Does God want us to judge him?

[ding]

It’s only magic to you because being a thing you can’t relate to a no thing.
So you call it magic when in reality it is like consciousness that exists independent from a material body. Of course you can’t relate to it and act the way you do. You are threatened by what you don’t understand.

I just find it concerning that you are detached from reality.
Your religion of spirit realms is entirely a function of belief in magic. I would suggest we can alternately define magic as submitting to fear and superstition.

How really convenient that your spirit realms are excempt from any examination by rational science.

Creationist dogma will never increase our understanding or knowledge of the physical world because knowledge is antithetical to the creationist. What is not already written in the bible is relegated to the unknowable hand of God moving in his creation. Fear and superstition has caused the Genesis story to be repeated for three thousand years and we know no more of existence now than when that tale was first written by the hand of man. In the last two hundred years of taking a scientific approach to studying the natural world, we have learned most of what we know about how living things work.

I just find it concerning that you are detached from reality.

You believe I am detached from reality because I believe the heart of this debate comes down to the material world being created by spirit versus everything proceeding from the material?

Or is it that you believe I am detached from reality because I believe we should make an objective analysis of whether the material world was created by spirit versus everything proceeding from the material?

Or is it that you believe I am detached from reality because we should stop reading Genesis like it is a fairy tale, but rather what it is which is how important information was passed down in ancient times? Through allegorical accounts of historical events which had important wisdoms interspersed with these accounts. That they chose to do it this way to make the events and lessons easier to remember so that that knowledge could be passed down from one generation to the next.

Or is it that you believe I am detached from reality because I believe ancient man thought so highly of these accounts that they passed it down for thousands of years.

Prey tell... please tell me which part of these beliefs are delusional. I would really appreciate hearing the opinion of someone like you who is so obviously knowledgeable about these things and can make logical arguments for her beliefs and not rely upon unsubstantiated rhetoric.

Your religion of spirit realms is entirely a function of belief in magic. I would suggest we can alternately define magic as submitting to fear and superstition.

Actually, no, it isn't. My belief starts with the logical assumption that either spirit created the material world or everything proceeded from the material. There are no other logical options.

You call it magic because you cannot perceive anything beyond the material world. Yet we know the material world cannot exist forever without achieving thermal equilibrium. So the only logical answer to what created space and time is no thing. Spirit is no thing. The closest any of us can come to understanding something which is not material and exists outside of time and space is consciousness without a body. And when we examine the only evidence we can examine, which is creation itself, we find that a case can be made for the material world being created by spirit or consciousness without material form. Specifically, the laws of nature; physical, biological and moral. We know that the physical and biological laws predestined being that know and create would eventually arise. We know that the physical laws tell us that space and time was created by no thing. And we know from the moral laws that there is an expectation for a universal truth based upon the concept of fairness.

How really convenient that your spirit realms are excempt from any examination by rational science.

I just explained to you how science can be used to study the creation of space and time and what that study tells us. You are the one who has no science to support your position. Please share with me your science, Hollie. I really want to know what you know.

Creationist dogma will never increase our understanding or knowledge of the physical world because knowledge is antithetical to the creationist. What is not already written in the bible is relegated to the unknowable hand of God moving in his creation. Fear and superstition has caused the Genesis story to be repeated for three thousand years and we know no more of existence now than when that tale was first written by the hand of man. In the last two hundred years of taking a scientific approach to studying the natural world, we have learned most of what we know about how living things work.

I have not come within 100 miles of creationist dogma, Hollie. I am making a logical argument for spirit creating the material world. Certainly not an argument built of fairy tales that's for sure. So going back to the two possibilities; spirit creating the material world versus everything proceeding from the material, the key distinction is no thing versus thing. So if we believe as you do that everything is just an accidental coincidence of the properties of matter, the logical conclusion is that matter and energy are just doing what matter and energy do which makes sense. The problem you have is that for matter and energy to do what matter and energy do, there has to be rules in place for matter and energy to obey. The formation of space and time followed rules. Specifically the law of conservation and quantum mechanics. These laws existed before space and time and defined the potential of everything which was possible. These laws are no thing. So we literally have an example of no thing existing before the material world. The creation of space and time from nothing is literally correct. Space and time were created from no thing. Spirit is no thing. No thing created space and time.

That's really just boilerplate creationist dogma.

Tell us more about your alleged spirit realms. Other than creationist claims that amount to ".... because I say so" to support the veracity of the spirit worlds, what separates your spirit realms from competing claims to spirit realms?

No. It is a thoughtful examination of the two boundary conditions. If you assume that everything which has unfolded is just an accidental coincidence of the properties of matter, the logical conclusion is that matter and energy are just doing what matter and energy do which makes sense. The problem is that for matter and energy to do what matter and energy do, there has to be rules in place for matter and energy to obey. The formation of space and time followed rules. Specifically the law of conservation and quantum mechanics. These laws existed before space and time and defined the potential of everything which was possible. These laws are no thing. So we literally have an example of no thing existing before the material world. The creation of space and time from nothing is literally correct. Space and time were created from no thing. Spirit is no thing. No thing created space and time.

Cutting and pasting the same material you found at a creation ministry does nothing to support your case for spirit realms.

The words are mine and are a culmination of a 23 years search for truth.

I will continue using them because winning arguments win arguments.

 

[ding]

Me no speak Mumbo-Jumbo.

Do you have Asperger's or something like that? Try a gofundme page so you can buy a clue.

You played an instrumental role in helping me develop this, Tax. Thank you.

Now you will help me in planting the seeds. I can't do this without you.

I wouldn't be so quick to take credit for what you find at any of the fundamentalist creation ministries.

It is people like you who forced me to examine space and time who deserve the credit, Hollie.

But please do search those websites and prove that is where I have gotten these words from.

Yes, I forced you. You will submit.

I am more than happy for you to see it that way. I can always tell when my arrows find their mark.

 

[ding]

Your posts are my proof. Your behaviors are my proof.

You traded the truth of a creator for the lie of the created.

You have yet to prove a creator. Just speculation and fartsmoke.

Sure I proved it. Space and time were created from no thing. Spirit is no thing.

You've never proven anything with real scientific proof, it's all because you say so.

Nope. If you start with a realistic perception of God and examine the evidence at our disposal, it should be obvious that if the material world were not created by spirit that everything that has unfolded in the evolution of space and time would have no intentional purpose. That it is just matter and energy doing what matter and energy do. Conversely, if the material world were created by spirit it should be obvious that the creation of the material world was intentional. After all in my perception of God, God is no thing and the closest thing I can relate to is a mind with no body. Using our own experiences as creators as a proxy, we know that when we create things we create them for a reason and that reason is to serve some purpose. So it would be no great leap of logic to believe that something like a mind with no body would do the same. We also know from our experiences that intelligence tends to create intelligence. We are obsessed with making smart things. So what better thing for a mind with no body to do than create a universe where beings with bodies can create smart things too.

The biological laws are such that life is programmed to survive and multiply which is a requisite for intelligence to arise. If the purpose of the universe was to create intelligence then a preference in nature for it had to exist. The Laws of Nature are such that the potential for intelligence to existed the moment space and time were created. One can argue that given the laws of nature and the size of the universe that intelligence arising was inevitable. One can also argue that creating intelligence from nothing defies the Second Law of Entropy. That creating intelligence from nothing increases order within the universe. It actually doesn't because usable energy was lost along the way as a cost of creating order from disorder. But it is nature overriding it's tendency for ever increasing disorder that interests me and raises my suspicions to look deeper and to take seriously the proposition that a mind without a body created the material world so that minds with bodies could create too.

If we examine the physical laws we discover that we live in a logical universe governed by rules, laws and information. Rules laws and information are a signs of intelligence. Intentionality and purpose are signs of intelligence. The definition of reason is a cause, explanation, or justification for an action or event. The definition of purpose is the reason for which something is done or created or for which something exists. The consequence of a logical universe is that every cause has an effect. Which means that everything happens for a reason and serves a purpose. The very nature of our physical laws point to reason and purpose.

All we have done so far is to make a logical argument for spirit creating the material world. Certainly not an argument built of fairy tales that's for sure. So going back to the two possibilities; spirit creating the material world versus everything proceeding from the material, the key distinction is no thing versus thing. So if we assume that everything I have described was just an accidental coincidence of the properties of matter, the logical conclusion is that matter and energy are just doing what matter and energy do which makes sense. The problem is that for matter and energy to do what matter and energy do, there has to be rules in place for matter and energy to obey. The formation of space and time followed rules. Specifically the law of conservation and quantum mechanics. These laws existed before space and time and defined the potential of everything which was possible. These laws are no thing. So we literally have an example of no thing existing before the material world. The creation of space and time from nothing is literally correct. Space and time were created from no thing. Spirit is no thing. No thing created space and time.

That's an interesting comment about starting with a realistic perception of the gods.

Westerners have made the gods in their own image. It's not at all uncommon. You can try this at home - take a look at the historical gods invented by different cultures and civilizations. Those gods were so often a reflection of the cultures and civilizations which created them.

