People are going to have to face the reality that there's NO GOD

[alang1216]

Maybe he is offended by your anti-Semitic quote from The Protocols of the Elders of Zion?

What quote would that be? ....

“We Jews, who have posed as Saviors of the World, we are today nothing else but the world’s seducers, its destroyers, its incendiaries, its executioners.”

 

[K9Buck]

I'm agnostic, or a skeptic, however there's much organization in the Universe, one which would seem to be hard to come from nothing.

Imagine your surprise and horror to discover that, upon your entering the hereafter, that your salvation and redemption is dependent upon a Jew.

 

[K9Buck]

“We Jews, who have posed as Saviors of the World, we are today nothing else but the world’s seducers, its destroyers, its incendiaries, its executioners.”

I take it you're another one of those tolerant, inclusive, loving liberals.

 

[alang1216]

“We Jews, who have posed as Saviors of the World, we are today nothing else but the world’s seducers, its destroyers, its incendiaries, its executioners.”

I take it you're another one of those tolerant, inclusive, loving liberals.

Hopefully I'm guilty as charged.

 

[Sunni Man]

“We Jews, who have posed as Saviors of the World, we are today nothing else but the world’s seducers, its destroyers, its incendiaries, its executioners.”

You neglected to include the author of the quote, which was the famous Jewish physician and scholar Oscar Levy. ....

 

[Boss]

But let's be clear, until you can offer valid evidence through science to support a notion that life created itself, then all you have is FAITH. You believe something is possible that you can't prove and that's fine... it's no different than faith in God.

There is giant, fundamental difference. Faith in God assumes the existence of the supernatural. Science operates exclusively in the natural world.

The only "giant fundamental" difference is perceptions. Let's start with what you call "supernatural." According to the dictionary, this is something not of the natural world. But God is very much a part of the natural world. He created it! He is omnipresent in it! He is not part of the perceptive physical world because He is spiritual. But again, you don't believe in spiritual nature so your perception is that God is supernatural.

Let me pose the following question for you to ponder. Do you consider dark matter and dark energy to be "supernatural" or "natural?" It doesn't interact with light, we can't observe it or it's very difficult to observe it even in obscurity. Really, the only reason we know it physically exists is because of the gravity it provides in the cosmos. It's particles (if we can call them that) are passing right through your body and our planet as we speak. Now you can say, well... since we scientifically have proven dark energy and dark matter exist, then they are obviously not supernatural... but were they supernatural BEFORE we knew they existed or before we scientifically proved them?

My point is, what we humans define as "supernatural" can be subjective based on our knowledge at any given point in time. If I tell you it is possible to transfer information faster than the speed of light, what would you say? At first glance, this appears to contradict physics because nothing travels faster than the speed of light. Wouldn't this be considered "supernatural" by any definition or perception? How do you explain quantum entanglement? This is when two subatomic particles alter each other's behaviors instantaneously across millions of light years. Einstein called it "spooky action at a distance."

I also have a problem with what you consider the "natural world" when I believe you base this upon your limited five senses and perception of only 4 physical dimensions. What makes you believe that your very limited ability is everything? I would suspect that a lowly ant inside an ant hill, probably believes it knows all there is to know... but does it?

What if there are "senses" that humans don't have? We see some evidence of this in the nature around us. Do you know which flowers need pollinating? Can you telepathically communicate with tens of thousands of your contemporaries instantly the way bees and ants can? We're not even masters of our own five senses... there are things that can see, taste, smell, hear and feel better than humans. Even our own sciences betray our hubris in relating to our dimensional reality-- quantum physics predicts we can't even comprehend half of the dimensions that exist. So what IS "the natural world" and how do you know that we're fully aware of it?

 

[task0778]

People are going to have to face the reality that there's no God

OR

People are going to have to face the reality that there IS a God and there IS an afterlife.

Hopefully there is an afterlife and something positive to look forward to.

 

[Boss]

The Big Bang time line says it occurred something like 13.7 billion years ago....Science does not speculate on what was going on before the Big Bang as there is no way of making direct or indirect observations.... it seems to me the Big Bang marked a change from a Unitary situation wherein Everything and Nothing were one thing and a binary or dual state continuum manifested explosively and morphed to the Space Time continuum we occupy and processes within that Space Time continuum eventually birthed us ....the Universe then is like a tree that produces consciousness or sentience; that consciousness in turn then fixes maintains explores and creates reality in an undulating vibration that produces a sound "OM"...

