Archaeology of the New Testament

Cypress said:
You aren't actually professing a state of ignorance.
You've already insinuated that you basically know what the answer is: you are 100% certain inanimate, irrational, physical material causes somehow caused a lawfully organized and mathematically rational universe.
Click to expand...
Ichabod Stain said:
No! He didn't say that!
Click to expand...
That's interesting. You are therefore insinuating that diehard atheists believe their is something beyond inanimate matter and energy; some higher reality beyond inanimate material physicalism which was responsible for the appearance of a rational and lawfully organized universe.
 
Cypress said:
That's interesting. You are therefore insinuating that diehard atheists believe their is something beyond inanimate matter and energy; some higher reality beyond inanimate material physicalism which was responsible for the appearance of a rational and lawfully organized universe.
Click to expand...
he's stated he's an agnostic.

that's not a die hard atheist.
 
Melchizedek=Tecumseh said:
Cypre

Cypress thinks 2+2 will save his soul! But Numbers 22:22 ,Catch 22 won't Passover him,because he's a math major!
Click to expand...
Disagreed that's what @Cypress thinks. He's simply recognizing that the Universe is logical and, therefore, predictable in its actions. The main variable is life, which alters the Universe in, sometimes, unpredictable ways.

An example is the flow of water off mountains and down to the sea due to gravity, temperature and other predictable events. Water and gravity carved the Grand Canyon over time. Life, OTOH, can alter that predictable results such as beavers damming streams which can alter their course or slow their flow. Life downstream of the dams may flourish and further impede water flow.

Predicting physics over hundred thousand or a million years is easy but predicting the course of life over the same time period is not.
 
Cypress said:
Now I've got some atheists running away from the label atheist, and trying to grasp a grip on the label agnostic.

See posts 1502 and 1503.
Click to expand...
It's fun to watch atheists back away from their claims while they continue to whine about the theists.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
Disagreed that's what @Cypress thinks. He's simply recognizing that the Universe is logical and, therefore, predictable in its actions. The main variable is life, which alters the Universe in, sometimes, unpredictable ways.
Click to expand...
True. And the question of why the universe is logical, rational, and lawfully organized is a philosophical question, not a scientific one.

Nobody really knows what the answer is.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
It's fun to watch atheists back away from their claims while they continue to whine about the theists.
Click to expand...
I actually think most atheists are actually agnostic, because you can get them to eventually run away 🏃‍♂️ from the implications of a strictly physical and material world view by just following atheism to it's logical conclusion.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
Disagreed that's what @Cypress thinks. He's simply recognizing that the Universe is logical and, therefore, predictable in its actions. The main variable is life, which alters the Universe in, sometimes, unpredictable ways.

Predicting physics over hundred thousand or a million years is easy but predicting the course of life over the same time period is not.
Click to expand...
Good point

Carbon-based life, DNA, and consciousness is, if not unique, certainly exceedingly rare in the universe.

That's why when we marvel at universal laws of nature we are talking about physics, not biology.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
Disagreed that's what @Cypress thinks. He's simply recognizing that the Universe is logical and, therefore, predictable in its actions. The main variable is life, which alters the Universe in, sometimes, unpredictable ways.

An example is the flow of water off mountains and down to the sea due to gravity, temperature and other predictable events. Water and gravity carved the Grand Canyon over time. Life, OTOH, can alter that predictable results such as beavers damming streams which can alter their course or slow their flow. Life downstream of the dams may flourish and further impede water flow.

Predicting physics over hundred thousand or a million years is easy but predicting the course of life over the same time period is not.
Click to expand...
no.

that is what cypress thinks and he's a retard.
'
he is caught in the materialistic scientism trap.

he has no soul.
 
ZenMode said:
I've already said that I am 99.999% certain that none of the gods that man has written about our real.
Click to expand...
So you don't like the anthropomorphic idea of a supernatural guy with a beard and a white robe, a hindu god with eight arms, or greek god throwing lightening bolts.

Fine, but that still makes you agnostic because you are leaving open the possibility that a lawful and rational universe could be caused by a higher rational agency. Pantheists do not believe in gods in white robes either.
ZenMode said:
I gave multiple examples of how the universe is not finally tuned. It's actually anything but finally tuned, yet you cling to that as your soul basis for believing in your deity.
Click to expand...
You are not talking about fine tuning the way physicists and cosmologists do. Anything biological does not involve universal mathematical principles.
ZenMode said:
I have never claimed that everything came into an assistance by some irrational means.
Click to expand...
Anything purely physical and material is irrational by definition. It doesn't have reason, logic, or a mind.

If you want to stick with the story that nothing is real but the inanimate, the physical, the material, then you have to explain your cosmology by giving me an explanation for how the rational and material somehow came from the irrational and immaterial.
ZenMode said:
All I've said is that I don't know how it came into existence. You are the one making claims about how it came into existence.

Actually, there is a lot of gravity that we cannot account for and science only speculates on how it is created.

That gap in our knowledge is something that you would likely explain via a sky wizard.
Click to expand...

It's not that we can't account for some gravity. You're talking about dark matter.

The thing we can't explain, even after studying gravity for 600 years is why exactly mass causes spacetime to deform, and why a universal mathematical principle underlies the grammatical field.
 
Melchizedek=Tecumseh said:
I have no trouble believing evolution and creation as one and the same ,from different POV
Click to expand...
The modern neo-Darwinian concept of descent with modification is one of the most thoroughly tested and convincing scientific theories we have.

Only Bible thumping fundamentalists attempt to cast serious doubt on it's basic outlines.
 
Cypress said:
So you don't like the anthropomorphic idea of a supernatural guy with a beard and a white robe, a hindu god with eight arms, or greek god throwing lightening bolts.
Click to expand...
It's not about liking gods or the idea of gods. I'd love to know that I can exist eternally in the afterlife. There's just no reason to believe it's going to happen for anyone.
Cypress said:
Fine, but that still makes you agnostic because you are leaving open the possibility that a lawful and rational universe could be caused by a higher rational agency. Pantheists do not believe in gods in white robes either.
Click to expand...
atheism means not believing in gods. I don't believe in gods... any of them. My belief is independent of reality. I can believe x and y might be true. Since I'm not omniscient, I have to be willing to acknowledge that it's possible that a god(s) exist, but that is completely separate from my atheistic beliefs.

Theism is also a belief in gods, but doesn't address whether or not gods actually exist.
Cypress said:
You are not talking about fine tuning the way physicists and cosmologists do. Anything biological does not involve universal mathematical principles.
Click to expand...
Black holes, deadly radiation, 99.999% of the universe doesn't support, and in fact actively ends, life.
Cypress said:
Anything purely physical and material is irrational by definition. It doesn't have reason, logic, or a mind.

If you want to stick with the story that nothing is real but the inanimate, the physical, the material, then you have to explain your cosmology by giving me an explanation for how the rational and material somehow came from the irrational and immaterial.
Click to expand...
No, I don't. Like the "unexplainable" gravity, I'm fine saying "I don't know" rather than going all "God of the Gaps".
Cypress said:
It's not that we can't account for some gravity. You're talking about dark matter.
Click to expand...
There are varying theories on what causes the "extra" gravity. Dark matter is one, but I'm not tempted to say "God is creating the extra gravity" because that would be ridiculous.
Cypress said:
The thing we can't explain, even after studying gravity for 600 years is why exactly mass causes spacetime to deform, and why a universal mathematical principle underlies the grammatical field.
Click to expand...
Well, then God must be doing it, right?
 
Dutch Uncle said:
Disagreed that's what @Cypress thinks. He's simply recognizing that the Universe is logical and, therefore, predictable in its actions. The main variable is life, which alters the Universe in, sometimes, unpredictable ways.

An example is the flow of water off mountains and down to the sea due to gravity, temperature and other predictable events. Water and gravity carved the Grand Canyon over time. Life, OTOH, can alter that predictable results such as beavers damming streams which can alter their course or slow their flow. Life downstream of the dams may flourish and further impede water flow.

Predicting physics over hundred thousand or a million years is easy but predicting the course of life over the same time period is not.
Click to expand...
I don't believe that! I think most the Grand Canyon was formed when
Planet Earth had one very bad day!
 
Cypress said:
The modern neo-Darwinian concept of descent with modification is one of the most thoroughly tested and convincing scientific theories we have.

Only Bible thumping fundamentalists attempt to cast serious doubt on it's basic outlines.
Click to expand...
I have no problem believing in Evolution and Creation
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top