ATroubledMan

It may be, and one supported by good reasoning

Perhaps if it doesn't interest you or you're not willing to consider creation as a legit proposition maybe don't get involved in religious discussions?

How can we possibly know when China censors information more than youtube and facebook?

You were never once asked to believe anything irrational. 

Perhaps reevaluate what I wrote. 

I'm not going over the same things continually, I'm also not going to be lectured what the processes entail when my argument is that the processes are created through an intelligent Source, that's WHY they occur.

Until you acknowledge it we can't move forward. 

Science doesn't make claims about the Creator, we went over that. 

They point to the ingredients (recipe) not the Maker or one that puts them together.

No they don't.

 I believe the word I've been using is consider, and that means to consider the rationale in my posts, that are weighed through evidence, inference, correlation, logic and common sense.

Thanks for the opinion. But that's absurd.....IMO of course. But just so you know, science doesn't claim that, that's your personal opinion. 

We were taking advice from WHO, and WHO ultimately failed. 

China has more, they just aren't reporting the cases.

when it dawns on your rational mind one day that processes don't just occur all by themselves

 I have the right to religious liberty, and freedom of assembly, and Daddy government, can kiss my ass, on my rights.

Please consider, not hating, President Trump. he is not the Antichrist, you know.

Not at all!  I have a "plethora" of material over the years, and in prayer Jesus reminded me of this fact regarding His main enemy Satan.  I therefore found the needed material for Stephen and presented it forthwith. 

Jesus is NOT smiling!

You are taking semantics to an embarrassing low level to try in vain to remove your biblical ignorance

because myself, Jesus in spirit, and in behalf of others that would correct you

 Besides, as if Jesus wouldn't stand by me

if only I was present in my easily Bible Slapping you silly, instead of two or three, or even a multitude was there, as the passage in question so states! 

First off, you are denying Jesus' statement of "there am I among them" which deduces to Jesus' spirit.  In turn, you are having an embarrassing time of understanding the term "spirit" of Jesus standing with me, where once again you slap Jesus in the face by denying His spirt! When does your insolence towards Jesus ever stop???!!!

In prayer with Jesus last night, he referred me to the following

Correct, I specifically stated in my post #57 that you attacked Jesus

You are obviously having a very hard time in understanding Matthew 18:20 relative to you positing that I can't have Jesus standing right in front of us when I Bible Slap the pseudo-christian like you, where most certainly I can.

I buy a baseball bat and ball for $110. If the baseball bat cost $100 more than the ball, how much did the ball cost?

Well in this puzzle it explains a lot because it's blatantly obvious and logical, to come to a logical conclusion we have to follow rational thought...my argument resides more on the fact that you accept that they do. 

Not verifiable through a method like science no but certainly has been shown through the correct methods or sources.

Perhaps, but I think it's more about perspective really because nothing I'm saying is absurd or unreasonable. Once a person is convinced of a particular position it is hard to get them out of that. 

You have the wrong idea about science which is somewhat typical, it's just a method of examining how the natural universe works. But that's it, it doesn't have the capability to reach the hand of God because of the nature of God, all it can do is confirm what it can observe and show the ingredient behind a process or end result. Science is a neutral study in that it makes no claims about or against God, that's not what it is for. So Theism is perfectly compatible with science, but Theism takes it a step further and deals with WHY these things take place since God is the Mover. By assuming science has all the possible insight you are avoiding the issue which is why I'm bringing it to your attention.

I really went over this already which makes this somewhat frustrating, I dealt with it by giving you the recipe analogy. Perhaps go back to that explanation. As for your claim about them operating on their own read above. Science is only able to show the ingredients, not the one putting them together.

Obviously I can't show it to be true other than appealing to your rational mind, first I know God exists so that part is already a done deal. The only thing I can do for you is to have this discussion and hopefully move forward or get to a place where you are satisfied with my explanation.

Well despite the fact I HAVE been explaining how this fits together I don't know what else to say. Maybe someone else will pick up on the rationale of what I'm writing and be willing to move forward in the discussion but I can't continue to keep repeating the same thing at this point. Once you see the rationale is in my proposition that processes are only associated with intelligence maybe we can get somewhere. I don't have to explain that it explains itself.

Other than my claims? what other thing would you be looking for in our discussion?

it is the very proposition I'm making that I want you to consider, I don't have any need at this moment for anyone else's claims but my own proposition.

And again, the only thing verifiable is that you know how the processes work, albeit leaving out the WHY they occur. I understand you don't have any reason to ask why they occur, but that is the point behind my argument...to ask yourself why would any processes be occurring at all.

