par4dcourse Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 All that to prove that if we close our eyes and imagine and wish real hard maybe possibly pigs can indeed fly. End, you got to much time on your hands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 All that to prove that if we close our eyes and imagine and wish real hard maybe possibly pigs can indeed fly. End, you got to much time on your hands. Just stubborn that way Par... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legion Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 Personally End, I think you would be better off arguing for a trinity from a biological or psychological standpoint. For instance, Freud thought the mind had three aspects: the id, the ego, and the superego. And biologist Steen Rasmussen is trying to create living cells from scratch by functionally coupling three “things”: genes, metabolism, and container. Anyway you could try those angles too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chefranden Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 ...A typical phase diagram. The dotted green line gives the anomalous behaviour of waterThe single combination of pressure and temperature at which water, ice, and water vapour can coexist in a stable equilibrium occurs at exactly 273.16 K (0.01 °C) and a partial vapour pressure of 611.73 pascals (ca. 6.1173 millibars, 0.0060373057 atm). At that point, it is possible to change all of the substance to ice, water, or vapor by making arbitrarily small changes in pressure and temperature. Note that even if the total pressure of a system is well above 611.73 pascals (e.g. normal atmospheric pressure), if the partial pressure of the water vapour is 611.73 pascals then the system can still be brought to the triple point of water. Strictly speaking, the surfaces separating the different phases should also be perfectly flat, to avoid the effects of surface tensions... Under these condition water could be in any of three states, nevertheless no particular molecule is in all three states at the same time. It is along with its immediate neighbors still in one state. And sure you can use cellulose to filter water but that takes rather more manipulation than just tossing a couple of sticks in the pond. However, if Moses did know how to manipulate cellulose to filter water for a million people the miracle is gone and God is gone with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trike Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 A few things here I have run across in "the physical" that appear to me to loom large in the evidence for Christianity catagory......the presumption, that men did not understand these physical properties many hundreds of years ago, but they, to me, are in agreement with Scripture as they have come to understanding. The question is: How do you feel about these? Please know, I am no expert in any of these fields, so I would wecome knowledge that is not known to me upon posting this. I will try to explain also why I see them as agreeing.... 1) The triple point of water in the Trinity argument. The Bible talks about that God's Spirit is water . To me, as we have discussed previously, God would be like solid water, Jesus, water in the liquid form, and the Holy Spirit, water as vapor. (The ole 1+1+1= 1 joke). Well, here it is in nature, the three phases existing simultaneously as one single water molecule....I think Wiki even goes so far as to call it a "substance" rather than water... Also, the separation of the waters(forms) by God in Genesis. END3 First, I'm gonna need chapter and verse that "god's spirit is water". Secondly, the trinity of water is not proof of the Christian god. Nay, it is proof of the trinity composed of Demeter, Hecate and Persephone! We must meditate on the mystery of this! [/sarcasm]. Trinities exist in all religions, hence any theist or polytheist could grasp this argument. Thus it only provides "proof" to the ignorant. And you should look at the real pictures of lamin that were posted, a Christian cross it is not. Even if it were, the Christian cross which you are used to seeing is a product of the late third and early fourth century, long after the crucifixion took place. In fact, the only artists who use a cross to represent Jesus before that time period were Roman graffiti artists who used it to mock Christians (and it seems as though the early Christians were very much ashamed of the cross). And, if it were a cross, could it not also bolster one's faith in Satanism when placed upside down? Again no definite proof is there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oddbird1963 Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 1) The triple point of water in the Trinity argument. The Bible talks about that God's Spirit is water . These water illustrations ,might have a purpose when used for illustration purposes - - not as any proposed evidence or proof of Christianity. It is a fallacy to say : Something in the physical world is like something that Christiians believe, therefore Christianity is true. This does not provide evidence or even teach the doctrine the illustration illuminates. 