Zone1 Belief in God drops to 81 percent

[Meriweather]

Really, what’s more impressive a novel as a basis for an afterlife, then “Frankenstein‘s” monster. Really, several clinically dead people , all brought back to life in the same person……THATS A RELIGION WORTH BUILDING A STORY AROUND. If you’re going to make up shit to build a religion around, Fankenstein‘s monster gets my vote over Christ any day.

How does Frankenstein help you live your daily life?

 

[Meriweather]

After my ccd classes decades ago, I remember little, except for the movie “fallen”, excellent flick and as good an insight of fallen angels as anything in the movie world. Denzel’s better movie.
“time is on my side, yes it is.”

I've never had an experience with a fallen angel, and as I don't watch many movies, I haven't seen Fallen, either.

My great-uncle saw an angel once. After his mother died.

 

[Ringtone]

Yes.

Good. Hopefully things will be become clearer and clearer.

But before I go on, I should establish the incontrovertible first principle of ontology, sometimes referred to as the principle of eternality.

The First Principle of Ontology or The Principle of Eternality:

1. Something exists rather than nothing.​

2. Existence cannot arise from nonexistence.​

3. Hence, something has always existed.​

Existence arising from nonexistence would be absurd; indeed, a state of nonexistence in and of itself is an absurdity.
___________________________

Scientifically, we have known for sure since the early 20th Century that the Universe is necessarily moving forward in time to a relatively greater and greater state of entropy (a greater and greater state of relative chaos or disorganization). This increasing state of entropy is routinely referred to as the arrow of time.

But let's go back a few centuries, to a time in history before we knew this scientifically.

Aside from the fact that their respective revelations told them that the Universe began to exist in the finite past, when at time-0 God ordered or spoke or willed the Universe into existence: how did the classical theist thinkers of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam know that the Universe (the spacetime continuum of mater and energy) began to exist in the finite past, i.e., could not be the eternal existent?

 

[BreezeWood]

Let’s not get carried away. It represents a concept used in math to deal with limits. It seems you need infinite descriptors in math to deal with finite values.
Like, if you cut the distance between you and the person you are chasing in half every minute, would you ever catch him ?
By taking the limit of an infinitely defined expressions, you do. There is your lesson for today. You’re now ready for differential calculus.

you seem to believe past and future are relevant measurements -

in your instance why not just use a circle ...

 

[BreezeWood]

Nonsense!

You deny God's existence.

So who/what created the Universe?

Stop trolling the thread. It's a simple question.

was it who secretly wrote the c bible by turning the feather of who was writing it ...

 

[Ringtone]

I've never had an experience with a fallen angel, and as I don't watch many movies, I haven't seen Fallen, either.

My great-uncle saw an angel once. After his mother died.

I did.

The following stanza is from a poem I wrote about the experience:

And I have looked into the eyes—the amused, malignant

ulcers—of a creature beyond redemption;​

Have smelled its yellow breath,
Felt its vile touch slither up my spine like the wet lick

of a wounded dog . . .​

The crystalline moment of recognition, the puddle of urine

on the floor.​

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

in your instance why not just use a circle ...

Zeno's paradox of motion. Check it out. Come back.

Now, want to see a real life example of it?

Go to a black hole. Sit outside the event horizon, and throw a rock into the black hole.

The rock will approach the event horizon, then it will appear to slow down. At the same time, it will appear to dim and to turn more and more red.

And you will never, not ever, see it cross the event horizon. If your eyes are sensitive enough, you will see it as what appears to you to be stopped, as it would take many more lifetmes just for it to appear to have moved another millimeter.

Yet the rock does, indeed, cross the event horizon. In fact, to one sitting on the rock, nothing seems to change at all, when it crosses the event horizon. He can still see you on the outside, waving in real time.

 

[Ringtone]

was it who secretly wrote the c bible by turning the feather of who was writing it ...

There is no need to appeal to the Bible to answer that question.

Collectively, the a priori imperatives of logic and mathematics, the fundamental laws of physics, and the first principle of ontology tell us that the Universe began to exist in the finite past and that God the Creator necessarily exists.

