My proof for God. Critiques please

  • Thread starter Thread starter coolduude
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Outside of time you would see everything happening at once.
Outside of time you wouldn’t see anything at all. Without time, no light would affect the sensors in your eyes. There would be no metabolism occuring in the cells in your brain. In fact, without time, how could the matter and energy that make up your body exist at all?
 
Outside of time you wouldn’t see anything at all. Without time, no light would affect the sensors in your eyes. There would be no metabolism occuring in the cells in your brain. In fact, without time, how could the matter and energy that make up your body exist at all?
obviously. Since god (to use an example) does exist outside the universe (or at least the concept of him states this, for all you atheists out there) this is what he would “see” to put it simply. this is a simple hypothetical. no body, eyes, brain, cells etc are necessary.
 
No one in acquaintance with the facts established by Harvey on the circulation on the blood could be in any doubt that the human heart can operate autonomously without any influence external to the human body.
What do you believe triggers a heart to beat?
I’m sorry, I don’t fully understand the question. Can you be more specific?
Sorry for the ambiguous question. I hope these questions provide more clarity. Do you believe that there is such a thing as good and evil in this world? Do you believe that if one could have visibility to the True reason for a person’s action, that this action could be classified as either good or evil?
 
What do you believe triggers a heart to beat?
I’m not a cardiologist, but if I had to guess I’d say cells that respond to electrochemical trigger signals and hormonal levels.
Sorry for the ambiguous question. I hope these questions provide more clarity. Do you believe that there is such a thing as good and evil in this world? Do you believe that if one could have visibility to the True reason for a person’s action, that this action could be classified as either good or evil?
I think good and evil are points of view.
 
obviously. Since god (to use an example) does exist outside the universe (or at least the concept of him states this, for all you atheists out there) this is what he would “see” to put it simply. this is a simple hypothetical. no body, eyes, brain, cells etc are necessary.
That sounds very convenient, but doesn’t sound very reasonable…
 
@momor

Two simple points to ponder:
  1. the difference between divisibility and being describable in terms of segments of time.
  2. The concept of time travel today generally involves the concept of “the” space-time continuum; which is not a thing in physics but is a useful mathematical model for describing and understanding what the universe looks like from various points of view for various purposes. Thus there is no such thing as a single space time continuum, there are various models from various hypothetical viewpoints of a moving multiple directional (relative to the viewpoint) universe. The mathematical term continuum implies complete indivisibility. The whole involved can be described in graphs, but cannot be divided. Sources available somewhere this side of page 20 in one of my posts. I’m off to work but if you would like them more conveniently, let me know here and I’ll dig them out and copy them in a more current posting.
 
I’m not a cardiologist, but if I had to guess I’d say cells that respond to electrochemical trigger signals and hormonal levels.

I think good and evil are points of view.
I would call them categories of human assessment of the actions and events of our existence.
 
@momor

Two simple points to ponder:
  1. the difference between divisibility and being describable in terms of segments of time.
  2. The concept of time travel today generally involves the concept of “the” space-time continuum; which is not a thing in physics but is a useful mathematical model for describing and understanding what the universe looks like from various points of view for various purposes. Thus there is no such thing as a single space time continuum, there are various models from various hypothetical viewpoints of a moving multiple directional (relative to the viewpoint) universe. The mathematical term continuum implies complete indivisibility. The whole involved can be described in graphs, but cannot be divided. Sources available somewhere this side of page 20 in one of my posts. I’m off to work but if you would like them more conveniently, let me know here and I’ll dig them out and copy them in a more current posting.
Thanks for the reply but I am unlikely to understand any mathematical models.

Do you think we can ‘see’ the future the same way we can ‘see’ the past mathematically? Is there any good reason to think there are other realities where we currrently exist in a different moment in time? It seems to me this gets us closer to the idea of the eternal now in which all reality is knowable at once. Next to the mystery of the Trinity, the nature of time is one of the things I am most looking forward to learning in heaven. I envy people here on earth who have the mind to be able to understand the mathematics of time and can conceptualize it in a way I cannot.
 
what are you talking about? do you have to actually be on the beaches of the Bahamas to visualize what it looks like?
I have to have seen them to do so, at the very least in photographic representation. To see that I need sense organs, eyes. To use these sense organs I need light to strike my retina. Light moves through space as a function of time.
 
I have to have seen them to do so, at the very least in photographic representation. To see that I need sense organs, eyes. To use these sense organs I need light to strike my retina. Light moves through space as a function of time.
ok. so look at your keyboard. then remember what your keyboard looked like in the past. then imagine both those past and present images to be happening at the same time. Viola!
 
ok. so look at your keyboard. then remember what your keyboard looked like in the past. then put the two images together.
I’ve seen my keyboard. I have never seen the Bahamas. I can’t visualize something I haven’t seen, that stands to reason.
 
I’ve seen my keyboard. I have never seen the Bahamas. I can’t visualize something I haven’t seen, that stands to reason.
do you think the person who first imagined a unicorn saw a unicorn? or a dragon? or a black hole? or Superstrings?
 
do you think the person who first imagined a unicorn saw a unicorn? or a dragon? or a black hole? or Superstrings?
Oh, I could make up an image in my head of what I imagine the Bahamas looks like, but it would undoubtedly be incorrect.
 
Or the first person to conceive a black swan… what a numpty.

👍
A poor example.

The person who first did that already had an archetype, the white swan, to work with. All he had to do was turn it black with his imagination.

Since I know nothing of the Bahamas, I really don’t have an archetype to work with at all. Any attempt on my part to visualize it would be wild surmise, which is not something I feel comfortable engaging in.

👍
 
A poor example.

The person who first did that already had an archetype, the white swan, to work with. All he had to do was turn it black with his imagination.

Since I know nothing of the Bahamas, I really don’t have an archetype to work with at all. Any attempt on my part to visualize it would be wild surmise, which is not something I feel comfortable engaging in.

👍
well you have an archetype to work with. the universe. and just as you can imagine a black swan in place of a white swan, replace a universe with time, with a universe without time. ezpz.
 
What is the source of these electrochemical trigger signals?
*Specialized, noncontractile cells in the sinoatrial (SA) node, also known as the heart’s pacemaker, start an electrical impulse that travels throughout the atria to the atrioventricular (AV) node. The cells of the SA node naturally send out an electrical impulse at a rate of about 60-100 times per minute. This is why the normal heart range is 60-100 bpm. The AV node delays the impulse, so the atria finish contracting before the ventricles start contracting. The AV node sends an impulse to the atrioventricular bundle, also known as the bundle of His. The bundle of His sends impulses to Purkinje fibers in the ventricles, forming the electrical connection between the atria and ventricles. *
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top