Lv 747,183 points

Dave D

Favourite answers6%
Answers13,415
Questions117
  • How can so many Protestants speak about "Sola Scriptura"?

    The believe that every word is literally true but they do so from a Bible which has had 6 books, a psalm. various chapters, and verse cut from it which had been part of the Bible for 1,200 years. How can you attack the Catholic Church based on your Bible when the true Bible has all the support for their teachings in the books which you have eliminated?

    10 AnswersReligion & Spirituality3 months ago
  • Christians.... or anyone else looking for a great series...have you seen "The Chosen"?

    This is a free series with 8 seasons planned giving the most realistic story of Jesus I have even seen. Absolutely stunning! Season 1 is complete. It is available on YouTube, facebook and other venues. If you haven't seen it check it out!

    Here is the link to episode 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=craeyJdrCsE

    Youtube thumbnail

    Let me know your reaction!

  • Why would people who claim they want an answer to their question block people who can provide them?

    An anonymous person asked: "The origin of the universe is the uncaused cause, the origin has no origin because it is the origin". Can anyone please make sense of this?"

    I could not post my response because he/she apparently has me blocked.

    My response was:

    Absolutely it can be explained. All PHYSICAL things logically must have a cause for their existence. This likewise applies to the largest physical thing of the universe which is the universe itself. Most people when asked the cause of the universe would reply with "the Big Bang", but what caused that? Here is where you get an endless series of suggestions such as other dimensions, the existence of quantum fluctuations, other universes, membranes producing countless universes, etc. ALL of these are more physical things that likewise need a cause. It is impossible to have an endless series of causes because without a FIRST cause you would have endless nothingness.

    However this first cause must itself need nothing else for its own existence. It must be an UNcaused cause. Therefore it cannot be physical and as a result must be spiritual or supernatural. For it to cause the incredible order and fine-tuning of all the cosmological constants of our universe it must be mega-intelligent, and have the ability, willingness and purpose to act. In other words He must be a "person" who is omnipotent, omniscient, etc., etc. thus possessing all of the powers we assign to the Supreme Being whom we call "God".

    7 AnswersReligion & Spirituality11 months ago
  • Can anyone point to the tallest tree in the universe? Does the fact that you cannot mean that it does not exist?

    All God-centered religions with which I am familiar refer to God as "the SUPREME Being". Logically that means there can be only one.

    4 AnswersReligion & Spirituality1 year ago
  • What is the "reason and logic" that supports atheism?

    In a comment to my answer on a question an atheist made this common reply: "Eh, still doesn't change the fact that Atheism will prevail. Logic and reasoning eventually prevails over dogmatic religious beliefs."

    I have given many examples of reason and logic that supports the existence of God in my questions. What is the reason and logic that supports atheism,,, I just do not seem to have seen any.

    46 AnswersReligion & Spirituality2 years ago
  • #13 Atheists what would be your LOGICAL rebuttal of this evidence supporting the existence of the supernatural?

    In order to make various theories “work” it has been proposed that as many as 26 different dimensions exist. These extra proposed dimensions are additional dimensions of both space and time beyond the 3 physical and 1 time dimensions of our own existence. Some of these theories, such as the “M-Theory”, were created specifically to attempt to dismiss the fine-tuning of our universe which is such strong evidence for the existence of God. If there were an endless number of universes then ours might just be the one that got all of the values right. But it is ironic that in doing so they are actually providing more evidence of His existence.

    Scientists have stated that if there are extra-dimensions then it is possible that each of these other dimensions could have universes of their own with intelligent life that would be completely different than our own. They also have said that they could be occupying the same physical space as we are but if they possessed our exact four dimensions they could interact within our universe while we would have no knowledge of their presence. If a 5-dimensional being from a universe with all of our dimensions +1, and they had discovered a way to enter the rift between our universe and his, then he might even be able to present himself in our 4-dimensional world. Most likely we would only see him as a wisp or what we might call a “ghost” or an "apparition" . If this isn’t the definition of “supernatural” then I don’t know what is.

    11 AnswersReligion & Spirituality2 years ago
  • #12 (Christians be sure to look) Atheists what would be your LOGICAL rebuttal to this evidence of God's existence?

    This blew my mind. It came from a YOUTUBE video but when I checked it with other sources I found that it was true.

    The first word of Genesis in the Bible is the Hebrew word “bereshit” meaning “In beginning”. The Hebrew letters which form this word are Bet, Resh, Alef, Shin, Yod, and Tau.

    Each of these letters are also words with a number of meanings:

    Bet means: tent, house, the body, the household, inside, within, or amid

    Resh means: a head, a person, what is the highest, the most important and chief

    Alef means: ox, bull, gentile, tame, the leader, strength, what is first, Adonai (God), a thousand and teach.

    Shin means: teeth, ivory, the point of a rock, a peak, to devour, to consume, destroy, something sharp.

