Archaeology of the New Testament

[Melchizedek=Tecumseh]

The first quarks and electrons appeared somewhere around a thousandth of a microsecond after the inflationary big bang started.

Matter didn't exist before the Big Bang

 

[Melchizedek=Tecumseh]

You really want this to be a debate about whether there is a magical guy in a white robe floating in the clouds.

I'll make that a quick debate by saying I don't believe in that.

You don't need any special experimental equipment, you don't need a PhD in physics, you don't need any math to answer a very simple question of logic:

Could inanimate and irrational causes be the most reasonable explanation for a mathematically rational and lawful universe?​

​

Or not?​

Could you please not keep dodging and just answer this very simple question?

But you believe in intelligent design!

 

[Jerry Mathers]

Of course you did Beav!

Satan and lucifer are exactly the same.

 

[Melchizedek=Tecumseh]

Satan and lucifer are exactly the same.

 

[Cypress]

What you're referencing as creator of the universe is exactly the same concept as gods of various religions and superstitions.

I've never referenced a sky daddy in a white robe. That is a caricature you've been trained by by militant atheism to use.

But believe in something very much like it.

I've never written anything that confirms to your cartoon of an old guy in a white robe and sandals who lives in the clouds.
Most people on the planet, including most scientists on the planet believe in some type of god or higher power. Are you just smarter and better than everyone else?

Rational and lawful (laws created by a "god") are your opinion, not a fact.

Mathematics is a form of pure logic. We know that the scaffolding of the universe is based on mathematical relationships. If that's not rational and lawful, nothing is.

Your belief that the universe is unorganized, random, arbitrary contradicts 500 years of physics, and stands in direct opposition to history's most famous physicists.

In fact, I maintain you don't actually believe the universe is random and unorganized. You are just reticent to reflect on the question of how an ordered and lawful universe can spring into existence from an inanimate, irrational cause.

I have answered it. You insert adjectives into a description of the universe that are opinion. You then use that opinion to justify your beliefs in a conscious creator.

You have never answered it, except to make subjective complaints about wisdom teeth or knee joints, or whatever. Wisdom teeth and knees constitute essentially zero percent of the total matter and energy in the universe, so you can't point to them as fundamental properties of a lawful cosmos.

 

[Jerry Mathers]

I've never referenced a sky daddy in a white robe. That is a caricature you've been trained by by militant atheism to use.

I've never written anything that confirms to your cartoon of an old guy in a white robe and sandals who lives in the clouds.
Most people on the planet, including most scientists on the planet believe in some type of god or higher power. Are you just smarter and better than everyone else?

Mathematics is a form of pure logic. We know that the scaffolding of the universe is based on mathematical relationships. If that's not rational and lawful, nothing is.

Your belief that the universe is unorganized, random, arbitrary contradicts 500 years of physics, and stands in direct opposition to history's most famous physicists.

In fact, I maintain you don't actually believe the universe is random and unorganized. You are just reticent to reflect on the question of how an ordered and lawful universe can spring into existence from an inanimate, irrational cause.

You have never answered it, except to make subjective complaints about wisdom teeth or knee joints, or whatever. Wisdom teeth and knees constitute essentially zero percent of the total matter and energy in the universe, so you can't point to them as fundamental properties of a lawful cosmos.

does free will exist?

 

[Cypress]

does free will exist?

I do but @ZenMode doesn't.

But the psychology of one hominid species on one small planet is not a fundamental property of the universe. The brains and psychology of homo sapiens are essentially zero percent of all the matter and energy in the universe, and you can't point to it as proof that the cosmos as a whole is fundamentally unorganized and arbitrary

 

[ZenMode]

I've never referenced a sky daddy in a white robe. That is a caricature you've been trained by by militant atheism to use.

Clothing doesn't matter.

I've never written anything that confirms to your cartoon of an old guy in a white robe and sandals who lives in the clouds.

Clothing doesn't matter.

Most people on the planet, including most scientists on the planet believe in some type of god or higher power. Are you just smarter and better than everyone else?

It has absolutely nothing to do with being better or worse and everything to do with evidence and intellectual honesty.

Mathematics is a form of pure logic. We know that the scaffolding of the universe is based on mathematical relationships. If that's not rational and lawful, nothing is.

Your belief that the universe is unorganized, random, arbitrary contradicts 500 years of physics, and stands in direct opposition to history's most famous physicists.

In fact, I maintain you don't actually believe the universe is random and unorganized. You are just reticent to reflect on the question of how an ordered and lawful universe can spring into existence from an inanimate, irrational cause.

You have never answered it, except to make subjective complaints about wisdom teeth or knee joints, or whatever. Wisdom teeth and knees constitute essentially zero percent of the total matter and energy in the universe, so you can't point to them as fundamental properties of a lawful cosmos.

Again, when you remove the God of the Gaps aspect, it all comes down to evidence.

Either there is sufficient evidence to believe in gods or there's not. You are creating reasons to believe in gods. You are filling in gaps in what we can explain with god(s).

 

[Into the Night]

that's what masons say.

It is not.

 

[Into the Night]

I'm smarter than you. stfu and quit biting at my heels for no reason, little bitch.

You obviously are not.

You don't even understand English very well.
You have no idea what the Free Mason support or denounce.
You have no idea what capitalism is.
You have no idea what socialism is.
You have apparently never read the Bible.
You try to combine the Bible with the Prose Erda.
You condemn that which you do not understand.
You seem to not even understand gender.

 

[Into the Night]

There's no conflict here.