Isn't it great that western portrayals of Jesus are of a very tall, fair-skinned, blue-eyed Caucasian looking guy?

Making the gods in our own image. Don't you find it convenient (and a bit more conceited),to worship a long-haired hippie in sandals vs. a chubby Buddha?

If you perceive God to be some magical fairy tale then everything you see will skew to that result. There won't be one single thing that you will agree with or accept. Whereas if you were trying to objectively analyze the evidence for spirit creating the material world you would listen to the whole argument and not look for trivial things to nitpick.

Genesis is the allegorical account of the history of the world that all people share. Chapter 1 and 2 of Genesis is the allegorical account of creation. Specifically, that the universe did have a beginning and that man is a product of the universe. We need to stop reading the Bible like we think it is a fairy tale. These are allegorical accounts of history that ancient man deemed important enough to orally pass down from generation to generation for thousands of years. We shouldn't view these accounts using the context of the modern world. We are so far removed from these events that we have lost all original meaning which is why some modern men view these accounts as fairy tales instead of what they really are; ancient man's allegorical account of world history.

The closest thing we can come to perceiving God is that God is consciousness without a body. A case for spirit creating the material world can be made by examining the evidence that we have at our disposal. Some of the most compelling evidence is man's belief in universal right and wrong and his unwillingness to abandon this concept even when he violates it.

Good reasons do exist for us to keep an open mind about the possibility of the creator of space and time communicating with us. We can use our own experiences as proxies to better understand what form these revelations may take. When taken in this light, ancient man's revelation that the universe did have a beginning and that man is a product of the universe is not that far fetched.

 

[Hollie]

I just find it concerning that you are detached from reality.
Your religion of spirit realms is entirely a function of belief in magic. I would suggest we can alternately define magic as submitting to fear and superstition.

How really convenient that your spirit realms are excempt from any examination by rational science.

Creationist dogma will never increase our understanding or knowledge of the physical world because knowledge is antithetical to the creationist. What is not already written in the bible is relegated to the unknowable hand of God moving in his creation. Fear and superstition has caused the Genesis story to be repeated for three thousand years and we know no more of existence now than when that tale was first written by the hand of man. In the last two hundred years of taking a scientific approach to studying the natural world, we have learned most of what we know about how living things work.

I just find it concerning that you are detached from reality.

You believe I am detached from reality because I believe the heart of this debate comes down to the material world being created by spirit versus everything proceeding from the material?

Or is it that you believe I am detached from reality because I believe we should make an objective analysis of whether the material world was created by spirit versus everything proceeding from the material?

Or is it that you believe I am detached from reality because we should stop reading Genesis like it is a fairy tale, but rather what it is which is how important information was passed down in ancient times? Through allegorical accounts of historical events which had important wisdoms interspersed with these accounts. That they chose to do it this way to make the events and lessons easier to remember so that that knowledge could be passed down from one generation to the next.

Or is it that you believe I am detached from reality because I believe ancient man thought so highly of these accounts that they passed it down for thousands of years.

Prey tell... please tell me which part of these beliefs are delusional. I would really appreciate hearing the opinion of someone like you who is so obviously knowledgeable about these things and can make logical arguments for her beliefs and not rely upon unsubstantiated rhetoric.

Your religion of spirit realms is entirely a function of belief in magic. I would suggest we can alternately define magic as submitting to fear and superstition.

Actually, no, it isn't. My belief starts with the logical assumption that either spirit created the material world or everything proceeded from the material. There are no other logical options.

You call it magic because you cannot perceive anything beyond the material world. Yet we know the material world cannot exist forever without achieving thermal equilibrium. So the only logical answer to what created space and time is no thing. Spirit is no thing. The closest any of us can come to understanding something which is not material and exists outside of time and space is consciousness without a body. And when we examine the only evidence we can examine, which is creation itself, we find that a case can be made for the material world being created by spirit or consciousness without material form. Specifically, the laws of nature; physical, biological and moral. We know that the physical and biological laws predestined being that know and create would eventually arise. We know that the physical laws tell us that space and time was created by no thing. And we know from the moral laws that there is an expectation for a universal truth based upon the concept of fairness.

How really convenient that your spirit realms are excempt from any examination by rational science.

I just explained to you how science can be used to study the creation of space and time and what that study tells us. You are the one who has no science to support your position. Please share with me your science, Hollie. I really want to know what you know.

Creationist dogma will never increase our understanding or knowledge of the physical world because knowledge is antithetical to the creationist. What is not already written in the bible is relegated to the unknowable hand of God moving in his creation. Fear and superstition has caused the Genesis story to be repeated for three thousand years and we know no more of existence now than when that tale was first written by the hand of man. In the last two hundred years of taking a scientific approach to studying the natural world, we have learned most of what we know about how living things work.

I have not come within 100 miles of creationist dogma, Hollie. I am making a logical argument for spirit creating the material world. Certainly not an argument built of fairy tales that's for sure. So going back to the two possibilities; spirit creating the material world versus everything proceeding from the material, the key distinction is no thing versus thing. So if we believe as you do that everything is just an accidental coincidence of the properties of matter, the logical conclusion is that matter and energy are just doing what matter and energy do which makes sense. The problem you have is that for matter and energy to do what matter and energy do, there has to be rules in place for matter and energy to obey. The formation of space and time followed rules. Specifically the law of conservation and quantum mechanics. These laws existed before space and time and defined the potential of everything which was possible. These laws are no thing. So we literally have an example of no thing existing before the material world. The creation of space and time from nothing is literally correct. Space and time were created from no thing. Spirit is no thing. No thing created space and time.

That's really just boilerplate creationist dogma.

Tell us more about your alleged spirit realms. Other than creationist claims that amount to ".... because I say so" to support the veracity of the spirit worlds, what separates your spirit realms from competing claims to spirit realms?

No. It is a thoughtful examination of the two boundary conditions. If you assume that everything which has unfolded is just an accidental coincidence of the properties of matter, the logical conclusion is that matter and energy are just doing what matter and energy do which makes sense. The problem is that for matter and energy to do what matter and energy do, there has to be rules in place for matter and energy to obey. The formation of space and time followed rules. Specifically the law of conservation and quantum mechanics. These laws existed before space and time and defined the potential of everything which was possible. These laws are no thing. So we literally have an example of no thing existing before the material world. The creation of space and time from nothing is literally correct. Space and time were created from no thing. Spirit is no thing. No thing created space and time.

Cutting and pasting the same material you found at a creation ministry does nothing to support your case for spirit realms.

The words are mine and are a culmination of a 23 years search for truth.

I will continue using them because winning arguments win arguments.

I'm glad you know how to use microsoft Word. You can generate entire walls of text you found at creation ministries and dump those text walls into every thread.

 

[ding]

You believe I am detached from reality because I believe the heart of this debate comes down to the material world being created by spirit versus everything proceeding from the material?

Or is it that you believe I am detached from reality because I believe we should make an objective analysis of whether the material world was created by spirit versus everything proceeding from the material?

Or is it that you believe I am detached from reality because we should stop reading Genesis like it is a fairy tale, but rather what it is which is how important information was passed down in ancient times? Through allegorical accounts of historical events which had important wisdoms interspersed with these accounts. That they chose to do it this way to make the events and lessons easier to remember so that that knowledge could be passed down from one generation to the next.

Or is it that you believe I am detached from reality because I believe ancient man thought so highly of these accounts that they passed it down for thousands of years.

Prey tell... please tell me which part of these beliefs are delusional. I would really appreciate hearing the opinion of someone like you who is so obviously knowledgeable about these things and can make logical arguments for her beliefs and not rely upon unsubstantiated rhetoric.

Actually, no, it isn't. My belief starts with the logical assumption that either spirit created the material world or everything proceeded from the material. There are no other logical options.

You call it magic because you cannot perceive anything beyond the material world. Yet we know the material world cannot exist forever without achieving thermal equilibrium. So the only logical answer to what created space and time is no thing. Spirit is no thing. The closest any of us can come to understanding something which is not material and exists outside of time and space is consciousness without a body. And when we examine the only evidence we can examine, which is creation itself, we find that a case can be made for the material world being created by spirit or consciousness without material form. Specifically, the laws of nature; physical, biological and moral. We know that the physical and biological laws predestined being that know and create would eventually arise. We know that the physical laws tell us that space and time was created by no thing. And we know from the moral laws that there is an expectation for a universal truth based upon the concept of fairness.

I just explained to you how science can be used to study the creation of space and time and what that study tells us. You are the one who has no science to support your position. Please share with me your science, Hollie. I really want to know what you know.

I have not come within 100 miles of creationist dogma, Hollie. I am making a logical argument for spirit creating the material world. Certainly not an argument built of fairy tales that's for sure. So going back to the two possibilities; spirit creating the material world versus everything proceeding from the material, the key distinction is no thing versus thing. So if we believe as you do that everything is just an accidental coincidence of the properties of matter, the logical conclusion is that matter and energy are just doing what matter and energy do which makes sense. The problem you have is that for matter and energy to do what matter and energy do, there has to be rules in place for matter and energy to obey. The formation of space and time followed rules. Specifically the law of conservation and quantum mechanics. These laws existed before space and time and defined the potential of everything which was possible. These laws are no thing. So we literally have an example of no thing existing before the material world. The creation of space and time from nothing is literally correct. Space and time were created from no thing. Spirit is no thing. No thing created space and time.