Translation: God is Great! lol

 

[Boss]

People are going to have to face the reality that there's no God

OR

People are going to have to face the reality that there IS a God and there IS an afterlife.

Hopefully there is an afterlife and something positive to look forward to.

I've always had mixed feelings about the term "afterlife." I really think there should be another word to define it because it sounds too much like a contradiction of what we understand of physics. When "life" ends, it's over... it ceases to exist. Something else might exist but it's not that physical life that ended. Perhaps "spiritual after-existence" is a better terminology? Your eternal spirit moves on to some other plane or dimension of existence, no longer physical "life" as we know it.... or perhaps, life in some other state?

I think one of the fundamental problems we have as humans is the inability to fully comprehend spiritual nature. We have to imagine "afterlife" as if it's an extension of our own physical experience. It's because that is all we can relate to. Religious people may often imagine they will see long lost loved ones after they die, but why would your spirit need the physical attribute of eyesight? What if you have an acute awareness that you don't have as a mortal being and your loved ones are merely "sensed" for lack of a better word?

 

[Votto]

People are going to have to face the reality that there's no God. The odds of such developing out of thin space is nearly ZERO.

Sure, physics and chemistry takes some faith in the start but it most certainly explains everything since. Everything when using evidenced based science works together very well.

The first stars came around 12 or billion years ago to form the first galaxies.
Our star formed within our galaxy a little earlier then the earth as gravity had to develop the planets like earth. So earth about 4.3 billion years ago.
The first single celled life
The first muilti celled life
Land life
on up to humans is everything at odds with the 2,000 year old book. The book makes no sense and it is just a crock of shit.

That is reality.

Life formed in the oceans
The fossil record shows that man is only a few million years old as a "family" group and a few hundred thousand years old as a single species.
The sun came first in the case of our solar system
Then the planets
Then life
Then more advanced life in the oceans
Then life on land
Then after a few hundred million years humans come into the picture.

This is once again reality.

One is a fool if they attempt to put belief ahead of the facts and evidence.

Time to come to the conclusion that there probably isn't a god and you shouldn't force religion on other people...Those other people are more likely to be RIGHT.

Why would this god come out of "thin space"? Isn't the premise of god that it created everything? That would include space itself; wouldn't it?

Which means God created time.

 

[alang1216]

“We Jews, who have posed as Saviors of the World, we are today nothing else but the world’s seducers, its destroyers, its incendiaries, its executioners.”

You neglected to include the author of the quote, which was the famous Jewish physician and scholar Oscar Levy. ....

I don't believe he is the origin of the quote. See here.

 

[BreezeWood]

Every bone is a transitional bone, every fossil a transitional fossil.

So you, or some scientist, directly observed the species change from one type of animal to another?

I doubt that.

The best you can say is that supposedly the species changed from one thing into another.

You have no direct and uncontroversial proof that the bones of one are the ancestors of another unless you, or a scientist, were there to directly observe the phenomenon take place.

View attachment 152721

*****SMILE*****

.

You have no direct and uncontroversial proof that the bones of one are the ancestors of another unless you, or a scientist, were there to directly observe the phenomenon take place.

View attachment 152757


nature provides such a proof from a land creature to an avian, observable and verified - without an intermediary transition.

That is not correct use of the word, "proof". It also is not even evidence. It is easily explained without the need to introduce your magical thinking, nor is it compelling. Stop using the words "evidence" and "proof" in your diatribes. For accuracy, substitute " kinda sorta feels like" and "because I say so".

.

That is not correct use of the word, "proof". It also is not even evidence. It is easily explained without the need to introduce your magical thinking, nor is it compelling. Stop using the words "evidence" and "proof" in your diatribes. For accuracy, substitute " kinda sorta feels like" and "because I say so".

View attachment 152759

incontestable proof of a transition from one being into another ... without an intermediary stage. - suck on it fort fun ...


without the need to introduce your magical thinking -


... and where is the being during the process.

"incontestable proof of a transition from one being into another ... without an intermediary stage. - suck on it fort fun ..."