That's been done already, since you seem unable to pick up on it I'm going to leave it be I guess. Hopefully any readers will see the rationale in what I've been saying. And just to repeat it yet again, my argument rests in the idea that processes cannot occur all by themselves because inanimate forces can't generate intelligent results......that IS my explanation in a nutshell.

And despite many people accepting that they do, I'm building the case for God through the use of common sense and rationale that God has been the Source behind the processes that have occurred in our universe.

You asked me show that, my practical answer is.....it is the very processes we see taking place that are used by God to bring things into existence, in other words if there was no intelligent source none of these processes would be taking place. So what we observe through the scientific method is how God creates the universe.

So I must say again, that from the Creationists perspective it is indeed a superior view and one reason it is, is because it deals with WHY processes occur in the first place, since it is illogical to assume that they occur by themselves. From your point of view, which I do get, you are content not asking why they occur since it appears there is no Prime Mover and I also went over that already briefly.

YOUR BLATANT ATTACK UPON JESUS QUOTE:

 He said he was not going to the feast, and he only went in disguise, not as himself. And he stated why he was doing so, but his disciples did not understand. Is disguising one's self a sin?

Since Jesus does not LIE

Jesus and I

2. If it is possible that a maximally great being exists, then a maximally great exists in some possible world.

3. If a maximally great exists in some possible world, then it exists in every possible world.

I am fully aware of all the angles, I'm well versed in many hypotheses and I do educate myself on scientific studies. So just because I have come to an obvious conclusion doesn't mean I'm not open-minded or that I am biased. Materialism, atheism and naturalism are all worldviews I have been facing and addressing for a long time now. I'm sharing with you what I believe to be the superior view.

Having said that what we have been discussing is only one aspect of what I base my beliefs on, we are just working from a surface level platform. If I can get you to see that it is reasonable to consider there is a Creator involved then maybe we can discuss all the things that it implies from God to creation to the soul, and many of the deeper issues or concerns with religious theologies.

Yes science is in the business of explaining how things work, but that does not necessitate that is why they operate. Since my claim is that God is using the elements and forces to generate processes, it may appear that these forces or elements act upon themselves but that's because God eludes what we can physically observe however, the processes themselves are the indication, they indicate intelligence. If I can get you to see the intelligence behind what they produce then I have a chance to get you to consider God as that intelligent Source.

This is just to get us considering there might be a Creator and then we move forward. In other words I would want you to consider that Theism is not something that is just about some absurd beliefs, there is good reason to accept God exists. We start by examining the nature of the processes within the universe. You're free to accept that they operate alone but I'm offering what I see as a superior proposition.

I honesty don't think it's that difficult to show, if I can get you to look at the final products and question how inanimate forces could ever produce anything. Again, we can see and observe how they work, but why are they doing that?

My reasoning is that planets don't just create themselves, and surely not in positions where they receive heat and light sources...my reasoning behind that is I don't believe processes can occur from nothing, and then produce things that appear intelligently in order. I don't believe evolution for example has the ability on its own to produce creatures of sentience and intelligence all by itself, I see God as the prime mover. This is pure common sense I'm appealing to. I know we can observe the processes taking place but again, I'm appealing to your rational mind that God generates them. God manipulates the elements and energy to create form within the universe, the formation of stars, solar systems and planets....brings about processes to manifest things into existence. It might seem a futile thing for me to do but I'm trying to switch your perspective.

We can agree to disagree here but if I have any chance at all in this discussion it's that I want you to consider one proposition superior to the other.

Formations is the key word I would want you to focus on. That's a big key factor IMO, how can a formation happen without a formER. I'm not asking how they form, I'm asking why they form. Why would anything form in the first place? you say electromagnetic radiation and gravity being the main forces building solar systems and I say God is using those tools to form solar systems. Look at the order in which things occur, they fit perfectly in with the process of a Creator...birth of stars (light and heat sources), displacement of galaxies, arrangement of solar systems, formation of planets, development of environments and ecosystems, food sources and then the evolution of embodiment. I mean to me it is very obvious this was prepared and thought out. My question is how could you accept it occurred by itself through inanimate substances? I say you're accepting (believing) that they occur by themselves.

No, the story can't be compared to evolution but that's not the question....the question is can they be compatible. The answer to that question of course is yes, by not taking a literal approach to Genesis. And as I brought up in another thread the Genesis story just invokes the idea behind creation, it's not a recipe for how God created processes to where we observe them today. It's more like a snap shot or a generalized concept to conceptualize imagery rather than a detailed account of how God creates things, or manifests them into existence. 

There could be several reasons why there is movement beneath the Earth (perhaps google it), but to avoid focusing on plate tectonics alone that's not really what I'm referring to as processes in that it specifically shows there to be a Creator. I gave you some examples previously, perhaps you could address some of those things. I'm not making the assumption I know why every process was generated, I'm simply pointing out that the larger picture...being the whole of what we observe is pretty straight forward. There seems to be an obvious pattern of processes that achieve a desired ends and that doesn't just happen all by itself, meaning to me at least it is obvious there is an intelligent force at work. 

