New chatbot lets users text with AI Jesus

[bilby]

As a believer born in the modern world I would say God was the ultimate scientist

What papers has he published in reputable scientific journals?

 

[Learner]

As a believer born in the modern world I would say God was the ultimate scientist

What papers has he published in reputable scientific journals?

Published in reputable scientific journals? At the level of human comprehension?

It would have to be a gargantuan 'dumbing down' of a God level science to be conceivable to mere humans.

Most importantly: Could mere mortals cope, psycho-emotionally being able to be responsible with such incredible knowledge that represents being in possession of great great power?

Understandably for a responsible creator...
....there'd be no papers in the scientific journals for mere mortals. We are emotionally disturbed as it is with much smaller in comparison, nuclear arms being in the irresponsible wrong hands.

 

[Learner]

double post

 

[Learner]

double post again, sorry.

 

[ideologyhunter]

I get it totally. God is the ultimate scientist, because of course he has the answers to the structure of everything. So, while inspiring the Bible, he knew about valence bond theory, germ theory, the double helix, the speed of light, dark matter. Et cetera. But his magnum opus has a firmament holding gobs of water overhead, an earth that's older than stars, also an earth that's somewhere between six and ten thousand years old, a flood that covers the earth and erases mankind (plus all the other Noah-related nonsense.) A man that lives to 969. An ass that talks. Got it, got it, got it. Just consider that he knew germ theory AND he loves us AND he didn't let on about germs. But "his" book is still the greatest repository of wisdom in existence.

 

[Jarhyn]

I get it totally. God is the ultimate scientist, because of course he has the answers to the structure of everything. So, while inspiring the Bible, he knew about valence bond theory, germ theory, the double helix, the speed of light, dark matter. Et cetera. But his magnum opus has a firmament holding gobs of water overhead, an earth that's older than stars, also an earth that's somewhere between six and ten thousand years old, a flood that covers the earth and erases mankind (plus all the other Noah-related nonsense.) A man that lives to 969. An ass that talks. Got it, got it, got it. Just consider that he knew germ theory AND he loves us AND he didn't let on about germs. But "his" book is still the greatest repository of wisdom in existence.

I find it funny, in many respects, because we discovered something interesting about aperiodic bonding structure in certain quasi-crystals: they correspond in some identifiable cases with the shadows of higher dimensional platonic solids.

It may be the case that the universe itself could be the interaction of such components of a shadow of a higher dimensional platonic solid, in which case we could consider that God might just be a child with a flashlight.

How much of a physics genius would such a hyperdimensional alien need to be to flick the button on a flashlight and shine it on a block toy, and see a world there unfolding in the shadow, or to make their own shadow puppet to play with the shadow people?

 

[ideologyhunter]

I get it totally. God is the ultimate scientist, because of course he has the answers to the structure of everything. So, while inspiring the Bible, he knew about valence bond theory, germ theory, the double helix, the speed of light, dark matter. Et cetera. But his magnum opus has a firmament holding gobs of water overhead, an earth that's older than stars, also an earth that's somewhere between six and ten thousand years old, a flood that covers the earth and erases mankind (plus all the other Noah-related nonsense.) A man that lives to 969. An ass that talks. Got it, got it, got it. Just consider that he knew germ theory AND he loves us AND he didn't let on about germs. But "his" book is still the greatest repository of wisdom in existence.

I find it funny, in many respects, because we discovered something interesting about aperiodic bonding structure in certain quasi-crystals: they correspond in some identifiable cases with the shadows of higher dimensional platonic solids.

It may be the case that the universe itself could be the interaction of such components of a shadow of a higher dimensional platonic solid, in which case we could consider that God might just be a child with a flashlight.

How much of a physics genius would such a hyperdimensional alien need to be to flick the button on a flashlight and shine it on a block toy, and see a world there unfolding in the shadow, or to make their own shadow puppet to play with the shadow people?

And then to tell some of the shadow people that their dicks made them dominant but that they needed to lose the foreskin. That kid with the flashlight has issues.

