The true living God

[Taz]

Yes, the rules for everything existed before space and time.

You can't possibly expect us to believe that you know what existed before the BB.

The laws of nature existed before space and time. How else did the creation of space and time follow them if they didn’t exist.

Maybe they came out at the same time? WHAT THE FUCK DO YOU KNOW?

Matter and energy were created in accordance to the laws of nature which means the laws of nature existed before space and time.

Not it doesn’t. Stop lying.

 

[Taz]

Why not? Discussions are good.

Yes, they are. But that’s not your motivation and it is your motivation which reveals that your life is lacking.

I came here looking for proof of god. Nobody here has any real proof, but I can still discuss the topic. Nothing lacking, just curious.

That’s odd because I have shared it with you dozens of times.

You have nothing. Not even anything interesting that might lead somewhere. Nada, Zilch.

Despite your objections I have quite a lot. We know from science that space and time had a beginning. Specifically, red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations, quantum mechanics, the First Law of Thermodynamics, the Second Law of Thermodynamics and Inflation Theory.

Red shift, cosmic background radiation and Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations tells us that all matter and energy in the universe once occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of an atom and then began to expand and cool. The the First Law of Thermodynamics (i.e. conservation of energy) tells us that since that time matter and energy has only changed form. Which means that the atoms in our bodies were created from nothing when space and and time were created from nothing.

Red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations and the Second Law of Thermodynamics tells us that space and time did have a beginning. If the universe is expanding then it must have a beginning. If you follow it backwards in time, then any object must come to a boundary of space time. You cannot continue that history indefinitely. This is still true even if a universe has periods of contraction. It still has to have a beginning if expansion over weights the contraction. Physicists have been uncomfortable with the idea of a beginning since the work of Friedman which showed that the solutions of Einstein's equation showed that the universe had a beginning. The problem with a cyclical universe is with the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. For every matter to energy or energy to matter exchange there is a loss of usable energy. So while the total energy of the universe does not decrease, the usable energy of the universe does decrease. If it is a periodic or cyclical universe then the entropy will increase with each cycle. The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is a fundamental law of nature which tells us that entropy can only increase or stay the same. Entropy can never decrease. Which means that in a finite amount of time, a finite system will reach a maximum state of disorder which is called thermal equilibrium and then it will stay in that state. A cyclical universe cannot avoid this problem. Since we do not see thermal equilibrium (good thing too because there would be no life) we know that the universe did have a beginning.

Inflation Theory, the First Law of Thermodynamics and quantum mechanics tells us that it is possible for matter to have a beginning. In a closed universe the gravitational energy which is always negative exactly compensates the positive energy of matter. So the energy of a closed universe is always zero. So nothing prevents this universe from being spontaneously created. Because the net energy is always zero. The positive energy of matter is balanced by the negative energy of the gravity of that matter which is the space time curvature of that matter. There is no conservation law that prevents the formation of such a universe. In quantum mechanics if something is not forbidden by conservation laws, then it necessarily happens with some non-zero probability. So a closed universe can spontaneously appear - through the laws of quantum mechanics - out of nothing. And in fact there is an elegant mathematical description which describes this process and shows that a tiny closed universe having very high energy can spontaneously pop into existence and immediately start to expand and cool. In this description, the same laws that describe the evolution of the universe also describe the appearance of the universe which means that the laws were in place before the universe itself.

Same old fartsmoke.

 

[ding]

There you have it. No police state.

You still think an invisible being will punish me/is punishing me, don't you?

I don’t know what your fate is anymore than I know what my fate is.

But you think I'M going to be punished. Man up.

Why would I believe that?

I thought it was pretty clear when I wrote that I don’t know what your fate is anymore than I know what my fate is.

But you’re a massive liar.

What is it that you believe I have lied about?

 

[ding]

Yes, the rules for everything existed before space and time.

You can't possibly expect us to believe that you know what existed before the BB.

The laws of nature existed before space and time. How else did the creation of space and time follow them if they didn’t exist.

Maybe they came out at the same time? WHAT THE FUCK DO YOU KNOW?

Matter and energy were created in accordance to the laws of nature which means the laws of nature existed before space and time.

Not it doesn’t. Stop lying.

It does. I’m not lying.