Just because there is movement beneath the Earth does not necessarily mean God is driving it specifically (like physically moving the plates lol), but the reason there is movement at all is because of a prior cause (which was generated due to forming this planet in a desired fashion).....like I said there are causes and there are effects, processes and then effects. But, it seems to me that mountains are an aspect of what makes the earth beautiful and while there may be several reasons why movement beneath the Earth is needed (like heat for example).....I would think though that God surely wanted mountains in the grand scheme of things as also Earth is a planet God wanted movement. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_internal_heat_budget

Look, we can nitpick all day at what we believe is not necessary but to me that's just avoiding the point I'm making. I'm asking you to step back and look at the whole picture, if you wish to zoom in on the smaller details you might lose sight of what I want you to look at. My main point being, that processes don't occur all by themselves and produce things that have an intelligent outcome. Sure, there's going to be smaller details that make us scratch our heads but remember the scale at what we are dealing with. Not everything is going to appear to be perfect, from the earth's point of view maybe we are in the way, from our point of view maybe plate tectonics are in the way, maybe from the ants point of view everything is just too large lol, on and on we go...perceptions are a dime a dozen and that's the nature of contrast and duality. In the larger picture God figured out some pretty cool ways to make it all work for the most part.

I appreciate that  but how can you say that looking at what energy produces though? isolating itself to create forms...it is the very force that drives pretty much everything, it creates all kinds of processes including creatures that are conscious and sentient...I mean come on. Look at our own solar system and the arrangement involved, heat and light sources, a planet that is a gigantic habitat for all kinds of life. If you focus in on micro scale stuff you're going to miss the larger outcome. Kind of like if you were to observe a recipe and decided to focus on only the measurement of flour, salt, sugar or any one those ingredients and refused to look at the end result of a magnificent pie....a pancake and all it's glory after just a few processes came together lol. I guess I would want you to look at the end product and not the ingredients to see what I mean by a desired end product.

Having said that I think the hand of God can surely be seen in the ingredients but it's not always as obvious.

Not everything has to have purpose for creation to be true. Often times things will certainly appear to be random or have no real purpose especially when you get down to the subatomic and nanopartical levels, things get weird. That is the nature of playing with elements. The larger picture, the structuring of the world and all the processes that are involved should be blatantly obvious. What you should be considering is how the very nature of energy operates in creation, with desired outcomes, why it produces intelligence.....and questioning how the larger picture could be producing those processes.

I'm going to say there's processes and there are effects, effects are not always the desired outcome of a process. On the larger picture I would say mountains being formed are a process in that it's the desired outcome, and that involves the use of tectonic plates. Yes, it's quite dangerous but for the most part many are untouched by it and many are able to observe their beauty without fear. But then again the whole idea of a planet and its functions are quite dangerous, God is playing with mega blocks lol when humans are quite tiny and frail, it's the nature of the game I suppose. In the long run, if a human were to lose their physical body they just move to another part of creation. I doubt the perception of God is limited by tragedies that occur on one planet.

I disagree with that assessment and quite frankly seems somewhat small minded, or better put short sighted. But I appreciate that opinion, at least you're being polite and engaging on a mature level. From my perspective it seems quite the opposite. The forces themselves of course are inanimate, I'm not arguing the forces are intelligent it's my position they are used by an intelligent Source. That's obvious when you step back and see what they produce. We could argue that energy itself appears to be intelligent but it's more accurate to say it operates as intelligence. Energy though is a by-product of conscious activity, it co-exists with the conscious Reality of God, it's what generates energy and why it even exists. This energy in turn is manipulated to manifest form in creation through processes.

Why do you insist that "everyone" reads English?

Pretty much, the alternative is to accept that processes occur by themselves from inanimate forces. 

The manipulations of elements and energy certainly indicate intelligence by what they produce.

But, I'm arguing that gravitation is an aspect of creation. That was the whole point behind my proposition. In other words no "natural" processes or phenomenon would occur without an intelligence behind that process. 

Bottom line, at it's creation, the earth day was not 24 hours. Again, I maintain that time is relative, even from an earth perspective.

Sure, none of your English translations show you two separate sentences. The ancient Hebrew does. 

An evening and morning of a "day" of what perspective?

So, why are you so hung up on time, anyway?

And who gives a flying qw5ejf9vne anyway? If you're going to let a calendar rule your creation argument, you have bigger problems than missing a few days, or ten billion of them.

We have, therefore, no idea how long a period was in between the "5th day" and the 6th.