Evidence for God from Science

Justhuman wrote:Abelcainsbrother:

... I'm not focusing on evidence when you don't really care about it...

There you do it again!

And I repeat, you don't know me so know nothing about my (in this case) caring!

I think I'll leave it at at that (with you).

I think you are offended because of the truth.You know? The truth can hurt,just by telling somebody the truth,but the truth is important. So get over it and think about the truth I revealed to you,instead of clamming up and playing the offended card.It was never my intention to offend you all I'm doing is trying to get you to realize how important it is to have evidence behind whatever you have chosen,to find reasons that you've made the correct choice based on evidence,information,etc.You cannot say you have if you have accepted atheism where you don't know.

And remember it is a dumb choice to make when Jesus offers free salvation because if you are wrong?You will pay for the choices you've made but not if you truly believed in Jesus and are saved,you win either way having Jesus.Pascal was a gambling man and he knew all about odds of winning when you are gambling with your life. Increase your odds of winning with Jesus,especially when you have no evidence or way to know you've made the correct choice by choosing atheism that has no evidence behind it,only doubt and unbelief.

Abe, chillax.

Kurieuo wrote:To turn the page onto a different topic, away from "free will" and that we really do influence our own actions and beliefs (rather than such being caused by "physical" events)... Here's another video, which really gets to the heart of explaining why Atheism, at least those who believe in Naturalism, is rationally self-defeating aka "irrational".


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKX-QtEo2fI

I've watched this video, but am not convinced of the deeper reasoning. It might be I misinterpretate the Naturalist principle, or maybe I do not as yet understand why he thinks naturalist and reasoning is in conflict with itself. If one doesn't grasp what and how it's meant, as I do(n't), it really would better to talk to eachother, to better clarify things quicker.
As before I would have to view these videos a view times, to really understand what and why he says, in relation to naturalism.
The biggest 'problem' I think he says is whether a pure chemical biological naturalist developed brain is capable of reasoning. But does he mean it is not capable of reasoning or it has no need for reasoning?

Anyway, I've also read some more on 'my' materialistic view and came closer to a better definition, which is "physicalistic materialism". But it is extremely difficult to pinpoint a position based on so much differentiations.

Justhuman wrote:

B. W. wrote:

Justhuman wrote:

B. W. wrote:

Justhuman wrote:There is no 'true evidence', for any humans point of view regarding our origin (existence?) (And many other things too). Only assumptions and opinions (and fuzzy feelings). What is deemed rational seems to depend on what one believes. Both can be rational whithin their own boundaries.

I didn't write that rational thought is an illusion, on the contrary. In a materialist universe there is no illusion, for everything is 'real'.

With the exception of the first act of creation...

Now, do you mean that "With the exception of the first act of creation..." the act of creation is (also) not real in the materialist universe? I.e. not happened?

Where did the material come from that made all the entire universe?

I don't know. How do you expect me to explain it? Do I expect you to explain where God got it from?

Justhuman wrote:(1) I don't know. How do you expect me to explain it? .....

Then your adherence to strict materialism falls apart, have you considered that?

Justhuman wrote: (2) Do I expect you to explain where God got it from?

Do you?
-
-
-

Justhuman wrote:As B.W. wrote:

To answer that, God remains true in the absolute sense to all that he is, all his character traits, nature, words, promises, gifts, callings, etc without and shadow of turning. He keeps his word and promises...

Therefore, if he cannot keep his word, then how can he remain God? He gave humanity great promises and callings, and one of these is reason and thought in a free manner. No matter what decisions people make, God works all things to prove himself true and incapable of breaking his word, promises, etc. This manner proves himself just and fair as well as all powerfully able to work through all things, justly toward all.

Come on! God 'incapable' of breaking his word? He is an omnipotent omniscient being. How can you know God wont do this or that or didn't lie (a little)? You may think so, but you cannot know. Or is there no alternative for you? Like "to admit he is capable of breaking His word, would break away the pillars of my belief"?

As for me I don't know I'm right in my atheistic view, but I think so. It's what I 'feel', or don't 'feel'.

Points to consider:

If God broke his word and cannot have it come to pass, then he is not omnipotent omniscient being.

The key to understanding the origin of evil is that it seeks to prove that God cannot be true to his own characteristics by attempting to play God's own characteristics against each other...

If God denied free moral reasoning, as you desire, then again God is not omnipotent omniscient being either and
thus incapable of actually purifying dross before perfection comes...

Are you not, then, most likely unknowingly, attempting to play God's character against each other just to prove yourself right - whose side are you on?

You ask, how do I or any Christian know what God is like: He gave us a book and put his own words in it telling us who he is, what he is like, as well as what his character traits are too.

What do you have? Materialism?

Recall, you asked this --- regarding where the material came from that made the universe...

Justhuman wrote: I don't know. How do you expect me to explain it?

My answer was: Then your adherence to strict materialism falls apart, have you considered that?

If material stuff always existed then why cannot God who would be the logical one to have created material from nothing...

Something cannot come from Nothing ... that defies logic. the very gift of reason God gave you...

