Isn't there a majority that believe the universe had a beginning? That it is indeed finite actually still expanding? I know there's other crazy theories like the multiverse etc but the general consensus from most scientists evolutionary or otherwise know that our current universe had a beginning.
Manny
It's quite a big leap to go from "the cosmos had a beginning"
or "the ratios and other properties of the cosmos imply to many that a cosmic intelligence must have been involved in its formation"
to "Sasquatch was dreaming about blueberry muffins one day and that's how the cosmos was formed."*
---------
*Even though this is exactly how it was reported by the generally trustworthy Spider Crystals of the Seventh Aeon from their compretemporal point-of-view.
@dj2becker saidCareful with that -- you might poke out someone's belief system. 😉
Impossible to test this hypothesis.
@ghost-of-a-duke saidI thought Moses was there at the time and took notes.
Neither of us were there at the time of creation (if there even was a creation). How could we possibly rule anything in or out with certainty?
@wolfgang59 saidNow there's a question that could really take us down the rabbit hole. 😉
Do you believe one stroke of paint can be randomly placed on a canvas?
Maybe we should bring in a Zen brush-master for this one.
@menace71 saidI think the 'complete randomness' thing is where you are going wrong.
Okay not a painting but a nice Swiss Watch my contention is this that that Swiss watch could not have assembled itself. Also noting out of all the little intricate parts of the Swiss watch if they are thrown into a paper bag and you shook the paper bag for a million years it still would not assemble itself. We see a car we don't assume that the car assembled itself we absolu ...[text shortened]... nce behind it. Yet many assume the biological systems just came from complete randomness?
Manny
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
@wolfgang59 saidActually I am because the baboons could be regarded as an intelligent mechanism in the first place.
That is in no way answering my question.
@dj2becker saidThat doesn't relate to my question. And is irrelevant.
Actually I am because the baboons could be regarded as an intelligent mechanism in the first place.
I suggest you backtrack and follow the conversation between us.
When you find that your replies are irrelevant to the discussion
I am sure you will not reproduce them here.
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
@wolfgang59 saidFaith in something happening that has never been observed to happen.
faith in what?
@ghost-of-a-duke saidSo you mean to say you the process is guided with a purpose?
I think the 'complete randomness' thing is where you are going wrong.
@wolfgang59 saidCan you define the process that would do that? There is none!
Splendid.
Can you elaborate?
@caesar-salad saidThere was no Moses or Exodus. It is all a myth.
I thought Moses was there at the time and took notes.
@dj2becker saidThe Bible itself, of course: exegesis (scholarly examination of internal consistency, style, vocabulary, etc.), the provenance of the various 'books' (scrolls, actually) of which it is composed, the surviving original fragments from the time of probable composition and documentation of the chain of custody of those fragments.
Which evidence could that be?
As well as references from non-Biblical sources for events recounted in the Bible. Same as for any other ancient text (Herodotus, Thucydides, Homer, Plato, etc.).
As well as surviving MSS of a similar nature but not canonized by the Council of Nicea in the 4c. AD. Cf the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Nag Hamadi Library, etc.