 

[Jarhyn]

I get it totally. God is the ultimate scientist, because of course he has the answers to the structure of everything. So, while inspiring the Bible, he knew about valence bond theory, germ theory, the double helix, the speed of light, dark matter. Et cetera. But his magnum opus has a firmament holding gobs of water overhead, an earth that's older than stars, also an earth that's somewhere between six and ten thousand years old, a flood that covers the earth and erases mankind (plus all the other Noah-related nonsense.) A man that lives to 969. An ass that talks. Got it, got it, got it. Just consider that he knew germ theory AND he loves us AND he didn't let on about germs. But "his" book is still the greatest repository of wisdom in existence.

I find it funny, in many respects, because we discovered something interesting about aperiodic bonding structure in certain quasi-crystals: they correspond in some identifiable cases with the shadows of higher dimensional platonic solids.

It may be the case that the universe itself could be the interaction of such components of a shadow of a higher dimensional platonic solid, in which case we could consider that God might just be a child with a flashlight.

How much of a physics genius would such a hyperdimensional alien need to be to flick the button on a flashlight and shine it on a block toy, and see a world there unfolding in the shadow, or to make their own shadow puppet to play with the shadow people?

And then to tell some of the shadow people that their dicks made them dominant but that they needed to lose the foreskin. That kid with the flashlight has issues.

Well, my guess is that it wasn't a kid with a shadow puppet, and if you wanted to convince me that it was, you would need better evidence than the word of a species of known liars from ancient times before any standard of evidence was dreamed of.

But yeah, if that's down to the kid with the flashlight saying it, then there's some issues there.

 

[WAB]

I get it totally. God is the ultimate scientist, because of course he has the answers to the structure of everything. So, while inspiring the Bible, he knew about valence bond theory, germ theory, the double helix, the speed of light, dark matter. Et cetera. But his magnum opus has a firmament holding gobs of water overhead, an earth that's older than stars, also an earth that's somewhere between six and ten thousand years old, a flood that covers the earth and erases mankind (plus all the other Noah-related nonsense.) A man that lives to 969. An ass that talks. Got it, got it, got it. Just consider that he knew germ theory AND he loves us AND he didn't let on about germs. But "his" book is still the greatest repository of wisdom in existence.

I find it funny, in many respects, because we discovered something interesting about aperiodic bonding structure in certain quasi-crystals: they correspond in some identifiable cases with the shadows of higher dimensional platonic solids.

It may be the case that the universe itself could be the interaction of such components of a shadow of a higher dimensional platonic solid, in which case we could consider that God might just be a child with a flashlight.

How much of a physics genius would such a hyperdimensional alien need to be to flick the button on a flashlight and shine it on a block toy, and see a world there unfolding in the shadow, or to make their own shadow puppet to play with the shadow people?

And then to tell some of the shadow people that their dicks made them dominant but that they needed to lose the foreskin. That kid with the flashlight has issues.

Well, my guess is that it wasn't a kid with a shadow puppet, and if you wanted to convince me that it was, you would need better evidence than the word of a species of known liars from ancient times before any standard of evidence was dreamed of.

But yeah, if that's down to the kid with the flashlight saying it, then there's some issues there.

Which species of known liars?

 

[Jarhyn]

I get it totally. God is the ultimate scientist, because of course he has the answers to the structure of everything. So, while inspiring the Bible, he knew about valence bond theory, germ theory, the double helix, the speed of light, dark matter. Et cetera. But his magnum opus has a firmament holding gobs of water overhead, an earth that's older than stars, also an earth that's somewhere between six and ten thousand years old, a flood that covers the earth and erases mankind (plus all the other Noah-related nonsense.) A man that lives to 969. An ass that talks. Got it, got it, got it. Just consider that he knew germ theory AND he loves us AND he didn't let on about germs. But "his" book is still the greatest repository of wisdom in existence.

I find it funny, in many respects, because we discovered something interesting about aperiodic bonding structure in certain quasi-crystals: they correspond in some identifiable cases with the shadows of higher dimensional platonic solids.

It may be the case that the universe itself could be the interaction of such components of a shadow of a higher dimensional platonic solid, in which case we could consider that God might just be a child with a flashlight.

How much of a physics genius would such a hyperdimensional alien need to be to flick the button on a flashlight and shine it on a block toy, and see a world there unfolding in the shadow, or to make their own shadow puppet to play with the shadow people?

And then to tell some of the shadow people that their dicks made them dominant but that they needed to lose the foreskin. That kid with the flashlight has issues.

Well, my guess is that it wasn't a kid with a shadow puppet, and if you wanted to convince me that it was, you would need better evidence than the word of a species of known liars from ancient times before any standard of evidence was dreamed of.

But yeah, if that's down to the kid with the flashlight saying it, then there's some issues there.

Which species of known liars?

He swore that fish was SO big and he was in it for three whole days and nights!

While we do have documented whale swallowing, they last mere seconds.

Humans are rife with lies, from saying apparently honest things about hallucinations (chaotically dishonest experiences), to saying dishonest things about honest experiences ("I have golden plates that only I can read and no you can't see em!").

We are born such that we pathologically fail to tell the truth so often, if only because we were born to be ignorant of any such truth

 

[ideologyhunter]

"Is it more probable that nature should go out of her course, or that a man should tell a lie? We have never seen, in our time, nature go out of her course. But we have good reason to believe that millions of lies have been told in the same time. It is therefore at least millions to one that the reporter of miracle tells a lie."
-Thomas Paine, Age of Reason, Part I (1794)

 

[Learner]

I get it totally. God is the ultimate scientist, because of course he has the answers to the structure of everything. So, while inspiring the Bible, he knew about valence bond theory, germ theory, the double helix, the speed of light, dark matter. Et cetera.

He would know humans would come up with quite a variety of names for different theories.

But his magnum opus has a firmament holding gobs of water overhead,

What's that in Gen Z speak?

an earth that's older than stars, also an earth that's somewhere between six and ten thousand years old,

Earth older than the stars,...well It does imply that when the earth was void i.e. suggesting it was already formed and existing.

Regarding the six thousand plus years - the writings imply this means the creation of life, rather than the age of the earth. Therefore, there's s no contradiction or confusion in the age of the earth, if seen from this perspective.

a flood that covers the earth and erases mankind (plus all the other Noah-related nonsense.)

71% of the earth covered in ocean isn't that hard to picture the possibility of a world flood plausibility. A simple spatial reasoning which unfortunately atheists do seem to lack in, I find.

A man that lives to 969. An ass that talks. Got it, got it, got it.

Indeed...
...Then God said he will reduce the human life span to 120 years

Genesis 6:3 states, “Then the Lord said, ‘My Spirit will not contend with man forever, for he is mortal; his days shall be 120 years.’”

Amazing ain't it? . It seems science agrees with the human lifespan limit, mentioned in the bible thousands of years ago! And If God is right about 120 years then I'm going to think 969 or whatever years should be right too...easy for an ultimate scientist..

Just consider that he knew germ theory AND he loves us AND he didn't let on about germs.

The bible is 'awash' with washing, bathing, being clean, being cleansed, being isolated from others for seven days for sores, skin issues, being unclean, etc. & etc.

Besides you are wrong when you said God didn't " let on" about germs (in today's science terms) because of the obvious...
...we know about it!

But "his" book is still the greatest repository of wisdom in existence.

It is indeed.... since the wisdom of the bible stands on a base of love and compassion. Science journals and texts have zilch. It doesn't do wisdom from the language of compassionate understanding.

 

[ideologyhunter]

a flood that covers the earth and erases mankind (plus all the other Noah-related nonsense.)

71% of the earth covered in ocean isn't that hard to picture the possibility of a world flood plausibility. A simple spatial reasoning which unfortunately atheists do seem to lack in, I find.

