Confirmed miracles?

[JP Cusick]

I am not worried. What was the question?

The questions went way over your head, and it would require some courage for you to answer so you are off the hook as I do not request nor expect anything from you.

:aliens3:

And perhaps while you are at it you can explain the logical connection between the collapse of the Schrodinger wave function and a god.

Answer = It has no relevance at all.

:2wave:

 

[RogueWarrior]

I just wish that anyone would tell me what are you all so afraid of?

Are you all just terrified of a real God? or intimidated by the miracles?

Just because there are real miracles and a real God then that does not mean that the Bible is true - no, and it does not mean that Christianity is true either - not at all, and there being a real God and real miracles only means that we need to study and research these realities more deeply and more accurately.

Albert Einstein had this same problem, as when Einstein told about the "God" then religious people jumped all over the words of Einstein as if there being a real God then that means they must accept Jesus as their personal savior - well no, that was NEVER what Einstein meant, and the reality of God does NOT mean that we go to Heaven or Hell after death as those are NOT real and not true.

If that is what you all fear - that if you simply acknowledge the reality of the miracles and or the reality of a God that THEN you will become RELIGIOUS - well no, science does not have to be a new religion.

Not afraid of anything.
Not afraid of unproven imaginary beings like gods, leprechauns or flying spaghetti monsters. By my definition of miracle, none have happened.

Acknowledging a god does not make someone religious, it makes them a theist. Don't confuse theism and religions like most religious theists do.

 

[zyzygy]

Answer = It has no relevance at all.

Have you abandoned the parallel words theory as proof of a god?

 

[JP Cusick]

Have you abandoned the parallel words theory as proof of a god?

The parallel universes do not prove God and I never said that it does.

The Big-Bang is a real proof but not the parallel universes.

The parallel universes simply explain what God is doing, and it gives a cool if not uncomfortable explanation of what is going on with our selves.

It is information for those of us who really want to know the details.

 

[zyzygy]

The parallel universes do not prove God and I never said that it does.

The Big-Bang is a real proof but not the parallel universes.

The parallel universes simply explain what God is doing, and it gives a cool if not uncomfortable explanation of what is going on with our selves.

It is information for those of us who really want to know the details.

What does prove that your god exists?

 

[JP Cusick]

What does prove that your god exists?

Not my God or "your god" as it is the real God.

Here are a few pieces of the proof:

1) Science proves the existence of God by the Creation Day (Big-Bang), and with the Intelligent Design of Evolution.

2) The reality of ghosts and spirits and demons are real evidence for there being a real spiritual life.

3) Certain prophesies which could not be faked, as like The US and Britain in Prophesy.

4) The self evident power in following the moral standards which apply to all people.

5) Our own conscience tells us so (when it is not suppressed).

6) And there is more.

 

[RAMOSS]

The parallel universes do not prove God and I never said that it does.

The Big-Bang is a real proof but not the parallel universes.

The parallel universes simply explain what God is doing, and it gives a cool if not uncomfortable explanation of what is going on with our selves.

It is information for those of us who really want to know the details.

You keep on saying 'the big bang' is a real proof of God, but all the big bang is evidence of is an expansion of space/time, not of God.

As for the 'homeland', that is something that was worked for, because of the prophecy, yet, it does not yet match the prophecy, since the state of Israel is secular, and does not have a King, Not until then will that prophecy be complete.

 

[zyzygy]

Not my God or "your god" as it is the real God.

There are many alleged gods. Why is yours the real one?

 

[JP Cusick]

You keep on saying 'the big bang' is a real proof of God, but all the big bang is evidence of is an expansion of space/time, not of God.

As for the 'homeland', that is something that was worked for, because of the prophecy, yet, it does not yet match the prophecy, since the state of Israel is secular, and does not have a King, Not until then will that prophecy be complete.

Yes I know about all of that, and it is sad that most of Christianity would try to force their wrong ideas onto God, and of course I understand that there is no way to talk you out of that horrible interpretation of the prophesies.

The thing is that the truth (as in that link) is so much cooler and much more fun.

The truth is stranger than the fiction, and it is a lot more interesting too.



================================================

There are many alleged gods. Why is yours the real one?

Again - it is not my God, and even that name of "God" is an illegitimate and inaccurate English word for an idol, and I just can not even resist its use because I can not reason the simplest of truths with immature people.

Answer to question:
= The reason that my view of God is independently accurate is because I have honestly done the research and the homework and so I determinedly found out what-was-what and what was not.

It did not happen by accident or by miracle as I had to work for it.

And it is much more then just study and research as I had to put the principles into action and do them, and as such I took huge risk and sacrifices and then I found out the reality the hard way by forcing my self to be sincere.

This is why I know instead of just believing.

 

[zyzygy]

Not my God or "your god" as it is the real God.

Here are a few pieces of the proof:

1) Science proves the existence of God by the Creation Day (Big-Bang), and with the Intelligent Design of Evolution.

2) The reality of ghosts and spirits and demons are real evidence for there being a real spiritual life.

3) Certain prophesies which could not be faked, as like The US and Britain in Prophesy.

4) The self evident power in following the moral standards which apply to all people.

5) Our own conscience tells us so (when it is not suppressed).

6) And there is more.

To pick one point, ghosts and spirits have never been proven to be real.

 

[zyzygy]

The thing is that the truth (as in that link) is so much cooler and much more fun.
.

The truth is cooler than the work of fiction known as the bible, or any so-called holy book.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Failed_biblical_prophecies

 

[Risky Thicket]

Other than the awe effect what would be the value of seeing miracles?

 

[JP Cusick]

To pick one point, ghosts and spirits have never been proven to be real.

I know that the denying type of people like to pick that one point to deny because it seems like an easy target when your only intention is to win, but since I am not competing and I care nothing about any perception of "winning or losing" then it is one of my favorite pieces of real proof.

The trick of course is that we can not capture the spirit or ghost or demon and since we can not capture it then that means there is no proof, because the other proof of seeing the ghost and experiencing the spirit and hearing the demon or feeling the presence is not accepted as the science kind of proof.

What I say is that this discrepancy simply shows a huge limitation in science when science is unable to recognize such a reality.

It is as simple as this = "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstein

The spirits and ghosts are in fact everywhere as there must be billions of them or more, and every town or Country has local places where those invisible "THINGS" can be experienced, so in order to deny the real spiritual life then one must deny their own eyes and ears and feeling and our own experience while an honest person can not deny this reality.

The truth is cooler than the work of fiction known as the bible, or any so-called holy book.

Failed biblical prophecies - RationalWiki

I endorse some parts of the Bible but not the entire book.

And there is also the many WRONG and stupid interpretations of the Bible by Christianity which confuses everything much more than is necessary.

As like the book of Jonah where Jonah gets swallowed by a big fish or by a whale was never meant to be taken as literally true. The story of Jonah was like a child's nursery rhyme, so Jonah was a story like "Jack and the Beanstalk" or "King Arther and the Round Table" as they are not true stories but only intended to teach a morality lesson to people.

So of course the Bible is not literal, and it is a mistake to view the Bible as the word of God which it is NOT.

But some parts of the Bible are true as some parts are very profound and some parts of the Bible are extremely exceptional, as like that prophesy = is such a part.

 

[Paschendale]

The trick of course is that we can not capture the spirit or ghost or demon and since we can not capture it then that means there is no proof, because the other proof of seeing the ghost and experiencing the spirit and hearing the demon or feeling the presence is not accepted as the science kind of proof.

Can you demonstrate, with any credibility, that you saw a ghost, experienced a spirit, heard a demon, or felt a presence, rather than simply mistook a mundane experience for something more or were just hallucinating or dreaming? Your word alone is not evidence. No one's word should be.

 

[zyzygy]

Can you demonstrate, with any credibility, that you saw a ghost, experienced a spirit, heard a demon, or felt a presence, rather than simply mistook a mundane experience for something more or were just hallucinating or dreaming? Your word alone is not evidence. No one's word should be.

Why aren't slaughterhouse packed jam full with the spirits of innumerable beeves?

 

[JP Cusick]

Can you demonstrate, with any credibility, that you saw a ghost, experienced a spirit, heard a demon, or felt a presence, rather than simply mistook a mundane experience for something more or were just hallucinating or dreaming? Your word alone is not evidence. No one's word should be.

I can and have demonstrated all that to myself many times and my own credibility is very credible to myself.

And my own credible word based on my own honesty is quite enough for me.

I really find that very many people simply do not see their self as credible and therefore they reject what they see and experience.

As such I am certain that you or anyone can credibly determine the reality of the ghost and spirit life for your self if you will be honest and believe your self.

And I call the things as "ghost" and "spirits" simply because those are the words and we do not have any better words or designation for those things.

You really need to do it for your self, and then believe your own experience and believe your own senses.

There are some credible books about the subject of ghost and demons but I see no logic in believing any book when one does not first believe their self.

The thing is that I have talked to very many people concerning this and the vast majority of people have had experiences with the ghosts and most people will admit the truth of it, so I am very convinced that those who deny the reality of the ghost have already had experiences and just deny their own credibility.

To hallucinate or daydream a vision is very exaggerated because they are NOT really an easy thing to do as visions or hallucinations do not happen very often if at all, and if it is a mental illness like schizophrenia then the visions would keep on going as they do not just happen in a haunted house and then become no more mental illness after leaving the haunted house.

There needs to be a real reason to hallucinate or daydream a vision and NOT just to deny the reality of the spirit life.

 

[JP Cusick]

Why aren't slaughterhouse packed jam full with the spirits of innumerable beeves?

Animals are different and God gave animals as the sacrifice for the sins of mankind so they are not the same equation as people.

The evil spirit of the butchered animals is inside of the meat that humans eat.

As the animal in life and at death were treated with pain and fear and violence so all of that is attached to the meat, and so when people eat that meat they are eating the same pain and fear and violence from the butchered animal because it is in the meat.

Far back in time humans started out as vegetarians, and slowly progressed into being farmers of the land, but the people learned that by eating the meat of animals that it would make the people more aggressive and thereby it made the people into harder working laborers and into fiercer warriors for battles, and that still goes onward today.

 

[zyzygy]

Far back in time humans started out as vegetarians,

How far back?

 

[RogueWarrior]

Animals are different and God gave animals as the sacrifice for the sins of mankind so they are not the same equation as people.

The evil spirit of the butchered animals is inside of the meat that humans eat.

As the animal in life and at death were treated with pain and fear and violence so all of that is attached to the meat, and so when people eat that meat they are eating the same pain and fear and violence from the butchered animal because it is in the meat.

Far back in time humans started out as vegetarians, and slowly progressed into being farmers of the land, but the people learned that by eating the meat of animals that it would make the people more aggressive and thereby it made the people into harder working laborers and into fiercer warriors for battles, and that still goes onward today.

Do you have a source for all this wonderful misinformation?

 

[zyzygy]

Animals are different and God gave animals as the sacrifice for the sins of mankind so they are not the same equation as people.

.

In the absence of any evidence for the existence of any god your statement is pure speculation.

 

[zyzygy]

Animals have evil spirits inside them? What nonsense. The source is a vivid imagination.

 

[JP Cusick]

How far back?

I do not know how far, but below is a source:

QUOTE:
"Many anthropologists believe that most early humans ate mainly plant foods, being more like gatherers than hunters. This view is supported by the fact that the human digestive system resembles that of other plant-eaters rather than that of meat-eaters. The early "human as plant-eater" view is also supported by the fact that humans on meat-based diets contract recieve major health problems such as heart disease and cancer much more frequently than people eating vegetarian diets." Link History of Vegetarianism
====

Also human teeth are not the teeth of carnivores, and raw meat is not digestible to humans as we must cook it and usually must add flavor to cover up the nasty taste of flesh.

I also know of an old record from the early Roman Empire and it was only recorded because it was a complaint from the soldiers to the commanders, in that the Roman soldiers had been farmers and they did not want to eat animal meats which they were being served and so the soldiers made a big complaint about their food to the Roman commanders.

And it makes sense that the Roman Empire wanted their soldiers to be more fierce and more aggressive so it was surely no accident that the soldiers were being fed the butchery instead of bread and vegetables which the soldiers were accustomed to on their farms.

