Religion III

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

Little circles within bigger circles.

Infinite regress land

Logically, there can be no infinite regress with what is eternal; for what is eternal has no beginning and no end; therefore, was not caused. It just IS. Only entities that came into existence with no known first or ultimate cause reside in infinite regress land.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

No, the topic at the moment, between you and I, is "real self" as brought up by Light.

Fine. Then take the topic up with him because Mark 13 is one huge non sequitur.

Which Diaspora was Jesus referring to?

Since the passage is clearly alluding to a future event, it must be an event yet future to Jesus, don't you think?

Jewish history as told by Jews, takes a different view. Actor touched on this. So why wasn't Jesus, the all knowing, discussing the entire series of events?

Jesus wasn't giving a history lesson. He was predicting the nation's future. What happened in 70 A.D. was the ultimate Jewish Diaspora because the Jews lost their homeland and temple. And when they lost the temple, they lost their exclusive covenant relationship with YHWH which he established with the nation through the Mosaic Covenant. Moreover, with the loss of the temple they lost the foundation to their religious, cultural and political life, as these were all inextricably linked together through the religious rituals of the temple! The Judaism of the Mosaic Covenant died an ignominious death in 70 A.D., and will never again rise from the ashes. The Old (Mosaic) Covenant has been replaced by the New which Jesus himself instituted at the Last Supper and ratified in his own blood when he atoned for the sins of his Father's people on the Cross.

All of this literally came to pass, as Jesus predicted -- and within his (i.e."this generation") to boot!

And here's a little "factoid" you can stuff in your hash pipe and puff on: God in 70 A.D., through Rome, poured out his wrath upon the Jews and destroyed their temple because the Jews destroyed His temple, which was the most heinous and atrocious sin ever committed against God by any nation! And if you're wondering what temple the Jews destroyed, give me a shout and I'll share that historical event with you out of the bible.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Logically, there can be no infinite regress with what is eternal; for what is eternal has no beginning and no end; therefore, was not caused. It just IS. Only entities that came into existence with no known first or ultimate cause reside in infinite regress land.

We have mentioned a number of times the universe may be part of an endless , infinite series of expansions and contractions. I have posted in Hindu cosmology, incredibly long periods of time of cycles within cycles.


The late astrophysicist Carl Sagan (1980) noted that “the Hindu religion is the only one of the world’s great faiths dedicated to the idea that the Cosmos itself undergoes an immense, indeed an infinite, number of births and deaths. It is the only religion in which the time cycles correspond, no doubt by accident, to those of modern scientific cosmology. Its cycles run from our ordinary day and night to a day and night of Brahma, 8.64 billion years long, longer than the age of the Earth or the Sun and about half the time since the Big Bang. And there are much longer time scales still.”

— Carl Sagan (1934-1996) famous astrophysicist.

Yes, It just IS

Quite a bit larger than what your hero Bishop Ussher said.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by Actor

Known to mathematicians and physicists as a Fourier series.

This?

YouTube (Short URL)

Question: Is there a similar mathematical function that describes fractals?

"A never-ending pattern. Fractals are infinitely complex patterns that are self-similar across different scales."

Not circles within circles, but geological, and biological repeating patterns, one within another
I am particularly interested in branching patterns.
Rivers, trees, blood vessels and nerve cells and neurons.

In Taoism and other eastern thought, the "transformation of one to many and the reverse", is a model for our local universe.

The trunk of a tree represents the one that manifests the many parts within.
Always thought the being "created in God's (the universe?) image" was an expression of this. In fact, this might have meant more than just the birth of Alchemy.

“As above; so below. As within; so without. As with the universe; so with the soul.” ~ Hermes Trismegistus

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

We have mentioned a number of times the universe may be part of an endless , infinite series of expansions and contractions. I have posted in Hindu cosmology, incredibly long periods of time of cycles within cycles.


The late astrophysicist Carl Sagan (1980) noted that “the Hindu religion is the only one of the world’s great faiths dedicated to the idea that the Cosmos itself undergoes an immense, indeed an infinite, number of births and deaths. It is the only religion in which the time cycles correspond, no doubt by accident, to those of modern scientific cosmology. Its cycles run from our ordinary day and night to a day and night of Brahma, 8.64 billion years long, longer than the age of the Earth or the Sun and about half the time since the Big Bang. And there are much longer time scales still.”

— Carl Sagan (1934-1996) famous astrophysicist.

Yes, It just IS

Quite a bit larger than what your hero Bishop Ussher said.

