Show me your definition of GOD(s).

[Darkstar]

these numeric patterns cannot be so easily explained away, therefor to dissmiss them is not logical

But you dismissed the "numeric patterns" in the Qur'an quite easily, it seems.

[downbeatplumb]

The first cause can't be physical (ancients use "natural" in a different sense). Philosophers have known this for 2350 years. Starting with Plato, then Aristotle, continuing to Avicenna and Aquinas, and further to Descartes (debatable) and Kant. Even closer to modern day, Heidegger believed a god was first causer(Being and Time).

If the first cause were physical, it would need something to cause it's existence, thus making that causer the first causer (This is the gap that is never air tight according to Gearbreak). This goes forever unless the first causer is Existence itself. Existence itself is obviously more than a physical body.

The first cause must be a being because the Existence is the only thing non-contingent and there are other things. That means the other things are chosen to exist. Because of the will, Existence shows itself as a being.

So in your fantasy something completely non-material, that is to say an abstract thing like "taste in music" somehow poofed the universe into existence!

I would say that the odds are that something material happened, probably something to do with "quantum".

Just because we don't know what happened dosen't mean we can't point to what didn't, I will say, with a great deal of confidence, that god did not create the universe.

I can say this because every time a mystery has been solved it has turned out not to be magic.

[Tex]

So in your fantasy something completely non-material, that is to say an abstract thing like "taste in music" somehow poofed the universe into existence!

Not even close. In fact, I'm not even sure where this comes from. I'll just assume you're talking about Existence.

Existence is not within me. My taste of music is subjective. Colors, to an extent, are subjective. My own preferences have nothing to do with my explanation. Existence is outside of me. I exist, but I am not the source of my own existence, lest I beg the question.

The only valid way to refute this is to say that there is no "I" and become a nihilist.

I would say that the odds are that something material happened, probably something to do with "quantum".

(sarcasm)Huh? What's that?(/sarcasm)

Quantum doesn't explain anything. Quantum can legitimately say, "In the observed area, the amount of matter changed without a known cause" but it cannot say "Therefore matter just moves around without cause" because "...matter changed without a known cause". Quantum is attempting to overstep its bounds.

Just because we don't know what happened dosen't mean we can't point to what didn't, I will say, with a great deal of confidence, that god did not create the universe.

Whatever happened, unless it is innately uncaused, is not the first cause. Ever. The only innately uncaused thing possible is Existence itself.

I can say this because every time a mystery has been solved it has turned out not to be magic.

I don't believe in magic either. No qualms.

[goodnews]

This is your numbers ???? No they are not my numbers did I write Genesis 1:1 ? no I did not ! did I allocate the numbers to the Hebrew letters ? no I did not etc etc did I discover these patterns ? no I did not ! DID YOU CALL JESUS SATAN WITH YOUR NUMBERS ? YES YOU DID ????? your arguments inept

[Tex]

The numbers can make Jesus into Satan. I've shown you how. Do not put trust in numbers, you only get out of them what is already within.

[goodnews]

The only one who is reading more into these patterns is you, since your argument fell flat, you try to side step by implying that its me whos is reading scripture by a numeric code, but this evasion tactic will fail as I have made no such assertions in my posts, BUT YOU HAVE ?

[Tex]

Don't you preach endlessly about that "bible code" that you know? Is it not based on numbers? Or is it not all like the Genesis 1:1 crap you posted? What is this mysterious bible code that you stall on explaining anything on?

There is no evasion. I do not read scripture by any numeric code and was using that as an example of why we should not use numeric codes for interpretation. If you do not use numerology to interpret scripture, then what do you use? In the example on Genesis 1, everything was numerology.

[pocaracas]

Soooo... god exists because a book has some numerological oddities?
sheite!!
Here's a text, in portuguese, that makes perfect sense, while every single word begin with a P:

---

Pedro Paulo Pereira Pinto, pequeno pintor português, pintava portas, paredes, portais. Porém, pediu para parar porque preferiu pintar panfletos. Partindo para Piracicaba, pintou prateleiras para poder progredir. Posteriormente, partiu para Pirapora. Pernoitando, prosseguiu para Paranavaí, pois pretendia praticar pinturas para pessoas pobres.
Porém, pouco praticou, porque Padre Paulo pediu para pintar panelas, porém posteriormente pintou pratos para poder pagar promessas. Pálido, porém personalizado, preferiu partir para Portugal para pedir permissão para papai para permanecer praticando pinturas, preferindo, portanto, Paris.