Denying your conflicts does not make them go away, Void.

I don't believe in Gods, because the evidence for gods is so lacking, and don't know how the universe came into existence.

You do, Void. You believe in a Farting Rainbow Unicorn, for one thing.
You also believe in some kind of Sky Daddy.

You cannot make any evidence just disappear, Void.

You also don't know how the universe, and all of its characteristics, came into, but you give in to the same error, God of the gaps, the man has fallen into.

I'm not trying to claim the Universe 'came into existence' at all, Void. Pay attention.

More tap dancing.

Inversion fallacy. I can't blame your word games on me or anybody else.

Could an object, like a rock, design and create the universe?

What makes you think the Universe is designed?
What makes you think the Universe is created?
A rock is not sentient, Void.

I nothing Christianity. I also nothing Harry Potter.

Try English. It works better.

 

[Into the Night]

You have been playing word games all along. On the one hand you say you're an atheist, and you're absolutely certain the universe does not have any rational cause or creator.

He is not an atheist. He is a fundamentalist, just like you.

But then you say you don't know what caused the universe.

The Universe is not a cause.
The Universe is unorganized.

Which one is it? How can you be certain and uncertain at the same time?

He does seem to have a lot of conflicting arguments.

Consciousness is a subjective human term which is poorly understood and poorly defined. I have too much science education to use poorly defined, poorly understood, inappropriate words when it comes to the physical universe.

You deny science.
There is only one Universe.
The Universe is unorganized.

If the laws of physics, the laws of logic, the laws of math exist independently of time and space, if they exist in some kind of transcendent Platonic reality, if they are part and parcel of some eternal logos, then they can be the rational basis for a cause and effect relationship without having to try to shoehorn a subjective human word like consciousness into it.

The Universe is not physics.
The Universe is not a law.
The Universe is not mathematics.
Mathematics is not a law.
Logic is not a law.
Physics is created by Man.
Logic is created by Man.
Mathematics is created by Man.
Neither physics, mathematics, or logic are time or space.
Neither physics, mathematics, or logic are a logo.
Neither physics, mathematics, or logic are a cause or an effect.
You do not get to speak for Plato.

I know how much you hate Christianity and you want to steer the topic towards the cartoonish idea of a sky daddy who has a white beard and wears a white robe.

I don't think he has ever described his Sky Daddy.

 

[Into the Night]

You really want this to be a debate about whether there is a magical guy in a white robe floating in the clouds.

I'll make that a quick debate by saying I don't believe in that.

You don't need any special experimental equipment, you don't need a PhD in physics, you don't need any math to answer a very simple question of logic:

Could inanimate and irrational causes be the most reasonable explanation for a mathematically rational and lawful universe?​

​

Or not?​

Not logic. Buzzwords are not logic.

The Universe is not sentient.
The Universe is not a division.
The Universe is not mathematics.
The Universe is not a law.
The Universe has no known origin.
The Universe has no known boundary.

The Universe is unorganized.

Could you please not keep dodging and just answer this very simple question?

Buzzwords is not a question.

 

[Into the Night]

What you're referencing as creator of the universe is exactly the same concept as gods of various religions and superstitions.

But believe in something very much like it.

Rational and lawful (laws created by a "god") are your opinion, not a fact.

Opinions are facts, Void. Go learn what 'fact' means.

I have answered it. You insert adjectives into a description of the universe that are opinion.

His buzzwords are not adjectives. He doesn't even know what those words mean.

You then use that opinion to justify your beliefs in a conscious creator.

Just like you.

 

[Into the Night]

I do but @ZenMode doesn't.

But the psychology of one hominid species on one small planet is not a fundamental property of the universe. The brains and psychology of homo sapiens are essentially zero percent of all the matter and energy in the universe, and you can't point to it as proof that the cosmos as a whole is fundamentally unorganized and arbitrary

Irrelevance fallacy.
The Universe is simply unorganized.

 

[Into the Night]

Clothing doesn't matter.

Clothing doesn't matter.

You might be a bit warmer by using it!

It has absolutely nothing to do with being better or worse and everything to do with evidence and intellectual honesty.

You deny both.

Again, when you remove the God of the Gaps aspect, it all comes down to evidence.

So you believe in three gods:
* a magic Farting Rainbow Unicorn
* a magic Sky Daddy.
* a God of the Gaps.

Either there is sufficient evidence to believe in gods or there's not.

Conflicting statement. You claim a belief in gods then say there is no god.
You cannot make any evidence just disappear, Void.

You are creating reasons to believe in gods.

So are you. You just have different gods.

You are filling in gaps in what we can explain with god(s).

You cannot blame your religion on him.

 

[Into the Night]

Matter didn't exist before the Big Bang

What 'Big Bang'?

Every chemical explosive I know converts matter in solid form to gaseous form (rather quickly!). The same matter exists as well.
Every nuclear explosion requires matter to convert into energy. The same matter exists afterward as well.

 

[Into the Night]

But you believe in intelligent design!

He seems to have a lot of trouble stating his beliefs, since he couches so much of it in meaningless buzzword chants.

 

[Into the Night]

Satan and lucifer are exactly the same.

Wrong.
The name 'Satan' has five letters. You also correctly capitalized it, since Satan is being use as a proper noun.
The name 'lucifer' has seven letters. You also incorrectly left is lower case, despite that it is used as a proper noun.

The Bible uses both names to refer to the same entity.
It also associates them with 'devil'. 'dragon', and 'serpent'; as Satan took these forms at one time or another.

 

[Into the Night]

View attachment 89144

YARP