User Tag List

Page 2 of 13 FirstFirst 1234512 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 186

Thread: Argument supporting existence of a God

  1. #16
    TOL Legend genuineoriginal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    On a sea of glass mixed with fire in front of a throne.
    Posts
    10,284
    Thanks
    1,794
    Thanked 1,769 Times in 1,296 Posts

    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    523679
    Quote Originally Posted by SabathMoon View Post
    Actually, its E = γmc2
    Why?
    Learn to read what is written.

    _____
    The people who are supposed to be experts and who claim to understand the science are precisely the people who are blind to the evidence.
    ~ Dr Freeman Dyson

  2. #17
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    964
    Thanks
    79
    Thanked 68 Times in 59 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by genuineoriginal View Post
    Why?
    As gamma comes close to one, E=MC^2 becomes a close approximation. You should look up gamma. A gamma of one is the energy of matter at rest.
    Last edited by SabathMoon; February 13th, 2019 at 10:36 PM. Reason: clarity

  3. #18
    Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle Stripe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    18,088
    Thanks
    394
    Thanked 11,680 Times in 8,369 Posts

    Blog Entries
    2
    Mentioned
    35 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147837
    Quote Originally Posted by genuineoriginal View Post
    Why?
    See my signature.
    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
    E≈mc2
    When the world is a monster
    Bad to swallow you whole
    Kick the clay that holds the teeth in
    Throw your trolls out the door

    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
    -Bob B.

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Stripe For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (February 14th, 2019),Tambora (February 22nd, 2019)

  5. #19
    Over 1500 post club
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    1,799
    Thanks
    144
    Thanked 271 Times in 221 Posts

    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    Ex Nihilo, nihilo fit

  6. #20
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    964
    Thanks
    79
    Thanked 68 Times in 59 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Stripe View Post
    See my signature.
    The curly equal sign is intentional then.

  7. #21
    Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle Stripe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    18,088
    Thanks
    394
    Thanked 11,680 Times in 8,369 Posts

    Blog Entries
    2
    Mentioned
    35 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147837
    Quote Originally Posted by SabathMoon View Post
    The curly equal sign is intentional then.


    You're the first guy to even notice.
    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
    E≈mc2
    When the world is a monster
    Bad to swallow you whole
    Kick the clay that holds the teeth in
    Throw your trolls out the door

    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
    -Bob B.

  8. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Stripe For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (February 14th, 2019),Tambora (February 22nd, 2019)

  9. #22
    Over 6000 post club Aimiel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    6,146
    Thanks
    169
    Thanked 258 Times in 186 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    104661
    For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.`For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:`and likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.
    No Bueno.

  10. #23
    Silver Member Clete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Seated in the heavenly places at God's right hand, in Him!
    Posts
    9,376
    Thanks
    590
    Thanked 6,447 Times in 3,414 Posts

    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147767
    Quote Originally Posted by SaintAndrew View Post
    I see your argument which suggests it unlikely that progressive evolution could account for a God, because of the extreme rarity of key events from elementary random matter -> abiogenesis, to DNA, to a maximized evolution species or individual (God) etc.

    However I disagree with your statement which I have bolded and underlined "No, God could not have evolved any more than we could have, not in a million billion trillion years and not in an eternity either
    ."

    Even the most extreme odds against an event, even 10 to the (fill in the blank, largest number you can write)power, is infinitely small against infinite time.
    I had no idea that this post existed until I came looking through the thread, which I may never have done. If you use the quote tags, I'll get a notification that I've been quoted and will respond much faster.

    So, let's take this one point at a time...

    You don't believe that humans have arisen from evolution???
    No, I don't. There is NO evidence that it is even possible, never mind that it actually occurred. Using evolution as a basis for a belief in a hyper-evolved god is a false religion on top of a false religion.

    Humans are a prime example of "progressive evolution".
    Saying it doesn't make it so.

    The idea is that intelligence can be a mechanism for enhanced survival.
    The existence of intelligence is a prime example of why evolution cannot have happened. The effect cannot be greater than that which caused it.

    Quote Originally Posted by SaintAndrew View Post
    I see your argument which suggests it unlikely that progressive evolution could account for a God, because of the extreme rarity of key events from elementary random matter -> abiogenesis, to DNA, to a maximized evolution species or individual (God) etc.
    I does not merely suggest it, it proves it. I don't think that you appreciate the magnitude of just how "unlikely" the production of even a single protein is, never mind the complex biological machines that exist in the thousands in even the most "primitive" of life forms. Random processes could NEVER produce even one single, do nothing but sit there, protein molecule. Not in billions of trillions of years.

