Perhaps it's a larger point about faith. This starts with KalvinB's topic If you could see heaven. Included as a starting point is the response I offered there:

If you could see heaven and it was all great and wonderful, would you still want to be here on earth? I'm assuming that the topic post operates under the presupposition that the vision of heaven put before us is not an illusion cast by the Grand Deceiver?

Frankly, at that point, the qusetion becomes moot.

If we can be sure that the heaven we're seeing is actually heaven, then how do we know we're seeing it? Well, someone has to be showing it to us and explaining with certain credibility that this is what we're seeing. Who is that doing the explaining?

For instance, the Summerland: if I wanted to be as literal as the vague descriptions allow me, heaven is a Phish concert in July at the Gorge Amphitheatre--music, oblivious individual happiness, and communal joy. Well, the body weight in hashish is important, too, but it's a Phish concert, so I think that part's covered.

So someone needs to make it clear to you that this is not an illusion, is not a Phish concert, and so forth. Now, who is that person/entity? Is that entity--presumably not Satan--evidence of God?

And at that point, let me turn the question back to the topic poster: Standing in God's presence, will it really take the temptation of Heaven to incite compliance?

I mean, if communication with God isn't enough to convince me to kowtow and whimper for my soul, I guess we can always shoot for the appeal to greed.

The boldfaced portion above is where it occurred to me: How does anybody know when they're dealing with God?

Think of murder, for a moment. There is a Sufi Dervish tale which recounts an impatient man who sought a master for advice. The master sends him to a junction in a mountain road to stand beneath a withered tree and offer refreshments to travelers. And so he does, ad nauseam until one day a man ignores his offers. "Hello, traveler, you must be weary. Please, stop and partake of refreshment." But the traveler does not bat an eye; offended at not even having been acknowledged, the impatient man pulls his gun from the crook in the tree and shoots the traveler in the back, whereupon the tree blossoms and a voice is heard. The voice explains that this is the Will of God; the dead man was a murderer on the way to the most heinous crime of his career (as known by God), and thus his passing, orchestrated by God, is cause for rejoice. Though Sufi tales are meant for several interpretive levels, the most relevant here is the obvious claim that things are not always what they seem, especially when dealing with God.

Now, given the number of exchanges I've had with other posters about what is of God and what is of the Devil, I think it might be time to ask, What makes you so sure?

We can look to the Bible, and the story of Balaam, who struck his ass thrice for refusing to proceed. There a man curses and beats his animal for being in awe of a godly presence.

Aside from Because the Bible tells me so, who is to say that the Satan tempting Jesus in the desert was not Dad in Disguise; after all, Jesus was fully human, and therefore subject to temptation--God may have just been checking up on him. (You'll note it is later that Jesus gets around to the "unforgiveable" sin of besmirching the Holy Spirit.)

When Tony1 claims something to be inspired by, conspired with, or demanded by the Devil, how does he know he's not besmirching the Spirit?

When you see Heaven, as noted in KalvinB's topic, how do you know it's really Heaven? What if it's just the Deceiver seeking new subscribers?

How do you know anything at all about God?

This is why it's called faith.

thanx,
Tiassa :cool:

And you complain that God doesn't show himself...

Ben

The God of the Holy Bible is too 'great' to conceive, and it is written that the Heavens and the Earth would pass away in His very presents!!! He is very real, and very God and He 'alone' is the Creator of all the Heavens and the Earth and all that is unknown to mankind!

Mankind was created in the 'image' of GOD, and was made like it's said in Genesis 1:1-on, that man was made in His image fully formed! And not a monkey off-shot!!:rolleyes:

You will see GOD one day, saint or sinner, we all will! But to see Him in all His Glory here on Earth, you know not what you are asking for!

Jesus saves! Lost and confused people who need Him! Jesus is the ONLY WAY unto the Father God! There is absolutely no other way! Jesus and God are one in the same! God Almighty!!

KalvinBAnd you complain that God doesn't show himself...Well, if God did show himself, I suppose we wouldn't be having this discussion?

Once again, the only way I can make any sense of your point is if I either assume you have none or else wildly speculate what other factors could possibly make such a position relevant. If there's something I'm missing, KalvinB, please share.

Loone

Well, there's a funcitonal criterion. If I'm surprised, don't let that bother you:The God of the Holy Bible is too 'great' to conceive, and it is written that the Heavens and the Earth would pass away in His very presents!!! Hmmm ... so if one was definitively dealing with the God, it would be evident because the Heavens and Earth would pass away?

I'll accept that answer. It renders every holy vision, every apocalyptic dream, and any vision of Heaven one might receive invalid.

Not bad, Loone.

Not bad at all.

thanx,
Tiassa :cool:

If you could see heaven you would doubt it were actually heaven.

If you could see God would you doubt he was actually God?

Ben

It is impossible for us to SEE God atleast while we are still in the physical earthly form. The Bible says we could not survive it.
As for how we know it is Him we are dealing with be it thru an angel, a prophet, the Holy Spirit or audible voice of God...we would know. Our spirit would testify with in us with undeniable assurance of His presence. Being created of God and sustained by His very power....our spirit knows Him, He is not a stranger but a power that we have known intimatly from the very begining..and our spirit recognizes Him.

Have you ever met someone...someone you are sure you do not remember ever haveing met, but somehow they seemed strangely familiar, almost comfortable as though you had been close for a very very long time? That is a very crude example...but it is that way with God. We have no knowledge of His appearance...that we remember anyway :O)...but when we "see" Him, we "know" Him.

As for Heaven...John said the streets are purest gold...Jesus said we lay up treasures there by what we do here...the Bible says there are levels to the heavens....one could speculate that we in some way must create our own heaven. I certainly don't think we will be wandering around playing harps and hugging all the time, it would get boreing after the first 3 or 400 years. :O) It would have to be beyond our wildest dreams and since each of our dreams are unique and different, Heaven must surely cover them all.

What if you have been lied to? & you believed it!.

*Mystical Ethics: The mystic theory of ethics is explicitly based on the premise that the standard of value of man's ethics is set beyond the grave, by the laws requirements of another, supernatural dimension, that ethics is imposible for man to practice, that it is unsuited for and opposed to man's life on earth, and that man must take the blame for it and suffer through the whole of his earthly existence, to atone for the guilt of beign unable to practice the impracticable. The Dark Ages and the Middle Ages are the existential monument to "this" theory of ethics.