Well, since the cosmos undergoes an "infinite" number of "births and deaths", then the cosmos at some point in that "infinite" chain came into existence and goes out of existence. Sagan, philosophy is an oxymoron. For things that are eternal, by definition, cannot go in and out of existence. Contrast this stupid oxmoron with this eminently logical scripture:

1 Tim 1:17
17 Now to the King eternal, immortal , invisible, the only God, be honor and glory for ever and ever. Amen.
NIV

God has no beginning or end. He is the I AM. God doesn't go into and out of of existence. God was never born and he'll never die.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Well, since the cosmos undergoes an "infinite" number of "births and deaths", then the cosmos at some point in that "infinite" chain came into existence and goes out of existence. Sagan, philosophy is an oxymoron. For things that are eternal, by definition, cannot go in and out of existence. Contrast this stupid oxmoron with this eminently logical scripture:

1 Tim 1:17
17 Now to the King eternal, immortal , invisible, the only God, be honor and glory for ever and ever. Amen.
NIV

God has no beginning or end. He is the I AM. God doesn't go into and out of of existence. God was never born and he'll never die.

Although Carl Sagan did not write an erroneous pompous assed non-scientific non-mathematical 11 part treatise on what the universe is, he unlike you and your hero Bishop Ussher suspected the universe was more than what may be seen, and a hell of lot older than 6,000 years..

Once again you are not understanding what others write. My first sentence above states.....

We have mentioned a number of times the universe may be part of an endless , infinite series of expansions and contractions.

Sorry you are having such a difficult time thinking out of your box, box.

Btw, tell us again, what did you do for a living ? Act as a sock puppet for some crooked evangelist preacher? Does it still hurt?

[Actor]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Well, since the cosmos undergoes an "infinite" number of "births and deaths", then the cosmos at some point in that "infinite" chain came into existence and goes out of existence.

Totally wrong. No point in the cycle can be identified as a beginning or an end. This can be proven mathematically.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

Although Carl Sagan did not write an erroneous pompous assed non-scientific non-mathematical 11 part treatise on what the universe is, he unlike you and your hero Bishop Ussher suspected the universe was more than what may be seen, and a hell of lot older than 6,000 years..

Once again you are not understanding what others write. My first sentence above states.....

We have mentioned a number of times the universe may be part of an endless , infinite series of expansions and contractions.

Sorry you are having such a difficult time thinking out of your box, box.

Btw, tell us again, what did you do for a living ? Act as a sock puppet for some crooked evangelist preacher? Does it still hurt?

Here, try to get this axiom to sink into your thick skull once and for all: Life, Death, Expansions and Contractions necessarily involve CHANGE; and whatever changes from one state into another or from one form into another, or from one condition into another, etc. requires a CAUSE.

Therefore, your beloved Mr. Sagan's horse manure logically terminates in infinite regression; for neither you, or Actor or Sagan or anyone else who is committed to atheistic materialism can point to a First Cause. The very best "scientific explanation" possible is what you stated earlier: The Universe just IS!

But biblical monotheism completely avoids this kind of incoherent absurdity because God himself is invisible, eternal and immortal, having no beginning or end and is, therefore, is immutable! God's essence is not subject to or ever can be subject to any kind of change. As scriptures says, "He is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow."

Go play in your sandbox. You are much better suited to that environment.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Actor

Totally wrong. No point in the cycle can be identified as a beginning or an end. This can be proven mathematically.

See my last post to Hcap. By definition, cycles require change to in order to cycle from and to another state, condition or occurrence. And whatever changes requires a cause.

Have a nice day.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Here, try to get this axiom to sink into your thick skull once and for all: Life, Death, Expansions and Contractions necessarily involve CHANGE; and whatever changes from one state into another or from one form into another, or from one condition into another, etc. requires a CAUSE.

Therefore, your beloved Mr. Sagan's horse manure logically terminates in infinite regression; for neither you, or Actor or Sagan or anyone else who is committed to atheistic materialism can point to a First Cause. The very best "scientific explanation" possible is what you stated earlier: The Universe just IS!

But biblical monotheism completely avoids this kind of incoherent absurdity because God himself is invisible, eternal and immortal, having no beginning or end and is, therefore, is immutable! God's essence is not subject to or ever can be subject to any kind of change. As scriptures says, "He is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow."

Go play in your sandbox. You are much better suited to that environment.

Theoretically your god is "immutable" correct?

1)-So your god never changes?
He created Adam and eve and then after providing a wondrous garden for them, providing everything needed, changed his mind and kicked them out.

Or why bother with garden?

2)- Created the earth, told Adam to multiply, miscalculated his "children's evilness", changed his mind and wiped out 99% of his children and plants and animals, with a global flood and did a monumental do over.

Do overs constitute changing one's mind!

3)-Gave birth to Jesus. Had his "Jewish children" precipitate Jesus's death after choosing Jews as the chosen ones. After all Jesus was s'posed to correct his chosen ones sinfulness.

Another do-over. A failed one at that, since Jesus must return to finish the job.

Or, if you do not succeed the first time, try, try, try again

So what if change require cause? Logically the concept of infinity must include change and no change. There is zero reason an infinite universe can not alter it's form, appearance or state. Immutability is one of your delusions. More word games to discount your propensity for your limited short-sighted infinite regress philosophy.

I will leave you with one more note, fallibility and non-omniscient automatically generates change. The example I gave you are just the tip of your pathetic melting iceberg

Your god as I just illustrated is fallible and not knowing.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

Theoretically your god is "immutable" correct?