In the absence of any evidence for the existence of any god your statement is pure speculation.

Actually is is based on the very real proof of God, and so it was not speculation at all.

And most of the information can be proved by our own efforts so we do not need any evidence from God to give us that information.

Animals have evil spirits inside them? What nonsense. The source is a vivid imagination.

You changed the wording so yes with your changed words that certainly is nonsense.

But the words that I said are not nonsense and yet maybe I did not make the thing clear enough to understand it correctly.

The spirit of the animals are not evil - certainly not, but the butchered meat from the animals are evil because the human cruelty and barbarism makes so that the animal meat is evil, as in the meat contains the pain and the fear and the violent cruelty inside of the meat which humans put there.

An animal dies a natural death and then there is no evil in that meat, but then humans do not eat any animal that dies naturally, and that is really because the humans only really feed on the brutal violence of murdering the animals and a natural death does not feed that depravity.

 

[zyzygy]

I do not know how far, but below is a source:

QUOTE:
"Many anthropologists believe that most early humans ate mainly plant foods, being more like gatherers than hunters. This view is supported by the fact that the human digestive system resembles that of other plant-eaters rather than that of meat-eaters. The early "human as plant-eater" view is also supported by the fact that humans on meat-based diets contract recieve major health problems such as heart disease and cancer much more frequently than people eating vegetarian diets." Link History of Vegetarianism
====

Also human teeth are not the teeth of carnivores, and raw meat is not digestible to humans as we must cook it and usually must add flavor to cover up the nasty taste of flesh.

I also know of an old record from the early Roman Empire and it was only recorded because it was a complaint from the soldiers to the commanders, in that the Roman soldiers had been farmers and they did not want to eat animal meats which they were being served and so the soldiers made a big complaint about their food to the Roman commanders.

And it makes sense that the Roman Empire wanted their soldiers to be more fierce and more aggressive so it was surely no accident that the soldiers were being fed the butchery instead of bread and vegetables which the soldiers were accustomed to on their farms.


Actually is is based on the very real proof of God, and so it was not speculation at all.

And most of the information can be proved by our own efforts so we do not need any evidence from God to give us that information.


You changed the wording so yes with your changed words that certainly is nonsense.

But the words that I said are not nonsense and yet maybe I did not make the thing clear enough to understand it correctly.

The spirit of the animals are not evil - certainly not, but the butchered meat from the animals are evil because the human cruelty and barbarism makes so that the animal meat is evil, as in the meat contains the pain and the fear and the violent cruelty inside of the meat which humans put there.

An animal dies a natural death and then there is no evil in that meat, but then humans do not eat any animal that dies naturally, and that is really because the humans only really feed on the brutal violence of murdering the animals and a natural death does not feed that depravity.

Merely saying that spirits exist will not conjure them into being. Belief is not proof. Evil in meat? Are you being serious?

 

[JP Cusick]

Do you have a source for all this wonderful misinformation?

Since it is my own words and it is a rather broad summary then surely it is a composite of many different sources being paraphrased by me.

So there is no one source that I know of, but there are plenty of sources that have a piece here and another piece there so if you want that kind of reference then you would need to do your own research.

And if you have any counter claim then you are free to post whatever you chose.

I stand by the comment of mine as being accurate and true, but it is not exhaustive.

 

[JP Cusick]

Merely saying that spirits exist will not conjure them into being. Belief is not proof. Evil in meat? Are you being serious?

There really is physical proof of that as in feeding animals raw meat will turn the animals into being more fierce and aggressive and dog trainers are known to do that for attack dogs, but when the dogs become use to raw meat then one must be careful because then the dog will eat a human baby or it might eat you if it gets hungry.

They also tried feeding animal flesh to cows which do not eat meat and then the people created the Mad-Cow disease.

We can see in Zoos that the plant eating Herbivores are passive and tranquil while the meat eating carnivores pace around and must be secluded from other animals.

Human beings are another type of animal and we started out as vegetarians so when humans eat meat then it makes humans more aggressive and more barbaric.

What goes in is what comes out.