How to discuss religion with believers?

[polymath257]

@Drich
Did you really stop reading after the first line?
Did you seriously not see the avalanche of answers I gave you?
Did you honestly, literally, not see that my post continued and that I actually bothered to address all your points anyways?
Has your faith blinded you to the point you can no longer literally see some type of information? Like real physical blindness that doesn't allow you to see any further and you just see white?

At first I thought I had finally found a decent believer interlocutor that could shed some light on his religion and what were the reasons and logic that brought them to believe in the first place. But now the picture is clearer and all I see is a man blinded by his own faith. Literally blinded. I thought it was strange that you answered to my posts as if you didn't read them. I thought to myself "maybe I didn't explain it well". Then it started getting weirder and weirder that your answers straight out ignored the points I had made. 

My conclusion is that you can't actually see some information, as if you were literally blind to them. It's like your brain was filtering information and showing you white. I really cannot fathom it otherwise.

I can't really get angry at you because I realize you are just victim of your circumstances. You found in "god" a way to cope and it worked, so really, who am I to take that away from you? As they say, "whatever floats your boat, man".

I don't think there is any point in continuing this. A conversation stops being a conversation when all you can hear is your echo.

If you'll ever bother to actually read my post, then you'll find all the answers and may understand. I'll also add that you might be interested to read these pages, even though they may actually do more harm than anything. What I wonder is: do you really wish to understand further? 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denialism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance

I seriously read everything you had to say. and you have been closedmindedly repeating yourself for like the last 4 posts. 

Again I completely understand your theortical approach and understand why you have stuck to your guns. But in doing so you have made no effort outside of labling what I have said as being wrong on the simple fact that what I said differs from your take.

What I then moved to do it point out that unknowingly one of your peers polymath who has indeed corrected you on occasion on his own saw I was speaking on an atomic level then took it upon himself to reword everything he had to say converting from mols to atoms and explaining his new conclusion.. but low and behold his new arguement his new numbers and his new conclusion.. were my numbers were my thoughts and my conclusion from the beginning... Then because he had only 1/2 of what I said I walked him through the rest of why I'm saying there is no 1:1 conversion

Then I asked you to not address me and my work but to address his and explain to me how he is wrong.

Please don't claim I said something I never said. Scientia is correct here. You aren't. The masses are in 1:1 ratio before and after any reaction.

[Drich]

please read post 114 everything is broken down and explain out there. I don't claim you say... I quote and high light your actual words. I know you don't like being used to futher a point you are against, but as the record shows I simply got there first made my point and it took you boys a few days to catch up to me is all, well not me but what the lord showed me.

If you think I have miss quoted you then please address what was said in post 114 rather than cheaply move to dismiss your captured comments.

[polymath257]

Do you know what a particle accelerater is? I'm gonna piss you off and tell you any way. In cern where the biggest accelerator is located it is a huge hoop made up of many segments and each segment contains an electromagnetic 'booster' not imagine a 1000 segments each able to boost anything in the segment a little faster than the boost before and so on and so one in a closed loop circuit. 

So what do they boost? the boost helium and generally they turn it up to nearly the speed of light. meaning the helium atoms  are soring through this huge cose loop zipping about at or near the speed of light then normally the introduce other atoms to split the bonds between electrons netrons and positrons. 

So this is how they made gold from bismuth a lead like substance. They took grams of bismuth and bombarded it with trillions upon trillions of helium atoms going near the speed of light. The fission you say has to happen was not the goal here. They used the helium atoms like a bullets. they shot the static bismuth but not ever atom of helium that hit an atom of bismuth was turned to gold. some who hit head on obliterated the bismuth and it was turned into atom of far less mass, >100u  while others were just winged which left they with an atomic weight of 200+ u some where hit off center and made 175u.. The only thing counted as gold was any atoms that where between 190u and 200u with the gold atomic standard being 196u.

Do you understand? yes energy was applied and atomic changes where made but not to a 1:1 ratio. again grams were used to creat just atoms with lots and lots of by product that was far lighter than gold or far heavier. 

Do you understand my side of the arguement? can you explain it back to me and I will do the same so at least we know each other knows what the other is saying.

Yes, I understand. You make several basic errors. First, the fission is, precisely, the point of trying to turn bismuth (not helium) into gold. The bismuth has 83 protons and 209-83=126 neutrons. The helium has 2 protons and 2 neutrons. When the helium hits the bismuth, it knocks some of those protons and neutrons out and the remaining nucleus of gold has 79 protons and 197-79=118 neutrons. The other 6 protons and 10 neutrons still exist and are 'fragments'. But there is still a 1:1 ratio of mass before and after the collision.

