What is Tim Duncan's religion?

[Blue-Lightning]

Does the creator have an infinite pass?

I'm assuming you mean "past." The answer to that question is that the creator must be outside our universe in order to be outside the first law of thermodynamics. Now since time is a part of our universe, we can't be sure that it exists outside of it, and if it does what it's like. So, there may not be a "past" for the creator to have. Then again their may be. Maybe the creator was created by another creator and another creator, etc. Who knows? Faith can tell you what the creator is like (outside of revelation, according to those who believe it), but we really don't have any concrete information on the multiverse, if it exists, what's there, or what the creator is.

Good question,

BL

[Blue-Lightning]

LOL butthurt christian soldier playing physicist.

When you can hold your own in the conversation, let me know. Otherwise you're like a gnat. Maybe if we were on the playground in kindergarten, this would work... but your current tactic just shows you don't know enough to participate.

It's okay - maybe you'll get smarter over time if you apply yourself.

BL

[Blue-Lightning]

You don't choose whether to believe in something. I can't choose to believe the grass is blue or the sky green.

That's a poor analogy. A better analogy is like the stock market where investors choose to put their faith in certain companies with their money. Or like how when you sat in your chair, you put your faith in it since you didn't inspect it first.

BL

[redzero]

I believe in John 3:16

Why?

Hope I'm wrong but if I'm not...sorry that's the path you've chosen for yourself.

Good, so the all-loving God can send me to eternal damnation! Won't be the first thing he does that makes no damn sense.

I'm assuming you mean "past." The answer to that question is that the creator must be outside our universe in order to be outside the first law of thermodynamics. Now since time is a part of our universe, we can't be sure that it exists outside of it, and if it does what it's like. So, there may not be a "past" for the creator to have. Then again their may be. Maybe the creator was created by another creator and another creator, etc. Who knows? Faith can tell you what the creator is like (outside of revelation, according to those who believe it), but we really don't have any concrete information on the multiverse, if it exists, what's there, or what the creator is.

Good question,

BL

Or maybe you don't know what you are talking about. Maybe you don't know that there is a creator. Maybe you create premises only to go outside of them to come a conclusion.

[ElNono]

Prepare for an intellectual can of whoop ass in...

3

2

1

The first law of thermodynamics says energy can neither be created nor destroyed. That means the universe cannot be self-generated. The universe also cannot have existed forever as that would mean it has an infinite past. If it has an infinite past, then how did we arrive in the present? That would be like you saying you ran an infinite amount of miles to go to the grocery store. "No you didn't." You can't travel an infinite amount of space nor time as that would mean it wasn't infinite in the first place. So the fact that we live in the present means the past cannot be infinite.

Therefore, since the universe cannot be self-generated, and since it can't have existed forever, that leaves us with one option. The universe was created by an outside source. What do we call something that creates? We call it a creator. Now whether the creator is YHWH or made of pasta is up to your own faith to decide (or lack thereof)... but the fact that it exists(ed) is undeniable.

Have fun,

BL

Open wide, your can of whoop ass is coming right back at you including the plethora of asinine assumptions and shortcuts you made above (pretty typical of science hacks that gloat about IQ, tbh).

Unfortunately, I have to type all this on my cell, so it's gonna be later on. I'm quoting this to make sure you don't go around editing your post before the axe falls.

[all_heart]

He does know what you're talking about it and he has a really good point. You need to be able to defend your beliefs better. And that "x stuff," well, that's called math.

If he can't change your beliefs, then you're no better than an ignorant piece of dirt. Intelligent people can adjust their beliefs if they see they are wrong. Wise people know that they are not above being wrong. You're not omniscient, chief. And if you can't sway his opinion, then your's must not be all that impressive.

Maybe it's because you guys are high schoolers... I don't know, but yeesh you should both be able to do better than this.