A mystic code of morality demanding self-sacrifice cannot be promulgated or propagated without a supreme ruler that becomes the collector of the sacrificing. Traditionally, there have been two such collectors: either God or society. The collector had to be inaccessible to mankind at large, and his authority had to be revealed only through an elite of special intermediaries, variously called "high priests," "commissars," "Gauleiters," etc.*Ayn Rand*

So what awaits us after death?
The illusion of a heaven, fed to us by ancient religions, with the threat that if one does not believe, our soul will end up in another illusion representing evil, which we call hell?.

It's a hard pill to swallow!. Why does religion need the concept of hell, in order to threaten unbelievers?.

If you could see God would you doubt he was actually God? Wouldn't have to. I would know it wasn't God. Specifically, I would know it was not the God of the Bible. As Loone has pointed out, if I had the time to doubt because the Heavens and the Earth had not passed away--and, presumably, me with them--we can be sure it's not God.

thanx,
Tiassa :cool:

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Godless
What if you have been lied to? & you believed it!.

*Mystical Ethics: The mystic theory of ethics is explicitly based on the premise that the standard of value of man's ethics is set beyond the grave, by the laws requirements of another, supernatural dimension, that ethics is imposible for man to practice…

If by ‘mystic’ you mean a person devoted to God, then your understanding of his ethics are miguided.

The humble sages, by virtue of true knowledge, sees with equal vision a learned and gentle brahmana, a cow, an elephant, a dog and a dog-eater.
BG. 5.18.

It is not about beyond the grave, it is about here and now.

When, however, one is enlightened with the knowledge by which nescience (ignor-ance} is destroyed, then his knowledge reveals everything, as the sun lights up everything in the daytime.

When one’s intelligence, mind, faith and refuge are all fixed in the Supreme, then one becomes fully cleansed of misgivings through complete knowleedge and thus proceeds straight on the path of liberation.
BG. 5.16-17

… that it is unsuited for and opposed to man's life on earth, and that man must take the blame for it and suffer through the whole of his earthly existence, to atone for the guilt of beign unable to practice the impracticable.

Do you regard learning a sufferation and impractical. If so, then it would explain a lot.

So what awaits us after death?

Change, according to your present life.

The illusion of a heaven, fed to us by ancient religions, with the threat that if one does not believe, our soul will end up in another illusion representing evil, which we call hell?.

Heaven is not an illusion. On our very own planet, we get glimpses of heaven and hell. A prisoner goes to prison, where the standard of life is hellish compared to a man who has no money worries, a lovely house, a beautiful wife and good children. But both are under the control of material nature. They still have to suffer birth, death, disease and old age.

The start of the heavenly planets, is the moon, and they continue right up to the top of the universe. Beyond that are veils of the main elements which surround the universe, and then beyond that is the spiritual sky (brahmajyoti; the spiritual effulgence of God), and in that is the spiritual world which is eternal and full of knowledge and bliss and an unlimited amount of 'spiritual' planets this is the destination of devotees of God.

It's a hard pill to swallow!. Why does religion need the concept of hell, in order to threaten unbelievers?.

If you drink too much and I say don’t drive home because you could kill someone or yourself and therefore lose your licence and go to prison where life can be miserable, then you take no notice of me and drive home and kill someone. Where have I threatened you?

That is what religion is, it gives you the best option, whether or not you accept is up to you.

Love

Jan Ardena.

It's a hard pill to swallow!. Why does religion need the concept of hell, in order to threaten unbelievers?.

If you drink too much and I say don’t drive home because you could kill someone or yourself and therefore lose your licence and go to prison where life can be miserable, then you take no notice of me and drive home and kill someone. Where have I threatened you?

That is what religion is, it gives you the best option, whether or not you accept is up to you. Tell me, Jan, what does that illustration have to do with anything? What Godless said was why do you need the concept of Hell except to threaten unbelievers. You have answered that if they hurt themselves when you ask them not to, where have you threatened. The only problem with this is that it does not reflect the example it responds to.

By Godless' question, the question focuses on why the religion needs to threaten other people.

By your reponse, the issue focuses on what people do to themselves.

Now, I know people like to reason that the condemned choose death, but that's as poor an excuse for a religious perspective as faith itself.

Jan, you have presented a response involving the self to accommodate a question regarding what one does to another. The answer does not suffice, and is indicative of a theistic trend whereby one "answers" questions about another by examining unrelated circumstances and never putting any effort into the tie-in.

In other words, sir, I believe the response you posted to Godless very well may have meaning, but in what discussion I'm not sure.

What does threatening a person with death have to do with whether or not they kill themselves?

So what about you, Jan ... how do you know? I figured I should at least ask if you have an opinion on the topic, of if you dropped by just to deflect an answer into the oblivion of theistic misdirection.

thanx,
Tiassa :cool:

It was never meant to be threatening...men have made it a "threat" to controll people. We are Gods children...just as if we saw our own children falling away from us and were in fear of loseing them we would reason with them, plead with them, do anything and everything with-in our power to protect them and save them from destroying themselves.
We can not MAKE them, and the thought of loseing them or seeing them suffer would grieve us beyond belief. Jesus did not threaten us, He pleaded, reasoned, and was willing to do anything and everything...even die for us. The Bible makes it clear God does not want us to come to Him out of fear, but out of Love...but it says He would rather we came out of fear than to see us destroy ourselves. What else would you expect from a perfect Father?
Men took some creative liscense and saw an opportunity to use Gods words as a weapon of tyrany.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by tiassa
Tell me, Jan, what does that illustration have to do with anything? What Godless said was why do you need the concept of Hell except to threaten unbelievers.

It has a lot to do with anything.
The concept of hell is our making.
The concept of a prison house, in a society, although overseen by the governing body, is there because there are prisoners. Not that the governing body says “we are going to build a prison, go out and get some prisoners.”

You have answered that if they hurt themselves when you ask them not to, where have you threatened. The only problem with this is that it does not reflect the example it responds to.

That’s because godless is coming from the point of view that God ‘threatens’ people if they do not worship Him.
But then again he calls himself godless, Which is hardly surprising.

By your reponse, the issue focuses on what people do to themselves.

Exactly…….now you’re learning my son.

Now, I know people like to reason that the condemned choose death.

Do they?
That’s new to me.

Jan, you have presented a response involving the self to accommodate a question regarding what one does to another.

It is the ‘self’ who perpetuates happiness or sadness.