    Yod means: a hand closing, to work, a deed done, a finished work

    Tau mean: a mark, to sign, cross, ownership, to seal, covenant, join two things, together, and the last.

    The first two letters, bet and resh when used together mean “son” (coming from the most important person of the household)

    As a result the VERY FIRST WORD OF THE BIBLE when using the first two letters as “son” and the remaining letters as individual words could easily be seen to mean “The Son of God is destroyed by his own work on the cross.”

    Genesis existed as an oral story for centuries and was written down perhaps as long as 4,000 years ago. Yet the very first word can be seen to forecast what was to come 2000 years later with Christ. This could ONLY have happened by God Himself.

    12 AnswersReligion & Spirituality2 years ago
  • #11 Atheists what is your LOGICAL rebuttal to this evidence of God's existence?

    The Mandelbot Set is a series of numbers selected by a simple equation that produces a product number which does not grow. When used with imaginary numbers or fractals and then graphed it produces a shape which repeats itself in smaller sizes but in doing so creates incredible beautiful shapes infinitely. One could never determine the true circumference of the starting shape. It is interesting that with this set can also be found over and over the Fibonacci sequence.

    This however exists only in the abstract world of math. You will not find it fully in nature because nature is the physical world, not the abstract. Infinities do not exist in nature. What you will find easily in nature is approximate fractals. They are referred to as “approximate” because of the restraints of the physical there will be a limited number of reiterations. Among others Mandelbot sets are found in snowflakes, frost, ferns, broccoli, coastlines, mountain chains, clouds, lightning and spiral galaxies. Why should a bolt of lightning conform to this abstract equation?

    There is absolutely no reason that the set must be found in nature. There is no reason why it should tie into another chance equation of the Fibonacci sequence. Randomness or chance certainly would never be able to produce it once, let alone all of the examples where it can be found.

    The fact that abstract mathematical equations can be found also in nature is an obvious proof of the intelligence behind it, which must be God.

  • #10 Atheists what would be your LOGICAL rebuttal to this evidence of the existence of God?

    The Big Bang starting from an extremely small singularity which exploded with incredible force setting in motion the creation of the universe. So from where came the singularity? There are only four logical answers to this: that it was spontaneously generated, that it was eternal, that there is an endless cycle of universes, or that it was created.

    1) The First Law of Thermodynamics states that no new matter or energy can be created or destroyed. Therefore all matter/energy had to be contained within that microscopic singularity. If one says that this spontaneously generated this would be a violation of the First Law. There are no exceptions to this Law. This rules this possibility out.

    2) The Second Law of Thermodynamics states that everything moves towards decline or entropy. Energy is constantly being transformed to unusable forms of energy. This means that the amount of usable energy is running down irreversibly. Because usable energy still exists the universe could not have always existed.

    3) The idea of an endless cycle of universes has already been disproved by science. If it were true the expansion of the universe should be slowing down. Science has proved that instead the speed of expansion is increasing thus making to idea of a cycle of universes nonviable.

    4) This leaves only the final possibility that the universe exists because of an action taken by God.

    “When you eliminate the impossible, whatever is left, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.”

    9 AnswersReligion & Spirituality2 years ago
  • #9 Atheists what would be your LOGICAL rebuttal to this evidence of the existence of God?

    The “First Law of Thermodynamics” states that in a closed system, which science claims the universe is, matter and energy can be neither created nor destroyed but it can change from. Matter can become energy and energy matter. What this means is that no new matter or energy can come into existence and that there is no matter or energy which goes out of existence.

    As a result those who state that the universe came from “nothing” violate the first law of thermodynamics which was established by the very same scientific community which they claim to represent. Typically some try to make nothing something by stating there were quantum fluctuations without any explanation as to how they could exist if nothing else does. Likewise some appeal to the Law of Gravity without remembering that they have also stated that the universal laws all break down completely as you approach the moment of the Big Bang. This means that the Law of Gravity did not yet exist. Gravity functions because of the existence of objects. If there are no objects then there is no gravity.

    If nothing existed then the implications are clear: an outside influence beyond our sense of understanding and completely free from any control by physical laws functioned with intelligent force and deliberate intent acted to set in motion the creation of the universe. It is evident that a being that is greater than science had to create the scientific laws. No other explanation makes any sense.

    19 AnswersReligion & Spirituality2 years ago
  • #8 Atheists what would be your LOGICAL rebuttal to this evidence of God's existence?

    Thomas Aquinas' argument of contingency and necessity,

    All life that exists depends on something else for their existence. They are “contingent beings”. This therefore requires a “necessary being” from which the contingent being came. But this necessary being might also be a contingent being requiring a previous necessary being. Again, no matter how far back you go and no matter how many evolutionary changes have been made you arrive at a FIRST necessary being, or God. Our very existence demands that God must exist.