BL

Hold on cowboy, first of all I'm not really trying to change any of these clowns opinions.. over the internet?! Even if that was true, they would want to believe or have an interest. Seems to me they don't at all. They can't change my beliefs cause they practically have none of their own. Never claimed to be omniscient. I'll be the first to admit, I'm not impressive in this regard, I'm no preacher nor do I know the Bible backwards or forwards but I do know what kind of life God wants me to live though and I can tell when people are talking non-sense for the sake of argument. High school?! Very funny. I'm nearly 20 yrs removed, that's why I have no silly or cute avatars or sigs... I come here to talk Spurs, but this is where I find myself...

[all_heart]

That's a poor analogy. A better analogy is like the stock market where investors choose to put their faith in certain companies with their money. Or like how when you sat in your chair, you put your faith in it since you didn't inspect it first.

BL

Yes, thank you.

[baseline bum]

When you can hold your own in the conversation, let me know. Otherwise you're like a gnat. Maybe if we were on the playground in kindergarten, this would work... but your current tactic just shows you don't know enough to participate.

It's okay - maybe you'll get smarter over time if you apply yourself.

BL

LOL @ using a physical argument for a metaphysical concept like the universe being generated.

[all_heart]

Why?



Good, so the all-loving God can send me to eternal damnation! Won't be the first thing he does that makes no damn sense.



Or maybe you don't know what you are talking about. Maybe you don't know that there is a creator. Maybe you create premises only to go outside of them to come a conclusion.

What do you mean "why?" Ask a better question if you are gonna ask why.

You talk/write as if there is a God, but you don't understand him. Is this true? If you don't believe in God, then why does any of this concern you whatsoever?

[redzero]

Why do you believe what John 3:16 says? It's a simple question.

[underdawg]

I don't think people are dumb for believing in white man in the sky god tbh. I mean, it's a huge and sophisticated con-job that begins in childhood when people are more apt to respect and pay attention to figures of authority. When someone gets cheated, you don't blame the victim; you blame the swindlers.

what religion believes in the "white man in the sky"?

[all_heart]

Why do you believe what John 3:16 says? It's a simple question.

Because in my heart I feel those words to be true. I believe Jesus was sent to us to lay down the blueprint for us to gain eternal life in Heaven. The simple answer is because I have Faith and you just don't understand that concept.

[all_heart]

Why do you believe what John 3:16 says? It's a simple question.

I answered you, now answer my questions:

You talk/write as if there is a God, but you don't understand him. Is this true? If you don't believe in God, then why does any of this concern you whatsoever?

BTW, what's your beef with Thomas Aquinas? Did you get butt raped @TA high school or something? Shame on those people for what they did to you.

[Blake]

I'll be the first to admit, I'm not impressive in this regard, I'm no preacher nor do I know the Bible backwards or forwards

No way

[ElNono]

The first law of thermodynamics says energy can neither be created nor destroyed. That means the universe cannot be self-generated.

Let's start with the first asinine assumption here. You haven't established that:

A) The law of thermodynamics apply to a fairly unique event like the creation of the universe, if, in fact there was such an event (and I think we can agree that should it have happened, it was a fairly unique event). It's not like we don't have physical phenomena that only apply either only locally or under certain cir stances (quantum physics, newton's law of gravity, etc).
Establishing that the 1st law of thermodynamics did apply in that event would be a good start.

B) Even if we assume that the 1st law of thermodynamics do apply, then it s on your creator theory, since the creation of the universe would have been merely a transfer of energy from another source of energy (which also couldn't have been created or destroyed, merely existed as a previous transfer of energy).

C) The 1st law of thermodynamics makes no assumptions on a creator. As a matter of fact, it does away with the creator concept entirely. It's just as plausible that aliens inserted energy into a closed system and created the universe as any alleged deity doing the same. It's also just as plausible that the energy was already 'there', and it just combined into, say, the big bang under the right cir stances. Neither you or I know (yet)

The universe also cannot have existed forever as that would mean it has an infinite past. If it has an infinite past, then how did we arrive in the present? That would be like you saying you ran an infinite amount of miles to go to the grocery store. "No you didn't." You can't travel an infinite amount of space nor time as that would mean it wasn't infinite in the first place. So the fact that we live in the present means the past cannot be infinite.

