Originally posted by 7ate9Let's say for a moment that all you smart guys have been really misinterpreting the whole thing. One other meaning for name is Authority. Well if I operate in your authority for the moment I operate in your power. You know like "open up in the name (authority) of the law) or United States of America -vs- John Doe. It takes on an entirely differnt dynamic. It may have been debatable and was certainly controversial. When for the first time the Hebrew Messiah revealed a relationship that was offensive to all the religious leaders of the time. He said "Father" now given the new look with a fresh pair of eyes, he was implying an authority that no one else had ever done. Rhetorically he asked "who do men say that (I am)" Was it just a play on words or was he revealing man's true power to assert, manifest, create. If any of you can dispute that you have and continue to operate in your own earthly fathers authority. You lie and the truth is not in you!
[b]yeah, but what does the true name of Jesus mean. not what systems that support His name do, but the real name of Jesus.
Originally posted by spiritmangr8nessOf course there is an atheistic concensus! We all believe there is no God! It's not about difficulty, at all. It's simply about proof. There is no evidence for God in any way whatsoever. Indeed, many things that your bible claims can be shown to be wrong. That is evidence AGAINST God!!!
Likewise there is no true Atheistic concensus of disbelief. You guys are all over the map. It is more difficult to prove their is a God than to prove there is no God is no rational argument at all.
u believe in science and not in god right.
so u trust newton or any scientist rather than god.
do u know the equations of gravitation and how it is derived.
we use equations of circular motion .that means we are comparing a case of swinging a ball or something tied to a thread .
but can u go on swinging the ball for infinite time .
do u have the power.
but how does sun earth or any massive body has this to keep it swinging. i say this infinite power is god.
Originally posted by kuthuScientist / non-scientist, what's the biggy? Scientists are people too, you know. Unlike Gods. I guess I'll trust real people over fictional constructs any day.
u believe in science and not in god right.
so u trust newton or any scientist rather than god.
do u know the equations of gravitation and how it is derived.
we use equations of circular motion .that means we are comparing a case of swinging a ball or something tied to a thread .
but can u go on swinging the ball for infinite time .
do u have the power ...[text shortened]... es sun earth or any massive body has this to keep it swinging. i say this infinite power is god.
Originally posted by kuthuMy God, it's frightening to think that places like India are full of hundreds of millions of brain-washed morons like this guy.
u believe in science and not in god right.
so u trust newton or any scientist rather than god.
do u know the equations of gravitation and how it is derived.
we use equations of circular motion .that means we are comparing a case of swinging a ball or something tied to a thread .
but can u go on swinging the ball for infinite time .
do u have the power ...[text shortened]... es sun earth or any massive body has this to keep it swinging. i say this infinite power is god.
Originally posted by kuthuThere's no need to input power for a gravitational orbit to be stable, dude. Study some more physics.
u believe in science and not in god right.
so u trust newton or any scientist rather than god.
do u know the equations of gravitation and how it is derived.
we use equations of circular motion .that means we are comparing a case of swinging a ball or something tied to a thread .
but can u go on swinging the ball for infinite time .
do u have the power ...[text shortened]... es sun earth or any massive body has this to keep it swinging. i say this infinite power is god.
1 edit
Originally posted by scottishinnzWhat about conciousness? Is that also included in the universe of your definition? If you admit the existence of conciousness within the universe, how do you go about analysing it? Or proving something about it? It rather supports the view of one of the posters (mrstabby) that it's all just in the mind. There can be no objective proof.
In which case you simpply haven't taken everything into account. Once you do, you realise that all that extra stuff is actually part of the universe, you just forgot it before.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
Originally posted by ranjan sinhaAll your thoughts and feelings your 'consciousness' is simply the product of the neurons in your brain. There is nothing 'special' about it or humans which is a common religious conceit which goes back millennia, Humans have consistently thought of themselves as special, we were gods special creation, we were at the century of the solar system, the centre of the universe, the only intelligent self-aware creature, All wrong. Consciousness isn't even unique on earth. And certainly does not pose any problem to cosmology.
What about conciousness? Is that also included in the universe of your definition? If you admit the existence of conciousness within the universe, how do you go about analysing it? Or proving something about it? It rather supports the view of one of the posters (mrstabby) that it's all just in the mind. There can be no objective proof.