Hello .... McFly..... those are not different beings... seriously man, take a high school level science course! And of course there is an intermediate stage... several, actually. You can literally watch the nymph form the adults structures slowly. Where DO you get this laughable nonsense?

.

those are not different beings

they are different beings, one is bound to land the other has wings the same would be true of a human that grew wings they would be two different beings your assumption of DNA constraint is without substance the DNA is not the controlling factor.

an evolutionary transition without an intermediary stage is verifiable and observed as per the original discourse of disbelief by that poster.

And of course there is an intermediate stage...

again from the original poster, intermediate stages are required for proof is inaccurate when the being transforms from one to another the process eventually becomes metaphysical single stage irregardless the creature. the intermediate stages are the aberrations or test runs for the metaphysical process that is not required though occasionally observed.

 

[alang1216]

There is giant, fundamental difference. Faith in God assumes the existence of the supernatural. Science operates exclusively in the natural world.

The only "giant fundamental" difference is perceptions. Let's start with what you call "supernatural." According to the dictionary, this is something not of the natural world. But God is very much a part of the natural world. He created it! He is omnipresent in it! He is not part of the perceptive physical world because He is spiritual. But again, you don't believe in spiritual nature so your perception is that God is supernatural.

Not correct. If God created nature he outside of nature and is by definition supernatural.

Let me pose the following question for you to ponder. Do you consider dark matter and dark energy to be "supernatural" or "natural?" It doesn't interact with light, we can't observe it or it's very difficult to observe it even in obscurity. Really, the only reason we know it physically exists is because of the gravity it provides in the cosmos. It's particles (if we can call them that) are passing right through your body and our planet as we speak. Now you can say, well... since we scientifically have proven dark energy and dark matter exist, then they are obviously not supernatural... but were they supernatural BEFORE we knew they existed or before we scientifically proved them?

My point is, what we humans define as "supernatural" can be subjective based on our knowledge at any given point in time. If I tell you it is possible to transfer information faster than the speed of light, what would you say? At first glance, this appears to contradict physics because nothing travels faster than the speed of light. Wouldn't this be considered "supernatural" by any definition or perception? How do you explain quantum entanglement? This is when two subatomic particles alter each other's behaviors instantaneously across millions of light years. Einstein called it "spooky action at a distance."

I also have a problem with what you consider the "natural world" when I believe you base this upon your limited five senses and perception of only 4 physical dimensions. What makes you believe that your very limited ability is everything? I would suspect that a lowly ant inside an ant hill, probably believes it knows all there is to know... but does it?

What if there are "senses" that humans don't have? We see some evidence of this in the nature around us. Do you know which flowers need pollinating? Can you telepathically communicate with tens of thousands of your contemporaries instantly the way bees and ants can? We're not even masters of our own five senses... there are things that can see, taste, smell, hear and feel better than humans. Even our own sciences betray our hubris in relating to our dimensional reality-- quantum physics predicts we can't even comprehend half of the dimensions that exist. So what IS "the natural world" and how do you know that we're fully aware of it?

I don't define the natural world, it defines me. Do I understand it all? No. Does my lack of understanding change reality. No. Is there more in heaven and earth...? Certainly, but it is still part of the natural world.

 

[Sunni Man]

I don't believe he is the origin of the quote. See here.

His quote was included in the Protocols, and his words and the Protocols ring true even today. ....

Israel | Dr. Oscar Levy, a Jew, Admits His People's Error

 

[BreezeWood]

You missed a lot but this one you did get.

You fail to understand that evolution is NOT a random process. Natural selection is the key. If you had an large box of letters and spilled them onto a table the odds that they would match Shakespare's Hamlet are infinitesimally small. However some would match and if you removed every letter that didn't match and spilled them out again some more would match. It wouldn't take very long to get to Hamlet with this selective pressure.

Every bone is a transitional bone, every fossil a transitional fossil.

Not difficult at all if you have enough time.

No and it didn't.

You guys tend to always run to "evolution" in order to explain origin and it simply doesn't explain origin and never will. What does it take to get that salient point through your neanderthal heads? In order to "evolve" something first had to exist. Can you offer a valid and testable scientific hypothesis for how life originated? If not, just admit you can't! Stop trying to use "evolution" to explain something it doesn't and can't explain.