2) Laminin....a case for Jesus who holds all things together. The agreement here lies in the molecule exists as the cross shape, "holding all things together". Laminin The Bible is no longer my authority and it hurts even me to see that kind of torture of the book. It is also an illustration. It is not some physical proof of the omnipresence of God or the power of Christ. Great for a sunday school lesson to get people's heads around an idea, but noting of any interpretive or evidential value. 3) Celluostic compounds used in water purification. Same response as number 1 and number 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MathGeek Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 End3, 1 + 1 + 1 = 1 3 = 1 let B = the god of the Bible 3B = 1B 3B - 1B = 0 2B = 0 B = 0 Therefore the God of the Bible does not exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 1) The triple point of water in the Trinity argument. The Bible talks about that God's Spirit is water . These water illustrations ,might have a purpose when used for illustration purposes - - not as any proposed evidence or proof of Christianity. It is a fallacy to say : Something in the physical world is like something that Christiians believe, therefore Christianity is true. This does not provide evidence or even teach the doctrine the illustration illuminates. 2) Laminin....a case for Jesus who holds all things together. The agreement here lies in the molecule exists as the cross shape, "holding all things together". Laminin The Bible is no longer my authority and it hurts even me to see that kind of torture of the book. It is also an illustration. It is not some physical proof of the omnipresence of God or the power of Christ. Great for a sunday school lesson to get people's heads around an idea, but noting of any interpretive or evidential value. 3) Celluostic compounds used in water purification. Same response as number 1 and number 2. Hello OB, They are things that I personally hold as "evidence" along with rainbows, children, and many others. It wasnt meant to offend anyone. Some of the folks here and I have a history of debate, nothing more.... Thanks for the response and welcome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 End3, 1 + 1 + 1 = 1 3 = 1 let B = the god of the Bible 3B = 1B 3B - 1B = 0 2B = 0 B = 0 Therefore the God of the Bible does not exist. Not a math whiz MG, but I think you are missing the equation brother.... Let B= the God of the Bible, where B=1. An interesting note. I think my view of the trinity is different than the orthodox. L4A was stating, if I am reading him right, that there would be three indivduals acting as one god. I don't see it that way. I see it, well, you know how I see it. I think Hans sees it my way, but that was interesting for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MathGeek Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 Not a math whiz MG, but I think you are missing the equation brother.... Let B= the God of the Bible, where B=1. An interesting note. I think my view of the trinity is different than the orthodox. L4A was stating, if I am reading him right, that there would be three indivduals acting as one god. I don't see it that way. I see it, well, you know how I see it. I think Hans sees it my way, but that was interesting for me. Therefore... B = the god of the Bible B = 1 Christians have told me that the Trinity is articulated like this 1 * 1 * 1 = 1 Well, there are two ways to look at this... B * B * B = 1 B^3 - 1 = 0 (B - 1)(B^2 + B + 1) = 0 B - 1 = 0 or B^2 + B + 1 = 0 B = 1 or B = (1 + i * sqrt(3)) / 2 or B = (1 - i * sqrt(3)) / 2 This means the God of the Bible is one part real and two parts imaginary. OR... B * B * B = B B^3 - B = 0 B * (B^2 - 1) = 0 B * (B - 1) * (B + 1) = 0 B = 0 or B = 1 or B = -1 This means the God of the Bible is one part real, one part unknown, one part nonexistent. Either way, the God of the Bible is a completely real concept, a completely nonexistent concept or a nebulous concept that cannot be pinned down at all. Since basic algebra proves beyond the shadow of a doubt that the God of the Bible is both imaginary and real, then this a contradiction therefore the God of the Bible does not exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 B * B * B = B B^3 - B = 0 B * (B^2 - 1) = 0 B * (B - 1) * (B + 1) = 0 B = 0 or B = 1 or B = -1 This means the God of the Bible is one part real, one part unknown, one part nonexistent. Bingo brother! B is still God, so God is either real to us, unknown to us, or nonexistent to us. Thank you for your math gift.....me and math splitted company at DiffEq....and I still thank God Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MathGeek Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 B * B * B = BB^3 - B = 0 B * (B^2 - 1) = 0 B * (B - 1) * (B + 1) = 0 B = 0 or B = 1 or B = -1 This means the God of the Bible is one part real, one part unknown, one part nonexistent. Bingo brother! B is still God, so God is either real to us, unknown to us, or nonexistent to us. Thank you for your math gift.....me and math splitted company at DiffEq....and I still thank God I basically