Terrible stuff, and frankly it should only take you a few minutes to realize the fallacy of the argument. How we determine what's "present"? How we measure anything really? We setup frames of references. "present" is what we make it out to be based on our frame of reference. We do it all the time. We don't know when time started or when it's going to end. We simply started counting at a given time and that reference gives you the yesterday, today and tomorrow.

There's no mathematical impediment in measuring time over either a finite or infinite timeline. "Infinite" is a perfectly normal mathematical construction.

The example is specially re ed. The only reason a person wouldn't know how much they walked (a measurable event) is because they didn't set a frame of reference when they started. That would be the person being stupid, not a mathematical impossibility.

Do we know wether the universe is finite or infinite, time-wise? No we do not. Is there any mathematical impossibility for it to be infinite, no there is not.

Therefore, since the universe cannot be self-generated, and since it can't have existed forever, that leaves us with one option. The universe was created by an outside source. What do we call something that creates? We call it a creator. Now whether the creator is YHWH or made of pasta is up to your own faith to decide (or lack thereof)... but the fact that it exists(ed) is undeniable.

And finally we arrive at drawing conclusions over flawed assumptions, more typical stuff from science hacks that gloat about high IQ.

If only you actually spent more time learning about what you post you could've saved yourself the embarrassment, tbh.

[underdawg]

Well... the theists and atheists both have brought my IQ down just reading these posts.

Here you go:

The universe can't exist without some kind of creator (first law of thermodyanics, mathematical impossibility of an infinite past while in the present). To determine what the creator is or is like requires a great deal of faith since we can only know factually what exists within our own universe. Saying that a god can't or doesn't exist is mathematical ignorance.

The bible is a mess as well, and the quicker you accept that the better. It teaches a lot of really good stuff... and then it also teaches about religious abortions by the priest in Numbers. So it's a hodge podge of good versus unacceptable, with mostly good in the New Testament. And yes, I have a degree in biblical studies.

Have fun,

BL

I'm not sure what version you're looking at, but the original Hebrew does not translate a "miscarriage" as some have thought and therefore equated to God endorsing a priest to abort a baby.

[Blake]

Because in my heart I feel those words to be true. I believe Jesus was sent to us to lay down the blueprint for us to gain eternal life in Heaven. The simple answer is because I have Faith and you just don't understand that concept.

Why didn't God send Jesus before the flood?

[redzero]

Because in my heart I feel those words to be true.

Why?

I believe Jesus was sent to us to lay down the blueprint for us to gain eternal life in Heaven.

Why did God send Jesus down so many years after man was "created"? Why did God send Jesus down at all? Why didn't he just communicate directly with human beings? It would save everybody a lot of trouble.

The simple answer is because I have Faith and you just don't understand that concept.

Sorry that I actually want to have a good reason to believe something that would alter my entire life. "Feeling" just isn't good enough for me.

You talk/write as if there is a God, but you don't understand him. Is this true?

For the sake of the argument, I am assuming that the Judeo-Christian God exists.

If you don't believe in God, then why does any of this concern you whatsoever?

Because it does concern me and everybody else in America.

BTW, what's your beef with Thomas Aquinas? Did you get butt raped @TA high school or something? Shame on those people for what they did to you.

Butt raped? What?

[ElNono]

Nono man, bible boy needs you to do more "learning".

Apparently, counting laps on a circle-shaped (and thus infinite) track is a mathematical impossibility. You have to wonder what kind of vortex and black holes building one of those would create...

[redzero]

Let's start with the first asinine assumption here. You haven't established that:

A) The law of thermodynamics apply to a fairly unique event like the creation of the universe, if, in fact there was such an event (and I think we can agree that should it have happened, it was a fairly unique event). It's not like we don't have physical phenomena that only apply either only locally or under certain cir stances (quantum physics, newton's law of gravity, etc).
Establishing that the 1st law of thermodynamics did apply in that event would be a good start.

