Summations Only

Buz you seem to be describing a universe where whatever occurs can simply be attributed to Jehovah with little rhyme or reason as to when interference is or isn't required. It just amounts to "When Buz thinks so based on his personal interpretation of the bible".This hardly compares to scientific theories which can be objectively defined and which make intensely accurate predictions and which have led to discoveries of new observable phenomena.

I think that Buz thinks that God is in the closed system.

Indeed. But if that God can create and destroy energy at will as well as redistribute it around to ensure that after an eternity we still haven't reached a heat death situation then it isn't really closed in any theromdynamic sense at all.If Buz is going to invoke the supernatural and miraculous to overcome the laws of thermodynaimcs wherever he needs I am left wondering why he bothers to include them in his little theory at all.

I don't know why ICANT can't comprehend a closed system with the energy source of the system within the system. This would needs be the case with any closed system. No?I've cited over and over to ICANT Biblical confirmation that God's abode is in the system over the years, sometimes chapter and verse. I guess he thinks Jesus who sits on God's right hand, the four living creatures and 24 elders around the throne, the seraphims and cherubims around Jehovah the emerald throne and all else are all out in some undefinable ether beyond the cosmos of our universe.I guess he thinks Jesus is coming back into the universe from that mysterious ether allegedly outside the universe in order to return for his messianic kingdom on earth withing the system, as prophesied.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.

Friend Straggler, I've never claimed that Jehovah has destroyed even one iota of energy in the Universe. You're misconstruing my terminology. When a builder/designer destroys one building and rebuilds it, sometimes using some of the same materials on the new, , sometimes using all new materials, no energy has been obliterated from existence. Nothing has been obliterated from existence. All material and energy has just changed forms by work of the designer, and perhaps an increase in entropy, due to the deterioration of the old buildings by weather, erosion, neglect, etc. . :
----------

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.

Hi Chuck, I gave my reasons as God and angels being able to go from their realm into the universe for believing it is an open universe.If the universe is open God can add or remove anything He desires too at any time.At the same time the laws of this universe does not apply to the realm in which God resides.You said in Message 42 the earth was a closed system and was corrected which you agreed with in Message 45 that it was open.We get energy from the sun and the sun is dying because of that expended energy and one day it will implode, after swallowing the earth so we are told.Whether we realize it or not one of these days this entire universe is going to melt with fervent heat, according to Peter.

quote:

---

2Pe 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

---

If I am not mistaken science has said the earth will melt with fervent heat in a couple of billion years or so.If God and His angels are apart of this universe when it melts with fervent heat I would assume they would cease to exist also.But since they are not a part of this universe God will then create a new heaven and a new earth as John tell us.

quote:

---

Rev 21:1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.

---

The heaven and the earth will be restored to the way it was when God created it in Genesis 1:1 with all sin purged from it.That means a lot of energy is going to be expended and used as well as matter to create a new heaven and new earth.You see our rules and regulations as well as God's laws we have discovered does not control what God can or can not do.If they did He would not be God.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

Hi Buz, No I actually believe they are sitting around in the third heaven with this universe and maybe several more as I would not limit God to one universe watching us make all of our mistakes and trying to guide us in the right direction through the Holy Spirit.Sitting there scratching their heads like some of the guys here do when they try to explain their views to either of us. Wondering why in the world we don't get it.One question:Where was God when He created the heavens and the earth that is recorded in Genesis 1:1?God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

So Buz - In your scenario Jehovah just redistributes existing energy in violation of the second law wherever needed? Is that right?Do you agree that without such intevervention a universe that has existed for eternity would be in state of maximum entropy? (i.e. heat death)Are there any known examples of the 2nd law of thermodynaimcs being violated in a the way that your model predicts?

Aside from noting that you've apparently lost all ability to write sentences in proper English, I would simply point out that you frequently invade threads that are already pretty intense to deliver an "attaboy" to the newest creationist, regardless of the quality of his arguments or even whether he's defending a creationism you agree with. (It's fairly obvious that it doesn't matter to creationists; unlike evolutionists, who criticize each other when the quality of argument being put forth is not up to snuff, creationists see solidarity as more important than honesty.) Because you repeat your evidenceless claims over and over again, and people ask you for the evidence over and over again. If you think your threads are such a hotbed of intellectual discourse, Buz, then here's my question for you: why are they always 300 posts or more of people asking you for evidence? Because you've never provided any?I'm actually aware of quite a bit of archeological evidence that supports elements of the "Biblical record" - there are actually some things that the Bible got right, and I have no problem being a secular atheist and admitting that.But here's the thing, Buz - I never learned about any of that evidence from you. I've had to go around you, and around all you creationist "types", to actually learn about the real evidence that supports elements of the Biblical record.Why is that? Come on, Buz. You know me. I've been here as long as you have - I joined 6 days after you did.Do you really think I'm in cahoots with the admins? Do you really think the admins would suffer to be in cahoots with me?

