If your donator status is incorrect, please contact Michael at operations@freedomainradio.com with the relevant information.

Freedomain Radio Amazon Affiliate Links: United States - Canada - United Kingdom

Welcome to Freedomain Radio Message Board

If you're interested in joining the philosophical discussion, click "sign in" or "create account" on the right of the page. If you're creating a new account, please be sure to include an explanation as to why you're interested in joining the message board community. This verification requirement is included to cut down on possible spam accounts.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

JamesRedford

God Proven to Exist According to Mainstream Physics

49 posts in this topic

luke 9:13 says that the total amount of meat was not enough to feed 5000 on its own.

the apostles say they don't have enough food, and would need to go to the market to buy more food in order to have enough food to feed all 5000.

 

this is assuming the story is real and correctly recorded, which is a question on it's own

 

Actually the scripture goes like this:

 

Feeding the Five Thousand

10 And the apostles, when they had returned, told Him all that they had done. Then He took them and went aside privately into a deserted place belonging to the city called Bethsaida. 11 But when the multitudes knewit, they followed Him; and He received them and spoke to them about the kingdom of God, and healed those who had need of healing. 12 When the day began to wear away, the twelve came and said to Him, “Send the multitude away, that they may go into the surrounding towns and country, and lodge and get provisions; for we are in a deserted place here.”

13 But He said to them, “You give them something to eat.”

And they said, “We have no more than five loaves and two fish, unless we go and buy food for all these people.” 14 For there were about five thousand men.

Then He said to His disciples, “Make them sit down in groups of fifty.”15 And they did so, and made them all sit down.

16 Then He took the five loaves and the two fish, and looking up to heaven, He blessed and broke them, and gave them to the disciples to set before the multitude. 17 So they all ate and were filled, and twelve baskets of the leftover fragments were taken up by them.

 

And the feeding of the 5000 pretty much ends there. Who knows how it really happened or what is true or not.

When a story is written by many and it is done thru several decades it is hard to get the truth. Some of the accounts become pretty much hear say.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually the scripture goes like this:

 

Feeding the Five Thousand

10 And the apostles, when they had returned, told Him all that they had done. Then He took them and went aside privately into a deserted place belonging to the city called Bethsaida. 11 But when the multitudes knewit, they followed Him; and He received them and spoke to them about the kingdom of God, and healed those who had need of healing. 12 When the day began to wear away, the twelve came and said to Him, “Send the multitude away, that they may go into the surrounding towns and country, and lodge and get provisions; for we are in a deserted place here.”

13 But He said to them, “You give them something to eat.”

And they said, “We have no more than five loaves and two fish, unless we go and buy food for all these people.” 14 For there were about five thousand men.

Then He said to His disciples, “Make them sit down in groups of fifty.”15 And they did so, and made them all sit down.

16 Then He took the five loaves and the two fish, and looking up to heaven, He blessed and broke them, and gave them to the disciples to set before the multitude. 17 So they all ate and were filled, and twelve baskets of the leftover fragments were taken up by them.

 

And the feeding of the 5000 pretty much ends there. Who knows how it really happened or what is true or not.

When a story is written by many and it is done thru several decades it is hard to get the truth. Some of the accounts become pretty much hear say.

 

 

 

whats the point of the story if it's just about 5000 people eating food for 5000+ people?

 

one would have to look at the motivations of those telling the story.

commentaries i have read suggest the intent is to indicate it was a miracle of feeding 5000, without the food for 5000, showing power of god.

 

 

We have our foreskins dissected.... to be fair... that happens even if you do enter the covenant.

 

showing "god" not working through the free market principles.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is anyone else not NEARLY high enough to read this shit?

 

 

Seems to me that if I wanted this much mental masturbation, I would get better results thinking about hot Japanese lesbian high school students.

 

God has been proven to exist based upon the most reserved view of the known laws of physics.
 