1)-So your god never changes?
He created Adam and eve and then after providing a wondrous garden for them, providing everything needed, changed his mind and kicked them out.

Or why bother with garden?

2)- Created the earth, told Adam to multiply, miscalculated his "children's evilness", changed his mind and wiped out 99% of his children and plants and animals, with a global flood and did a monumental do over.

Do overs constitute changing one's mind!

3)-Gave birth to Jesus. Had his "Jewish children" precipitate Jesus's death after choosing Jews as the chosen ones. After all Jesus was s'posed to correct his chosen ones sinfulness.

Another do-over. A failed one at that, since Jesus must return to finish the job.

Or, if you do not succeed the first time, try, try, try again

So what if change require cause? Logically the concept of infinity must include change and no change. There is zero reason an infinite universe can not alter it's form, appearance or state. Immutability is one of your delusions. More word games to discount your propensity for your limited short-sighted infinite regress philosophy.

I will leave you with one more note, fallibility and non-omniscient automatically generates change. The example I gave you are just the tip of your pathetic melting iceberg

Your god as I just illustrated is fallible and not knowing.

I said God cannot change his ESSENCE (nature), you dunce!

God "changing his mind" is a figure of speech (anthropomorphism), Mr. Fundy Hyper-Literalist.

Re the Garden: God didn't change his mind. He made good on his promise of death.

Re the Flood: God again made good on is promise that the penalty for disobedience is death.

Jesus' death was preordained by God. It was all part of the grand plan of redemption for Jews and Gentiles.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by boxcar

I said God cannot change his ESSENCE (nature), you dunce!

God "changing his mind" is a figure of speech (anthropomorphism), Mr. Fundy Hyper-Literalist.

Re the Garden: God didn't change his mind. He made good on his promise of death.

Re the Flood: God again made good on is promise that the penalty for disobedience is death.

Jesus' death was preordained by God. It was all part of the grand plan of redemption for Jews and Gentiles.

So when your god kicked Adam and Eve out, flooded the globe he wasn't using his "essence"

His "promise of death" sounds pretty essence-y to me.

Word games galore.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

So when your god kicked Adam and Eve out, flooded the globe he wasn't using his "essence"

His "promise of death" sounds pretty essence-y to me.

Word games galore.

Typical, childish retort. Look up the definition of "essence" or "nature".

And I'm done going down your stupid rabbit hole. I pointed out that cycles, life, death, expansion, contraction, etc. all involve CHANGE. And whatever changes, a cause is required. Therefore, your atheistic materialism reduces to the absurdity of infinite regress, which means your precisious, beloved scientism has NO answers whatsoever as to what caused the universe to come into existence.

At the end of the day, your utterly simple-minded, inane worldview with respect to origins can only be summed up with a circular statement: The universe is because it is.

Congratulations, Humpty.

[Actor]

Originally Posted by boxcar

See my last post to Hcap. By definition, cycles require change to in order to cycle from and to another state, condition or occurrence. And whatever changes requires a cause.

We've been over this before. Here is Newton's Third Law of Motion right out of the textbook.

"To every action there is always opposed an equal reaction; or, the mutual actions of two bodies upon each other are always equal, and directed to contrary parts."

In other words, we have a causal loop. A causes B and B causes A. In the case of the three body problem A acts upon B and C, B acts upon A and B, C acts on A and B. This can be extended to n bodies and mathematically n can be infinite.

Cycles do not require a "first cause." In a one dimensional cycle (an oversimplification since the process can extend to infinite dimensions) one might arbitrarily choose some state as the initial state which causes a derivative state which in turn ultimately causes the arbitrarily chosen state, ergo no initial state exists.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Actor

We've been over this before. Here is Newton's Third Law of Motion right out of the textbook.

"To every action there is always opposed an equal reaction; or, the mutual actions of two bodies upon each other are always equal, and directed to contrary parts."

In other words, we have a causal loop. A causes B and B causes A. In the case of the three body problem A acts upon B and C, B acts upon A and B, C acts on A and B. This can be extended to n bodies and mathematically n can be infinite.

Cycles do not require a "first cause." In a one dimensional cycle (an oversimplification since the process can extend to infinite dimensions) one might arbitrarily choose some state as the initial state which causes a derivative state which in turn ultimately causes the arbitrarily chosen state, ergo no initial state exists.

Anything and Everything that changes requires a first cause. You must love the absurdity of infinite regressions.

Here's a cycle for you:

The universe is what it is because it is.

The universe is what it is because it is.

The universe is what it is because it is.

The universe is what it is because it is.

The universe is what it is because it is.

The universe is what it is because it is.

The universe is what it is because it is.

The universe is what it is because it is.

The universe is what it is because it is.

The universe is what it is because it is.

The universe is what it is because it is.

The universe is what it is because it is.

The universe is what it is because it is.

The universe is what it is because it is.

The universe is what it is because it is.

The universe is what it is because it is.

Ad infinitum...