The answer does not suffice, and is indicative of a theistic trend whereby one "answers" questions about another by examining unrelated circumstances and never putting any effort into the tie-in.

That is why I keep asking you to read BG, because you will understand how God is situated in relation to us.

In other words, sir, I believe the response you posted to Godless very well may have meaning, but in what discussion I'm not sure.

Let me put your mind at rest. This discussion.

So what about you, Jan ... how do you know? I figured I should at least ask if you have an opinion on the topic, of if you dropped by just to deflect an answer into the oblivion of theistic misdirection.

I was just about to answer your question and then you come with that stuff at the end……….I’m not sure I feel like it now. (LOL)

The post by Taken explains, very well, what I mean.

Love

Jan Ardena.

It was never meant to be threatening...men have made it a "threat" to controll people. We are Gods children...just as if we saw our own children falling away from us and were in fear of loseing them we would reason with them, plead with them, do anything and everything with-in our power to protect them and save them from destroying themselves.So, in order to not be threatening, and in care of His children, God creates a circumstance where he chooses the condemnation of those souls? Look, people like to talk about the child-discipline angle, but consider the condemnation of a soul versus child discipline.

If you catch the child playing with matches and punish him, what is the punishment? Spanking? Go to your room? I guarantee you it's not setting him on fire.

Or should we be scared for child #6? (Yes, that's a brushback pitch, as high and inside as I can get it. But there's something fundamentally wrong with the justification I'm perceiving, and, frankly, that's pretty much it.)

In order to save them from "destroying themselves", He will destroy them? Sounds absurd.We can not MAKE them, and the thought of loseing them or seeing them suffer would grieve us beyond belief. Jesus did not threaten us, He pleaded, reasoned, and was willing to do anything and everything...even die for us. The Bible makes it clear God does not want us to come to Him out of fear, but out of Love...but it says He would rather we came out of fear than to see us destroy ourselves. What else would you expect from a perfect Father?But would you kill your child to prevent them from suffering? (Should we revisit the abortion debate?) What degree of suffering is important here because I know the occasional Christian who will accept a family member's opting out under the burden of cancer or such. So if you feared your child had loose sexual mores and was going to suffer at the hands of violent men until, four children by three fathers later, she may die of AIDS ... well? Would you kill your child? We're talking about God's choices here, not mere circumstance of life. Or are we going to reduce life to marionette routines? (So much for choosing God, accepting the gift, &c. at that point.)

Jesus did threaten, though. Just because he wasn't waving a sword at the time doesn't mean he's not threatening. There's at least one place in Matthew where Jesus spells it out: if you do this, you get to go be with God; if you do this, you get cast into everlasting fire. As a parent, can you throw your child in front of a car? Just because God, as the parent, fears the death of the child is no reason to kill the child!

Seriously, I don't get it. What is the idea of a negative circumstance compared to the normal experience except a threat? Have you come across the parking lot example that I'm beating to death these days but which Christians still skip over?

And don't tell me it's a difference between God's will and human will. As has been pointed out in defense of slavery, what justifies the Biblical ownership of another is, in part, the nature of the human relationship with the Biblical God. So to apply the example of a divine authority versus a human authority is obviously kosher at Sciforums:

* When you feel the knife put to your throat, and hear the voice instructing you in which depraved favors you are going to submit to in order to prevent your attacker from cutting your throat, what will you do? Obviously, you wanted to have sex, because you did not choose to die in order to avoid it.

Now, if the stake of one's life does not equal duress, what the hell does? If a human life is precious, why does God hold them in such contempt as to be willing to condemn and destroy an individual? Obviously, the nature of that individual is God's will. What, God blesses the conception, birth, and the child, but had absolutely no influence on the creation of a human life? (Really, what is God's excuse: I couldn't make the personality matrix work the way I wanted to so I'm throwing this one in the incinerator because I love it so much.)

What do I expect from a perfect father? Well, let's put it this way: if the father was perfect the family would be able to deal with its issues in a far less mortal way. A perfect father does not murder his children.Men took some creative liscense and saw an opportunity to use Gods words as a weapon of tyrany.This is the Will of God that it should be so. Why else did God transmit a message that can be used as a weapon? If God doesn't want the children all dead in the schoolyard, he shouldn't give them all loaded guns. After all, what can a Dad say next, "Play nice or I'll shoot the lot of ya"?

thanx,
Tiassa :cool:

It has a lot to do with anything.
The concept of hell is our making.
The concept of a prison house, in a society, although overseen by the governing body, is there because there are prisoners. Not that the governing body says “we are going to build a prison, go out and get some prisoners.” While I agree that Hell is our own making, that's a philosophical metaphor that only requires religion whatsoever in order to justify the idea of Hell. Aside from that, though, you're wrong.

Prisons in the United States are a growth industry. As in, for profit. About the same time this happened (privatization), we also passed mandatory minimum sentences which have the effect of keeping more people in jail for a longer time. At the same time, we're building prisons faster than schools. At the same time, the bedspace devoted to housing violent criminals has been largely given over to holding pot smokers and other political prisoners. There are missives between legislators, interest groups, and the executive back in the 1930's which reflect the sentiment that drug laws could be used against people for their skin color. (At the time, there were four primary user groups: Hispanics, blacks, native Americans, and jazz musicians--most of whom were ethnic minorities as well.) Seriously, bust the pot smokers, you get to bust a bunch of Negroes. I live in the United States of America, Jan, and throwing people in prison is about to exceed baseball as the national pastime.

That aside, what practical considerations hold such dominion over God that he is limited in His actions and must condemn?

And, furthermore, what kind of gift is it that a parent should teach their child so early in life to start building their Hell? People teach religion and punishment to infants. If the concept of Hell is our making, then why perpetuate such a silly and damaging, hateful idea? A tool for dominion? Sounds about consistent most, if not all religions I've encountered.That’s because godless is coming from the point of view that God ‘threatens’ people if they do not worship Him.Well, what would you call it? If you do this, you get a reward. If you do this, I'll send you to Hell. A good bribe, a bad extortion: it's all the same racket.

Guess what, Jan? All those people that share Godless' apparent misconception that God threatens people in the Holy Bible need to be told. They're destroying the best shot humanity has of perpetuity. Of course, that's what they're hoping for.