 

 

Ok, I have read some of the stuff on this thread and I think you guys are missing the whole problem with James here. So James, you claim that physics proves the existence of an Omega Consciousness called God that has the following properties.

 

1)  He knows everything that is logically possible to know.

2)  He can do anything logically possible.

3)  He is eternal and unchanging.

 

Ignoring for the moment that there is a contradiction between a being that can do something, yet is at the same time unchanging, the real BASIC question I have for you is as follows:

 

Q)  How do you know that this Omega Consciousness is the God described by Christianity?

 

The guys on this thread are missing the point arguing over the multiplication of fish.  After all, a "God" could have Star Trek like technology and maybe he beamed the extra fish and bread in with a transporter.  Or maybe he pulled them out of a parallel universe.

 

The REAL problems with your view that he's the god described by Christianity, in my view, are as follows.

 

1)  Why would the Omega Consciousness have a place like "heaven" where we go if we believe in him?  Or a place like "hell" if we don't believe in him or disobey his rules?

 

2)  Why would the Omega Consciousness care about whether I obey certain things?  Like for example, not eating pork or shellfish?  I understand that such things might carry disease, but what about cooking them properly? Or why does he care whether or not I have gay sex?

 

3)  If his message to mankind is important, why is he relying on an old book that has been unreliably translated numerous times and has been reinterpreted in thousands of different ways.  For example,

 

a) Regarding the gay sex issue, some people think the Bible clearly condemns gay sex whereas other people think those passages only refer to non-consensual sex, or temple prostitution. 

 

b) Some people believe that all you have to do to be saved is believe in Jesus. Others say that believing isn't enough and that you need works.  Others believe you need faith plus the sacraments. 

 

You would think if his message to mankind was so important, it would be pretty clear where he stands on these issues.

 

4)  Why would the Omega Consciousness create one set of rules for ancient people to follow (i.e. the Old Testament) and then decide to create a new set of rules (i.e. the New Testament)? Can't he get it right the first time?

 

5)  Assuming we follow the right rules and we get to go to heaven, what will we do there that won't get boring after doing it for hundreds or thousands of years?

 

 

It seems that a being that knows everything and can do everything would consider the "Christian religion" too stupid to be worth his time.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

one thing i would be wondering is what kind of differences this makes for those that are ancap christian, and those that are ancap athiest, or other religion?

 

i would see a danger in statist christianity, but not in ancap christianity in the same way.

 

is this saying in the future ancap christians will have be part of what ancap athiests will not be a part of?  would the ancap athiests have a choice in the future to have what the ancap christians have, instead of what the ancap athiests would not have?

 

Yeshua Ha'Mashiach said that being a Christian consists of following His teachings, and furthermore He said that those who call themselves followers of Him yet who do not follow His teachings are in fact not His followers.
 
So one can be a genuine Christian without ever having heard of Jesus. Further, many of those who call themselves Christians will face Perdition.
 
For the details on this, see my following article:
 
James Redford, "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Sept. 10, 2012 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2011), 186 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708; PDF, 1741424 bytes, MD5: 8f7b21ee1e236fc2fbb22b4ee4bbd4cb. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1974708 , http://archive.org/details/ThePhysicsOfGodAndTheQuantumGravityTheoryOfEverything , http://theophysics.host56.com/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf , http://alphaomegapoint.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/redford-physics-of-god.pdf , http://sites.google.com/site/physicotheism/home/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf
-2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My goodness he is absolutely blowing you all out of the water & it seems like the big dogs who usually are first to defend atheism have steered clear of this possibly cause of the immense empirical data James Redford has laid down. The ones who stay to defend are simply nitpicking small things about Christianity.

-4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

in order for the known laws of physics to be mutually consistent, the universe must diverge to infinite computational power as it collapses into a final cosmological singularity, termed the Omega Point

 

How can this feel so wrong...

 

the dead can be resurrected--never to die again--via perfect computer emulation of the multiverse from its start at the Big Bang.

 

Yet this feel so familiar...

