Revan, Bane, and Sidious vs. Sion

Started by Jinsoku Takai8 pages
Originally posted by ares834
If my understanding of it is correct, the Primordial Atom theory holds that said atom contained all matter/energy within it. Thus it really isn't "creating" anything.

This has been addressed already.

Originally posted by Jinsoku Takai
This has been addressed already.

No it hasn't. The theory states that matter/energy was always there is much the same way that God was always there. It does not need to "create itself".

...It's getting too late for me. Up at 3 in the morning for work (11:47 here now). Catch up with you guys later.

I think what Red is getting at is that he essentially agrees with everything I've been saying.

Originally posted by ares834
No it hasn't. The theory states that matter/energy was always there is much the same way that God was always there. It does not need to "create itself".

How did the matter get there? Ohhh, it must have created itself. Now... as I said a minute ago, sleepy time.

Again, this is not a rhetorical debate. You cannot "score points" off of me for the simple reason that I am not seeking to score any myself. I am informing you that these are questions of fact, with real, determinable, and imminently settled answers. Metaphysics and, forgive me, philosophy as a whole (of which theology is a subset) can butt out.

Your first post to include argumentation that I noticed is reproduced below:

Originally posted by Jinsoku Takai
I see what you are saying there. However, with that being said, there cannot be a beginning in the truest sense then, since no beginning can come about on its own. Therefore, there must be an absolute first cause who has always existed. And this first cause is GOD!!

Now, if you mean to suggest that this is not meant to be read as an endorsement of the Judeo-Christian figure, then I offer my apologies. Within the context of the Atheist/Christian argument already in progress, however, it is a reasonable assumption to make. In fact, I make that assumption, and am not rebuffed:
Originally posted by Zampanó
That's nice. The stereotypical (undergraduate) philosophy student answer is that you cannot jump from "a first cause exists" to "that first cause is the Christian God."

It's nice that you've investigated your faith, though.


Now, the final thing I have to say about the First Cause argument (I find these discussions to be rather predictable, and do not intend to continue much longer) is that the absolute furthest one can go with this argument is the existence of some kind of agency near the Big Bang. Literally no characteristics can be attributed to this agency other than existence.

And I don't even concede the validity of the argument on its own merits; there are too many assumptions for the exercise to have any real world meaning (much like the ontological argument).

Originally posted by Jinsoku Takai
How did the matter get there? Ohhh, it must have created itself. Now... as I said a minute ago, sleepy time.

What? Have you been ignoring what I stated the theory claims that the matter was there since the begining. It has no origin it simply was always there.

Edit: I'm not saying that God doesn't exist, BTW, simply that that argument does not prove it.

Originally posted by Jinsoku Takai
This has been addressed already.


Much like particles sometimes erupt spontaneously into existence at the quantum level (paired with their antiparticle) without any violation of conservation of energy, the Big Bang was just a macro-scale eruption of quantum-scale effects that ultimately sum to zero.

Yes. It has been addressed by scientists who put thought and effort and years of their life into inching our understanding of the universe forward. Oh, did I mention they have proof for their claims?

Originally posted by Iden Enserath
Well the simple fact that time has, at any given time, a present, would prove that it also has a beginning, otherwise there would be an infinite span of time that proceeds any given present point in time, whereby the present point in time would never be able to be fully realised.

Though I must say it's a concept I have a hard time wrapping my head around, but it would seem that time can be proven to possess a beginning, within the confines of potentially imperfect human reasoning.


This is a philosophical argument for something that is (all but) an observed scientific phenomena; the Hubble Telescope discovers more and more ancient formations as it looks into the sky, and the Background Radiation is (again, almost) completely explained by the expansionary model of the universe, so I'm not sure why you feel the need to use outdated logic traps when you can simply point to the night sky.

But yes, the evidence is that time as we experience it has continued for some 14 billion years. (There is one school of thought that I like, in which the universe is in a sort of time loop of expansion and contraction, but the math is still out on that one.)

Nebaris, I think you've got the right idea but are a little behind on the latest facts? Do you try to stay current with science-news? It's hard because journalism on the sciences is so abysmally poor. You practically have to read the papers themselves to know what's going on, and even then you're faced with pages of jargon.

Originally posted by Dr McBeefington
Nope, because they have evidence. I'm just not well versed enough to elaborate on it.. I'm reading the second book by Dr. Kaku.

