[duffyd (OP)]

HIS love, this divine love (agape, Greek) is available to all who seek HIM. Scientists must ask themselves and lay people alike why would any rational human being not seek HIS love?  and study their answers carefully.

[duffyd (OP)]

I have never observed an answer to this question that made sense. I have seen this question answered many times and based on scientific principles, I can predict with great accuracy the answers we will receive. Not one of them will be thoroughly straight forward. None will be comprehensive. None will be thoroughly logical although some logic will be used to a limited extent in some of them. No one will say, "you know, I really ought to look into that. Maybe I should find out. Maybe I'll ask HIM to show HIS love, to see if HE is real." Not one.
 It is truly amazing. Science is awesome.

[alancalverd]

I think the key is in the word "rational".

Or you might look at the smug and inhumane behaviour of believers over the last 2000 years and decide it would be unethical to associate with them.

Or you might ask which Him? The protestant or the catholic, since belief in either is apparently a reason to despise the other? Or the prophet in whose name you must slaughter infidels, oppress women and ban anything that looks or sounds enjoyable?

You don't need faith to behave decently but it provides an excuse for evil.

Yes, I've looked into it, and quickly put the lid back on that seething mass of superstition and corruption.

[duffyd (OP)]

I have never observed a litigant who loses during a Judge Judy show, state that the Judge was right. Not one time! Thousands have been on the losing end of her decisions. She has never made the correct decision, she never ruled fairly, ever, in any case in which she presided according to the losing party.

There are scientific (provable) reasons why this is so. I have to imagine that based on her education, her early career as a family court judge in N.Y.C. and the hundreds of millions she's earned over the years she hosted her show, that she probably made a fair ruling at least once, but not according to the ones who don't receive favorable rulings.

I can tie this phenomena in with the reasons people refuse to experiment to see if GOD's love for them is real.

[alancalverd]

You may have stumbled upon the obvious. Half the people in any courtroom are lying. It is the job of the judge and jury to determine which half is the more plausible.

[duffyd (OP)]

I think the key is in the word "rational".

Or you might look at the smug and inhumane behaviour of believers over the last 2000 years and decide it would be unethical to associate with them.

Or you might ask which Him? The protestant or the catholic, since belief in either is apparently a reason to despise the other? Or the prophet in whose name you must slaughter infidels, oppress women and ban anything that looks or sounds enjoyable?

You don't need faith to behave decently but it provides an excuse for evil.

Yes, I've looked into it, and quickly put the lid back on that seething mass of superstition and corruption.

Would an objective scientist be willing to critique his excuses?

[duffyd (OP)]

Or, you could look at the love they show others.
Or, you could ask Jesus.
You could decide to hang out with other Christians who aren't all as you describe them.
Jesus demands we slaughter others? Or, you could focus on the love HE demonstrated.
Or you could say that seeking HIM isn't about motivation for ethical behavior.

As you can see, none of these answers has anything to do with your willingness to experiment. The worst possible scenario for you would be what? That HIS love is too cool and you could reject HIM and do whatever you were doing before?

[duffyd (OP)]

You may have stumbled upon the obvious. Half the people in any courtroom are lying. It is the job of the judge and jury to determine which half is the more plausible.

And your comment has nothing to do with why you refuse to experiment. BTW, I didn't ask about church history, the church, denominations, how to behave, other gods, did I?

You refuse to test, to experiment, to see what would happen and you don't say why. You make excuses just like most people, just like science proved you would. But, you haven't presented one reason why you refuse to find out if HE loves you simply by asking HIM. 

[duffyd (OP)]

You may have stumbled upon the obvious. Half the people in any courtroom are lying. It is the job of the judge and jury to determine which half is the more plausible.

And they have no money in the pot. Awards are paid by the program and she still is never fair if she rules against you.

Both parties lie.

[Bored chemist]

HIS love, this divine love (agape, Greek) is available to all who seek HIM. Scientists must ask themselves and lay people alike why would any rational human being not seek HIS love?  and study their answers carefully.

What form would you propose that the experiment might take?

[alancalverd]

Would an objective scientist be willing to critique his excuses?

We don't make excuses.

[PmbPhy]

HIS love, this divine love (agape, Greek) is available to all who seek HIM. Scientists must ask themselves and lay people alike why would any rational human being not seek HIS love?  and study their answers carefully.

Because that is not in their area of professional expertise. Some scientists believe in God so they might ask that question. Theologeans ask that question I believe.

The main reason that scientists don't address that question is that it can't be answered in the realm of science sine its not falsifiable or testable, both of which are required in any physical theory,

[duffyd (OP)]

HIS love, this divine love (agape, Greek) is available to all who seek HIM. Scientists must ask themselves and lay people alike why would any rational human being not seek HIS love?  and study their answers carefully.

Because that is not in their area of professional expertise. Some scientists believe in God so they might ask that question. Theologeans ask that question I believe.

The main reason that scientists don't address that question is that it can't be answered in the realm of science sine its not falsifiable or testable, both of which are required in any physical theory,

If GOD is, He can make His manifest presence known to anyone. HE's very capable of letting us know HE IS in no uncertain terms, in a fashion that HE knows will be particularly meaningful just to you. Time stands still when you least expect it,  small snow flakes silently falling around you. Suddenly, startled by beauty you'd never noticed, the Presence of Someone you've known all your life, but never met, is next to you, in warm waves of love and understanding forgotten since boyhood. Then you know. In a split second you can never be the same. You are loved. 

[duffyd (OP)]

This post was evangelising and has been removed

[duffyd (OP)]

Yes, I've looked into it, and quickly put the lid back on that seething mass of superstition and corruption.

 
I never asked you to experiment with "it."  Try the spirits. Test them. See Who HE is.                                                                                 

[duffyd (OP)]

Would an objective scientist be willing to critique his excuses?

We don't make excuses.

You are not a scientist?

[Colin2B]

Scientists must ask themselves and lay people alike why would any rational human being not seek HIS love?  and study their answers carefully.

Because that is not in their area of professional expertise. Some scientists believe in God so they might ask that question. Theologeans ask that question I believe.

The main reason that scientists don't address that question is that it can't be answered in the realm of science sine its not falsifiable or testable, both of which are required in any physical theory,

Unfortunately Pete, Duffy doesn’t understand scientific evidence, she believes testimony is a valid proof of god’s existence.
She needs to understand that this “Scientists must ask themselves and lay people alike why would any rational human being not seek HIS love?  and study their answers carefully.” is not an experiment, it is a survey. As a result you will get a variety of answers, but none will prove god is out there.

Consider Duffy, what if we were to ask a similar question some time before 1400, ie before Copernicus. We might ask people’s view of the Sun and the heavens and would receive the reply that any rational human must believe that the sun and planets orbit the earth*.
So what happened after the time of Copernicus? When belief changed, did the sun, earth and planets reorientate themselves?
I would suggest that the fact that a large number of people believe something does not make it true. So, testimony of personal belief is not proof that god exists.


* We will ignore Aristarchus around 200BCE who hypothesised that the earth and planets orbit the sun, and the stars are distant suns. However, Aristotle killed that idea.

PS Duffy, if you use these threads for evangelising. - which is against the forum rules - they will be locked, the posts removed, and you may face a ban.