summed up the three basic points of views on the existence of God in regards to Christianity, but my argument was about the nature of God itself and to basically show you how absurd the Trinity is. Either way, the God of the Bible is bogus concept in my opinion. Thanks for the comments btw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 B * B * B = BB^3 - B = 0 B * (B^2 - 1) = 0 B * (B - 1) * (B + 1) = 0 B = 0 or B = 1 or B = -1 This means the God of the Bible is one part real, one part unknown, one part nonexistent. Bingo brother! B is still God, so God is either real to us, unknown to us, or nonexistent to us. Thank you for your math gift.....me and math splitted company at DiffEq....and I still thank God I basically summed up the three basic points of views on the existence of God in regards to Christianity, but my argument was about the nature of God itself and to basically show you how absurd the Trinity is. Either way, the God of the Bible is bogus concept in my opinion. Thanks for the comments btw. You are welcome, and I know I tweeked the meaning a bit, but look anyway at the result.....three different "switch settings" from your equation.....-1, 0, and 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chefranden Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 But you are right in a sense....it is a theoretical point, IMO, due to the limitations of changing very, very, small temps and pressures. Now, we are asked by science to have faith in this point as apparently physical things are calibrated on this knowledge. So where do we go from here brother? You can have faith (if that is what you want to call it) in the knowledge of science because the knowledge works. This state can be used for calibration because it is a known point. If the calibration is off, you know you screwed up your math or your instruments in some fashion. If the calibration doesn't work many times, you know that you don't have sufficient knowledge of this state of matter, or that your idea was loony to start with. Faith in God on the other hand leaves you hanging by your balls 99% of the time. I works no better than coincidence. Just try praying for Christian unity and see if it works. Christ Almighty, it didn't even work for Jesus! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 But you are right in a sense....it is a theoretical point, IMO, due to the limitations of changing very, very, small temps and pressures. Now, we are asked by science to have faith in this point as apparently physical things are calibrated on this knowledge. So where do we go from here brother? You can have faith (if that is what you want to call it) in the knowledge of science because the knowledge works. This state can be used for calibration because it is a known point. If the calibration is off, you know you screwed up your math or your instruments in some fashion. If the calibration doesn't work many times, you know that you don't have sufficient knowledge of this state of matter, or that your idea was loony to start with. Faith in God on the other hand leaves you hanging by your balls 99% of the time. I works no better than coincidence. Just try praying for Christian unity and see if it works. Christ Almighty, it didn't even work for Jesus! You're alright Chef, I don't care what Hans has said about you.....I see your point, but faith in God works for me.....it just does. You are right on the other counts, and I will readily admit that. Perhaps the relationship is faith in a unity that is rarely achieved here on earth, even if it is perhaps make believe.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 You're alright Chef, I don't care what Hans has said about you..... What have I said about Chef?!? I'm not sure what the heck you're talking about... I consider Chef to be a very nice and brilliant guy! I don't think I have ever said anything else... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chefranden Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 You're alright Chef, I don't care what Hans has said about you.....I see your point, but faith in God works for me.....it just does. You are right on the other counts, and I will readily admit that. Perhaps the relationship is faith in a unity that is rarely achieved here on earth, even if it is perhaps make believe.... Don't worry about it none. I don't listen to Han anyway. I suppose that what you mean by "works for me" is that the idea of God makes you feel all warm, fuzzy, and safe. You don't mean that if you pray to have God to save your favorite dog from the rabies that you actually expect that he will? Right? I get the same feeling from chocolate bunnies. Dang I could use one right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 You're alright Chef, I don't care what Hans has said about you..... What have I said about Chef?!? I'm not sure what the heck you're talking about... I consider Chef to be a very nice and brilliant guy! I don't think I have ever said anything else... Just an expression we have here in West Texas to get people into trouble.....nothing was said, just a way to pick on you. If I didn't pick on you, you would know I didn't think