Intelligent first cause: why it must exist

Originally posted by HarryTZ
Also, your pointing out my so-called 'fallacies' was not an useful addition to the argument, at all. It was completely irrelevant.

So, pointing out the logical fallacies in your logic based theory were irrelevant? How so?

It seems everyone's so busy trying to tell me why I'm wrong, when they have yet to put forth any material that suggests that they're right. If that's how this whole debate thing works, I'm disappointed.

reply to post by MichaelPMaccabee


When there are pages and pages and pages of others making the exact same point... yea, it's irrelevant.

reply to post by HarryTZ

Is someone going to make an useful contribution or are we just going to continue to tell Harry how 'illogical' he is?

Harry, no offense meant, but if you're going to claim that your argument is wholly logical and someone points out several logical fallacies in your argument... that is the very definition of "making a useful contribution". Please note that engaging in logical fallacies doesn't mean you're incorrect when it comes to matters of science, it just means that you're not correct for the reasons you're claiming; science is more about making a rationalization (aka a hypothesis) based on observations and then testing it. However, when engaging in a philosophical argument, which is what I assumed you're doing since you posted this in the P&M forum, logic is generally all you have to stand on. If your foundation is faulty, you'll find that you're not standing for long.

reply to post by iterationzero


Honestly, whether or not someone sees my arguments as logical or not is all down to personal perception. Obviously, some agreed with my logic. In fact, if people were to read some of my posts past the first page, there was a lot more logic. I think personal judgments were clouding peoples perception and not allowing them to see the *obviously* logical points I have made throughout this thread. But again, if someone really just doesn't want to see my logic, that's their own problem, and not mine.

reply to post by HarryTZ

Honestly, whether or not someone sees my arguments as logical or not is all down to personal perception. Obviously, some agreed with my logic. In fact, if people were to read some of my posts past the first page, there was a lot more logic. I think personal judgments were clouding peoples perception and not allowing them to see the *obviously* logical points I have made throughout this thread. But again, if someone really just doesn't want to see my logic, that's their own problem, and not mine.

But if you're going to be objective about it, you should also perceive the following may be true: that the people who agreed with your logic may also be letting personal judgements cloud their perception and allowing them to overlook the logical fallacies you have engaged in throughout this thread. It would be one thing if you were addressing the logical fallacies that have been pointed out, but instead of acknowledging them and showing why they are not applicable to your argument. Instead, you're simply hand waving them away and saying, "Nuh uh!"

reply to post by iterationzero


I am sure that is also the case.

Also, and again, if you were to read through this thread, you would see that I have addressed peoples claims of fallacy.

Originally posted by HarryTZ
reply to post by NewAgeMan

 

It makes sense to me, but good luck with these other folks.

So you're saying that you understand the implications both from a first/last cause and in terms of the entire cosmological framework? You really get it or "grok" it..? It's rather um discombobulating, isn't it? How on earth and in haven did he (it) KNOW, in advance, from the beginning, and if it IS also an allegory, holy smokes, the implications of that for the human being as child of God are utterly ...gobsmaking, so forgive me for being skeptical that you REALLY get it, like in terms of it's most farthest reaching implications and significance.

reply to post by NewAgeMan


It really isn't that magnificent, not for a God at least

But ya, from a human's point of view, who can only see just an infinitesimal slice of time... it's pretty damn amazing.

Originally posted by HarryTZ
reply to post by MichaelPMaccabee

 

When there are pages and pages and pages of others making the exact same point... yea, it's irrelevant.

If it is irrelevant, isn't it disingenuous to ask me to do it again, simply to dismiss it after I have done so?

reply to post by MichaelPMaccabee


Maybe that's why I did it

Originally posted by HarryTZ
reply to post by MichaelPMaccabee

 

Maybe that's why I did it

Is it why you did it? Are you merely baiting people to respond to your threads so that you can ridicule them when they are able to disprove your illogical comments?

Because you see it's either meaningful and of the farthest reaching implications and significance, or meaningless and absurd, but, by virtue of it's existence, including our own, it cannot be dismissed as without purpose or value, and thus, by virtue of our own inclusion, such a sign means everything, and may indeed be interpreted as intended.. as intended... whoa! And neither can the "data" be rejected as meaningless based on the strong anthropic principal, because the corollary to that is, that we would not be here to even have the opportunity to see and recognize it if it wasn't the way it is, and that's what makes it REALLY "trippy" imho, because our observation closes the circle, either in ignorance, even willful ignorance, or in recognition (re cognition) thus confounding the strong anthropic principal. It's a re-frame therefore in terms of our place in the creation as intended by a loving and very gracious God who it pleased immeasurably to share his eternal kingdom of light, life and love with all his children including last but not least where perhaps it may be said that the last are first and the first, last - the human being, right here, right now in the form and manifestation of you and me.

It testifies to us, that indeed we are made in the image of God and were created with intent and by design to perfectly reflect the Godhead, but we fall short, which is why I am convinced that Jesus read this sign as testimony to himself and his own relationship to the Godhead, but by him and his doing, we too are given to see it and recognize it as a statement and allegory offered by none other than God himself towards his son with whom he seeks to be in intimate relationship where God is our loving father (first father of creation) and we his sons and daughters (begotten), with our inheritance the whole of it all, but done and presented in such a way that it is made clear to us, without question, that it was an inheritance in time and space prepared from before the foundation of the world (cosmos).

reply to post by NewAgeMan


'Twas beautiful, my good sir. 'Twas beautiful.

reply to post by HarryTZ

And if that weren't enough, to make it more interesting still, it has become evident that Jesus employed the lunar eclipse on Passover on April 3rd, 33AD by our calendar to complete his "Great Work", as if working to a schedule known by him and presumably John the Baptist, well in advance. And it would have been the perfect reverse-sting/hoodwink too because the moon rose over the horizon, as seen from Jerusalem, mid-afternoon, already entering into the eclipse phase, with Jesus already on the cross, which would have confounded his enemies to realize at that particular juncture, just who was in control of all the events, right down to the very HOUR, and who was not and who had therefore lost control (power).