Look.... I understand that you believe all life has ultimately "evolved" into existence from some mysterious and unexplained single cell. But to me, that's pretty fucking incredible! That trillions of various life forms in all their majestic wonder, with all their symbiotic relationships and interdependence, sprang forth from an ubiquitous single cell of life. Think about what you are claiming and explain how it isn't, for all practical purposes, an unprecedented miracle of miracles?

I don't comprehend how any rational mind could conclude such a thing was a fluke of random chance due to chemistry and physics in an otherwise chaotic universe. To me, that makes even less sense than any Creator Deity imaginable.

Just because you don't understand something doesn't mean it is impossible. I have no idea how we can launch a spacecraft and hit a planet but that doesn't mean it can't be done.

Did I state that something was "impossible?" If so, please use the quote feature and point that out to me. Because I am usually pretty careful about proclaiming things "impossible."

But let's be clear, until you can offer valid evidence through science to support a notion that life created itself, then all you have is FAITH. You believe something is possible that you can't prove and that's fine... it's no different than faith in God.

.

Did I state that something was "impossible?" .. / .. You believe something is possible that you can't prove and that's fine.

Did I state that something was "impossible?"


in your own paragraph ...

Well no, you fucking idiot... stating factually that something hasn't been proven possible is NOT saying something is impossible! You must enjoy me bitch slapping you or something?

.

Well no, you fucking idiot... stating factually that something hasn't been proven possible is NOT saying something is impossible! You must enjoy me bitch slapping you or something?

You believe something is possible that you can't prove

NOT saying something is impossible ../.. that you can't prove

^ makes no sense ...

you clearly contradicted yourself in the same paragraph, you simply haven't the capacity to separate fact from fiction.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: People are going to have to face the reality that there's NO GOD
※→ SobieskiSavedEurope, et al,

That is actually two different suggested characteristics of the universe. Remember, it is all theory and certain lines of thought are probable.

• Coming from Nothing
• The Order and Structure of the Universe.
​

Then there is a latent question super imposed, yet has not asked, in your question?

• What is the source of energy needed to create and transform the subatomic world into into the massive elements composing the universe as we see it today.​

I'm agnostic, or a skeptic, however there's much organization in the Universe, one which would seem to be hard to come from nothing.

(COMMENT)

First, ask yourself ⇒ are these question that the Supreme Being would be interested in

The fact that a number of cosmologist and physicist can almost see how some plausible explanations on the formation of the universe is on a close on the Horizon.

In the space-time framework of the universe ⇒ nothing is not nothing. Humanity may not quite understand it all the mechanics yet; but, the knowledge base is moving forward.

The belief system, of a Supreme Being, cannot be used to support or nullify the observations of science. And likewise science, as of this time, cannot be used to support or nullify religious teaching on the existence of a Supreme Being.

What is even stranger, is that the human mortals cannot quite define supernatural powers, or the attributes and characteristics of the Supreme Being. We do not even know it we could recognize the Supreme Being if we saw it. But a Supreme Being is not going to be restricted by the mentality of man.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[alang1216]

I don't believe he is the origin of the quote. See here.

His quote was included in the Protocols, and his words and the Protocols ring true even today. ....

Israel | Dr. Oscar Levy, a Jew, Admits His People's Error

The Protocols are forgeries but you're welcome to believe what you want. Just don't complain when someone equates Islam with terrorism.

 

[Boss]

There is giant, fundamental difference. Faith in God assumes the existence of the supernatural. Science operates exclusively in the natural world.

The only "giant fundamental" difference is perceptions. Let's start with what you call "supernatural." According to the dictionary, this is something not of the natural world. But God is very much a part of the natural world. He created it! He is omnipresent in it! He is not part of the perceptive physical world because He is spiritual. But again, you don't believe in spiritual nature so your perception is that God is supernatural.

Not correct. If God created nature he outside of nature and is by definition supernatural.

Again, the definition of "supernatural" is something outside of physical nature. Something that is a part of physical nature is not outside of it. Omnipresence means God is part of it. The lack of physical evidence for something spiritual is not unexpected.

Let me pose the following question for you to ponder. Do you consider dark matter and dark energy to be "supernatural" or "natural?" It doesn't interact with light, we can't observe it or it's very difficult to observe it even in obscurity. Really, the only reason we know it physically exists is because of the gravity it provides in the cosmos. It's particles (if we can call them that) are passing right through your body and our planet as we speak. Now you can say, well... since we scientifically have proven dark energy and dark matter exist, then they are obviously not supernatural... but were they supernatural BEFORE we knew they existed or before we scientifically proved them?

