Draft1


 * As you almost certainly know, the awkward phrase "begins to exist" rather than simply "exists" is a clumsy attempt to leave God out the argument using a painfully obvious special pleading fallacy.

I usually raise with "demonstrate the universe began to exist" and they usually raise "isn't that what Big Bang theory teaches?" and I raise "we can't even see the Big Bang because the universe didn't become opaque to photons until 370,000 years after the Big Bang" and they fold.


 * Still blinded that Messiah came, the suffering servant of Isaiah 53, Jesus Christ, God manifested in the flesh?

That's why Jews never accepted Jesus as Messiah. They defined the Messiah as the Jewish fellow who comes and kicks Syrian/Greek/Roman hiney. Instead the Romans crushed Jesus like a gnat.


 * Quantum physics shows that observation alters reality. See the two slit experiment. When the big bang happened it would have to be observed for the universe to be created therefore God exists.

An observation requires some form of detector (the human eye, a phosphor screen) to change from a ready state to a pointer state. If you claim a god is the observer of the Big Bang, so be it, but that god is not the immutable god described in scripture and the Summa Theologica.


 * I'm not sure the universe was ever infinitely small. Before the onset of inflation, it is hard to know much details. We're pretty sure inflation happened. And that it stopped. But did it ever start?

All we know is the CMB (that speckled sphere everyone has seen) had a radius of 42 million light years at a time 380,000 years from the singularity, and it's 1092 times bigger now. Points and infinities don't come into it, observation-wise.


 * current assumption is (as far as I understand) sudden appearance of that "hot-spot", then inflation. Is there some knowledge that excludes that "hot-spot" having been there, in a very small space but for a (maybe even very) long time until inflation started (for whatever reason)

The laws of physics are time-symmetric. Any interaction explainable in one direction of time is also explainable in the reverse direction of time. When considering the first moment, however, we lose this choice. We are constrained by the boundary to explain it in reverse order.


 * If water baptism is not done invoking the name of Jesus, the water baptism is fraudulent, is not recorded in heaven and is not recognized by God. ALL New Testament believers in the Bible were baptized in the name of Jesus. The Trinity baptism was a later development.

After the foregoing instructions, baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living [running] water...” (Didache 7:1 [A.D. 70])

70 is prior to the authorship of the book of Acts (80-85) with its four citations of allegedly "Jesus Only" baptism.

The V2/NO/Bergoglian “church” is not Catholic. Much of the hierarchy are Freemasons & Bergoglio is another in a long line of antiPopes starting with John XXIII. It’s in your faces but you can’t see can you?
 * No need the whole building attests to what it is..a snake.

John XXIII died before Vatican II approved the first of sixteen documents so what did he do to become an "anti-pope" (accepting for a moment that an anti-pope is just a pope you don't like rather than a pope not duly elected by the College of Cardinals) ?


 * Catholics believe in Faith PLUS Works for salvation, not Faith alone. It must be nice to believe that you enter Heaven by simply believing, without having to take any responsibility for sin or without having to do any charity for your fellow man.

Schrodinger's Protestant:

1. Salvation is by faith alone, not by works of law.

2. Catholics are not saved because they have statues in their churches contrary to the law of Moses.


 * Reading the bible saves the soul

That's what Bibliolators do, put their faith in a book rather than in the risen Christ.


 * God is the omnipotent one and it is written that the wicked will have a short-lived victory.

It is also written that God can't defeat iron chariots or forgive blasphemy of the holy ghost. That's just off the top of my head.


 * There is no theological conflict between science and the Bible

BIBLE: The first thing to appear in the universe, before any evolution, was a conscious being.

ALSO BIBLE: This being could make trillions of galaxies in the same amount of time, 24 hours, that it took him to make sea life and birds on one planet.

AGAIN BIBLE: This being pronounced everything he made as good just before a talking serpent suborned the first woman into disobedience.

ALSO BIBLE: A wind could evaporate 1.1 billion cubic miles of rainwater.

