The Bible is True

I never bought the whole idea that we were created so we could be later judged by our creator.

Regards longevity. Larger bodies, given the limited speed of molecular interactions and cell division, as well as reasonable time for nutrient and energy acquisition, demand a longer lifespan. Remember larger organisms are not made of massively larger cells, but more cells, and cells take time to divide, and make more cells. It is part of the reason why longer lifespans evolved at all.

originally posted by: coomba98
a reply to: Murgatroid

So nothing exploded,created everything, and that everything became self replicatingbit which became dinosaurs...

Thanks for reminding me WHY I quit taking this 'science' seriously...

Name a reputable scientist or peer review paper saying everything came from nothing?

Like seriously!!! However, on the otherside...

Show me a nothing we have detected to determine that something can, or cannot, come from nothing?

Yeezus Crimps mi lord.

Thanks for reminding me WHY I quit religion.

Coomba98

I think Lawrence Krauss, does defend a universe from nothing. But he says we've misdefined nothingness, and true nothingness is actually something.

a reply to: Xenogears

Xenogears,

He does not say we have misdefine 'nothing', just that what we Joe/Jane Public call nothing is different to what physicists call 'nothing'.

The Bible nothing is a true nothing, an empty void. aka 8:00 in the video. But 8:00+ is actual physics. An empty void with a low level of energy. aka.... not a nothing Theists say something came from.

aka.... aka.... [quote] So nothing exploded,created everything, [/quote]

The only people who misdefine nothingness are Theists, not scientists or logical reasonable people.

Here is a good example of a Theist arguing against the nothing fallacy.



Get some popcorn out and watch it all. however the nothing from something fallacy starts 9:40.

Have fun.

Coomba98

Many of those same scientists who said God didn't exist, life was over after we die on Earth, sang a different tune, when they neared death, themselves.

Everyone sees mortality more clearly, near death -that, in truth, it is really not the end.

When someone has a fatal illness, how he treated others will be revealed to him. A cruel man will be alone, in pain. A caring, man will have others who love him, and show love, and care, as he showed others, during his own life.


That's what our life was created for, I believe.

A rich, greedy man, will have greedy people at his deathbed, who don't love him at all, they want only his money. As he did, in his own greedy life.

a reply to: coomba98

Dillahunty is great. It's funny because similar arguments happen right on this site. "Nothing" is undefinable, and it is impossible to make any kind of case that "nothing" ever existed at any point. It's fallacious from the second it is used and it's a primary argument for the existence of god, who ironically just exists out of nowhere.

a reply to: Barcs

I agree, his also a good educator on critical thinking and evaluation of the evidence. His def taught me a thing or ten.

Coomba98

Here's what reasonable people think when talking to unreasonable people.
(Love paster george, his called in a few times)



Coomba98

originally posted by: coomba98
a reply to: Xenogears

Xenogears,

He does not say we have misdefine 'nothing', just that what we Joe/Jane Public call nothing is different to what physicists call 'nothing'.

The Bible nothing is a true nothing, an empty void. aka 8:00 in the video. But 8:00+ is actual physics. An empty void with a low level of energy. aka.... not a nothing Theists say something came from.

aka.... aka.... [quote] So nothing exploded,created everything, [/quote]

The only people who misdefine nothingness are Theists, not scientists or logical reasonable people.

Here is a good example of a Theist arguing against the nothing fallacy.

Get some popcorn out and watch it all. however the nothing from something fallacy starts 9:40.

Have fun.

Coomba98

I define nothing as the absense of something, of all things. Aka ZERO. But mathematically the infinite emerges merely from an equation to zero.


Both Pi and e transcendental numbers. Numbers such as PI are said may contain all possible integer sequences within its infinite sequence, all possible binary patterns, all possible truths, all possible states of all possible simulation, all possible patterns corresponding to the state of all possible minds. If that is true, all movies, all songs, all books, all universes in a simulated form would exist within it. Yet somehow this emerges in an equation = to zero. To the symbolic representation of absolute nothing.

a reply to: Toolman18

So believing in God and also believing that humans evolved from "lesser" life forms is mutually exclusive?

Did God plant evidence in the fossil record to fool us and test our faith?

a reply to: Xenogears

I think Lawrence Krauss, does defend a universe from nothing. But he says we've misdefined nothingness, and true nothingness is actually something.

That's exactly what I said.

I define nothing as the absense of something...

Until we have a true real example of your nothing, any claim you make about said nothing is a nonsensical useless claim.

All we can work off is what we have experienced, and your nothing does not come into the picture.