That's really just boilerplate creationist dogma.

Tell us more about your alleged spirit realms. Other than creationist claims that amount to ".... because I say so" to support the veracity of the spirit worlds, what separates your spirit realms from competing claims to spirit realms?

No. It is a thoughtful examination of the two boundary conditions. If you assume that everything which has unfolded is just an accidental coincidence of the properties of matter, the logical conclusion is that matter and energy are just doing what matter and energy do which makes sense. The problem is that for matter and energy to do what matter and energy do, there has to be rules in place for matter and energy to obey. The formation of space and time followed rules. Specifically the law of conservation and quantum mechanics. These laws existed before space and time and defined the potential of everything which was possible. These laws are no thing. So we literally have an example of no thing existing before the material world. The creation of space and time from nothing is literally correct. Space and time were created from no thing. Spirit is no thing. No thing created space and time.

Cutting and pasting the same material you found at a creation ministry does nothing to support your case for spirit realms.

The words are mine and are a culmination of a 23 years search for truth.

I will continue using them because winning arguments win arguments.

I'm glad you know how to use microsoft Word. You can generate entire walls of text you found at creation ministries and dump those text walls into every thread.

I couldn't be happier for you to believe that.

 

[Hollie]

You have yet to prove a creator. Just speculation and fartsmoke.

Sure I proved it. Space and time were created from no thing. Spirit is no thing.

You've never proven anything with real scientific proof, it's all because you say so.

Nope. If you start with a realistic perception of God and examine the evidence at our disposal, it should be obvious that if the material world were not created by spirit that everything that has unfolded in the evolution of space and time would have no intentional purpose. That it is just matter and energy doing what matter and energy do. Conversely, if the material world were created by spirit it should be obvious that the creation of the material world was intentional. After all in my perception of God, God is no thing and the closest thing I can relate to is a mind with no body. Using our own experiences as creators as a proxy, we know that when we create things we create them for a reason and that reason is to serve some purpose. So it would be no great leap of logic to believe that something like a mind with no body would do the same. We also know from our experiences that intelligence tends to create intelligence. We are obsessed with making smart things. So what better thing for a mind with no body to do than create a universe where beings with bodies can create smart things too.

The biological laws are such that life is programmed to survive and multiply which is a requisite for intelligence to arise. If the purpose of the universe was to create intelligence then a preference in nature for it had to exist. The Laws of Nature are such that the potential for intelligence to existed the moment space and time were created. One can argue that given the laws of nature and the size of the universe that intelligence arising was inevitable. One can also argue that creating intelligence from nothing defies the Second Law of Entropy. That creating intelligence from nothing increases order within the universe. It actually doesn't because usable energy was lost along the way as a cost of creating order from disorder. But it is nature overriding it's tendency for ever increasing disorder that interests me and raises my suspicions to look deeper and to take seriously the proposition that a mind without a body created the material world so that minds with bodies could create too.

If we examine the physical laws we discover that we live in a logical universe governed by rules, laws and information. Rules laws and information are a signs of intelligence. Intentionality and purpose are signs of intelligence. The definition of reason is a cause, explanation, or justification for an action or event. The definition of purpose is the reason for which something is done or created or for which something exists. The consequence of a logical universe is that every cause has an effect. Which means that everything happens for a reason and serves a purpose. The very nature of our physical laws point to reason and purpose.

All we have done so far is to make a logical argument for spirit creating the material world. Certainly not an argument built of fairy tales that's for sure. So going back to the two possibilities; spirit creating the material world versus everything proceeding from the material, the key distinction is no thing versus thing. So if we assume that everything I have described was just an accidental coincidence of the properties of matter, the logical conclusion is that matter and energy are just doing what matter and energy do which makes sense. The problem is that for matter and energy to do what matter and energy do, there has to be rules in place for matter and energy to obey. The formation of space and time followed rules. Specifically the law of conservation and quantum mechanics. These laws existed before space and time and defined the potential of everything which was possible. These laws are no thing. So we literally have an example of no thing existing before the material world. The creation of space and time from nothing is literally correct. Space and time were created from no thing. Spirit is no thing. No thing created space and time.

That's an interesting comment about starting with a realistic perception of the gods.

Westerners have made the gods in their own image. It's not at all uncommon. You can try this at home - take a look at the historical gods invented by different cultures and civilizations. Those gods were so often a reflection of the cultures and civilizations which created them.

Isn't it great that western portrayals of Jesus are of a very tall, fair-skinned, blue-eyed Caucasian looking guy?

Making the gods in our own image. Don't you find it convenient (and a bit more conceited),to worship a long-haired hippie in sandals vs. a chubby Buddha?

If you perceive God to be some magical fairy tale then everything you see will skew to that result. There won't be one single thing that you will agree with or accept. Whereas if you were trying to objectively analyze the evidence for spirit creating the material world you would listen to the whole argument and not look for trivial things to nitpick.

Genesis is the allegorical account of the history of the world that all people share. Chapter 1 and 2 of Genesis is the allegorical account of creation. Specifically, that the universe did have a beginning and that man is a product of the universe. We need to stop reading the Bible like we think it is a fairy tale. These are allegorical accounts of history that ancient man deemed important enough to orally pass down from generation to generation for thousands of years. We shouldn't view these accounts using the context of the modern world. We are so far removed from these events that we have lost all original meaning which is why some modern men view these accounts as fairy tales instead of what they really are; ancient man's allegorical account of world history.

The closest thing we can come to perceiving God is that God is consciousness without a body. A case for spirit creating the material world can be made by examining the evidence that we have at our disposal. Some of the most compelling evidence is man's belief in universal right and wrong and his unwillingness to abandon this concept even when he violates it.

Good reasons do exist for us to keep an open mind about the possibility of the creator of space and time communicating with us. We can use our own experiences as proxies to better understand what form these revelations may take. When taken in this light, ancient man's revelation that the universe did have a beginning and that man is a product of the universe is not that far fetched.

Why not link to 3 or 4 threads where you have cut and pasted that creationist material instead of dumping it multiple times in the same thread?

 

[Hollie]

That's really just boilerplate creationist dogma.

Tell us more about your alleged spirit realms. Other than creationist claims that amount to ".... because I say so" to support the veracity of the spirit worlds, what separates your spirit realms from competing claims to spirit realms?

No. It is a thoughtful examination of the two boundary conditions. If you assume that everything which has unfolded is just an accidental coincidence of the properties of matter, the logical conclusion is that matter and energy are just doing what matter and energy do which makes sense. The problem is that for matter and energy to do what matter and energy do, there has to be rules in place for matter and energy to obey. The formation of space and time followed rules. Specifically the law of conservation and quantum mechanics. These laws existed before space and time and defined the potential of everything which was possible. These laws are no thing. So we literally have an example of no thing existing before the material world. The creation of space and time from nothing is literally correct. Space and time were created from no thing. Spirit is no thing. No thing created space and time.

Cutting and pasting the same material you found at a creation ministry does nothing to support your case for spirit realms.

The words are mine and are a culmination of a 23 years search for truth.

I will continue using them because winning arguments win arguments.

I'm glad you know how to use microsoft Word. You can generate entire walls of text you found at creation ministries and dump those text walls into every thread.

I couldn't be happier for you to believe that.

Henry Morris is happy if you're happy.

 

[ding]

Sure I proved it. Space and time were created from no thing. Spirit is no thing.

You've never proven anything with real scientific proof, it's all because you say so.

Nope. If you start with a realistic perception of God and examine the evidence at our disposal, it should be obvious that if the material world were not created by spirit that everything that has unfolded in the evolution of space and time would have no intentional purpose. That it is just matter and energy doing what matter and energy do. Conversely, if the material world were created by spirit it should be obvious that the creation of the material world was intentional. After all in my perception of God, God is no thing and the closest thing I can relate to is a mind with no body. Using our own experiences as creators as a proxy, we know that when we create things we create them for a reason and that reason is to serve some purpose. So it would be no great leap of logic to believe that something like a mind with no body would do the same. We also know from our experiences that intelligence tends to create intelligence. We are obsessed with making smart things. So what better thing for a mind with no body to do than create a universe where beings with bodies can create smart things too.

The biological laws are such that life is programmed to survive and multiply which is a requisite for intelligence to arise. If the purpose of the universe was to create intelligence then a preference in nature for it had to exist. The Laws of Nature are such that the potential for intelligence to existed the moment space and time were created. One can argue that given the laws of nature and the size of the universe that intelligence arising was inevitable. One can also argue that creating intelligence from nothing defies the Second Law of Entropy. That creating intelligence from nothing increases order within the universe. It actually doesn't because usable energy was lost along the way as a cost of creating order from disorder. But it is nature overriding it's tendency for ever increasing disorder that interests me and raises my suspicions to look deeper and to take seriously the proposition that a mind without a body created the material world so that minds with bodies could create too.