What is it, Jan? Are you choosing one description of God over another, just like everyone else? Ah, that's right, you'll sit and plunk down commentary from across the room, but since you're too lazy to make it make sense, everyone needs to go back to their libraries and read everything you say. And if they still disagree, what should they read next, Jan? Which version of God are you defending, Jan? I live in a nation where a millions of people live according to their superstitions. I live in a country where the only way the religious people will stop feeling tread upon is if we all roll over and let them destroy us. When we're silent, destitute, and dying because that religious faction has gotten its way, who will stop them from stringing up your pagan ass, which would tell them that Hell is of our own making, and that they need to read an infidel holy book?It is the ‘self’ who perpetuates happiness or sadness. Which is utterly irrelevant to a question about what one does to another. Why are you refusing to approach the actual question at hand, Jan? If I take a gun and kill you--effectively as much as I can do in imitation of God's condemnation of your soul--do I get to blame you for not perpetuating your happiness?

Seriously, if I walk up to you on the street and hit you with the sawed-off butt-end of a 21-ounce pool cue (incidentally, a great self-defense tool), I guess it's your own fault if you're not happy with it. What if I smash your skull some, and leave you brain-damaged an unable to perpetuate your own happiness? Why prosecute me? It's your own effing fault, if I apply the logic you're pushing. Godless asked about what another entity in the Universe chooses to do to you!

Okay? So then you answer by talking about what one does to their own self and create an analogy which prescribes a limited, hamstrung God. If that really and truly is a straight answer, then sure, I'll accept it and its full implications. It tells me much about your Sciforums persona. Unfortunately, that's a negative assessment.

Refer to my post to Taken ... since she speaks for you on some issues, my response to her should be adequate.

thanx,
Tiassa :cool:

Again you have to go back to the interpretation of what was ACTUALLY said.
The fact that men use it in such a hostile way is just a thing men do. Much like burning Harry Potter even though his mom wrote it to provide an income for her child and get off welfare as opposed to an organized attempt to convert our children to wicca.
The Bible remains as a great help and life guide to those who chose to use it for it's intended purpose while for others it just makes them look foolish and hatefull when the final count is in.

If our spirit goes on from this life...and what we do here effects what happenes to it later, it is very important that we do the best we can to guard that future. I had mentioned in another thread that we in many ways create our own heaven...well perhaps we should think in terms of creating our own hell. If once out of the physical body and back to pure spiritual energy we are aware of the fullness of knowledge and the truth and we must face haveing been cruel and murderouse in this life...what form of suffering will that be? From the narrative of Lazarus in the Bible, we see the rich man who had refused him food or water; in "hell" suffering day and night from dier thirst and unable to obtain even a drop of water. He in his cruelty created that suffering of his spirit by searing his own conscience. Did God "sentence" him to this torture, I do not think so, I think he put it upon himself by quenching his own spirit and hardening his own heart. This is what God and Jesus desperatly want us to realize...we are in fact spiritually destroying ourselves and it is not God's intention for it to be that way. We have free will to make these decisions and in doing so we are unaware of the FULL impact we will suffer from them. God has urged us to listen to our conscience, to walk in the spirit and not let what seems momentarily pleasing cause us to run up a "bill" we will eventually have to pay. God can no more stop us from doing bad than He can make us do good. We are not puppets. All He can do is guide us, reason with us, plead with us, like any parent would.

*Originally posted by tiassa
When Tony1 claims something to be inspired by, conspired with, or demanded by the Devil, how does he know he's not besmirching the Spirit?*

Because it's the Holy Spirit reminding me of everything that Jesus said.

But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
(John 14:26, KJV).

*How do you know anything at all about God?
This is why it's called faith.*

It's only called faith until you know it.
After that it's called knowledge.

*Originally posted by Godless
What if you have been lied to? & you believed it!*

We know that isn't the case because we have you to listen to.
Whatever you say is for sure wrong, therefore the opposite is right.

*The collector had to be inaccessible to mankind at large, and his authority had to be revealed only through an elite of special intermediaries*

That's why most religions are out to lunch.
Any religion that doesn't give you personal contact with God isn't worth the effort.

*Why does religion need the concept of hell*

So that people would understand what cemeteries are for.

*Originally posted by tiassa
So what about you, Jan ... how do you know?*

She doesn't, she's just guessing.

*but consider the condemnation of a soul versus child discipline.
...
I guarantee you it's not setting him on fire.*

You can't guarantee that, since for some kids the punishment of disobedience is setting themselves on fire.

*if you do this, you get to go be with God; if you do this, you get cast into everlasting fire.*

The question is how and why?

For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned.
(Matthew 12:37, KJV).

Essentially, you'll be tossing yourself in the lake of fire.
Thus, it isn't punishment in the usual way.
You yourself are choosing death with every word you speak, since you aren't speaking any words of life.

*What is the idea of a negative circumstance compared to the normal experience except a threat?*

Is starvation a "threat" if you choose not to eat?

*A perfect father does not murder his children.*

A perfect father may well let his children kill themselves if they are so inclined.

*If the concept of Hell is our making*

It isn't.
Hell is the grave, and even the cartoon hell most people insist on imagining wasn't of your own making.

*Originally posted by Taken
...Harry Potter even though his mom wrote it...*

Don't count on that being the case. See the Larry Potter books.

*If our spirit goes on from this life...and what we do here effects what happenes to it later*

Nothing you do here will affect what happens to your spirit.

Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.
(Ecclesiastes 12:7, KJV).

*I had mentioned in another thread that we in many ways create our own heaven...well perhaps we should think in terms of creating our own hell.*

In other words, your religion is completely imaginary.

*If once out of the physical body and back to pure spiritual energy we are aware*

Not happening....

...the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten.
(Ecclesiastes 9:5, KJV).

*in "hell" suffering day and night from dier thirst and unable to obtain even a drop of water.*

Nothing about day and night in that parable at all.
Where are you getting this stuff?

2+2=4 I'm I fuc*ing wrong Tony?
We know that isn't the case because we have you to listen to.
Whatever you say is for sure wrong, therefore the opposite is right.
What makes you so sure?

Ezekiel
4:12
And thou shalt eat it as barley cakes, and thou shalt bake it with dung that cometh out of man, in their sight.