 

[ding]

Yes, they are. But that’s not your motivation and it is your motivation which reveals that your life is lacking.

I came here looking for proof of god. Nobody here has any real proof, but I can still discuss the topic. Nothing lacking, just curious.

That’s odd because I have shared it with you dozens of times.

You have nothing. Not even anything interesting that might lead somewhere. Nada, Zilch.

Despite your objections I have quite a lot. We know from science that space and time had a beginning. Specifically, red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations, quantum mechanics, the First Law of Thermodynamics, the Second Law of Thermodynamics and Inflation Theory.

Red shift, cosmic background radiation and Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations tells us that all matter and energy in the universe once occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of an atom and then began to expand and cool. The the First Law of Thermodynamics (i.e. conservation of energy) tells us that since that time matter and energy has only changed form. Which means that the atoms in our bodies were created from nothing when space and and time were created from nothing.

Red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations and the Second Law of Thermodynamics tells us that space and time did have a beginning. If the universe is expanding then it must have a beginning. If you follow it backwards in time, then any object must come to a boundary of space time. You cannot continue that history indefinitely. This is still true even if a universe has periods of contraction. It still has to have a beginning if expansion over weights the contraction. Physicists have been uncomfortable with the idea of a beginning since the work of Friedman which showed that the solutions of Einstein's equation showed that the universe had a beginning. The problem with a cyclical universe is with the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. For every matter to energy or energy to matter exchange there is a loss of usable energy. So while the total energy of the universe does not decrease, the usable energy of the universe does decrease. If it is a periodic or cyclical universe then the entropy will increase with each cycle. The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is a fundamental law of nature which tells us that entropy can only increase or stay the same. Entropy can never decrease. Which means that in a finite amount of time, a finite system will reach a maximum state of disorder which is called thermal equilibrium and then it will stay in that state. A cyclical universe cannot avoid this problem. Since we do not see thermal equilibrium (good thing too because there would be no life) we know that the universe did have a beginning.

Inflation Theory, the First Law of Thermodynamics and quantum mechanics tells us that it is possible for matter to have a beginning. In a closed universe the gravitational energy which is always negative exactly compensates the positive energy of matter. So the energy of a closed universe is always zero. So nothing prevents this universe from being spontaneously created. Because the net energy is always zero. The positive energy of matter is balanced by the negative energy of the gravity of that matter which is the space time curvature of that matter. There is no conservation law that prevents the formation of such a universe. In quantum mechanics if something is not forbidden by conservation laws, then it necessarily happens with some non-zero probability. So a closed universe can spontaneously appear - through the laws of quantum mechanics - out of nothing. And in fact there is an elegant mathematical description which describes this process and shows that a tiny closed universe having very high energy can spontaneously pop into existence and immediately start to expand and cool. In this description, the same laws that describe the evolution of the universe also describe the appearance of the universe which means that the laws were in place before the universe itself.

Same old fartsmoke.

You misspelled truth.

 

[james bond]

You said you had empirical evidence for god, so where is it? Until then, nobody's established anything in that regard.

So I can't post anything questioning god's performance or I'm branded as a Satanist?

You are a follower of Satan. You are a hell's angel and probably get off on it. Just read your post #414 and the countless ones blaming God for creating evil when Lucifer created the first sin.

You, yourself said this. It means you believe God exists. I've tried to correct you on it as above, but to no avail.

If you want empirical evidence, then we found the chicken came before the egg in 2017. The enzyme on the eggshell is only produced by the ovaries of the hen. I discussed many others on the science and this board.

 

[james bond]

Who is the "we" you write about in terms of establishing existence of the gods?

Why is it that requiring "pwoof" of the gods from those claiming pwoof is always absent pwoof?

BTW, I have pwoof disproving your pwoof.

You've gone over one too many proofs probably something at least 80 proof with your slurring of words. Lucky for you we are in the religious forum because science isn't about proofs, but best theory. The best theory is the creation, God, or Bible theory. This was widely accepted in science before the 1850s. Today, we have the fake science of evolution.

 

[Taz]

You said you had empirical evidence for god, so where is it? Until then, nobody's established anything in that regard.

So I can't post anything questioning god's performance or I'm branded as a Satanist?

You are a follower of Satan. You are a hell's angel and probably get off on it. Just read your post #414 and the countless ones blaming God for creating evil when Lucifer created the first sin.