If we examine the physical laws we discover that we live in a logical universe governed by rules, laws and information. Rules laws and information are a signs of intelligence. Intentionality and purpose are signs of intelligence. The definition of reason is a cause, explanation, or justification for an action or event. The definition of purpose is the reason for which something is done or created or for which something exists. The consequence of a logical universe is that every cause has an effect. Which means that everything happens for a reason and serves a purpose. The very nature of our physical laws point to reason and purpose.

All we have done so far is to make a logical argument for spirit creating the material world. Certainly not an argument built of fairy tales that's for sure. So going back to the two possibilities; spirit creating the material world versus everything proceeding from the material, the key distinction is no thing versus thing. So if we assume that everything I have described was just an accidental coincidence of the properties of matter, the logical conclusion is that matter and energy are just doing what matter and energy do which makes sense. The problem is that for matter and energy to do what matter and energy do, there has to be rules in place for matter and energy to obey. The formation of space and time followed rules. Specifically the law of conservation and quantum mechanics. These laws existed before space and time and defined the potential of everything which was possible. These laws are no thing. So we literally have an example of no thing existing before the material world. The creation of space and time from nothing is literally correct. Space and time were created from no thing. Spirit is no thing. No thing created space and time.

That's an interesting comment about starting with a realistic perception of the gods.

Westerners have made the gods in their own image. It's not at all uncommon. You can try this at home - take a look at the historical gods invented by different cultures and civilizations. Those gods were so often a reflection of the cultures and civilizations which created them.

Isn't it great that western portrayals of Jesus are of a very tall, fair-skinned, blue-eyed Caucasian looking guy?

Making the gods in our own image. Don't you find it convenient (and a bit more conceited),to worship a long-haired hippie in sandals vs. a chubby Buddha?

If you perceive God to be some magical fairy tale then everything you see will skew to that result. There won't be one single thing that you will agree with or accept. Whereas if you were trying to objectively analyze the evidence for spirit creating the material world you would listen to the whole argument and not look for trivial things to nitpick.

Genesis is the allegorical account of the history of the world that all people share. Chapter 1 and 2 of Genesis is the allegorical account of creation. Specifically, that the universe did have a beginning and that man is a product of the universe. We need to stop reading the Bible like we think it is a fairy tale. These are allegorical accounts of history that ancient man deemed important enough to orally pass down from generation to generation for thousands of years. We shouldn't view these accounts using the context of the modern world. We are so far removed from these events that we have lost all original meaning which is why some modern men view these accounts as fairy tales instead of what they really are; ancient man's allegorical account of world history.

The closest thing we can come to perceiving God is that God is consciousness without a body. A case for spirit creating the material world can be made by examining the evidence that we have at our disposal. Some of the most compelling evidence is man's belief in universal right and wrong and his unwillingness to abandon this concept even when he violates it.

Good reasons do exist for us to keep an open mind about the possibility of the creator of space and time communicating with us. We can use our own experiences as proxies to better understand what form these revelations may take. When taken in this light, ancient man's revelation that the universe did have a beginning and that man is a product of the universe is not that far fetched.

Why not link to 3 or 4 threads where you have cut and pasted that creationist material instead of dumping it multiple times in the same thread?

Because you keep making the same ridiculous arguments, so I will keep correcting them.

 

[ding]

You can always tell when someone thinks they are losing the argument because they appeal for their opponents to stop doing the things they are doing.

Whereas I literally want them to keep doing the same things they are doing so that I have a stage to keep doing what I am doing.

God loves logic. He created it.

 

[Hollie]

You've never proven anything with real scientific proof, it's all because you say so.

Nope. If you start with a realistic perception of God and examine the evidence at our disposal, it should be obvious that if the material world were not created by spirit that everything that has unfolded in the evolution of space and time would have no intentional purpose. That it is just matter and energy doing what matter and energy do. Conversely, if the material world were created by spirit it should be obvious that the creation of the material world was intentional. After all in my perception of God, God is no thing and the closest thing I can relate to is a mind with no body. Using our own experiences as creators as a proxy, we know that when we create things we create them for a reason and that reason is to serve some purpose. So it would be no great leap of logic to believe that something like a mind with no body would do the same. We also know from our experiences that intelligence tends to create intelligence. We are obsessed with making smart things. So what better thing for a mind with no body to do than create a universe where beings with bodies can create smart things too.

The biological laws are such that life is programmed to survive and multiply which is a requisite for intelligence to arise. If the purpose of the universe was to create intelligence then a preference in nature for it had to exist. The Laws of Nature are such that the potential for intelligence to existed the moment space and time were created. One can argue that given the laws of nature and the size of the universe that intelligence arising was inevitable. One can also argue that creating intelligence from nothing defies the Second Law of Entropy. That creating intelligence from nothing increases order within the universe. It actually doesn't because usable energy was lost along the way as a cost of creating order from disorder. But it is nature overriding it's tendency for ever increasing disorder that interests me and raises my suspicions to look deeper and to take seriously the proposition that a mind without a body created the material world so that minds with bodies could create too.

If we examine the physical laws we discover that we live in a logical universe governed by rules, laws and information. Rules laws and information are a signs of intelligence. Intentionality and purpose are signs of intelligence. The definition of reason is a cause, explanation, or justification for an action or event. The definition of purpose is the reason for which something is done or created or for which something exists. The consequence of a logical universe is that every cause has an effect. Which means that everything happens for a reason and serves a purpose. The very nature of our physical laws point to reason and purpose.

All we have done so far is to make a logical argument for spirit creating the material world. Certainly not an argument built of fairy tales that's for sure. So going back to the two possibilities; spirit creating the material world versus everything proceeding from the material, the key distinction is no thing versus thing. So if we assume that everything I have described was just an accidental coincidence of the properties of matter, the logical conclusion is that matter and energy are just doing what matter and energy do which makes sense. The problem is that for matter and energy to do what matter and energy do, there has to be rules in place for matter and energy to obey. The formation of space and time followed rules. Specifically the law of conservation and quantum mechanics. These laws existed before space and time and defined the potential of everything which was possible. These laws are no thing. So we literally have an example of no thing existing before the material world. The creation of space and time from nothing is literally correct. Space and time were created from no thing. Spirit is no thing. No thing created space and time.

That's an interesting comment about starting with a realistic perception of the gods.

Westerners have made the gods in their own image. It's not at all uncommon. You can try this at home - take a look at the historical gods invented by different cultures and civilizations. Those gods were so often a reflection of the cultures and civilizations which created them.

Isn't it great that western portrayals of Jesus are of a very tall, fair-skinned, blue-eyed Caucasian looking guy?

Making the gods in our own image. Don't you find it convenient (and a bit more conceited),to worship a long-haired hippie in sandals vs. a chubby Buddha?

If you perceive God to be some magical fairy tale then everything you see will skew to that result. There won't be one single thing that you will agree with or accept. Whereas if you were trying to objectively analyze the evidence for spirit creating the material world you would listen to the whole argument and not look for trivial things to nitpick.

Genesis is the allegorical account of the history of the world that all people share. Chapter 1 and 2 of Genesis is the allegorical account of creation. Specifically, that the universe did have a beginning and that man is a product of the universe. We need to stop reading the Bible like we think it is a fairy tale. These are allegorical accounts of history that ancient man deemed important enough to orally pass down from generation to generation for thousands of years. We shouldn't view these accounts using the context of the modern world. We are so far removed from these events that we have lost all original meaning which is why some modern men view these accounts as fairy tales instead of what they really are; ancient man's allegorical account of world history.

The closest thing we can come to perceiving God is that God is consciousness without a body. A case for spirit creating the material world can be made by examining the evidence that we have at our disposal. Some of the most compelling evidence is man's belief in universal right and wrong and his unwillingness to abandon this concept even when he violates it.

Good reasons do exist for us to keep an open mind about the possibility of the creator of space and time communicating with us. We can use our own experiences as proxies to better understand what form these revelations may take. When taken in this light, ancient man's revelation that the universe did have a beginning and that man is a product of the universe is not that far fetched.

Why not link to 3 or 4 threads where you have cut and pasted that creationist material instead of dumping it multiple times in the same thread?

Because you keep making the same ridiculous arguments, so I will keep correcting them.

There is nothing ridiculous about challenging your claims to supernaturalism and spirit realms.

It is, however, ridiculous for you to spam thread after thread with the same creationist cut and paste wall of text.

 

[ding]

No. It is a thoughtful examination of the two boundary conditions. If you assume that everything which has unfolded is just an accidental coincidence of the properties of matter, the logical conclusion is that matter and energy are just doing what matter and energy do which makes sense. The problem is that for matter and energy to do what matter and energy do, there has to be rules in place for matter and energy to obey. The formation of space and time followed rules. Specifically the law of conservation and quantum mechanics. These laws existed before space and time and defined the potential of everything which was possible. These laws are no thing. So we literally have an example of no thing existing before the material world. The creation of space and time from nothing is literally correct. Space and time were created from no thing. Spirit is no thing. No thing created space and time.

