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.
We need not go into the inadequacies of your lab.Only in your mind. Only moving objects are *demonstrated* to cause photon redshift, whereas "space expansion" is a pure act of faith in the "unseen" (in the lab).
We need not go into the inadequacies of your lab.
Why? It's actually quite common in "science", not just religion. Cause/effect relationships are often *assumed* rather than being empirically demonstrated, and many ideas begin by starting with an assumed premise, and working backwards. It's actually a *common* behavior in science.
But your god notions are incompatible with mainstream cosmology, are they not?
He was implying that I just picked a truth and stuck to it no matter what, when in fact this is not what I've done. What I've done is deeply questioned everything about existence and have found a truth that makes sense. And for me that truth is Jesus Christ.
If you believe that to be the case, why are you here?
I didn't actually make that assumption about you or your motives, Hitchslap did that. I simply noted that his criticism was moot (regardless of whether it's true or not) since half of all scientific beliefs (both proven and falsified) actually started out that way.
You make any concept of god seem as good as the next.Not really. The concept 'Let there be light' seems to be rather compatible with most Christian concepts of God, including the Catholic Priest that invented the idea. If all I cared about was 'confirmation' of my religious ideas, it would have been a *lot* easier to simply accept Lambda-CDM. Unfortunately my empirical preferences often conflict with my preconceived beliefs, regardless of whether they originated in 'religious' circles, or 'scientific' circles. M-theory seems about as '"out there' IMO as any 'supernatural' concept of God.
Great, then I apologize for assuming you agreed with what HitchSlap was saying about my beliefs.
If "truth" is "that which is true or in accordance with fact or reality", why should it be so hard for you to demonstrate? Or by "truth", do you mean "opinion"?I'm here because you do not believe and I want you to experience the truth of God, but there comes a point where I must accept that God has it all handled. I know I can't force you to believe what I believe.
As I tried to explain, I didn't actually agree with him about your personal motives in this case, but if you need an apology from me for some reason, you got it.
You make any concept of god seem as good as the next.
Funnily, I would agree.
Sure it is. You've decided Jesus is real, accepting all evidence supporting your assumption, and reject all evidence to the contrary. This is as plain as day for anyone to see.He was implying that I just picked a truth and stuck to it no matter what, when in fact this is not what I've done. What I've done is deeply questioned everything about existence and have found a truth that makes sense. And for me that truth is Jesus Christ.
Because for two hundred thousand years of modern human existence, he hasn't yet.
But "God" is a dud in the lab?Not actually isn't the case for me personally. I tend to prefer an *empirical* concept *regardless* of the topic, including the topic of God. Panetheism would in fact be my 'personal preference' as a result of my preference for empiricism and falsifiability.
If however we stick strictly to the 'scientific method', and we allow for *supernatural* entities as external agents, and we simply *assume* various cause/effect relationships, it really is six of one, half a dozen of the other IMO.
If "truth" is "that which is true or in accordance with fact or reality", why should it be so hard for you to demonstrate? Or by "truth", do you mean "opinion"?
How so? What demonstration did he provide such that caused you to assume his existence?I'm only 29 and he's demonstrated his existence to me. But of course it doesn't really matter how he demonstrates his existence to me because its a personal experience and it would require you to "believe" me.
But "God" is a dud in the lab?
Of course. You may have only imagined the experience.I'm only 29 and he's demonstrated his existence to me. But of course it doesn't really matter how he demonstrates his existence to me because its a personal experience and it would require you to "believe" me.
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?