You, yourself said this. It means you believe God exists. I've tried to correct you on it as above, but to no avail.

If you want empirical evidence, then we found the chicken came before the egg in 2017. The enzyme on the eggshell is only produced by the ovaries of the hen. I discussed many others on the science and this board.

So you have no empirical evidence for god. I win.

 

[Taz]

I came here looking for proof of god. Nobody here has any real proof, but I can still discuss the topic. Nothing lacking, just curious.

That’s odd because I have shared it with you dozens of times.

You have nothing. Not even anything interesting that might lead somewhere. Nada, Zilch.

Despite your objections I have quite a lot. We know from science that space and time had a beginning. Specifically, red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations, quantum mechanics, the First Law of Thermodynamics, the Second Law of Thermodynamics and Inflation Theory.

Red shift, cosmic background radiation and Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations tells us that all matter and energy in the universe once occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of an atom and then began to expand and cool. The the First Law of Thermodynamics (i.e. conservation of energy) tells us that since that time matter and energy has only changed form. Which means that the atoms in our bodies were created from nothing when space and and time were created from nothing.

Red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations and the Second Law of Thermodynamics tells us that space and time did have a beginning. If the universe is expanding then it must have a beginning. If you follow it backwards in time, then any object must come to a boundary of space time. You cannot continue that history indefinitely. This is still true even if a universe has periods of contraction. It still has to have a beginning if expansion over weights the contraction. Physicists have been uncomfortable with the idea of a beginning since the work of Friedman which showed that the solutions of Einstein's equation showed that the universe had a beginning. The problem with a cyclical universe is with the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. For every matter to energy or energy to matter exchange there is a loss of usable energy. So while the total energy of the universe does not decrease, the usable energy of the universe does decrease. If it is a periodic or cyclical universe then the entropy will increase with each cycle. The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is a fundamental law of nature which tells us that entropy can only increase or stay the same. Entropy can never decrease. Which means that in a finite amount of time, a finite system will reach a maximum state of disorder which is called thermal equilibrium and then it will stay in that state. A cyclical universe cannot avoid this problem. Since we do not see thermal equilibrium (good thing too because there would be no life) we know that the universe did have a beginning.

Inflation Theory, the First Law of Thermodynamics and quantum mechanics tells us that it is possible for matter to have a beginning. In a closed universe the gravitational energy which is always negative exactly compensates the positive energy of matter. So the energy of a closed universe is always zero. So nothing prevents this universe from being spontaneously created. Because the net energy is always zero. The positive energy of matter is balanced by the negative energy of the gravity of that matter which is the space time curvature of that matter. There is no conservation law that prevents the formation of such a universe. In quantum mechanics if something is not forbidden by conservation laws, then it necessarily happens with some non-zero probability. So a closed universe can spontaneously appear - through the laws of quantum mechanics - out of nothing. And in fact there is an elegant mathematical description which describes this process and shows that a tiny closed universe having very high energy can spontaneously pop into existence and immediately start to expand and cool. In this description, the same laws that describe the evolution of the universe also describe the appearance of the universe which means that the laws were in place before the universe itself.

Same old fartsmoke.

You misspelled truth.

You can’t get ANYONE to agree with you. You lose.

 

[Taz]

You can't possibly expect us to believe that you know what existed before the BB.

The laws of nature existed before space and time. How else did the creation of space and time follow them if they didn’t exist.

Maybe they came out at the same time? WHAT THE FUCK DO YOU KNOW?

Matter and energy were created in accordance to the laws of nature which means the laws of nature existed before space and time.

Not it doesn’t. Stop lying.

It does. I’m not lying.

You lie that you know what was before the BB. Nobody knows that.

 

[Hollie]

Who is the "we" you write about in terms of establishing existence of the gods?

Why is it that requiring "pwoof" of the gods from those claiming pwoof is always absent pwoof?

BTW, I have pwoof disproving your pwoof.

You've gone over one too many proofs probably something at least 80 proof with your slurring of words. Lucky for you we are in the religious forum because science isn't about proofs, but best theory. The best theory is the creation, God, or Bible theory. This was widely accepted in science before the 1850s. Today, we have the fake science of evolution.

