Proof we were Created - Yes, I said Proof!

Originally posted by agentscoly
reply to post by EnochWasRight

 

Foolish Human when will you wake up and realize we are nothing more than another animal on the rock floating around the chasm adhered to the gravity of the sun?

A deity? What do you smoke that you believe the lies that the powers that be have created ions ago to control the overpopulated animals?

Isn't this a conspiracy theory website? You should quit with the bible thumping and produce a viable conspiracy theory or how about the truth? religion was created to quell the masses and give those that cannot believe in themselves something to believe in...

ConSpiracy is against the Spiritus. I am Prospiratorial. Didn't you read my avatar? I am with the Spirit. You might argue that the prefix con means with. This is true. Those who conspire are together, yet against the Spirit of law. I am proSpiritual. There is a difference. Although I am eager to hear a good conspiracy, the only conspiracy here is the brainwashing of evolution as a cause. It is a result of the cause. Involution of the Spirit into the waters of life is Baptism. We are here to rise to new life (Evolve). This is true. This little change of paradigm allows you to see the true conspiracy.

Originally posted by boncho
reply to post by EnochWasRight

It begins with knowing what you are proving. In this thread, it's simple. We are created. I need no proof for this. It is evident.

 

So you offer proof, but you don't need proof but you have proof? Sorry, I'm going cross-eyed.

I offer proof, but I don't need it. I have faith, which is seeing what is unseen. I see by faith and not by sight. Those who look for proof are looking for things and actions. Proof can't be found in tangible objects or actions visible to our senses. God cannot be measured. What can be measured is the probability of an ancient text stating that the Father of Creation is the Aleph Bet and the Son is the Bet Nun (house of seed). The Son goes by the name WORD. DNA is Word and it creates all life. Imagine the odds of nomads and shepherds getting this right. It's nice to see Pi and E included as a signature, but we already knew enough from scripture, DNA, our holographic universe and the multitude of physicists to see that a Creator is evident. I have continued, post after post, to show evidence that leaves no room for another conclusion. We are created.

Each time I reply, it is not to someone giving a solid case for evolution as a cause of consciousness. On the contrary, or best proof of all is the very consciousness collapse of wave function that is know from physics. of course, this is unseen as well.

Keep looking. I see with different eyes. You can as well. Watch the many videos presented. They leave no doubt.

reply to post by boncho


You seem to know quite a bit about proof. What would constitute proof for you? Give me an example.

Originally posted by Leonidas
reply to post by EnochWasRight

 

You need to drop your anti-ad hominen plea or accept the label "Hypocrite". You opened your thread by calling anyone who disagreed with you:

"...Delusion can be the only state of mind for anyone trying to cling to any other conclusion..".

That was in your 1st Paragraph.

You can't take a cheap-shot and then try and shame anyone else for even thinking about doing what you just did.

I do not agree with your point of you, neither did you provide any proof. And I am not delusional. Frankly, my opinion is that the topic and title of your thread is bordering on nothing but an elaborate trolling on your part.

You need to play by your own rules.

Give me an example of proof that would meet your criteria.

reply to post by EnochWasRight



For starters, some honesty from you. And you stop trying to "manage" the conversation. You are obviously smart, so I presume e both know what you started and why.

Drop the agenda and talk straight. That will go a long way, otherwise there is little point in a discussion if all you want to do is convert people to your point of view rather than a determination of truth.

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
This is your pretext, not mine. I have outlined my context accurately.

I don't think you did. You employed a very cumbersome technique to derive Pi from Genesis. How does this discovery relate to a conclusion that the function of Pi is to dismiss the evolution theory?

Don't you think that the supporting discovery of number e (e = 2.7182...) in the Gospel of John is mighty counterproductive to your argument? Number e is the base of NATURAL logarithms, and it is NATURE that is responsible for evolution. How do you reconcile the presence of number e with your claim? How does number e support the idea of the creation, especially when the initial of "evolution" is letter "e"?

