Real Muslims claim that's not Islam, just like "real" Christians denounce all the crap done in the name of Jesus. So that's a wash.... next?
Scientific evidence for Christianity
- Thread starter The Pixie
- Start date
This is about your claim of scientific evidence for God. I started the thread, I know exactly what it about.
Evidence you claimed to have, but have still failed to provide.
For this thread, I want to see the scientific evidence for God you claimed to have.
But the reality is there is none. It is just a fantasy. And now we have to go though all your usual BS as you try to cover up this simple fact.
I am not falling for it Steve. You said you have scientific evidence for God. You got called on it. You failed to supply it.
Conclusion: <i>You are full of BS.</i>
SteveB
Well-known member
It's a pity you don't actually read."We"I'll accept your admission no other Jesus followers here support your inane claim. You need a new excuse for failing so badly.
I think that what Luke said regarding the Berean people actually applies here. My question is--- are you as noble, or are you, like the Thessalonians, closed-minded?
Act 17:11 NKJV - These were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily [to find out] whether these things were so.
You see--- I don't need you to "accept" anything. I'd expect someone who is reasonable, rational, and a logical thinker to do their own investigation, and follow the precepts, principles, and instructions to learn for themselves, and choose for themselves.
Which is equally ironic, because this too develops a basis upon which the scientific method was developed.
I'm not the one who needs to be convinced that I'm telling the truth.
You are the one who is already convinced I'm lying.
So.... be reasonable, rational, and logical, and do what the Bereans did.
Act 17:11 NKJV - These were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily [to find out] whether these things were so.
Prove that I'm lying. It's easily enough achieved.
SteveB
Well-known member
Ironically, the people whom you claim are real muslims are called fakes by the people who are telling others to murder non-muslims. And the strange thing is--- they're using the Quran to do so.
Are you sure it's a wash?
Because I've yet to find anything in the Quran that says killing your enemies is wrong.
I've found plenty in the new testament to show that bombing abortion clinics, killing people, etc.... is wrong.
the most interesting is out of Jesus' own mouth.
43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor[ and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you, 45 that you may be sons of your Father in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. 46 For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? 47 And if you greet your brethren[fn] only, what do you do more than others? Do not even the tax collectors do so? 48 Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect.
Then, in 1 John 3 we read
10 In this the children of God and the children of the devil are manifest: Whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor is he who does not love his brother. 11 For this is the message that you heard from the beginning, that we should love one another, 12 not as Cain who was of the wicked one and murdered his brother. And why did he murder him? Because his works were evil and his brother’s righteous.
13 Do not marvel, my brethren, if the world hates you. 14 We know that we have passed from death to life, because we love the brethren. He who does not love his brother[fn] abides in death. 15 Whoever hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him.
And
from 1 John 2
9 He who says he is in the light, and hates his brother, is in darkness until now. 10 He who loves his brother abides in the light, and there is no cause for stumbling in him. 11 But he who hates his brother is in darkness and walks in darkness, and does not know where he is going, because the darkness has blinded his eyes.
So.... by all means, show me in the Quran where these things are stated.
Here are a handful to get you looking in the correct location.
Quran (2:244) - "Then fight in the cause of Allah, and know that Allah Heareth and knoweth all things." (See also: Response to Apologists)
Quran (2:216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not." Not only does this verse establish that violence can be virtuous, but it also contradicts the myth that fighting is intended only in self-defense, since the audience was obviously not under attack at the time. From the Hadith, we know that this verse was narrated at a time that Muhammad was actually trying to motivate his people into raiding merchant caravans for loot. (See also: Response to Apologists)
Quran (3:56) - "As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help." (See also: Response to Apologists)
Quran (3:151) - "Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority". This speaks directly of polytheists, yet it also includes Christians, since they believe in the Trinity (ie. what Muhammad incorrectly believed to be 'joining companions to Allah'). (See also: Response to Apologists)
Quran (4:74) - "Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward." The martyrs of Islam are unlike the early Christians, who were led meekly to the slaughter. These Muslims are killed in battle as they attempt to inflict death and destruction for the cause of Allah. This is the theological basis for today's suicide bombers. (See also: Response to Apologists)
Quran (4:76) - "Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah, and those who disbelieve, fight in the cause of Taghut (Satan, etc.). So fight you against the friends of Shaitan (Satan)" The Arabic for the word "fight" is from qital, meaning physical combat.
