God, The Supernatural And the Three Laws

The Biblically supernatural is harmoniously in concordance with the three thermodynamic laws, which, in my own buzwords are as follows:Law 1. It is impossible that energy and mass can come to be, or as some would put it, be created.Law 2. it is impossible to transfer heat, from an area of lower temperature to an area of higher temperature without adding work to the system. I suppose this would somehow apply to energy.Law 3. Assuming the entropy of all elements at absolute zero can be taken as zero, then All elements above absolute zero will have a limited, positive entropy; since entropy can't be reduced to zero by limited means. No system can be reduced to absolute zero.With the above laws in mind, consider the following Biblical texts:Colosians 1:16,17 tells us that Jesus existed before all things. In, by and through him all things consist. Jesus came via the Holy Spirit, so the Spirit of Jesus and of the father, Jehovah seems to be what is being referenced to here, since we know that it was the Holy Spirit that moved the waters in Genesis one and in Psalms 104:30 we are told that God sends forth his spirit to do things in the world (and presumably in the rest of the universe) So we see, just as secularists believe something minute expanded to produce everything, the Bible says it all came from one being. By that, nothing is added to the universe by creation of each and every thing. In that sense one might even argue that it did not come to be supernaturally, perse, but pre-existed in a different form.Remember the woman who had the issue of blood and touched Jesus's garment effecting her healing? What did Jesus say? Who touched me? Why did he ask when everyone was crowded around him? Because, says the text, he felt energy/virture leave his body. See Matthew 5:30 My American Standard Bible says "power proceeding from him had gone forth."Then take a look at Luke 6:19 where we read, "And all the multitude sought to touch him, for power came forth from him and healed them all."So think about it. Doesn't the above satisfy all three of the thermodynamic laws?This message has been edited by buzsaw, 12-09-2004 09:45 PM

---

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buz

I figured to present Biblical text which satisfies all three laws and leave some of the thinking to the reader. Did you notice, Paul, that I said, think about it?1. I assumed everyone in town would know what the three laws state. I've posted text which, imo, satisfies all three. Go figure. If I'm mistaken, let's hear your argument. What's so difficult or obsure about that?This message has been edited by buzsaw, 12-09-2004 07:21 PM

Hi Percy. I was posting my last post before your's came up so didn't see it in time. I was trying to keep it brief enough to satisfy the guidelines. Loudmouth seems to understand my proposition. How about if we see if there's a problem with people comprehending my hypothesis by and large? If you still think revision is needed, I'll work on it.

Correct me if mistaken, but aren't energy and heat related? I've read some definitions of the 2nd law where energy is applicable. The unhealty person lacked energy. Power/energy proceeded forth from Jesus, the powerful one and entered into the weak one who lacked energy, effecting a measure of equalibrium of energy. Thus we see the 2nd law satisfied, do we not?This message has been edited by buzsaw, 12-09-2004 07:37 PM

Ok, come, let us all reason together.Some 20 years ago or so, senior National Geographic analyist, Rich Gore did published an article called something like "The Once and Forever Universe" In this article he stated that around 20 billion years ago a particle of space (yes he used the word space) billions of times smaller than the proton of an atom exploded to produce everything.Questions?
1. Were any of the three laws violated here?2. Were they in effect here?My hypothesis, at least has something more tangible than space to begin with, but I am beginning with an intelligent entity/god in place of the particle of space and I am giving it far more time to happen. As most long timers her are no doubt aware, I have long contended that the universe is and has been forever. So Rich's hypothesis and mine have something "forever." He has the forever particle of space and I have the forever intelligent deity.We both have everything existing emerging from something extraordinary and in fact emerging from what would be considered by many to be UNBELIEVABLY EXTRAORDINARY sources.Question.
1. Does my hypothesis violate any of the three laws?2. Does Rich Gore's hypothesis violate any of the three laws?

That's right. God is in the universe and by definition, there's nothing outside of the universe.

.........And once again we see Percy going at the ole man of no degree rather than refuting the ole man of no degree. 1. Nosey Ned approved the op as stated for posting. Are you here as moderator or as counterpart poster? Since you're not the mighty red cat, I assumed you are the latter. Of course, I never forget that you're the owner and like the sarge said in boot camp, "I may not always be right, but I'm always the sargent" 2. Below are the three laws in my own buzwords. If you approve of them and would like them added to the op, I'd be happy to do that.Law 1. It is impossible that energy and mass can come to be, or as some would put it, be created.Law 2. it is impossible to transfer heat, from an area of lower temperature to an area of higher temperature without adding work to the system. I suppose this would somehow apply to energy.Law 3. Assuming the entropy of all elements at absolute zero can be taken as zero, then All elements above absolute zero will have a limited, positive entropy; since entropy can't be reduced to zero by limited means. No system can be reduced to absolute zero.How'm I doing???This message has been edited by buzsaw, 12-09-2004 09:39 PM

---

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buz

Methinks, rather, that a literal particle of space is EMPTY VOID, CONTAINING NOTHING, lacking the wherewithall to be contrary to any physical law. Well, after all, having been in this town, listening to and reading all the town talk, goin on two years, one's bound to assimilate something! Right? Thanks to you people for egukating me. This message has been edited by buzsaw, 12-09-2004 09:19 PM

Agree on 2. On 1, agree, assuming that Gore's alleged area of space is not literal space, by definition.This message has been edited by buzsaw, 12-09-2004 09:28 PM

Thanks, Percy. Feel free to suggest other improvements. Peace! (I hope.)

Problem for your would be trap. My "A", having intelligence, has the ability to release and to withold energy at will.

---

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buz

Even if it does God, how does that pertain to the topic or refute my op? My OP is not about proving God. My op is whether the so called supernatural processes stated in my op violate any of the three scientific laws. You have yet to forthrightly answer that question. I believe I have you in checkmate.

Mmmm, do I sense an underlying concession here? It appears that, so far, the three laws are alive and well in creotown.

---

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buz

I understand your point here, but God is not only all knowing, but posseses within his being, I say, within his being, infinite power. Having infinite power within his being keeps the system closed, thus satisfying scientific laws applicable to closed systems. I believe I would be right in stating that characteristics such as goodness do not relate to physical laws in any system, and for you to suggest otherwise would not be good science.This thread is not to prove there is a god, but to show that we who believe there is ample evidence that God exists also have an hypothesis which operates within scientific laws.Our belief in intelligent design, thus appears to be no more illogical nor less scientific than National Geographic's Rich Gore's hypothesis, which has the universe emerging from a mear submicroscopic particle of space. It is, indeed, imo, I say imo, more logical and more scientific.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I guess the best way to answer your question, my friend, is to ask one. How can you replicate Rich Gore's hypothesis experimentally to measure the power within a submicroscopic particle of space which allegedly existed to blow up some 20 billion years ago to bring about this amazingly wonderous universe?