When will you eat your own dung, Tony1 as in Ezekiel? your god comands it! start eating, cause most of what comes out of your mouth is sh*t anyway!!. :p

I would be really curiouse to know what denomination you are because your beliefs are really "messed" up.
But I will continue to humor you as it creates an opportunity for good.
How long do you suppose the man was or will be there?
As for makeing our own heaven...I will repost that the Bible says we lay up treasures for ourselves in heaven...of course those would be from the good we do here. AND it also says there are different levels in heaven. Ask the guys laying under the alter how many of them there are. You not being able to understand a dirrect point, I do not expect to understand an idea or concept. So Mr. Heavenly authority...were you there with John, or in some past life?

As for Larry Potter...I do not buy in to all your demon fear and conspiracy theorys. Get a grip, is God not in controll? Is He not able to keep us? Is anything able to seperate us from His love? Who is STILL on the throne. As a child of God I do not need to creep around life looking over my shoulder and checking under my bed for the big old ugly devil....I know exactly where he is at all times and he is in check!

""If once out of the physical body and back to pure spiritual energy we are aware*

Not happening.... """

Ok lets get to this after-life...or life-after-death or what ever strange wording you need to be comfortable discussing it. The body WILL die...it WILL return to dust. The spirit will return to God and with God we will have (according to the BIBLE) Perfect peace, understanding and knowledge! All the things we are not able to have in fullness in these bodies.

If nothing you do here will effect your spirit...then why are we taught NOT to quench the spirit and why did you bother getting saved if it won't matter? Do you believe in predestination?...that if you are predestined for heaven you can be a serial killer and still have a seat at the Fathers table in the kingdom of heaven?

Tony1 is a child, in a grown men's body, of course he is scared and sees the boogy-man is about to get him!, he learned how to fight the boogy-man too, he claims to fight demons, so he's a fighter!:rolleyes: However when it comes to the real boogy-man up in the sky, next to god, the devil, well he is really scared of him!!.

so he feels he must warn everyone, and smurk everyone that does not agree with him, the boogy-man is going to get ya!!:bugeye:

This is his tactic, as well as other religionists scare the hell out of them so they will "ovey" the lord!. do thy will, all the BS, that comes along with it!.

Religion has been nothing but a tool!! a tool to "manipulate" men of ignorance to the bitting of the elites!.:(

And that Taken is the truth!.

*Originally posted by Godless
2+2=4 I'm I fuc*ing wrong Tony?*

Yes, you are.
2+2=10 in base 4, 11 in base 3, undefined in base 2, etc.

*We know that isn't the case because we have you to listen to.
Whatever you say is for sure wrong, therefore the opposite is right.
What makes you so sure?*

See above.

*Ezekiel
4:12
And thou shalt eat it as barley cakes, and thou shalt bake it with dung that cometh out of man, in their sight.

When will you eat your own dung, Tony1 as in Ezekiel? your god comands it! start eating, cause most of what comes out of your mouth is sh*t anyway!!. *

If that's what comes out of my mouth, then obviously that verse is for you.

*Originally posted by Taken
I would be really curiouse to know what denomination you are because your beliefs are really "messed" up.*

I'm no denomination, which is why it looks messed up to you.
You ARE denominated, therefore your beliefs are, by definition, wrong.

Jesus didn't start any denominations.

*I do not expect to understand an idea or concept.*

I'm starting to see that.

*As for Larry Potter...I do not buy in to all your demon fear and conspiracy theorys.*

LOL!
What?
ROTFLMAO!
What on earth could you be trying to say here?

*I know exactly where he is at all times and he is in check! *

Really?
So Peter was lying when he told you to be sober and vigilant?

Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:
(1 Peter 5:8, KJV).

*The body WILL die...it WILL return to dust. The spirit will return to God *

Uh-huh, but for you to agree with the Bible is so rare that I can only wait to see what you're going to say next.

*If nothing you do here will effect your spirit...then why are we taught NOT to quench the spirit and why did you bother getting saved if it won't matter?*

Yeah, I thought so.
I'll bet you're one of those people who sees a sign saying "Fine for Parking Here," and parks there because it is fine.

One's spirit will return to God regardless of what one does.
I got saved so the rest of me will go with my spirit.

*Originally posted by Godless
a tool to "manipulate" men of ignorance to the bitting of the elites!*

What elites?

I love the way you mutilate sentence structure...miss that day in English 101?


So I am denominational? Really? I don't recall anyone but you issuing me denominations....don't seem to recall I ever claimed one. But what I say doesn't matter, you know what everyone thinks, feels, and believes cause you have your demons planted in our minds controlling us right? LOL

Oh so you plan to dig up a decomposed corpse and run around in it? Gee that won't make heaven very welcoming will it, the smell... sheeesh!

Yeah be vigilant...or better yet behave, be good, be faithfull...I do not recall being instructed to cowar or hide in fear of the devil. I understood God to be in charge of what is His. You just do not think He can handle the job do ya?

Again tony, you seem to think science knows nothing. I can tell you with 100% certainty that light travels through a vaccuum. I can tell you that an atom of the most common isotope of hydrogen consists of a single proton orbited by a single electron. I can tell you the planetary order of our solar system is Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune and Pluto (although for 20 of it's 249 year orbit Pluto moves inside the orbit of Neptune and becomes the 8th planet, another scientific fact. The next time this will happen is in the year 2226).

I'd like to see you prove any one of these things wrong. I'm sure you'd win the Nobel Prize if you did.

*Originally posted by Taken
I love the way you mutilate sentence structure...miss that day in English 101?*

It's nothing compared to the way you could torture test a spelling checker.
What happened, did you miss that day in "this is a pencil" in Grade 1?

*Oh so you plan to dig up a decomposed corpse and run around in it? Gee that won't make heaven very welcoming will it, the smell... sheeesh!*

See how the mocking of God immediately follows deception?
BTW, Taken, that question is for everyone else.
For you, I'm not sure what that question would mean.

*You just do not think He can handle the job do ya? *

He delegated it to you, and for sure, you're not doing it.
You think this is all about topping the other person with a smart comeback.
It isn't, it's about your life.

*Originally posted by Xelios
I can tell you with 100% certainty that light travels through a vaccuum.*

O-O-O-O-O-O-O-OK.
What would stop it anyway, and why would you need science to tell you that?

*I can tell you that an atom of the most common isotope of hydrogen consists of a single proton orbited by a single electron.*

No you can't.
You can't even tell me what a proton or an electron is.

*I can tell you the planetary order of our solar system is Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune and Pluto*

So what?
Are you sure Uranus isn't between your ears?