There are some holes in your "PROOF" theory.
First i must ask, what language of bible are you talking about when it comes to multiplying the number of letters? The first bible was not written in english and translated words dont have the same number of letters as the same word in another language.
Secondly, GOD did not put that number of letters in to those writings but the HUMAN that wrote it chose what to say and how to say it thus that HUMAN put that number in there. Not to mention the fact that the person responsible for translating the text used words he/she thought fit best and not everything is a word for word translation.
I have very little doubt there are many other holes in the theory but I only made it that far before I shruged it of and even laughed a little at how easy it was to deny your so called undeniable proof. Now if you tell me the very first bible ever written was used for this ( not a copy eather but the exact hand written text) than i will take it more serious and finish your post with an open mind but untill than it seems nonsensical.

reply to post by EnochWasRight


Christ lived and died on the cross. What more proof does anybody really need ?
Remember to seperate your wants from your needs. Seek for yourselves and you will find.

OK, I'm going to ask this again since it's been overlooked every time someone has said it. What do you have to say about the Bible originally being passed by word of mouth? That alone destroys any codes that might be found. No matter how badly you want to believe it is, the Bible is not in its original form. It doesn't matter how far you go back into the written text of a story that was spread by word of mouth, it's not going to be exact. Any codes found in it are put there on purpose or by complete accident. The Bible is kind of like the telephone game.

Originally posted by tremex

Originally posted by boncho
It is not my fault nor my problem you are illiterate.

Your quotes from Wikipedia just confirms what I said before. You should at least learn the meaning of basic scientific terminology to properly criticize the OP. As I read some of your scribble, you still have a hard time to distinguish between evidence and proof.

edit on 25-8-2013 by tremex because: (no reason given)

Is the National Academy of Sciences good enough for you?

Is Evolution a Theory or a Fact?

It is both. But that answer requires looking more deeply at the meanings of the words "theory" and "fact."

In everyday usage, "theory" often refers to a hunch or a speculation. When people say, "I have a theory about why that happened," they are often drawing a conclusion based on fragmentary or inconclusive evidence.

nationalacademies.org...

I will quote you again:

Are you aware of the cold reality that evolution is a theory?

Nope, evolution is not a holy scientific fact, as it is sometimes presented by the believers in the Omniscient Science.

Seems you and the NAS disagree.

reply to post by EnochWasRight

Proof can't be found in tangible objects or actions visible to our senses.

So if one person gives me and orange, and another person gives me an orange, me holding two oranges in my hand is not proof that I hold two oranges in my hand?

Or wait, you are speaking about proof of creation? So you cannot find proof that we were created in tangible objects/items/relics.

But if you found a genetic engineering lab from an alien race on another planet that seeded the Earth, that would be tangible proof. The concept has been proven by science, that it is possible given the means, to genetically engineer a race.

So therefore, proof of creation by tangible evidence is indeed a possibility and if it is possible, your statement that "Proof can't be found in tangible objects or actions visible to our senses." Is False.

(I'm not stating that we were created by aliens in a lab, only the possibility)

God cannot be measured. What can be measured is the probability of an ancient text stating that the Father of Creation is the Aleph Bet and the Son is the Bet Nun (house of seed). The Son goes by the name WORD. DNA is Word and it creates all life. Imagine the odds of nomads and shepherds getting this right. It's nice to see Pi and E included as a signature, but we already knew enough from scripture, DNA, our holographic universe and the multitude of physicists to see that a Creator is evident. I have continued, post after post, to show evidence that leaves no room for another conclusion. We are created.

If you believe in god I assume you also believe in Jesus, his life, his corporal form? Therefore measurable. Is god a mass of energy, a being of dimension, weight, mass? In this dimension or another? Which would make him/her/it measurable, etc.

Each time I reply, it is not to someone giving a solid case for evolution as a cause of consciousness. On the contrary, or best proof of all is the very consciousness collapse of wave function that is know from physics. of course, this is unseen as well.

Gobbledegook

Keep looking. I see with different eyes. You can as well. Watch the many videos presented. They leave no doubt.

Yet, you couldn't put it into a coherent argument if you tried...

reply to post by EnochWasRight


How is that? How do I operate? Talk about ad hominem.

Where does Paul call them bondservants? My lexicon shows the word used in Ephesians 6:5 as "douloi" which means slave, NOT bondservant. The word used in Galatians 3:28 is "doulos" which is the singular form of "doulois", so it seems he was contradicting himself after all.

I asked where Paul calls them bondservants and you come back with Paul calling himself a bondservant? That wasn't the question I was asking and you know it. No wonder you had to resort to an ad hominem.

ETA: Apparently a bond-servant IS a slave. Talk about ironic. What was your argument again? Because you basically just proved my point for me.

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
reply to post by boncho

 

You seem to know quite a bit about proof. What would constitute proof for you? Give me an example.

As I said, if you are trying to prove that god exists, if upon entering this thread entitled "Proof we were Created - Yes, I said Proof!"

----.....god, himself, (itself) whisked us away to some alternate plane of existence, to show us how we were created and plunked us back down in front of our computer screens, we'd all be posting,

"Holy crap that was some proof."

Or, if through long tedious career of research and discovery and in it you had uncovered ancient scripts and artifacts that possessed some supernatural ability to explain our origins by the hand of god, you would have evidence and proof of our creator.

In fact though, life is much duller than that and it is the reason Hollywood does so well.

The existence of god often turns into a Russel's Teapot scenario for anyone who ends up debating a believer. Suddenly the onus is on the other side to prove god doesn't exist or that he does.

No one asked you to run around looking for nonsense "proof" of god. It isn't there. Doesn't exist in our world and existence as we know it.

I surmise the only time there may be a possibility of understanding ourselves and our being, any better, is the days we move past our stars and possibly our galaxy and begin understanding life outside of our realm.

Then, and only then is there a chance.

People have spent the last few thousand years trying to "prove" god exists. And in that quest for proof they have burned people, speared them, skewered them, stoned them, cut out their tongues, their eyes, off with their penises, sewn tight their vaginas, and the grand sum of proof found:

=0

Big round of applause for that one. Congratulations.

Now, in the quest of understanding, we have compiled a good number of books and graphs and charts and papers and the life, and we have a hefty bit of scientific facts. Theories and the like. And it gives us information, makes us informed. It does not answer every question we have about our existence and why we are here, or exactly what we are (in the grand scheme of things) but it does enough to make you educated on the matter of all things human, and the perspective seen from within.

So we have that.

Anything offering more than that be weary. Be weary of anyone or anything offering up all the goods for free. Somehow, without even the modest interaction of god himself, his followers who have never met him, known him, seen him, heard him, or even graced his presence, all begin to speak on his behalf and have all the answers. Not only that, they only seek (or sought for) complete political control and impunity from the state (taxes). Aint that rich?

And do tell which god or which interpretation of god is correct then. Either they all are speaking about the same one, or there are many, but if there are many than there are none because most claim they are the one true god or there is no god like this one. Forget that though, it's not like god was a fabrication by men who looked for control over the populace by instantly answering questions they all longed to have answered... Nah, couldn't be!

reply to post by EnochWasRight


Are you #ing joking? You honestly came to ATS with ... with THAT? Incredible. I never thought I'd say this to a wimpy theist, but I think It actually takes more balls to believe that load of cow dung than reality. I mean, really did I miss the joke? Was this supposed to be like satire or something?

Originally posted by EnochWasRight

Originally posted by Xtrozero

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
Sounds like you have it all figured out. Good luck as the future arrives. I have learned a great deal about how you operate in these threads. I will leave you to your answers.

So with your title and many of your posts where does faith end and proof begin?

It begins with knowing what you are proving. In this thread, it's simple. We are created. I need no proof for this. It is evident.

What am i proving? Something so obvious, it needs no proof to be evident all by itself.

edit on 25-8-2013 by EnochWasRight because: (no reason given)

Reading these 2 lines from your post. I have 2 words for you. Confirmation bias. It seems you are litterally sticking yourbfingers in your ears and shouting "im not listening, i am right"

As pointed out, you have presented no proof. Just you tube videos and bible verses.

reply to post by boncho

Is god a mass of energy, a being of dimension, weight, mass? In this dimension or another? Which would make him/her/it measurable, etc.

This is exactly what God is. God is thee energy mass. But it is not measurable, like the energy mass of hes creation.

Do you know why energy can never disapear? Or why its information never can be lost?

Originally posted by boncho

Is Evolution a Theory or a Fact?

It is both. But that answer requires looking more deeply at the meanings of the words "theory" and "fact."

