If God were real, you wouldn’t need a book

[ZenMode]

How what is accepted?

FFS.... The age of the Earth. The Bible does not literally say how old it is, but many Christians literally believe that the Earth is only about 6,000 years old. There's entire society committed to it.

This is your opinion. Notice that you did not use the word "incorrect" which is all that matters.

I believe it's incorrect, but that's not provable anymore than either of us can prove there isn't an island full of magical rainbow unicorns in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean.

However, it is still true that the Bible makes claim after claim after claim that flies directly in the face of various scientific areas. Your answer to these impossible things is to justify them with more claims that fly in the face of science.

It's not possible for a human to walk on the surface of water, so your God magically changes the atomic makeup of water to make it possible. And that makes sense to you, despite the fact that the only evidence for your God today is a book written 2000 plus years ago, again, by people who couldn't explain where the sun went at night and used to very dead animals under buildings for good luck and quite literally wrote about thousands of other gods for whom are atheistic in your beliefs..

 

[IBDaMann]

It's more probable than not that a mathematically rational and lawfully organized universe was caused by some kind of rational agency or force.

I hope you realize that you are merely chanting those things that have already been debunked, obviously in a desperate attempt to delude yourself into keeping the bubble from bursting.

When was your God created and by whom? Who designed your God?

Einstein famously said the most incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it's comprehensible.

Bud Abbott famously said "Who's on first."

The universe is an unorganized mess, a random dust cloud with no comprehensible distribution.

It's logically incoherent and unintelligible to believe a deity just popped into existence by random chance.

FTFY. When and how did your God pop into existence?

 

[Cypress]

you are merely chanting those things!

^^ Because of strictly emotional and ego-related reasons, he refuses to acknowledge that all the matter around us and in the universe is organized in a periodic, regular pattern of structure, organization, and hierarchy.

 

[IBDaMann]

The answer to the question, “Did the universe have a beginning?” is, “It probably did.”

Why did you omit all explanation of how the probability was calculated?

We have no viable models of an eternal universe.

@Into the Night just gave you one.

It would appear that you never call booooooolsch't when you should.

The BGV theorem gives us reason to believe that such models simply cannot be constructed.

@Into the Night just gave you one. Obviously such a model can be constructed.

The laws of physics that describe the quantum creation of the universe

No laws of physics describe a creation of any universe. @Into the Night asked you why you assume the universe was created. What's your answer?

 

[IBDaMann]

^^ Because of strictly emotional and ego-related reasons, he refuses to acknowledge that all the matter around us and in the universe is organized in a periodic, regular pattern of structure, organization, and hierarchy.

Great. Using the periodic table of the elements, map the stars of the universe.

 

[IBDaMann]

He was not trying to.

It took you long enough but at least now you finally understand why.

 

[IBDaMann]

Just name one of them. Show that you are not a jerkoff troll, debate for once in your life.

Aristotle's law of motion: an object's natural state is at rest.

Status: falsified

 

[Cypress]

@Into the Night just gave you one!

I pointed to a peer reviewed mathematical theorem published by esteemed theoretical physicists showing that an expanding universe cannot extend infinitely back into the past.

We are not going to place obscure internet poster IntoTheNight's hasty guesswork on the same par.

 

[Cypress]

When and how did your God pop into existence?

Never, according to Christians.

The theological claim is that something that creates space, matter, and time by necessity and by logic is outside of time and therefore eternal.

 

[IBDaMann]

I pointed to a peer reviewed mathematical theorem

Theorems pertain to closed functional systems. Science is an open functional system. You have another disconnect to fix.

published by esteemed theoretical physicists showing that an expanding universe cannot extend infinitely back into the past.

An oscillating universe, i.e. expanding, collapsing, expanding, collapsing, expanding, collapsing, ad infinitum, can theoretically extend infinitely back into the past.

 

[IBDaMann]

Never, according to Christians.

The question asks according to you. What is your answer?

The theological claim is that something that creates space, matter, and time by necessity and by logic is outside of time and therefore eternal.

You insisted that that is incoherent.

 

[Cypress]

You insisted that that is incoherent.

Incorrect, existing independent of time is not incoherent. Photons do not experience time. To them, the beginning of the universe up to now was instantaneous. (Let the frantic Googling commence)

The mathematical laws of physics, the axioms of geometry, and the laws of logic are independent of time.

 

[IBDaMann]

Incorrect, existing independent of time is not incoherent.

Then you have no problem with @Into the Night's theory. Previously you did, but I'm glad we got that settled.