Cutting and pasting the same material you found at a creation ministry does nothing to support your case for spirit realms.

The words are mine and are a culmination of a 23 years search for truth.

I will continue using them because winning arguments win arguments.

I'm glad you know how to use microsoft Word. You can generate entire walls of text you found at creation ministries and dump those text walls into every thread.

I couldn't be happier for you to believe that.

Henry Morris is happy if you're happy.

I don't believe in a young earth.

So I'm not sure how happy he would be with my argument.

Space and time were created ~14 billion years ago from no thing. The potential for beings that know and create existed before space and time because the laws of nature existed before space and time. These laws predestined that beings that know and create would eventually arise. All of these things are totally consistent with the beliefs of ancient man who recorded their beliefs in Genesis.

 

[Hollie]

You can always tell when someone thinks they are losing the argument because they appeal for their opponents to stop doing the things they are doing.

Whereas I literally want them to keep doing the same things they are doing so that I have a stage to keep doing what I am doing.

God loves logic. He created it.

Ahh, so your continued cut and paste spam is all about a sense of self aggrandizement.

 

[Hollie]

Cutting and pasting the same material you found at a creation ministry does nothing to support your case for spirit realms.

The words are mine and are a culmination of a 23 years search for truth.

I will continue using them because winning arguments win arguments.

I'm glad you know how to use microsoft Word. You can generate entire walls of text you found at creation ministries and dump those text walls into every thread.

I couldn't be happier for you to believe that.

Henry Morris is happy if you're happy.

I don't believe in a young earth.

So I'm not sure how happy he would be with my argument.

Space and time were created ~14 billion years ago from no thing. The potential for beings that know and create existed before space and time because the laws of nature existed before space and time. These laws predestined that beings that know and create would eventually arise. All of these things are totally consistent with the beliefs of ancient man who recorded their beliefs in Genesis.

"..... because I say so".

 

[ding]

Nope. If you start with a realistic perception of God and examine the evidence at our disposal, it should be obvious that if the material world were not created by spirit that everything that has unfolded in the evolution of space and time would have no intentional purpose. That it is just matter and energy doing what matter and energy do. Conversely, if the material world were created by spirit it should be obvious that the creation of the material world was intentional. After all in my perception of God, God is no thing and the closest thing I can relate to is a mind with no body. Using our own experiences as creators as a proxy, we know that when we create things we create them for a reason and that reason is to serve some purpose. So it would be no great leap of logic to believe that something like a mind with no body would do the same. We also know from our experiences that intelligence tends to create intelligence. We are obsessed with making smart things. So what better thing for a mind with no body to do than create a universe where beings with bodies can create smart things too.

The biological laws are such that life is programmed to survive and multiply which is a requisite for intelligence to arise. If the purpose of the universe was to create intelligence then a preference in nature for it had to exist. The Laws of Nature are such that the potential for intelligence to existed the moment space and time were created. One can argue that given the laws of nature and the size of the universe that intelligence arising was inevitable. One can also argue that creating intelligence from nothing defies the Second Law of Entropy. That creating intelligence from nothing increases order within the universe. It actually doesn't because usable energy was lost along the way as a cost of creating order from disorder. But it is nature overriding it's tendency for ever increasing disorder that interests me and raises my suspicions to look deeper and to take seriously the proposition that a mind without a body created the material world so that minds with bodies could create too.

If we examine the physical laws we discover that we live in a logical universe governed by rules, laws and information. Rules laws and information are a signs of intelligence. Intentionality and purpose are signs of intelligence. The definition of reason is a cause, explanation, or justification for an action or event. The definition of purpose is the reason for which something is done or created or for which something exists. The consequence of a logical universe is that every cause has an effect. Which means that everything happens for a reason and serves a purpose. The very nature of our physical laws point to reason and purpose.

All we have done so far is to make a logical argument for spirit creating the material world. Certainly not an argument built of fairy tales that's for sure. So going back to the two possibilities; spirit creating the material world versus everything proceeding from the material, the key distinction is no thing versus thing. So if we assume that everything I have described was just an accidental coincidence of the properties of matter, the logical conclusion is that matter and energy are just doing what matter and energy do which makes sense. The problem is that for matter and energy to do what matter and energy do, there has to be rules in place for matter and energy to obey. The formation of space and time followed rules. Specifically the law of conservation and quantum mechanics. These laws existed before space and time and defined the potential of everything which was possible. These laws are no thing. So we literally have an example of no thing existing before the material world. The creation of space and time from nothing is literally correct. Space and time were created from no thing. Spirit is no thing. No thing created space and time.

That's an interesting comment about starting with a realistic perception of the gods.

Westerners have made the gods in their own image. It's not at all uncommon. You can try this at home - take a look at the historical gods invented by different cultures and civilizations. Those gods were so often a reflection of the cultures and civilizations which created them.

Isn't it great that western portrayals of Jesus are of a very tall, fair-skinned, blue-eyed Caucasian looking guy?

Making the gods in our own image. Don't you find it convenient (and a bit more conceited),to worship a long-haired hippie in sandals vs. a chubby Buddha?

If you perceive God to be some magical fairy tale then everything you see will skew to that result. There won't be one single thing that you will agree with or accept. Whereas if you were trying to objectively analyze the evidence for spirit creating the material world you would listen to the whole argument and not look for trivial things to nitpick.

Genesis is the allegorical account of the history of the world that all people share. Chapter 1 and 2 of Genesis is the allegorical account of creation. Specifically, that the universe did have a beginning and that man is a product of the universe. We need to stop reading the Bible like we think it is a fairy tale. These are allegorical accounts of history that ancient man deemed important enough to orally pass down from generation to generation for thousands of years. We shouldn't view these accounts using the context of the modern world. We are so far removed from these events that we have lost all original meaning which is why some modern men view these accounts as fairy tales instead of what they really are; ancient man's allegorical account of world history.

The closest thing we can come to perceiving God is that God is consciousness without a body. A case for spirit creating the material world can be made by examining the evidence that we have at our disposal. Some of the most compelling evidence is man's belief in universal right and wrong and his unwillingness to abandon this concept even when he violates it.

Good reasons do exist for us to keep an open mind about the possibility of the creator of space and time communicating with us. We can use our own experiences as proxies to better understand what form these revelations may take. When taken in this light, ancient man's revelation that the universe did have a beginning and that man is a product of the universe is not that far fetched.

Why not link to 3 or 4 threads where you have cut and pasted that creationist material instead of dumping it multiple times in the same thread?

Because you keep making the same ridiculous arguments, so I will keep correcting them.

There is nothing ridiculous about challenging your claims to supernaturalism and spirit realms.

It is, however, ridiculous for you to spam thread after thread with the same creationist cut and paste wall of text.

You keep mistating my beliefs because you literally have no argument against my beliefs. At the heart of this debate is whether or not the material world was created by spirit. If the material world were not created by spirit, then everything which has occurred since the beginning of space and time are products of the material world. Everything which is incorporeal proceeded from the corporeal. There is no middle ground. There is no other option. Either the material world was created by spirit or it wasn't. All other options will simplify to one of these two lowest common denominators which are mutually exclusive.

You keep trying to paint an incorrect perception of God. You perceive God to be some magical fairy tale. Everything you see skews to that result. There is not one single thing that you will agree with or accept. Whereas if you were trying to objectively analyze the evidence for spirit creating the material world you would listen to the whole argument and not look for trivial things to nitpick.

Let's start with a realistic perception of God so that we can objectively assess the two boundary conditions; spirit created the material world or everything proceeded from the material. There is no thing that can describe God because God is no thing. God is not matter and energy like us and God exists outside of our four dimension space time. In fact the premise is that God is no thing. That God is a spirit. A spirit is no thing. Being things we can't possibly relate to being no things. A two dimensional being would have an easier time trying to understand our third dimension than we - a four dimensional being - would in trying to understand a multi-dimensional being outside of our space time. The closest I can come to and later confirm with the physical laws is that God is consciousness. That Mind, rather than emerging as a late outgrowth in the evolution of life, has existed always as the matrix, the source and condition of physical reality - that the stuff of which physical reality is composed is mind-stuff. It is Mind that has composed a physical universe that breeds life, and so eventually evolves creatures that know and create.

 

[ding]

You can always tell when someone thinks they are losing the argument because they appeal for their opponents to stop doing the things they are doing.

Whereas I literally want them to keep doing the same things they are doing so that I have a stage to keep doing what I am doing.

God loves logic. He created it.

Ahh, so your continued cut and paste spam is all about a sense of self aggrandizement.

Like I said before winning arguments win arguments. I will keep making the same argument because that is the one that wins.

I appreciate the platform you provide me.

 

[ding]

The words are mine and are a culmination of a 23 years search for truth.

I will continue using them because winning arguments win arguments.

I'm glad you know how to use microsoft Word. You can generate entire walls of text you found at creation ministries and dump those text walls into every thread.

