Six biblical truths about money...

Have you not realized that it's pointless arguing with those who keep on ignoring widely agreed issues? That big bang is a theory is a widely accepted fact. That matter cannot by any current scientific understanding originate from nothing and much less collide without gravity and velocity is also uncontested by anyone in the scientific community. It's completely useless to waste time debating with those who deny that.

Look how it goes, when some don't like what is being said one is accused as being antisemitic. What a joke and how uncorrelated. It should be perfectly apparent by now that some in this thread only like to stir up discontent without any meaningful point they are willing to listen to, much less the ability on their end to make a coherent point.

Again, my point is not that God can be proven mathematically. My point was, and is, that faith is require for both beliefs: Creationism and the big BANG! beliefs.

You insist on believing that your big BANG! is rooted in mathematics and is superior to all others. It's not. It's a guess.

For the curious. Meyer properly indicates that science doesn't (and won't ever be able to, imo) explain the origins of matter/energy. Math and science can describe them ... once they exist:





“Spontaneous Creation”: Meyer on Stephen Hawking’s Category Error
https://evolutionnews.org/2018/03/spontaneous-creation-meyer-on-stephen-hawkings-category-error/

"
We’re now more than a week beyond the passing of Stephen Hawking, and so we are feeling freer to do other than engage in eulogies. We asked Discovery Institute philosopher of science Stephen Meyer for his view on Hawking’s notions about the universe’s self-creation.

In his book The Grand Design, as you know, Hawking argues that “Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist.” Thus, for Hawking, “It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going.”

Meyer points out, though, that Hawking’s statement betrays a kind of category error — a philosophical misunderstanding of what the laws of nature do. Meyer notes that “the laws of nature describe how matter and energy in different states or configurations interact with other material entities. They do not tell us where matter and energy (or space and time) came from in the first place.” He goes on:



Hawking earlier seemed to realize this. He asked poignantly in A Brief History of Time, “What is it that breathes fire into the equations and makes a universe for them to describe?” But in The Grand Designhe slipped back into reifying our mathematical descriptions of nature — treating the mathematical descriptions in our own minds as if they existed as real things in nature, things that could, moreover, cause other entities they describe to originate in the first place.

“The laws of nature,” says Meyer, “describe how stuff behaves once it exists. They do not explain where that stuff came from.”"
 
Last edited:
Ha, if anyone in this thread made coherent points then it was him. He clearly stated that the Big Bang theory is as much a theory, that requires a huge leap of faith and the denial of current accepted scientific findings in that matter cannot come into the existence from nothing and collide without gravity and velocity. You and your friends completely ignore that point. It's hard to argue with someone who can't even hold together a dialog. I ignore the rest of your diatribe because its more entertaining than worthy of a response.

What is your answer then? You are working so very very hard to avoid providing it that it must be starting to hurt badly! You started this conversation by saying:

When I pointed out how inconsistent your stated fundamentalist belief was with rational thought processes you started frantically tap dancing around until now you're denying that you said that, but apparently unwilling, unable, or both, to say what you really believe. If the bible isn't an infallible document that we must believe without question and apparently you reject the scientific method as well ("My answer is neither this, nor that.") what crazy voodoo mix of "logic" do you believe in?

Let me ask you a simple yes or no question, just to distill this down for you, along the lines of "Are you drunk or not". Do you believe the bible is the infallible truth and can't be wrong? Are you capable of answer that simple question?
 
NCSE, you mean that hyper aggressive organization that actually consists of numerous Christians and those of other religious faiths and which by self admission states

"Listen to the testimony of Dr. Francisco J. Ayala (University of California, Irvine), a supporter of the NCSE, whose name is listed on their letterhead:

A hypothesis is empirical or scientific only if it can be tested by experience. . . . A hypothesis or theory which cannot be, at least in principle, falsified by empirical observations and experiments does not belong to the realm of science (1974, 700; emphasis added).

Evolution, therefore, is not science!

Many skeptics have conceded that the ideology of “evolution” is very much a faith matter. Dr. Robert Jastrow, professor of astronomy and geology at Columbia University (an agnostic), in discussing the evolutionary view of the spontaneous origin of life on earth has said this:

The [evolutionary view of life’s origin] is also an act of faith. The act of faith consists in assuming that the scientific view of the origin of life is correct, without having concrete evidence to support that belief (1977, 52; emphasis added).

Dr. Louis More of Princeton wrote: “The more one studies paleontology, the more certain one becomes that evolution is based upon faith alone” (1925, 160; emphasis added)."



https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/are-virtual-particles-rea/


https://ncse.com/library-resource/gravity-its-only-theory
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/difference-between-theory-and-law.309324/

Of course as other posters have pointed out we know reading comprehension has never been your strong point, so these links are really for anyone else interested in the idea. Nothing illuminates an anti-intellectual ignoramus more than the guy who argues "It's just a theory!" Come to think of it, this is yet another demonstration of the concept you so cooperatively went along with last week...where we allow the bigots/ignorant/anti-intellectual folks self-identify so we all know who they are and can avoid putting them in any position of responsibility. So again, thanks for that demonstration, you're a very cooperative subject!
 
