Total Posts:67|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Are there any Good Arguments for God?

Bluepaintcan123
Posts: 17
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2015 12:13:59 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
When I say good arguments for God, I don't mean evidence from the bible (or torah) or anything that conflicts with science. I want to know if there is any good reason for me to consider the belief in God without it conflicting with what we know is fact.
Whenever I search this on the internet I always get things that could be dismantled instantly and easily. Since I know that there are smarter religious people with better arguments than that, I ask that you challenge my beliefs in Atheism and tell me your best argument for Theism.
Thanks for the help!
-Blue
b_sorelson
Posts: 78
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2015 12:47:18 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/7/2015 12:13:59 AM, Bluepaintcan123 wrote:
When I say good arguments for God, I don't mean evidence from the bible (or torah) or anything that conflicts with science. I want to know if there is any good reason for me to consider the belief in God without it conflicting with what we know is fact.
Whenever I search this on the internet I always get things that could be dismantled instantly and easily. Since I know that there are smarter religious people with better arguments than that, I ask that you challenge my beliefs in Atheism and tell me your best argument for Theism.
Thanks for the help! : :

Science has always been concerned with visible objects as being proof for our existence but when they got involved in quantum physics, it confused them. If evolution is true, then where did our thoughts ( consciousness ) come from?

Consciousness is a big problem in the study of visible objects because they don't appear to come from the same source. If they eventually come to the conclusion that visible objects and consciousness came from the same source, then they will have to accept the fact that there must be a creator.

Quantum physics has shown that particles are illusive and become waves when not observed or measured. This has proven that waves are where visible objects come from so when they figure out that consciousness comes from this same source, then they will have to accept the fact that waves are nothing but information.

Where did this information come from?
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2015 12:49:23 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/7/2015 12:13:59 AM, Bluepaintcan123 wrote:
When I say good arguments for God, I don't mean evidence from the bible (or torah) or anything that conflicts with science. I want to know if there is any good reason for me to consider the belief in God without it conflicting with what we know is fact.

Despite some estimated 4,000 religions and countless theological claims, claims of metaphysical intervention have consistently failed to produce reliable, independent confirmation of specifics, while claims of creation have consistently failed to predict the time-frames, processes and products that actually occurred in cosmogenesis, terragenesis and biogenesis with any accuracy.

From this consistent failure we can conclude that these claims do not arise from any kind of revealed insight or even observation, but from ignorant imagination and unfounded superstition recognised to be innate to human psychology.

That magical thinking and cultural effects explain these wild claims is beyond reasonable doubt. There's no further point entertaining claims of revelation and miracles without first seeing rigorous, compelling and independently-confirmed evidence of their accuracy.
DavidHenson
Posts: 446
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2015 1:10:58 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
There are more arguments for God than there are grains of sand, but if you want some scientifically accepted compromise you won't find it, at least nothing remotely resembling any specific God in any true sense of it.
"Seek freedom and become captive of your desires. Seek discipline and find your liberty." - Frank Herbert, Chapterhouse: Dune
b_sorelson
Posts: 78
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2015 1:21:27 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/7/2015 12:49:23 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 9/7/2015 12:13:59 AM, Bluepaintcan123 wrote:
When I say good arguments for God, I don't mean evidence from the bible (or torah) or anything that conflicts with science. I want to know if there is any good reason for me to consider the belief in God without it conflicting with what we know is fact.

Despite some estimated 4,000 religions and countless theological claims, claims of metaphysical intervention have consistently failed to produce reliable, independent confirmation of specifics, while claims of creation have consistently failed to predict the time-frames, processes and products that actually occurred in cosmogenesis, terragenesis and biogenesis with any accuracy.

From this consistent failure we can conclude that these claims do not arise from any kind of revealed insight or even observation, but from ignorant imagination and unfounded superstition recognised to be innate to human psychology.

That magical thinking and cultural effects explain these wild claims is beyond reasonable doubt. There's no further point entertaining claims of revelation and miracles without first seeing rigorous, compelling and independently-confirmed evidence of their accuracy. : :

I have 36 years of experience with the Creator of mans' experiences who had me write thousands of pages and speak millions of words to learn about the past, present and future. He even taught me how he created everything. These thoughts that I witnessed, are our true reality.

You can chalk this up to magical thinking if you want but you will have to put a bullet into my head before you could convince me that our creator doesn't exist. He is definitely the real deal but to try prove that our creator exists is impossible.

We are living in a simulation as characters who are not real at all. Our creator of this simulation and our experiences within this simulation is outside of his program called Eternal Life.

There happens to be several scientists and thousands of other people I've met in the past four years who believe their experiences are nothing but a dream or simulation. Now they have a witness of our Creator's mind ( thoughts ) to listen to and learn the details of how everything in our experiences were created.

Since you don't believe my testimonies from the mind ( thoughts ) of our Creator, you will not learn about the future or how we were created. Belief is the only way to the knowledge of our created existence that I possess. There is no proof that we're invisible characters in a simulation but at least a few scientists are getting closer to this fact. Quantum physics and the study of consciousness is leading them to it.
Harikrish
Posts: 11,010
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2015 1:35:17 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/7/2015 12:47:18 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 12:13:59 AM, Bluepaintcan123 wrote:
When I say good arguments for God, I don't mean evidence from the bible (or torah) or anything that conflicts with science. I want to know if there is any good reason for me to consider the belief in God without it conflicting with what we know is fact.
Whenever I search this on the internet I always get things that could be dismantled instantly and easily. Since I know that there are smarter religious people with better arguments than that, I ask that you challenge my beliefs in Atheism and tell me your best argument for Theism.
Thanks for the help! : :

Science has always been concerned with visible objects as being proof for our existence but when they got involved in quantum physics, it confused them. If evolution is true, then where did our thoughts ( consciousness ) come from?

Consciousness is a big problem in the study of visible objects because they don't appear to come from the same source. If they eventually come to the conclusion that visible objects and consciousness came from the same source, then they will have to accept the fact that there must be a creator.

Quantum physics has shown that particles are illusive and become waves when not observed or measured. This has proven that waves are where visible objects come from so when they figure out that consciousness comes from this same source, then they will have to accept the fact that waves are nothing but information.

Where did this information come from?

You got it backward Brad. Particles behave like waves when observed/measured. Waves are energy fields not information. Your diminished mental capacity just hit a new low.
b_sorelson
Posts: 78
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2015 1:38:50 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/7/2015 1:35:17 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 9/7/2015 12:47:18 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 12:13:59 AM, Bluepaintcan123 wrote:
When I say good arguments for God, I don't mean evidence from the bible (or torah) or anything that conflicts with science. I want to know if there is any good reason for me to consider the belief in God without it conflicting with what we know is fact.
Whenever I search this on the internet I always get things that could be dismantled instantly and easily. Since I know that there are smarter religious people with better arguments than that, I ask that you challenge my beliefs in Atheism and tell me your best argument for Theism.
Thanks for the help! : :

Science has always been concerned with visible objects as being proof for our existence but when they got involved in quantum physics, it confused them. If evolution is true, then where did our thoughts ( consciousness ) come from?

Consciousness is a big problem in the study of visible objects because they don't appear to come from the same source. If they eventually come to the conclusion that visible objects and consciousness came from the same source, then they will have to accept the fact that there must be a creator.

Quantum physics has shown that particles are illusive and become waves when not observed or measured. This has proven that waves are where visible objects come from so when they figure out that consciousness comes from this same source, then they will have to accept the fact that waves are nothing but information.

Where did this information come from?

You got it backward Brad. Particles behave like waves when observed/measured. Waves are energy fields not information. Your diminished mental capacity just hit a new low. : :

Scientists have it backwards. Waves were spoken into a simulation program called Eternal Life. From these waves come particles that can be observed and measured but once they are not observed or measured, they remain as waves.

You have no idea who our Creator is or what He has revealed to me. You are the worst listener I have ever met.
tstor
Posts: 1,467
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2015 1:42:56 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/7/2015 12:13:59 AM, Bluepaintcan123 wrote:
I believe that it is pivotal to not look into actual theology first. A more reasonable approach is to first come to the conclusion that it is more viable for there to be a higher being/power rather than a strictly naturalistic explanation. So what do I mean by this? I will break down this post into three areas:
1) Beginning
2) Central
3) Present

Beginning
So what is the scientific explanation for the beginning? Well, the most widely accepted theory is the big bang, which occurred about 13.8 billion years ago. The theory goes that there was a globule that was thousands of times smaller than a pinhead. It was hotter and denser than anything we know of or could dream of today. This globule exploded and from it came the universe(s) we know (or do not know) today. As well, time, space and matter also came from this explosion. This explosion is still expanding and therefore so is the creation of other stars, planets, etc.

