The supernatural

[Pixel42]

There is no doubt. Victory belongs to God alone. Whatever is in the way of God is victorious. We have seen this for centuries. Please read the history. To see better. Enmity with God is absolute destruction. Maybe for a short time the thoughts of God have a word of disbelief. Of course, something that is only acceptable to them. But this is a very short time. Definite and permanent victory is for believing in God. History has made this clear. And it still continues.

This is simply not true. People who believe in God are no more likely to be lucky, victorious or successful than people who don't. If it was true it would be possible to prove it scientifically, which you yourself have already acknowledged cannot be done.

 

[Cosmic Yak]

This is simply not true. People who believe in God are no more likely to be lucky, victorious or successful than people who don't. If it was true it would be possible to prove it scientifically, which you yourself have already acknowledged cannot be done.

There's also the fact that atheism and agnosticism are growing worldwide, and religious faith is declining.
Islam is increasing in numbers of believers not because of converts, but because of high birth rates in many Muslim countries.
This is another reason, then, why heydarian is wrong. Yet again.

 

[IanS]

Hello philosopher
Maybe ... but I specialize in industrial safety and occupational health. Of course, I have many studies in the field of philosophy. I have said a point many times in this group. But unfortunately you ignore it.
The issue of "proving God" is not in the realm of experimental science. You study - prove and discover matter in the universe. Well, this is a completely logical and accepted approach. And we totally agree with that.
But the proving God is not in this area. Proving God is a philosophical approach. Do you, dear philosopher, accept this? That .... is the proving God through philosophy and logic.
We prove God through philosophy and logic. And I have said its ways many times in this group. Experimental science is in the field of matter and the universe. And proves it. And all human beings agree. And there is no denying it. Proof of God is not in the realm of experimental science and matter. And it is proved through philosophy - logic and mysticism. This is why the approach to proving God is different from the experimental sciences. Understand this and that.
Why do you deny this fact? And you just do storytelling? The reason for this is that: your unwarranted pride and arrogance prevent you from accepting the truth. And this approach is completely wrong. I have no insistence on proving God to you. I'm just sorry you can't think right. And you have the wrong prejudice. Unrighteous pride is not good at all.

No, I certainly do not accept that it's possible to prove God through anything claimed to be "philosophical logic". And we just talked about this in your recent posts on the last few pages where you were, and where you are again, trying to ban science from this argument even though all your claims here have been about science revealed in a 7th century Quran …

… all of your claims have been about science, so you are going to have to face the fact that all of real published science completely disagrees with you … and we have already been over ALL of that countless times!

 

[IanS]

Thinking is a faith hazard.No...

Thinking is a sign of true faith. All my speeches and messages in this group are due to correct thinking with faith in God, the Qur'an and Muhammad. No one can win the fight against them. The efforts of all infidels in this way are in vain. And its failure is quite clear. And we see. This is not my claim. God has said. Enmity with God is absolute destruction.
I see the day when the whole universe is wrapped like paper by God. And leads to singularity. The sun is getting dark. It turns red. grows. Swallows the planets of the solar system one by one. It turns into a black hole. Gravity is 20 billion times greater. Swallows systems and galaxies. All the stars are getting dark. And become black holes.
Everything we see falls into "the black hole". And it goes to ... "sigularity". The end of the universe is reaching "the single". And the single goes to "nothingness". This is the process of the universe and its end. All data and information of the universe is stored in a book dedicated to God.And God recreates the universe. Creation is not new. It is a re-creation. And with exactly the advanced teleportation mechanism, it returns everything. You discover all this with experimental science, especially quantum. And you will understand. I understand all these sciences by reading and interpreting the Qur'an. And I discover.
See the discoveries of James Webb. Only a corner of this claim has been proven by God in the Qur'an. And it still continues. And you will see more. Hawking has proven these scientific facts in astronomy and quantum. And it is only a corner of God's claim in the Qur'an. I'm proud of Hawking for proving God with his valuable discoveries. Of course, he proved the signs of God in the universe. Experimental science discovers God's creatures. And it shows that they have a creator and a Manufacturer. And of course we prove the existence of God with philosophy - logic and mysticism. Experimental sciences and theology are closely related. You just have to understand. And decrypted. I have no claim. I'm just trying to understand this relationship. And I'm completely satisfied.And it is extremely enjoyable.