much of you. Just like at the steer ropings around here Hans.....if your horse starts bucking because you havn't warmed him up enough, all of your friends will just start hoopin and hollering trying to make him buck harder.....and then get the biggest laugh... Hang in there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tabula Rasa Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 I haven't read the whole thread, but if you want to try to foster proof for christianity by cross patterns in nature... I can very easily make a cross shape. All I need do is stand put my legs together and stick my arms out to the side. Some might see this as proof that the christ story is valid, that the shape of the human body shows that the crucifixion was destined to happen, that a human body perfectly fits a cross. However, I can also while still standing, spread my feet apart and form a crude pentagram. You could also judge by my ability to do so, it shows the imprint of the devil, and of man's inherited corruption. Or we could just assume, you can see what you want to see in shapes, forms and patterns. I'm not averse to the idea of God, I'm a deist after all, but I am very averse to the biblical representation of him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chefranden Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 You're alright Chef, I don't care what Hans has said about you..... What have I said about Chef?!? I'm not sure what the heck you're talking about... I consider Chef to be a very nice and brilliant guy! I don't think I have ever said anything else... Just an expression we have here in West Texas to get people into trouble.....nothing was said, just a way to pick on you. If I didn't pick on you, you would know I didn't think much of you. Just like at the steer ropings around here Hans.....if your horse starts bucking because you havn't warmed him up enough, all of your friends will just start hoopin and hollering trying to make him buck harder.....and then get the biggest laugh... Hang in there That's right Han. It's a popular gag here in the Midwest to. It is sort of a way to express affection without getting too mushy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 Hang in there That's right Han. It's a popular gag here in the Midwest to. It is sort of a way to express affection without getting too mushy. I'm getting tears in my eyes... no wait, I poked my eye by mistake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbobrob Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 End, if you want to really look into how religion has used water to represent their deity, try Taoism. They use water very effectively to explain the nature of a universal deity. Far better, in my opinion, than this Christian attempt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MathGeek Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 I will respond to the cross assertion. Crosses appear everywhere because right angles appear almost everywhere in nature. Trees fallen in the forest, rocks that have been upended due to plate tectonics, even bent over blades of grass in a wind storm. Since the right angle is such a natural formation, wouldn't one expect that a religion to use a right angle to some degree in their rituals. The cross is a natural shape in terms of engineering and ordinary construction. I think it is a case of religion being a parasite off of nature. As they say, somebody inevitably steals something from somebody else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 And don't forget, these have triple points as well: Substance T (K) P (kPa*)Acetylene 192.4 120 Ammonia 195.40 6.076 Argon 83.81 68.9 Butane[5] 134.6 7 × 10−4 Carbon (graphite) 3900 10100 Carbon dioxide 216.55 517 Carbon monoxide 68.10 15.37 Chloroform[6] 175.43 0.870 Deuterium 18.63 17.1 Ethane 89.89 8 × 10−4 Ethanol[7] 150 4.3 × 10−7 Ethylene 104.0 0.12 Formic acid[8] 281.40 2.2 Helium-4 (lambda point) 2.19 5.1 Hexafluoroethane[9] 173.08 26.60 Hydrogen 13.84 7.04 Hydrogen chloride 158.96 13.9 Iodine[10] 386.65 12.07 Isobutane[11] 113.55 1.9481 × 10−5 Mercury 234.2 1.65 × 10−7 Methane 90.68 11.7 Neon 24.57 43.2 Nitric oxide 109.50 21.92 Nitrogen 63.18 12.6 Nitrous oxide 182.34 87.85 Oxygen 54.36 0.152 Palladium 1825 3.5 × 10−3 Platinum 2045 2.0 × 10−4 Sulfur dioxide 197.69 1.67 Titanium 1941 5.3 × 10−3 Uranium hexafluoride 337.17 151.7 Water 273.16 0.6117 Xenon 161.3 81.5 Zinc 692.65 0.065 So we should talk about the Holy Spirit as Methane too... isn't that... ah, yes it is. The Holy Fart. It's now proven, God is triple state of Fart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MathGeek Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 There are triple points in other disciplines as well. Check out these articles... In hydrology and geology... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple_Divide_Peak In seismology and plate tectonics... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afar_Triple_Junction http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mendocino_Triple_Junction I guess Jesus really wants to rock this world... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts