Scripture just means the sacred texts of a religion.
"You believe that nothing became something ,billions of years ago . How,? "
Studying the Bible as a way to come to feel ‘in tune’ with peace rather just mentally analyzing it so as to be right or wrong etc seems more in line with its purpose in my eyes. But seemingly many Christians and non Christians alike would disagree - might even tell you that an experiential peace is of little or no value.
I enjoy debating things around religion because I find the mythology of religions very interesting despite not believing they are true, and I enjoy researching the history of where the myths of religions originally came from and spread to.
I enjoy debating things around religion because I find the mythology of religions very interesting despite not believing they are true, and I enjoy researching the history of where the myths of religions originally came from and spread to.
But I have to say that you don’t understand what atheism is at all. Atheism is simply not believing in gods or the myths of religions. That’s it. Atheism is not about anything else. Atheism is not a belief system, it’s certainly not a religion, it is not about believing in the Big Bang or even believing in science of any kind especially if the atheist has never studied the science before. To be an atheist you do not have to be able to explain anything to do with the universe or life on Earth because atheism is simply not believing in gods or the myths of religion. An atheist may not even understand the science around the universe so how can that be part of atheism?
Now for those who have studied the science, they actually don’t theorise that the universe popped into being uncaused. And any work done around this has to be reviewed and proven with mathematics in order to be recognised as a theory.
The Equation of the Universe (According to the Theory of Relation)
Discover a groundbreaking equation connecting matter, space, and time. Explore the correlation between velocity, time, distance, matter, and energy. Uncover the unified process of electro-gravitation. Integrate cosmological time into a coherent equation. Interpret dark energy and explore the...www.scirp.org
This is far more reliable than just saying “god(s) did it”. And, again, if you believe that nothing doesn’t come from nothing, where did god(s) come from?
You are correct when you say “the universe does not have an eternal past” because before the Big Bang, time did not exist so the notion of a “past” does not exist.
I’ve already twice explained to you that life does not come from life when there is no life to start with. For the third time now; before there was life on Earth it was the flow of excess charged particles called protons that came from vents pumping out heated alkaline fresh water into cooler more acidic salt sea water that created a chemical reaction and energy that formed molecules that are called cells, and life began.
Biogenesis is the synthesis of substances by living organisms to be able to multiply or reproduce and create new living organisms. However, for biogenesis to have been able to happen, abiogenesis had to have occurred for first life to come about. Like you say, nothing doesn’t come from nothing, there is evidence and mathematical equations to show how abiogenesis created life.
Please, then, show me the evidence and mathematical equation for god(s). And the evidence and mathematical equation for how these god(s) created life. If you can’t, then I’m afraid it is religion that fails in being believable.
We discovered DNA in 1869 and have been studying DNA since around the late 1940s. DNA proves that evolution is factual:
DNA shows we do not need a fossil record to prove anything because it is all there in our genes.
And like I recently said with regards to human evolution from earlier species of Homo and Australopithecines, palaeontologists have found that with each increase of human brain size and a new human specifies there were sudden catastrophically huge climate changes that occurred at the same time. In reaction to the need to work out how to survive the new conditions, human genes mutated to cause an increase in brain size and intelligence. And again this is proven in the same way that video shows, in our genes. So even when we have the fossil record, we don’t even need it.
I enjoy debating things around religion because I find the mythology of religions very interesting despite not believing they are true, and I enjoy researching the history of where the myths of religions originally came from and spread to.
But I have to say that you don’t understand what atheism is at all. Atheism is simply not believing in gods or the myths of religions. That’s it. Atheism is not about anything else. Atheism is not a belief system, it’s certainly not a religion, it is not about believing in the Big Bang or even believing in science of any kind especially if the atheist has never studied the science before. To be an atheist you do not have to be able to explain anything to do with the universe or life on Earth because atheism is simply not believing in gods or the myths of religion. An atheist may not even understand the science around the universe so how can that be part of atheism?
Now for those who have studied the science, they actually don’t theorise that the universe popped into being uncaused. And any work done around this has to be reviewed and proven with mathematics in order to be recognised as a theory.
The Equation of the Universe (According to the Theory of Relation)
Discover a groundbreaking equation connecting matter, space, and time. Explore the correlation between velocity, time, distance, matter, and energy. Uncover the unified process of electro-gravitation. Integrate cosmological time into a coherent equation. Interpret dark energy and explore the...
This is far more reliable than just saying “god(s) did it”. And, again, if you believe that nothing doesn’t come from nothing, where did god(s) come from?
You are correct when you say “the universe does not have an eternal past” because before the Big Bang, time did not exist so the notion of a “past” does not exist.
I’ve already twice explained to you how life first came about. For the third time now; before there was life on Earth it was the flow of excess charged particles called protons that came from vents pumping out heated alkaline fresh water into cooler more acidic salt sea water that created a chemical reaction and energy that formed molecules that are called cells, and life began.
Biogenesis is the synthesis of substances by living organisms to be able to multiply or reproduce and create new living organisms. However, for biogenesis to have been able to happen, abiogenesis had to have occurred for first life to come about. Like you say, nothing doesn’t come from nothing, there is evidence and mathematical equations to show how abiogenesis created life.
Please, then, show me the evidence and mathematical equation for god(s). And the evidence and mathematical equation for how these god(s) created life. If you can’t, then I’m afraid it is religion that fails in being believable.
We discovered DNA in 1869 and have been studying DNA since around the late 1940s. DNA proves that evolution is factual:
DNA shows we do not need a fossil record to prove anything because it is all there in our genes.
And like I recently said with regards to human evolution from earlier species of Homo and Australopithecines, palaeontologists have found that with each increase of human brain size and a new human species there were sudden catastrophically huge climate changes that occurred at the same time. In reaction to the need to work out how to survive the new conditions, human genes mutated to cause an increase in brain size and intelligence (that is not to say that one day I was a homoheidelbergensis and the next day I woke up and I was a homosapiens, it takes much longer than that!). And again this is proven in the same way that video shows, in our genes. So even when we have the fossil record, we don’t even need it because our DNA proves it and it’s corroborated with the evidence of climate changes in the geological record as well as corroboration from the astronomical record which show changes in the Earth’s path around the Sun at the same time as these climate changes and evolutionary changes in humans occurred.
For me, the mechanical aspect of it is merely the foundation. Everything else arises from the foundation and the variety of life can be as wide reaching as it can push itself, far wider than a human brain’s creativity could ever imagine and as beautiful as life can be without even thinking about the mechanical aspect.Re what you wrote re mathematics, here’s something from David Bohm that may question whether there is another way. And I might question whether ,if humanity decides that a mechanistic way of looking at life is the ultimate way of truth, then will it ever really get to experience life as something other than being a machine?
“To plumb the implicate order, Bohm said, physicists might need to jettison basic assumptions about nature. During the Enlightenment, thinkers such as Newton and Descartes replaced the ancients’ organic concept of order with a mechanistic view. Even after the advent of relativity and quantum mechanics, “the basic idea is still the same,” Bohm told me, "a mechanical order described by coordinates.”
Bohm hoped scientists would eventually move beyond mechanistic and even mathematical paradigms. “We have an assumption now that’s getting stronger and stronger that mathematics is the only way to deal with reality,” Bohm said. “Because it’s worked so well for a while, we’ve assumed that it has to be that way.”
Someday, science and art will merge, Bohm predicted. “This division of art and science is temporary,” he observed. “It didn't exist in the past, and there’s no reason why it should go on in the future.” Just as art consists not simply of works of art but of an “attitude, the artistic spirit,” so does science consist not in the accumulation of knowledge but in the creation of fresh modes of perception. “The ability to perceive or think differently is more important than the knowledge gained,” Bohm explained.”
David Bohm, Quantum Mechanics and Enlightenment
The visionary physicist, whose ideas remain influential, sought spiritual as well as scientific illuminationblogs.scientificamerican.com
I enjoy debating things around religion because I find the mythology of religions very interesting despite not believing they are true, and I enjoy researching the history of where the myths of religions originally came from and spread to.
But I have to say that you don’t understand what atheism is at all. Atheism is simply not believing in gods or the myths of religions. That’s it. Atheism is not about anything else. Atheism is not a belief system, it’s certainly not a religion, it is not about believing in the Big Bang or even believing in science of any kind especially if the atheist has never studied the science before. To be an atheist you do not have to be able to explain anything to do with the universe or life on Earth because atheism is simply not believing in gods or the myths of religion. An atheist may not even understand the science around the universe so how can that be part of atheism?
Now for those who have studied the science, they actually don’t theorise that the universe popped into being uncaused. And any work done around this has to be reviewed and proven with mathematics in order to be recognised as a theory.
The Equation of the Universe (According to the Theory of Relation)
Discover a groundbreaking equation connecting matter, space, and time. Explore the correlation between velocity, time, distance, matter, and energy. Uncover the unified process of electro-gravitation. Integrate cosmological time into a coherent equation. Interpret dark energy and explore the...
This is far more reliable than just saying “god(s) did it”. And, again, if you believe that nothing doesn’t come from nothing, where did god(s) come from?
You are correct when you say “the universe does not have an eternal past” because before the Big Bang, time did not exist so the notion of a “past” does not exist.
I’ve already twice explained to you how life first came about. For the third time now; before there was life on Earth it was the flow of excess charged particles called protons that came from vents pumping out heated alkaline fresh water into cooler more acidic salt sea water that created a chemical reaction and energy that formed molecules that are called cells, and life began.
Biogenesis is the synthesis of substances by living organisms to be able to multiply or reproduce and create new living organisms. However, for biogenesis to have been able to happen, abiogenesis had to have occurred for first life to come about. Like you say, nothing doesn’t come from nothing, there is evidence and mathematical equations to show how abiogenesis created life.
Please, then, show me the evidence and mathematical equation for god(s). And the evidence and mathematical equation for how these god(s) created life. If you can’t, then I’m afraid it is religion that fails in being believable.
We discovered DNA in 1869 and have been studying DNA since around the late 1940s. DNA proves that evolution is factual:
DNA shows we do not need a fossil record to prove anything because it is all there in our genes.
And like I recently said with regards to human evolution from earlier species of Homo and Australopithecines, palaeontologists have found that with each increase of human brain size and a new human species there were sudden catastrophically huge climate changes that occurred at the same time. In reaction to the need to work out how to survive the new conditions, human genes mutated to cause an increase in brain size and intelligence (that is not to say that one day I was a homoheidelbergensis and the next day I woke up and I was a homosapiens, it takes much longer than that!). And again this is proven in the same way that video shows, in our genes. So even when we have the fossil record, we don’t even need it because our DNA proves it and it’s corroborated with the evidence of climate changes in the geological record as well as corroboration from the astronomical record which show changes in the Earth’s path around the Sun at the same time as these climate changes and evolutionary changes in humans occurred.
“Jesus” hasn’t proven anything. There’s no relaible proof the bloke ever existed.
There’s isn’t one single piece of reliable evidence for his existence never mind any of his story. Some people might say “why does that matter?” But it does because to have billions of people follow his a religion for 1,800 years (or whenever it was that Christianity was founded) and to still be running with it now to the extent it is, surely requires some substance?
This is simply untrue. Doesn’t mean he’s the messiah or the son of God but you’d be in a very lonely place as a scholar if you held this view.
Agree on the connected thing. Would probably disagree on whether it is spiritual or not, and whether the mathematical is more the foundation or more along the lines of organisational patterns of that which connects. Each to their own. And I hope this doesn’t offend any but I could almost say that I experience life more as a motivated or depressed ’human machine’ or more as an inspired ‘human being.’ Even the ‘best’ of what I could achieve with the former- money, fortune, fame or whatever- would somehow be lacking in relation to, eg, a simple walk through a forest as an inspired human being. But it feels like it comes down to the presence or absence of connection, even if different words, ideas and perception are used, even if it is arrived at through different means. Cheers
You’ve got the world’s most respected atheist scholar saying the opposite to you and you say “humour me”?
Believing nothing created everything is your fairytale. Believing that matter became men over billions of yearsis an embarrassment to science and good reasoning .
When you seemingly believe nothing created matter , that matter somehow came alive and changed into plants, animals and people over billions of years then your beliefs would mean nothing can become anything. That's how you believe you got here. If you can make those irrational jumps then there's not much point in discussing Christ's historicity. What you're doing is relying on His immaterial eternal laws of logic to make rational and coherent statements. The Logos( translated as logic) Himself is who you rely on to make coherent statements yet you deny His existence. So your worldview is a total contradiction ,inconsistent and irrational.
Believing that something can come from nothing uncaused is irrational. Atheism is an irrational worldview. Nothing becomes everything uncaused, on that worldview . That is the atheist position. It is as irrational as it is embarrassing.
You use words to make statements. Words are in accordance with laws of logic. These laws are immaterial, eternal abstract objects. One couldn't think ,reason, know anything without them. They are the basis of science ( knowledge) , mathematics , objectivity, truth, uniformity in nature. They are universal laws, not man made. They apply to everyone whether atheist or theist. They can't be changed. They're invariant and are not simply the result of electro chemical processes in the brain. What happens inside your brain cannot be regarded as a law, for it does not necessarily correspond to what happens in another person’s brain. In other words, if these laws were simply in your brain, we could not argue that logical contradictions cannot occur in a distant galaxy, distinct from conscious observers. There would be arbitrariness without laws of logic. These are universal laws that everyone is subject to, including the materialist atheist. The atheist relies on immaterial eternal laws of logic which reflect God's nature. Christ Jesus is the Logos. The basis for rationality.
Intelligent conversation must presuppose a logical basis for rational discourse. Logic is reflected in God's nature.