A widely accepted idea is the "accelerating universe". Essentially, the universe is expanding at an increased rate as it continues. As someone who is more interested in biology, I liken it to that of a positive feedback system (such as blood clotting). Now I do not know the probability of such an event happening, but it has to be slim. That does not inherently deny that it happened though. The probability of my parents having me as a child is extremely slim as well, but probably better than that of the big bang. So for me it is easier to accept that such an event occurred, not by nature, but by a higher being/power starting the process. It is more viable that way.

Central
So what is the scientific explanation for after the beginning? You know, where did life come from? So through the big bang and other processes such as meteors hitting earths surface to bring water we get to the point of a lifeless ancient earth. The widely accepted scientific conclusion for the beginning of life is what they call "abiogenesis", or life coming from non-life. How did this happen? We do not know.

Scientists have come up with many different ideas as to how life on earth began. One of the more popular ideas for a long time was that through the composition of ancient earth's atmosphere (ammonia, methane, hydrogen, etc), an electrical discharge (probably lightening) and finally the water/water vapor, these three elements created what was called "primordial soup". This soup contained amino acids, which are the building blocks of proteins. From there we can logically conclude that those amino acids might eventually form a protein and continue from there until we get basic life. The problem is that the main experiment (Miller-Urey) that was used to prove this idea is now useless. It has been proven to not accurately represent what the atmosphere on ancient earth was really like:
"Is the 'prebiotic soup' theory a reasonable explanation for the emergence of life? Contemporary geoscientists tend to doubt that the primitive atmosphere had the highly reducing composition used by Miller in 1953." (Prebiotic Soup"Revisiting the Miller Experiment, Science, May 2, 2003, by Jeffrey Bada and Antonio Lazcano, pp. 745-746)

The more modern ideas are, well, ideas. They have no real basis other than that it could be possible. However, once again, I do not know the actual probability of these ideas occurring. One can assume that it is limitless given that the Miller-Urey idea (which now has a probability of 0), from what I have heard, had a probability of about 10^130 when it came to forming even the most basic protein. So, like before, I feel that it is more viable to conclude that a higher being/power possibly intervened in this process to make it occur, whatever that process may have been.

Going on to evolution, it is still an area I am researching. So I am not going to waste your time or embarrass myself by trying to break it down and I am sorry that I can be of no real assistance here. However, there are plenty of good sources on the internet for naturalist evolution, theistic evolution, and creation. I can link you to one source for all three at the bottom of this post.

Present
Look around you! You can witness the beautiful plants, animals, humans, architecture, etc. Whether these things are from evolution or creation, I cannot help but think that there had to be a designer. His process of design may have been evolution or it may have been creation, who knows. Let me present you with a scenario:

Let's say that you go to bed tonight and wake up in the middle of a vast desert. For as far as you can tell it is just flat sand. So what do you do? Naturally, you begin walking. You walk until your legs are about to give and then you see a black shape off in the distance. You quicken your pace and as you come closer you realize it is a prepossessing house. Once you actually reach the house, you see that it is clean and maintained. What are the conclusions you come to? Logically, they would be something like this:
1) someone built it
2) someone lives in it

So what do you do? Most people would simply walk up to the door and knock. But what if you get no response? Well, then you begin yelling "HEY! IS ANYONE IN THERE?!" Yet you get no response again. So you begin peeping through the windows and sauntering around the house trying to see if anyone is inside, but nothing. So you return to the front door and turn the knob only to find that it is locked. So what conclusions do you draw now?
1) someone built it
2) someone lives here but must have left

However, as you examine your second conclusion you notice that there are no footprints in the sand other than your own. There are also no tire tracks. So what is the explanation? You still know someone built it despite having no physical evidence other than the house being there. You also know that there is someone who maintains it despite there being no sign of that person ever existing. So what do you do now? Do you continue walking? Do you wait for someone to come? Do you break in and look around, perhaps raiding the place for food and drinks? Well, what someone does next is completely subjective and ultimately irrelevant to the point I am trying to make. You came to the conclusion that someone created the house, despite there being no other evidence than the product. You also came to the conclusion that someone maintained it despite there being no evidence for that either, other than the product. Similarly, those with faith in a higher being/power come to these same conclusions with the natural things around us.

I will give you an example of a truly magnificent piece of nature. Have you ever examined a bird's feather? Now I am not an ornithologist, but I do not need to be in order to appreciate the pulchritude of a bird's feather. Essentially, each wing is composed with the rachis, or the style/stalk of the feather in the center. Then attached to the rachis are the barbs. Attached to the barbs are the posterior and anterior barbules. The barpbules are connected by what are called "hooklets". It truly is beautiful and complex, but also completely random according the atheist.

Extra Reading

Big Bang
https://en.wikipedia.org...
https://en.wikipedia.org...

Abiogenesis
https://en.wikipedia.org...

Miller-Urey
https://en.wikipedia.org...
http://www.sciencemag.org...

Evolution
http://evolution.berkeley.edu... (natural)
http://www.theistic-evolution.com... (theistic)
https://answersingenesis.org... (young earth creationist)
http://www.reasons.org... (old earth creationist)

Bird's feather:
http://creationrevolution.com...
"The afternoon came down as imperceptibly as age comes to a happy man. A little gold entered into the sunlight. The bay became bluer and dimpled with shore-wind ripples. Those lonely fishermen who believe that the fish bite at high tide left their rocks, and their places were taken by others, who were convinced that the fish bite at low tide." (John Steinbeck; Tortilla Flat, 1935)
tstor
Posts: 1,467
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2015 1:44:53 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/7/2015 12:13:59 AM, Bluepaintcan123 wrote:
I would also like to add that you can read more about my own understandings of science as a Christian on this website:
http://www.reasons.org...

I hope that you continue to ask questions and do research. Usually an answer to an important question does not come easy.
"The afternoon came down as imperceptibly as age comes to a happy man. A little gold entered into the sunlight. The bay became bluer and dimpled with shore-wind ripples. Those lonely fishermen who believe that the fish bite at high tide left their rocks, and their places were taken by others, who were convinced that the fish bite at low tide." (John Steinbeck; Tortilla Flat, 1935)
b_sorelson
Posts: 78
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2015 2:01:53 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/7/2015 1:44:53 AM, tstor wrote:
At 9/7/2015 12:13:59 AM, Bluepaintcan123 wrote:
I would also like to add that you can read more about my own understandings of science as a Christian on this website:
http://www.reasons.org...

I hope that you continue to ask questions and do research. Usually an answer to an important question does not come easy. : :

Jesus warned God's future believers to not go with someone who points to a place to find God. That's because they are false prophets. A true prophet speaks for God.
tstor
Posts: 1,467
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2015 2:02:37 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/7/2015 2:01:53 AM, b_sorelson wrote:

Jesus warned God's future believers to not go with someone who points to a place to find God. That's because they are false prophets. A true prophet speaks for God.
The post had nothing to do with Christianity.
"The afternoon came down as imperceptibly as age comes to a happy man. A little gold entered into the sunlight. The bay became bluer and dimpled with shore-wind ripples. Those lonely fishermen who believe that the fish bite at high tide left their rocks, and their places were taken by others, who were convinced that the fish bite at low tide." (John Steinbeck; Tortilla Flat, 1935)
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2015 2:05:59 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/7/2015 1:21:27 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 12:49:23 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 9/7/2015 12:13:59 AM, Bluepaintcan123 wrote:
When I say good arguments for God, I don't mean evidence from the bible (or torah) or anything that conflicts with science. I want to know if there is any good reason for me to consider the belief in God without it conflicting with what we know is fact.
Despite some estimated 4,000 religions and countless theological claims, claims of metaphysical intervention have consistently failed to produce reliable, independent confirmation of specifics, while claims of creation have consistently failed to predict the time-frames, processes and products that actually occurred in cosmogenesis, terragenesis and biogenesis with any accuracy.
From this consistent failure we can conclude that these claims do not arise from any kind of revealed insight or even observation, but from ignorant imagination and unfounded superstition recognised to be innate to human psychology.
That magical thinking and cultural effects explain these wild claims is beyond reasonable doubt. There's no further point entertaining claims of revelation and miracles without first seeing rigorous, compelling and independently-confirmed evidence of their accuracy.

I have 36 years of experience with the Creator of mans' experiences who had me write thousands of pages and speak millions of words to learn about the past, present and future. He even taught me how he created everything. These thoughts that I witnessed, are our true reality.
Your subjective reality, so long as you remain ignorant of any other. Which, from your posted thought to date, might be quite a while.