So..... have some courage for your claims, and check them out. Provide a reason for why I should believe you.Your confirmation bias is in full swing here. If you are not aware that the variety of Islamic apologists and Christian apologists can land you anywhere you own reflection takes you, then you are as intellectually dishonest as everybody here claims you are.
Full Islamic emersion would lead you to the truth of the doctrine - regardless of what it states, but you refuse to do it, so you shouldn't talk about things you don't know anything about, like whether Christianity is a better answer for humanity than Islam.
You just don't know... you didn't do the work. Like you said, you have 40+ years invested in a one sided human lie with no exploration to your own standards in any other potential answer, and you'll claim that that is somehow science.
SteveB
Well-known member
Really?
Because it seems pretty clear that the only thing you know is your own bias, your own preconceptions, and your own opinions, which are all based on the complete lack of knowledge of what science is, and entails.
Perfect example of your lack of knowledge and understanding.
I was quite clear in what I stated, and you completely skipped over it.
Here.... this will save you a limited amount of laziness. Admittedly, I'm not real clear why you need to be as lazy as you've become.
- Scientific evidence for Christianity
A poster on another thread claims he used the scientific method to the God portrayed in the Bible exists. Because I did what every scientist has done for centuries---- I used the tools, information, materials, etc.... to follow the scientific method. the evidence I obtained has resulted in my...
forums.carm.org
When reading Journal articles, some scientists actually want to know for themselves if the author's claims are true or not. Sometimes out of curiosity, and others because they'd done something similar, but it didn't work.
So....
They examine the Journal article, work through the details of the experiment, check the data, and then using the same equipment, procedures, instruments, etc..... perform the experiment.
Now, a skilled scientist, with previous experience will know where the pitfalls are, and look for the data referencing such in the journal, or other reports dealing with a comparable experiment.
An unskilled, or less-experienced scientist will not be readily looking for such, and just focus on the data itself.
One thing I've never heard of is a scientist who'll run back to the previous author, after only one or two trials, and claim he's a fraud.
They'll continue to perform the experiment, looking closely at their procedures, the data, the equipment used, room conditions, instruments, etc....
They then document their findings--- including nuances--- and present them to the original author, or peer review process, so such can be corroborated.
Note that they won't talk to non-experienced, non-scientific types about it, who have no experience, or expertise on the specified field of study.
So, when someone like the atheists here tells me they've "done christianity before", but are not able to describe to be their experiences, I find myself scratching my head, wondering why not.
and I'm led invariably back to my studies in physics---- they can't describe it because they didn't actually do what Jesus said. They did what they believed was christianity, but not what it actually is.
they may have indeed grown up in a church, or attended a group, maybe even read the bible--- or "much" "some" "part" of the bible-- but not enough to have actually learned or done what is stated we're to do, to know.
You see, when a scientist does experiments, they're actually interested in learning the truth regarding that topic of interest. They're not trying to win an argument, or prove someone else wrong--- they want to know the truth.
And as Truth is always at the heart of scientific inquiry, there's not supposed to be any room for pettiness, or one-upsmanship.
This is why I find myself so curious about people who tell me they did not have my experience with what they call christianity, and I keep telling them it's about Jesus, not an institutional religion.
Scientific inquiry is about learning. It's about seeking understanding. Gallileo did not seek to prove he could be better than anyone else--- he wanted to understand what he was investigating.
Same with Copernicus.
Same with Newton, Euler, and the others.
So..... if you want to "do what scientists" do.... then start reading.
Start taking the time.
