Zone1 For Christians who believe in Darwinian evolution, question

[Bob Blaylock]

I'll never serve on a jury. I don't even know the specifics of the case. I will say, "Not guilty" 1 trillion times out of 1 trillion. I have first hand experience with the criminal justice system. Innocent people get fucked constantly. Guilty people get treated like gold.

It is no surprise that you would blame the justice system for the consequences of your own bad behavior.

 

[TNHarley]

Well, you should doubt that. No one believes the universe was eternal into the past. That is of course except for the ones that have a theological motivation to not believe the universe popped into existence being hardwired to produce life and intelligence.

I get that you don't know. I just think that means you have a doubt about there being a Supreme Being/Creator.

Thats not true. And it doesnt really matter to me what other people believe. Some people think fungus is good with beef and swiss.

 

[ding]

We could have just been an effect of creation.

Or the purpose of it.

 

[TNHarley]

Incorrect. It's extremely relevant. The account of Creation in Genesis was in direct opposition to the religious beliefs of the day; polytheism. It's this context, this contrast that matters the most. Believing everything was created by one God who didn't control the weather or meddle in the affairs of men would have been equivalent to the earth being round or the earth revolving around the sun. It was blaspheme at the time. Did you know that Genesis correctly sequence matter existing before light? It took science 6,000 years to agree with that and that the universe began.

Just goes from many gods answering unanswerable questions, to one god. Its still leaning on a higher power to settle questions we probably wont ever have an answer to.

 

[TNHarley]

Or the purpose of it.

Could be.

 

[surada]

Incorrect. It's extremely relevant. The account of Creation in Genesis was in direct opposition to the religious beliefs of the day; polytheism. It's this context, this contrast that matters the most. Believing everything was created by one God who didn't control the weather or meddle in the affairs of men would have been equivalent to the earth being round or the earth revolving around the sun. It was blaspheme at the time. Did you know that Genesis correctly sequence matter existing before light? It took science 6,000 years to agree with that and that the universe began.

The cave paintings in Spain and France are 40,000 years old.

The stone granaries in Jordan are 14,000 years old.
.

 

[ding]

Thats not true. And it doesnt really matter to me what other people believe. Some people think fungus is good with beef and swiss.

It is one hundred percent true. Cosmic background radiation (CMB), red shift and Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equation put the nail in the coffin of an eternal into the past universe. 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.

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. In this description, the same laws that describe the evolution of the universe also describe the appearance of the universe which means that the laws were in place before the universe itself.

 

[ding]

The cave paintings in Spain and France are 40,000 years old.

The stone granaries in Jordan are 14,000 years old.
.

So what?

 

[surada]

So what?

By the time of Genesis Sumer had a written language, agriculture, irrigation and sailboats.

 

[ding]

Could be.

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.

So we need to start from that position and examine the evidence we have at our disposal which is creation itself. Specifically, the laws of nature; physical, biological and moral. And how space and time has evolved. And how we perceive God.

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.

 

[TNHarley]

It is one hundred percent true. Cosmic background radiation (CMB), red shift and Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equation put the nail in the coffin of an eternal into the past universe. 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.

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. In this description, the same laws that describe the evolution of the universe also describe the appearance of the universe which means that the laws were in place before the universe itself.

What if the universe had no beginning?

www.livescience.com

 

[ding]

By the time of Genesis Sumer had a written language, agriculture, irrigation and sailboats.

Again... so what. It's not about when Genesis was written, dummy. The first eleven chapters were oral accounts that were passed down from generation to generation for thousands of years before it was recorded in writing.

 

[ding]

What if the universe had no beginning?

www.livescience.com

I'm familiar with this, it's a mathematical gimmick to avoid the singularity. It's not really saying there was no beginning. It's saying time had no beginning. It doesn't explain how the CMB got there either. It's a joke. But if the universe beginning makes you uncomfortable feel free to believe it.

Here's their paper. I don't believe it's been peer reviewed or published yet.

[2109.11953] If time had no beginning

arxiv.org

 

[TNHarley]

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.

So we need to start from that position and examine the evidence we have at our disposal which is creation itself. Specifically, the laws of nature; physical, biological and moral. And how space and time has evolved. And how we perceive God.

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.

What if our creation was a mistake? Or just a byproduct.
People make mistakes when creating things and create something else. Even your god makes mistakes.

 

[TNHarley]

I'm familiar with this, it's a mathematical gimmick to avoid the singularity. It's not really saying there was no beginning. It doesn't explain how the CMB got there either. It's a joke. But if the universe beginning makes you uncomfortable feel free to believe it.

It doesnt make uncomfortable. Thats a bit silly.

 

[ding]

What if our creation was a mistake? Or just a byproduct.
People make mistakes when creating things and create something else. Even your god makes mistakes.

Our universe exists because a mistake was made. It should have been a universe filled only with radiation. Because that's how paired particle production works. But in our case for every 1 billion anti-matter particles there were 1 billion and 1 matter particles. So when all of the matter particles and anti-matter particles mutually annihilated each other there was 1 particle per 2 billion particles left over. The two billion particles for every 1 remaining particle is what created the background radiation. Which is why I and others believe the creation of the universe was intentional and not a happy coincidence of what matter and energy do. Because if it were a happy coincidence of what matter and energy do the universe would be filled with only background radiation and not background radiation and matter.

 

[ding]

It doesnt make uncomfortable. Thats a bit silly.

You are denying the mainstream science of how the universe was created for no good reason and without doing any due diligence. It's emotional for you.

 

[ding]

People make mistakes when creating things and create something else.

Yes, but it began as an intentional process. Furthermore, if you create something and I find it and don't know who created it, I could still use what you created to learn things about you.

 

[TNHarley]

You are denying the mainstream science of how the universe was created for no good reason and without doing any due diligence. It's emotional for you.

Wrong. I am not denying it. I am just saying I believe other things could have happened.

 

[TNHarley]

Yes, but it began as an intentional process. Furthermore, if you create something and I find it and don't know who created it, I could still use what you created to learn things about you.

Sure it did. But a byproduct was still made. By accident.