For The Sake Of Truth

[chrysostom]

Why is a giant toe nail or the flying spaghetti monster less reasonable that an invisible disembodied mind?

there is no reason to believe that
a giant toe nail
or
the flying spaghetti monster
started what we experience
that is nonsense suggested by you
it is unreasonable

entropy is a proven scientific phenomena
it means the universe had a beginning
and
something had to start it
an uncaused cause

 

[gcthomas]

entropy is a proven scientific phenomena
it means the universe had a beginning
and
something had to start it
an uncaused cause

Didn't you read my post in response to your question about entropy? You don't really seem to understand the role of entropy in cosmology.

 

[Hedshaker]

there is no reason to believe that
a giant toe nail
or
the flying spaghetti monster
started what we experience
that is nonsense suggested by you
it is unreasonable

So is a disembodied mind or what you call God unreasonable

entropy is a proven scientific phenomena
it means the universe had a beginning
and
something had to start it
an uncaused cause

I have already addressed this and I'm not going to repeat myself for a third time. I have not disputed the universe having a beginning.

 

[Hedshaker]

Didn't you read my post in response to your question about entropy? You don't really seem to understand the role of entropy in cosmology.

I've noticed how he ignores anything that opposes his view.

 

[Right Divider]

where can i read ur motto. And God be definition cannot have a beginning. It's like saying the married bachelor. lol.

Folks like him are the reason there is an 'ignore list'.

 

[Jamie Gigliotti]

Quantum Physics tells us that our intuition is far from reliable when it comes to understanding the deeper side of reality.

And also, please check, I did not say there is an infinity of cause and effects. That would be your straw man, which I do not appreciate. I implied, no one knows the state of existence before the Big Bang.

And I'm betting that if science ever does discover what caused the formation of the universe it will not only be something natural but far stranger than anyone's religious beliefs. Though I seriously doubt it will be in my life time so I don't worry about it.

You sit on the fence. Most take a the stance that there is one uncaused phenomena as most see that as being the most resonable case. You can look at the facts and come to that same conclusion, or you can sit there, wanting physical evidence of God that is Spiritual.

 

[Hedshaker]

You sit on the fence. Most take a the stance that there is one uncaused phenomena as most see that as being the most resonable case. You can look at the facts and come to that same conclusion, or you can sit there, wanting physical evidence of God that is Spiritual.

Not so much on the fence. I find the idea of a disembodied mind creating the universe too ridiculous to contemplate.

With that we seem to be going round in circles so I'll bid you good day. Feel free to have last word if you must but I'm done with this branch.

Regards

 

[patrick jane]

Pot kettle black!



You aren't paying attention, are you? The universe may well have had a beginning but no one knows the state of existence before then. Therefore no one, including you, can possibly know what caused its formation. But it is reasonable to assume something natural since we have never encountered anything other. QED

Do keep up. Repeating oneself gets tedious quickly.



Maybe a giant toe nail did it, maybe the flying spaghetti monster did it. You can call it what you want but you still don't know. No one does and no one can. That's why it's called unknown.

You are engaging in the
Fallacy of opposition . You are right because you say you are right, therefore anyone in opposition must be wrong by default.

This is a fallacy and is also unreasonable.

You can believe whatever you want but without evidence that does not make your belief any more reasonable than anyone else's suggestion.

View attachment 20629

 

[Hedshaker]

For anyone interested:

What Happened Before the Big Bang

Some scientist are starting to think the unthinkable. That the Big Bang wasn't the beginning

 

[Ben Masada]

For anyone interested:

What Happened Before the Big Bang

Some scientist are starting to think the unthinkable. That the Big Bang wasn't the beginning

I am not surprised at all. BTW, they have never fooled any one into thinking that they work on facts. That's exactly what theories aka guesses are all about. Cosmology is like Evolution. They are always erasing older dates for more recent ones.

I have always taken the big bang as the "Let there be light and there was light of Gen. 1:3." And that happened "In the beginning" when the Primal Cause caused the universe to begin and then followed by expansion. BTW, when Einstein was working on a formula about the Expansion of the universe, he was asked if he indeed believed in HaShem. His answer was that all his life was trying to catch HaShem at His work of creation. Joke or not as atheists wish it was, Einstein connected Expansion with HaShem's work of Creation.

 

[Ben Masada]

You mean "exercising faith" where faith is merely a confession and not a practicing way of life.

Very good Mr. Prophet! As I can see, there is nothing false about you. Indeed, that's my same view. Faith is a confession and not a practicing way of life.

 

[chrysostom]

Didn't you read my post in response to your question about entropy? You don't really seem to understand the role of entropy in cosmology.

are you referring to this half baked theory?

If the universe started with one on Linde's chaotic inflation bubbles, as it seems it did, then being so compact it is likely to have had very low entropy.

Should I call the inflation bubble God? Not very personal, I know, but if it makes you happy...

entropy is Second law of thermodynamics

enough said

 

[gcthomas]

are you referring to this half baked theory?



entropy is Second law of thermodynamics

enough said

Aren't you going to at least try to argue the case for entropy proving the existence of a personal God?

 

[chrysostom]

Aren't you going to at least try to argue the case for entropy proving the existence of a personal God?

no

that would be unreasonable
and
you don't seem to know what that means

 

[popsthebuilder]

It's an ancient myth and I don't believe a word of it. Disbelief does not require faith, you just want it to.

Science it the only method that finds real answers.

I don't want your God's love and grace. Are we clear?

Hey. Maybe you aren't aware but Faith in GOD doesn't require a lack of scientific belief. Nor does science refute a watchmaker, or Creator. At a bare minimum, you cannot refute something based on not having experienced it. Science is great. But all is of God, including man and his derived means of observation and knowledge acquisition.

You don't have to want the love of God. You don't have to be hateful either though. You can act like your unique existence and potential as it pertains to all other existence is just a matter of chance, I guess. But that could lead to a very underwhelming existence. Not to mention that even If you think everything came to be from dust, something made that dust. Something cause it to be, and, or caused the things that caused it to be.

No matter what; existence is something. Something cannot come from literally nothing at all. There is a creative force. It is much more than that as well, but now's not the time.
Thanks. Good luck.

 

[popsthebuilder]

No that would be you, you just can't bring yourself to admit it.



Then maybe you can explain how your invisible entity did it without evoking Magic.

Previous question: "If not magic then how was it done?" Got an answer or not?

What's your answer?

 

[popsthebuilder]

We'll call that something godless Nature, and we are equal then?

Saying godless nature is saying nature. Again you are saying that nature made nature. So where did it start? What started nature as you understand it?

 

[popsthebuilder]

A cause for what exactly? The universe may have had a beginning but no one knows the state of existence before that so no one can possibly know what caused the formation of the universe.

Claiming to know what is unknown is unreasonable QED.

To say that a power beyond our understanding is what the known universe came from is logical. That power that is not totally comprehensible that created existence is GOD.

If you wanted you could praise nature as long as you understand that it is of God and not the same as God technically.

 

[popsthebuilder]

Very good Mr. Prophet! As I can see, there is nothing false about you. Indeed, that's my same view. Faith is a confession and not a practicing way of life.

If you confess faith in something and don't act according then you may not really have too much Faith in that thing.

 

[heir]

i believe salvation comes from trusting and believing and everything you wrote.
What im referring to is claiming that we can speak to unbelievers about the Word of God and expect them to 'just believe'
I use to be an atheist and that is the worst answer to give someone!
Im trying to explain that as believers saved by grace through faith we are called to be able to defend the scriptures logically and rationally. Same way paul and the apostles did.

We should whenever possible, show them by scripture. An open Bible is the best policy. Then they aren't taking your word for it. When a Bible is not at hand, they can be encouraged to write down the scripture references and check out everything discussed with the word of God to see if the things that were said are so. I often carry tracts in my purse to hand out.