Atheism, please note the capitalisation❤️

[ProfessorDavey]

We're a scientist or merely anyone observing Jesus empirically. They would have seen a human being.

In which case composed of cells, tissues etc etc - so divisible and therefore by your own definition not god. You aren't helping yourself.

Particularly evidenced at his partial dissection at crucifixion. Science though does not do God. Those observing Jesus spiritually would have detected God. Both the divine and the human then are in the one person, Jesus of Nazareth. Full divinity and full humanity.
This might help
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypostatic_union

Total non-sense as if this is one entity then it is composed of cells, tissues etc (as you have indicated above) and therefore not god. Perhaps (allowing your arguments) when assessed miraculously this 'person' wasn't composed of anything and therefore indivisible in which case could be god (by your definition) but definitely not human (as humans are composed of cells, tissues etc). Were this the case the god would not have become human.

Perhaps the two are completely separate - a human with a god moseying around - but in which case you cannot say they are the same thing as they would be divisible and therefore not god. But they could (allowing the argument) be two distinct things, a human and a god. But that isn't your argument.

As for your link - theological mumbo-jumbo - basically a completely unevidenced faith position derived centuries before we had any meaningful understanding of human physiology, so completely irrelevant to any discussion that requires an assessment of the composition of humans.

[Stranger]

Before time though is hotly debated in science...

No, it isn't. 'Before time' is a contradiction in terms. The word 'before' has no meaning without time.

...since apparently people are no longer satisfied that the universe had a start.

Which would mean time extending further back, not a 'before time', which is gibberish.

[ProfessorDavey]

Before time though is hotly debated in science since apparently people are no longer satisfied that the universe had a start.

Complete non-sense. 'Before' is something inextricably linked to time, so there cannot be something before time - it is oxymoronic.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

No, it isn't. 'Before time' is a contradiction in terms. The word 'before' has no meaning without time.

Which would mean time extending further back, not a 'before time', which is gibberish.

I think they are talking about before the big bang and infinite time. I confess to not seeing a lot of pushback on those two ideas on this forum.

It is of course, a metaphor..

[Walt Zingmatilder]

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-myth-of-the-beginning-of-time-2006-02/

[Stranger]

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-myth-of-the-beginning-of-time-2006-02/

Old news, that I've already addressed.   

Which would mean time extending further back, not a 'before time', which is gibberish.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Old news, that I've already addressed.   

I think it was St Augustine who said the universe was created with time rather than in time.

[Stranger]

I think it was St Augustine who said the universe was created with time rather than in time.

And....?

Are you just posting a load of stupid irrelevant stuff in the hope we'll all forget the stupidity of "before time"?

[ProfessorDavey]

I think it was St Augustine who said the universe was created with time rather than in time.

And what on earth would he have known about either time or the universe from his position of 4thC ignorance. He almost certainly thought that the sun went around the earth and that the universe was a few thousand years old.

Not his fault of course, he lived at a time when our knowledge of time and space was incredibly limited and often based on faith rather than actual knowledge and evidence. But nonetheless that would have been his perspective so as an arbiter of truth on time and the universe I think he can comfortably be ignored.

[Alan Burns]

No, it isn't. 'Before time' is a contradiction in terms. The word 'before' has no meaning without time.

Which would mean time extending further back, not a 'before time', which is gibberish.

A better concept would be "outside time", referring to what may exist outside our known universe in which time is a dimension.

[Nearly Sane]

A better concept would be "outside time", referring to what may exist outside our known universe in which time is a dimension.

Are you suggesting that things exists outside time? Because that has its own issues since existence is a time based concept. 'Outside time' isn't a concept, it's two words stuck together with no meaning.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

And what on earth would he have known about either time or the universe from his position of 4thC ignorance. He almost certainly thought that the sun went around the earth and that the universe was a few thousand years old.

Not his fault of course, he lived at a time when our knowledge of time and space was incredibly limited and often based on faith rather than actual knowledge and evidence. But nonetheless that would have been his perspective so as an arbiter of truth on time and the universe I think he can comfortably be ignored.