You can chalk this up to magical thinking if you want
Thank you, David. I have and shall.

you will have to put a bullet into my head before you could convince me that our creator doesn't exist.
I don't need to interrupt your mind's functions. I think you're doing that perfectly well yourself.

We are living in a simulation as characters who are not real at all. Our creator of this simulation and our experiences within this simulation is outside of his program called Eternal Life.
Oh gosh. Ancient Vedic dogma about maya now given mangled Information Age language and tucked under Christian doctrine to make it more appealing! Gee, that's not suddenly getting popular, is it?

There happens to be several scientists and thousands of other people I've met in the past four years who believe their experiences are nothing but a dream or simulation.
That might be true, but believing it still can't make it more than conjecture, and even if true, believing it wouldn't give you any authority to pronounce how it works.

Now they have a witness of our Creator's mind ( thoughts ) to listen to and learn the details of how everything in our experiences were created.
Because the world isn't already full of people thinking they can do that -- all of them inconsistent and largely incoherent?

And what can you do that they can't, David? I'm afraid that getting science wrong, and misrepresenting conjecture as fact isn't impressive -- they all do that.

Since you don't believe my testimonies from the mind ( thoughts ) of our Creator, you will not learn about the future or how we were created.
I won't learn your account of it? Oh dear. Please punish me more then, and also spare me further mangled accounts of science. :)

at least a few scientists are getting closer to this fact. Quantum physics and the study of consciousness is leading them to it.
No, it's really not. QM is doing some cool stuff with mass and waves, while psychology and neuroscience are doing some great work with the soup of function, subjectivity and self-delusion that is the human mind.

But pretty much anything Deepak Chopra says about either of those things is false, and I'm afraid that your ignorant, fatuous guff is no better.
b_sorelson
Posts: 78
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2015 2:08:20 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/7/2015 2:02:37 AM, tstor wrote:
At 9/7/2015 2:01:53 AM, b_sorelson wrote:

Jesus warned God's future believers to not go with someone who points to a place to find God. That's because they are false prophets. A true prophet speaks for God.
The post had nothing to do with Christianity. : :

LOL !!!!! You are not a very good listener are you?
tstor
Posts: 1,467
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2015 2:09:55 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/7/2015 2:08:20 AM, b_sorelson wrote:

LOL !!!!! You are not a very good listener are you?
I understood what you said fully, but I am saying that it has no relevance.
"The afternoon came down as imperceptibly as age comes to a happy man. A little gold entered into the sunlight. The bay became bluer and dimpled with shore-wind ripples. Those lonely fishermen who believe that the fish bite at high tide left their rocks, and their places were taken by others, who were convinced that the fish bite at low tide." (John Steinbeck; Tortilla Flat, 1935)
Harikrish
Posts: 11,010
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2015 2:15:40 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/7/2015 1:38:50 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 1:35:17 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 9/7/2015 12:47:18 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 12:13:59 AM, Bluepaintcan123 wrote:
When I say good arguments for God, I don't mean evidence from the bible (or torah) or anything that conflicts with science. I want to know if there is any good reason for me to consider the belief in God without it conflicting with what we know is fact.
Whenever I search this on the internet I always get things that could be dismantled instantly and easily. Since I know that there are smarter religious people with better arguments than that, I ask that you challenge my beliefs in Atheism and tell me your best argument for Theism.
Thanks for the help! : :

Science has always been concerned with visible objects as being proof for our existence but when they got involved in quantum physics, it confused them. If evolution is true, then where did our thoughts ( consciousness ) come from?

Consciousness is a big problem in the study of visible objects because they don't appear to come from the same source. If they eventually come to the conclusion that visible objects and consciousness came from the same source, then they will have to accept the fact that there must be a creator.

Quantum physics has shown that particles are illusive and become waves when not observed or measured. This has proven that waves are where visible objects come from so when they figure out that consciousness comes from this same source, then they will have to accept the fact that waves are nothing but information.

Where did this information come from?


Scientists have it backwards. Waves were spoken into a simulation program called Eternal Life. From these waves come particles that can be observed and measured but once they are not observed or measured, they remain as waves.

You have no idea who our Creator is or what He has revealed to me. You are the worst listener I have ever met.

Particles are in a superposition state or indeterminate state until measured. How does the simulation program process particles that are in an indeterminate state?
You say waves are spoken into a simulation program called Eternal Life. How does having this process revealed to you help you? You have been a homeless beggar living in a sleeping bag outside a church for the last several years.
It is like someone shouting E=MC (squared) . in your ear. How does knowing that help you?
b_sorelson
Posts: 78
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2015 2:23:30 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/7/2015 2:05:59 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 9/7/2015 1:21:27 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 12:49:23 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 9/7/2015 12:13:59 AM, Bluepaintcan123 wrote:
When I say good arguments for God, I don't mean evidence from the bible (or torah) or anything that conflicts with science. I want to know if there is any good reason for me to consider the belief in God without it conflicting with what we know is fact.
Despite some estimated 4,000 religions and countless theological claims, claims of metaphysical intervention have consistently failed to produce reliable, independent confirmation of specifics, while claims of creation have consistently failed to predict the time-frames, processes and products that actually occurred in cosmogenesis, terragenesis and biogenesis with any accuracy.
From this consistent failure we can conclude that these claims do not arise from any kind of revealed insight or even observation, but from ignorant imagination and unfounded superstition recognised to be innate to human psychology.
That magical thinking and cultural effects explain these wild claims is beyond reasonable doubt. There's no further point entertaining claims of revelation and miracles without first seeing rigorous, compelling and independently-confirmed evidence of their accuracy.

I have 36 years of experience with the Creator of mans' experiences who had me write thousands of pages and speak millions of words to learn about the past, present and future. He even taught me how he created everything. These thoughts that I witnessed, are our true reality.
Your subjective reality, so long as you remain ignorant of any other. Which, from your posted thought to date, might be quite a while.

My experiences with our Creator are all objective. Your judgment towards my experiences are subjective.

You can chalk this up to magical thinking if you want
Thank you, David. I have and shall.

you will have to put a bullet into my head before you could convince me that our creator doesn't exist.
I don't need to interrupt your mind's functions. I think you're doing that perfectly well yourself.

My mind is the mind of our Creator. The mind that I used to believe in is no longer an influence over the mind of our Creator.

We are living in a simulation as characters who are not real at all. Our creator of this simulation and our experiences within this simulation is outside of his program called Eternal Life.
Oh gosh. Ancient Vedic dogma about maya now given mangled Information Age language and tucked under Christian doctrine to make it more appealing! Gee, that's not suddenly getting popular, is it?

There have been many cultures of the past that believed we're living in a dream. If they were living today, they would love to hear me speak to them from the mind of our Creator.

There happens to be several scientists and thousands of other people I've met in the past four years who believe their experiences are nothing but a dream or simulation.
That might be true, but believing it still can't make it more than conjecture, and even if true, believing it wouldn't give you any authority to pronounce how it works.

Belief is all that God's people have. Why should I believe your thoughts over someone else's thoughts? I don't need to believe in anyone's thoughts today because I understand where all thoughts come from.

Now they have a witness of our Creator's mind ( thoughts ) to listen to and learn the details of how everything in our experiences were created.
Because the world isn't already full of people thinking they can do that -- all of them inconsistent and largely incoherent?

The word I speak for our Creator is consistent forever. The words that come from this world are not to be trusted.

And what can you do that they can't, David? I'm afraid that getting science wrong, and misrepresenting conjecture as fact isn't impressive -- they all do that.

Since you don't believe my testimonies from the mind ( thoughts ) of our Creator, you will not learn about the future or how we were created.
I won't learn your account of it? Oh dear. Please punish me more then, and also spare me further mangled accounts of science. :)

All you can do is believe or not believe my experiences. I don't care either way. However, I do know you will believe in the next age.

at least a few scientists are getting closer to this fact. Quantum physics and the study of consciousness is leading them to it.
No, it's really not. QM is doing some cool stuff with mass and waves, while psychology and neuroscience are doing some great work with the soup of function, subjectivity and self-delusion that is the human mind.

Of course there are many skeptical scientists but many of them will learn that everything we experience comes from invisible waves. There's no such thing as real matter, time or space. They're all illusions in our experiences.

