|
|
Up |
|
|
  |
Author: awais.nazir.chawais.nazir.ch Date: May 24, 2008 20:39
INTRODUCTION:
I WAS ALSO SKEPTICAL. I was also skeptical, of whether God exists or
not? I tested many theories, but all of them say that they nearly
prove God, but not Absolutely. But, then I read the Bible by myself,
and this is what dawned upon me, which changed my life for the better.
BIBLE PROPHESISES MUHAMMAD, AMIDST JEWISH JEALOUSY. Whenever Bible
prophesies about the future messenger, in 95%% it is Muhammad,
explicitly, other 5%% for remaining biblical messengers; now, thousands
of bias by jews towards Arabs, couldn't alter it. I found the same
story in Hindu/Parsi scriptures.
NEED FOR A SECULAR PROOF ALSO. But I know that this will be considered
as fake, and biased interpretation of Bible/Hindu/Parsi scriptures.
Thus, to gain the attention, I have to support it with secular proofs.
And for that reason, I have first given the Secular Proof, which
almost proves God, then the Religious Proof, which absolutely proves.
SECULAR EVIDENCE (THAT GOD EXISTS):
REFERENCE: en.wikipedia.com
|
| Show full article (5.87Kb) |
|
| | 59 Comments |
|
  |
Author: turtoniturtoni Date: May 24, 2008 20:51
> GOD INTENDED MESSENGERSHIP, AS ABSOLUTE PROOF.
there is no "absolute proof" of anything; except in the conditioing of your
imagination via culture.
you're literally a brain sitting in the vat of your body.
you had to imagine to get to the other imaginations in the first place.
were you born believing in god? NO.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPQR-OsH0RQ
|
| |
|
| | no comments |
|
  |
Author: EnkiduEnkidu Date: May 24, 2008 21:25
awais.nazir.ch@ gmail.com wrote in
news:fc3913c2-04eb-46d9-b107-95cc9615794a@ 2g2000hsn.googlegroups.com:
I read a lot of crap, but I didn't see any reaoning, correct or
otherwise . . . wait, that crap wasn't your reasoning, was it? You're
drunk, right? Because if you're not, well, that would be very sad indeed.
--
Enkidu AA#2165
EAC Chaplain and ordained minister,
ULC, Modesto, CA
"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a
lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal
God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If
something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded
admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal
it."
Albert Einstein, in Albert Einstein: The Human Side
|
| |
| no comments |
|
  |
Author: ImmortalistImmortalist Date: May 24, 2008 21:40
On May 24, 8:51 pm, "turtoni" fastmail.net> wrote:
>> GOD INTENDED MESSENGERSHIP, AS ABSOLUTE PROOF.
>
> there is no "absolute proof" of anything; except in the conditioing of your
> imagination via culture.
>
> you're literally a brain sitting in the vat of your body.
>
> you had to imagine to get to the other imaginations in the first place.
>
> were you born believing in god? NO.
>
|
| Show full article (1.91Kb) |
| no comments |
|
  |
Author: turtoniturtoni Date: May 24, 2008 21:44
"Immortalist" yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:7495ec2f-4912-4099-b446-2da4ad6e8c30@v26g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
On May 24, 8:51 pm, "turtoni" fastmail.net> wrote:
>> GOD INTENDED MESSENGERSHIP, AS ABSOLUTE PROOF.
>
> there is no "absolute proof" of anything; except in the conditioing of
> your
> imagination via culture.
>
> you're literally a brain sitting in the vat of your body.
>
> you had to imagine to get to the other imaginations in the first place.
>
> were you born believing in god? NO.
>
|
| Show full article (2.39Kb) |
| no comments |
|
  |
Author: raven1raven1 Date: May 24, 2008 21:49
No. It is neither correct, nor is it reasoning.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
  |
Author: turtoniturtoni Date: May 24, 2008 21:49
> God:
> No. It is neither correct, nor is it reasoning.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
  |
Author: Uncle VicUncle Vic Date: May 24, 2008 22:48
One fine day in alt.atheism, awais.nazir.ch@ gmail.com wrote:
> SECULAR EVIDENCE (THAT GOD EXISTS):
>
> REFERENCE: en.wikipedia.com
>
> FIRST LIFE CAME ABOUT 4 BILLION YEARS AGO. First-life, proto-DNA/RNA/
> PNA/TNA/GNA, on earth emerged about 4 billion years ago, as fossil
> records suggest.
>
> That proto-DNA/RNA/PNA/TNA/GNA has to meet the following four
> conditions, (1) ALL OF THEM (2) SIMULTANEOUSLY AND (3) WITHIN ONE
> GENERATION, or the proto-DNA/RNA/PNA/TNA/GNA is dead:
> -different organic compounds joined in exact helical order.
> -have a complete reproductive system.
> -have a complete DNA/RNA/PNA/TNA/GNA-repair system.
> -have a complete metabolic system.
>
> Conclusion:
> -GOD IS REQUIRED.
|
| Show full article (0.98Kb) |
| no comments |
|
  |
Author: DanielSanDanielSan Date: May 24, 2008 23:01
Uncle Vic wrote:
> One fine day in alt.atheism, awais.nazir.ch@ gmail.com wrote:
>
>> SECULAR EVIDENCE (THAT GOD EXISTS):
>>
>> REFERENCE: en.wikipedia.com
>>
>> FIRST LIFE CAME ABOUT 4 BILLION YEARS AGO. First-life, proto-DNA/RNA/
>> PNA/TNA/GNA, on earth emerged about 4 billion years ago, as fossil
>> records suggest.
>>
>> That proto-DNA/RNA/PNA/TNA/GNA has to meet the following four
>> conditions, (1) ALL OF THEM (2) SIMULTANEOUSLY AND (3) WITHIN ONE
>> GENERATION, or the proto-DNA/RNA/PNA/TNA/GNA is dead:
>> -different organic compounds joined in exact helical order.
>> -have a complete reproductive system.
>> -have a complete DNA/RNA/PNA/TNA/GNA-repair system.
>> -have a complete metabolic system.
>>
>> Conclusion: ...
|
| Show full article (1.40Kb) |
| no comments |
|
  |
|
|
  |
Author: Uncle VicUncle Vic Date: May 24, 2008 23:08
One fine day in alt.atheism, DanielSan gmail.com> wrote:
> Uncle Vic wrote:
>> One fine day in alt.atheism, awais.nazir.ch@ gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> SECULAR EVIDENCE (THAT GOD EXISTS):
>>>
>>> REFERENCE: en.wikipedia.com
>>>
>>> FIRST LIFE CAME ABOUT 4 BILLION...
|
| Show full article (1.29Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|