The Historical Jesus: Did He Create the Universe?

Hi AZ, I know you can't answer that question and it is because you don't have any evidence that it did exist. It is proof that you don't have any evidence. So when I present evidence you will say that is no evidence.[/qs=AZPaul]Your insistence that we know everything before your god dies is rejected. We know enough to have killed the concept of gods many many times over these last 200 years and we have done just that. You have no ghosts to pray to except those imagined in the darkest depths of your inferior mind.[/qs]My God is not going to die He is eternal.And no you have no proof that God does not exist all you have is ASSUMPTIONS.If you got evidence present it.I gave you historical evidence that Jesus did exist and walk on earth you just will not accept anything I say or prove to be true.You have made up your mind what you believe and facts are not going to interfere with your faith in what you believe. You are worse than candle2, or at least just as bad.God Bless,

hi Percy
. OK I apologize for that and will try to remember to put a notation from now on.But you did not comet on the one that I did give the website where I got the information from, why not? Care to comment on it?Here it is again.

quote:

---

The universe began 13.8 billion years ago, and in its early years, it looked completely different than it does now. For nearly 400,000 years, the entire cosmos was opaque, which means we have no direct observations of anything that happened during that time.

---

Early Universe | Center for Astrophysics | Harvard & SmithsonianIs that an accurate statement?God Bless,

I don't understand how that is relevant to the topic.

We can't say for certain how the initial energy came to be in this universe but we know that it did. We physically observe the after effects. We have an actual picture of those after effects.A part of your intellectual failings is the inability to acknowledge the logic of our models as evidence. No, we cannot see the photon jump quantum orbitals but our models say it must and the universe appears to operate as such.Our models also tell us what happened to create the CMB and the state of the universe prior. And the universe appears to operate as those models have revealed. So, yes, we have more than sufficient evidence that the workings of this universe from T=10^-33 on to the present are well known to us.I know you are too ignorant to understand the logic, reasoning, math, science that makes this so. Unfortunately, I am too ignorant to adequately explain it to you. That depends on the quality of your evidence. Your WORD will not suffice. Give us the mathematical models that describe the processes you propose. Show us the logic from those models that evidence your claims. Give us the strict treatment of fact and logic that you demand of us. Your god died centuries ago. Unfortunately, the stench of the rotting corpse is still with us. Still squirming with the "prove a negative" crap. Your logic is pathetic. I've seen no proof or truth from any of your supposed evidences.Regardless, in deference to Tangle, I will not dispute this BS. You can get on with your argument that your supposed historical Jesus created something. Idiocy, Reverend. The preponderance of the facts, the evidence, replaces faith with reality. You are the one for whom facts mean nothing when they interfere with your faith. You're trying to hide behind your projections again.

Everyone is giving you grief over speculating that there was a "behind you" and "in front of you" but all you seem to be doing is arguing that if humans can conceive of a singularity they can also conceive of a Creator (uncaused first cause). At least that how I understand what you are asserting. Isnt the expansion of matter into empty space similar to a creative thought occupying nothingness? Which in my mind explains to a minor degree the thought process of a Creator speaking matter into existance (or into space which was once nothingness) I don't really understand it either, Percy. Do you? Maybe God isnt your thing either. In my mind ICANT ia simply suggesting that a singularity has no more evidence than would God. The only evidence that could be used for either is all that we see, hear, and know.

For a guy who claims that he can *poof* gods out of existence with but a thought, you sure seem hung up on their influence. My theory is that you once thought that a God may exist, demanded proof, got nothing and then became angry with religion as the cause of all human misery rather than human reasoning itself...Its not my fault that you dont believe. Im too weak to give it all up, but surely that is not a point against me.You disbelieve that in the beginning was the Word but you have no problem with in the beginning Numbers and Chemicals. Which is human conceit.

Then ICANT's god does not exist. (surprise)The singularity we calculate at T=0 is not a real actual physical thing. A cosmic singularity does not exist.Going back in time to the point just prior to where a "singularity" is calculated is as far back as we can see. Taking that next step to T=0 only creates a huge bright red neon sign flashing "Error Error! Error!"There is no actual singularity just like there is no actual god.

Oh for christ sake, Phat. How do you come up with this stuff?I can mentally poof the gods away because they never existed in the first place. That has not fuckall to do with the evil influence with which these concepts still torture humanity. They don't exist yet the influence of the concepts still poisons our society. See recent Alabama.

I'm good.--Percy

Hi Percy,I'm Bad to the bone.!God Bless,

You believe that the Great High Lord of Creation, Ruler of a Trillion Worlds, murmurs moral instruction directly into your auditory cortex. He holds an especially tender concern for your genitals and their uses.Human conceit, indeed.

Hi Phat, You don't remember in 2011 cavediver and Son Goku chewing me out about bringing up to them a singularity.cavediver almost lost his cool one night with me.A singularity is the place where the math don't work anymoreGod Bless,

So, 177 posts in this thread and still no Jesus did it model.

Hi AZ, What makes you think that you are not seeing how God created the universe?
Oh I know the answer to that question you do not believe in God as it would ruin all your beliefs. And you know what you believe and it makes no difference what the facts say because you cannot be bothered by facts. All the CMB tells you is that in the past there was a lot of energy being expended to create the universe and everything in it, nothing else. It sure don't tell you that all that energy was enclosed in an area 1 billionth of the size of an atom. That is a pipe dream.As far as anything you got facts for I have no problem with it.
But you have no facts for the first 380,000 years and will never have any. The entire cosmos was opaque so you have no observations of those years. Anything that you have or invent is just that invented by imagination no facts just assumptions. I may be ignorant but I am not stupid.
In theology I don't like to have to ask questions, but I do, sometimes.I know better than to accept the assumptions of anybody as fact, does not make any difference who they are or what education they have.But, what kind of logic are you talking about Formal or Informal logic? Any evidence is better than no evidence.Your problem is that you have zero evidence for that very hot, very dense, 1 billionth of a size universe filled with enough energy to produce our universe as it is today all that we can see and all that we cannot see, when it had no source for the energy and no place for it to even exist as there was nothing outside of it. No He was gone the moment the rock was rolled in front of the tomb.
Him and the thief was together in paradise. You are the one that is hid I am right here.God Bless,

Hi Tan, I posted the following in you in Message 87I found this there: Historical Jesus - Wikipedia

quote:

---

The term "historical Jesus" refers to the life and teachings of Jesus as interpreted through critical historical methods, in contrast to what are traditionally religious interpretations.[1][2] It also considers the historical and cultural contexts in which Jesus lived.[3][4][5][6] Virtually all scholars of antiquity accept that Jesus was a historical figure, and the idea that Jesus was a mythical figure has been consistently rejected by the scholarly consensus as a fringe theory.[7][8][9][10][11] Scholars differ about the beliefs and teachings of Jesus as well as the accuracy of the biblical accounts, with only two events being supported by nearly universal scholarly consensus: Jesus was baptized and Jesus was crucified.

---

It also seems that a consensus is respected by the scientific community.This article in Wikipedia says there is a consensus that Jesus was a historical person.The consensus should then settle the question of Jesus being a Historical Jesus.I don't see where you agreed that this consensus was acceptable to you or not.Several agree to agree that Jesus was a Historical person for the sake of argument. That is not enough. If a consensus of Historians cannot be accepted as evidence then there can be no evidence. There has been 90 posts since I posted Message 87 and no one has challenged it to refute it. AZPaul dismissed it as propaganda. Message 91 Nobody else has mentioned it.Everybody is saying lets go.OK either accept this as Historical evidence or refute it.I am ready lets go.God Bless,