[Levi Jones]

Re: Prove that god is real

¿Why everything needs a creator? Can you give me an example of something that was created from nothing? (except God, of course).

I can't give you an example of something created from nothing, except God.

Thanks for making my point for me. Check and mate, atheists.

[refridgerator]

Re: Prove that god is real

I can't give you an example of something created from nothing, except God.

Thanks for making my point for me. Check and mate, atheists.

I mean, nothing is created, only transformed of what always have been. So the affirmation, "everything created needs a creator" is false, because nothing is created but transformed.

[Levi Jones]

Re: Prove that god is real

I mean, nothing is created, only transformed of what always have been. So the affirmation, "everything created needs a creator" is false, because nothing is created but transformed.

Oh sure, you just think that Einstein is going to form from the dust bunnies under your bed!

[MitzaLizalor]

Re: Prove that god is real

What was transformed into Time?

I mean, nothing is created, only transformed of what always have been. So the affirmation, "everything created needs a creator" is false, because nothing is created but transformed.

I've read about "what happens if the universe is smaller than a proton?" and it's not really very persuasive in the light of pure communication from God who actually made everything (or was in charge of the transformations) and has provided copious data to guide us. This information has been very effective. If the source were dubious, surely the information would be dubious too?

There is always a reason. If there is no reason, there is no cause, if there is no cause, there is no effect, if there is no effect, they can't die.

REASON and CAUSE are two different things signified by two different words. If they were the same thing they would be signified by a single word. But they're not. So they aren't. Thus your statement, If there is no reason, there is no cause, is not valid and your argument is not sound.

Records are kept for a reason. There is a record of our posts on the forum for example so we can read earlier posts and respond appropriately. It enables others to follow a discussion and see how The Bible sheds light where otherwise there'd be darkness. At meetings there are minutes kept and points of order raised which in turn are settled by looking at the records of how the society was incorporated or perhaps by looking at the minutes from previous meetings. "How was the matter settled in 1842?" you could ask & pop off to the vaults to see for yourself.

What about 1628? Would those records be useful? Are they too old yet? Think of records from 1066. Are they any good? We can compare easily with an online forum. Here is a statement..

Nothing is created, only transformed.

..made by poster Refutator in 2017AD on April 28th at 22:54UT. This is not a new idea but so far no evidence has been produced to support it. I can check your wording tomorrow or look at the replies and refer others to check out the new evidence for transform hypothesis if any gets presented. Your words are recorded so that's easy to do. A hard copy would be better, something you'd written or dictated at the time, but when does the record become false? After 10 years? 100? 500? The Domesday Book was done by 1086AD yet remains a valuable record of landholdings and stuff from that time. That's 931 years old. If I look up your remark in 931 years it will still be your remark. The record is still OK. What about in 1,931 years? 2,931? At what point will the past have changed and the record record something you had NOT said or done? In our imagined meeting [above] if a turkey had flown in the window the minutes would record that. If a train derailed and came to rest by the door the minutes would not HAVE to record that (because it took place outside the venue) but probably would. If the train's headlight fell inside on the floor, the minutes should record that.

II Chronicles 5 . KJV . look up
9a They drew out the staves of the ark , that the ends of the staves were seen from the ark before the oracle; but they were not seen without..
10 There was nothing in the ark save the two tables which Moses put therein at Horeb, when the LORD made a covenant with the children of Israel, when they came out of Egypt.
11 And it came to pass, when the priests were come out of the holy place:
11b-12 (for all the priests that were present were sanctified, and did not then wait by course: also the Levites which were the singers, all of them of Asaph, of Heman, of Jeduthun, with their sons and their brethren, being arrayed in white linen, having cymbals and psalteries and harps, stood at the east end of the altar, and with them an hundred and twenty priests sounding with trumpets)
13 It came even to pass, as the trumpeters and singers were as one, to make one sound to be heard in praising and thanking the LORD; and when they lifted up their voice with the trumpets and cymbals and instruments of musick, and praised the LORD, saying , For he is good; for his mercy endureth for ever: that then the house was filled with a cloud, even the house of the LORD;
14 So that the priests could not stand to minister by reason of the cloud: for the glory of the LORD had filled the house of God.

In verses 11b.–12 we have listed, marked in blue, who was in attendance. ALL OF the singers. Their sons and brothers. ALL OF the sanctified priests. The musicians (instruments are listed) together with 120 priests on trumpets. But this is a record of visual events and I'm interested in your reply as to JUST WHEN the record became unreliable? The next day? Week? What about in 1,931 years? 2,931? This is a major event, not the weekly meeting of doyley collectors. And like a coronation or the inauguration of a president the records are scrutinised and witnessed by many people.