My point is, what we humans define as "supernatural" can be subjective based on our knowledge at any given point in time. If I tell you it is possible to transfer information faster than the speed of light, what would you say? At first glance, this appears to contradict physics because nothing travels faster than the speed of light. Wouldn't this be considered "supernatural" by any definition or perception? How do you explain quantum entanglement? This is when two subatomic particles alter each other's behaviors instantaneously across millions of light years. Einstein called it "spooky action at a distance."

I also have a problem with what you consider the "natural world" when I believe you base this upon your limited five senses and perception of only 4 physical dimensions. What makes you believe that your very limited ability is everything? I would suspect that a lowly ant inside an ant hill, probably believes it knows all there is to know... but does it?

What if there are "senses" that humans don't have? We see some evidence of this in the nature around us. Do you know which flowers need pollinating? Can you telepathically communicate with tens of thousands of your contemporaries instantly the way bees and ants can? We're not even masters of our own five senses... there are things that can see, taste, smell, hear and feel better than humans. Even our own sciences betray our hubris in relating to our dimensional reality-- quantum physics predicts we can't even comprehend half of the dimensions that exist. So what IS "the natural world" and how do you know that we're fully aware of it?

I don't define the natural world, it defines me. Do I understand it all? No. Does my lack of understanding change reality. No. Is there more in heaven and earth...? Certainly, but it is still part of the natural world.

Your lack of understanding most certainly changes reality for you. We have to remember that "reality" is unique for every living organism. There is no "universal" reality. Your perception of reality is unique to your perspective. Even conjoined Siamese twins experience different realities. They might be similar, we may share many of the same perceptions of reality but each person and every living thing has a different journey and experience. It is this journey and experience which defines our reality.

You are correct that you don't understand it all, none of us do. But humans have this intrinsic hubris to believe they DO know everything. Again-- what IS "the natural world" if you admit you don't know or understand everything? What you mean to say is, something isn't part of the natural world as you know it. That does not mean it's true.

Here is another curious thing to ponder.... You and I perceive everything we realize as "reality" in the past! As physical mortal beings, we are incapable of witnessing "the present" as it happens. Try to wrap your mind around that for a moment. Look at yourself in the mirror... what you see is a reflection of what was there a nanosecond ago. Your perception is, it's a reflection of you in the present but it's actually perception of a past that has already happened. Physics had to take place. Light had to travel from you to the mirror and back to your eyes. Your brain had to process the information and formulate a visual image and then translate that to your perceptive mind. All of this took time. It's not possible for us to experience present time other than a perception which is forever in the past. The instant of "presence" eludes us.

Does "time" really exist? We can't experience the instant of presence. The past time no longer exists. The future time is yet to exist. All we have is a fleeting perception of the past which has already occurred. Now, try to comprehend that "GOD" transcends time.

 

[Taz]

RE: People are going to have to face the reality that there's NO GOD
※→ Taz, et al,

Help out an old man here.

You have no response to the truth, that's why. We've known it all along.

You and "truth" aren't even in the same zip code. .... ...

The truth is, you're a fake Muslim who won't even grow a beard.

(QUESTIONS)

What is the significance of a beard?

• Does it make you wiser?
• Does it make you more devote?
• Does it make you more moral?
• Does it make you more ethical?
• Does it instill greater honesty and integrity?
• Does it help you commune with the Supreme Being?​

Why does the Supreme Being care if you have a beard or not?

Does the Supreme Being even view humans with the same limitations as humans spectral sensitivity?

Why is a beard a factor at all?

Most Respectfully,
R

The idiot poster Taz has been following me around from thread to thread with his infantile, "you don't have a beard", comments for years. I assume it's supposed to be some kind of lame insult alluding to my adherence to Islam. ....

Dude can't handle my posts so he gets them erased. I WIN!!!!

 

[Sunni Man]

The Protocols are forgeries but you're welcome to believe what you want.

Whether the Protocols are a forgery or not isn't the issue. It's words ring with truth, and explains the Zionist / Israeli goals and agenda perfectly. .....