I am saying that [I]because[/I] not all will perceive Him spiritually, He will (as He always does) make a way for the world to see Him in a way that is within their limitations: [I]naturally[/I]. There are a lot of aspects of nature people are ignorant of because of the school of thought for which they subscribe. The enemy exploits this fault. So, how will two people (one at the P.M., one at the Int'l DL) [I]naturally[/I] see Him in a globe earth [I]at the same time? [/I]And, if physics cannot explain it, why is physics (as humans know it in modernity) an acceptable school of thought for anything else we consider true? I think these are legitimate questions one should ask even if one isn't a believer in anything beyond [I]nature[/I]. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Non-Mainstream and Controversial Science
Responses to Flat Earth Challenges
Top
Bottom