Re: -
Where does one commence, amongst contradiction?
Where does one commence, amongst contradiction?
I was giving my own comments on Hugh Jackman's videos, not quoting scripture.
I do, however, enjoy your ego trips, have 3 degrees myself (2 of which are in science), and own a successful business.
The most studied/educated scientists recognize a presence of a higher power outside of all laws of science/nature. Statistics hold no meaning for me & never have. I am interested in miracles and things outside of the laws of nature, things that cannot be scientifically explained and are out of our realm. If you can go there, I'll gladly join you. Thanks for sharing your views.
Is this not the overall contradiction? As titled in the video 'Is Christianity a Ego Trip?' and a previous post I have resonated two valid psychological perceptions of individual consciences, Fritz's Balance theory and James' varieties on religious experiences. As confusing as it may have been, if the Bible, is the true and everlasting word, then why is not fulfilled to its complete perceptions, yet left to individual dichotomy? You stated: 'God' as love, thus the only form of justification I can exclaim of this is evidential from the Bible, for an Atheist cannot truly hold value to express God's love, if you get what I mean. However, the Bible says Christians should (in summary of a few verses) propose killings, murder other religious priests as they are not fulfilling 'God's' orgasmic narcissism? I guess my fault lies that I don't really understand how this so called God works, thus relating to scripture in the only evidence of this deity's proclamations.
I am truly happy for you. I appreciate the work and intellect the field of science holds, for the future of tomorrow is not possible without it, let alone the recount of yesterday is evidential with it. Please do not regard this as an ego trip, I just wanted to make a rebuttal, of a thread on an opposing point of two people who enjoy non-denominational churches, I simply just wanted to merely ask why, and point out on what I believe it bears no significance in individual reasoning. I don't think there has been many notified studies emphasising the value a faith in religion holds to do so. If you don't mind me asking what sciences did you study in? Just out of curiosity.
Sorry, but I thought you studied science? How exactly are conclusions confined with evidence from statistical data? Albeit, qualitative/quantitative data holding no means? I understand forecasting errors, or regression residuals, yes they are accounted as errors and it is justified, but surely you have conducted and concluded many experiments based on statistical data, surely? What makes your account for having no reasoning to it? As a mere science observer and stepping into the academic field, I am curious to hear your views on this, as it may differentiate my views on any further experiments I may conduct with statistical data. In addition, your point about leading scientists on having a higher recognition higher than science/nature, well that is 'statistically deemed correct (DeGrasse Tyson's point) but I care of nothing what so ever what their beliefs are, I care again when this is biased against objectivity or encroachment of my beliefs and reasoning for holding trialled and tested methods by critical analysis and peer reviewed on its accuracy.
Comment