Partindo para Paris, passou pelos Pirineus, pois pretendia pintá-los. Pareciam plácidos, porém, pesaroso, percebeu penhascos pedregosos, preferindo pintá-los parcialmente, pois perigosas pedras pareciam precipitar-se principalmente pelo Pico, porque pastores passavam pelas picadas para pedirem pousada, provocando provavelmente pequenas perfurações, pois, pelo passo percorriam, permanentemente, possantes potrancas. Pisando Paris, permissão para pintar palácios pomposos, procurando pontos pitorescos, pois, para pintar pobreza, precisaria percorrer pontos perigosos, pestilentos, perniciosos, preferindo Pedro Paulo precaver-se.

Profundas privações passou Pedro Paulo. Pensava poder prosseguir pintando, porém, pretas previsões passavam pelo pensamento, provocando profundos pesares, principalmente por pretender partir prontamente para Portugal. Povo previdente! Pensava Pedro Paulo… Preciso partir para Portugal porque pedem para prestigiar patrícios, pintando principais portos portugueses. Paris! Paris! Proferiu Pedro Paulo. Parto, porém penso pintá-la permanentemente, pois pretendo progredir.

Pisando Portugal, Pedro Paulo procurou pelos pais, porém, Papai Procópio partira para Província. Pedindo provisões, partiu prontamente, pois precisava pedir permissão para Papai Procópio para prosseguir praticando pinturas. Profundamente pálido, perfez percurso percorrido pelo pai. Pedindo permissão, penetrou pelo portão principal. Porém, Papai Procópio puxando-o pelo pescoço proferiu: Pediste permissão para praticar pintura, porém, praticando, pintas pior. Primo Pinduca pintou perfeitamente prima Petúnia. Porque pintas porcarias? Papai, proferiu Pedro Paulo, pinto porque permitiste, porém, preferindo, poderei procurar profissão própria para poder provar perseverança, pois pretendo permanecer por Portugal.

Pegando Pedro Paulo pelo pulso, penetrou pelo patamar, procurando pelos pertences, partiu prontamente, pois pretendia pôr Pedro Paulo para praticar profissão perfeita: pedreiro! Passando pela ponte precisaram pescar para poderem prosseguir peregrinando. Primeiro, pegaram peixes pequenos, porém, passando pouco prazo, pegaram pacus, piaparas, pirarucus.
Partindo pela picada próxima, pois pretendiam pernoitar pertinho, para procurar primo Péricles primeiro.
Pisando por pedras pontudas, Papai Procópio procurou Péricles, primo próximo, pedreiro profissional perfeito. Poucas palavras proferiram, porém prometeu pagar pequena parcela para Péricles profissionalizar Pedro Paulo.
Primeiramente Pedro Paulo pegava pedras, porém, Péricles pediu-lhe para pintar prédios, pois precisava pagar pintores práticos. Particularmente Pedro Paulo preferia pintar prédios. Pereceu pintando prédios para Péricles, pois precipitou-se pelas paredes pintadas.
Pobre Pedro Paulo, pereceu pintando…”

Permita-me, pois, pedir perdão pela paciência, pois pretendo parar para pensar… Para parar preciso pensar. Pensei. Portanto, pronto pararei.

---

Now....following your logic, this text must have been created by a god... and god seems to favor the portuguese language, which incorporates some latin, some arabic, some greek.... damn! We're speaking the language of GOD!
[/sarcasm]

[Darkstar]

Now....following your logic, this text must have been created by a god... and god seems to favor the portuguese language, which incorporates some latin, some arabic, some greek.... damn! We're speaking the language of GOD!
[/sarcasm]

But those are arbitrarily invalid because they aren't numbers. Correction: they aren't his numbers. Numbers in other holy texts are also arbitrarily discarded, and any numbers (even variants of his own, or the exact same thing, I'm not sure which) that are biblical, but say things he doesn't like (such as Jesus being Satan) are also arbitrarily discarded.

[goodnews]

Oh how you dig yourself deeper "Bible code" these are your words ? " numeric codes" your words again ? If you go back and read my posts you will see that I was quiet simply drawing attention to the fact that there are a patterns of sevens in Genesis 1:1 that had to be by divine design as the chance it is a fluke are {one in 7.143} END OF I was in no way implying mysterious secret codes, THAT IS WHAT YOU HAVE IMPLIED . Now be a good righteous man and admit your folly