👆
The scientists have one better than evidence:
they have math
😛

[triple post?]

It's funny how most people confuse Nominal Christianity with the original teachings - and don't know the difference.

They don't know that Catholicism is different and how much the Catholic Church trashed and warped the teachings of Jesus.

And the funniest part, is when people believe the Bible is simply a book of moral guidlines.

People view Catholicism and Christianity as the same thing, the way people during the Jedi Civil War viewed the Jedi and Sith to be the same.

Ignorance is a shame.

I'm gone for less than a day and first thing I see is this...

What the f*ck are you people on about now?

Originally posted by NowYouRemember
It's funny how most people confuse Nominal Christianity with the original teachings - and don't know the difference.

They don't know that Catholicism is different and how much the Catholic Church trashed and warped the teachings of Jesus.

And the funniest part, is when people believe the Bible is simply a book of moral guidlines.

People view Catholicism and Christianity as the same thing, the way people during the Jedi Civil War viewed the Jedi and Sith to be the same.

Ignorance is a shame.

Here lies DarkSerpent
Perverse, most likely high,
and virulently anti-Catholic

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
I'm gone for less than a day and first thing I see is this...

What the f*ck are you people on about now?


It's the Order 66 thread all over again.

At least I didn't start it this time!

Originally posted by Zampanó
It's the Order 66 thread all over again.

At least I didn't start it this time!

That's ringing a bell. Which one was that?

It was the very first political thread. I think Capt. Valerian started the thread, and it had to do with the 501st versus [something]. Maybe HALO?

Anyway, I used Iraq as an analogy and bricks were shat onto fans.

Debates like these have been argued for years now and have never reached a conclusion which is why I prefer not to engage in them most of the time. However, I will tell you guys why I believe there is God that is working far beyond human comprehension. The reason for my belief is: Life here on earth.

Some will argue that life on earth, like the universe, was created by chance or coincidence. What we do know is that life on earth could never exist were it not for a series of other so called "coincidences" such as:

- The earth's location in the solar systen as well as the planet's orbit, tilt, rotational speed, and our unusual moon.

- A magnetic field and an atmosphere that serve as a dual shield.

- Natural cycles that replenish and cleanse the planet's air and water supply.

It is hard for me to believe that all these series of coincidences happened to one planet by chance. Not only that but also the way so many different life forms also came about on one planet. I do not believe that humans, mammals, fish, and plant life were all created on the same exact planet by mere chance. It seems to me that there is a conscious being that was behind all creation. The way life was brought into this world seems far too perfect to develope by chance.

Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
Debates like these have been argued for years now and have never reached a conclusion which is why I prefer not to engage in them most of the time. However, I will tell you guys why I believe there is God that is working far beyond human comprehension. The reason for my belief is: Life here on earth.

Some will argue that life on earth, like the universe, was created by chance or coincidence. What we do know is that life on earth could never exist were it not for a series of other so called "coincidences" such as:

- The earth's location in the solar systen as well as the planet's orbit, tilt, rotational speed, and our unusual moon.

- A magnetic field and an atmosphere that serve as a dual shield.

- Natural cycles that replenish and cleanse the planet's air and water supply.

It is hard for me to believe that all these series of coincidences happened to one planet by chance. Not only that but also the way so many different life forms also came about on one planet. I do not believe that humans, mammals, fish, and plant life were all created on the same exact planet by mere chance. It seems to me that there is a conscious being that was behind all creation. The way life was brought into this world seems far too perfect to develope by chance.

It really isn't perfect at all. It has been a sloppy and messy process that's failed several times and taken 4.5 billion years to get anywhere.

Humans are simply awful at comprehending scale.

Actually there is an argument based on that. It's called the Fine Tuning argument. The problem I have with it is life as we know it could not exist if some of these factors were shifted, however the possabiltiy of life would still not be impossible.

Ultimately, we evolved within the parameters set by this universe.

Originally posted by Lucius
It really isn't perfect at all. It has been a sloppy and messy process that's failed several times and taken 4.5 billion years to get anywhere.

Humans are simply awful at comprehending scale.

Failed several times? Where do you get that? Even if you are correct, do you believe that all the failed attempts were chances also? It would seem that if it was a process that has failed several times, then something or someone was wanting life to be evolved here.

4.5 billion years is really not that long compared to forever.