 

[Meriweather]

Good. Hopefully things will be become clearer and clearer.

What conclusion did you reach?

 

[Ringtone]

you use self negating examples to define - "your" universe ...

Huh?

a timelessness would be more applicable to an indefinable universes

The Universe is not timeless, and the Universe is definable.

than the calculable creations of a creator.

Huh?

Your response is incoherent, essentially meaningless mumbo jumbo.

 

[Ringtone]

I’ll say this slowly, now listen. I DON’T KNOW.
What ever that makes me, I wear the label proudly. Believers who can’t keep their beliefs to themselves, are pompous bores. You wear that label.

People who say they don't know should keep their mouths shut when talking to those who do know. You're the pompous, know-nothing bore.

Moreover, I answered your question about God, which you dismissed as false. You made an emphatic claim to know something that you now tells you know nothing about. Make up your mind.

You're a very confused, pompous, know-nothing bore.

 

[Ringtone]

What conclusion did you reach?

About what?

And do you understand or have any questions what I've shared with you so far about the Universe?

 

[Ringtone]

why don't you relate to the desert religions the relevancy of your question ... as is obvious by your responses there is non.

Why don't you start making sense?

 

[Ringtone]

Then apparently both you and he misjudge me. There is no weaseling. I don't read every word in the Bible through a literal lens. Period.

I didn't say you were weaseling. He did. I said that you didn't directly answer his question after wrongfully implying that the notion of a young Earth is derived from a literal reading of the biblical text.

No, it's not!

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

There is no need to appeal to the Bible to answer that question.

Collectively, the a priori imperatives of logic and mathematics, the fundamental laws of physics, and the first principle of ontology tell us that the Universe began to exist in the finite past and that God the Creator necessarily exists.

And there's the scam. The entire scam of the ontological nonsense layered in the pseudoscience and the non-academic theology and the pomp and circumstance.

The game is rigged from the start.

Turtles all the way down

 

[Meriweather]

About what?

And do you understand or have any questions what I've shared with you so far about the Universe?

What are your own conclusions about the beginnings of the universe? That is my only question.

 

[Meriweather]

I didn't say you were weaseling. He did. I said that you didn't directly answer his question after wrongfully implying that the notion of a young Earth is derived from a literal reading of the biblical text.

No, it's not!

Yes, it was, at least by Ussher. If you come up with young earth creation by a non-literal means, lay it out.

 

[BreezeWood]

There is no need to appeal to the Bible to answer that question.

Collectively, the a priori imperatives of logic and mathematics, the fundamental laws of physics, and the first principle of ontology tell us that the Universe began to exist in the finite past and that God the Creator necessarily exists.

there is never an appeal for the c bible than for those that wrote it ... the crucifiers and their henchmen.

- presence of the heavens and nothing more.

 

[Ringtone]

Because it’s good fodder for fools.

You deny God's existence.

So who/what created the Universe?

It's a simple question.

Dagosa: "I don't know."

So why did you come on this thread out of nowhere talking trash to folks?

Dagosa: "I don't know."

Indeed. You're a pompous, know-nothing bore of a trash-talking weasel.

Dagosa: "That's me to a Tee."

Hey, why don't you tell us about how colons are only used to set off lists again. That was a real hoot.

Dagosa: "I just made that up out of nowhere."

Sort of like how you came on this thread out of nowhere talking trash to folks?

Dagosa: "I'm a hypocrite and a liar and a useless troll."

Indeed! You're not even a funny troll. You're a sourpuss of a vicious little funk blot.

Dagosa: I'm a pontificating loudmouth without anything of value to say.

Indeed! Hey, if you don't know who/what created the Universe, why were you talking smack about Puff the Magic Dragon as if you did?

Dagosa: Because I'm a pompous ass, a bore, a know-nothing Karen of a sissified bitch poodle.

From your piehole to God's Puff's ears.

 

[Ringtone]

there is never an appeal for the c bible than for those that wrote it ... the crucifiers and their henchmen.

- presence of the heavens and nothing more.

Calm down, Gandhi.