The War on Religion

[KingNothing]

It's interesting that you bring that up. Why do you automatically assume that the universe must be billions of years old? Why would it be so unthinkable to you that I might believe that? For your information, no, I do not believe the universe is 4000 years old. It is slightly more than 6000 years old. I do not believe that the universe came into being with the introduction of Christ's teachings, which is what you are implying. The Old Testament times existed. The fact that you just automatically revert to the time of Christ shows that you know nothing about the Bible, and you also know nothing about creationism.

Dude, I specifically mentioned the Old Testament.

And believing the Earth is 6,000 years old when we repeatedly find older and older evidence of human existence is silly. It's absolutely silly.

You're one of those "Jesus rode a dinosaur" guys, aren't you?

 

[PaulConventionWV]

As a Christian, if you believe the reason for being is to follow the word of God, what reason for being did the people who lived prior the publication and wide(r)spread knowledge of the Old and New Testaments of the Bible have?

For those with no knowledge of God, life would have no inherent meaning by your definition.

I don't believe in God, but at the fork in the road I opted for existentialism instead of nihilism and chose to create my own meaning.

God created Adam and Eve with knowledge of Him and His laws. Simple.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

I understand what you're saying. You are not confusing me. Your logic is just not correct because you're prescribing a set of constraints to phenomena that don't necessarily require them. You're just making an assumption.

Pray tell, what assumption is that? I am not so sure you do understand because, if you did, you would have to agree in order to be logically consistent.

 

[KingNothing]

You are also quite arrogant. You assume that the things you know are the truth.

No, I don't. That's why I've read as much philosophy as I have. It's why I've read as much science as I have. I'm humble when it comes to admitting the limited scope of my knowledge in comparison to all that there is to know. I'm arrogant when I put what I know up against those who know exponentially less, though.

 

[KingNothing]

Pray tell, what assumption is that? I am not so sure you do understand because, if you did, you would have to agree in order to be logically consistent.

That the Universe had a beginning. It doesn't necessarily have to have a beginning, just as your God does not have a beginning. You prescribe that constraint on the Universe, but not God, which is baffling.

Everything about your argument is baffling, though, because you're no where close to as smart as you think you are.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

I don't think you understand anything about this, or how the idea of an infinite universe or multiverse works.

It's really interesting stuff. I encourage you to Google it, and read as much as your fingers will lead you to. Then check out Youtube. You can find lots of great videos there.

If the universe is expanding, then it is increasing in volume. If it is not infinite, then it will never be infinite because it would have to expand infinitely in order to be infinite. Let me know when it is finished expanding infinitely...

 

[KingNothing]

God created Adam and Eve with knowledge of Him and His laws. Simple.

Yes, he created Adam and Eve. A whole bunch on incest and daughter-banging later, here we are.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

Dude, I specifically mentioned the Old Testament.

And believing the Earth is 6,000 years old when we repeatedly find older and older evidence of human existence is silly. It's absolutely silly.

You're one of those "Jesus rode a dinosaur" guys, aren't you?

Uh, no. Now you're just being insulting. We do not find "older and older evidence." That is the point. There is no evidence that the universe is older than that. There is plenty of solid evidence that the universe is NOT billions of years old, though.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

No, I don't. That's why I've read as much philosophy as I have. It's why I've read as much science as I have. I'm humble when it comes to admitting the limited scope of my knowledge in comparison to all that there is to know. I'm arrogant when I put what I know up against those who know exponentially less, though.

LOL, you say you're not arrogant, and then you have the audacity to say you know "exponentially more" than other people. If you know more, then you are saying that what you know is right, and what they know is wrong.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

That the Universe had a beginning. It doesn't necessarily have to have a beginning, just as your God does not have a beginning. You prescribe that constraint on the Universe, but not God, which is baffling.

Everything about your argument is baffling, though, because you're no where close to as smart as you think you are.

I am not assuming the universe had a beginning. I am inferring it from the fact that I had a beginning and that there had to be a cause for my beginning. Therefore, there had to have been an original cause. If ANYTHING began to exist, that means everything began to exist because you cannot have an infinite regression of causes. There had to have been an original cause to what brought me about.

 

[KingNothing]

If the universe is expanding, then it is increasing in volume. If it is not infinite, then it will never be infinite because it would have to expand infinitely in order to be infinite. Let me know when it is finished expanding infinitely...

Dude. Really?

This is novice level stuff.