Read.
Learn.
Document
make inquiry--- not for the sake of berating/belittling-- for the sake of learning to understand.
As God is a person, and Christianity is not a philosophy, don't try to debate this from your perspective.
Take this from the perspective that you're engaging a real person (from the perspective that you've never met them before).
We who have met God, and Jesus, and whom God and Jesus have introduced themselves to..... we came at this not having a clue how it "was supposed to be done." We came, as "scientists" making inquiry, so we could better know the truth whereof we were instructed.
So....
They examine the Journal article, work through the details of the experiment, check the data, and then using the same equipment, procedures, instruments, etc..... perform the experiment.
Now, a skilled scientist, with previous experience will know where the pitfalls are, and look for the data referencing such in the journal, or other reports dealing with a comparable experiment.
An unskilled, or less-experienced scientist will not be readily looking for such, and just focus on the data itself.
One thing I've never heard of is a scientist who'll run back to the previous author, after only one or two trials, and claim he's a fraud.
They'll continue to perform the experiment, looking closely at their procedures, the data, the equipment used, room conditions, instruments, etc....
They then document their findings--- including nuances--- and present them to the original author, or peer review process, so such can be corroborated.
Note that they won't talk to non-experienced, non-scientific types about it, who have no experience, or expertise on the specified field of study.
So, when someone like the atheists here tells me they've "done christianity before", but are not able to describe to be their experiences, I find myself scratching my head, wondering why not.
and I'm led invariably back to my studies in physics---- they can't describe it because they didn't actually do what Jesus said. They did what they believed was christianity, but not what it actually is.
they may have indeed grown up in a church, or attended a group, maybe even read the bible--- or "much" "some" "part" of the bible-- but not enough to have actually learned or done what is stated we're to do, to know.
You see, when a scientist does experiments, they're actually interested in learning the truth regarding that topic of interest. They're not trying to win an argument, or prove someone else wrong--- they want to know the truth.
And as Truth is always at the heart of scientific inquiry, there's not supposed to be any room for pettiness, or one-upsmanship.
This is why I find myself so curious about people who tell me they did not have my experience with what they call christianity, and I keep telling them it's about Jesus, not an institutional religion.
Scientific inquiry is about learning. It's about seeking understanding. Gallileo did not seek to prove he could be better than anyone else--- he wanted to understand what he was investigating.
Same with Copernicus.
Same with Newton, Euler, and the others.
So..... if you want to "do what scientists" do.... then start reading.
Start taking the time.
Read.
Learn.
Document
make inquiry--- not for the sake of berating/belittling-- for the sake of learning to understand.
As God is a person, and Christianity is not a philosophy, don't try to debate this from your perspective.
Take this from the perspective that you're engaging a real person (from the perspective that you've never met them before).
We who have met God, and Jesus, and whom God and Jesus have introduced themselves to..... we came at this not having a clue how it "was supposed to be done." We came, as "scientists" making inquiry, so we could better know the truth whereof we were instructed.
To get this evidence, you need to do what Jesus said for yourself.
Especially since you want to SEE it.
I.e., I'm surprised you're not understanding this.
You live on another part of the planet, and considering I've had a standing, open invitation, to anyone who wants to meet me, and I've only ever received ridicule about it, I highly doubt you're among those who'd ever actually come. But if you are serious, fly to Reno, Nevada, and then PM me. I'll come and pick you up, and we'll work it out from there. And yes, it's at your own expense. I'm not wealthy enough to have my own vacation, so I won't be paying for yours.
There's actually plenty, and I've posted it on this forum for years. Since however, this is only a written medium, and not a face to face environment, no amount of words would ever be enough to satisfy the mockers.
That said--- you now know which airport you need to fly to, and how to get a hold of me.
When you do this, I'll know you're actually serious, and not just another coward who likes playing games to win an argument they lost years ago.
I didn't expect you to "fall" for anything.
I've provided you with the basic means and methods required so you can know, without leaving where you live.