I couldn't be happier for you to believe that.

Henry Morris is happy if you're happy.

I don't believe in a young earth.

So I'm not sure how happy he would be with my argument.

Space and time were created ~14 billion years ago from no thing. The potential for beings that know and create existed before space and time because the laws of nature existed before space and time. These laws predestined that beings that know and create would eventually arise. All of these things are totally consistent with the beliefs of ancient man who recorded their beliefs in Genesis.

"..... because I say so".

No. Because science tells us so.

Chapters 1 and 2 of Genesis is the allegorical account of creation. Specifically, the creation of the universe and everything in it from nothing and the evolution of space and time from cosmic evolution through the evolution of consciousness.

We know from science that space and time had a beginning. Specifically, red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations, quantum mechanics, the First Law of Thermodynamics, the Second Law of Thermodynamics and Inflation Theory.

Red shift, cosmic background radiation and Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations tells us that all matter and energy in the universe once occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of an atom and then began to expand and cool. The the First Law of Thermodynamics (i.e. conservation of energy) tells us that since that time matter and energy has only changed form. Which means that the atoms in our bodies were created from nothing when space and and time were created from nothing.

Red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations and the Second Law of Thermodynamics tells us that space and time did have a beginning. If the universe is expanding then it must have a beginning. If you follow it backwards in time, then any object must come to a boundary of space time. You cannot continue that history indefinitely. This is still true even if a universe has periods of contraction. It still has to have a beginning if expansion over weights the contraction. Physicists have been uncomfortable with the idea of a beginning since the work of Friedman which showed that the solutions of Einstein's equation showed that the universe had a beginning. The problem with a cyclical universe is with the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. For every matter to energy or energy to matter exchange there is a loss of usable energy. So while the total energy of the universe does not decrease, the usable energy of the universe does decrease. If it is a periodic or cyclical universe then the entropy will increase with each cycle. The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is a fundamental law of nature which tells us that entropy can only increase or stay the same. Entropy can never decrease. Which means that in a finite amount of time, a finite system will reach a maximum state of disorder which is called thermal equilibrium and then it will stay in that state. A cyclical universe cannot avoid this problem. Since we do not see thermal equilibrium (good thing too because there would be no life) we know that the universe did have a beginning.

Inflation Theory, the First Law of Thermodynamics and quantum mechanics tells us that it is possible for matter to have a beginning. In a closed universe the gravitational energy which is always negative exactly compensates the positive energy of matter. So the energy of a closed universe is always zero. So nothing prevents this universe from being spontaneously created. Because the net energy is always zero. The positive energy of matter is balanced by the negative energy of the gravity of that matter which is the space time curvature of that matter. There is no conservation law that prevents the formation of such a universe. In quantum mechanics if something is not forbidden by conservation laws, then it necessarily happens with some non-zero probability. So a closed universe can spontaneously appear - through the laws of quantum mechanics - out of nothing. And in fact there is an elegant mathematical description which describes this process and shows that a tiny closed universe having very high energy can spontaneously pop into existence and immediately start to expand and cool.

Chapters 1 and 2 of Genesis is the allegorical account of creation and describes that the universe was created in steps or stage or phases. Scientific evidence tells us that the universe started out as subatomic particles and very quickly formed hydrogen and helium. This is called cosmic evolution. The hydrogen and helium formed stellar structures such as galaxies. This is called stellar evolution. The supernovas of stars created all of the elements and compounds that we see through fusion. This is called chemical evolution. All of these stages or phases had to occur before inanimate matter could make the leap to life. An event we still do not fully understand although the best understanding is that it can only occur in hot, wet conditions with an atmosphere rich in certain chemical compounds. Even with these condition being present we do not know how these chemical compounds could fold themselves in just the correct sequence to create life capable of replicating itself. The amount of information required for life to replicate is staggering. But however life made this leap we know it had to begin from a single celled organism and evolved into evermore increasing complex life forms up to the point that beings that know and create eventually arose.

Chapters 1 and 2 of Genesis tells us that space and time had a beginning, that it was created in steps and that life came from inanimate matter.

 

[Hollie]

That's an interesting comment about starting with a realistic perception of the gods.

Westerners have made the gods in their own image. It's not at all uncommon. You can try this at home - take a look at the historical gods invented by different cultures and civilizations. Those gods were so often a reflection of the cultures and civilizations which created them.

Isn't it great that western portrayals of Jesus are of a very tall, fair-skinned, blue-eyed Caucasian looking guy?

Making the gods in our own image. Don't you find it convenient (and a bit more conceited),to worship a long-haired hippie in sandals vs. a chubby Buddha?

If you perceive God to be some magical fairy tale then everything you see will skew to that result. There won't be one single thing that you will agree with or accept. Whereas if you were trying to objectively analyze the evidence for spirit creating the material world you would listen to the whole argument and not look for trivial things to nitpick.

Genesis is the allegorical account of the history of the world that all people share. Chapter 1 and 2 of Genesis is the allegorical account of creation. Specifically, that the universe did have a beginning and that man is a product of the universe. We need to stop reading the Bible like we think it is a fairy tale. These are allegorical accounts of history that ancient man deemed important enough to orally pass down from generation to generation for thousands of years. We shouldn't view these accounts using the context of the modern world. We are so far removed from these events that we have lost all original meaning which is why some modern men view these accounts as fairy tales instead of what they really are; ancient man's allegorical account of world history.

The closest thing we can come to perceiving God is that God is consciousness without a body. A case for spirit creating the material world can be made by examining the evidence that we have at our disposal. Some of the most compelling evidence is man's belief in universal right and wrong and his unwillingness to abandon this concept even when he violates it.

Good reasons do exist for us to keep an open mind about the possibility of the creator of space and time communicating with us. We can use our own experiences as proxies to better understand what form these revelations may take. When taken in this light, ancient man's revelation that the universe did have a beginning and that man is a product of the universe is not that far fetched.

Why not link to 3 or 4 threads where you have cut and pasted that creationist material instead of dumping it multiple times in the same thread?

Because you keep making the same ridiculous arguments, so I will keep correcting them.

There is nothing ridiculous about challenging your claims to supernaturalism and spirit realms.

It is, however, ridiculous for you to spam thread after thread with the same creationist cut and paste wall of text.

You keep mistating my beliefs because you literally have no argument against my beliefs. At the heart of this debate is whether or not the material world was created by spirit. If the material world were not created by spirit, then everything which has occurred since the beginning of space and time are products of the material world. Everything which is incorporeal proceeded from the corporeal. There is no middle ground. There is no other option. Either the material world was created by spirit or it wasn't. All other options will simplify to one of these two lowest common denominators which are mutually exclusive.

You keep trying to paint an incorrect perception of God. You perceive God to be some magical fairy tale. Everything you see skews to that result. There is not one single thing that you will agree with or accept. Whereas if you were trying to objectively analyze the evidence for spirit creating the material world you would listen to the whole argument and not look for trivial things to nitpick.

Let's start with a realistic perception of God so that we can objectively assess the two boundary conditions; spirit created the material world or everything proceeded from the material. There is no thing that can describe God because God is no thing. God is not matter and energy like us and God exists outside of our four dimension space time. In fact the premise is that God is no thing. That God is a spirit. A spirit is no thing. Being things we can't possibly relate to being no things. A two dimensional being would have an easier time trying to understand our third dimension than we - a four dimensional being - would in trying to understand a multi-dimensional being outside of our space time. The closest I can come to and later confirm with the physical laws is that God is consciousness. That Mind, rather than emerging as a late outgrowth in the evolution of life, has existed always as the matrix, the source and condition of physical reality - that the stuff of which physical reality is composed is mind-stuff. It is Mind that has composed a physical universe that breeds life, and so eventually evolves creatures that know and create.

All the same cut and paste creationist dogma you dumped almost a dozen times into the thread.

 

[ding]

If you perceive God to be some magical fairy tale then everything you see will skew to that result. There won't be one single thing that you will agree with or accept. Whereas if you were trying to objectively analyze the evidence for spirit creating the material world you would listen to the whole argument and not look for trivial things to nitpick.

Genesis is the allegorical account of the history of the world that all people share. Chapter 1 and 2 of Genesis is the allegorical account of creation. Specifically, that the universe did have a beginning and that man is a product of the universe. We need to stop reading the Bible like we think it is a fairy tale. These are allegorical accounts of history that ancient man deemed important enough to orally pass down from generation to generation for thousands of years. We shouldn't view these accounts using the context of the modern world. We are so far removed from these events that we have lost all original meaning which is why some modern men view these accounts as fairy tales instead of what they really are; ancient man's allegorical account of world history.

The closest thing we can come to perceiving God is that God is consciousness without a body. A case for spirit creating the material world can be made by examining the evidence that we have at our disposal. Some of the most compelling evidence is man's belief in universal right and wrong and his unwillingness to abandon this concept even when he violates it.

Good reasons do exist for us to keep an open mind about the possibility of the creator of space and time communicating with us. We can use our own experiences as proxies to better understand what form these revelations may take. When taken in this light, ancient man's revelation that the universe did have a beginning and that man is a product of the universe is not that far fetched.

