Been Redeemed AMEN!

Let’s start with the fact the majority of the most brilliant men throughout history, including scientists, would disagree with you. Therefore it is possible that you are missing something. Since it seems so obvious and simple to you (which is only true because you were indoctrinated from birth to monist materialism) and is either not obvious or obvious in the other direction to the luminaries of the ages, maybe there are many arguments you have never heard and only simple strawman caricatures. -- Is francis collins is not a “true scientist”? Either is James Tour, Time magazine 50 most influential scientists businessinsider scientist of the year, nanotech society top scientist, etc etc etc. Nor is werner heisenberg nobel winner, nor einstein nobel winner, nor newton, kepler, penrose. I could go on for pages if we go before 1900. What about the very devout catholic Peter Grunberg who won the 2007 nobel prize in physics? Nevil mott. William philips. Charles Townes! Anthony Hewish. Theres five who won nobels just in physics last fifty years. And thats just the devout religious not all the theists. And just nobels. And just physics. There are even more proportionally in chemistry and biology (yes biology) and philosophy. Post-modernism has a cadre of lies that all quasi-intellectuals are drenched in and from them conclude that it’s just obvious that atheistic monist materialism (which is actually an inherently contradictory with no grounding for false/true) is obvious to anyone.

@@ibperson7765 When you state "Let’s start with the fact the majority of the most brilliant men throughout history, including scientists, would disagree with you. Therefore it is possible that you are missing something". I would ask what am I missing? What fantastic knowledge have I been denied that other more brilliant people share?

@@edwardlongfellow5819 I can point at a few things, but it’s not possible to help someone undo decades of indoctrination in scientific materialism in the comments. I would say for me the main realization was that all materialism is eliminative materialism, whether the philosopher admits it or not. There is no way to have only matter and true or false claims. Before the 20th century, most people agreed that materialism is false. That mentality is in fact non-physical. - Derk Pereboom Start by realizing all materialism is eliminative materialism. Basically the only assertions that can be made come as a list of equations about the laws of physics and of states of energy-matter at points of time. I have yet to hear a materialist/physicalist successfully explain how assertions or statements can even exist, let alone be true or false, under their model of reality. I did read about correspondence theory, but imo it doesnt explain that. Assertions are ontologically distinct from the physical. Hence they cannot make claims, including the claim of physicalism itself. We also cannot employ the laws of logic because they are non-physical and hence do not exist. You can check out on here “Jay Richards: Why materialism fails” which I’ll paste in a separate comment, hopefully it goes through.

@@ibperson7765 The question I asked of you was in respect of your 'the brilliant men in history who would not agree with you " I will now take the opportunity to put to you once more my original and simple question-"What am I missing? What fantastic knowledge have I been denied that other more brilliant people share? If you do not know the answer, then say so straight out, but please do not try to cloak the issue with what appears to be no more a pseudo-intellectual exercise on your part.

@@edwardlongfellow5819 You want me to write the philosophical and religious tradition of your ancestors in the comments? I am trying to help. Sorry that wasnt what you wanted. Here’s one summary about atheistic materialism. It is incoherent and makes no sense. The only point to all that is the realization that “how can there be truth if there is only matter?” “How can there even be claims or laws of logic?” Scientific materialism is a prison and incohoerdnt and a lie. Thats why it has been rejected until fe*mi*nist and secular and post-modern bs. ----- C.S. Lewis authored a lay-summary of why materialism, physicalism, and all monisms are contradictions. The final steps contain the main ideas 8. Naturalism is the philosophical position that essentially excludes the possibility for beliefs to stand in ground-and-consequent relations. 9. A necessary condition for rational thought is for beliefs to stand in ground-and-consequent relations. Therefore, 10. Naturalism cannot satisfy a necessary condition for rational thought to exist. 11. Any philosophical position that excludes rational thought is self-defeating. Therefore, 12. Naturalism this self-defeating. (From three and four) In sum, Lewis’ argument proceeds by arguing that naturalism is a philosophy that only admits cause-and-effect relations and leaves no room for beliefs to be produced by ground-and-consequence. Since ground-and-consequent relations are necessary for rationality, anyone who arrives at a philosophical position that does not include them must admit that nothing, including his position, can be supported rationally. Finally, a philosophical position which entails that nothing can be supported rationally must itself not be supported rationally, and so there are no grounds for believing it is true. Therefore, someone who became convinced that naturalism is true would also be in a position to believe that there is no rational support or grounds for believing it is true. Hence any proof for naturalism would yield the self-defeating position of being a “proof that there are no such thing as proofs“.

God is light and in Him there is no darkness 1sr John ch vs5

People dont believe the Bible is inspired truth because this speaker said so, they have other reasons.

@@ibperson7765 People obviously have their own reasons for accepting or not accepting that which is presented in the Gospels.