Photons do not experience time.

Sure they do.

To them, the beginning of the universe up to now was instantaneous.

This must be more of your lunatic religion's fad science fiction bizarraverse.

The mathematical laws of physics, the axioms of geometry, and the laws of logic are independent of time.

Incorrect. You must not have heard of GPS, time dilation, Relativity, etc.

 

[Cypress]

Incorrect. You must not have heard of GPS!

Think man, think! GPS is used to measure time/location coordinates in our frame of reference - not the frame of reference of the photon.

time dilation!

That's exactly why photons traveling at speed c do not experience time.

Relativity!

While you didn't understand this when you wrote it, relativity is precisely the reason photons traveling at speed of light do not experience time in their frame of reference.

 

[ZenMode]

How do we tell time? Motion of the sun,moon and earth!
Sun and the moon weren't created till day 4 ,so how long were days 1-2-33?

Something God probably should have made sure was clarified in the Bible, right? I mean, the Bible is presented as his word and not just the ramblings of superstitious, iron age men...

 

[ZenMode]

It's more probable than not that a mathematically rational and lawfully organized universe was caused by some kind of rational agency or force.

Einstein famously said the most incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it's comprehensible.

It's logically incoherent and unintelligible to believe a mathematically rational and lawfully organized universe was caused by chance and inanimate, irrational material physical causes.

I could be wrong about it.

The claim that it is organized is an opinion. Like I said earlier, I don't see a universe that is at all organized. It's a mess.

The equation you keep posting was created after the fact to explain something and even an equation looks like a mess.

 

[IBDaMann]

GPS is used to measure time/location coordinates in our frame of reference - not the frame of reference of the photon.

That was stupid. You said nothing.

That's exactly why photons traveling at speed c do not experience time.

Nope. The reason photons don't experience anything is that they are not alive.

Read up on time dilation.

 

[Cypress]

That was stupid! You said nothing!

^ Not a logical or meaningful response. You just hoping that I am wrong does not make me wrong.

Nope. The reason photons don't experience anything is that they are not alive.

Time dilation and Lorentz contraction have nothing to do with organic material. It is based on the spacetime properties of general relativity.

Read up on time dilation!

It's funny that you didn't even recognize the mathmatical formula for time dilation when I posted it in previous responses

 

[Cypress]

The claim that it is organized is an opinion. Like I said earlier, I don't see a universe that is at all organized. It's a mess.

Again , you would be dissuaded of that opinion if you successfully passed some physics, astronomy, and cosmology courses.

The equation you keep posting was created after the fact to explain something and even an equation looks like a mess.

The mathmatical principle of general relativity existed before Einstein published it. It existed before humans existed. It existed before the solar system existed.

In other words, it's independent of the human mind.

The fact that we use a base 10 mathmatical notation by convention does not change the fact there is an underlying mathmatical principle to general relativity which could be represented in other mathmatical notations.

 

[IBDaMann]

FFS.... The age of the Earth.

You are the one who doesn't understand the meanings of the words he uses. Until you learn what "literally" means, I will apparently have to take this very slowly with you.

The age of the earth according to what/whom?

The Bible does not literally say how old it is,

Aaaaahhhh, you mistakenly think the word "literally" is the word "explicitly." Now I see where your error is. You're still using the word "literally" incorrectly.

but many Christians literally believe that the Earth is only about 6,000 years old.

What's the difference between a Christian who believes something and a Christian who literally believes it?

There's entire society committed to it.

Are you claiming to speak for this society?

I believe it's incorrect, but that's not provable anymore than either of us can prove there isn't an island full of magical rainbow unicorns in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean.

Au contraire, mon frère, I sent one of my ships over to the coordinates of the supposed unicorn island and there is no island there.

However, it is still true that the Bible makes claim after claim after claim that flies directly in the face of various scientific areas.

You are chanting crap that has been refuted.

Your answer to these impossible things is to justify them with more claims that fly in the face of science.

Give me an example.

It's not possible for a human to walk on the surface of water,

Are you insisting that it would take a miracle for a man to walk on water?

so your God magically changes the atomic makeup of water to make it possible.

So if my God magically changes the atomic makeup of water, how does that fly in the face of anything?

And that makes sense to you, despite the fact that the only evidence for your God today is a book written 2000 plus years ago,

Can you find a Bible that was printed 2,000 years ago?

... and quite literally wrote about thousands of other gods for whom are atheistic in your beliefs..

Are you seriously pretending to speak on my beliefs?