- Scientific evidence for Christianity
A poster on another thread claims he used the scientific method to the God portrayed in the Bible exists. Because I did what every scientist has done for centuries---- I used the tools, information, materials, etc.... to follow the scientific method. the evidence I obtained has resulted in my...
forums.carm.org
yep. Imagine if I wasn't.
What kind of tripping would you be doing to ensure that I was, solely to protect your fragile ego.
Let me know if you ever grow a pair. Adulthood that is.
SteveB
Well-known member
I wouldn't know. Because so far, you haven't provided what you claim is the truth, beyond your own opinion.
I provided actual evidence, countering your unsupported opinion, so by all means, provide your evidence.
Again, had you actually provided evidence supporting your opinions, I could better ascertain your claim.
Then provide the evidence that what you're claiming is correct, and accurately understood.
You're the one making the claim of a scientific for your deity, not me. My only claim is you didn't do the work to know whether Islam is true, and you admitted it.
SteveB
Well-known member
And you're the one who threw the muslims in there to side-line the discussion.
So, either man up, and provide the evidence of your claim, or walk it back.
Remember--- you're the one who needs to win here.
I've provided the resource information for you to do what I've done, so you can know for yourself.
- Scientific evidence for Christianity
A poster on another thread claims he used the scientific method to the God portrayed in the Bible exists. Because I did what every scientist has done for centuries---- I used the tools, information, materials, etc.... to follow the scientific method. the evidence I obtained has resulted in my...
forums.carm.org
When reading Journal articles, some scientists actually want to know for themselves if the author's claims are true or not. Sometimes out of curiosity, and others because they'd done something similar, but it didn't work.
So....
They examine the Journal article, work through the details of the experiment, check the data, and then using the same equipment, procedures, instruments, etc..... perform the experiment.
Now, a skilled scientist, with previous experience will know where the pitfalls are, and look for the data referencing such in the journal, or other reports dealing with a comparable experiment.
An unskilled, or less-experienced scientist will not be readily looking for such, and just focus on the data itself.
One thing I've never heard of is a scientist who'll run back to the previous author, after only one or two trials, and claim he's a fraud.
They'll continue to perform the experiment, looking closely at their procedures, the data, the equipment used, room conditions, instruments, etc....
They then document their findings--- including nuances--- and present them to the original author, or peer review process, so such can be corroborated.
Note that they won't talk to non-experienced, non-scientific types about it, who have no experience, or expertise on the specified field of study.
So, when someone like the atheists here tells me they've "done christianity before", but are not able to describe to be their experiences, I find myself scratching my head, wondering why not.
and I'm led invariably back to my studies in physics---- they can't describe it because they didn't actually do what Jesus said. They did what they believed was christianity, but not what it actually is.
they may have indeed grown up in a church, or attended a group, maybe even read the bible--- or "much" "some" "part" of the bible-- but not enough to have actually learned or done what is stated we're to do, to know.
You see, when a scientist does experiments, they're actually interested in learning the truth regarding that topic of interest. They're not trying to win an argument, or prove someone else wrong--- they want to know the truth.
And as Truth is always at the heart of scientific inquiry, there's not supposed to be any room for pettiness, or one-upsmanship.
This is why I find myself so curious about people who tell me they did not have my experience with what they call christianity, and I keep telling them it's about Jesus, not an institutional religion.
Scientific inquiry is about learning. It's about seeking understanding. Gallileo did not seek to prove he could be better than anyone else--- he wanted to understand what he was investigating.
Same with Copernicus.
Same with Newton, Euler, and the others.
So..... if you want to "do what scientists" do.... then start reading.
Start taking the time.
Read.
Learn.
Document
make inquiry--- not for the sake of berating/belittling-- for the sake of learning to understand.
As God is a person, and Christianity is not a philosophy, don't try to debate this from your perspective.
Take this from the perspective that you're engaging a real person (from the perspective that you've never met them before).