 

:laugh:

 

 

Seriously though, infinity, like a number, can only be a concept. Infinity cannot exist in reality. There cannot be an infinite amount of matter, or an infinite amount of energy, or an infinite amount of complexity. There can be a finite assortment of matter which repeats infinity times, so long as the number of things that actually exist is still finite. Infinity can exist as a scope of calculable information, or an infinite amount of time, both being concepts.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How can this feel so wrong...

 

 

Yet this feel so familiar...

 

:laugh:

 

 

Seriously though, infinity, like a number, can only be a concept. Infinity cannot exist in reality. There cannot be an infinite amount of matter, or an infinite amount of energy, or an infinite amount of complexity. There can be a finite assortment of matter which repeats infinity times, so long as the number of things that actually exist is still finite. Infinity can exist as a scope of calculable information, or an infinite amount of time, both being concepts.

 

Actually, all of fundamental mathematics (and indeed, physics) is based upon the reality of infinity. In mathematics, this is called Set Theory, and everything in mathematics, from simple arithmetic on up, is based upon it (e.g., Zermelo-Fraenkel Set Theory).
 
In physics, this is called singularity studies.
 
You cannot get rid of the singularity. It exists in a very fundamental way. It is there, as a basic feature of existence.
 
So deal with it.
 
For more on this fundamental infinity of existence, see my following resources:
 
James Redford, "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Sept. 10, 2012 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2011), 186 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708; PDF, 1741424 bytes, MD5: 8f7b21ee1e236fc2fbb22b4ee4bbd4cb. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1974708 , http://archive.org/details/ThePhysicsOfGodAndTheQuantumGravityTheoryOfEverything , http://theophysics.host56.com/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf , http://alphaomegapoint.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/redford-physics-of-god.pdf , http://sites.google.com/site/physicotheism/home/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf
 
Further, in the below resource are six sections which contain very informative videos of physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler explaining the Omega Point cosmology, which is a proof (i.e., mathematical theorem) of God's existence per the known laws of physics (viz., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics), and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model Theory of Everything (TOE), which is also required by the known laws of physics. The seventh section therein contains an audio interview of Tipler.
 
A number of these videos are not otherwise online. I also provide some helpful notes and commentary for some of these videos.
 
James Redford, "Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech: Can Physics Prove God and Christianity?", alt.sci.astro, Message-ID: jghev8tcbv02b6vn3uiq8jmelp7jijluqk@4ax.com , 30 Jul 2013 00:51:55 -0400. https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.sci.astro/KQWt4KcpMVo , http://archive.is/a04w9 , http://webcitation.org/6IUTAMEyS The plain text of this post is available at: TXT, 42423 bytes, MD5: b199e867e42d54b2b8bf6adcb4127761. http://mirrorcreator.com/files/JCFTZSS8/ , http://ge.tt/3lOTVbp
-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Actually, all of fundamental mathematics (and indeed, physics) is based upon the reality of infinity. In mathematics, this is called Set Theory, and everything in mathematics, from simple arithmetic on up, is based upon it (e.g., Zermelo-Fraenkel Set Theory).

 

Well, to cite a similar example, calculus makes use of the number i (square root of negative 1) and even though there is no such number, and even though no one could ever count i apples or measure i inches of distance, its still valid to use in an algebraic equation because it's simply a variable whose value is never calculated. If 4i = 8X, then divide both sides by i and you get 4 = 8X / i. So yeah, work can be done with these numbers that have no defined value, but only because the work done with them never tries to define their value.

 

I just don't see how infinity could exist in reality. It's a concept like the number i. Surely if we don't think the number 7 exists in reality, then the number i and the number infinity must also be nonexistent? Because 7 would be a lot easier to define in reality than something which has no definition. The number 7 is more like a descriptive word "red" than an existing independent object. That apple is red. There are 7 red apples.