Do I really need to list all of the ridiculous facet of Genesis 6 through 9? This is a tale you think is historical? Omniscient God being sorry he made men, although he knew in advance, etc etc...600 year old man with a hammer building an ocean liner...pandas and kangaroos and pangolins and Arctic foxes making it to the Middle East...trees living underwater for months. I get it that little kids like the story, with mass death and all. But when adults don't know they're reading folklore, it's sad.

Just consider that he knew germ theory AND he loves us AND he didn't let on about germs.

The bible is 'awash' with washing, bathing, being clean, being cleansed, being isolated from others for seven days for sores, skin issues, being unclean, etc. & etc.

Yes, it's awash all right, with ritualistic definitions of clean and unclean. Bible cures for leprosy include miracle healing, sacrifices, and cleansing rites. But it's caused by a bacterium, which is why a WHO physician today will skip the rabbi, the incantations, the special bathing formula and use Multidrug Therapy. The same WHO physician will not want to treat women for having menstrual periods, but of course the Bible wants them to be untouchables for a week. And God's good with that, I guess. How many faithful still practice the primitive purity laws?

Besides you are wrong when you said God didn't " let on" about germs (in today's science terms) because of the obvious...
...we know about it!

This is 100% backward. It is exactly like my born-again cousin's comment when I told her that doctors had turned around the death rate of childhood leukemia, and it now had better than a 90% cure rate. Her response: "Praise God!!" I had a struggle not to drop the phone at that moment. So God creates a world and all its organisms, which obviously include germs, bacteria, viruses. Man only starts developing germ theory in the 1500s, but it's not established science until after the American Civil War. But of course God knew all about it for the previous millenia -- yet you're crediting God with letting us in on it. That's backward to the point of illegibility. Whatever factual, practical, reproducible knowledge we have in medicine, chemistry, astronomy, geology and on and on in the sciences comes from the diligent work of women and men who reject all preconceptions in their work (and yes, as a group, are preponderantly nonbelievers.) If you had leprosy before modern drug therapies, which means for all but a scintilla of recorded history, you were fucked. You were probably told to pray about it.

 

[ideologyhunter]

Dammit. Did I have to type 'illegibility'??? Must've meant unintelligibility. Damn these internet first/final drafts.

 

[DBT]

I get it totally. God is the ultimate scientist, because of course he has the answers to the structure of everything. So, while inspiring the Bible, he knew about valence bond theory, germ theory, the double helix, the speed of light, dark matter. Et cetera.

He would know humans would come up with quite a variety of names for different theories.

But his magnum opus has a firmament holding gobs of water overhead,

What's that in Gen Z speak?

an earth that's older than stars, also an earth that's somewhere between six and ten thousand years old,

Earth older than the stars,...well It does imply that when the earth was void i.e. suggesting it was already formed and existing.

Regarding the six thousand plus years - the writings imply this means the creation of life, rather than the age of the earth. Therefore, there's s no contradiction or confusion in the age of the earth, if seen from this perspective.

a flood that covers the earth and erases mankind (plus all the other Noah-related nonsense.)

71% of the earth covered in ocean isn't that hard to picture the possibility of a world flood plausibility. A simple spatial reasoning which unfortunately atheists do seem to lack in, I find.

A man that lives to 969. An ass that talks. Got it, got it, got it.

Indeed...
...Then God said he will reduce the human life span to 120 years

Genesis 6:3 states, “Then the Lord said, ‘My Spirit will not contend with man forever, for he is mortal; his days shall be 120 years.’”

Amazing ain't it? . It seems science agrees with the human lifespan limit, mentioned in the bible thousands of years ago! And If God is right about 120 years then I'm going to think 969 or whatever years should be right too...easy for an ultimate scientist..

Just consider that he knew germ theory AND he loves us AND he didn't let on about germs.

The bible is 'awash' with washing, bathing, being clean, being cleansed, being isolated from others for seven days for sores, skin issues, being unclean, etc. & etc.