    However I disagree with your statement which I have bolded and underlined "No, God could not have evolved any more than we could have, not in a million billion trillion years and not in an eternity either
    ."
    Whether you disagree with it or not is only a function of whether you allow sound reason to persuade your mind. The numbers do not lie. It cannot happen - period.

    Even the most extreme odds against an event, even 10 to the (fill in the blank, largest number you can write)power, is infinitely small against infinite time.
    No no no. This shows a simple misunderstand of how reality works. Sure infinity is bigger than any number but that's because infinity is not a number, its an idea. Real work (i.e. scientific work in particular) cannot be done with infinity. In fact, when you run into an infinity while doing real science, its an indication that you've made an error or that there is something which you don't understand.

    Further, think through your suggested idea that anything can happen if given an eternity (actually the tacit implication is that everything WILL happen if given an eternity). Why would such a thing be true?
    If had an whole ocean of amino acids in a perfect environment, after 500,000,000,000 (500 Billion) years of time, have the odds improved that an change of amino acids will self assemble into a single viable protein? NO!
    How about after 500 trillion years, is it any more likely at that point? NO!
    The likelihood of such an effect occurring does not change with the passage of time!
    Why is that? You might ask?
    Well, its because the self-assembly of amino acids is not a function of time. Amino acids have no way of telling the time or experiencing the passage of time and don't care whether its been a long time or not. The likelihood of such an event happening is precisely the same at day one trillion as it was on day 1 or at any point inbetween.

    And here's the kicker - that's just for the formation of a single protein molecule! This doesn't even touch the actual complexity that would really need to be dealt with because the only way anyone have ever known a protein to be built is for it to be built by other proteins which by some means receive instructions on how to do so which are encoded in - you guested it - other proteins! You've got the most complex chicken and the egg dilemma conceivable! Which protein came first? The proteins (plural) involved in actually building proteins or the proteins the read the intructions on how to build proteins or the proteins in which the instructions are encoded?

    AND THAT'S JUST PROTEINS!!!!

    There are thousands of other mind bendingly complex biological systems that have nothing to do with proteins (at least not directly) that are also impossible for evolution to produce no matter how much time its given to produce them and all of that has to do with us lowly biological creatures here on this single planet. You propose to send the complexities to a truly transcendent level by positing the notion that a god could have evolved.

    Hopefully, you're beginning to see that it's just nuts.


    Lastly, using evolution to explain the existence of God is a self-defeating proposition anyway. Where the need for evolution to explain anything if God exists? In other words, if God exists, then why believe we (or anything else) evolved? And if biological evolution is rejected then on what basis would you be able to suggest that God evolved?

    See the problem?


    Clete

    (No time fore editing! Sorry for typos!)

    "The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders

  11. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Clete For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (February 14th, 2019),Right Divider (February 22nd, 2019),Tambora (February 22nd, 2019)

  12. #24
    TOL Legend genuineoriginal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    On a sea of glass mixed with fire in front of a throne.
    Posts
    10,284
    Thanks
    1,794
    Thanked 1,769 Times in 1,296 Posts

    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    523679
    Quote Originally Posted by SabathMoon View Post
    As gamma comes close to one, E=MC^2 becomes a close approximation. You should look up gamma. A gamma of one is the energy of matter at rest.
    You are aware that c in the expression is a mathematical constant that has nothing to do with the actual speed of light and doesn't limit the speed that matter can travel, right?
    Learn to read what is written.

    _____
    The people who are supposed to be experts and who claim to understand the science are precisely the people who are blind to the evidence.
    ~ Dr Freeman Dyson

  13. #25
    Silver Member Clete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Seated in the heavenly places at God's right hand, in Him!
    Posts
    9,376
    Thanks
    590
    Thanked 6,447 Times in 3,414 Posts

    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147767
    Quote Originally Posted by genuineoriginal View Post
    You are aware that c in the expression is a mathematical constant that has nothing to do with the actual speed of light and doesn't limit the speed that matter can travel, right?
    What?

    In Einstein's equations (and most other scientific equations) c is nothing else other than the speed of light. In Einstein's famous equation, E is energy, m is mass and c is the speed of light. The units can vary depending on the application but typically the speed of light, c, is measured in meters per second, or m/s; mass, m, is measured in kilograms, or kg and energy, E, is in joules, or J.

    There's no way you didn't already know all of that and so I'm curious to know what your point is.

