Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it. Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it.(Matthew 7:13-14) NKJV
Occam’s razor is a philosophical train wreck which has been used to delude people into believing hypotheses which are vastly more complex than their competitors.
Occam’s Razor is a problem-solving principle attributed to William of Ockham (c. 1287–1347), who was an English Franciscan friar and scholastic philosopher and theologian. The principle can be interpreted as stating:
Among competing hypotheses, the one with the fewest assumptions should be selected.– William of Ockham (c. 1287–1347)
This is also stated as: all things being equal, the simplest explanation is best. Simple is best, right? However, there’s two major flaws in this logic:
The Philosophical Glitches of Occam’s Razor
- All things aren’t equal,
- What really happened is rarely the simplest explanation.
Occam’s Razor – Navigation
|1||Occam’s Razor||Matthew 7:13-14|
|Who’s The Smartest?||Isaiah 29:14|
|2||Occam’s Twitter||Isaiah 5:20|
|Is Simple Still Best?||John 8:31-32|
|Occam’s Delusion||2 Thessalonians 2:9-12|
- Call upon the name of Jesus Christ,
- believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead,
- confess your sin.
Read through the Bible in a year
|Reading plan||July 23|
|Linear||Song of Solomon 1-3|
50 Replies to “July 23rd”
“Matty’s Paradigm Assumptions
God cannot lie.”
this is based on presuppositions:
There is a god
The god I believe in is the only one
My god is needed for something.
I’d love to see you show that spacetime and gravity aren’t associated, something you claim you know isn’t true.
“God cannot lie and the Bible is true” is a principle which is deduced from axioms.
Severing the link between spacetime and gravity is simply a matter of the sequence of events in Genesis chapter 1. A body of water called “the deep” existed before gravity was created, therefore gravity is not a property of the existence of spacetime. Spacetime existed before gravity was created.
no, it is not. Axioms are “a statement or proposition which is regarded as being established, accepted, or self-evidently true.” we have no evidence for your god so it is not established as true. We also have this god needing to lie to people per your bible, so again, it doesn’t work.
Sicne there is no evidence for the supposed events in Genesis, we also have nothing to show that spacetime and gravity aren’t connected. Depends on which creation story you read in Genesis if there was water before or after the creation of earth, so again the bible shows that you, and it, are incoherent. Thanks to Einstein, gravity and spacetime are parts of each other.
The existence of the universe is the evidence of God.
You could say that about any coincidence, especially if you ignore the lack of a causal link in your ideology.
And what is your causal link, exactly?
What does that question mean?
The universe exists because God created it.
What is your alternative hypotheses?
The universe exists
That’s an effect. Not the cause.
Why does there have to be a cause?
Also, if there is one, how do you know that your God did it?
Yep. Saw that coming.
You just crashed and burned.
You just broke the first law of thermodynamics.
How smug of you. That question does not answer my questions. Try again without the diversion tactic
Atheist “denial of cause” is enough for you to be disqualified.
Any other place where you break the rules you get kicked out.
Go back to Twitter if you want to play that game.
Disqualified from what?
You just renounced the intellectual high ground on which science and atheism is supposedly built.
You have once again proven that atheism is not intellectually viable.
Come back when you can identify a causal agent other than God.
I have not ‘renounced’ or ‘denied’ anything.
I asked a few questions which you have not been able to answer yet.
A question cannot be a denial.
You could still answer if you wanted.
Whining can’t change that.
Every theist says this and has no evidence for it.
The universe is the evidence.
That’s the point.
It can’t be until you have established a causal link. Until then, the idea renains a non-sequitur
Atheism is not intellectually viable.
Science has failed you.
The Bible has a cause for the universe and a source of Hydrogen for nucleosynthesis.
Science has neither.
You want to claim that the universe is evidence for your version of your god. Not for other gods, just your own. And you have no evidence for this or that a god is needed at all. You have a baseless claim just like every other theist. Not impressed.
The evidence is that the Bible can account for all empirical observations and physical evidence with accurate physics which includes the origin and nature of gravity.
If God is real and the Bible is His word that’s exactly what we would expect.