Coomba98

originally posted by: coomba98
a reply to: Xenogears

I define nothing as the absense of something...

Until we have a true real example of your nothing, any claim you make about said nothing is a nonsensical useless claim.

All we can work off is what we have experienced, and your nothing does not come into the picture.

Coomba98

Mathematically an equation to zero can have anything and everything on the other side so long as the values cancel out to zero. It is believed the universe itself, all that is cancels out to zero, and some say it may even recollapse in on itself given time.

How much energy does the universe have?
Thus, "the gravitational field has negative energy. In the case of a universe that is approximately uniform in space, one can show that this negative gravitational energy exactly cancels the positive energy represented by the matter. So the total energy of the universe is zero."-livescience

zero is the absence of something. Equations such as Euler's identity, show that an infinite amount of information, the infinite sequences of pi and e, are related to the number 1 and can be made equal to zero, the absence of something, of all things.

a reply to: Xenogears

Xenogears,

If your talking about the nothing Lawrence Krauss talks about, aka a something, then I agree.

If your talking about the nothing theists talk about then I disagree.

Coomba98

a reply to: pheonix358

Not exactly a fairy tale when locations in the Bible have been found and confirmed as real.

One needs to be specific when trying to disprove.

originally posted by: ADVISOR
a reply to: pheonix358

Not exactly a fairy tale when locations in the Bible have been found and confirmed as real.

One needs to be specific when trying to disprove.

So all of the fiction books with place names are real?

The Nancy Drew Mysteries are true?

An alien space ship over the White House is real because they knew the name of the house.

And all of this was written over a thousand years ago?

WHat the heck are you saying?

P

originally posted by: coomba98
a reply to: Xenogears

Xenogears,

If your talking about the nothing Lawrence Krauss talks about, aka a something, then I agree.

If your talking about the nothing theists talk about then I disagree.

Coomba98

IF you believe in digital physics, then the mere existence of binary numbers, or numbers is enough to suffice as basis for existence. Know that if you're connected to a computer, digital information can produce all your conscious sensations. Unless the brain is miraculously turning digital information into nondigital information, then it too stands to reason even consciousness could arise from digital representation alone. And consciousness is the most miraculous phenomena in the entire universe, if it can arise from digital representation than it is likely the rest of the universe can too.

As for true nothing of the theist kind, zero is the symbol that stands for zero, for nothing, for absence of anything. Mathematically equations such as Euler's identity show that infinite information can be equal to zero, to absolutely nothing. Numerical information, or information of any kind is all that is needed for existence if you take it the nature of the universe is information, and digital representation suffices.

I think physicist Max Tegmark takes it the universe itself could be a mathematical structure, and all mathematical structures may exist within the pattern of numbers such as pi.

A famous thorny issue in philosophy is the so-called infinite regress problem. For example, if we say that the properties of a diamond can be explained by the properties and arrangements of its carbon atoms, that the properties of a carbon atom can be explained by the properties and arrangements of its protons, neutrons and electrons, that the properties of a proton can be explained by the properties and arrangements of its quarks, and so on, then it seems that we’re doomed to go on forever trying to explain the properties of the constituent parts. The Mathematical Universe Hypothesis offers a radical solution to this problem: at the bottom level, reality is a mathematical structure, so its parts have no intrinsic properties at all!
(…) the bottom line is that if you believe in an external reality independent of humans, then you must also believe that our physical reality is a mathematical structure. Nothing else has a baggage-free description. In other words, we all live in a gigantic mathematical object—one that’s more elaborate than a dodecahedron, and probably also more complex than objects with intimidating names such as Calabi-Yau manifolds, tensor bundles and Hilbert spaces, which appear in today’s most advanced physics theories. Everything in our world is purely mathematical—including you.-wikiquote

a reply to: Xenogears

Not getting into the conciousness psuedo-science.

This sounds like my little brothers belief that everything that exists, both exists and at the same time and does not exist?

Coomba98

originally posted by: coomba98
a reply to: Xenogears

Not getting into the conciousness psuedo-science.

This sounds like my little brothers belief that everything that exists, both exists and at the same time and does not exist?

Coomba98

You may call it pseudoscience, ignorantly. But what do you think future brain computer interfaces are going to record in? You think digital recording of information will not suffice for conscious playback, and conscious thought exchange between people?

There is no reason to suppose that accurate enough recordings of the brain activity, in a digital format, will not recreate the same sensation, the same qualia if replayed again in the brain.

As for not existing, truth is immaterial, it need not be written down to exist, it is eternal, atemporal, it never began being true and never ceases being true. Things like the integers are elements of truth. Truth alone suffices as basis for all existence.