BIBLE REDUX: Dead people resurrect and float into the sky.

BIBLE ONCE MORE: This being was frightened that humans, in the stone age would build a structure, sans steel reinforcement tall enough to invade his turf in the sky.

ALSO BIBLE: Two million migrants wandered a peninsula the size of West Virginia without leaving a trace.

BIBLE HAS ONE MORE GO: The rotation of the Earth was started and stopped to provide extra hours of daylight and this was never recorded by the Egyptians or the Han Dynasty, nor did the friction of the still-moving interior mantle against the non-moving crust melt the crust.


 * It's his trilemma that Jesus must be a lunatic, a liar, or Lord. He left out legend. And he dismissed lunatic and liar without sufficient analysis.

Lewis dismisses two of the options like this: "It seems to me obvious that He was neither a lunatic nor a fiend." That's it. No detailed reasoning. It's just seems obvious...to him.


 * The problem here, Tweetophon, is that the metaphysics an atheist would need to adopt in order to account for natural law would also necessitate classical theism.

Atheists don't need to account for natural laws, only observe what they are. Biology is explained by chemistry, and chemistry is explained by physics, but the whole point of fundamental regularities of succession is that they have no deeper explanation.


 * There is no such thing as an atheist on the left. They have one of five religions that they normally follow. Marvel. Disney. Star Wars. The Handmaid's Tale. Harry Potter

Atheists frequently have religions. I'm Taoist. The first two Prime Ministers of Israel were Jewish atheists. What atheists have in common is they judge the existence of a sentient being who created the universe to be insufficiently demonstrated as factual.


 * Hell is full of people who worked tirelessly to get there. Don’t blame GOD. HE provided a way out. Repent, Jesus can redeem your soul!

For hell to exist for infinite time, God must work tirelessly to supply infinite energy, otherwise hell will just burn out. So God does his part too, see?


 * My beliefs are wrapped in one sentence from Christ "Love one another as God loves you". No better ideal than that.  If you have an issue with that belief then that's your problem.

Q. Describe how God loves us?

A. God loves us unconditionally, unless we die after committing a mortal sin like eating a hot dog on a Friday of Lent, in which case we will be tormented without rest day and night in the presence of the Lamb and the holy angels forever and ever.


 * Unless one denies the big bang which would mean they have no answer for infinite regress. Besides the Quran is a literary miracle which even posed a challenge to create a verse similar to it. In short atheists in the mud

People used to imagine the Earth was a slab balanced on the back of a tower of turtles that went down forever. But the Earth is actually a sphere, sufficient unto itself. Today, people think events are on an infinite stack of prior causes. Someday they will see time is a sphere.


 * More than half of the New Testament is composed from letters written on paper. This is not even hidden; the books are named after the people the letters are written to. God atheism is stupid.

THEISM: Using ESP to let a Jewish ghost know you will accept him as your master and ask him to remove a curse passed down to you after a woman who was made from the rib of her partner ate a piece of fruit from a magical tree because a talking snake told her it was a good idea.


 * Wtf?? Dr Hossenfelder is an atheist, so she rejects that interpretation of Her Own Words -- what does Thelron think they're doing?

He thinks the Copenhagen "solution" to the measurement problem is proof that God exists, because its ontology hinges on a conscious observer, and only God was alive in the big bang epoch. He won't listen if you tell him God's constant universal observation means nothing changes.


 * “Overrated” then is everything just relative?

Everything is relational. A mother can only be a mother if she has a child. Morality itself emerged from a kind of natural selection as free moral agents found persistently workable solutions to local social problems. This, of course, conflicts with the Divine Decree conjecture.

SOCRATES: To do is to be

PLATO: To be is to do

SHAKESPEARE: To be or not to be

SINATRA: Do be do be do


 * I again refer you to this ugly screenshot of the argument, in which Aquinas clearly refers to a temporal regress of motion which leads back to the first mover. His argument does not permit an infinite past, nor does it require input by the first mover past the first movement.