None of that is in my copy. The word Hydrogen doesn’t appear once. The genesis story doesn’t resemble anything seen in real life either. Your claims don’t match either the Bible or the real world.
Care to be specific…?
What is Hydrogen?
A proton and an electron.
Proton is Greek for “first or beginning.”
Check James 3:17 in the Greek for an example of its use.
You’re running on an empty tank of bluff.
Why do you always respond with sarcasm and other forms of insult? Why do you distort plain questions with empirious sneering or straw man responses?
Because your pitiful whining is pathetic, and I’m trying to be nice.
No whining here, all I’ve done is ask questions and you respond with malice.
You respond with zero scientific substance to a simple question:
What caused the universe?
There is a cause and effect.
The cause: you don’t want the Bible to be true.
The effect: you accept an rationalization of human existence which is critically flawed.
No, the bible doesn’t explain or account for all empiracle observations and physical evidence. we have. You are just lying, Matt. The bible makes claims that light exists before objects that produce light. it claims that stars are little spots on a dome. It claims that stars can fall onto the earth and are only tiny things compared to real stars. It claims that the earth is on pillars and has corners. It claims that hailstones are in magic warehouses. The poor thing can’t even get its creation stories to match up. Your god was too stupid to know that animals wouldn’t make a good mate for Adam.
it claims that there was a magical flood higher than Everest. No flood deposit has ever been found for that and surprise Christians can’t point to a time it happened, just like for the Exodus, etc.
Genesis 1:2 refers to a body of water called the deep.
Genesis 1:3 is when God said “let there be light.”
Using deductive reasoning we can conclude that the deep was the source of Hydrogen for nucleosynthesis.
Mt. Everest didn’t exist at the time of Noah’s flood. The tectonic breakup of Pangaea was 200 years after the flood. That’s when the Himalayas were upthrust.
How long do you suggest it took for Mt Everest to form?
A few days. It’s the event mentioned in Genesis 10:25.
Genesis 10:25 “nd to Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided; and his brother’s name was Joktan”
Yep, that’s the tectonic breakup of Pangaea. 200 years after Noah’s flood so the animals and people groups had time to spread out across the earth. That’s why we only find Marsupials and Monotremes in Australia (for example).
Have I got the right quotation? Obviously there is no mention of tectonics there, so where is it?
The earth was divided = tectonic breakup of Pangaea.
Or the earth was divided into haves and have-nots, left and right handed, sea and land, or anything.
You’re using induction to make it what you want.
On the other hand, if we use deduction then follow this logic:
IF animals and humans spread out after Noah’s flood,
BEFORE the supercontinent Pangaea broke up,
AND this was during human history,
THEN it should be in the Bible.
Guess what? It is.
Except it isn’t. The timescale us wrong. There is too much good evidence in the geological record.
That simply means that you don’t understand evidence.
You’re confusing two things:
1) the stratigraphic column,
2) the geological timescale.
The stratigraphic column is evidence.
The geological timescale is your explanation for the evidence.
I can take exactly the same evidence (the stratigraphic column) and show that it is the evidence of Noah’s flood.
Yep, a body of water just hanging out in nothingness. so we have water which needs oxygen to exist, which can’t exist until we have some means to make hydrogen and then oxygen out of that. Sure, Matt. As usual, you demonstrate your utter ignorance.
And funny how you have no idea when Noah’s flood was so you can’t say that Mt. Everest wasn’t there. It’s hilarious that you try to gussie up your failure with real science words. Pangaea broke up around 200 million years. So, Matt, Noah was around 199.999,800 years ago? The Himalayas started growing 50 million years ago and are still at it.
You are so incompetent.
There are no millions of years.
sure dear. Then there is no nucleosynthesis and no radioactive elements. Keep going, I do want to see just how addled you are.
Nuclear decay began after the fall of man in Genesis 3.
Since the earth had formed around a gravitational singularity the majority of the heavy atomic weight elements were concentrated in the core.
Nuclear decay was initially rapid so the core of the earth melted – that’s why hell is at the center of the earth.
This is also the reason why measurements of decay rates in the present are not an accurate indicator of decay rates in the past.
As a result, timescales based on radiometric dating are bogus and the earth is about 6,000 years old.