    This is similar to two other of my arguments but this one speaks of life rather than the universe,

    12 AnswersReligion & Spirituality2 years ago
  • #7 Atheists what would be your LOGICAL rebuttal to this evidence of God's existence?

    Thomas Aquinas' argument from motion.

    Nothing can essentially change itself by its own power. I cannot grow wings or gills because I want or even if need them. Therefore changes in oneself must be performed or created from something beyond the scope of oneself. Ultimately, no matter how many steps in-between this leads to a prime mover which is God.

    Aquinas lived long before Darwin, but the argument is valid even when considering evolution. Adapting to one’s environment can only take you so far. Major positive change in a living thing must be as the result of an intelligent force outside of the life-form.

    22 AnswersReligion & Spirituality2 years ago
  • #6 Atheists, what would be your LOGICAL rebuttal to this evidence of the existence of God?

    The necessity for a “First Cause” that relies on nothing else for its own existence.

    All physical and gaseous things need a cause for their existence. This would include the largest known physical & gaseous thing which is the universe itself. The things which perhaps caused the universe to exist such as the Big Bang likewise also need a cause for its existence. No matter how far back you go, whether you speak of other universes in a cycle, other dimensions with universes of their own, membranes producing countless universes they ALL need a cause for their existence. Saying that there is an infinite number of causes and effects or an infinite cycle of universes is illogical because without an ultimate starting place for the existence of the physical there would be infinite nothingness. Logic therefore demands that there MUST be an ultimate first cause which depended on nothing else for its own existence which created or set in motion the cause or causes of the universe.

    We can make numerous logical deductions as to the nature of this ultimate first cause, but that may be another question.

    24 AnswersReligion & Spirituality2 years ago
  • Atheists are constantly asking for scientific evidence that supports theism. Can an atheist give scientific evidence that supports atheism?

    Note that this is NOT a discussion about evolution. Atheists have made it clear their belief that atheism is ONLY about a disbelief in God. Just give me any sort of supportive science that supports that position.

    42 AnswersReligion & Spirituality2 years ago
  • For some reason this has not been appearing... 4th try... Atheists your logical rebuttal of this evidence of God?

    DNA can to store non-biological information but it suffers from degradation over time. Of less capacity, yet far more resilient, is the Genetic Code. Here information can be stored. Once fixed the code could remain unchanged over cosmological time-frames.

    On the behest of SETI mathematicians were presented with a code or signal embedded in terrestrial genetic codes. The code was shown to possess an ensemble of same-style precision-type patterns. The patterns were further shown to match the criteria for an intelligent signal. Only a mega-intelligence could have done this.

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ar...

    This leaves only two viable possibilities. Either the mega-intelligence involved was from an alien species from within our universe or it involved a super-intelligence from outside of it.

    Evidence strength: On its own I would give it a 5/10 because of the either/or scenario. However when coupled with the Oxford University Study to be posted I believe it shoots it up to about 8/10

    2 AnswersReligion & Spirituality2 years ago
  • #5 Atheists what is your LOGICAL rebuttal for this evidence of God's existence?

    Humans are predisposed to believe In God an and afterlife

    A recent 3 year study done in a diverse range of cultures in 20 nations done by Oxford University has found human beings are predisposed to believe in God and an afterlife. This is seen as an innate drive rather than a learned behavior. Both theism and atheism are reasonable responses to this drive.

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/07/1107...

    Evidence strength: 5/10. Like the “Wow signal” mentioned above this is not direct evidence of God but rather of human programming by an intelligence. However when the two are taken together we have a curious question that logically strengthens the evidence for the existence of God. For if both the programming of terrestrial genetic code and the human programming to believe in God and in an afterlife were in fact done by an alien species we must ask why an alien mega-intelligence would program humans to believe in God unless they themselves did also?

    Evidence strength when taken together I would place at about 8/10

    7 AnswersReligion & Spirituality2 years ago
  • #4 Atheists what is you LOGICAL rebuttal for this evidence of God's existence?

    The “WOW Signal” of Terrestrial Genetic Code

    DNA has already been shown to be able to store non-biological information but it suffers from degradation over time. Of less capacity, yet far more resilient, is the Genetic Code. Here information can be stored. Once fixed the code could remain unchanged over cosmological time-frames.

    On the behest of SETI mathematicians were presented with a code or signal embedded in terrestrial genetic codes. The code was shown to possess an ensemble of same-style precision-type patterns. The patterns were further shown to match the criteria for an intelligent signal. Only a mega-intelligence could have done this.

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/...

    This leaves only two viable possibilities. Either the mega-intelligence involved was from an alien species from within our universe or it involved a super-intelligence from outside of it.

    Evidence strength: On its own I would give it a 5/10 because of the either/or scenario. However when coupled with the Oxford University Study to be posted I believe it shoots it up to about 8/10

    1 AnswerReligion & Spirituality2 years ago