God's computer program called Eternal Life

[Psalm139]

In this thread, I will be discussing how God created everything. The Genesis story starts out by saying that God created the heavens and earth. The earth was without form and void. This statement that the earth was created without form is what most people miss when they read the Bible.

How can the earth be created without form?

This question will be answered in this thread using information that God has taught me directly and what physicists, cosmologists, cellular biologists and spiritual people talk about.

I want to hear the thoughts from you members who have been interested in this topic of the universe being a simulation or a hologram, etc.

We can discuss this until every member in this thread gets a complete understanding of who we really are instead of what we thought we were for the past thousands of years that man has existed in this universe.

So go ahead and start sharing your thoughts without any judgment from me at all. I accept all thoughts because I know where all thoughts come from.

[Psalm139]

The answer I have will help you understand why you exist.

Why as in purpose? Or why, as in how we technically came to be?

If the former, you must first demonstrate there exists a super entity capable of intellectual thought and purpose. Otherwise, there is no demonstrable overarching "purpose" to life, only the purpose we ascribe to it individually.

There are two parts to the program we're living in. The first part is to let us know who we are and how we were created before it ends. The next part will be radically different than what we're experiencing in this age. I have information to help you understand what it will be like living in the next age.

So far, you haven't exercised any patience at all. Do you ask the teacher on the first day of class for all the evidence for everything he or she is going to teach you for the year?

I'm going to be using each post in this thread like one day of class. By giving you too much information all at once, you won't be able to absorb it all.

[Psalm139]

[Replying to post 10 by Psalm139]

I just lost two hours of writing a post due to impatience by a moderator. I will write offline this time to make sure it isn't lost again due to impatience.

[Zzyzx]

.

[Replying to post 10 by Psalm139]

I just lost two hours of writing a post due to impatience by a moderator. I will write offline this time to make sure it isn't lost again due to impatience.

Of course it is a moderator's impatience that causes someone to compose two hours of writing in a text box and lose it to an internet connection problem. Moderators are often blamed for someone's __________ (lack of wisdom or intelligence) or for their failure to fare well in debate.

What a shame. After a month of membership and a couple hundred posts FINALLY composing something purporting to show evidence of great knowledge " and lose it for lack of knowledge regarding how to write without risk of loss due to internet problems.

I must complement the creativity of an excuse that I haven't heard before. "I lost my homework because your impatience caused an internet glitch." That beats "The dog ate it and that is your fault", but not by much.

[Zzyzx]

.

So far, you haven't exercised any patience at all.

Only a month and 200 posts " with nothing " yup, lack of patience " a bit similar to "I'll be back during this generation", failing to do so, and having believers say "Just wait a little longer and you will see."

Do you ask the teacher on the first day of class for all the evidence for everything he or she is going to teach you for the year?

If after a month a "teacher" had said nothing more significant than "I know a lot. I know a lot. I will tell you someday " after you believe I know a lot " and after you believe what I say is true" " a "student" is likely to rightly conclude that the "teacher" is an imposter who isn't likely to convey any useful information.

I'm going to be using each post in this thread like one day of class.

Setting one's self forth as a "teacher" with "classes" is presumptuous to preposterous " and is totally out of place in a debate Forum.

By giving you too much information all at once, you won't be able to absorb it all.

It is unwise to overestimate one's self and underestimate others. In extreme cases that is known as delusion of grandeur / or superiority.

[Psalm139]

.

So far, you haven't exercised any patience at all.

Only a month and 200 posts " with nothing " yup, lack of patience " a bit similar to "I'll be back during this generation", failing to do so, and having believers say "Just wait a little longer and you will see."

Do you ask the teacher on the first day of class for all the evidence for everything he or she is going to teach you for the year?

If after a month a "teacher" had said nothing more significant than "I know a lot. I know a lot. I will tell you someday " after you believe I know a lot " and after you believe what I say is true" " a "student" is likely to rightly conclude that the "teacher" is an imposter who isn't likely to convey any useful information.