And, more to the point, an omnipotent designer with full control would not need the helium and could just take the required number of protons and neutrons out of the bismuth to give an atom of gold. Furthermore, any excess could be used to make *further* atoms of gold with no waste (like the human experiments had).

So, the ideal situation, which would be fully possible in an omnipotent deity, would be an exact 1:1 ratio of masses of bismuth (or any other element) and the resulting gold.

[Drich]

Do you know what a particle accelerater is? I'm gonna piss you off and tell you any way. In cern where the biggest accelerator is located it is a huge hoop made up of many segments and each segment contains an electromagnetic 'booster' not imagine a 1000 segments each able to boost anything in the segment a little faster than the boost before and so on and so one in a closed loop circuit. 

So what do they boost? the boost helium and generally they turn it up to nearly the speed of light. meaning the helium atoms  are soring through this huge cose loop zipping about at or near the speed of light then normally the introduce other atoms to split the bonds between electrons netrons and positrons. 

So this is how they made gold from bismuth a lead like substance. They took grams of bismuth and bombarded it with trillions upon trillions of helium atoms going near the speed of light. The fission you say has to happen was not the goal here. They used the helium atoms like a bullets. they shot the static bismuth but not ever atom of helium that hit an atom of bismuth was turned to gold. some who hit head on obliterated the bismuth and it was turned into atom of far less mass, >100u  while others were just winged which left they with an atomic weight of 200+ u some where hit off center and made 175u.. The only thing counted as gold was any atoms that where between 190u and 200u with the gold atomic standard being 196u.

Do you understand? yes energy was applied and atomic changes where made but not to a 1:1 ratio. again grams were used to creat just atoms with lots and lots of by product that was far lighter than gold or far heavier. 

Do you understand my side of the arguement? can you explain it back to me and I will do the same so at least we know each other knows what the other is saying.

Yes, I understand. You make several basic errors. First, the fission is, precisely, the point of trying to turn bismuth (not helium) into gold. The bismuth has 83 protons and 209-83=126 neutrons. The helium has 2 protons and 2 neutrons. When the helium hits the bismuth, it knocks some of those protons and neutrons out and the remaining nucleus of gold has 79 protons and 197-79=118 neutrons. The other 6 protons and 10 neutrons still exist and are 'fragments'. But there is still a 1:1 ratio of mass before and after the collision.

And, more to the point, an omnipotent designer with full control would not need the helium and could just take the required number of protons and neutrons out of the bismuth to give an atom of gold. Furthermore, any excess could be used to make *further* atoms of gold with no waste (like the human experiments had).

So, the ideal situation, which would be fully possible in an omnipotent deity, would be an exact 1:1 ratio of masses of bismuth (or any other element) and the resulting gold.

says who? God describes himself as the alpha and omega the begining and end of all things. meaning he is only obligated to his will want and desire. that is what true omnipotents looks like, not some foolish idea that God must perform to the peak of what that defination means to you but rather He does what He wants to. If God decides to use a proton accelerator to turn bismuth into gold then what in the term alpha and omega prevents him from doing so?

Again being alpha and omega or truly all powerful is doing what you want to do not to be tied to some idea that one must always put 1000% pure power into everything and always come out with the purest most efficient way of doing things. That is what alpha and omega means it is the absolute power to do as much or as little as one wants.

For example can an alpha and omega God create a rock so big he can not lift it? Yes if he wants to and no if he does not.

can god create a triangle who's angles do not add up to 180* for an alpha and omega yes if he wants to and no if he does not

Can god create gold for another substance at a 1:1 ratio, again yes if he wants to and no he does not.

My only point in all of this is that we know how to create gold from other materials and no it is not a 1:1 exchange. not even close. and since gold does not currently condense out of thin air as a natural process and if we can only use air to facilitate such change then air not only becomes the medium of change it also becomes the fuel god has to facilitate change. again as you all pointed out it would need some sort of fission to make this work. my only point in all of this is how much air does it take to create the fission necessary to facilitate a 1:1 air exchange?

Where you two dunder heads fail is you assume omnipotent God just magics air into gold, and I'm pointing out there maybe a cost like with the bismuth as God is not obligated to do things your way.

[The Grand Nudger]

God never describes itself as anything. If it did, it might clear up the confusion that the worlds magic books perpetuate...though the religious would likely insist that it was a liar and that their magic books were still true, lol.

[Scientia]

@Drich
If denying this reality and its laws helps you sleep at night, then be it.

We've invested enough energy in trying to explain it to you and if 13 pages weren't enough, then there are only two conclusions:
1) you understood it but you deny it
2) you didn't understand it (in which case you are lost)

In either case, it's impossible to continue a conversation when you are refusing the very basics and just go back on your old replies.

