RE: Jesus as Lord - why is this appealing to so many?
February 14, 2018 at 12:57 pm
(This post was last modified: February 14, 2018 at 12:59 pm by polymath257.)
(February 14, 2018 at 12:42 pm)SteveII Wrote:(February 14, 2018 at 12:13 pm)Grandizer Wrote: You're NOT paying attention!
polymath is arguing similar to Sean Carroll, in that he's not sure if space/time is infinite or not, but the bet is that it is.
No, not the "bet". That implies a theory. There is no theory that gets past the illogical concept of an actual infinity. What you are describing is a hope (the word Sean Carroll used). And that hope is driven by one thing only: a desire to have no beginning that then requires an explanation other than naturalism.
Quote:And I make no claim that what I hold to is scientific in its entirety. My personal view is logical but not necessarily completely supported by scientific evidence, though it also doesn't contradict it either. So it's absurd that you want us to post a scientific theory that says this is what is the case, when no one said anything about a scientific theory.
You have not shown that your personal view is logical. You don't have to post a scientific theory. You chose to post a video that brought that up. Post anything that shows that people believe an actual infinite number of real things is possible--from any reputable source.
http://www.iep.utm.edu/infinite/
(February 14, 2018 at 12:46 pm)SteveII Wrote:(February 14, 2018 at 12:39 pm)polymath257 Wrote: I can add a few more.
infinity * infinity=infinity
infinity/5=infinity
infinity^infinity=infinity
5*infinity=infinity
Generally, division of infinity isn't defined. So, infinity/infinity isn't well defined. But if you divide an infinite set into a finite number of equal sized sets, each piece will be infinite.
I'm done with you because you seem incapable of having a discussion. You cannot hold up your end of anything. It has been a hundred posts of assertions and never addressing anything mentioned--just writing vague sentences that only you think applies to anything.
I think there is still hope for Grandizer.
Where is the contradiction? Be specific. I have addressed the *logical* point. You have failed to address the issue of the *logical* possibility of a completed infinity.
Instead, you present some *paradoxes* that show how the infinite is different than the finite. But that is to be expected. Paradoxes are not contradictions.