"My hour has not yet come" said Jesus, on more than one occasion, slipping through the crowds who were setting out to stone him.

God how I love such a heroic triumph at the expense of everything that is absurd and ridiculous. Way to go Jesus!

So it's (moon-earth-sun relationship) like a divine signature X2!

Ref: Day of the Cross.
Ref 2: My earlier post (and please check the post it links to and follow the crumbs right down the rabbit hole mystery of mysteries).

Also see red moon in my avatar.


Best regards, and God bless of course (it's already happening anyway if you're there),

NAM

P.S. For prettyness, and as a point of contemplation, the red moon on my avatar is clipped from this lunar eclipse photo taken with the moon, appropriately, in the constellation of Leo. The starfield of the background is of course, Aquarius.


Now of course at this point some might object and exclaim - WTH does Jesus and the cross have to do with the moon and super-intelligent design from a first/last cause?!!!


To you I will say that the information has already passed you by and that therefore you are not given to understand it or comprehend it's significance, not because you are open minded and inquisitive, but solely based on your own bias and expectation, and that's funny too, how only some are even permitted to see it and recognize it for what it is, funny in a sad sort of way but still amuzing, to have the info so in your face and so graciously presented (by moi) and yet you cannot recognize it, nor even begin to fathom what it means or signifies. Poor you.

"There is a principal which serves as a bar against all information and proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a person in everlasting ignorance. That principal is called - contempt, prior to investigation."
~ Herbert Spencer, Scientist

Oh God it's so funny - but how did You KNOW?!!!!

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
reply to post by HarryTZ

 

And if that weren't enough, to make it more interesting still, it has become evident that Jesus employed the lunar eclipse on Passover on April 3rd, 33AD by our calendar to complete his "Great Work", as if working to a schedule known by him and presumably John the Baptist, well in advance. And it would have been the perfect reverse-sting/hoodwink too because the moon rose over the horizon, as seen from Jerusalem, mid-afternoon, already entering into the eclipse phase, with Jesus already on the cross, which would have confounded his enemies to realize at that particular juncture, just who was in control of all the events, right down to the very HOUR, and who was not and who had therefore lost control (power).

"My hour has not yet come" said Jesus, on more than one occasion, slipping through the crowds who were setting out to stone him.

God how I love such a heroic triumph at the expense of everything that is absurd and ridiculous. Way to go Jesus!

So it's (moon-earth-sun relationship) like a divine signature X2!

Ref:

How did "he" know..? Think it through, all the way through... for those who will, or I should say, who can. Because some cannot, they just can't let themselves or their worldview accommodate what amounts to a sort of superdeterministic, hyper-freedom and yet the recognition never comes by expectation anyway, so it's always a surprise to whoever gets it when they get it and it happens from time to time, that someone "groks" it, and shares it with others.

"Feed my sheep!" Three times he Jesus (post-crucifizion&tomb experience) repeated that to poor Peter when asked by Jesus "do you love me Peter?" with Peter saying each time in dismay and increasing agony and pleading "you KNOW I love you Lord!!"

Everything Jesus did was playful, even in his last request before departing for good (aside: I don't think he "beamed straight up" myself - see those hills yonder through the windows beyond the box and cross of a room in my Da Vinci avatar of The Last Supper, but don't tell anyone [shhhh]).

So in the spirit of Peter (disciple of Jesus) let me just say "behold Lord I am feeding them now" because it's never "too little too late".

It's imperative that we look into and consider and ponder over and wrestle with these things, especially these days because we all need a good kick in the head and a whole new outlook on the meaning of life and our true place in the grand scheme of things and that's not just my opinion, but a fact.


"You are the light of the world!"
~ Jesus, to me and you.

"And as my father first sent me, even so send i YOU."
~ Jesus, smiling as usual. (I'm certain of it and no I don't think I'm Jesus, just a spokesperson)

reply to post by HarryTZ


if " harry " wants to demonstrate logic - " harry " should coherently explain the origin of his alledged god - i already asked - but you ignored it - so the floor is yours

reply to post by HarryTZ


here is a question for you - are you prepared to admit that you could be wrong ?

reply to post by NewAgeMan


i will debate you , " harry " is now talking about himself in the 3rd person - which is not a good sign

so ok - your entire argument is that a ratio of 400:1 between 2 values cannot occur by chance ??

the problem with your claim is that it makes multiple unevidenced assumptions

1 - that " something " decided to do it

2 - that it was done for our.........................err our what ?? benefit , pleasure ???

eclipses just happen - they serve no actual emperical benefit to any terestrial organism - infact untill the age of science - humans panicked and did absurd things like kill people to " appease the gods "

further the ratio of partial to total eclipses underscores the fact that this is a natural phenonemon .

lastly - look at the track of an eclipse - it is only visible breifly from a tiny fraction of the earths surface

if it was " created / intended " - why not a relationship that would cause an eclipse of the sun visible from the entire sun facing hemisphere ?

for a " designed " event its poorly designed