Depending on the assumptions you make, it won't "expand infinitely" -- it will expand until the vastness of it reaches a point at which there isn't enough energy to continue expanding, or it will rip-itself apart, or collapse in on itself which could start the entire process over again. But this could just be one universe in a pool of infinite universes, with differing initial conditions. That's my belief --- that there are enough universes to cover all sets of conditions, all causes, and all effects. That would be an infinite universe, in a sense.

When you said that we needed to define "infinity" earlier, I thought you were just kidding. Have you never taken part in these discussions before?

 

[PaulConventionWV]

Yes, he created Adam and Eve. A whole bunch on incest and daughter-banging later, here we are.

Incest was not a problem in the beginning, since the gene pool was perfect.

Also, it appears you have no problem with attacking others' beliefs as abnormal and weird in order to get your point across. Are you aware of the ad hominem fallacy? You have been using it quite a bit and I have been tolerant up until now.

 

[KingNothing]

I am not assuming the universe had a beginning. I am inferring it from the fact that I had a beginning and that there had to be a cause for my beginning. Therefore, there had to have been an original cause. If ANYTHING began to exist, that means everything began to exist because you cannot have an infinite regression of causes. There had to have been an original cause to what brought me about.

THIS IS THE DEFINITION OF BEGGING THE QUESTION!

HOLY CHRIST! If God made us in His image, and he actually made you, our creator is obtuse to the point of being enraging.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

Dude. Really?

This is novice level stuff.

Depending on the assumptions you make, it won't "expand infinitely" -- it will expand until the vastness of it reaches a point at which there isn't enough energy to continue expanding, or it will rip-itself apart, or collapse in on itself which could start the entire process over again. But this could just be one universe in a pool of infinite universes, with differing initial conditions. That's my belief --- that there are enough universes to cover all sets of conditions, all causes, and all effects. That would be an infinite universe, in a sense.

When you said that we needed to define "infinity" earlier, I thought you were just kidding. Have you never taken part in these discussions before?

When it reaches a point when it can't keep expanding, then it still isn't infinite. That is my point. If it is not infinite in volume now, it can never be infinite.

 

[KingNothing]

Incest was not a problem in the beginning, since the gene pool was perfect.

Also, it appears you have no problem with attacking others' beliefs as abnormal and weird in order to get your point across. Are you aware of the ad hominem fallacy? You have been using it quite a bit and I have been tolerant up until now.

Yes, exactly. Perfect genes, spoiled during the fall. Got it.

And I'm not engaging in ad hominem fallacies. I'm not saying that your views are wrong because you're an idiot. I'm saying that your ability to reason is similar to that of a Downs patient.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

THIS IS THE DEFINITION OF BEGGING THE QUESTION!

HOLY CHRIST! If God made us in His image, and he actually made you, our creator is obtuse to the point of being enraging.

I am not begging the question. If I am begging the question, the FREAKING SHOW ME HOW I AM BEGGING THE QUESTION INSTEAD OF FLYING OFF THE HANDLE AND ACTING LIKE A 5 YEAR OLD.

 

[KingNothing]

When it reaches a point when it can't keep expanding, then it still isn't infinite. That is my point. If it is not infinite in volume now, it can never be infinite.

If it, or the multiverse, repeats endlessly it is infinite.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

Yes, exactly. Perfect genes, spoiled during the fall. Got it.

And I'm not engaging in ad hominem fallacies. I'm not saying that your views are wrong because you're an idiot. I'm saying that your ability to reason is similar to that of a Downs patient.

That is the definition of an ad hominem attack. You are not actually refuting my reasoning with the correct reasoning. Instead, you are resorting to saying that I have the reasoning of a patient with Down's Syndrome, whatever that means.

The point is that you are not trying to convince me. You are simply insulting me.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

If it, or the multiverse, repeats endlessly it is infinite.

The idea that there are an infinite number of universes still doesn't answer the question of where the original cause of our existence came from. You can speculate all you want on the number of universes, but that doesn't mean any of them are actually infinite in that they had no beginning and no end.

 

[KingNothing]

I am not begging the question. If I am begging the question, the FREAKING SHOW ME HOW I AM BEGGING THE QUESTION INSTEAD OF FLYING OFF THE HANDLE AND ACTING LIKE A 5 YEAR OLD.

Here's how you're begging the question: you set the requirement that the universe must have a beginning, like you and I have a beginning. Why? If someone puts forth a belief that the universe is infinite and claims that it has always existed and will always exist, you can't defeat that argument by saying that the Universe must have a beginning. Why? Why must the universe have a beginning? Because other things do? Other things are not necessarily the same as the Universe.