 

Maybe I still haven't understood what you mean though, would be my fault. I haven't taken the higher math classes. So if that's my problem forgive me :blink:

 

Trying this from a different angle let's assume the number 7 exists because we can touch 7 red apples with our fingers and count each touch. This way, the existence of a number manifests itself by our ability to physically move our bodies across its domain. Can you make infinity manifest itself? No one could ever touch infinity apples infinity times with their finger, all they can do is keep trying to finish. No one could touch i apples because if they're never touched an apple before then they're already touched too many apples.

 

I gotta say that I still think you're right, even though I don't agree with the argument to prove your point. I've read something similar called The Simulation Argument, and I have considered this possibility from many different angles. How else could we call ourselves "creations" if we're not created? This argument if true would also explain how eternal life is possible, and how the death of flesh is just one stage within an eternal lifespan.

-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

one thing i would be wondering is what kind of differences this makes for those that are ancap christian, and those that are ancap athiest, or other religion?

 

i would see a danger in statist christianity, but not in ancap christianity in the same way.

 

is this saying in the future ancap christians will have be part of what ancap athiests will not be a part of?  would the ancap athiests have a choice in the future to have what the ancap christians have, instead of what the ancap athiests would not have?

 

I'm not sure what you're asking, but my following article would seem to address your basic concerns:

 

My following article demonstrates the logically unavoidable anarchism of Jesus Christ's teachings as recorded in the New Testament (in addition to analyzing their context in relation to his actions, to the Tanakh, and to his apostles). It is logically complete on this subject, in the sense of its apodixis.
 
James Redford, "Jesus Is an Anarchist", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Dec. 4, 2011 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2001), 60 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1337761; PDF, 312715 bytes, MD5: ff45387b1b2ed9d6dec411d5328abdd6. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1337761 , http://archive.org/download/JesusIsAnAnarchist/Redford-Jesus-Is-an-Anarchist.pdf , http://theophysics.host56.com/anarchist-jesus.pdf , http://webcitation.org/66AIz2rJw , http://pdf-archive.com/2013/09/10/redford-jesus-is-an-anarchist/redford-jesus-is-an-anarchist.pdf
-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My goodness he is absolutely blowing you all out of the water & it seems like the big dogs who usually are first to defend atheism have steered clear of this possibly cause of the immense empirical data James Redford has laid down. The ones who stay to defend are simply nitpicking small things about Christianity.

There is no need to stay and waste ones time, debating a proposition which relies on 2+2=5.  As James mentioned from the very beginning "God defies all laws of conservation of energy in matter...."  After such a fact, what is left to debate?  And no it is not nitpicking, when the very root of the proposition is disproved in one line.  To borrow from Stefan "If I make a proposition which relies on 2+2=unicorn, will you stay to debate with me?  Most likely not.  

 

To sum it up, god is a self contradictory being, which breaks all laws of physics (being a consciousness without matter and all) hardly a nitpicking at christianity when you look at what he was attempting to prove now is it.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did anyone here notice the mention of the words: "Mainstream Physics" ?

 

You guys are too mainstream, I only believe in Pre-Newtonian physics, in my garden all the apples fall UP.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So now that God has been proven to exist, what are Christians supposed to do with the hole in their psyche where they once needed faith? I'd feel a little ripped off, I mean, all that time just believing without proof, struggling to stay loyal to Christian tradition despite a lack of good reason. All the anguished prayers asking for clarity and strength to overcome the deceptive reasoning of satan's puppets. All those times getting up early on a Sunday for church to continually bolster their belief through repetitive hymns and long, boring sermons. All that effort, all that commitment, the steadfast loyalty in the face of reason, the blood, sweat, and tears! All for nothing... now we have 'proof'!? Where is the fun in that!? Where is the struggle!? The character building!? Surely God hasn't forgotten about those who believed before it was cool... before it was proven!? Before it was undeniable fact!?

 

All those scriptures about faith are now completely redundant. What about free will? If God has been proven then we have no choice but to believe... right?

 

Bah, I'm tired. Christianity is ridiculous.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites