Archaeology of the New Testament

[Cypress]

The Universe is not a brain. The Universe is not a quark. The Universe is not an electron. The Universe is not a mother. The Universe is not sentient. The Universe is not a chemical. The Universe is not meat. The Universe is not a robot. The Universe is not a quark. The Universe is not an electron. The Universe is not a boson. The Universe is not sentient. The Universe is not 'right'. The Universe is not' 'wrong'.

You need to see a psychiatrist.

 

[ZenMode]

What's the origin of the fundamental forces?

We don't know.

Does it seem reasonable to you that they could just appear by random chance from inanimate and irrational causes?

Again, there are a lot of things that we don't understand the origin of.

They are mathematical equations expressed in base 10 math, but even advanced aliens could describe these universal relationships in their own mathematical system.

Ok?

You keep getting this fundamentally wrong. The natural laws and universal constants have defined mathematical relationships

No they don't. Mathematics is a creation of man.

which are invariant and existed billions of years before humans discovered them. They don't have to be expressed in base 10 math to have mathematical relationships.

Yes, there are consistencies.

They are mathematical equations expressed in base 10 math, but even advanced aliens could describe these universal relationships in their own mathematical system.

Yes, many conscious beings has ability to create mathematics.

In other words, these natural laws are universal, invariant, and completely independent of man.

Yes, except for man's attempt to explain them.

Advanced aliens would be expected to discover the same universal laws using their mathematical systems.

Yes they would. None of that means a sky wizard created it. Yes, no matter how you try to spin it, you are implying a sky wizard. A conscious, all-powerful creator That created gravity, the forces that man describes as physics, consciousness, etc.

 

[ZenMode]

You need to see a psychiatrist.

Agree.

 

[Into the Night]

ape-faced butthole fallacy.

Denial of logic. Mantra 1a. Lame.

 

[Into the Night]

That is an appropriate response. Stupid in. Stupid out.

Argument of the Stone fallacy. Consensus fallacy.

 

[Into the Night]

What's the origin of the fundamental forces?

Man.

Does it seem reasonable to you that they could just appear by random chance from inanimate and irrational causes?

If you consider Man random chance.
Man is animate.
Man is not a cause.

They are mathematical equations expressed in base 10 math, but even advanced aliens could describe these universal relationships in their own mathematical system.

Aliens did not invent the mathematics we use.
The Universe is not a relationship.
The Universe is not mathematics.
The Universe is not ten fingers.
The Universe is not an alien.
The Universe is not sentient.
The Universe is not a division.
The is no such thing as a 'universal relationship'.

The Universe is unorganized.

You keep getting this fundamentally wrong. The natural laws and universal constants have defined mathematical relationships which are invariant and existed billions of years before humans discovered them. They don't have to be expressed in base 10 math to have mathematical relationships.

The Universe is not a law.
The Universe is not a constant.
There is no such thing as a 'universal constant'.
The Universe is not a relationship.
Mathematics is variant. It has variables.
You are denying algebra.
Mathematics is not discovered.
The Universe is not a numeric base.

The Universe is unorganized.

They are mathematical equations expressed in base 10 math, but even advanced aliens could describe these universal relationships in their own mathematical system.

The Universe is not an equation.
The Universe is not mathematics.
The Universe is not a numeric base.
The Universe is not an alien.
There is no such thing as a universal relationship.

The Universe is unorganized.

In other words, these natural laws are universal, invariant, and completely independent of man. Advanced aliens would be expected to discover the same universal laws using their mathematical systems.

The Universe is not a law.
There is no such thing as a 'universal law'.
Mathematics has variables.
The Universe is not mathematics.
Man created mathematics.
You don't get to speak for every alien. Omniscience fallacy.
The Universe is not an alien.

The Universe is unorganized.

 

[Into the Night]

We don't know.

It is already known. They were created by Man.

Again, there are a lot of things that we don't understand the origin of.

They were created by Man.

No they don't. Mathematics is a creation of man.

This statement is correct.

Yes, there are consistencies.

Yes, many conscious beings has ability to create mathematics.

Yes, except for man's attempt to explain them.

Yes they would. None of that means a sky wizard created it. Yes, no matter how you try to spin it, you are implying a sky wizard. A conscious, all-powerful creator That created gravity, the forces that man describes as physics, consciousness, etc.

Worshiping your Sky Wizard again?
Gravity is a force.
Physics is not a force.
Consciousness is not a force.

The Universe is not a Sky Wizard.
The Universe is not sentient.
The Universe is not a force.

The Universe is unorganized.

 

[Into the Night]

You need to see a psychiatrist.

Mantra 1d. Lame.

 

[Into the Night]

Agree.

Consensus fallacy.

 

[Cypress]

Mathematics is a creation of man.

So the inverse square relationship of electricity never existed until 300 years ago when Europeans discovered it? That shouldn't make any sense to you.

The relationships of universal natural laws are proportional, inverse, geometric, exponential, derivative, logarithmic - independent of whether we base 10 or base 3 numerical systems. These universal laws are discoverable by alien Civilizations who can express these universal relationships in their own mathematical systems.

Yes they would. None of that means a sky wizard created it. Yes, no matter how you try to spin it, you are implying a sky wizard. A conscious, all-powerful creator That created gravity, the forces that man describes as physics, consciousness, etc.

I don't believe a wizard, witch, magician, or sorcerer created the universe.

 

[ZenMode]

So the inverse square relationship of electricity never existed until 300 years ago when Europeans discovered it? That shouldn't make any sense to you.

There are forces in the universe. The way man tries to explain or define them says nothing about their origin

I don't believe a wizard, witch, magician, or sorcerer created the universe.

Yes you do. You are clearly implying that there was some kind of conscious decision to weave these forces and rules and laws into the fabric of the universe.

You are tonight yet because you are trying to pull a bait and switch.

 

[Cypress]

There are forces in the universe. The way man tries to explain or define them says nothing about their origin

The fundamental forces and universal constants existed since 13.8 billion years ago. Humans didn't create them. Humans discovered them.

Nature had the concepts of quantity, proportion, momentum, and number embedded within it 13 billion years before humans appeared.

You are rapidly losing credibility in claiming humans just subjectively invented mathematical relationships and natural laws.

Yes you do. You are clearly implying that there was some kind of conscious decision to weave these forces and rules and laws into the fabric of the universe.

That is not a wizard or a witch. I'm sure it sounds good to your ear to claim that's what I believe. Yes, I think the evidence points to some higher transcendent reality beyond matter and energy.

As an atheist, you believe there is nothing by quarks and electrons bumping into each other in your brain; i.e., there is no free will, there is no autonomous "you", there is no genuine love freely-given, there is no objectively real right and wrong. We are essentially meat robots. That is a steep price to pay to be an atheist.

 

[ZenMode]

The fundamental forces and universal constants existed since 13.8 billion years ago. Humans didn't create them. Humans discovered them.

Yes, an apple falls because of gravity.

Nature had the concepts of quantity, proportion, momentum, and number embedded within it 13 billion years before humans appeared.

Yes. Forces, and what man labels as laws, have existed faronger than man.

You are rapidly losing credibility in claiming humans just subjectively invented mathematical relationships and natural laws.

Forces, like gravity, have existed for as long as the universe has.

That is not a wizard or a witch. I'm sure it sounds good to your ear to claim that's what I believe. Yes, I think the evidence points to some higher transcendent reality beyond matter and energy.

You are clearly alluding to a god.

As an atheist, you believe there is nothing by quarks and electrons bumping into each other in your brain; i.e., there is no free will, there is no autonomous "you",

Yes

there is no genuine love freely-given,

Sure there is.

there is no objectively real right and wrong.

There is objective right and wrong. Moral and immoral.

We are essentially meat robots. That is a steep price to pay to be an atheist.

What you're really getting at is free will. The fact that we don't have free will is a positive, not a negative.

 

[IBDaMann]

If nothing is real but matter and energy, how is the universe caused by nothing?

This question was already addressed, and you did not like the answer, so you became a broken record, asking the same question over and over, hoping beyond hope that if you ask a sufficient number of times, the answer will somehow change.

1. What "caused" your God? If everything must be "caused" by something else, you have some explaining to do. Note that @Into the Night is a Christian whose religious views do not suffer from your imposed fatal flaw. You might want to ask him for some assistance on the matter. Perhaps the secret is not trying to prove your religion is somehow "settled science".

2. Why must anyone assume that "prior" to the universe there was "nothing"? Were you there? Your question presumes that there was "nothing" prior to the universe, so you have some explaining to do before your question can be accepted with its assumptions.

In short, your broken-record gibberish is annoyingly incoherent. The response to your question will not change until something about it changes.

How are organization and lawful order caused by the immaterial, irrational, and inanimate?

Let me check, ... yep, the universe is still a randomly distributed dust cloud.

Let me check, ... yep, you still haven't identified any test of randomness that the universe fails.

Let me check, ... yep, Nature's determinism does not have the authority to classify randomness as order; that would require an Executive Order.

If your brain is just a collection of quarks and electrons,

There are no quarks, at least not that anyone has ever shown.

Or is it just the deterministic chemical interactions of electrons moving around?

This would be a good way of describing it if you hadn't implied only electrons.

Are you just a meat robot?

This is your way of bastardizing through sarcastic dismissal an otherwise good description.

If nothing exists but quarks, electrons, and bosons,

There are no bosons either, at least that anyone has ever shown.

doesn't that mean morality is really just relative and utterly subjective?

Nope.

Aren't we deluding ourselves that there is really anything objectively right or wrong?

I can't speak for those who are so deluding themselves. You delude yourself on many things.

 

[IBDaMann]

Yes, an apple falls because of gravity.

Unless you are explaining the apple's motion through General Relativity, in which there is no gravity.

Yes. Forces, and what man labels as laws, have existed faronger than man.

Nope. The concept of forces has only been around during the time of man. Only Nature exists and we don't really understand it. Just because you have decided to think of Nature as "having forces" that doesn't compel Nature into being that way. In fact, Einstein gave us a substantially different way of conceiving of Nature which also works.

So no, there are no "forces" that exist outside our minds that we can perceive as they are. Nature does not conform to our beliefs about it. Cypress is off his rocker.

Forces, like gravity, have existed for as long as the universe has.

Nope. Nature has, but no single human concept has. If you are trying to break down Nature into what you believe are its component parts, you will only result in beliefs about Nature, and not any absolute truths about Nature.

You are clearly alluding to a god.

Did you ask him what created his deity?

 

[IBDaMann]

Logic is the foundation of geometry, number theory, etc.

The foudation is not the house; it's only the foundation of the house.

 

[Cypress]

The Universe is not mathematics. The Universe is not ten fingers. The Universe is not an alien. The Universe is not a law. The Universe is not a constant. The Universe is not an equation. The Universe is not a numeric base. The Universe is not an alien. The Universe is not a law.

Bat shit crazy. ​

 

[Cypress]

There are forces in the universe. The way man tries to explain or define them says nothing about their origin

I'm asking you if you think it's reasonable to believe the fundamental forces and laws of nature could just randomly pop into existence from inanimate, immaterial, and irrational causes.

Yes you do. You are clearly implying that there was some kind of conscious decision to weave these forces and rules and laws into the fabric of the universe.

You are tonight yet because you are trying to pull a bait and switch.

Once you precisely scientifically define what consciousness is and what causes it, then I'll decide if I want to use that word in this context.

I've stated about eighty seven times previously that to me, the most logical explanation for a lawful and mathematically rational universe is some type of higher rational agency or organizing principle.

 

[Cypress]

The foudation is not the house; it's only the foundation of the house.

Thanks for helping me prove that because the cosmos obeys consistent universal mathematical laws, there is some type of logical harmony underlying the basis of the universe.
It's not unorganized, random, or arbitrary.

 

[Jerry Mathers]

What's the origin of the fundamental forces? Does it seem reasonable to you that they could just appear by random chance from inanimate and irrational causes?

They are mathematical equations expressed in base 10 math, but even advanced aliens could describe these universal relationships in their own mathematical system.

You keep getting this fundamentally wrong. The natural laws and universal constants have defined mathematical relationships which are invariant and existed billions of years before humans discovered them. They don't have to be expressed in base 10 math to have mathematical relationships.

They are mathematical equations expressed in base 10 math, but even advanced aliens could describe these universal relationships in their own mathematical system.

In other words, these natural laws are universal, invariant, and completely independent of man. Advanced aliens would be expected to discover the same universal laws using their mathematical systems.

so.

none of this gets at their origin.

the origin is simply unknown.