Is it good to mix Reason with Religion?

[Nimos]

The interplay between visible and invisible matter first time in the history of research is published here: Gravity Law Without Universalism is Solving Many Tasks, viXra.org e-Print archive, viXra:2007.0112 It is the connection between spirits and material, and it describes the change from spiritual matter into physical matter and vice versa.

And how does that answer my question at all, in regards to Satan being matter and therefore defying material laws?

I quickly looked through the document, because I wanted to see what "spiritual matter" is, I can find something you call virtual matter? however I could not find the word spiritual anywhere in the PDF file, so can you explain or define what it is?

To prove you, that I am a very talented young researcher, I am showing the one-page proof of the Riemann Hypothesis and much more: Five million man: proofs of key problems

I don't care if you believe that you are a talented researcher or not. When it's rather obvious, at least to me, that you have a tendency to jump to conclusions.

Just looking at our very short chat here, you pretty much start off with a biased view...

The Church comes first because I care more for my soul than for the comfort of my body. I am angry at anything, which without sufficient reason harms my Church wellbeing.

The church shouldn't come first, truth should. No one have been able to demonstrate what a soul is suppose to be or that it even exists. What is "sufficient reason"? So when science does not confirm what you believe, then you label it as being an "agent" that without sufficient reason tries to harm your church? That doesn't seem very objective or even as someone who understand the motivation behind science.

Then you state the following:
I have invented the term "Natural Theology" by improving the term "Natural Philosophy".....

John Ray (1627–1705) also known as John Wray, was an English naturalist, sometimes referred to as the father of English natural history. He published important works on plants, animals, and natural theology, with the objective "to illustrate the glory of God in the knowledge of the works of nature or creation".

So you didn't invent the term Natural theology? That seems to be a dishonest statement.

I then ask you how natural theology is used and what its purpose is... to which you answer:
Google: "the US navy has confirmed: these UFO videos are real." The size of UFO can be so small, that it fits into a laptop, PC, iPhone. Thus, the results of calculations in Science, the work with large data is not reliable. One needs Natural Theology: one needs holy people doing ordinary research.

Which confuses me, why you would refer to UFOs when that have nothing to do with what I asked... However I then ask into this, to which you draw another conclusion out of the blue:

The UFO violates material laws, in particular Newton's first law. This means it is the devil.

Even if the UFO defy material laws, that ought to be the conclusion. But somehow you conclude that it is the devil?

I then asked you how you could tell the difference between a highly advanced alien lifeform and the devil, to which you just answer a lot of definitions... Which lead me to ask you, how it is possible for the fighter jet to lock on to the UFO, if it is not a physical material and therefore the devil must be of such material as well.

Which leads to this post, where you then want to point out that you see yourself as a young talented researcher... So given this quick summary, why should I believe it, as you have clearly demonstrated that you jump to conclusion for things you have not examined or can't demonstrate?

 

[night912]

Look at your legs: the left leg has exactly the same length as the right one. It is a fact for the overwhelming majority of us. With a coordinating soul inside the body, is it any wonder that both legs of a person grow to the same length?

With a coordinating soul inside the body, is it any wonder that both legs of some people does not grow to the same length?

 

[Valjean]

With a coordinating soul inside the body, is it any wonder that both legs of some people does not grow to the same length?

It's a wonder that the Swiss do not have different leg lengths, to more easily walk around in heir sloping topography.

 

[tayla]

Look at your legs: the left leg has exactly the same length as the right one. It is a fact for the overwhelming majority of us. With a coordinating soul inside the body, is it any wonder that both legs of a person grow to the same length?

There are other explanations for this.

 

[questfortruth]

There are other explanations for this.

Please, tell me about alternatives.

 

[Valjean]

Please, tell me about alternatives.

From post #29, which you apparently didn't read:
No, the legs are the same length because natural selection selected for functionality.
How is this not obvious? What mechanism do you think this co-ordinating soul uses to regulate leg length?
All living things have highly co-ordinated anatomy and physiology. Do they all have souls?

How can something as obvious as natural selection not occur to you? Any educated ten year old would see this.

 

[questfortruth]

From post #29, which you apparently didn't read:
No, the legs are the same length because natural selection selected for functionality.
How is this not obvious? What mechanism do you think this co-ordinating soul uses to regulate leg length?
All living things have highly co-ordinated anatomy and physiology. Do they all have souls?

How can something as obvious as natural selection not occur to you? Any educated ten year old would see this.

I do not consider evolution. I consider the growth of me. How my legs became the same length? How it is possible to make robot, which legs grow simultaneously?

 

[Valjean]

If you refuse to consider a well evidenced explanation you're just being willfully blind.
"I like this fantasy and choose to reject any alternatives or evidence threatening it."