Why not link to 3 or 4 threads where you have cut and pasted that creationist material instead of dumping it multiple times in the same thread?

Because you keep making the same ridiculous arguments, so I will keep correcting them.

There is nothing ridiculous about challenging your claims to supernaturalism and spirit realms.

It is, however, ridiculous for you to spam thread after thread with the same creationist cut and paste wall of text.

You keep mistating my beliefs because you literally have no argument against my beliefs. At the heart of this debate is whether or not the material world was created by spirit. If the material world were not created by spirit, then everything which has occurred since the beginning of space and time are products of the material world. Everything which is incorporeal proceeded from the corporeal. There is no middle ground. There is no other option. Either the material world was created by spirit or it wasn't. All other options will simplify to one of these two lowest common denominators which are mutually exclusive.

You keep trying to paint an incorrect perception of God. You perceive God to be some magical fairy tale. Everything you see skews to that result. There is not one single thing that you will agree with or accept. Whereas if you were trying to objectively analyze the evidence for spirit creating the material world you would listen to the whole argument and not look for trivial things to nitpick.

Let's start with a realistic perception of God so that we can objectively assess the two boundary conditions; spirit created the material world or everything proceeded from the material. There is no thing that can describe God because God is no thing. God is not matter and energy like us and God exists outside of our four dimension space time. In fact the premise is that God is no thing. That God is a spirit. A spirit is no thing. Being things we can't possibly relate to being no things. A two dimensional being would have an easier time trying to understand our third dimension than we - a four dimensional being - would in trying to understand a multi-dimensional being outside of our space time. The closest I can come to and later confirm with the physical laws is that God is consciousness. That Mind, rather than emerging as a late outgrowth in the evolution of life, has existed always as the matrix, the source and condition of physical reality - that the stuff of which physical reality is composed is mind-stuff. It is Mind that has composed a physical universe that breeds life, and so eventually evolves creatures that know and create.

All the same cut and paste creationist dogma you dumped almost a dozen times into the thread.

Like I said before, I don't believe in a young earth. So I can't be a creationist. What part of that do you not understand?

Also, winning arguments win arguments. If you keep making the same stupid assertions, I will keep correcting you. Why would you expect my answers to change?

Clearly you know you are defeated that's why you are trying to get me change what I am doing.

I on the other hand want you to keep doing exactly what you are doing because it provides a platform for me to share these messages with others.

 

[Hollie]

I'm glad you know how to use microsoft Word. You can generate entire walls of text you found at creation ministries and dump those text walls into every thread.

I couldn't be happier for you to believe that.

Henry Morris is happy if you're happy.

I don't believe in a young earth.

So I'm not sure how happy he would be with my argument.

Space and time were created ~14 billion years ago from no thing. The potential for beings that know and create existed before space and time because the laws of nature existed before space and time. These laws predestined that beings that know and create would eventually arise. All of these things are totally consistent with the beliefs of ancient man who recorded their beliefs in Genesis.

"..... because I say so".

No. Because science tells us so.

Chapters 1 and 2 of Genesis is the allegorical account of creation. Specifically, the creation of the universe and everything in it from nothing and the evolution of space and time from cosmic evolution through the evolution of consciousness.

We know from science that space and time had a beginning. Specifically, red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations, quantum mechanics, the First Law of Thermodynamics, the Second Law of Thermodynamics and Inflation Theory.

Red shift, cosmic background radiation and Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations tells us that all matter and energy in the universe once occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of an atom and then began to expand and cool. The the First Law of Thermodynamics (i.e. conservation of energy) tells us that since that time matter and energy has only changed form. Which means that the atoms in our bodies were created from nothing when space and and time were created from nothing.

Red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations and the Second Law of Thermodynamics tells us that space and time did have a beginning. If the universe is expanding then it must have a beginning. If you follow it backwards in time, then any object must come to a boundary of space time. You cannot continue that history indefinitely. This is still true even if a universe has periods of contraction. It still has to have a beginning if expansion over weights the contraction. Physicists have been uncomfortable with the idea of a beginning since the work of Friedman which showed that the solutions of Einstein's equation showed that the universe had a beginning. The problem with a cyclical universe is with the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. For every matter to energy or energy to matter exchange there is a loss of usable energy. So while the total energy of the universe does not decrease, the usable energy of the universe does decrease. If it is a periodic or cyclical universe then the entropy will increase with each cycle. The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is a fundamental law of nature which tells us that entropy can only increase or stay the same. Entropy can never decrease. Which means that in a finite amount of time, a finite system will reach a maximum state of disorder which is called thermal equilibrium and then it will stay in that state. A cyclical universe cannot avoid this problem. Since we do not see thermal equilibrium (good thing too because there would be no life) we know that the universe did have a beginning.

Inflation Theory, the First Law of Thermodynamics and quantum mechanics tells us that it is possible for matter to have a beginning. In a closed universe the gravitational energy which is always negative exactly compensates the positive energy of matter. So the energy of a closed universe is always zero. So nothing prevents this universe from being spontaneously created. Because the net energy is always zero. The positive energy of matter is balanced by the negative energy of the gravity of that matter which is the space time curvature of that matter. There is no conservation law that prevents the formation of such a universe. In quantum mechanics if something is not forbidden by conservation laws, then it necessarily happens with some non-zero probability. So a closed universe can spontaneously appear - through the laws of quantum mechanics - out of nothing. And in fact there is an elegant mathematical description which describes this process and shows that a tiny closed universe having very high energy can spontaneously pop into existence and immediately start to expand and cool.

Chapters 1 and 2 of Genesis is the allegorical account of creation and describes that the universe was created in steps or stage or phases. Scientific evidence tells us that the universe started out as subatomic particles and very quickly formed hydrogen and helium. This is called cosmic evolution. The hydrogen and helium formed stellar structures such as galaxies. This is called stellar evolution. The supernovas of stars created all of the elements and compounds that we see through fusion. This is called chemical evolution. All of these stages or phases had to occur before inanimate matter could make the leap to life. An event we still do not fully understand although the best understanding is that it can only occur in hot, wet conditions with an atmosphere rich in certain chemical compounds. Even with these condition being present we do not know how these chemical compounds could fold themselves in just the correct sequence to create life capable of replicating itself. The amount of information required for life to replicate is staggering. But however life made this leap we know it had to begin from a single celled organism and evolved into evermore increasing complex life forms up to the point that beings that know and create eventually arose.

Chapters 1 and 2 of Genesis tells us that space and time had a beginning, that it was created in steps and that life came from inanimate matter.

Chapters 1 and 2 of Genesis is the allegorical account of creation. Specifically, the creation of the universe and everything in it from nothing and the evolution of space and time from cosmic evolution through the evolution of consciousness.

We know from science that space and time had a beginning. Specifically, red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations, quantum mechanics, the First Law of Thermodynamics, the Second Law of Thermodynamics and Inflation Theory.

Red shift, cosmic background radiation and Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations tells us that all matter and energy in the universe once occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of an atom and then began to expand and cool. The the First Law of Thermodynamics (i.e. conservation of energy) tells us that since that time matter and energy has only changed form. Which means that the atoms in our bodies were created from nothing when space and and time were created from nothing.

Red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations and the Second Law of Thermodynamics tells us that space and time did have a beginning. If the universe is expanding then it must have a beginning. If you follow it backwards in time, then any object must come to a boundary of space time. You cannot continue that history indefinitely. This is still true even if a universe has periods of contraction. It still has to have a beginning if expansion over weights the contraction. Physicists have been uncomfortable with the idea of a beginning since the work of Friedman which showed that the solutions of Einstein's equation showed that the universe had a beginning. The problem with a cyclical universe is with the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. For every matter to energy or energy to matter exchange there is a loss of usable energy. So while the total energy of the universe does not decrease, the usable energy of the universe does decrease. If it is a periodic or cyclical universe then the entropy will increase with each cycle. The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is a fundamental law of nature which tells us that entropy can only increase or stay the same. Entropy can never decrease. Which means that in a finite amount of time, a finite system will reach a maximum state of disorder which is called thermal equilibrium and then it will stay in that state. A cyclical universe cannot avoid this problem. Since we do not see thermal equilibrium (good thing too because there would be no life) we know that the universe did have a beginning.

Inflation Theory, the First Law of Thermodynamics and quantum mechanics tells us that it is possible for matter to have a beginning. In a closed universe the gravitational energy which is always negative exactly compensates the positive energy of matter. So the energy of a closed universe is always zero. So nothing prevents this universe from being spontaneously created. Because the net energy is always zero. The positive energy of matter is balanced by the negative energy of the gravity of that matter which is the space time curvature of that matter. There is no conservation law that prevents the formation of such a universe. In quantum mechanics if something is not forbidden by conservation laws, then it necessarily happens with some non-zero probability. So a closed universe can spontaneously appear - through the laws of quantum mechanics - out of nothing. And in fact there is an elegant mathematical description which describes this process and shows that a tiny closed universe having very high energy can spontaneously pop into existence and immediately start to expand and cool.