Galilean relativity says you can't tell the difference between God lifting a planet and God pushing himself away from a planet, if only God and the planet exist. So the first mover must not be moved himself. Yet this violates the law of conservation of linear momentum.


 * The apostle Paul was bitten by poisonous snake on Malta in Book of Acts. Promise in Mark not unconditional. We can trust God to deliver us from harm, or be with us in it.

The thing about snakes in Mark wasn't a "promise" it was a sign. If you're bitten by a snake and you still die, notwithstanding that "God is with you" in your harm, that's a sign of business as usual.


 * "To be united to God in unity of person was not fitting to human flesh, according to its natural endowments, since it was above its dignity; nevertheless, it was fitting that God, by reason of His infinite goodness, should unite it to Himself for man’s salvation." - Aquinas

The fun part is when Aquinas explains how the union of divinity and human flesh can be possible with a God who by nature cannot change.

red shift explained by variable speed of light youtube.com/watch?v=eKuYVx… Sabine, subject material for future video!
 * @skdh variable speed of light explains gravity youtube.com/watch?v=aSEYzc…

Variable curvature of space-time explains gravity.

Gμν + Λgμν = (8πG/c⁴)Tμν

Redshift explained by dynamic insertion of new space-time in the interstices of existing space-time by the operation of the cosmological term of Einstein's equation.

Speed of light need not vary.


 * The human mind may perceive truth only through thinking, as is clear from Augustine.

Aquinas (Q32 A1 O3): "I answer that, It is impossible to attain to the knowledge of the Trinity by natural reason."


 * Let's see if you can work out WHY the wave-function collapses? We know it does as seen in the experiment, can you work out why it collapses, the root cause of it. BIG Clue: What is it about observing that does that?

No one ever sees it collapse. They just assume there's a superposition of quantum states from the interference effects observed from many repetitions of the experiment and they assume this collapses because each time they look at their experiment the particle has a single value.


 * Correct. We can only ascertain a result by using photons which interfere with the wave function we are looking at. Hence the Gaussian chamber and the degaussed and contrived means of firing the photons through the slits. It is all about that wave/particle duality...

A mountain covered in snow is a pointer in a ready state. A single snowflake can't be detected from the air, but we can see an avalanche and deduce where the snowflake landed. The snowflake in question, like a photon in a photographic emulsion, is all mixed up with the pointer.


 * I'll be honest and say that I'm not following that very well, it's an analogy too far perhaps? There are no photons in a photographic emulsion, there are reactant to photon 'bombardment' but none are retained.

The photon bounces around and causes silver atoms to go in and out of higher energy states, triggers chemical reactions, causes secondary infrared emissions, etc, until the energy of the original photon is completely used up. Hard to undo all that. So you have a "measurement".


 * Thanks to @NASAWebb & it's predecessors,little by little, we will uncover like a gift-wrapped gift, surprises of God's revelation of nature,that it's really a young universe & young earth of 10,000BC & measuring w/ the red shift based a limited part/sample of the universe = error

Set aside red-shift for now. Do you really think the apparent size of galaxies (Andromeda is 3.2 degrees by 1.0 degree) shrinks as they approach your 10,000 light-year limit, such that the Hubble Deep field which is just 2.6 arcminutes on a side has 3000 similar such galaxies?


 * "It is advantageous for slaves and masters, fit to be such by nature, that one be the master, and the other the slave." -St. Thomas Aquinas. Gotta love it when your guy explicitly supports slavery.

And when believers play the Back Then Slavery Was Just Voluntary Indentured Labor card:

"By the fact that we say that the instrument belongs to another, we distinguish a slave from a free person, who sometimes serves in a household freely or for pay, not as property." -- Aquinas


 * God brought it up with Adam because Adam is the head of the house; the dominion on the Earth. The point was that Eve was deceived and Adam was not. That point determines competency.

If Adam was not deceived then he sinned willingly, while Eve only sinned through error. Yet Paul treats Eve's sin the greater.