0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: duffyd on 09/05/2020 14:08:19the apostles were certain Christ rose from the dead.….and the world was flat and the sun travelled round the earth. More precisely, of course, they told people that Christ had risen from the dead. Whether they actually believed it or had any evidence for it is as likely as Donald Trump's statements about injecting disinfectant. Anyway, the answer to your question is that you haven't presented any such evidence or even a testable definition of god, and AFAIK neither has anyone else, ever.
the apostles were certain Christ rose from the dead.
Quote from: duffyd on 09/05/2020 14:08:19the apostles were certain Christ rose from the dead.….and the world was flat and the sun travelled round the earth. "More precisely, of course, they told people that Christ had risen from the dead. Whether they actually believed it or had any evidence for it is as likely as Donald Trump's statements about injecting disinfectant." big al Anyway, the answer to your question is that you haven't presented any such evidence or even a testable definition of god, and AFAIK neither has anyone else, ever.
If they were lying, if they made up the stuff about his rising from the dead, why did they subject themselves to the persecution?
Quote from: duffyd on 10/05/2020 12:46:30 Just look at the non-stop hostility. My so called hostility isn't about your beliefs.It's about your dishonesty.Quote from: Bored chemist on 10/05/2020 10:01:25Quote from: Bored chemist on 09/05/2020 23:59:18Quote from: Bored chemist on 09/05/2020 23:54:23Quote from: Bored chemist on 09/05/2020 23:52:47Quote from: Bored chemist on 09/05/2020 21:53:57Quote from: Bored chemist on 09/05/2020 17:14:19Quote from: duffyd on 09/05/2020 16:05:44By the time you said I lack clear thinking, you had already told me to, "Tell the truth for the first time in your life" OK, show everybody where I said that.
Just look at the non-stop hostility.
Quote from: Bored chemist on 09/05/2020 23:59:18Quote from: Bored chemist on 09/05/2020 23:54:23Quote from: Bored chemist on 09/05/2020 23:52:47Quote from: Bored chemist on 09/05/2020 21:53:57Quote from: Bored chemist on 09/05/2020 17:14:19Quote from: duffyd on 09/05/2020 16:05:44By the time you said I lack clear thinking, you had already told me to, "Tell the truth for the first time in your life" OK, show everybody where I said that.
Quote from: Bored chemist on 09/05/2020 23:54:23Quote from: Bored chemist on 09/05/2020 23:52:47Quote from: Bored chemist on 09/05/2020 21:53:57Quote from: Bored chemist on 09/05/2020 17:14:19Quote from: duffyd on 09/05/2020 16:05:44By the time you said I lack clear thinking, you had already told me to, "Tell the truth for the first time in your life" OK, show everybody where I said that.
Quote from: Bored chemist on 09/05/2020 23:52:47Quote from: Bored chemist on 09/05/2020 21:53:57Quote from: Bored chemist on 09/05/2020 17:14:19Quote from: duffyd on 09/05/2020 16:05:44By the time you said I lack clear thinking, you had already told me to, "Tell the truth for the first time in your life" OK, show everybody where I said that.
Quote from: Bored chemist on 09/05/2020 21:53:57Quote from: Bored chemist on 09/05/2020 17:14:19Quote from: duffyd on 09/05/2020 16:05:44By the time you said I lack clear thinking, you had already told me to, "Tell the truth for the first time in your life" OK, show everybody where I said that.
Quote from: Bored chemist on 09/05/2020 17:14:19Quote from: duffyd on 09/05/2020 16:05:44By the time you said I lack clear thinking, you had already told me to, "Tell the truth for the first time in your life" OK, show everybody where I said that.
Quote from: duffyd on 09/05/2020 16:05:44By the time you said I lack clear thinking, you had already told me to, "Tell the truth for the first time in your life" OK, show everybody where I said that.
By the time you said I lack clear thinking, you had already told me to, "Tell the truth for the first time in your life"
How can we approach this topic without breaking the rules? My theory is this: Spirituality is hard to define, but it is an important topic that deserves honest, respectful debate and consideration. My questions stem from the vaguery as the rules stand now.The following are rules are in place to make this forum a more comfortable place for all its users. We would urge all users of the forum to read the rules below, and abide by them. 1. Do not use insulting, aggressive, or provocative language.CHAT is not for science per se. This topic is directed specifically for the CHAT thread.A rule states that evangelism of one's pet theory is not allowed. Would someone offer the definitive terms for what is regarded as a pet theory? If individuals want to discuss their serious, well thought out, well established opinions on spiritual matters, and not on a pet theory, are they permitted? Many varied "religious" theories are promoted by different participants. When are they evangelizing a pet theory or just discussing it? Many comments are deliberate, untrue and aggressively insulting of spiritual matters and those who make them. The rule governing all of our statements forbids this type of language, yet some continue doing so flaunting their defiance. How are we to know, specifically, if/when we are violating this particular rule, "evangelizing a pet theory" on N.S.? If someone makes untrue, insulting accusations against spiritual opinions, persons, principles or their historic background, is everyone forbidden from responding, trying to make corrections? If commenters try to prove their opinions on spirituality (not pet theories) are scientifically supported, are they automatically barred from doing so? What if they sound like they are evangelizing when, in truth, they are trying to demonstrate the rational explanations for their points of view? How does anyone assert his point of view without evangelizing? Where is the line? What are the boundaries? Can anyone answer these questions not in general terms, but in detail? Should/could we have a thread dedicated to discussing spirituality in which, as long as the comments are respectful, is given more latitude?
More Evidence: "it takes the existence of some kind of a god to make the mathematical underpinnings of the universe comprehensible." b nelson
You didn't call me a liar, I just deliberately mislead people.
Quote from: duffyd on 10/05/2020 13:30:38If they were lying, if they made up the stuff about his rising from the dead, why did they subject themselves to the persecution?Perhaps you can explain to me why you lied- that might give us an insight into why others might.Why did you open yourself up to what you call harassment?Quote from: Bored chemist on 10/05/2020 13:02:00Quote from: duffyd on 10/05/2020 12:46:30 Just look at the non-stop hostility. My so called hostility isn't about your beliefs.It's about your dishonesty.Quote from: Bored chemist on 10/05/2020 10:01:25Quote from: Bored chemist on 09/05/2020 23:59:18Quote from: Bored chemist on 09/05/2020 23:54:23Quote from: Bored chemist on 09/05/2020 23:52:47Quote from: Bored chemist on 09/05/2020 21:53:57Quote from: Bored chemist on 09/05/2020 17:14:19Quote from: duffyd on 09/05/2020 16:05:44By the time you said I lack clear thinking, you had already told me to, "Tell the truth for the first time in your life" OK, show everybody where I said that.
"Quote from: Colin2B on 07/05/2020 06:35:28Quote from: duffyd on 07/05/2020 00:51:41Then, Colin asks me if I'm ignoring the Harvard site. "So you have decided to ignore the Harvard site? Because it does not support your idea?"Colin didn't mention the Harvard site to me. He mentioned it to GG.The reply was published in a public thread you were following.However, the question is still valid as you also saidQuote from: duffyd on 03/05/2020 14:50:23I was aware of the studies that show an increase in the flow of neurotransmitters in the brains of those who are in love.So your earlier statements were deliberately misleading as suggested by BCQuote from: Bored chemist on 03/05/2020 14:38:20Quote from: duffyd on 03/05/2020 10:09:47, but science can't even prove it exists.Liar.You were just told (by Colin) that science can show that love exists.Quote from: duffyd on 03/05/2020 10:15:04Why would anyone believe in love if science can't prove that it even existsDoubly wrong.Science can show that love exists.You were already told that.Why do you deliberately mislead people. You are denying Christ when you do that; Peter did it 3 times, how many times will you do it?"Aggressive hostility is forbidden? Now wait a minute. Did someone just cite the N.T. to accuse someone of being a triple liar? Now they believe in the accuracy of the N.T.! Can't believe it. WE HAVE CONVERTS!Golly. I never realized if someone said something, it is the truth. "Liar.You were just told (by Colin) that science can show that love exists." Well now. I apologize. Colin said it. It is Gospel. (no pun intended.) Forgive me. He is right afterall. I am too stuopid.
Quote from: duffyd on 10/05/2020 17:49:52 You didn't call me a liar, I just deliberately mislead people.Quote from: Bored chemist on 10/05/2020 13:38:35Quote from: duffyd on 10/05/2020 13:30:38If they were lying, if they made up the stuff about his rising from the dead, why did they subject themselves to the persecution?Perhaps you can explain to me why you lied- that might give us an insight into why others might.Why did you open yourself up to what you call harassment?Quote from: Bored chemist on 10/05/2020 13:02:00Quote from: duffyd on 10/05/2020 12:46:30 Just look at the non-stop hostility. My so called hostility isn't about your beliefs.It's about your dishonesty.Quote from: Bored chemist on 10/05/2020 10:01:25Quote from: Bored chemist on 09/05/2020 23:59:18Quote from: Bored chemist on 09/05/2020 23:54:23Quote from: Bored chemist on 09/05/2020 23:52:47Quote from: Bored chemist on 09/05/2020 21:53:57Quote from: Bored chemist on 09/05/2020 17:14:19Quote from: duffyd on 09/05/2020 16:05:44By the time you said I lack clear thinking, you had already told me to, "Tell the truth for the first time in your life" OK, show everybody where I said that.
Quote from: duffyd on 09/05/2020 23:53:14 Bruce Metzger, “The evidence for the resurrection of Jesus Christ is overwhelming. Nothing in history is more certain than that the disciples believed that, after being crucified, dead, and buried, Christ rose again from the tomb on the third day, and that at intervals thereafter he met and conversed with them.”This quotation contains an illogical sleight of hand. He states that the evidence is overwhelming, but uses the disciples belief as ‘proof’. However, belief is not proof of the existence of the object of that belief eg the resurrection.Quote from: duffyd on 09/05/2020 23:43:40Hundreds of millions of people claim the same profound, other worldly impact that he has had on their lives personally through the Spirit He sent in His place just as He promised before He was crucified. This is a phenomenon. It is unprecedented. Scientists cannot simply dismiss what this mass of humanity swear by. Scientists do not dismiss it, but they recognise it as belief, and also recognise that belief is a very powerful emotion and strong motivator, both for good and evil. However, when we are talking about credible evidence, belief is not good enough, even when something is believed by a large number of people. In another thread I gave one example where most of the citizens of the world believed something we now know to be incorrect; there are many other examples. We really cannot rely on belief for credible evidence.What I do not understand in all the threads you have started is why you set out to prove the existence of Jesus when the main question is about the existence of God. Even if you were to prove that Jesus existed, died on the cross, and survived, and people believe he is the son of God, you do not thereby prove the existence of God. Neither can you look back at historical texts and prove the existence of God; such texts only tell us what was believed at the time. If you want to provide credible scientific evidence for the existence of God today, you have to use the scientific method. Asking people’s opinion is of no help whatsoever.Are you able to propose a way of using the scientific method to determine whether there is credible evidence of his existence? And I don’t mean credible evidence of people’s belief in him. Bear in mind that there are alternative beliefs about Jesus eg by Muslims, and those beliefs are no less meaningful and influential to them as they are to you.I don’t believe it is possible to use science or any other method to prove or provide evidence of God. In the end all you show is belief.Quote from: duffyd on 09/05/2020 23:43:40In attempting to point out his divine nature I may have "evangelized" without intending to. I don't know exactly what is permitted and what isn't, so I'm on my own.We all appreciate the strength of your belief and what it means to you and how much you want to share that belief. However, this is not the best forum to to share that belief, because as you say you can end up evangelising. You may be surprised to hear that you have been given more leeway than most, please don’t abuse it.By the way, when I pointed out that you had misquoted, you accused me of lying and subsequently said you would not reply to me. That irritated me and in the heat of the moment I made the comment about my poor expectation of your replies; I stand by that comment, but given a moment of reflection I would have worded it differently.Just another small comment, you could stop this by answering his question. It is not harassment to ask for evidence of your statements. Quote from: Bored chemist on 09/05/2020 23:56:09Quote from: duffyd on 09/05/2020 23:53:14please stop harassing me.Calling you out for making false statements is not harassment, not least because you can so easily avoid it.
Bruce Metzger, “The evidence for the resurrection of Jesus Christ is overwhelming. Nothing in history is more certain than that the disciples believed that, after being crucified, dead, and buried, Christ rose again from the tomb on the third day, and that at intervals thereafter he met and conversed with them.”
Hundreds of millions of people claim the same profound, other worldly impact that he has had on their lives personally through the Spirit He sent in His place just as He promised before He was crucified. This is a phenomenon. It is unprecedented. Scientists cannot simply dismiss what this mass of humanity swear by.
In attempting to point out his divine nature I may have "evangelized" without intending to. I don't know exactly what is permitted and what isn't, so I'm on my own.
Quote from: duffyd on 09/05/2020 23:53:14please stop harassing me.Calling you out for making false statements is not harassment, not least because you can so easily avoid it.
please stop harassing me.
Quote from: Bored chemist on 10/05/2020 18:53:01Quote from: duffyd on 10/05/2020 17:49:52 You didn't call me a liar, I just deliberately mislead people.Quote from: Bored chemist on 10/05/2020 13:38:35Quote from: duffyd on 10/05/2020 13:30:38If they were lying, if they made up the stuff about his rising from the dead, why did they subject themselves to the persecution?Perhaps you can explain to me why you lied- that might give us an insight into why others might.Why did you open yourself up to what you call harassment?Quote from: Bored chemist on 10/05/2020 13:02:00Quote from: duffyd on 10/05/2020 12:46:30 Just look at the non-stop hostility. My so called hostility isn't about your beliefs.It's about your dishonesty.Quote from: Bored chemist on 10/05/2020 10:01:25Quote from: Bored chemist on 09/05/2020 23:59:18Quote from: Bored chemist on 09/05/2020 23:54:23Quote from: Bored chemist on 09/05/2020 23:52:47Quote from: Bored chemist on 09/05/2020 21:53:57Quote from: Bored chemist on 09/05/2020 17:14:19Quote from: duffyd on 09/05/2020 16:05:44By the time you said I lack clear thinking, you had already told me to, "Tell the truth for the first time in your life" OK, show everybody where I said that.
calling me a retard and standing by it?
Colin, do you know what a figure of speech is? Do you know what personification is? Hyperbole? Apply them to my comment that science says there is no God. You see, science can't talk. I was personifying science, making it or attaching to it human characteristics. ........ When I made science say it doesn't believe in God, I didn't mean literally that science became a human being. ......keep in mind those commonly used literary tools.
Quote from: duffyd on 10/05/2020 16:29:43Colin, do you know what a figure of speech is? Do you know what personification is? Hyperbole? Apply them to my comment that science says there is no God. You see, science can't talk. I was personifying science, making it or attaching to it human characteristics. ........ When I made science say it doesn't believe in God, I didn't mean literally that science became a human being. ......keep in mind those commonly used literary tools.Yes, I am fully aware of these literary tools, I do keep them in mind, and I never believed that you were suggesting science had become a human being. However, the use of these tools does not absolve you from ensuring that your statements are factually correct. As far as I am aware, there is no generally accepted scientific theory or published theory in any reputable journal or textbook which claims that god (any god) does not exist. So, to use personification, you are misquoting science and no matter how you phrase it, or interpret it, that is bad witness.
I always prefer the former, which, like most of what he said, is consistent with everyday observation and common sense."