But pretty much anything Deepak Chopra says about either of those things is false, and I'm afraid that your ignorant, fatuous guff is no better. : :

I could care less what Deepak Chopra says. He's as deluded as anyone else is in this world. Our Creator is a much better teacher than any of His people.
Harikrish
Posts: 11,010
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2015 2:28:42 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/7/2015 2:23:30 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 2:05:59 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 9/7/2015 1:21:27 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 12:49:23 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 9/7/2015 12:13:59 AM, Bluepaintcan123 wrote:
When I say good arguments for God, I don't mean evidence from the bible (or torah) or anything that conflicts with science. I want to know if there is any good reason for me to consider the belief in God without it conflicting with what we know is fact.
Despite some estimated 4,000 religions and countless theological claims, claims of metaphysical intervention have consistently failed to produce reliable, independent confirmation of specifics, while claims of creation have consistently failed to predict the time-frames, processes and products that actually occurred in cosmogenesis, terragenesis and biogenesis with any accuracy.
From this consistent failure we can conclude that these claims do not arise from any kind of revealed insight or even observation, but from ignorant imagination and unfounded superstition recognised to be innate to human psychology.
That magical thinking and cultural effects explain these wild claims is beyond reasonable doubt. There's no further point entertaining claims of revelation and miracles without first seeing rigorous, compelling and independently-confirmed evidence of their accuracy.

I have 36 years of experience with the Creator of mans' experiences who had me write thousands of pages and speak millions of words to learn about the past, present and future. He even taught me how he created everything. These thoughts that I witnessed, are our true reality.
Your subjective reality, so long as you remain ignorant of any other. Which, from your posted thought to date, might be quite a while.

My experiences with our Creator are all objective. Your judgment towards my experiences are subjective.

You can chalk this up to magical thinking if you want
Thank you, David. I have and shall.

you will have to put a bullet into my head before you could convince me that our creator doesn't exist.
I don't need to interrupt your mind's functions. I think you're doing that perfectly well yourself.

My mind is the mind of our Creator. The mind that I used to believe in is no longer an influence over the mind of our Creator.

We are living in a simulation as characters who are not real at all. Our creator of this simulation and our experiences within this simulation is outside of his program called Eternal Life.
Oh gosh. Ancient Vedic dogma about maya now given mangled Information Age language and tucked under Christian doctrine to make it more appealing! Gee, that's not suddenly getting popular, is it?

There have been many cultures of the past that believed we're living in a dream. If they were living today, they would love to hear me speak to them from the mind of our Creator.

There happens to be several scientists and thousands of other people I've met in the past four years who believe their experiences are nothing but a dream or simulation.
That might be true, but believing it still can't make it more than conjecture, and even if true, believing it wouldn't give you any authority to pronounce how it works.

Belief is all that God's people have. Why should I believe your thoughts over someone else's thoughts? I don't need to believe in anyone's thoughts today because I understand where all thoughts come from.

Now they have a witness of our Creator's mind ( thoughts ) to listen to and learn the details of how everything in our experiences were created.
Because the world isn't already full of people thinking they can do that -- all of them inconsistent and largely incoherent?

The word I speak for our Creator is consistent forever. The words that come from this world are not to be trusted.

And what can you do that they can't, David? I'm afraid that getting science wrong, and misrepresenting conjecture as fact isn't impressive -- they all do that.

Since you don't believe my testimonies from the mind ( thoughts ) of our Creator, you will not learn about the future or how we were created.
I won't learn your account of it? Oh dear. Please punish me more then, and also spare me further mangled accounts of science. :)

All you can do is believe or not believe my experiences. I don't care either way. However, I do know you will believe in the next age.

at least a few scientists are getting closer to this fact. Quantum physics and the study of consciousness is leading them to it.
No, it's really not. QM is doing some cool stuff with mass and waves, while psychology and neuroscience are doing some great work with the soup of function, subjectivity and self-delusion that is the human mind.

Of course there are many skeptical scientists but many of them will learn that everything we experience comes from invisible waves. There's no such thing as real matter, time or space. They're all illusions in our experiences.

But pretty much anything Deepak Chopra says about either of those things is false, and I'm afraid that your ignorant, fatuous guff is no better. : :

I could care less what Deepak Chopra says. He's as deluded as anyone else is in this world. Our Creator is a much better teacher than any of His people.

So how come He has kept you so dumb and destitute? You have been a homeless beggar for the last 5 years. Deepak Chopra is a multimillionaire. His religion works for him.
b_sorelson
Posts: 78
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2015 2:30:46 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/7/2015 2:09:55 AM, tstor wrote:
At 9/7/2015 2:08:20 AM, b_sorelson wrote:

LOL !!!!! You are not a very good listener are you?
I understood what you said fully, but I am saying that it has no relevance. : :

You are trying to teach someone without any authority from our Creator. If you had authority, you would be speaking for Him and not have to guide someone to a Christian biased website where nothing but information from the Beast can be read.
b_sorelson
Posts: 78
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2015 2:36:32 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/7/2015 2:15:40 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 9/7/2015 1:38:50 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 1:35:17 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 9/7/2015 12:47:18 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 12:13:59 AM, Bluepaintcan123 wrote:
When I say good arguments for God, I don't mean evidence from the bible (or torah) or anything that conflicts with science. I want to know if there is any good reason for me to consider the belief in God without it conflicting with what we know is fact.
Whenever I search this on the internet I always get things that could be dismantled instantly and easily. Since I know that there are smarter religious people with better arguments than that, I ask that you challenge my beliefs in Atheism and tell me your best argument for Theism.
Thanks for the help! : :

Science has always been concerned with visible objects as being proof for our existence but when they got involved in quantum physics, it confused them. If evolution is true, then where did our thoughts ( consciousness ) come from?

Consciousness is a big problem in the study of visible objects because they don't appear to come from the same source. If they eventually come to the conclusion that visible objects and consciousness came from the same source, then they will have to accept the fact that there must be a creator.

Quantum physics has shown that particles are illusive and become waves when not observed or measured. This has proven that waves are where visible objects come from so when they figure out that consciousness comes from this same source, then they will have to accept the fact that waves are nothing but information.

Where did this information come from?


Scientists have it backwards. Waves were spoken into a simulation program called Eternal Life. From these waves come particles that can be observed and measured but once they are not observed or measured, they remain as waves.

You have no idea who our Creator is or what He has revealed to me. You are the worst listener I have ever met.

Particles are in a superposition state or indeterminate state until measured. How does the simulation program process particles that are in an indeterminate state? : :

Particles are like pixels in a computer program called Photoshop. When measured or observed in the correct patterns and size, a bigger object can be observed. God knows exactly how an observer has to see an image so He makes sure those particles are sized correctly. However, when you're on LSD or some other kind of drugs, those particles can cause some pretty crazy patterns to make those visible objects appear much differently.

You say waves are spoken into a simulation program called Eternal Life. How does having this process revealed to you help you? You have been a homeless beggar living in a sleeping bag outside a church for the last several years.
It is like someone shouting E=MC (squared) . in your ear. How does knowing that help you? : :

You are still believing that Brad is something real. When you start believing in the tree of life, then you will understand who I AM.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2015 2:43:47 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/7/2015 2:23:30 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 2:05:59 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 9/7/2015 1:21:27 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 12:49:23 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 9/7/2015 12:13:59 AM, Bluepaintcan123 wrote:
When I say good arguments for God, I don't mean evidence from the bible (or torah) or anything that conflicts with science. I want to know if there is any good reason for me to consider the belief in God without it conflicting with what we know is fact.
Despite some estimated 4,000 religions and countless theological claims, claims of metaphysical intervention have consistently failed to produce reliable, independent confirmation of specifics, while claims of creation have consistently failed to predict the time-frames, processes and products that actually occurred in cosmogenesis, terragenesis and biogenesis with any accuracy.
From this consistent failure we can conclude that these claims do not arise from any kind of revealed insight or even observation, but from ignorant imagination and unfounded superstition recognised to be innate to human psychology.
That magical thinking and cultural effects explain these wild claims is beyond reasonable doubt. There's no further point entertaining claims of revelation and miracles without first seeing rigorous, compelling and independently-confirmed evidence of their accuracy.

I have 36 years of experience with the Creator of mans' experiences who had me write thousands of pages and speak millions of words to learn about the past, present and future. He even taught me how he created everything. These thoughts that I witnessed, are our true reality.
Your subjective reality, so long as you remain ignorant of any other. Which, from your posted thought to date, might be quite a while.

My experiences with our Creator are all objective. Your judgment towards my experiences are subjective.