I’m afraid that partisan religious dogma is not a theory but indoctrination as a result of parentage and place of birth.

You could always take that first step and post the “General Theory of Supernatural Creation” .

I’d suggest that something you call bible theory is a bit weak as supportive of a theory when the authors of the bibles are unknown, claims of magic as delineated in the bibles have been debunked and the errors, omissions and contradictions tend to crumble biblical tales and fables.

But other than that, post the fundie “General Theory of Supernatural Creation” so we can see if the theory withstands scrutiny.

 

[Hollie]

Who is the "we" you write about in terms of establishing existence of the gods?

Why is it that requiring "pwoof" of the gods from those claiming pwoof is always absent pwoof?

BTW, I have pwoof disproving your pwoof.

You've gone over one too many proofs probably something at least 80 proof with your slurring of words. Lucky for you we are in the religious forum because science isn't about proofs, but best theory. The best theory is the creation, God, or Bible theory. This was widely accepted in science before the 1850s. Today, we have the fake science of evolution.

Your retreat to fear and superstition that defined science before 1850 is something you dump in every thread.

You obviously missed it but when science and technology overtook fear and superstition, there was an explosion of learning and discovery.

Sorry to read that you are repulsed by learning and discovery but spending your life in trembling fear of monsters, spooks and angry gods is a prescription for a maladjusted personality.

 

[ABikerSailor]

ETA: Today, I think most of us choose not to sin, but we can't help it. We end up in sin and the different denominations have come up with ways to cleanse our sin. We have laws against sinful behavior, so one could end up in jail for those behaviors even though they aren't specified as sin. To me sin, is against God and what he states as objective moral values in the Ten Commandments.

You know, on this, we agree. I think the only things that are "sins" are those that go against the 7 Noahide Commandments, or the 10 Commandments.

All the other crap like pride, greed, sloth, and all the other "7 Deadly Sins", well, they aren't really sins, they are more like vices, but if you keep yourself rooted in those vices, you will be more likely to sin.

And........................anyone that says that being gay is a "sin" needs to recheck their book. Like I said, the only sins I consider to be bad are those listed in the 10 Commandments.

 

[kjw47]

Actually, 1/3 of the spirit beings fell later on as well. They have free will as well. It would have happened over and over, ruining it for all. This system is almost done. We are well along in Revelation.
The issue raised---1) Do we as mortals need to listen to Gods advice to find the path of lasting happiness?2) Or is it better to know both sides ourselves and choose for ourselves? This sick system shows #1 is 100% fact.

if god wants us to act a certain way, why did he give us free will.

He also created mortals to know only good, he knew it was best for flesh. Satans lie ruined it all. Mortals chose this satan ruled system. We have no choice. This system is nearing its end. In fact, Gods kingdom is mankinds only remaining hope.

You didn't answer my question.

He gave us free will to choose with that free will to listen to him and love him and appreciate all the good things. Few even know him.

Having to choose something or get punished isn't free will.

All have been warned in advance.

 

[kjw47]

why would god give us free will if he didn’t want us to disobey him? And I’m not responsible for what others, like Adam, do.

You have trouble with words and their definitions. Free will doesn't mean he didn't want us to disobey God. You keep interpreting words in a wrong manner and it ends up promoting Satan. It leads you to think in irresponsible terms. You are easily misled.

What it means is God gave us a choice. Remember, what Genesis taught us and that to have light, we had to have dark or the void and that was there in the beginning. In order to have God (good), we had to have Satan (bad). All of this was created, including hell, before the creation of the universe, Earth, and everything in it.

So you're saying that god didn't create everything in the universe. Got a list?

If god gives us free will and when I choose something, god punishes me. well, that's not free will.

Most choose and know it is not good. Yet keep on doing things that God disapproves of. God does not accept any sin. There is 0 room for sin with God. 1John 3)
After Jesus, thousand year reign as Gods appointed king,( Daniel 7:13-15) Jesus hands back the kingdom to his God and Father and subjects himself-1Corinthians 15:24-28) The 2nd resurrection,( symbolic) Jesus hands the followers back clean and unblemished anymore.( mortal). The earth will be transformed into a paradise. Gods kingdom will rule forever. Daniel 2:44)

If there is 0 room to disobey god, then that's not free will.

All are choosing. Deuteronomy 30:19-- Life or death. Both are everlasting.

Is 70-100 years of sin worth losing-trillions x trillions x trillions etc, of never ending years of life in Gods kingdom?
Few know the reality set before all.

 

[Taz]

if god wants us to act a certain way, why did he give us free will.

He also created mortals to know only good, he knew it was best for flesh. Satans lie ruined it all. Mortals chose this satan ruled system. We have no choice. This system is nearing its end. In fact, Gods kingdom is mankinds only remaining hope.

You didn't answer my question.

He gave us free will to choose with that free will to listen to him and love him and appreciate all the good things. Few even know him.

Having to choose something or get punished isn't free will.

All have been warned in advance.

Not free will, it’s like saying you have two choices a) and b), except that if you choose b) you’ll be shot dead. You wouldn’t say afterward that I gave you a choice.

 

[ABikerSailor]

You know, Jesus said in the Bible that His Father's house has many rooms.

Anyone ever think that Heaven would be a place that could accept people of all faiths, as long as they answered to a Higher Power of some kind and followed the basic rules that exist in all religions?

Like I've said before, I think that God is a multi faceted being, and each religion is there to show different aspects of Him?

 

[Taz]

why would god give us free will if he didn’t want us to disobey him? And I’m not responsible for what others, like Adam, do.

You have trouble with words and their definitions. Free will doesn't mean he didn't want us to disobey God. You keep interpreting words in a wrong manner and it ends up promoting Satan. It leads you to think in irresponsible terms. You are easily misled.

What it means is God gave us a choice. Remember, what Genesis taught us and that to have light, we had to have dark or the void and that was there in the beginning. In order to have God (good), we had to have Satan (bad). All of this was created, including hell, before the creation of the universe, Earth, and everything in it.

So you're saying that god didn't create everything in the universe. Got a list?

If god gives us free will and when I choose something, god punishes me. well, that's not free will.

Most choose and know it is not good. Yet keep on doing things that God disapproves of. God does not accept any sin. There is 0 room for sin with God. 1John 3)
After Jesus, thousand year reign as Gods appointed king,( Daniel 7:13-15) Jesus hands back the kingdom to his God and Father and subjects himself-1Corinthians 15:24-28) The 2nd resurrection,( symbolic) Jesus hands the followers back clean and unblemished anymore.( mortal). The earth will be transformed into a paradise. Gods kingdom will rule forever. Daniel 2:44)

If there is 0 room to disobey god, then that's not free will.

All are choosing. Deuteronomy 30:19-- Life or death. Both are everlasting.

Is 70-100 years of sin worth losing-trillions x trillions x trillions etc, of never ending years of life in Gods kingdom?
Few know the reality set before all.

Not a choice.

 

[james bond]

You said you had empirical evidence for god, so where is it? Until then, nobody's established anything in that regard.

So I can't post anything questioning god's performance or I'm branded as a Satanist?

You are a follower of Satan. You are a hell's angel and probably get off on it. Just read your post #414 and the countless ones blaming God for creating evil when Lucifer created the first sin.

You, yourself said this. It means you believe God exists. I've tried to correct you on it as above, but to no avail.

If you want empirical evidence, then we found the chicken came before the egg in 2017. The enzyme on the eggshell is only produced by the ovaries of the hen. I discussed many others on the science and this board.

So you have no empirical evidence for god. I win.

It means evolution destroyed. God wins. Are you going to ask me if you have to give up masturbation next ?

 

[Taz]

You said you had empirical evidence for god, so where is it? Until then, nobody's established anything in that regard.

So I can't post anything questioning god's performance or I'm branded as a Satanist?

You are a follower of Satan. You are a hell's angel and probably get off on it. Just read your post #414 and the countless ones blaming God for creating evil when Lucifer created the first sin.

You, yourself said this. It means you believe God exists. I've tried to correct you on it as above, but to no avail.

If you want empirical evidence, then we found the chicken came before the egg in 2017. The enzyme on the eggshell is only produced by the ovaries of the hen. I discussed many others on the science and this board.

So you have no empirical evidence for god. I win.

View attachment 268657

It means evolution destroyed. God wins. Are you going to ask me if you have to give up masturbation next ?

That’s not any kind of evidence. You dunce.