Specifically in the latter case, if your god's assistance hasn't helped you understand a simple concept in 13 pages of in-depth explanations, then I'd rather not receive your "god"'s help at all. It might just break something that is working correctly right now.

[Drich]

God never describes itself as anything.  If it did, it might clear up the confusion that the worlds magic books perpetuate...though the religious would likely insist that it was a liar and that their magic books were still true, lol.

here are 6 times where God is speaking and proclaims to be the alpha and omega describes what alpha and omega means (beginning and end) or is calling himself the beginning and end.
https://bible.knowing-jesus.com/topics/Alpha-And-Omega


Verse Concepts

"I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end."

Verse Concepts

"I am the Alpha and the Omega," says the Lord God, "who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty."

Then He said to me, "It is done I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end I will give to the one who thirsts from the spring of the water of life without cost. "He who overcomes will inherit these things, and I will be his God and he will be My son.

When I saw Him, I fell at His feet like a dead man And He placed His right hand on me, saying, "Do not be afraid; I am the first and the last, and the living One; and I was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore, and I have the keys of death and of Hades.

Verse Concepts

"Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: 'I am the first and I am the last, And there is no God besides Me.

Verse Concepts

"Listen to Me, O Jacob, even Israel whom I called; I am He, I am the first, I am also the last.

what does it mean to be the first and last, beginning and end alpha and omega?

It means no authority comes before, none comes after. God is.. whatever he wants to be. to be first says I can do _________ (fill in the blank) and the last means nothing no authority principle or law of man or nature can prevent him from filling in his own blank.

So can god create a rock he can not lift. Yes if he wants to and no if he does not want to. and so it goes with a boudless alpha and omega verses some poor omni max version of God who get tripped up by controdictions and word games.

[The Grand Nudger]

You realize that human beings wrote magic book, not a god..yes? God is not speaking at any point in magic book, people are writing stories about a god speaking, and conveniently enough the god says those things that they would say.

Like I said, a god could come down here right now and folks like yourself would call it a liar and insist that their magic books were still true.

[Drich]

@Drich
If denying this reality and its laws helps you sleep at night, then be it.

We've invested enough energy in trying to explain it to you and if 13 pages weren't enough, then there are only two conclusions:
1) you understood it but you deny it
2) you didn't understand it (in which case you are lost)

In either case, it's impossible to continue a conversation when you are refusing the very basics and just go back on your old replies.

Specifically in the latter case, if your god's assistance hasn't helped you understand a simple concept in 13 pages of in-depth explanations, then I'd rather not receive your "god"'s help at all. It might just break something that is working correctly right now.

I know you need your assessment to be true but your peers keep under mining your evaluation of me and the subject. again They get what I have said. while you have yet to even once out line my argument.

What you failed to do I have done repeatedly to your position. in that I have stated what you believe inorder to show I understand your arguements. then I take it a step further to show you what you need to understand to get to my point. Yours is a sin of pride in that you do not believe anything can exist outside your box of knoweledge, so you do not bother to take time to try and understand what I have written. 

This proves true because again your active peers not only have repeated my very own position using my numbers and explainations as their own, I was able to take them to the point you can not or will not understand. this is shown in 3 different angels of attacks all leading to you're all's collective false understanding of what God is.

Again you all wrongly assume God being all powerful must magic air into Gold at a 1:1 ratio. I said but what if he uses a mechanical means only using air? and even if air to gold is at a 1:1 ratio how much air is needed to fuel this mechanical means?

After all air does not automatically condense into gold on it's own. Even you said there would need be some sort of fission needed. but to stay true to your parameters only air can be used so this fission needs to happen with the restructure or breaking down of the air atoms and resorting them to make this fission/mechanical means to turn air into gold. again even if this is done to a 1:1 ration, how much air will be needed to full the conversion process?

---

You realize that human beings wrote magic book, not a god..yes?  God is not speaking at any point in magic book, people are writing stories about a god speaking, and conveniently enough the god says those things that they would say.

Like I said, a god could come down here right now and folks like yourself would call it a liar and insist that their magic books were still true.

if he did not align himself with what was written then he would not be the god ofthe bible.. the bible tells us there are other being who take the roles of angels and deity when they are not. So without some standard how would you know this being who came down is indeed God? is magic tricks all you need? a little gold perhaps to line your bathroom? How would you know God if he came down and spoke to you? how could you discern God from satan?

[Scientia]

@Drich
Lol, have you straight out ignored Polymath's post? Are you drunk or something?

I understand your need to deny reality, but at least be discrete about it.