Sorry, BoG. I've been carrying on parallel conversations with you and David. I think I may have those conversations confused. :)
b_sorelson
Posts: 78
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2015 3:13:00 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/7/2015 2:28:42 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 9/7/2015 2:23:30 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 2:05:59 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 9/7/2015 1:21:27 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 12:49:23 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 9/7/2015 12:13:59 AM, Bluepaintcan123 wrote:
When I say good arguments for God, I don't mean evidence from the bible (or torah) or anything that conflicts with science. I want to know if there is any good reason for me to consider the belief in God without it conflicting with what we know is fact.
Despite some estimated 4,000 religions and countless theological claims, claims of metaphysical intervention have consistently failed to produce reliable, independent confirmation of specifics, while claims of creation have consistently failed to predict the time-frames, processes and products that actually occurred in cosmogenesis, terragenesis and biogenesis with any accuracy.
From this consistent failure we can conclude that these claims do not arise from any kind of revealed insight or even observation, but from ignorant imagination and unfounded superstition recognised to be innate to human psychology.
That magical thinking and cultural effects explain these wild claims is beyond reasonable doubt. There's no further point entertaining claims of revelation and miracles without first seeing rigorous, compelling and independently-confirmed evidence of their accuracy.

I have 36 years of experience with the Creator of mans' experiences who had me write thousands of pages and speak millions of words to learn about the past, present and future. He even taught me how he created everything. These thoughts that I witnessed, are our true reality.
Your subjective reality, so long as you remain ignorant of any other. Which, from your posted thought to date, might be quite a while.

My experiences with our Creator are all objective. Your judgment towards my experiences are subjective.

You can chalk this up to magical thinking if you want
Thank you, David. I have and shall.

you will have to put a bullet into my head before you could convince me that our creator doesn't exist.
I don't need to interrupt your mind's functions. I think you're doing that perfectly well yourself.

My mind is the mind of our Creator. The mind that I used to believe in is no longer an influence over the mind of our Creator.

We are living in a simulation as characters who are not real at all. Our creator of this simulation and our experiences within this simulation is outside of his program called Eternal Life.
Oh gosh. Ancient Vedic dogma about maya now given mangled Information Age language and tucked under Christian doctrine to make it more appealing! Gee, that's not suddenly getting popular, is it?

There have been many cultures of the past that believed we're living in a dream. If they were living today, they would love to hear me speak to them from the mind of our Creator.

There happens to be several scientists and thousands of other people I've met in the past four years who believe their experiences are nothing but a dream or simulation.
That might be true, but believing it still can't make it more than conjecture, and even if true, believing it wouldn't give you any authority to pronounce how it works.

Belief is all that God's people have. Why should I believe your thoughts over someone else's thoughts? I don't need to believe in anyone's thoughts today because I understand where all thoughts come from.

Now they have a witness of our Creator's mind ( thoughts ) to listen to and learn the details of how everything in our experiences were created.
Because the world isn't already full of people thinking they can do that -- all of them inconsistent and largely incoherent?

The word I speak for our Creator is consistent forever. The words that come from this world are not to be trusted.

And what can you do that they can't, David? I'm afraid that getting science wrong, and misrepresenting conjecture as fact isn't impressive -- they all do that.

Since you don't believe my testimonies from the mind ( thoughts ) of our Creator, you will not learn about the future or how we were created.
I won't learn your account of it? Oh dear. Please punish me more then, and also spare me further mangled accounts of science. :)

All you can do is believe or not believe my experiences. I don't care either way. However, I do know you will believe in the next age.

at least a few scientists are getting closer to this fact. Quantum physics and the study of consciousness is leading them to it.
No, it's really not. QM is doing some cool stuff with mass and waves, while psychology and neuroscience are doing some great work with the soup of function, subjectivity and self-delusion that is the human mind.

Of course there are many skeptical scientists but many of them will learn that everything we experience comes from invisible waves. There's no such thing as real matter, time or space. They're all illusions in our experiences.

But pretty much anything Deepak Chopra says about either of those things is false, and I'm afraid that your ignorant, fatuous guff is no better. : :

I could care less what Deepak Chopra says. He's as deluded as anyone else is in this world. Our Creator is a much better teacher than any of His people.

So how come He has kept you so dumb and destitute? You have been a homeless beggar for the last 5 years. Deepak Chopra is a multimillionaire. His religion works for him. : :

Then you better listen to Deepak Chopra and learn how to become a multimillionare. He certainly won't lead you to the Truth.
b_sorelson
Posts: 78
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2015 3:14:35 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/7/2015 2:43:47 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 9/7/2015 2:23:30 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 2:05:59 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 9/7/2015 1:21:27 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 12:49:23 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 9/7/2015 12:13:59 AM, Bluepaintcan123 wrote:
When I say good arguments for God, I don't mean evidence from the bible (or torah) or anything that conflicts with science. I want to know if there is any good reason for me to consider the belief in God without it conflicting with what we know is fact.
Despite some estimated 4,000 religions and countless theological claims, claims of metaphysical intervention have consistently failed to produce reliable, independent confirmation of specifics, while claims of creation have consistently failed to predict the time-frames, processes and products that actually occurred in cosmogenesis, terragenesis and biogenesis with any accuracy.
From this consistent failure we can conclude that these claims do not arise from any kind of revealed insight or even observation, but from ignorant imagination and unfounded superstition recognised to be innate to human psychology.
That magical thinking and cultural effects explain these wild claims is beyond reasonable doubt. There's no further point entertaining claims of revelation and miracles without first seeing rigorous, compelling and independently-confirmed evidence of their accuracy.

I have 36 years of experience with the Creator of mans' experiences who had me write thousands of pages and speak millions of words to learn about the past, present and future. He even taught me how he created everything. These thoughts that I witnessed, are our true reality.
Your subjective reality, so long as you remain ignorant of any other. Which, from your posted thought to date, might be quite a while.

My experiences with our Creator are all objective. Your judgment towards my experiences are subjective.

Sorry, BoG. I've been carrying on parallel conversations with you and David. I think I may have those conversations confused. :) : :

That's okay my friend. David will become a friend of mine in the future, too. He doesn't understand that yet.
Harikrish
Posts: 11,010
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2015 3:37:41 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/7/2015 3:13:00 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 2:28:42 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 9/7/2015 2:23:30 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 2:05:59 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 9/7/2015 1:21:27 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 12:49:23 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 9/7/2015 12:13:59 AM, Bluepaintcan123 wrote:
When I say good arguments for God, I don't mean evidence from the bible (or torah) or anything that conflicts with science. I want to know if there is any good reason for me to consider the belief in God without it conflicting with what we know is fact.
Despite some estimated 4,000 religions and countless theological claims, claims of metaphysical intervention have consistently failed to produce reliable, independent confirmation of specifics, while claims of creation have consistently failed to predict the time-frames, processes and products that actually occurred in cosmogenesis, terragenesis and biogenesis with any accuracy.
From this consistent failure we can conclude that these claims do not arise from any kind of revealed insight or even observation, but from ignorant imagination and unfounded superstition recognised to be innate to human psychology.
That magical thinking and cultural effects explain these wild claims is beyond reasonable doubt. There's no further point entertaining claims of revelation and miracles without first seeing rigorous, compelling and independently-confirmed evidence of their accuracy.

I have 36 years of experience with the Creator of mans' experiences who had me write thousands of pages and speak millions of words to learn about the past, present and future. He even taught me how he created everything. These thoughts that I witnessed, are our true reality.
Your subjective reality, so long as you remain ignorant of any other. Which, from your posted thought to date, might be quite a while.

My experiences with our Creator are all objective. Your judgment towards my experiences are subjective.

You can chalk this up to magical thinking if you want
Thank you, David. I have and shall.

you will have to put a bullet into my head before you could convince me that our creator doesn't exist.
I don't need to interrupt your mind's functions. I think you're doing that perfectly well yourself.

My mind is the mind of our Creator. The mind that I used to believe in is no longer an influence over the mind of our Creator.

We are living in a simulation as characters who are not real at all. Our creator of this simulation and our experiences within this simulation is outside of his program called Eternal Life.
Oh gosh. Ancient Vedic dogma about maya now given mangled Information Age language and tucked under Christian doctrine to make it more appealing! Gee, that's not suddenly getting popular, is it?

There have been many cultures of the past that believed we're living in a dream. If they were living today, they would love to hear me speak to them from the mind of our Creator.

There happens to be several scientists and thousands of other people I've met in the past four years who believe their experiences are nothing but a dream or simulation.
That might be true, but believing it still can't make it more than conjecture, and even if true, believing it wouldn't give you any authority to pronounce how it works.

Belief is all that God's people have. Why should I believe your thoughts over someone else's thoughts? I don't need to believe in anyone's thoughts today because I understand where all thoughts come from.

