Archaeology of the New Testament

The natural laws of the cosmos are mathematical relationships. Mathematics is a form of pure logic. If that's not rational, then nothing is.
mathematics is a creation of man.
You make decisions every day of the week based on imperfect or incomplete information.
correct.
I'm not even asking you to explain the origin of the universe. I'm asking you to just address a basic, simply exercise in logic. Is it more reasonable to think the cause of the rational is the irrational; or that the cause of the rational is the rational?
You are using your opinions, and the opinions of others, to create justification for extraordinary claim.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. You don't have extraordinary evidence. you have, at best, circumstantial and it's poor circumstantial, at that.
 
mathematics is a creation of man.
This statement is correct.
correct.

You are using your opinions, and the opinions of others, to create justification for extraordinary claim.
Just like you.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. You don't have extraordinary evidence. you have, at best, circumstantial and it's poor circumstantial, at that.
You cannot make any evidence just disappear, Void.
 
objects at rest, tend to stay at rest, objects in motion tend to stay in motion.
Case in point, you are using a relative reference because nothing is stationary in an absolute sense.

you deny science, bitchtard.
If only some artist could capture the bizarre wonderland that you consider to be "science" in a work of art, we'd have a gallery centerpiece.

Everything in the universe is in motion. The only stationary objects are relatively stationary to some other object(s) that are also in motion.
 
mathematics is a creation of man.
The inverse square relationship of gravity and electricity existed 3.8 billion years before humans. Humans discovered the inverse square relationship, but it always existed. In other words, it's an innate property of the universe.
You are using your opinions, and the opinions of others, to create justification for extraordinary claim.
The inverse square laws, the universal fine structure constant, and the mathematical relationships of time dilation are not opinion.

They are rational, quantifiable, predictable and obey universal mathematical relationships.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. You don't have extraordinary evidence. you have, at best, circumstantial and it's poor circumstantial, at that.
I didn't ask for evidence, and I didn't even ask you to explain the origin of the universe.

I presented you a very simple question involving simple, basic logic. No evidence or elaborate explanation is required:
Is it more reasonable to think the cause of the rational is the irrational; or that the cause of the rational is the rational?
 
I love how militant atheists start slowly backing away from the label atheist
I love how you narrate your own delusions. You might have been a sportscaster but you kept calling some other game that was only occurring in your own head, between two teams that don't exist, playing the wrong sport according to your misunderstanding of the official rules.

when one starts asking probing questions about the atheist worldview.
I'm waiting for you to actually ask a probing question.
 
I'm waiting for you to actually ask a probing question.
If nothing is real but matter and energy, how is the universe caused by nothing?

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

If your brain is just a collection of quarks and electrons, are you just deluding yourself that your mother's love or wife's love is genuinely real and freely-given? Or is it just the deterministic chemical interactions of electrons moving around? Are you just a meat robot?

If nothing exists but quarks, electrons, and bosons, doesn't that mean morality is really just relative and utterly subjective? Aren't we deluding ourselves that there is really anything objectively right or wrong?
 
The inverse square relationship of gravity and electricity existed 3.8 billion years before humans. Humans discovered the inverse square relationship, but it always existed. In other words, it's an innate property of the universe.
As I've said previously, there are forces in the universe. Nobody is doubting that.
The inverse square laws, the universal fine structure constant, and the mathematical relationships of time dilation are not opinion.
Those are all mathematical explanations created by man.
They are rational, quantifiable, predictable and obey universal mathematical relationships.
Yes, math is rational, predictable, etc. That forces in the universe don't obey anything. They do what they do and man defines them.
I didn't ask for evidence, and I didn't even ask you to explain the origin of the universe.
Perfect, because nobody can.
I presented you a very simple question involving simple, basic logic. No evidence or elaborate explanation is required:
Is it more reasonable to think the cause of the rational is the irrational; or that the cause of the rational is the rational?
What's rational, reasonable, etc is mathematics, which was created by man. The universe does whatever it does.
 
The inverse square relationship of gravity and electricity existed 3.8 billion years before humans.
Mathematics was created by humans.
The inverse square law was created by humans.
Humans discovered the inverse square relationship, but it always existed. In other words, it's an innate property of the universe.
Nope. Humans CREATED the inverse square law.

The inverse square laws,
There is only one, Cyborg.
the universal fine structure constant,
There is no such thing as a universal fine structure constant.
Buzzword fallacy.
and the mathematical relationships of time dilation are not opinion.
Humans created that mathematics also. See the work of Lorenz and Einstein.
They are rational, quantifiable, predictable and obey universal mathematical relationships.
Go learn what 'rational' means, Cyborg. Buzzword fallacy.
Mathematics is not a quantity.
Mathematics inherently has the power of prediction. There are exceptions.
There is no such thing as 'universal mathematical relationships'. Buzzword fallacy.

The Universe is not a division.
The Universe is not mathematics.
The Universe is not predictable.
The Universe is not a quantity.
The Universe is not a relationship.

The Universe is unorganized.
I didn't ask for evidence, and I didn't even ask you to explain the origin of the universe.
The Universe is not evidence of anything other than that it exists (proof by identity).
The Universe has no known origin.

The Universe is unorganized.
I presented you a very simple question involving simple, basic logic. No evidence or elaborate explanation is required:
Is it more reasonable to think the cause of the rational is the irrational; or that the cause of the rational is the rational?
Non-English portion ignored.

The Universe is not a cause.
The Universe is not logic.
The Universe is not a division.

The Universe is unorganized.
 
If nothing is real but matter and energy, how is the universe caused by nothing?
The Universe is not a cause.
How are organization and lawful order caused by the immaterial, irrational, and inanimate?
The Universe is not a law.
The Universe is not sentient.
The Universe is not a division.

The Universe is unorganized.
If your brain is just a collection of quarks and electrons, are you just deluding yourself that your mother's love or wife's love is genuinely real and freely-given? Or is it just the deterministic chemical interactions of electrons moving around? Are you just a meat robot?
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 deterministic.
The Universe is not a chemical.
The Universe is not meat.
The Universe is not a robot.

The Universe is unorganized.
If nothing exists but quarks, electrons, and bosons, doesn't that mean morality is really just relative and utterly subjective? Aren't we deluding ourselves that there is really anything objectively right or wrong?
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 an object.
The Universe is not 'right'.
The Universe is not' 'wrong'.

The Universe is unorganized.
 
As I've said previously, there are forces in the universe. Nobody is doubting that.

Those are all mathematical explanations created by man.

Yes, math is rational, predictable, etc. That forces in the universe don't obey anything. They do what they do and man defines them.

Perfect, because nobody can.

What's rational, reasonable, etc is mathematics, which was created by man. The universe does whatever it does.
The Universe is not a force.
The Universe is not sentient.

The Universe is unorganized.
 
As I've said previously, there are forces in the universe. Nobody is doubting that.
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?
Those are all mathematical explanations created by man.
They are mathematical equations expressed in base 10 math, but even advanced aliens could describe these universal relationships in their own mathematical system.
Yes, math is rational, predictable, etc. That forces in the universe don't obey anything. They do what they do and man defines them.
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.
Perfect, because nobody can.

What's rational, reasonable, etc is mathematics, which was created by man. The universe does whatever it does.
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.
 
Back
Top