At what date will George Washington cease to be the first President of the United States?

[Acadia The Atheist]

Re: Prove that god is real

It seems like you've run into a dilemma. If you've read the Bible, you know that it's true and cannot be challenged. if you haven't read the Bible, you're in no place to question the Word of God.
Romans 10:17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Read the Bible like everyone else here, and you'll soon realize the error of your ways!

So I was an original Atheist and thought god was completely fake and I came to the complete realization of Jesus Christ being my savior especially the post of how the cucumber proves gods existence halleluiah

[Basilissa]

Re: Prove that god is real

So I was an original Atheist and thought god was completely fake and I came to the complete realization of Jesus Christ being my savior especially the post of how the cucumber proves gods existence halleluiah

That's very good, honey!

Now, in order to be a real Christian, you need to do three things:

1. Read the Holy Bible

2. Obey it

3. Start capitalizing "God" because in our language it is customary to capitalize proper names.

Also, it would be very nice if you made the effort to create an introduction thread in the aptly named Introduction Forum.

[Ezekiel Bathfire]

Re: Prove that god is real

¿Why everything needs a creator?

Upside down question mark -> Admit it - you're a Mexican Catilck, aren't you?

[Joanna Lytton-Vasey]

Re: Prove that god is real

Upside down question mark -> Admit it - you're a Mexican Catilck, aren't you?

Brother Bathfire, if only we'd realized sooner, we could have welcomed this person in his, her or its own language. I shall put this right immediately.

¡Hola! y ¡hola! y ¡hola! y ¡hola! refutator.

[tomdstone]

Re: Prove that god is real

"Prove that God is Real"Dear Acadia The Atheist
In this site, people like to refer to the Bible. However, in addition to Holy Scripture, there are metaphysical, logical, empirical, ontological, cosmological, teleological, arguments and as well arguments from physics which can be given to show the existence of God.

[Dolores de Barriga]

Re: Prove that god is real

"Prove that God is Real"Dear Acadia The Atheist
In this site, people like to refer to the Bible. However, in addition to Holy Scripture, there are metaphysical, logical, empirical, ontological, cosmological, teleological, arguments and as well arguments from physics which can be given to show the existence of God.

That's an interesting claim. Too bad you've failed to produce any sort of data-derived evidence to support it.

[tomdstone]

Re: Prove that god is real

That's an interesting claim. Too bad you've failed to produce any sort of data-derived evidence to support it.

I can give you a link to an article which develops these ideas, but I am afraid that it will be deleted as other links of mine have been deleted. To discuss these things in comprehensive detail will take a lot of time.

[Dolores de Barriga]

Re: Prove that god is real

I can give you a link to an article which develops these ideas, but I am afraid that it will be deleted as other links of mine have been deleted. To discuss these things in comprehensive detail will take a lot of time.

I don't think you have to worry about, ehem, missing links if you cite an article from a peer-reviewed reputable academic journal. If I see one more link from Wikipedia from you, I think I'll throw my laptop at the wall. And then I'll be stuck using just my Raspberry PI, and that is not going to make me happy because I'm not 100% happy about the graphics quality and haven't figured out yet if I can tweak that.

I give my students an F for citing unreliable sources. Seriously.

[Johny Joe Hold]

Re: Prove that god is real

And let's not forget the Scientific reasons for God's existence.

Everything created needs a creator, except one thing.

Radiometric dating is flawed, except when it supports our case (like with the Shroud of Turin)

Look at the way a banana fits in the human hand.

Prayer works 100% of the time, if God wills it to.

You can't create intelligence from dust, therefore God.

I'll give this to atheists. They will go to any length trying to prove God and Jesus did not exist. Now one of them is saying the Shroud of Turin could not have laid on a body but received its imprint from a flatter surface. That even though we know the Shroud has the actual blood, sweat and bodily fluids of Jesus Christ on it. Give it up, atheists.

Shroud of Turin wasn't laid on Jesus' body, but rather a sculpture, modeling study suggests | Live Science

[Dr. Anthony J. Toole]

Then there's the Holy Prepuce.

...at least 31 churches in Europe ... claimed to have the Holy Foreskin sometime during the Middle Ages, including ones in Paris, Antwerp, Bologna, Compostela and Toulouse.

I could understand a skeptic's reticence to believe a single solitary claim by some whacko about Jesus' foreskin, but 31 official claims by established authorities in the field? That's crank territory.

[MitzaLizalor]

That's crank territory.

Not if you have the real one.