Posts by Jonathan Drake

40

The mathematical probability of spontaneous order (no designer/creator)

by Fernando in

there seem to be many prerequisites for life as we know it.. to name a few: order, function, compatibility, availability, sustainability, intelligence, consciousness, intuition and so on.. focusing on only one, namely order.. what are the chances of order arising spontaneously, by chance, with no creator/designer?.

i have often pondered this and recently came across a mathematical summary of the big picture:.

if every particle in the known physical universe (10^80 particles), participated in one trillion interactions (10^12 interactions) per second, for the entire 30 billion years of the universe's existence (10^18 seconds), then we would by now have covered only 10^110 permutations.. if you had only 100 components in a container, what are the chances that a blindfolded person could lay them out in order on a table?.

Jonathan Drake

@Viv

oh my god... I cannot believe what I just read.

40

The mathematical probability of spontaneous order (no designer/creator)

by Fernando in

there seem to be many prerequisites for life as we know it.. to name a few: order, function, compatibility, availability, sustainability, intelligence, consciousness, intuition and so on.. focusing on only one, namely order.. what are the chances of order arising spontaneously, by chance, with no creator/designer?.

i have often pondered this and recently came across a mathematical summary of the big picture:.

if every particle in the known physical universe (10^80 particles), participated in one trillion interactions (10^12 interactions) per second, for the entire 30 billion years of the universe's existence (10^18 seconds), then we would by now have covered only 10^110 permutations.. if you had only 100 components in a container, what are the chances that a blindfolded person could lay them out in order on a table?.

Jonathan Drake

Viviane2 minutes ago
This does not require an intelligence to create the laws, the laws just are. 2+2=4 regardless of whether any intelligence exists to realise it. Nobody had to 'invent' the fact that 2+2=4, it just is.
Math is straight from babby Jesus and is held together and werks becuase of Gods Wholly Srprit!
http://www.christianperspective.net/math/god-and-math/
Checkmate!

You know, I really don't typically like your posts.

But this is damn hilarious. I can't stop laughing.

40

The mathematical probability of spontaneous order (no designer/creator)

by Fernando in

there seem to be many prerequisites for life as we know it.. to name a few: order, function, compatibility, availability, sustainability, intelligence, consciousness, intuition and so on.. focusing on only one, namely order.. what are the chances of order arising spontaneously, by chance, with no creator/designer?.

i have often pondered this and recently came across a mathematical summary of the big picture:.

if every particle in the known physical universe (10^80 particles), participated in one trillion interactions (10^12 interactions) per second, for the entire 30 billion years of the universe's existence (10^18 seconds), then we would by now have covered only 10^110 permutations.. if you had only 100 components in a container, what are the chances that a blindfolded person could lay them out in order on a table?.

Jonathan Drake

My response to the op is the same as I've said elsewhere.

Across infinite time the probability becomes 100%. Time is your measurement of the probability, and time (assuming it's real and not a human construct to measure existence) goes on forever into the future. Even if the components of life hadn't all mixed properly in 30 billion years it'd have just happened some other point in existence, that's assuming the 30 billion estimate is accurate.

the eventual spark of life isn't a question of what if, its only a matter of where and when. Across eternity 1 in 10^158 or whatever becomes 100% assured.

16

The end

by Garrett in

jw
friends

oh...my...god.... i can't.. well, i am officially done trying to explain things to them.

they talk in circles, and their excuse for everything is "imperfect men".

imperfect men!.

Jonathan Drake

Garrett,

in your previous thread I shared with you an incident I had with family. It took me only three times to learn this lesson and I think I'd like to suggest you apply it before anything seriously harms your relationships with any family:

Just let them be. If they ask me something I say, "it's best we not talk about this, I have my reasons." Whenever they are truly ready to listen you'll be able to tell the difference. I've had a couple of these opportunities and it's different from the regular circular argument.

I suggest following this model. If you can. The more noise you make the more attention you'll get. In my opinion, it's honestly best to avoid the attention and try to move on. I hope this works for you, but I know every situation is different.

8

Well...I blew it

by Garrett in

jw
friends

(follow up to my last post).

i let it rip.

i can't take stupidity from people i thought were capable of using their brain.

Jonathan Drake

You don't have to apologize to us I don't think.