The only one full of hate here is you. Just listen to yourself. Theatrical and highly entertaining yet utterly unrelated to the issue. 2 points for ink usage though.

If you're proud to associate yourself with him then embrace that man!

I don't know about you, but if an anti-semitic bigot agreed with something I said about hate I'd stop and think about exactly what I'd said. Agreeing with on an unrelated subject, like maybe bridge design, sure. Agreeing with him on hate, well that says a lot about you no matter how you justify it.

And I apologize if politely pointing out the inconsistencies in a belief system or calling out bigotry and anti-semitism makes someone a troll in your eyes. Again says a lot more about you than anyone else.
 
It's as faith based as is the big bang theory. That is what I stated.
Yes you have made the point, as well as userque, and then each go on attempting to poke holes in Science, only, because it leaves doubt.

The more years I live the more I learn how much I don't know and how uncertain everything is. I am stuck in the middle between the believers and non-believers in the religious realm. Just the way I like it. :D
 
Yes you have made the point, as well as userque, and then each go on attempting to poke holes in Science, only, because it leaves doubt.

No, that's not what I did; nor why I did what I did do.

I continued in response to @Sig 's continuing, not because it leaves doubt. @Sig is the only one here trying to change minds. Like I said earlier, what you and he eat, don't make me sh.t.

And I did not poke holes in Science. I poked holes in a theory.

"So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth."
 
Last edited:
I think you do get triggered. When you get triggered, you post this: :banghead:

Anyone new to this discussion can read for themselves whether you've successfully defended your beliefs; whether I've answered your simple question; and what I've already said about infallible truths, starting here:

https://www.elitetrader.com/et/threads/six-biblical-truths-about-money.331077/page-5#post-4836162
If expressing wonder at a lack of intellect displayed in a post is being "triggered" to you, then sure, I get triggered occasionally by the absolute idiocy of what is sometimes posted. Since that has nothing to do with my beliefs, except perhaps eroding my confidence in a basic level of critical thinking ability among humankind, I'm not sure what your point is. The last time I was "triggered" about my beliefs I believed as you do, that's why I know longer believe it!

Your link conspicuously fails to answer the elemental question though. Do you or do you not believe that the bible is the absolute, infallible truth? It's a yes or no question. Can't be too hard to just answer, can it? The fact that you won't embrace your religion is fine, ironic given that you're the one who just quoted Revelation 3:16, but then that religion is pretty good at rank hypocrisy in my experience.

You should know that this isn't the first time I've experienced this refusal to answer this exact answer from someone of your viewpoint. It's actually probably the 4th or 5th. The first three were among the things that caused me to affirmatively leave the faith, and every few years I check in to see if maybe I just had bad luck talking to the wrong people and ask again to see if I can get a rational answer. So far, I just get the refusal to answer the question just like you've demonstrated here, along with an attempt to paint me as a bad person for asking...as you've done quite conspicuously here. I still have a tiny bit of an open mind, but you personally are actively driving me and who knows how many of those like the 16 year old version me away. How does that make you feel, great about accomplishing your mission? I'm sure your christ will be proud of you, where was it again he said your mission was to alienate everyone from the religion? Again, maybe focus on what that Jesus fellow said. Many bibles actually conveniently put it in red for you. Then maybe you'd actually attract people to your religion instead of driving them away. And you might be proud enough to straight up embrace what you believe.
 
If expressing wonder at a lack of intellect displayed in a post is being "triggered" to you, then sure, I get triggered occasionally by the absolute idiocy of what is sometimes posted. Since that has nothing to do with my beliefs, except perhaps eroding my confidence in a basic level of critical thinking ability among humankind, I'm not sure what your point is. The last time I was "triggered" about my beliefs I believed as you do, that's why I know longer believe it!

Your link conspicuously fails to answer the elemental question though. Do you or do you not believe that the bible is the absolute, infallible truth? It's a yes or no question. Can't be too hard to just answer, can it? The fact that you won't embrace your religion is fine, ironic given that you're the one who just quoted Revelation 3:16, but then that religion is pretty good at rank hypocrisy in my experience.

You should know that this isn't the first time I've experienced this refusal to answer this exact answer from someone of your viewpoint. It's actually probably the 4th or 5th. The first three were among the things that caused me to affirmatively leave the faith, and every few years I check in to see if maybe I just had bad luck talking to the wrong people and ask again to see if I can get a rational answer. So far, I just get the refusal to answer the question just like you've demonstrated here, along with an attempt to paint me as a bad person for asking...as you've done quite conspicuously here. I still have a tiny bit of an open mind, but you personally are actively driving me and who knows how many of those like the 16 year old version me away. How does that make you feel, great about accomplishing your mission? I'm sure your christ will be proud of you, where was it again he said your mission was to alienate everyone from the religion? Again, maybe focus on what that Jesus fellow said. Many bibles actually conveniently put it in red for you. Then maybe you'd actually attract people to your religion instead of driving them away. And you might be proud enough to straight up embrace what you believe.

Readers can read the conversation themselves to determine whether I've answered your question ... multiple times: https://www.elitetrader.com/et/threads/six-biblical-truths-about-money.331077/page-5#post-4836162

LOL...what a troll
 
Back
Top