Agreed. But Science is a moving target, one day saying one thing and another day saying something else and often, the last thing they said is assumed to be, or peddled as, the absolute truth. They fall into that trap a lot. The Big Bang is an example of that.



Yes, I know how science is supposed to work. Unfortunately, they can't replicate the alleged Big Bang or show us pictures of the event. Nor can they initiate life from a bowl of inert chemicals. Etc. All they can say about the latter is that, well, given enough time, it just happened.



Perhaps. But maybe life was enjoyed by others in earlier eras too. Maybe people found meaning in life without cell phones and cancer killing radiation machines.



I hadn't heard that the Higgs Boson was related to Dark Matter. Last I heard, "Dark Matter" was hypothetical and nothing more.



What I object to is how they speak about the "Big Bang" as if it was a fact. It's not a fact. It may be supported by evidence but that doesn't make it a fact. The "flat earth" is also supported by evidence. All you need to do is move to Kansas and look at the horizon and you can SEE that it's flat. That's "evidence."



Agreed.



I understand that. The Urantia Book says that Adam and Eve were de-materialized on their home world and flown here by Seraphic transport and then re-materialized here, in the Garden (of Eden), 38,000 years ago. It also says that the original Garden is now under 3,000 feet of water in the eastern Mediterranean Ocean off the coast of Syria. So if that's ever found, it will validate The Urantia Book. The problem is that it's almost impossible to do any such research in that area due to the danger of being attacked by the militaries of several countries in that region.



I was intrigued by the idea that The Urantia Book's 2 billion year cycle of space respiration seems to dovetail the Hindu creation story (if I remember that right). Maybe some Hindu "seer" somehow found out.

It's not possible to have "tea with the queen" if the place does not exist.

As there is no Ancient term for "hell" that mean the word, and the place< does not exist.

Of course only a select few would want to change the whole "hell" concept. Only those interested in truth, that is.

ReserveCorp 06/05/18cont'd:

It's looking like our discussion might need to be moved to the Science and Philosophy thread.

I will say this as a final entry on the scientific method aspect:

All scientists agree that models are theories subject to correction and adjustment as new evidence comes along. The difference between scientific method and dogma is replication of evidence and methods by others to arrive at the same conclusion. When a theory, say, the discovery of penicillin, bec omes true in all cases and is generally accepted, one could say it is a fact.

This does not happen on a daily basis and as technology becomes ever more sophisticated, completely overturning a Theory requires much study and work and is not done on a whim.

Some people thought the Earth was flat, especially those in Europe during the Dark Ages. The Chinese, Chaldean, Egyptian, and more recently, the Persian cultures all had cosmologies based on several thousand years of observation. The Chaldeans, Sumerians if you like, had a developed 360 degrees spherical world view. The Vikings 'discovered' N. America a thousand years before Columbus. Saint Brendan the Navigator did it in a hide covered skiff in the 5th century.

TBC, the neighbor wants to have coffee...—IM

It was also instrumental in discovering the Higg's bosun which accounts for much of that space you're talking about. 'Dark Matter' coming Real Soon Now.


I hadn't heard that the Higgs Boson was related to Dark Matter. Last I heard, "Dark Matter" was hypothetical and nothing more.

I didn't say it was. '...talking about.' Period. Full stop. New sentence, new thought. Until they clean up the math and do some experiments, the jury is out. That's why I put it in quotation marks and jocularly wrote Real Soon Now.

To sum up:
I trained myself off/away from making conclusions about ontological subjects. I'm quite content with reason based on my five senses and the only belief I ascribe to is, 'there are no Absolutes in this universe'.—IM

Are you saying that there is no absolute truth?

Absolutely

Absolutely

This second post was unintentional (Ghost in the Machine?)—IM

Once again this man quotes to us from a mysterious source. Is there a name for the Bible you are using?

John, the beloved disciple, is dead. How then could he insist so strongly that he had "everlasting" life, and that all who are not believing this have made God a liar? It is evident that he did not have what we would understand by "everlasting" life or he would still be living. The rendering "eonian" avoids this difficulty. This life does not commence until the resurrection and lasts until death is no longer in action, at the consummation at the close of the eonian times. It will be, in effect, without end, but it would be foolish to predicate life when there is no death.

Doesn't the Bible tell us that ALL will have the Son?

CLV 1Cor 15:27 For He subjects all under His feet. Now whenever He may be saying that all is subject, it is evident that it is outside of Him Who subjects all to Him.
28 Now, whenever all may be subjected to Him, then the Son Himself also shall be subjected to Him Who subjects all to Him, that God may be All in all.

There is that pesky word ALL again.

It says ALL will be subject to Him. All, not some.

Guys. the title here is Which Did You Think Was "hell"? Not the Higgs Boson or Dark Matter.

Please stick to the subject.

You just made an "absolute ".

C orrupted
L ying
V ersion



CLV= all about me , and NOT about Him.

And when did you read this English version?

Do you know the difference between the Ancient Koine Greek and the Modern Greek?

Actually, '...there is absolutely no absolute truth' is a circular argument, same as putting absolute within quotation marks.

To make a statement that there is no absolute truth is illogical.

You say there is no absolute truth, are you absolutely sure of that?

If you say yes (which you already did) then you have made an absolute statement which itself implies the existence of absolutes.

Besides the problem of self-contradiction, there are several other logical problems one must overcome to believe that there are no absolute or universal truths.

One is that all humans have limited knowledge and finite minds and, therefore, cannot logically make absolute negative statements.

Actually, my mind is infinite, so I'm allowed

Nope. Only God is infinite.

So is pi

Pi doesn't possess life or the ability to reason.
It is just mathematical therefore it is non-applicable to the essence of infinite.

http://humanknowledge.net/Thoughts.html#Theology

Fail.

I rather hear what you have to say rather then read a bunch of copy N paste .

Glean what you can and create your assessment.