Hi ICANT, I fully understand what you are saying,(because im a Christian) but the point here ( I hope) is to try to explain the Lots to prove the existance of God or that they are "compatible" with Him, but you are doing a very poor job( if that's what you're trying to do).Of course, any diety if you believe in one (which I do) would be able to suspend whatever the hell he wants to. Try explaining that to an astrophysicist and you'll be shown the door right after you bring up the angels cruising back and forth from earth to heaven suspending the natural laws of physics.It's two entirely different worlds you guys are arguing. You may as well say the tooth fairy isn't bound by the laws of the spiritual world of teeth. Even tho I somewhat agree with you on a few things, your trying to prove a supernatural being exists using physical/natural laws to do it.(even if God DID set those laws in motion-he is not bound by them as being compatible with the supernatural- that's like saying you can tell who designed the software in your computer simply by understanding how it works, just because someone designed something doesn't mean they are compatible with it, they could be using a foriegn concept, to them that they may not agree with. Im not saying God did this but it debunks your point) When those laws don't allow for certain things you simply say "well God suspends them". That's not an argument it's a faith/suggestion. All your doing is saying laws do not apply to the creator of the universe because he well, created it. Which is fine, but this is theolgy, not science.The main point of this thread in the beggining was to bring cavediver into a debate about this very thing. I can't imagine he will want to talk about angels going to and fro as proof that the lots are compatible with God.Well, for here it is a discussion, I suppose, as it's not the Science section, so, carry on.Edited by Chuck77, : No reason given.Edited by Chuck77, : No reason given.Edited by Chuck77, : No reason given.

Yes, it's puzzling isn't it? Buzsaw apparently wants his god to be "scientific" in the sense that he's bound by the laws of thermodynamics. But it's hard to see why. If he was bound by the laws of hydrodynamics as well then Jesus would have sunk when he tried to walk on water. The ability to suspend the laws of nature is surely one of the most important qualifications for being a god. But Buz doesn't seem to see it that way.

I could not agree more. Why don't the fundies just call the whole deal a miracle and quit interfering with science? It is as if their faith is so weak, they must mess with obvious facts in order to justify their own position.If the literalists lack faith, it is not the responsibility of science, or indeed any other perspective, to buck up their lack of intestinal fortitude.I view the whole deal as 'You bought it bud, you own it, now own up to it.'

---

Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider. - Francis BaconPlease contribute to my apprenticeship in the gadfly society by rating all my messages as low as possible.

The apostle Paul's reference to the third heaven in no way depicts an out of the universe area of the cosmos. It simply distinguishes between the earth's atmosphere, perhaps the region of our Solar System or our Galaxy and the region in which God's abode exists.All related to Jehovah is active within the Universe. Jesus, the man/messiah who sits in Jehovah's abode with Jehovah, the father was born a man on earth, goes to Heaven and will return to earth. Jehovah's Holy Spirit moves on the waters etc doing the work of creation. This multi-present spirit of Jehovah creates things as per Psalms 104:30. All of the creatures of Jehovah, of a higher intelligence than that experienced on earth live in the Universe, many in his abode. Michael and Gabriel, archangels war with evil angels who appear to be entities having power over nations like Greece and Persia as per the prophet Daniel in the latter chapters of his book.This all depicts Jehovah as being in the Universe.As for the illogical notion of more than one uni-verse, that runs contrary to the definition of universe. What you're implying leaves no place for a uni-verse. You;re illogical notion implicates a multi-verse/multi-verse, our realm being one realm of the multi-verse. Uni=one. multi=more than one, i.e. everything existing in one as opposed to everything existing comprising more than one.There is no evidence for more than a uni/one-verse.Relative to topic, the notion of multi-verses would run contrary to much of Cavediver's conventional science paradigm which implies no outside of our Universe, Multiverses poses a problem as to what separates one of the segments of a multi-verse from the other, even if they are allegedly a pan-cake like stack, as I understand the concept to be.The multi-verse concept definitely runs contrary to the Biblical record, as I have explained. There is no Biblical references to support it. Edited by Buzsaw, : Update message title

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.

That's a pretty silly guide to use.There are no mentions of computers either.

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

There is evidence of the same sort (i.e. mathematical extrapolation) that led to the discovery of anti-matter. Enough of a basis to form a hypothesis that we can hopefully test one day.However what there definitely is not any evidence of is the sort of 2nd law of thermodynamics violations that are a logical prediction of your universe model.See Message 83