I looked over you're other thread, and I'm not surprised you lost your cool. If it makes you feel better, I also seriously lost my cool the first time talking about this with someone. It was really, really bad. They kept cutting me off and not letting me finish my sentences and that's a real quick way to piss me off. It got real ugly.

I did call them and apologize for loosing my temper. Because I did disrespect that person.

But just remember, and this is just my opinion, but you SHOULD be angry. There's nothing wrong with you for being angry. They should be angry too, but their minds are like... Hypnotized. It'll all work out. It'll be okay.

556

The Watchtower are Right About Blood...

by cofty in

... but, they fail to take note of one important detail.. i believe that if we are going to have any chance of reasoning with a jw about blood, this is the place we need to begin.. don't try to convince them that it was only a dietary law.

it wasn't, and they will never go along with it.. don't tell them that saving a life is more important than obeying a law, even a seemingly trivial one.

they take pride in obedience.

Jonathan Drake

@fisherman

amd that's the problem. It's not a conclusion. It's a fact. That is what was being spoken about, that is what they were referencing- actual consumption of blood. The Greek word used was to keep separate from, followed by blood being mentioned alongside eating sacrificial meet. It's not an interpretation. It's how it literally reads.

57

The Bible Gods Word or Mans

by azor in

i remember studying this book years ago and how it impacted my belief system.

i no longer believe the bible is god's word.

however i do have a couple of lingering questions on this subject.

Jonathan Drake

@razor

ahhh okay. So you're not a believer defending faith. I got the wrong impression. I still dot

mt think I'm understanding what you're looking for, but the epic of Gilgamesh predates the bible considerably and is believed it's what Noah is based on. I don't remember everything about it but I wanna say gods involved somewhere along the line.

556

The Watchtower are Right About Blood...

by cofty in

... but, they fail to take note of one important detail.. i believe that if we are going to have any chance of reasoning with a jw about blood, this is the place we need to begin.. don't try to convince them that it was only a dietary law.

it wasn't, and they will never go along with it.. don't tell them that saving a life is more important than obeying a law, even a seemingly trivial one.

they take pride in obedience.

Jonathan Drake

@fisherman

thing is, abstaining from blood is listed right along side abstaining from things sacrificed to idols.

What was sacrificed to idols?

a. Animals, meat.

What did they do with it?

a. Eat it.

When it says to abstain, what is meant?

a. Do not eat.

so when it says upstain from things sacrificed to idols AND FROM BLOOD, what is meant?

a. Do not eat sacrificial meat or blood.

Easy reasoning. Yet Paul makes it clear later that eating sacrificial meat was acceptable because it lost its sacred meaning! So how much more so must blood be used to save a life, since sacredity of life was the point and life is always sacred!

57

The Bible Gods Word or Mans

by azor in

i remember studying this book years ago and how it impacted my belief system.

i no longer believe the bible is god's word.

however i do have a couple of lingering questions on this subject.

Jonathan Drake

@razor

i don't think I get what your asking for; are you asking for evidence that Heaven does not exist?

This is kind of the problem, there's no way to prove unequivocally God and heaven don't exist. I don't disbelieve because of this kind of proof. I don't believe there is a God because of evidence that disproves the bible, because of terrible things that have happened, because of the things you can look around and see religion doing in the name of their God. All of this is evidence that the bible and these groups are lies. When the things that are supposed to be from God are all lies and there are evidence against them - in my mind that discredits God pretty heavily.

I highly suggest reading Undeniable by bill Nye. He explains some things that very heavily influenced my reasoning on God.

57

The Bible Gods Word or Mans

by azor in

i remember studying this book years ago and how it impacted my belief system.

i no longer believe the bible is god's word.

however i do have a couple of lingering questions on this subject.

Jonathan Drake

Finkelsteina minute ago
pressman
Very true that the bible started all the beliefs about god. it makes sense that it would because it is the word of god.

Oh shit pressman there were ancient civilizations that predate the ancient Hebrews by thousands of years and they had other gods to worship than YHWH .
If that is true then the ancient Hebrews were not worshiping the right god , they were worshiping a pagan god distinct from the original true god.

Yea I didn't even mention this, I'd really like to know how you rationalize the bible itself saying worship of that God is older than itself with your post.... Lol (@pressman)