In everyday usage, "theory" often refers to a hunch or a speculation. When people say, "I have a theory about why that happened," they are often drawing a conclusion based on fragmentary or inconclusive evidence.

nationalacademies.org...

I will quote you again:

Are you aware of the cold reality that evolution is a theory?

Nope, evolution is not a holy scientific fact, as it is sometimes presented by the believers in the Omniscient Science.

Seems you and the NAS disagree.

Oh, I see that you decided to call upon the heavy guns to facilitate your rescue. Do you think I'm going to kneel before them?

Of course I don't agree with them office academicians.

Evolution has been described as "fact and theory", "fact not theory", "only a theory, not a fact", "multiple theories, not fact", and "neither fact, nor theory". The disagreements among these statements, however, have more to do with the meaning of words than the substantial issues and these are discussed below.

en.wikipedia.org...

Evolution theory viewed as a fact, when the meaning of the word is inflected by various evolutionists, predisposes no other involvement in the process except the involvement of nature. And that's not a scientific fact by the slightest to begin with. The observation that the Neanderthals are no longer with us is a fact, but there are several views that tend to explain their demise. The dumbest of them all leans against the effects of natural selection. Since the Neanderthals played a part in the evolution of human species for some 200,000 years, and there are several theories - or rather hypothetical accounts - explaining the demise of the Neanderthals, those numerous explanations cannot be obviously treated as a fact. Those are in essence educated speculations. But you can call evolution "fact and theory" when the explanation is compared with the Biblical story of creation the way it is taught in Sunday schools.

Originally posted by Leonidas
reply to post by EnochWasRight

 

For starters, some honesty from you. And you stop trying to "manage" the conversation. You are obviously smart, so I presume e both know what you started and why.

Drop the agenda and talk straight. That will go a long way, otherwise there is little point in a discussion if all you want to do is convert people to your point of view rather than a determination of truth.

It was a simple request. What constitutes proof to you? Give me an example of something that would satisfy your definition of proof. That's a request from you so I know what you are expecting.

Originally posted by tremex

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
This is your pretext, not mine. I have outlined my context accurately.

I don't think you did. You employed a very cumbersome technique to derive Pi from Genesis. How does this discovery relate to a conclusion that the function of Pi is to dismiss the evolution theory?

Don't you think that the supporting discovery of number e (e = 2.7182...) in the Gospel of John is mighty counterproductive to your argument? Number e is the base of NATURAL logarithms, and it is NATURE that is responsible for evolution. How do you reconcile the presence of number e with your claim? How does number e support the idea of the creation, especially when the initial of "evolution" is letter "e"?

Pi and e are a small part of the thread and original post. They are there by design, just as God's name of Father is Aleph Bet and His Son is the Word. That's pretty obvious information. Having two mathematical constants hidden in the verses is another enigma. Showing that we are in a hologram, and God calling this an image of Word, takes the cake. Having four Nobel Physicists proclaim the same information--priceless. I really don't get the trouble you are having. Taken together, the probability of this beyond evidence. It confirms we are created. Again, I ask for you to provide a counterargument. I agree that evolution is obvious. It is a result of programming and adaptation of the code. It's a well known concept called involution and evolution. Again, all roads lead back to God for a reason. It's the obvious conclusion. On top of this, you have Chirality and Coalescence described in exacting detail in the Bible. You have an entire chapter (Matthew 18) devoted to entanglement. As another layer, the Bible accurately predicts our current world events, the money system and the tyranny of big government. On top of this, it gives you the exact timetables as they occur. On top of this, we have the back story of the Watchers from Enoch, complete with evidence from antiquity that we were once ruled by fallen beings "who from heaven to Earth came."

I could keep going, but the point should be clear. Pi and e are not my only evidence. I linked all this information to the OP in the form of podcasts, videos and further information along the way.

What would satisfy your definition of proof? Give me an example.

- i have No Clue what you are trying to 'prove' EWR

i think you make things but incredibly Complicated

..the amn, or whatever acronym in the OP - "MN" is AMUN, the Egyptian main deity
the "Hidden One " according to the Pyramid Spells

...i think...that you are influenced by him

since you re mixing stuff up

- with respect,