Oh no Tony...I am not mocking God...God is very credible and 100% reliable.
I am mocking your twisting of Gods word in to some shallow, self-serving, fairy tale. I do so in some futile attempt to make you see just how ridiculouse your ideas about Gods divine purpose are.

Sheesh...they said I can't use my pencil on the UBB.

No my job description came with a written promise that I no longer lived under the laws of sin or bondage of evil.

*Originally posted by Godless
2+2=4 I'm I fuc*ing wrong Tony?*

Yes, you are.
2+2=10 in base 4, 11 in base 3, undefined in base 2, etc. So, Tony1, who ridicules diverse perspectives ...

Oh, never mind. You're just too Christian to have a clue what anybody's talking about.

--Tiassa :cool:

*Originally posted by Taken
Oh no Tony...I am not mocking God...God is very credible and 100% reliable.
I am mocking your twisting of Gods word in to some shallow, self-serving, fairy tale. I do so in some futile attempt to make you see just how ridiculouse your ideas about Gods divine purpose are.*

It is futile.
Let's not forget that you came here to preach the gospel of snake-bitten, flu-stricken poverty.
Then, you decided that God wasn't going to bless anyone.
You aren't mocking me; you are mocking God.

*No my job description came with a written promise that I no longer lived under the laws of sin or bondage of evil. *

Read the terms of your job description.

Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:
(1 Peter 5:8, KJV).

That's for YOU to do, not God.
If you don't do that YOU get eaten alive, not God.

*Originally posted by tiassa
You're just too Christian to have a clue what anybody's talking about. *

And you're just too (blank) to have a clue.
Godless was wrong, and you know it, but you don't know enough math to do anything about it.
Actually, math has nothing to do with it.

Originally posted by tiassa

[quote]Loone

Well, there's a funcitonal criterion. If I'm surprised, don't let that bother you:Hmmm ... so if one was definitively dealing with the God, it would be evident because the Heavens and Earth would pass away?

I'll accept that answer. It renders every holy vision, every apocalyptic dream, and any vision of Heaven one might receive invalid.

Not bad, Loone.

Not bad at all.

thanx,
Tiassa :cool: [/B]

The statement is from the Holy Bible and is true! The Almighty God Himself is 'Spirit' and is the most powerful being of all!! Not like unto 'pegon' gods, that was made by man, but the GOD who 'created us all in His image and not the other way! The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, Moses,Paul, etc., was to GREAT a power to come to Earth with all His Glory & Might & Majesty, so He came as a little child in Bethlehem long ago, and grew to a man, (God-Man) who is Jesus the Son of God who is one in the same! So He did come personally to Earth to redeem those that put their trust in Him! Now He (JESUS) still lives and shall come again! And all eyes shall see Him one day! God is the 'Living GOD', and is a person, God in three persons, but one God! God the Father, God the Son (JESUS), and God the Holy Spirit, who is IN true born from above believers!

GOD Himself is beyond comprehension! You would have to know JESUS as Lord and saviour, to know GOD!

It's not dealing with God that makes the Heavens and Earth pass away, but you want to see Him, and you don't know what you ask! GOD has already come, His name is JESUS! God's Glory will far out shine the sun in it's full strenght! This is a big universe, and even it will flee before God's Great Glory!

:) So read the Bible and see He has manifested Himself to Moses in the "Burning Bush", and the 'pillar of fire' , and other ways, but not Himself in His Full Glory! No man has seen God at any time! But the Son of GOD JESUS Christ was among us! And will come again! :) We that are of GOD will see Him one day as He is! But sinful man, the Judgement! JESUS cares, and He saves!

Loone

You're not going to get a whole lot of argument from me on the direct point: as you've noted, we won't know it's God until the Heavens and Earth pass away. In that sense, we won't know until the point is moot. Quite honestly, you've hit dead-on one of the possible resolutions of this topic that I was prepared to accept. I'm thinking of starting another topic on the practical ramifications of such a resolution in the context of daily living as any particular person.

You've given me a first: a Biblically-related topic that reaches a conclusion within the anticipated data-set. Most topics in this forum that resolve do so around a tangential point and effectively die. It seems like the majority of topics just die. For all those circles, Loone, and for all the times I hadn't a clue what in Heaven's name you were saying, I must thank you so kindly for helping guide this topic to one of its possible conclusions based on what is so obviously commonsense. The statement is from the Holy Bible and is true!While we're going to disagree about the truth of much of the Bible, what is correct is that the statement is Biblical and therefore, to Christian faith, true. I would dare a Christian to show me how those words are not true and applicable in that context, but wouldn't that be just a little devilish? ;) Unfortunately, to refute your point will do just that.

But there are two notes to offer our fellow posters:

* What Sir Loone has done is to hand me what is essentially one of the possible definitive answers to the issues proposed in the topic post. I cannot in any way declare the topic closed, as there are other possible resolutions to the issue. Please don't let my little blissful moment of this particular agreement discourage your continued speculations, calculations, or otherwise.

* Would it be fair to speculate that the above note was unnecessary? :D

thanx,
Tiassa :cool:

While we are still not certain what a proton is made of, we can rightly say the most common isotope of hydrogen contains one proton and one electron in it's natural state. I don't really care if you don't believe me, but it is a fact.
O-O-O-O-O-O-O-OK.
What would stop it anyway, and why would you need science to tell you that?
I'll take that as your way of saying "Yes, that is a proven fact".
So what?
Are you sure Uranus isn't between your ears?
See above.
As you can see, science is not all theories and nonsense.

Originally posted by Sir. Loone


The statement is from the Holy Bible and is true! The Almighty God Himself is 'Spirit' and is the most powerful being of all!! Not like unto 'pegon' gods, that was made by man, but the GOD who 'created us all in His image and not the other way! The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, Moses,Paul, etc., was to GREAT a power to come to Earth with all His Glory & Might & Majesty, so He came as a little child in Bethlehem long ago, and grew to a man, (God-Man) who is Jesus the Son of God who is one in the same! So He did come personally to Earth to redeem those that put their trust in Him! Now He (JESUS) still lives and shall come again! And all eyes shall see Him one day! God is the 'Living GOD', and is a person, God in three persons, but one God! God the Father, God the Son (JESUS), and God the Holy Spirit, who is IN true born from above believers!

GOD Himself is beyond comprehension! You would have to know JESUS as Lord and saviour, to know GOD!

It's not dealing with God that makes the Heavens and Earth pass away, but you want to see Him, and you don't know what you ask! GOD has already come, His name is JESUS! God's Glory will far out shine the sun in it's full strenght! This is a big universe, and even it will flee before God's Great Glory!

:) So read the Bible and see He has manifested Himself to Moses in the "Burning Bush", and the 'pillar of fire' , and other ways, but not Himself in His Full Glory! No man has seen God at any time! But the Son of GOD JESUS Christ was among us! And will come again! :) We that are of GOD will see Him one day as He is! But sinful man, the Judgement! JESUS cares, and He saves!


Dude I am not even going to start this time. I don't like taking all the bandwidth..........lol Your statement is amzingly funny, But I respect what you believe in. After all you do Believe in "Baby God".;) ( No offense );)

*Originally posted by Xelios
While we are still not certain what a proton is made of, we can rightly say the most common isotope of hydrogen contains one proton and one electron in it's natural state. I don't really care if you don't believe me, but it is a fact.*

You don't know what a proton is, but you know there is only one?
That's a lot like saying you don't know what intelligence is, but by golly, you've got it.

*I'll take that as your way of saying "Yes, that is a proven fact"*

OK by me.
Since light does travel thru vacuum, it is a proven fact.
Since evolution is imaginary, then it is not proven fact.

*As you can see, science is not all theories and nonsense. *

I'm not sure if you can see this, but no one needs science to see light that has traveled thru a vacuum.
Therefore science IS all theories and nonsense.
That which is NOT nonsense, doesn't require science.

You don't know what a proton is, but you know there is only one?
That's right. We know a proton is a small particle with a very large mass when compared to an electron. Scientists have observed protons countless times in particle accelerators and on photo receptive plates. We know the proton has a + charge because of the way it travels in EM fields of a certain charge. The current theory is that a proton is made of 3 quarks, and that all atomic particles have their own waveform of probability, so you can never know exactly where a proton is, only what it's probability of being there is. We have many more theories on atomic particles that have yet to be solidly proven, but I'd say our understanding of them is not too bad at the moment.
That's a lot like saying you don't know what intelligence is, but by golly, you've got it.
Can you define intelligence for me?
Since light does travel thru vacuum, it is a proven fact.
Therefor not all science is imaginary, and not all science is speculative.
I'm not sure if you can see this, but no one needs science to see light that has traveled thru a vacuum
Actually, they do. Without science, we wouldn't know there is a vaccuum outside the Earth's atmosphere. Likewise, without science we wouldn't know our solar system contains 9 planets all in slightly elliptical orbits around an immense central object, the sun.
Therefore science IS all theories and nonsense.
That which is NOT nonsense, doesn't require science.
Quit with the bland statements and give me some substance behind what you're saying. I've just proven to you that science is not all nonsense. All you're doing is plugging your ears and humming just so you can keep on pretending science has no credibility but your religion does.

So as I'm looking through this topic, I see a few of your posts:

* Your first post responds to the question of How one knows with the proverbial, Because I know; you take an unnecessary swing at Jan Ardena; you take the position that proper punishment is to set children on fire; you split hairs, advocate suicide; you responded to a sentence fragment of mine when what you could have done was respond to the actual sentence in Jan's post, and thus avoided the earlier, even less appropriate potshot. I haven't even addressed, you'll notice, the idiocy of your response to Godless in that same post, nor your accusatory response to Taken, also in that same post. Of this post, the only real on-topic part is when you dodge the question at hand.

* Your next post demands that people throw away conventions of communication in order for you to have a point (we should not have to discuss what numeric base we're going to be using unless the debate at hand actually requires that distinction); you've kept up your useless dismissal of Taken, and made no particular points on the topic.

* Your next post is about as useless, and is highlighted only by its need to close certain parts of the discussion with astronomical puns.

* There's a post in there aimed at Taken and also at myself which has no purpose--do you realize that if you actually paid attention to or respected the topics at hand, these side discussions you're fostering wouldn't come up?

* I see your exchange with Xelios and have one question, Tony1: Why is it that your best proof of your point is that you don't accept any other point?

You've had several posts in this topic, Tony1 and thus far failed to address the issue. Because is not an answer to How. It is an answer to Why.

In lieu of addressing the topic, you have relied on the same dismissive arrogance as we have seen you employ in every topic you've stuck your snotty nose into. In lieu of demonstrating your argument, you have chosen to rely on the faults of others to demonstrate your point, to throw out convention, and to limit the debate to as few facets as possible.

Do you have anything to actually contribute to the topic?

Would you like to take another stab at the topic question? I'll repost it, since I know how much you hate to click links in order to read: How does anybody know when they're dealing with God?

So how do you know?

We know what you have faith in, Tony1. So try exploring that faith a little.

Bottom line: Get relevant now or get the hell out of this topic.

So, Tony1, do you have anything to contribute to the topic? Or are you seeking windmills?

--Tiassa :cool:

Great Tiassa, your last post 2 Tony0 is got to get an answer or a typical denial of "you don't know what you are talking about"

Quote Tony1;"No you can't.
You can't even tell me what a proton or an electron is.

No you can't. You can't even tell me what god is.
You can't explain supernatural, nor prove it's existence!!. :p

Fact is Tony1 you can't prove alot of crap that you belive in!.:bugeye: :D

a little more math for tony

1+1=3 or 4 or 5

*Originally posted by Xelios
That's right. We know a proton is a small particle with a very large mass when compared to an electron.*

You don't actually know it is a particle.

*Scientists have observed protons countless times in particle accelerators and on photo receptive plates.*

What they observe are not the particles, but the tracks left behind by something.

*that all atomic particles have their own waveform of probability, so you can never know exactly where a proton is, only what it's probability of being there is.*

IOW, you don't know what it is.

*...I'd say our understanding of them is not too bad at the moment.*

OK, let's review.
You don't know what they are, or where they are, and you can only guess.
That's a very solid understanding by scientific standards.
By any other standards, you're blowing swamp gas.

*Can you define intelligence for me?*

Intelligence for you?
Hmmm, I'm guessing "remotely plausible" is the best definition of intelligence for you, at this time.

*Actually, they do.*

You're blowing swamp gas, again.
No one needs science to see anything.

*I've just proven to you that science is not all nonsense.*

I see that you've "proven" that to scientific standards, i.e. you haven't proven it.
I have repeatedly stated that science does collect numbers, and those numbers are not nonsense, except in some cases, e.g. where they are fudged.
However, "scientists" persist in formulating the most absurd speculations about the most obvious stuff.

*Originally posted by tiassa
* Your first post...
*Your next post...*

Thanks for summarizing.

*we should not have to discuss what numeric base we're going to be using unless the debate at hand actually requires that distinction*

It actually did require that distinction since we were talking about the truth and an example of the "truth" was put forth.

*you've kept up your useless dismissal of Taken*

I'm actually not dismissing Taken, merely her more off-the-wall thoughts.

*close certain parts of the discussion with astronomical puns.*

Think big.

*Because is not an answer to How. It is an answer to Why.*

"How" simply does not have a corresponding simple answer to itself the way "why" does, so I merely borrowed the one from "why."

*to limit the debate to as few facets as possible.*

Just trying to do everyone a favor in limiting the number of potential digressions which you always seem to bring up at the point of resolution of some issue.

*How does anybody know when they're dealing with God?*

And after the earthquake a fire; but the LORD was not in the fire: and after the fire a still small voice.
(1 Kings 19:12, KJV).

To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.
(Isaiah 8:20, KJV).

*Originally posted by Godless
1+1=3 or 4 or 5*

OK?

You ask a dirrect question of Tony, and you get his usual answer!, he is always right and the whole world is wrong!.

Tony1 you never start a thread of your own, why?

Is it cause you like trampling over everyone elses', Taken couldn't post a happy thought we all appreciate at hearing. Who cares that she has five kids, and a sixth on the way?, are you supporting her?. Have never have anything nice to say to anyone?.

You must be a bitter, person Tony1, your not omniscient.


You are so ignorant is pathetic!!

Without science Benjamin wouldn't have been flying a kite, to prvoe his theory of electricity.

Without that, you wouldn't be able to type BS, all over Sciforums. And from the point of Benjamin it was throught the ignorant church why it took so long for the rest of technology to advance.

Thank goodness we didn't take the church seriously, or otherwise this type of technology, that came about through science would still be oblivian to us.

Do you have anything relevant to contribute to the topic, Tony1?

--Tiassa :cool:

*Originally posted by Godless
he is always right and the whole world is wrong!.*

Why thanks, Godless.
I wouldn't be so hard on the rest of the world, though, since some of them are right, too.

*Tony1 you never start a thread of your own, why?*

First we need to establish if people have the ability to think.
So far, it's not looking so good.

*are you supporting her?*

I think her husband is, but I did offer a prayer and blessings.

*Have never have anything nice to say to anyone?*

Et tu, Julio?

*Without science Benjamin wouldn't have been flying a kite, to prvoe his theory of electricity.*

Since when does flying a kite require science?

*Without that, you wouldn't be able to type BS, all over Sciforums.*

Lucky for you that science is letting you type BS all over, too.

*Originally posted by tiassa
Do you have anything relevant to contribute to the topic, Tony1?*

I'll let Godless' heartfelt testimonial speak for itself...
"he is always right and the whole world is wrong!"

Do you have anything relevant to contribute to the topic, Tony1?*

I'll let Godless' heartfelt testimonial speak for itself...
"he is always right and the whole world is wrong!"Please, then, leave this topic alone. If you've nothing to contribute, then don't waste our time or yours.

--Tiassa :cool:

*Originally posted bytiassa
Please, then, leave this topic alone. If you've nothing to contribute, then don't waste our time or yours.*

OK.
First one believes and then one sees the proof for the belief.

For proof, simply look at the discussions on this forum.
1. For example, a person chooses to believe in evolution
2. Everything from that point onward looks like proof for evolution, whether it is or not.
3. Since most people have similar levels of intelligence, the proof one sees then leads to some version of knowledge, whether it be assumption, tenuous agreement, wholehearted agreement, agreement with reservations, or certainty, or some other level of knowledge.

You don't actually know it is a particle.
What would you like me to call it then tony?
What they observe are not the particles, but the tracks left behind by something.
The tracks left behind by atomic particles, yes. And based upon the paths the tracks take you can find out what type of particle it is.
OK, let's review.
You don't know what they are, or where they are, and you can only guess.
That's a very solid understanding by scientific standards.
By any other standards, you're blowing swamp gas.
I have explained what they are. We know generally where they are, inside the nucleii of atoms, but one cannot pinpoint the location and the trajectory of any atomic particle because of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. I don't need the exact position of a particular proton to know it lies inside the nucleas of the helium molecule I am inspecting do I?
Intelligence for you?
Hmmm, I'm guessing "remotely plausible" is the best definition of intelligence for you, at this time.
Tony, stop trying to back out of the question again. Define intelligence.
I see that you've "proven" that to scientific standards, i.e. you haven't proven it.
I have repeatedly stated that science does collect numbers, and those numbers are not nonsense, except in some cases, e.g. where they are fudged.
However, "scientists" persist in formulating the most absurd speculations about the most obvious stuff.
Give me an example please.

Quote Tony! "Why thanks, Godless.
I wouldn't be so hard on the rest of the world, though, since some of them are right, too."

Only stupidity would turn sarcasm into a complement!!.:D

*Originally posted by Xelios
What would you like me to call it then tony?*

The point is not the exact name, so much as it is the nature of the proton.
To call it a particle, assumes a particular nature.
However, if you don't know where it is, or what it is, and can only describe it as a statistical probability map, I'd say that you don't know what it is.

*The tracks left behind by atomic particles, yes. And based upon the paths the tracks take you can find out what type of particle it is.*

Not quite, since a lot of assuming is going on at that point.
Generally, similar tracks are attributed to similar objects.

*We know generally where they are, inside the nucleii of atoms, but one cannot pinpoint the location and the trajectory of any atomic particle because of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. I don't need the exact position of a particular proton to know it lies inside the nucleas of the helium molecule I am inspecting do I?*

Actually, if you are claiming that you know what protons are, you do have to.
If protons turn out to be something like Schrodinger's cat, then they might not be within the nucleus at any given time.

*Define intelligence.*

What for?
You are in the same position with intelligence as you are with protons.
I simply stated a similarity in your position vis-a-vis both protons and intelligence.
You were the one to claim knowledge of protons, by saying you didn't know what it was.

I noted the similarity between that and intelligence.
Now I notice that you don't know what intelligence is either, since you keep asking me to define it.

*Give me an example please. *

Evolution.

*Originally posted by Godless
sarcasm into a complement!*

Well, it was a back-handed compliment.