    "The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders

  14. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Clete For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (February 20th, 2019),Tambora (February 22nd, 2019)

  15. #26
    TOL Legend genuineoriginal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    On a sea of glass mixed with fire in front of a throne.
    Posts
    10,284
    Thanks
    1,794
    Thanked 1,769 Times in 1,296 Posts

    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    523679
    Quote Originally Posted by Clete View Post
    What?

    In Einstein's equations (and most other scientific equations) c is nothing else other than the speed of light. In Einstein's famous equation, E is energy, m is mass and c is the speed of light. The units can vary depending on the application but typically the speed of light, c, is measured in meters per second, or m/s; mass, m, is measured in kilograms, or kg and energy, E, is in joules, or J.

    There's no way you didn't already know all of that and so I'm curious to know what your point is.
    I know the teaching that c is the speed of light and that no matter can travel faster than the speed of light.
    However, that is a false teaching.
    c is merely a mathematical constant that is related to the relationship between mass and energy, but how fast light travels in a vacuum has nothing to do with that relationship.
    Matter can travel faster than the speed of light.
    Learn to read what is written.

    _____
    The people who are supposed to be experts and who claim to understand the science are precisely the people who are blind to the evidence.
    ~ Dr Freeman Dyson

  16. #27
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    US of A
    Posts
    5,676
    Thanks
    512
    Thanked 761 Times in 625 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Aimiel View Post
    I don't believe that anything at all existed (physically) before God spoke, saying: "Let there be light..."

    Were I God, I might have said, "Wow! It sure is dark." ... and I'd probably still be all alone in the dark, without any form and simply: VOID.
    There was no "material" or "physical" realm before God's utterance.

  17. #28
    Silver Member Clete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Seated in the heavenly places at God's right hand, in Him!
    Posts
    9,376
    Thanks
    590
    Thanked 6,447 Times in 3,414 Posts

    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147767
    Quote Originally Posted by genuineoriginal View Post
    I know the teaching that c is the speed of light and that no matter can travel faster than the speed of light.
    However, that is a false teaching.
    c is merely a mathematical constant that is related to the relationship between mass and energy, but how fast light travels in a vacuum has nothing to do with that relationship.
    Matter can travel faster than the speed of light.
    No, it cannot.

    I don't know where you're getting this from but you just flatly wrong about this.

    c is not "merely a mathematical constant". It is not derived from other mathematical ideas (although it can be and has been) nor is it a number that someone needed to "plug in" in order to make their equations work as Einstein did with his cosmological constant, which he later proclaimed as his greatest scientific blunder. The speed of light has been known for quite a long period of time and over the years has been directly measured many thousands of times in a whole variety of ways.

    We not only know that matter and energy cannot travel faster than light, we know why. I won't get into those details here. That's a topic for another thread but just trust me, you are not correct on this point. Modern cosmology, including Einstein's theory, has a great many issues but the speed of light and the veracity of E=mc^2 is not one of them. I recommend that you not make this claim any longer until you've looked into it much more thoroughly.

    On the other hand, if you think you can support such a claim, I invite you to start a thread on the topic and make the argument. I promise to read it.

    Clete





    http://joshworth.com/dev/pixelspace/...larsystem.html (Click the little c icon in the lower right corner of the screen on this website to see how fast (slow) the speed of light really is.)
    Last edited by Clete; February 14th, 2019 at 04:58 PM.

    "The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders

  18. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Clete For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (February 20th, 2019),SabathMoon (February 14th, 2019)

  19. #29
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    24,101
    Thanks
    3,445
    Thanked 8,628 Times in 6,400 Posts

    Mentioned
    38 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    2147768
    since stripe is using the "approximately equal" symbol in his sig line, i'll be a pedant as well and point out that "c" is the speed of light in a vacuum

  20. The Following User Says Thank You to ok doser For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (February 20th, 2019)

  21. #30
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    964
    Thanks
    79
    Thanked 68 Times in 59 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by genuineoriginal View Post
    I know the teaching that c is the speed of light and that no matter can travel faster than the speed of light.
    However, that is a false teaching.
    c is merely a mathematical constant that is related to the relationship between mass and energy, but how fast light travels in a vacuum has nothing to do with that relationship.
    Matter can travel faster than the speed of light.
    Wrong! It limits the speed of matter, and some think light doesn't travel but just is. Light can't "travel" through a solid object the way that sound can either.
    Last edited by SabathMoon; February 14th, 2019 at 06:54 PM.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us