We who have met God, and Jesus, and whom God and Jesus have introduced themselves to..... we came at this not having a clue how it "was supposed to be done." We came, as "scientists" making inquiry, so we could better know the truth whereof we were instructed.
LOL! Wouldn't be a SteveB post with the 50,000 watt projection of his own inadequacies. Of course SteveB won't man up and admit he completely failed to provide any of his claimed scientific evidence for his Christian beliefs. Sad but expected.
SteveB
Well-known member
I'm not the one keeps telling me I'm inadequate.
You are the one continually demonstrating your cowardice and scientific ineptitude then projecting them onto others however.
SteveB
Well-known member
And yet you provide nothing to support your belief.
It's simply a series of posts that make the accusation.
You see, the difference between me and you is that I actually believe that you're intelligent enough to learn.
When reading Journal articles, some scientists actually want to know for themselves if the author's claims are true or not. Sometimes out of curiosity, and others because they'd done something similar, but it didn't work.
So....
They examine the Journal article, work through the details of the experiment, check the data, and then using the same equipment, procedures, instruments, etc..... perform the experiment.
Now, a skilled scientist, with previous experience will know where the pitfalls are, and look for the data referencing such in the journal, or other reports dealing with a comparable experiment.
An unskilled, or less-experienced scientist will not be readily looking for such, and just focus on the data itself.
One thing I've never heard of is a scientist who'll run back to the previous author, after only one or two trials, and claim he's a fraud.
They'll continue to perform the experiment, looking closely at their procedures, the data, the equipment used, room conditions, instruments, etc....
They then document their findings--- including nuances--- and present them to the original author, or peer review process, so such can be corroborated.
Note that they won't talk to non-experienced, non-scientific types about it, who have no experience, or expertise on the specified field of study.
So, when someone like the atheists here tells me they've "done christianity before", but are not able to describe to be their experiences, I find myself scratching my head, wondering why not.
and I'm led invariably back to my studies in physics---- they can't describe it because they didn't actually do what Jesus said. They did what they believed was christianity, but not what it actually is.
they may have indeed grown up in a church, or attended a group, maybe even read the bible--- or "much" "some" "part" of the bible-- but not enough to have actually learned or done what is stated we're to do, to know.
You see, when a scientist does experiments, they're actually interested in learning the truth regarding that topic of interest. They're not trying to win an argument, or prove someone else wrong--- they want to know the truth.
And as Truth is always at the heart of scientific inquiry, there's not supposed to be any room for pettiness, or one-upsmanship.
This is why I find myself so curious about people who tell me they did not have my experience with what they call christianity, and I keep telling them it's about Jesus, not an institutional religion.
Scientific inquiry is about learning. It's about seeking understanding. Gallileo did not seek to prove he could be better than anyone else--- he wanted to understand what he was investigating.
Same with Copernicus.
Same with Newton, Euler, and the others.
So..... if you want to "do what scientists" do.... then start reading.
Start taking the time.
Read.
Learn.
Document
make inquiry--- not for the sake of berating/belittling-- for the sake of learning to understand.
As God is a person, and Christianity is not a philosophy, don't try to debate this from your perspective.
Take this from the perspective that you're engaging a real person (from the perspective that you've never met them before).
We who have met God, and Jesus, and whom God and Jesus have introduced themselves to..... we came at this not having a clue how it "was supposed to be done." We came, as "scientists" making inquiry, so we could better know the truth whereof we were instructed.
https://forums.carm.org/threads/scientific-evidence-for-christianity.2056/post-134868
Tetsugaku
Well-known member
Steve has no scientific evidence. He has no evidence at all. All he can do is make vague proclamations about evidence being available to all who 'do what Jesus did' and then go into faith-based denial when told that we've done that and it doesn't work. He'll then demand specifics while refusing to give any specifics himself. Being vague is the only way he can continue to pretend that there is any parallel at all between science and his own faith-based delusions.
I previously said:
None of which impacts on the simple fact that I know why I started this thread.