Hello Dear Pixel
I'm glad to see you.

There is no doubt. Victory belongs to God alone. Whatever is in the way of God is victorious. We have seen this for centuries. Please read the history. To see better. Enmity with God is absolute destruction. Maybe for a short time the thoughts of God have a word of disbelief. Of course, something that is only acceptable to them. But this is a very short time. Definite and permanent victory is for believing in God. History has made this clear. And it still continues.

These posts are simply just religious preaching again.

Religious preaching is simply a declaration of your faith-beliefs about the supernatural. That is of no use here … here you need to show real science to support your claims …

… where is the published science that supports either your claims of science revealed in a 7th century Quran, or your claims that an intelligent designer God exists? … where does any of real published science make any claims like that?

If, by trying to insist upon “philosophy & logic”, you are trying to resurrect things like the so-called “5-ways” of Thomas Aquinas from the 13th century & claims about a need to stop/cut-off a so-called “infinite regression” of causes, then we can do that, but I have already explained to you several times in some detail how & why current science shows those sort of Aquinas claims are simply wrong anyway (they come from a pre-scientific age when people like Aquinas were scientifically 100% ignorant).

 

[Cosmic Yak]

No, it is not possible to prove God using philosophy and logic. There are always alternative explanations which are at least as, and usually far more, plausible and supportable. Occam's Razor is often all that's required to justify rejecting the God hypothesis.

People have been trying to prove God using philosophy and logic for centuries, heydarian. None have succeeded, though I doubt many have failed quite as spectacularly as you have.

heydarian ruled out the use of logic as a means of influencing or persuading others. He appears to have forgotten that.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

This seemed quite appropriate to this thread & some of the arguments used..


Jesus & Mo

 

[heydarian saeed]

This is simply not true. People who believe in God are no more likely to be lucky, victorious or successful than people who don't. If it was true it would be possible to prove it scientifically, which you yourself have already acknowledged cannot be done.

Hello dear pixel
Chance or science has nothing to do with it. Basically, luck is rejected. It is a matter of scientific fact. You need to read history well. As I said. I also told the reason. The soul is not made of matter. Therefore, it cannot be proved in the laboratory by the laws of matter. This is completely true and logical. I advise you to leave the chance completely. You are a very understanding and knowledgeable lady. I'm sure you do not accept the chance. I personally accept reality and truth. I do not accept superstitions and luck at all. I did not find you in this group by chance. To talk to you. I tried hard to find this group and you. This was not a matter of chance. And I am very happy.
Hope to see

 

[Mojo]

The soul is not made of matter. Therefore, it cannot be proved in the laboratory by the laws of matter. This is completely true and logical.

How do you distinguish between something that cannot beckbserved and something that doesn’t exist?

 

[heydarian saeed]

There's also the fact that atheism and agnosticism are growing worldwide, and religious faith is declining.
Islam is increasing in numbers of believers not because of converts, but because of high birth rates in many Muslim countries.
This is another reason, then, why heydarian is wrong. Yet again.

Hello Dear philosopher
Nice to meet you again.
I do not see any mistake in my beliefs about theism. Maybe you are wrong ...
The birth rate statistics that you say prove the same thing. That theism is correct. Note also:
This is even in harmony with nature. The idea that nature wants a woman to have 40 children is completely rejected. No. Nature does not want a woman to give birth to 40 children. This is completely optional. Women should not worry about having children. This is a program that is institutionalized in nature. Men and women are just tools to give birth to children if they want to. If they do not, they do not harm nature. I advise you to choose "civilization" if you do not accept this program and the cycle of nature. The dialogue of civilizations seems to be a good process.

 

[Pixel42]

Hello dear pixel
Chance or science has nothing to do with it. Basically, luck is rejected. It is a matter of scientific fact.

No, it's the law of probability which is scientific fact. Rejecting luck, i.e. the law of probability, is ignorant superstition.

 

[Pixel42]

Hello Dear philosopher
Nice to meet you again.
I do not see any mistake in my beliefs about theism. Maybe you are wrong ...
The birth rate statistics that you say prove the same thing. That theism is correct. Note also:
This is even in harmony with nature. The idea that nature wants a woman to have 40 children is completely rejected. No. Nature does not want a woman to give birth to 40 children. This is completely optional. Women should not worry about having children. This is a program that is institutionalized in nature. Men and women are just tools to give birth to children if they want to. If they do not, they do not harm nature. I advise you to choose "civilization" if you do not accept this program and the cycle of nature. The dialogue of civilizations seems to be a good process.

What's natural is to have lots of children, watch half of them die, and be dead by the time you're 40. Personally I very much prefer civilisation.

 

[IanS]

(1) Hello dear pixel
Chance or science has nothing to do with it. Basically, luck is rejected. It is a matter of scientific fact. You need to read history well. As I said. I also told the reason.

(2) The soul is not made of matter. Therefore, it cannot be proved in the laboratory by the laws of matter. This is completely true and logical.

I advise you to leave the chance completely. You are a very understanding and knowledgeable lady. I'm sure you do not accept the chance. I personally accept reality and truth. I do not accept superstitions and luck at all. I did not find you in this group by chance. To talk to you. I tried hard to find this group and you. This was not a matter of chance. And I am very happy.
Hope to see

We already established that your education in science is very poor ... I already challenged you on that, and you had admit that others in this thread are far above you in their science edcuation ... so in your first sentence 1 above where you are trying to tell Pixel what science can or cannot do, you are not in any educated position to tell Pixel or tell any of us what science can or cannot do, or what it has or has not done.

In your second sentence marked "2" - science has discovered and explained the nature of all subatomic particles, as specific patterns of vibration-like disturbance in various energy fields that compose the whole of space (everywhere in the entire universe), and that is NOT a "material" solid object of the form that you understand, is it? ... so science has discovered and explained all sorts of things that you yourself think of as "material/matter" ... so again you are simply uneducated-ly wrong to keep claiming that science could not discover any so-called "soul" when you wrongly claim that science can only understand "material" things "in a laboratory".

All that you have, like all religious fanatics, is just a claim of a soul ... you have not produced any such thing as any soul, all you have done is claimed that such things exist ... it's just repeating the same claims of superstitions made thousands of years ago from the ages of ignorance in biblical times.

 

[heydarian saeed]

How do you distinguish between something that cannot beckbserved and something that doesn’t exist?

Hi
This is a complex discussion. First, it must be believed. Secondly, a lot of research and effort must be put into understanding this issue. I do not want to go into too much detail. First of all, your views on this issue are low. Or you do not believe at all. Secondly, I have little expertise in this matter. And I may not be able to fully explain this to you. I apologize for that. But just for this important point that you said, I also say an important point. Quantum science has made many discoveries in this regard. And it goes this way. Of course, we all accept quantum science. The laws of quantum science are incompatible with the laws of matter. This alone is enough to understand that there are beings in the universe that cannot be proved by matter and through the laboratory of matter.I just mentioned an example of this in this group before. Let me remind you again ... In an experiment, Professor Suarez shone two identical photons at the same speed towards a mirror. They expected either to be reflected or both to pass. This happened. The item changed velocity in two photons. That is, it shines photons at the mirror at two different speeds. The faster the photon, the faster it should reach the mirror. To their surprise, they saw that the photon stopped at a faster speed so that the photon could reach him at a slower speed, and at the same time they reached the mirror. What force or consciousness was there in the photon to stop time and the corresponding photon to reach it? Is a photon a living being with intellect? No. So what consciousness governed and guided this experiment?
What is human "intelligence"? Roger Penrose, an English physicist at the University of Oxford, teacher Professor Hawking, a physicist, and scientists at the Max Planck Institute for Physics in Munich, Germany. The view that human "intelligence" is somehow related to information stored at the quantum level. And after the death of intelligence (information stored at the quantum level), human beings can remain as a storage file forever. And man can live with this information. This fact proves the resurrection and resurrection of all beings in the universe in a recreated way. And this is what God has repeatedly claimed in the Qur'an. That will do it. On the other hand, this issue also proves the advanced mechanism of teleportation.
Can these matters be understood in accordance with the laws of Article? While there. And it can not be denied. What we can say is: "The laws of matter in the universe prove some events and beings. And it can not prove everything. To find the proof of some beings that are not in the laws of matter, it is necessary that the laws And we have to have other sciences, and through them we have to prove immaterial beings, quantum science is an example of these sciences.
What I said in this message is completely documented and scientific. No one can deny it. My advice to all of you dear groups is to think logically and scientifically. And decide.

 

[heydarian saeed]

What's natural is to have lots of children, watch half of them die, and be dead by the time you're 40. Personally I very much prefer civilisation.

Your choice of "civilization" is admirable. We build civilization. But nature was created by God and is always being created. Civilizations are transformable. If we have good intentions, this is the transformation of civilization in the direction of evolution and improvement. Of course, we are seeing that civilizations are at war and killing ... therefore .... but nature is always moving in the right direction of evolution. Are we not substitutes for apes? So our evolution is in the right direction. This is the right course of nature. And its application is loaded in the genome of living organisms.
God claims to have uploaded this program in the genome. And no one can make that claim.

 

[Pixel42]

The laws of quantum science are incompatible with the laws of matter.

All you do when you post stuff like this is display your ignorance.

The laws of quantum mechanics are the laws of matter.

 

[Pixel42]

Your choice of "civilization" is admirable. We build civilization.

Indeed we do. The reason we had to invent civilisation is because nature is so awful. We just got fed up with having lots of babies, watching half of them die, and being dead by the time we're forty.

But nature was created by God and is always being created.

Unsupported assertion.

Are we not substitutes for apes?

No. We are apes.

Once again: all you do when you post about science of any kind, whether it's quantum theory or evolution, is display your ignorance.

God claims to have uploaded this program in the genome. And no one can make that claim.

You are the one making that claim. It's not even the author of the silly book you mindlessly parrot making it, because he had no knowledge or understanding of genomes, it's you. And it's not only unsupported, but contradicted by all the available evidence.

 

[Mojo]

The laws of quantum science are incompatible with the laws of matter.

…

In an experiment, Professor Suarez shone two identical photons at the same speed towards a mirror. They expected either to be reflected or both to pass. This happened. The item changed velocity in two photons. That is, it shines photons at the mirror at two different speeds. The faster the photon, the faster it should reach the mirror. To their surprise, they saw that the photon stopped at a faster speed so that the photon could reach him at a slower speed, and at the same time they reached the mirror.

…

What I said in this message is completely documented and scientific.

 

[Mojo]

Hi
This is a complex discussion. First, it must be believed. Secondly, a lot of research and effort must be put into understanding this issue. I do not want to go into too much detail. First of all, your views on this issue are low. Or you do not believe at all. Secondly, I have little expertise in this matter. And I may not be able to fully explain this to you. I apologize for that. But just for this important point that you said, I also say an important point. Quantum science has made many discoveries in this regard. And it goes this way. Of course, we all accept quantum science. The laws of quantum science are incompatible with the laws of matter. This alone is enough to understand that there are beings in the universe that cannot be proved by matter and through the laboratory of matter.I just mentioned an example of this in this group before. Let me remind you again ... In an experiment, Professor Suarez shone two identical photons at the same speed towards a mirror. They expected either to be reflected or both to pass. This happened. The item changed velocity in two photons. That is, it shines photons at the mirror at two different speeds. The faster the photon, the faster it should reach the mirror. To their surprise, they saw that the photon stopped at a faster speed so that the photon could reach him at a slower speed, and at the same time they reached the mirror. What force or consciousness was there in the photon to stop time and the corresponding photon to reach it? Is a photon a living being with intellect? No. So what consciousness governed and guided this experiment?
What is human "intelligence"? Roger Penrose, an English physicist at the University of Oxford, Professor Professor Hawking, a physicist, and scientists at the Max Planck Institute for Physics in Munich, Germany. The view that human "intelligence" is somehow related to information stored at the quantum level. And after the death of intelligence (information stored at the quantum level), human beings can remain as a storage file forever. And man can live with this information. This fact proves the resurrection and resurrection of all beings in the universe in a recreated way. And this is what God has repeatedly claimed in the Qur'an. That will do it. On the other hand, this issue also proves the advanced mechanism of teleportation.
Can these matters be understood in accordance with the laws of Article? While there. And it can not be denied. What we can say is: "The laws of matter in the universe prove some events and beings. And it can not prove everything. To find the proof of some beings that are not in the laws of matter, it is necessary that the laws And we have to have other sciences, and through them we have to prove immaterial beings, quantum science is an example of these sciences.
What I said in this message is completely documented and scientific. No one can deny it. My advice to all of you dear groups is to think logically and scientifically. And decide.

How do you distinguish between something that cannot be observed and something that doesn’t exist?

 

[steenkh]

Hello The soul is not made of matter. Therefore, it cannot be proved in the laboratory by the laws of matter.

The soul is supposed to think, and move our bodies around. So it affects matter. Everything that affects matter is subject to the laws of physics.

 

[heydarian saeed]

We already established that your education in science is very poor ... I already challenged you on that, and you had admit that others in this thread are far above you in their science edcuation ... so in your first sentence 1 above where you are trying to tell Pixel what science can or cannot do, you are not in any educated position to tell Pixel or tell any of us what science can or cannot do, or what it has or has not done.

In your second sentence marked "2" - science has discovered and explained the nature of all subatomic particles, as specific patterns of vibration-like disturbance in various energy fields that compose the whole of space (everywhere in the entire universe), and that is NOT a "material" solid object of the form that you understand, is it? ... so science has discovered and explained all sorts of things that you yourself think of as "material/matter" ... so again you are simply uneducated-ly wrong to keep claiming that science could not discover any so-called "soul" when you wrongly claim that science can only understand "material" things "in a laboratory".

All that you have, like all religious fanatics, is just a claim of a soul ... you have not produced any such thing as any soul, all you have done is claimed that such things exist ... it's just repeating the same claims of superstitions made thousands of years ago from the ages of ignorance in biblical times.

Hello philosopher
I am glad to see you again, dear philosopher.
1- What is your approach in philosophy? I have asked you many times, but unfortunately you are evading. What were you afraid of, philosopher ?! I would like to discuss with you according to your philosophical approach. To understand what I mean. But you dodge. I'm sorry again.
2- Our claim is that there is a "soul". Because it monitors and manages all the actions of the body. You can put any name you want on it. We have an explanation for him.
3- "Spirit" is not of the material kind. So it is not provable in your material laboratory. If you claim that in your laboratory only the substance is not examined. And other things that are not material can be examined. So our discussion is over. Because he must be able to prove the "soul". So please prove it to us in your material laboratory. Prove the "spirit" to all the people of the world in the laboratory of matter.
If you can do this amazing thing. You become unique in the world. I congratulate you from here. And you win the $ 1 million prize of this association. I'll give you a $ 1 million plus.
4- Yes, my specialty is not philosophy and modern sciences. But ... I have more than many of you in this group of philosophical studies and modern science. And I just want to use modern philosophy and science to prove God. And rest assured I'm up to date. I have already claimed that if anyone can deny God to me through modern science or philosophy, I will accept it. And I have no prejudice. But so far I have not seen or heard the answer. And I'm sure no one can deny God. These discussions are just words. And there is no denying God. God is undeniable. If God did not exist, the universe would not exist. The cause must be perfect in order for the disability to be created. Here is a relationship of necessity. The necessity of having a perfect cause which is God. And the necessity of the existence of a universe that is disabled and created. I have at least 4 reasons to prove this
And in the same group that I told you about. Read my previous messages. None of your words and those of other groupmates can deny "God". No one in the world can deny God. We only see playing with words and waving our hands and waving our mouths to deny God. Because no one can deny God.
5- This is my claim: "Put aside all the holy books and the Qur'an. Just look at the universe and the laws of science, especially quantum science. And just check these. It will definitely prove God to you. And the need for There is no book or prophet. If God sent the book and the prophet, it was because of our need. Otherwise, there is no need to prove the existence of God himself, because the existence of God is very clear.God definitely exists. And there is no doubt about its existence." This is my claim.