You deny reason?
-
-
-

Justhuman wrote:Come on! God 'incapable' of breaking his word? He is an omnipotent omniscient being. How can you know God wont do this or that or didn't lie (a little)? You may think so, but you cannot know.

You keep asserting this but you are simply wrong. And how I know you are wrong is exactly how I know God can't do this or that, through the power of reason with which he endowed me (and you). No revelation, no scripture, no tradition, no church. Good, old-fashioned reason.

Two things God can NOT do:

Make a square circle
Make a married bachelor.

Why?
Obvious to common reasoning.

The irrationality of atheism comes when they do not take their materialistic view to it's final conclusion.

http://blog.godreports.com/2016/06/note ... ds-matrix/
Even Michio Kaku acknowledges there's a possibility for god, as well as Dawkins, though he holds to a deistic possibility.

thatkidakayoungguy wrote:http://blog.godreports.com/2016/06/note ... ds-matrix/
Even Michio Kaku acknowledges there's a possibility for god, as well as Dawkins, though he holds to a deistic possibility.

There are countless cases of brilliant scientists proving to be terrible philosophers. Hawking, Kaku, and yes, even Dawkins ( ) are but a few. So what is your point exactly?

B. W. wrote:

Justhuman wrote:

B. W. wrote:

Justhuman wrote:

B. W. wrote:
With the exception of the first act of creation...

Now, do you mean that "With the exception of the first act of creation..." the act of creation is (also) not real in the materialist universe? I.e. not happened?

Where did the material come from that made all the entire universe?

I don't know. How do you expect me to explain it? Do I expect you to explain where God got it from?

Justhuman wrote:(1) I don't know. How do you expect me to explain it? .....

Then your adherence to strict materialism falls apart, have you considered that?

Justhuman wrote: (2) Do I expect you to explain where God got it from?

Do you?
-
-
-

This is getting complex...

Why is my 'adherence to strict materialism' falling apart just because I lack the knowledge to explain where all that material came from? Or is that not what you meant?

And no, I do not expect from you to explain where God got all that material from, for none can explain that either. I hope you agree with that.

B. W. wrote: Points to consider:

If God broke his word and cannot have it come to pass, then he is not omnipotent omniscient being.

The key to understanding the origin of evil is that it seeks to prove that God cannot be true to his own characteristics by attempting to play God's own characteristics against each other...

If God denied free moral reasoning, as you desire, then again God is not omnipotent omniscient being either and
thus incapable of actually purifying dross before perfection comes...

Are you not, then, most likely unknowingly, attempting to play God's character against each other just to prove yourself right - whose side are you on?

You ask, how do I or any Christian know what God is like: He gave us a book and put his own words in it telling us who he is, what he is like, as well as what his character traits are too.

What do you have? Materialism?

Recall, you asked this --- regarding where the material came from that made the universe...

Justhuman wrote: I don't know. How do you expect me to explain it?

My answer was: Then your adherence to strict materialism falls apart, have you considered that?

If material stuff always existed then why cannot God who would be the logical one to have created material from nothing...

Something cannot come from Nothing ... that defies logic. the very gift of reason God gave you...

You deny reason?
-
-
-

I think I have to clarify some:
1) as an omnipotent omniscient being God can lie and/or break his word. He may not have done so, but he is able to do so. That are two different things.
2) 'the origin of evil'? I hope you do not consider me part of that evil?
3) It's not so much my intention to 'prove' that God cannot be true to his own characteristics, but that he has a choice (free will?) in doing that. And again, see 1)
4) I'm not playing God's character against each other, because that's not the point. I must refer to 1) again.
5) I have to admit I might be wrong in my materialistic view, because I ultimately cannot verify/proof it. I think I'm more or less right though. Up to now it's all based on the physical evidence and observations of what I can see, and read in scientific literarature. What makes sense to me. That's a personal point of view.
5) You state that something cannot come from nothing, but you cannot prove that. You can reason it to be fairly true, maybe even logical, but since we just do not know what and how it happened at or before the Big Bang, it remains a philosofical issue.
It's not lack of reason, but lack of knowledge.

PaulSacramento wrote:Two things God can NOT do:

Make a square circle
Make a married bachelor.

Why?
Obvious to common reasoning.

If there is someone that can make a square circle, it's God!

Justhuman wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:Two things God can NOT do:

Make a square circle
Make a married bachelor.

Why?
Obvious to common reasoning.

If there is someone that can make a square circle, it's God!

• “His Omnipotence means power to do all that is intrinsically possible, not to do the intrinsically impossible. You may attribute miracles to Him, but not nonsense. There is no limit to His power.
  
  If you choose to say, 'God can give a creature free will and at the same time withhold free will from it,' you have not succeeded in saying anything about God: meaningless combinations of words do not suddenly acquire meaning simply because we prefix to them the two other words, 'God can.'
  
  It remains true that all things are possible with God: the intrinsic impossibilities are not things but nonentities. It is no more possible for God than for the weakest of His creatures to carry out both of two mutually exclusive alternatives; not because His power meets an obstacle, but because nonsense remains nonsense even when we talk it about God.” - CS Lewis, The Problem of Pain

Let me write it this way:
IF there is someone that can make a square circle, it's God!

(I tried to make the larger, but that doesn't work. )