It was a physicist who pointed it out to me, You I take are a biologist which I suppose is some sort of scientist. Mind you, he also referred to Dawkins as a “ mechanistic dinosaur.

Apparently, even these people back then were particularly gifted in maths and philosophy.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Are you suggesting that things exists outside time? Because that has its own issues since existence is a time based concept. 'Outside time' isn't a concept, it's two words stuck together with no meaning.

Existence is a time based concept? Where were you when people were proposing an infinite universe?

Anyway. Can you justify that assertion?

[Stranger]

A better concept would be "outside time", referring to what may exist outside our known universe in which time is a dimension.

The problem with that is that anything outside time cannot actually do anything. It can't think, or act, or do any 'begetting' (which is where this started)...

[Stranger]

Existence is a time based concept? Where were you when people were proposing an infinite universe?

What the fuck are you on about? What the hell has an infinite universe got to do with existence being a concept that involves time?

[Nearly Sane]

Existence is a time based concept? Where were you when people were proposing an infinite universe?

Anyway. Can you justify that assertion?

  No idea what the infinite universe has to do with it.

We measure existence in time. A thing is measured as exiting or not existing.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

  No idea what the infinite universe has to do with it.

We measure existence in time. A thing is measured as exiting or not existing.

I was thinking in terms of a citation, Sane.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

What the fuck are you on about? What the hell has an infinite universe got to do with existence being a concept that involves time?

How can an infinite universe exist since infinite things aren't time dependent?

[Nearly Sane]

I was thinking in terms of a citation, Sane.

All dictionaries.

[Stranger]

...infinite things aren't time dependent?

I know I'm going to regret asking this, but what bizarre contortions of illogic have led you to that conclusion?

[Nearly Sane]

I know I'm going to regret asking this, but what bizarre contortions of illogic have led you to that conclusion?

His arse

[Gonnagle]

It might help in some circumstances to clarify the language of the discussion.  The language of mythos in religions tries to convey inner experiences of those who claim to have had them to those who haven't and can be quite vague, but perhaps quite enticing if it deals with the desires and fears of living. Unfortunately, in the hands of the wrong shepherd it can be used as a controlling factor over the sheep, just as language can in politics and business.

Dear Ekim,

Once again thank you, a good myth is there for a reason, it is timeless, makes you think, one of my favourites is old Adam and Eve, we were given something beautiful and what have we done and are still doing, which is why I do think the most important thread on here is the one on environmentalism.

But I do like the way you say "in the hands of the wrong shepherd"  now that has got me thinking, I may have to start looking at the BBC news in a different light. Is Mr Trump the boogie man or the new Messiah, sorry Gonnagle do not even pass go just pack yer bags now, straight to hell, hey I did hear of one version which is all gut rot whisky and whores, now what is the down side😀🎵👍

Gonnagle.

[Alan Burns]

The problem with that is that anything outside time cannot actually do anything. It can't think, or act, or do any 'begetting' (which is where this started)...

You are trying to define what the limitations of "outside time" are by looking at them from within the time dependent space of our universe.  Try to imagine this scenario the other way round - from a timeless state it may be possible to be aware of every event which has ever occurred from the big bang to the death of the universe itself.

truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!  John 8:58

[Gordon]

You are trying to define what the limitations of "outside time" are by looking at them from within the time dependent space of our universe.  Try to imagine this scenario the other way round - from a timeless state it may be possible to be aware of every event which has ever occurred from the big bang to the death of the universe itself.

truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!  John 8:58

Unless you can actually quantify what you mean by 'outside time', which you can't, it's just another mindless oxymoron masquerading as a deepity.

[Stranger]

You are trying to define what the limitations of "outside time" are by looking at them from within the time dependent space of our universe.  Try to imagine this scenario the other way round - from a timeless state it may be possible to be aware of every event which has ever occurred from the big bang to the death of the universe itself.

Time is required to do any perception or do anything in respose to any perception. This is basic logic. You can't do anything or think anything without time because actions and thoughts take time. You could have a different time dimension, but no mind can exist without any time to operate in.

truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!  John 8:58

I am so not interested in what your silly, self-contradictory book of superstition and myths says.