I'm going to be using each post in this thread like one day of class.

Setting one's self forth as a "teacher" with "classes" is presumptuous to preposterous " and is totally out of place in a debate Forum.

By giving you too much information all at once, you won't be able to absorb it all.

It is unwise to overestimate one's self and underestimate others. In extreme cases that is known as delusion of grandeur / or superiority.

Just hang in there. My next post will have something of value and will force some members who read it to think differently. It will be short but interesting.

[Psalm139]

[Replying to post 10 by Psalm139]

The first three sentences in the book of Genesis found in the Bible show that the earth was not created as a visible object. It was created as something invisible. Physicists today know that visible objects are not what we thought they were since man existed on this earth. They did not know these three sentences revealed that the earth was created without form and void. Here are the three verses in chapter one of Genesis and the definitions to very important words in them.

Genesis 1 King James Version (KJV)
1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

form
noun
1.
external appearance of a clearly defined area, as distinguished from color or material; configuration:
a triangular form.
2.
the shape of a thing or person.
3.
a body, especially that of a human being.

void
noun
8.
an empty space; emptiness:
He disappeared into the void.
9.
something experienced as a loss or privation:
His death left a great void in her life.
10.
a gap or opening, as in a wall.
11.
a vacancy; vacuum.

light
noun
1.
something that makes things visible or affords illumination:
All colors depend on light.
2.
Physics.
a. Also called luminous energy, radiant energy. electromagnetic radiation to which the organs of sight react, ranging in wavelength from about 400 to 700 nm and propagated at a speed of 186,282 mi./sec (299,972 km/sec), considered variously as a wave, corpuscular, or quantum phenomenon.
b. a similar form of radiant energy that does not affect the retina, as ultraviolet or infrared rays.
3.
the sensation produced by stimulation of the organs of sight.
4.
an illuminating agent or source, as the sun, a lamp, or a beacon.


According to these definitions of form and void, the earth was created invisible. The light energy that God created made it appear visible. According to the double slit test that was first used in 1801, the particles of light only appear when observed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment

This would explain why God created light for illumination purposes to observe the earth but only when observed. This would require an observer to observe the earth or any other object on the earth or above it, which would include the entire observed universe filled with visible objects.

How could it be possible that the earth could be created without form and void?

Is it possible that God created the earth as invisible information in the form of waves?

Do physicists understand that the visible objects ( particles ) appear because of these waves?

Do physicists understand that particles cannot be observed unless there is an observer?

Why is an observer important?

Who would be considered an observer?

Im going to stop with this post to let you absorb some of this and ponder these questions before I go on any further. I have lots of information to share in this thread. This is just the beginning.

[Zzyzx]

.
[Replying to post 15 by Psalm139]
The thesis presented is based upon the assumption that the "creation" account in Genesis is truthful and accurate.

Starting with an unverifiable assumption is NOT an auspicious beginning. Back up a few steps and demonstrate that the Genesis account is truthful and accurate (and verifiable). If you cannot do so, everything based upon that assumption is worthless in debate. It is pure speculation.

Care to try again without assuming the Bible is authoritative or source / proof of truth? Forum Rules and Guidelines clearly specify 4. Unsupported Bible quotations are to be considered as no more authoritative than unsupported quotations from any other book. 5. Please avoid "preaching" and using the forum as simply a way to blast people with the gospel message. This is a debating forum, not a convenient place to overtly proselytize.

Your assumptions and speculations may seem convincing to believers but they are decidedly NOT so in honorable debate upon a "level playing field" where no theistic position is given preferential treatment.

Adding: It makes absolutely no difference if the Earth was visible or invisible according the the Genesis account, for instance, UNLESS the Genesis account can be shown to be accurate and truthful.

[Psalm139]

.
[Replying to post 15 by Psalm139]
The thesis presented is based upon the assumption that the "creation" account in Genesis is truthful and accurate.