Now they have a witness of our Creator's mind ( thoughts ) to listen to and learn the details of how everything in our experiences were created.
Because the world isn't already full of people thinking they can do that -- all of them inconsistent and largely incoherent?

The word I speak for our Creator is consistent forever. The words that come from this world are not to be trusted.

And what can you do that they can't, David? I'm afraid that getting science wrong, and misrepresenting conjecture as fact isn't impressive -- they all do that.

Since you don't believe my testimonies from the mind ( thoughts ) of our Creator, you will not learn about the future or how we were created.
I won't learn your account of it? Oh dear. Please punish me more then, and also spare me further mangled accounts of science. :)

All you can do is believe or not believe my experiences. I don't care either way. However, I do know you will believe in the next age.

at least a few scientists are getting closer to this fact. Quantum physics and the study of consciousness is leading them to it.
No, it's really not. QM is doing some cool stuff with mass and waves, while psychology and neuroscience are doing some great work with the soup of function, subjectivity and self-delusion that is the human mind.

Of course there are many skeptical scientists but many of them will learn that everything we experience comes from invisible waves. There's no such thing as real matter, time or space. They're all illusions in our experiences.

But pretty much anything Deepak Chopra says about either of those things is false, and I'm afraid that your ignorant, fatuous guff is no better. : :

I could care less what Deepak Chopra says. He's as deluded as anyone else is in this world. Our Creator is a much better teacher than any of His people.

So how come He has kept you so dumb and destitute? You have been a homeless beggar for the last 5 years. Deepak Chopra is a multimillionaire. His religion works for him. : :

Then you better listen to Deepak Chopra and learn how to become a multimillionare. He certainly won't lead you to the Truth.

Aren't you the homeless beggar who was asking for donations and running around with a whiteboard in the streets of Campbell?
b_sorelson
Posts: 78
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2015 3:41:37 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/7/2015 3:37:41 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 9/7/2015 3:13:00 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 2:28:42 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 9/7/2015 2:23:30 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 2:05:59 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 9/7/2015 1:21:27 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 12:49:23 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 9/7/2015 12:13:59 AM, Bluepaintcan123 wrote:
When I say good arguments for God, I don't mean evidence from the bible (or torah) or anything that conflicts with science. I want to know if there is any good reason for me to consider the belief in God without it conflicting with what we know is fact.
Despite some estimated 4,000 religions and countless theological claims, claims of metaphysical intervention have consistently failed to produce reliable, independent confirmation of specifics, while claims of creation have consistently failed to predict the time-frames, processes and products that actually occurred in cosmogenesis, terragenesis and biogenesis with any accuracy.
From this consistent failure we can conclude that these claims do not arise from any kind of revealed insight or even observation, but from ignorant imagination and unfounded superstition recognised to be innate to human psychology.
That magical thinking and cultural effects explain these wild claims is beyond reasonable doubt. There's no further point entertaining claims of revelation and miracles without first seeing rigorous, compelling and independently-confirmed evidence of their accuracy.

I have 36 years of experience with the Creator of mans' experiences who had me write thousands of pages and speak millions of words to learn about the past, present and future. He even taught me how he created everything. These thoughts that I witnessed, are our true reality.
Your subjective reality, so long as you remain ignorant of any other. Which, from your posted thought to date, might be quite a while.

My experiences with our Creator are all objective. Your judgment towards my experiences are subjective.

You can chalk this up to magical thinking if you want
Thank you, David. I have and shall.

you will have to put a bullet into my head before you could convince me that our creator doesn't exist.
I don't need to interrupt your mind's functions. I think you're doing that perfectly well yourself.

My mind is the mind of our Creator. The mind that I used to believe in is no longer an influence over the mind of our Creator.

We are living in a simulation as characters who are not real at all. Our creator of this simulation and our experiences within this simulation is outside of his program called Eternal Life.
Oh gosh. Ancient Vedic dogma about maya now given mangled Information Age language and tucked under Christian doctrine to make it more appealing! Gee, that's not suddenly getting popular, is it?

There have been many cultures of the past that believed we're living in a dream. If they were living today, they would love to hear me speak to them from the mind of our Creator.

There happens to be several scientists and thousands of other people I've met in the past four years who believe their experiences are nothing but a dream or simulation.
That might be true, but believing it still can't make it more than conjecture, and even if true, believing it wouldn't give you any authority to pronounce how it works.

Belief is all that God's people have. Why should I believe your thoughts over someone else's thoughts? I don't need to believe in anyone's thoughts today because I understand where all thoughts come from.

Now they have a witness of our Creator's mind ( thoughts ) to listen to and learn the details of how everything in our experiences were created.
Because the world isn't already full of people thinking they can do that -- all of them inconsistent and largely incoherent?

The word I speak for our Creator is consistent forever. The words that come from this world are not to be trusted.

And what can you do that they can't, David? I'm afraid that getting science wrong, and misrepresenting conjecture as fact isn't impressive -- they all do that.

Since you don't believe my testimonies from the mind ( thoughts ) of our Creator, you will not learn about the future or how we were created.
I won't learn your account of it? Oh dear. Please punish me more then, and also spare me further mangled accounts of science. :)

All you can do is believe or not believe my experiences. I don't care either way. However, I do know you will believe in the next age.

at least a few scientists are getting closer to this fact. Quantum physics and the study of consciousness is leading them to it.
No, it's really not. QM is doing some cool stuff with mass and waves, while psychology and neuroscience are doing some great work with the soup of function, subjectivity and self-delusion that is the human mind.

Of course there are many skeptical scientists but many of them will learn that everything we experience comes from invisible waves. There's no such thing as real matter, time or space. They're all illusions in our experiences.

But pretty much anything Deepak Chopra says about either of those things is false, and I'm afraid that your ignorant, fatuous guff is no better. : :

I could care less what Deepak Chopra says. He's as deluded as anyone else is in this world. Our Creator is a much better teacher than any of His people.

So how come He has kept you so dumb and destitute? You have been a homeless beggar for the last 5 years. Deepak Chopra is a multimillionaire. His religion works for him. : :

Then you better listen to Deepak Chopra and learn how to become a multimillionare. He certainly won't lead you to the Truth.

Aren't you the homeless beggar who was asking for donations and running around with a whiteboard in the streets of Campbell? : :

You must be talking about the flesh that's writing this post, which is only an illusion that I AM using to teach My people who they are. I could care less if he was a homeless beggar running around with a whiteboard. He will be killed soon so I won't ever see him again.
Sooner
Posts: 1,012
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2015 3:47:48 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/7/2015 1:35:17 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 9/7/2015 12:47:18 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 12:13:59 AM, Bluepaintcan123 wrote:
When I say good arguments for God, I don't mean evidence from the bible (or torah) or anything that conflicts with science. I want to know if there is any good reason for me to consider the belief in God without it conflicting with what we know is fact.
Whenever I search this on the internet I always get things that could be dismantled instantly and easily. Since I know that there are smarter religious people with better arguments than that, I ask that you challenge my beliefs in Atheism and tell me your best argument for Theism.
Thanks for the help! : :

Science has always been concerned with visible objects as being proof for our existence but when they got involved in quantum physics, it confused them. If evolution is true, then where did our thoughts ( consciousness ) come from?

Consciousness is a big problem in the study of visible objects because they don't appear to come from the same source. If they eventually come to the conclusion that visible objects and consciousness came from the same source, then they will have to accept the fact that there must be a creator.

Quantum physics has shown that particles are illusive and become waves when not observed or measured. This has proven that waves are where visible objects come from so when they figure out that consciousness comes from this same source, then they will have to accept the fact that waves are nothing but information.

Where did this information come from?

You got it backward Brad. Particles behave like waves when observed/measured. Waves are energy fields not information. Your diminished mental capacity just hit a new low.

I quote Harikrish:
"Adam ate the apple"
-(No "apple" is mentioned in Genesis or the Bible.) (Google it)

"America leads the world in human trafficking."
-(Or it's not even on the list)(google it)
Ignoring problems doesn't make them go away.
Harikrish
Posts: 11,010
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2015 3:49:04 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/7/2015 3:41:37 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 3:37:41 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 9/7/2015 3:13:00 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 2:28:42 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 9/7/2015 2:23:30 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 2:05:59 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 9/7/2015 1:21:27 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 12:49:23 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 9/7/2015 12:13:59 AM, Bluepaintcan123 wrote:
When I say good arguments for God, I don't mean evidence from the bible (or torah) or anything that conflicts with science. I want to know if there is any good reason for me to consider the belief in God without it conflicting with what we know is fact.
Despite some estimated 4,000 religions and countless theological claims, claims of metaphysical intervention have consistently failed to produce reliable, independent confirmation of specifics, while claims of creation have consistently failed to predict the time-frames, processes and products that actually occurred in cosmogenesis, terragenesis and biogenesis with any accuracy.
From this consistent failure we can conclude that these claims do not arise from any kind of revealed insight or even observation, but from ignorant imagination and unfounded superstition recognised to be innate to human psychology.
That magical thinking and cultural effects explain these wild claims is beyond reasonable doubt. There's no further point entertaining claims of revelation and miracles without first seeing rigorous, compelling and independently-confirmed evidence of their accuracy.