Chapters 1 and 2 of Genesis is the allegorical account of creation and describes that the universe was created in steps or stage or phases. Scientific evidence tells us that the universe started out as subatomic particles and very quickly formed hydrogen and helium. This is called cosmic evolution. The hydrogen and helium formed stellar structures such as galaxies. This is called stellar evolution. The supernovas of stars created all of the elements and compounds that we see through fusion. This is called chemical evolution. All of these stages or phases had to occur before inanimate matter could make the leap to life. An event we still do not fully understand although the best understanding is that it can only occur in hot, wet conditions with an atmosphere rich in certain chemical compounds. Even with these condition being present we do not know how these chemical compounds could fold themselves in just the correct sequence to create life capable of replicating itself. The amount of information required for life to replicate is staggering. But however life made this leap we know it had to begin from a single celled organism and evolved into evermore increasing complex life forms up to the point that beings that know and create eventually arose.

Chapters 1 and 2 of Genesis tells us that space and time had a beginning, that it was created in steps and that life came from inanimate matter.



Could we get clarification from Henry Morris on this?

 

[ding]

I couldn't be happier for you to believe that.

Henry Morris is happy if you're happy.

I don't believe in a young earth.

So I'm not sure how happy he would be with my argument.

Space and time were created ~14 billion years ago from no thing. The potential for beings that know and create existed before space and time because the laws of nature existed before space and time. These laws predestined that beings that know and create would eventually arise. All of these things are totally consistent with the beliefs of ancient man who recorded their beliefs in Genesis.

"..... because I say so".

No. Because science tells us so.

Chapters 1 and 2 of Genesis is the allegorical account of creation. Specifically, the creation of the universe and everything in it from nothing and the evolution of space and time from cosmic evolution through the evolution of consciousness.

We know from science that space and time had a beginning. Specifically, red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations, quantum mechanics, the First Law of Thermodynamics, the Second Law of Thermodynamics and Inflation Theory.

Red shift, cosmic background radiation and Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations tells us that all matter and energy in the universe once occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of an atom and then began to expand and cool. The the First Law of Thermodynamics (i.e. conservation of energy) tells us that since that time matter and energy has only changed form. Which means that the atoms in our bodies were created from nothing when space and and time were created from nothing.

Red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations and the Second Law of Thermodynamics tells us that space and time did have a beginning. If the universe is expanding then it must have a beginning. If you follow it backwards in time, then any object must come to a boundary of space time. You cannot continue that history indefinitely. This is still true even if a universe has periods of contraction. It still has to have a beginning if expansion over weights the contraction. Physicists have been uncomfortable with the idea of a beginning since the work of Friedman which showed that the solutions of Einstein's equation showed that the universe had a beginning. The problem with a cyclical universe is with the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. For every matter to energy or energy to matter exchange there is a loss of usable energy. So while the total energy of the universe does not decrease, the usable energy of the universe does decrease. If it is a periodic or cyclical universe then the entropy will increase with each cycle. The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is a fundamental law of nature which tells us that entropy can only increase or stay the same. Entropy can never decrease. Which means that in a finite amount of time, a finite system will reach a maximum state of disorder which is called thermal equilibrium and then it will stay in that state. A cyclical universe cannot avoid this problem. Since we do not see thermal equilibrium (good thing too because there would be no life) we know that the universe did have a beginning.

Inflation Theory, the First Law of Thermodynamics and quantum mechanics tells us that it is possible for matter to have a beginning. In a closed universe the gravitational energy which is always negative exactly compensates the positive energy of matter. So the energy of a closed universe is always zero. So nothing prevents this universe from being spontaneously created. Because the net energy is always zero. The positive energy of matter is balanced by the negative energy of the gravity of that matter which is the space time curvature of that matter. There is no conservation law that prevents the formation of such a universe. In quantum mechanics if something is not forbidden by conservation laws, then it necessarily happens with some non-zero probability. So a closed universe can spontaneously appear - through the laws of quantum mechanics - out of nothing. And in fact there is an elegant mathematical description which describes this process and shows that a tiny closed universe having very high energy can spontaneously pop into existence and immediately start to expand and cool.

Chapters 1 and 2 of Genesis is the allegorical account of creation and describes that the universe was created in steps or stage or phases. Scientific evidence tells us that the universe started out as subatomic particles and very quickly formed hydrogen and helium. This is called cosmic evolution. The hydrogen and helium formed stellar structures such as galaxies. This is called stellar evolution. The supernovas of stars created all of the elements and compounds that we see through fusion. This is called chemical evolution. All of these stages or phases had to occur before inanimate matter could make the leap to life. An event we still do not fully understand although the best understanding is that it can only occur in hot, wet conditions with an atmosphere rich in certain chemical compounds. Even with these condition being present we do not know how these chemical compounds could fold themselves in just the correct sequence to create life capable of replicating itself. The amount of information required for life to replicate is staggering. But however life made this leap we know it had to begin from a single celled organism and evolved into evermore increasing complex life forms up to the point that beings that know and create eventually arose.

Chapters 1 and 2 of Genesis tells us that space and time had a beginning, that it was created in steps and that life came from inanimate matter.

Chapters 1 and 2 of Genesis is the allegorical account of creation. Specifically, the creation of the universe and everything in it from nothing and the evolution of space and time from cosmic evolution through the evolution of consciousness.

We know from science that space and time had a beginning. Specifically, red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations, quantum mechanics, the First Law of Thermodynamics, the Second Law of Thermodynamics and Inflation Theory.

Red shift, cosmic background radiation and Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations tells us that all matter and energy in the universe once occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of an atom and then began to expand and cool. The the First Law of Thermodynamics (i.e. conservation of energy) tells us that since that time matter and energy has only changed form. Which means that the atoms in our bodies were created from nothing when space and and time were created from nothing.

Red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations and the Second Law of Thermodynamics tells us that space and time did have a beginning. If the universe is expanding then it must have a beginning. If you follow it backwards in time, then any object must come to a boundary of space time. You cannot continue that history indefinitely. This is still true even if a universe has periods of contraction. It still has to have a beginning if expansion over weights the contraction. Physicists have been uncomfortable with the idea of a beginning since the work of Friedman which showed that the solutions of Einstein's equation showed that the universe had a beginning. The problem with a cyclical universe is with the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. For every matter to energy or energy to matter exchange there is a loss of usable energy. So while the total energy of the universe does not decrease, the usable energy of the universe does decrease. If it is a periodic or cyclical universe then the entropy will increase with each cycle. The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is a fundamental law of nature which tells us that entropy can only increase or stay the same. Entropy can never decrease. Which means that in a finite amount of time, a finite system will reach a maximum state of disorder which is called thermal equilibrium and then it will stay in that state. A cyclical universe cannot avoid this problem. Since we do not see thermal equilibrium (good thing too because there would be no life) we know that the universe did have a beginning.

Inflation Theory, the First Law of Thermodynamics and quantum mechanics tells us that it is possible for matter to have a beginning. In a closed universe the gravitational energy which is always negative exactly compensates the positive energy of matter. So the energy of a closed universe is always zero. So nothing prevents this universe from being spontaneously created. Because the net energy is always zero. The positive energy of matter is balanced by the negative energy of the gravity of that matter which is the space time curvature of that matter. There is no conservation law that prevents the formation of such a universe. In quantum mechanics if something is not forbidden by conservation laws, then it necessarily happens with some non-zero probability. So a closed universe can spontaneously appear - through the laws of quantum mechanics - out of nothing. And in fact there is an elegant mathematical description which describes this process and shows that a tiny closed universe having very high energy can spontaneously pop into existence and immediately start to expand and cool.

Chapters 1 and 2 of Genesis is the allegorical account of creation and describes that the universe was created in steps or stage or phases. Scientific evidence tells us that the universe started out as subatomic particles and very quickly formed hydrogen and helium. This is called cosmic evolution. The hydrogen and helium formed stellar structures such as galaxies. This is called stellar evolution. The supernovas of stars created all of the elements and compounds that we see through fusion. This is called chemical evolution. All of these stages or phases had to occur before inanimate matter could make the leap to life. An event we still do not fully understand although the best understanding is that it can only occur in hot, wet conditions with an atmosphere rich in certain chemical compounds. Even with these condition being present we do not know how these chemical compounds could fold themselves in just the correct sequence to create life capable of replicating itself. The amount of information required for life to replicate is staggering. But however life made this leap we know it had to begin from a single celled organism and evolved into evermore increasing complex life forms up to the point that beings that know and create eventually arose.

Chapters 1 and 2 of Genesis tells us that space and time had a beginning, that it was created in steps and that life came from inanimate matter.



Could we get clarification from Henry Morris on this?

Does Henry Morris believe that space and time were created ~14 billion years ago from no thing? Or that the potential for beings that know and create existed before space and time because the laws of nature existed before space and time? Or that these laws predestined that beings that know and create would eventually arise?

All of these things are totally consistent with the beliefs of ancient man who recorded their beliefs in Genesis.