Starting with an unverifiable assumption is NOT an auspicious beginning. Back up a few steps and demonstrate that the Genesis account is truthful and accurate (and verifiable). If you cannot do so, everything based upon that assumption is worthless in debate. It is pure speculation.

Care to try again without assuming the Bible is authoritative or source / proof of truth? Forum Rules and Guidelines clearly specify 4. Unsupported Bible quotations are to be considered as no more authoritative than unsupported quotations from any other book. 5. Please avoid "preaching" and using the forum as simply a way to blast people with the gospel message. This is a debating forum, not a convenient place to overtly proselytize.

Your assumptions and speculations may seem convincing to believers but they are decidedly NOT so in honorable debate upon a "level playing field" where no theistic position is given preferential treatment.

Adding: It makes absolutely no difference if the Earth was visible or invisible according the the Genesis account, for instance, UNLESS the Genesis account can be shown to be accurate and truthful.

I just got started my friend. You're impatience is shining through this comment of yours. I used the beginning of the creation story to show you that God has created the earth without form and void long before any physicist knew that visible objects aren't what they appear to be.

I have lots of evidence coming with physicists, cosmologists, and other scientists sharing their knowledge and the possibility of us living in a simulation.

I will be sharing many analogies to prove to anyone that I know more than any scientist on this planet about how everything was created. It would be impossible for them to use analogies that I use because they don't have the knowledge about how we were created.

[Haven]

[Replying to post 10 by Psalm139]

The first three sentences in the book of Genesis found in the Bible show that the earth was not created as a visible object.

False. The first three sentences of Genesis read:

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

3 And God said, Let there be light, and there was light.

The author of the Genesis myth used a common Ancient Near Eastern (ANE) trope with "waters" and "formless and void" (these are also found in the Enuma Elish, a Babylonian creation myth), and says nothing about whether the Earth was visible or not. "Light" was seen as a separate object, but that doesn't mean that the Earth was by nature invisible.

Physicists today know that visible objects are not what we thought they were since man existed on this earth.

I'm going to need a citation for that one.

They did not know these three sentences revealed that the earth was created without form and void.

I'm sure many scientists, especially those from Christian or Jewish backgrounds, were aware of those verses.

Here are the three verses in chapter one of Genesis and the definitions to very important words in them.
form
noun
1.
external appearance of a clearly defined area, as distinguished from color or material; configuration:
a triangular form.
2.
the shape of a thing or person.
3.
a body, especially that of a human being.

You're using the English translation, but to really break down the passage it's necessary to have some knowledge of the original Hebrew. The original word used here (tohu) means waste, and implies that the Earth was destroyed from some prior state of perfection (this is also in line with earlier Babylonian myths), not that it was created empty.

According to these definitions of form and void, the earth was created invisible. The light energy that God created made it appear visible. According to the double slit test that was first used in 1801, the particles of light only appear when observed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment

See my comments on English translation above.

That's a misinterpretation of the double-slit experiment. The experiment demonstrates that photons exist as both particles and waves, and that which form they take apparently depends on observation. It says nothing about whether or not light is visible (that's a complete non-sequitur).

I'll address the second part of your arguments in a later post.

[Haven]

I have lots of evidence coming with physicists, cosmologists, and other scientists sharing their knowledge and the possibility of us living in a simulation.

Please provide this, preferably in the form of citations of peer-reviewed articles from reputable journals. As far as I'm aware, there's only one prominent academic (philosopher Nick Bostrom) who accepts that we're likely living in a simulation, and he holds this position for philosophical, not scientific, reasons. I'm not aware of any other scholars who believe we're in a simulation, and I'm fairly certain that there's no hard evidence supporting us living in a simulation (and quite a bit of evidence against it, such as irrational numbers).

I will be sharing many analogies to prove to anyone that I know more than any scientist on this planet about how everything was created.

Friend, I don't see how analogies can do this.