I have 36 years of experience with the Creator of mans' experiences who had me write thousands of pages and speak millions of words to learn about the past, present and future. He even taught me how he created everything. These thoughts that I witnessed, are our true reality.
Your subjective reality, so long as you remain ignorant of any other. Which, from your posted thought to date, might be quite a while.

My experiences with our Creator are all objective. Your judgment towards my experiences are subjective.

You can chalk this up to magical thinking if you want
Thank you, David. I have and shall.

you will have to put a bullet into my head before you could convince me that our creator doesn't exist.
I don't need to interrupt your mind's functions. I think you're doing that perfectly well yourself.

My mind is the mind of our Creator. The mind that I used to believe in is no longer an influence over the mind of our Creator.

We are living in a simulation as characters who are not real at all. Our creator of this simulation and our experiences within this simulation is outside of his program called Eternal Life.
Oh gosh. Ancient Vedic dogma about maya now given mangled Information Age language and tucked under Christian doctrine to make it more appealing! Gee, that's not suddenly getting popular, is it?

There have been many cultures of the past that believed we're living in a dream. If they were living today, they would love to hear me speak to them from the mind of our Creator.

There happens to be several scientists and thousands of other people I've met in the past four years who believe their experiences are nothing but a dream or simulation.
That might be true, but believing it still can't make it more than conjecture, and even if true, believing it wouldn't give you any authority to pronounce how it works.

Belief is all that God's people have. Why should I believe your thoughts over someone else's thoughts? I don't need to believe in anyone's thoughts today because I understand where all thoughts come from.

Now they have a witness of our Creator's mind ( thoughts ) to listen to and learn the details of how everything in our experiences were created.
Because the world isn't already full of people thinking they can do that -- all of them inconsistent and largely incoherent?

The word I speak for our Creator is consistent forever. The words that come from this world are not to be trusted.

And what can you do that they can't, David? I'm afraid that getting science wrong, and misrepresenting conjecture as fact isn't impressive -- they all do that.

Since you don't believe my testimonies from the mind ( thoughts ) of our Creator, you will not learn about the future or how we were created.
I won't learn your account of it? Oh dear. Please punish me more then, and also spare me further mangled accounts of science. :)

All you can do is believe or not believe my experiences. I don't care either way. However, I do know you will believe in the next age.

at least a few scientists are getting closer to this fact. Quantum physics and the study of consciousness is leading them to it.
No, it's really not. QM is doing some cool stuff with mass and waves, while psychology and neuroscience are doing some great work with the soup of function, subjectivity and self-delusion that is the human mind.

Of course there are many skeptical scientists but many of them will learn that everything we experience comes from invisible waves. There's no such thing as real matter, time or space. They're all illusions in our experiences.

But pretty much anything Deepak Chopra says about either of those things is false, and I'm afraid that your ignorant, fatuous guff is no better. : :

I could care less what Deepak Chopra says. He's as deluded as anyone else is in this world. Our Creator is a much better teacher than any of His people.

So how come He has kept you so dumb and destitute? You have been a homeless beggar for the last 5 years. Deepak Chopra is a multimillionaire. His religion works for him. : :

Then you better listen to Deepak Chopra and learn how to become a multimillionare. He certainly won't lead you to the Truth.

Aren't you the homeless beggar who was asking for donations and running around with a whiteboard in the streets of Campbell? : :

You must be talking about the flesh that's writing this post, which is only an illusion that I AM using to teach My people who they are. I could care less if he was a homeless beggar running around with a whiteboard. He will be killed soon so I won't ever see him again.

So you admit the one writing the posts is Brad Holkesvig. Brad Holkesvig is not an illusion. He lives in Campbell outside a church in a sleeping bag. God is the illusion you are unsuccessfully trying to create.
You said God uses His thoughts to control everything. He doesn't need a brain damaged Brad to speak for Him.
b_sorelson
Posts: 78
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2015 3:50:37 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/7/2015 3:49:04 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 9/7/2015 3:41:37 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 3:37:41 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 9/7/2015 3:13:00 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 2:28:42 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 9/7/2015 2:23:30 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 2:05:59 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 9/7/2015 1:21:27 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 12:49:23 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 9/7/2015 12:13:59 AM, Bluepaintcan123 wrote:
When I say good arguments for God, I don't mean evidence from the bible (or torah) or anything that conflicts with science. I want to know if there is any good reason for me to consider the belief in God without it conflicting with what we know is fact.
Despite some estimated 4,000 religions and countless theological claims, claims of metaphysical intervention have consistently failed to produce reliable, independent confirmation of specifics, while claims of creation have consistently failed to predict the time-frames, processes and products that actually occurred in cosmogenesis, terragenesis and biogenesis with any accuracy.
From this consistent failure we can conclude that these claims do not arise from any kind of revealed insight or even observation, but from ignorant imagination and unfounded superstition recognised to be innate to human psychology.
That magical thinking and cultural effects explain these wild claims is beyond reasonable doubt. There's no further point entertaining claims of revelation and miracles without first seeing rigorous, compelling and independently-confirmed evidence of their accuracy.

I have 36 years of experience with the Creator of mans' experiences who had me write thousands of pages and speak millions of words to learn about the past, present and future. He even taught me how he created everything. These thoughts that I witnessed, are our true reality.
Your subjective reality, so long as you remain ignorant of any other. Which, from your posted thought to date, might be quite a while.

My experiences with our Creator are all objective. Your judgment towards my experiences are subjective.

You can chalk this up to magical thinking if you want
Thank you, David. I have and shall.

you will have to put a bullet into my head before you could convince me that our creator doesn't exist.
I don't need to interrupt your mind's functions. I think you're doing that perfectly well yourself.

My mind is the mind of our Creator. The mind that I used to believe in is no longer an influence over the mind of our Creator.

We are living in a simulation as characters who are not real at all. Our creator of this simulation and our experiences within this simulation is outside of his program called Eternal Life.
Oh gosh. Ancient Vedic dogma about maya now given mangled Information Age language and tucked under Christian doctrine to make it more appealing! Gee, that's not suddenly getting popular, is it?

There have been many cultures of the past that believed we're living in a dream. If they were living today, they would love to hear me speak to them from the mind of our Creator.

There happens to be several scientists and thousands of other people I've met in the past four years who believe their experiences are nothing but a dream or simulation.
That might be true, but believing it still can't make it more than conjecture, and even if true, believing it wouldn't give you any authority to pronounce how it works.

Belief is all that God's people have. Why should I believe your thoughts over someone else's thoughts? I don't need to believe in anyone's thoughts today because I understand where all thoughts come from.

Now they have a witness of our Creator's mind ( thoughts ) to listen to and learn the details of how everything in our experiences were created.
Because the world isn't already full of people thinking they can do that -- all of them inconsistent and largely incoherent?

The word I speak for our Creator is consistent forever. The words that come from this world are not to be trusted.

And what can you do that they can't, David? I'm afraid that getting science wrong, and misrepresenting conjecture as fact isn't impressive -- they all do that.

Since you don't believe my testimonies from the mind ( thoughts ) of our Creator, you will not learn about the future or how we were created.
I won't learn your account of it? Oh dear. Please punish me more then, and also spare me further mangled accounts of science. :)

All you can do is believe or not believe my experiences. I don't care either way. However, I do know you will believe in the next age.

at least a few scientists are getting closer to this fact. Quantum physics and the study of consciousness is leading them to it.
No, it's really not. QM is doing some cool stuff with mass and waves, while psychology and neuroscience are doing some great work with the soup of function, subjectivity and self-delusion that is the human mind.

Of course there are many skeptical scientists but many of them will learn that everything we experience comes from invisible waves. There's no such thing as real matter, time or space. They're all illusions in our experiences.

But pretty much anything Deepak Chopra says about either of those things is false, and I'm afraid that your ignorant, fatuous guff is no better. : :

I could care less what Deepak Chopra says. He's as deluded as anyone else is in this world. Our Creator is a much better teacher than any of His people.