Besides you are wrong when you said God didn't " let on" about germs (in today's science terms) because of the obvious...
...we know about it!

But "his" book is still the greatest repository of wisdom in existence.

It is indeed.... since the wisdom of the bible stands on a base of love and compassion. Science journals and texts have zilch. It doesn't do wisdom from the language of compassionate understanding.

Given its theology and the nature of its stories, I can't seem to see that there is much love or compassion to be found in the bible.

 

[Eldarion Lathria]

I have been told that Jesus is Jesus Gonzales from Argentina. Is this true?

 

[DBT]

Given faith, anything can be true.

 

[Learner]

It is indeed.... since the wisdom of the bible stands on a base of love and compassion. Science journals and texts have zilch. It doesn't do wisdom from the language of compassionate understanding.

Given its theology and the nature of its stories, I can't seem to see that there is much love or compassion to be found in the bible.

There's much of it in the bible, but taking note of them of course, would be quite counter productive, conflicting with the atheist argument.

Best to keep ignoring those sections about love and compassion, and maintain the course for the sake of atheism.

 

[DBT]

It is indeed.... since the wisdom of the bible stands on a base of love and compassion. Science journals and texts have zilch. It doesn't do wisdom from the language of compassionate understanding.

Given its theology and the nature of its stories, I can't seem to see that there is much love or compassion to be found in the bible.

There's much of it in the bible, but taking note of them of course, would be quite counter productive, conflicting with the atheist argument.

Best to keep ignoring those sections about love and compassion, and maintain the course for the sake of atheism.

What sections on love and compassion are you referring to?

 

[Jarhyn]

It is indeed.... since the wisdom of the bible stands on a base of love and compassion. Science journals and texts have zilch. It doesn't do wisdom from the language of compassionate understanding.

Given its theology and the nature of its stories, I can't seem to see that there is much love or compassion to be found in the bible.

There's much of it in the bible, but taking note of them of course, would be quite counter productive, conflicting with the atheist argument.

Best to keep ignoring those sections about love and compassion, and maintain the course for the sake of atheism.

No, it's false messaging in the same way that while you will find many claims of tolerance among the Dutch, for example, you will quickly find out that all of this "tolerance" they claim to have is not tolerance (assuming you have some experience of bias against you), but passive-aggressive intolerance: it lasts right up until someone mentions Islamic immigrants, french people, or Romani; it lasts right up until someone eschews the expectations of their society in favor of a different look or way of thinking/being/acting, and the whole point of actual tolerance is insensitivity to different but valid ways of being/thinking/acting.

For every time you see the Bible enjoining the believers in it to treat the foreigner well, it seems more propaganda to demand good treatment AS a foreigner somewhere else, but which only gets lipservice at home.

This "Minnesota nice"/"bless your heart" passive-aggressive vindictiveness is much more in line with the actual behavior of biblical believers, and is associated closely with what I will call "Inverse Tinkerbell effects".

An Inverse Tinkerbell Effect is an effect wherein belief in some thing renders that thing believed false. The most readily shown example is the gushing belief in someone that they are humble, to the point of bragging of their humility: the extreme belief results in actions which directly invalidate the belief.

In the same way, the belief that you are tolerant or nice or full of love and compassion is one of the easiest ways to act without those things. You will find ways to overlook all the myriad shitty ways you act because you know "on the whole", despite the fact that the whole is exactly composed of all those moments you pretended your belief ways sufficient to create the reality.

The Bible suffers greatly from this, but to be fair I don't know how to correct it.

Of course the Bible ALSO says that people shouldn't see themselves as "good", and makes a big show of telling everyone they are sinners, and yet no Christian seems to treat themselves that way, having forgotten that in their discovery of (self-)forgiveness.

Overall, the Bible has a large mix of good and bad advice, and teasing apart those two things is the work of a lifetime. It's honestly better for most to just reject the whole of it and find a more well-written and well-founded source for their philosophical morals (like Camus' Absurdism), but people are partial to their childhood indoctrinations.