Sure I have biases and preconceptions, and yes, they influenced why I started this thread, but they do not in any way stop me knowing why I started the thread. To be completely clear here, I started the thread because I was sure your claims of scientific evidence for God were nonsense, and I wanted to expose it for the BS that it is. This thread, then, is specifically about you failing to provide any scientific evidence for God.
So yes, my biases and preconceptions influenced this thread. However, you are performing exactly as expected. Long winded posts that talk a big talk, but at the end of the day, you have no scientific evidence for God.
You are confirming that my biases and preconceptions were right about you.
Maybe I do lack knowledge in science (but I know enough to know positrons do not bounce off electrons!). However, I can still see that you have made no attempt to give any scientific evidence for God.
Whatever my background in science and my biases it is clear that:
(1) You claimed to have scientific evidence for God
(2) When challenged you failed to provide any scientific evidence for God
This is what I mean about fantasy. In your head you clearly think you have this scientific evidence for God, and apparently you think you have presented on this thread!
The reality is that you have not, and frankly you look delusional.
But what is the actual evidence? That post just describes the process, not the product of it.
Why is that?
Because there is no product. After 43 and a half years of research, all you have to offer is instructions on how to waste my life on fruitless research!
You have literally nothing to show for 43 and a half years of research, Steve.
This is exactly what I am talking about. You can tell us about the process, but where are the results? What did you actually find?
Nothing.
Zip.
Nada.
What I want is to know what scientific evidence you have for for God.
And we have the answer now.
None whatsoever.
On the other thread, you said (as quoted in the OP):
Because I did what every scientist has done for centuries---- I used the tools, information, materials, etc.... to follow the scientific method.
the evidence I obtained has resulted in my being convinced that God is exactly whom he describes himself as in the bible.
You stated you used the scientific method. However, now you are saying I have to do what Jesus said. Did Jesus instruct his followers to use the scientific method, Steve?
Or do you just spout whatever BS seems convenient at the moment?
If you have been posting it for years, why not post some on this thread?
Oh, right.
Because it does not exist. It is just a fantasy in your head.
That is such garbage thinking it's no wonder you believe the crap you do.
SteveB
Well-known member
Well, that's the great thing about conversation---- nobody has to believe a single thing you say. Especially when you clearly don't know how to actually back up your claims.
SteveB
Well-known member
If this wasn't so hilarious, it'd actually be funny.
but then I'd need to dumb it down, just to reach the level of this claim.
keep smokin' the whiskey N.
You've definitely reached the de-intellectualization stage.
Ephesians 4
the manner in which the people of the nations walk, in the futility of their mind, 18 having their understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God, because of the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart; 19 who, being past feeling, have given themselves over to lewdness, to work all uncleanness with greediness.
I.e., the futility of your thinking, your understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God (which you keep saying is your goal, to be completely alienated from God), due to the ignorance that is in you, as a result of the blindness of your heart.......
I'm curious..... do these actually seem like good attributes to you?
Are these attributes goals you seek to attain to?
Because if I were looking from outside, at the way atheists such as you talk, I'd be scratching my head, with the questions----
What are these guys so afraid of?
Don't they see that all they have to do is take the time to learn Jesus on Jesus' terms, and they'll get all the evidence they want?
I'd be thinking--- do they really think that by this--- "I don't want to be bothered, and would rather demand others do it for me, so I can excuse myself because I'll never actually know for myself"--- mentality..... only people who are genuinely stupid would follow that logic.
Great, so you will understand why no believes anything you say, right, Steve?
Tetsugaku
Well-known member
I'm not amused by your dishonest and evasive behaviour, and I doubt you are either. I notice you haven't shown anything I said to be wrong. You haven't even tried.
No, they sound like yet another strawman, erected to avoid having to address the reality of anything said to you.
You continue to be vague, exactly as predicted. Whenever you specify these terms they turn out to be something we've already done, or something that requires prior belief. And that is why you continue to hide behind vague claims and ad hominem nonsense.