So how come He has kept you so dumb and destitute? You have been a homeless beggar for the last 5 years. Deepak Chopra is a multimillionaire. His religion works for him. : :

Then you better listen to Deepak Chopra and learn how to become a multimillionare. He certainly won't lead you to the Truth.

Aren't you the homeless beggar who was asking for donations and running around with a whiteboard in the streets of Campbell? : :

You must be talking about the flesh that's writing this post, which is only an illusion that I AM using to teach My people who they are. I could care less if he was a homeless beggar running around with a whiteboard. He will be killed soon so I won't ever see him again.

So you admit the one writing the posts is Brad Holkesvig. Brad Holkesvig is not an illusion. He lives in Campbell outside a church in a sleeping bag. God is the illusion you are unsuccessfully trying to create.
You said God uses His thoughts to control everything. He doesn't need a brain damaged Brad to speak for Him. : :

You're following a dead body instead of the only ONE who can make us appear to be alive.
Harikrish
Posts: 11,010
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2015 3:53:17 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/7/2015 3:50:37 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 3:49:04 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 9/7/2015 3:41:37 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 3:37:41 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 9/7/2015 3:13:00 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 2:28:42 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 9/7/2015 2:23:30 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 2:05:59 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 9/7/2015 1:21:27 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 12:49:23 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 9/7/2015 12:13:59 AM, Bluepaintcan123 wrote:
When I say good arguments for God, I don't mean evidence from the bible (or torah) or anything that conflicts with science. I want to know if there is any good reason for me to consider the belief in God without it conflicting with what we know is fact.
Despite some estimated 4,000 religions and countless theological claims, claims of metaphysical intervention have consistently failed to produce reliable, independent confirmation of specifics, while claims of creation have consistently failed to predict the time-frames, processes and products that actually occurred in cosmogenesis, terragenesis and biogenesis with any accuracy.
From this consistent failure we can conclude that these claims do not arise from any kind of revealed insight or even observation, but from ignorant imagination and unfounded superstition recognised to be innate to human psychology.
That magical thinking and cultural effects explain these wild claims is beyond reasonable doubt. There's no further point entertaining claims of revelation and miracles without first seeing rigorous, compelling and independently-confirmed evidence of their accuracy.

I have 36 years of experience with the Creator of mans' experiences who had me write thousands of pages and speak millions of words to learn about the past, present and future. He even taught me how he created everything. These thoughts that I witnessed, are our true reality.
Your subjective reality, so long as you remain ignorant of any other. Which, from your posted thought to date, might be quite a while.

My experiences with our Creator are all objective. Your judgment towards my experiences are subjective.

You can chalk this up to magical thinking if you want
Thank you, David. I have and shall.

you will have to put a bullet into my head before you could convince me that our creator doesn't exist.
I don't need to interrupt your mind's functions. I think you're doing that perfectly well yourself.

My mind is the mind of our Creator. The mind that I used to believe in is no longer an influence over the mind of our Creator.

We are living in a simulation as characters who are not real at all. Our creator of this simulation and our experiences within this simulation is outside of his program called Eternal Life.
Oh gosh. Ancient Vedic dogma about maya now given mangled Information Age language and tucked under Christian doctrine to make it more appealing! Gee, that's not suddenly getting popular, is it?

There have been many cultures of the past that believed we're living in a dream. If they were living today, they would love to hear me speak to them from the mind of our Creator.

There happens to be several scientists and thousands of other people I've met in the past four years who believe their experiences are nothing but a dream or simulation.
That might be true, but believing it still can't make it more than conjecture, and even if true, believing it wouldn't give you any authority to pronounce how it works.

Belief is all that God's people have. Why should I believe your thoughts over someone else's thoughts? I don't need to believe in anyone's thoughts today because I understand where all thoughts come from.

Now they have a witness of our Creator's mind ( thoughts ) to listen to and learn the details of how everything in our experiences were created.
Because the world isn't already full of people thinking they can do that -- all of them inconsistent and largely incoherent?

The word I speak for our Creator is consistent forever. The words that come from this world are not to be trusted.

And what can you do that they can't, David? I'm afraid that getting science wrong, and misrepresenting conjecture as fact isn't impressive -- they all do that.

Since you don't believe my testimonies from the mind ( thoughts ) of our Creator, you will not learn about the future or how we were created.
I won't learn your account of it? Oh dear. Please punish me more then, and also spare me further mangled accounts of science. :)

All you can do is believe or not believe my experiences. I don't care either way. However, I do know you will believe in the next age.

at least a few scientists are getting closer to this fact. Quantum physics and the study of consciousness is leading them to it.
No, it's really not. QM is doing some cool stuff with mass and waves, while psychology and neuroscience are doing some great work with the soup of function, subjectivity and self-delusion that is the human mind.

Of course there are many skeptical scientists but many of them will learn that everything we experience comes from invisible waves. There's no such thing as real matter, time or space. They're all illusions in our experiences.

But pretty much anything Deepak Chopra says about either of those things is false, and I'm afraid that your ignorant, fatuous guff is no better. : :

I could care less what Deepak Chopra says. He's as deluded as anyone else is in this world. Our Creator is a much better teacher than any of His people.

So how come He has kept you so dumb and destitute? You have been a homeless beggar for the last 5 years. Deepak Chopra is a multimillionaire. His religion works for him. : :

Then you better listen to Deepak Chopra and learn how to become a multimillionare. He certainly won't lead you to the Truth.

Aren't you the homeless beggar who was asking for donations and running around with a whiteboard in the streets of Campbell? : :

You must be talking about the flesh that's writing this post, which is only an illusion that I AM using to teach My people who they are. I could care less if he was a homeless beggar running around with a whiteboard. He will be killed soon so I won't ever see him again.

So you admit the one writing the posts is Brad Holkesvig. Brad Holkesvig is not an illusion. He lives in Campbell outside a church in a sleeping bag. God is the illusion you are unsuccessfully trying to create.
You said God uses His thoughts to control everything. He doesn't need a brain damaged Brad to speak for Him. : :

You're following a dead body instead of the only ONE who can make us appear to be alive.

How are you dead if you are still posting? Your mind ain't right, Brad.
uncung
Posts: 3,455
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2015 3:57:55 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/7/2015 12:13:59 AM, Bluepaintcan123 wrote:
When I say good arguments for God, I don't mean evidence from the bible (or torah) or anything that conflicts with science. I want to know if there is any good reason for me to consider the belief in God without it conflicting with what we know is fact.
Whenever I search this on the internet I always get things that could be dismantled instantly and easily. Since I know that there are smarter religious people with better arguments than that, I ask that you challenge my beliefs in Atheism and tell me your best argument for Theism.
Thanks for the help!
Quran is the best argument for the existence of God.
b_sorelson
Posts: 78
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2015 3:58:40 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/7/2015 3:53:17 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 9/7/2015 3:50:37 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 3:49:04 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 9/7/2015 3:41:37 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 3:37:41 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 9/7/2015 3:13:00 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 2:28:42 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 9/7/2015 2:23:30 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 2:05:59 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 9/7/2015 1:21:27 AM, b_sorelson wrote:
At 9/7/2015 12:49:23 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 9/7/2015 12:13:59 AM, Bluepaintcan123 wrote:

But pretty much anything Deepak Chopra says about either of those things is false, and I'm afraid that your ignorant, fatuous guff is no better. : :

I could care less what Deepak Chopra says. He's as deluded as anyone else is in this world. Our Creator is a much better teacher than any of His people.

So how come He has kept you so dumb and destitute? You have been a homeless beggar for the last 5 years. Deepak Chopra is a multimillionaire. His religion works for him. : :

Then you better listen to Deepak Chopra and learn how to become a multimillionare. He certainly won't lead you to the Truth.

Aren't you the homeless beggar who was asking for donations and running around with a whiteboard in the streets of Campbell? : :

You must be talking about the flesh that's writing this post, which is only an illusion that I AM using to teach My people who they are. I could care less if he was a homeless beggar running around with a whiteboard. He will be killed soon so I won't ever see him again.

So you admit the one writing the posts is Brad Holkesvig. Brad Holkesvig is not an illusion. He lives in Campbell outside a church in a sleeping bag. God is the illusion you are unsuccessfully trying to create.
You said God uses His thoughts to control everything. He doesn't need a brain damaged Brad to speak for Him. : :

You're following a dead body instead of the only ONE who can make us appear to be alive.

How are you dead if you are still posting? Your mind ain't right, Brad. : :

All the images we observe are nothing but illusions. They are dead but appear to be alive as information is processed beyond the speed of light through each created being, who are like computer processors. This is much faster than the computers we use in this world.

Did you actually believe that light is something real and that it can travel? LOL !!!!!!