B) Even if we assume that the 1st law of thermodynamics do apply, then it s on your creator theory, since the creation of the universe would have been merely a transfer of energy from another source of energy (which also couldn't have been created or destroyed, merely existed as a previous transfer of energy).

C) The 1st law of thermodynamics makes no assumptions on a creator. As a matter of fact, it does away with the creator concept entirely. It's just as plausible that aliens inserted energy into a closed system and created the universe as any alleged deity doing the same. It's also just as plausible that the energy was already 'there', and it just combined into, say, the big bang under the right cir stances. Neither you or I know (yet)



Terrible stuff, and frankly it should only take you a few minutes to realize the fallacy of the argument. How we determine what's "present"? How we measure anything really? We setup frames of references. "present" is what we make it out to be based on our frame of reference. We do it all the time. We don't know when time started or when it's going to end. We simply started counting at a given time and that reference gives you the yesterday, today and tomorrow.

There's no mathematical impediment in measuring time over either a finite or infinite timeline. "Infinite" is a perfectly normal mathematical construction.

The example is specially re ed. The only reason a person wouldn't know how much they walked (a measurable event) is because they didn't set a frame of reference when they started. That would be the person being stupid, not a mathematical impossibility.

Do we know wether the universe is finite or infinite, time-wise? No we do not. Is there any mathematical impossibility for it to be infinite, no there is not.



And finally we arrive at drawing conclusions over flawed assumptions, more typical stuff from science hacks that gloat about high IQ.

If only you actually spent more time learning about what you post you could've saved yourself the embarrassment, tbh.

What he said.

[baseline bum]

Apparently, counting laps on a circle-shaped (and thus infinite) track is a mathematical impossibility. You have to wonder what kind of vortex and black holes building one of those would create...

So you don't believe it's turtles all the way down?

[ElNono]

So you don't believe it's turtles all the way down?

hawkings ftw

[DMC]

prepare for an intellectual can of whoop ass in...

3

2

1

the first law of thermodynamics says energy can neither be created nor destroyed. That means the universe cannot be self-generated. The universe also cannot have existed forever as that would mean it has an infinite past. If it has an infinite past, then how did we arrive in the present? That would be like you saying you ran an infinite amount of miles to go to the grocery store. "no you didn't." you can't travel an infinite amount of space nor time as that would mean it wasn't infinite in the first place. So the fact that we live in the present means the past cannot be infinite.

Therefore, since the universe cannot be self-generated, and since it can't have existed forever, that leaves us with one option. The universe was created by an outside source. What do we call something that creates? We call it a creator. Now whether the creator is yhwh or made of pasta is up to your own faith to decide (or lack thereof)... But the fact that it exists(ed) is undeniable.

Have fun,

bl

7/10

[all_heart]

Why?



Why did God send Jesus down so many after man was "created"? Why did God send Jesus down at all? Why didn't he just communicate directly with human beings? It would save everybody a lot of trouble.



Sorry that I actually want to have a good reason to believe something that would alter my entire life. "Feeling" just isn't good enough for me.



For the sake of the argument, I am assuming that the Judeo-Christian God exists.



Because it does concern me and everybody else in America.



Butt raped? What?

A lot of good questions, but I don't know and I doubt many could give you a good enough answer. I understand if feeling is not good enough for you, but like I said it's what many people believe and these feelings strike a strong chord inside many people and is what drives their Faith. Let me ask you, have you ever loved a person? If so how would you describe that feeling?

Don't assume for the sake of argument.. do you actually believe in a Judeo Christian God?

[all_heart]

So you don't believe it's turtles all the way down?

Infinity is a powerful word. It always trips me out that if you could travel in outer space in a straight line forever and ever and never hit a wall or boundary. And if you did.. what's on the other side of that wall?