Hung up by the "God particle?"

When discussing creation and existence "GOD" has become a standard reference point.

But yes, "god particle" was an overstatement, as it does not explain the "GOD principle" of creation and existence.

Just establishes the temporary existence of another sub atomic particle.

This is a demonstration why scientists object to the 'god particle' label. It invites superstition and ignorance into the discussion.

To apply "superstition and ignorance" to religion merely demonstrates the ignorance of the scientists and others who claim it. Those scientists who also embrace religion understand a very simple concept you are overlooking. "Empirical evidence," so-called, depends upon evidence obtained by use of our five senses, plus a sentient brain [capable of independent thought and analysis]. Those scientists who reject religion also happen to dismiss that any other senses are available to humanity, such as faith. Yep, that's a sixth sense, and some scientists are beginning to acknowledge it. Most people equate faith with belief, but mere belief makes no imposition on us to act on belief. Faith does, and Paul, the Apostle, explains how that is necessary, and how it is done. Have to read to get it, though, and few people bother to do that, cover-to-cover. There are other senses, as well, that science is beginning to recognize as available to humans, that traditional science denies. Their loss.

A Higgs Boson walks into a church.

"But what are you doing here?" asks the priest

"Well, I know you can't have mass without me"

To apply "superstition and ignorance" to religion

No one has done that except for you. The higgs particle has absolutely nothing to do with gods or religion. It like calling Ricky Gervais a theologian or David Barton a historian 🤔. One has nothing to do with the other. Its marketing sensationalism that ultimately causes confusion among the uninitiated.

it does not explain the "GOD principle" of creation and existence.

Of course, it does, forgiving that the H-B was just lacking memory when it first allegedly kaboomed. Another H-B before ours did it, too, and they're likely doing it all over the place that we do not yet see. The ability demonstrated by our own primary Higgs Boson is of intelligent design, not creatio ex nihilo, as some well-meaning but ignorant folk wanted to describe creation. They have misguided ideas about who the Creator is, Who preceded Him, and why He, and They are so intelligent. And that is mostly tied up in not recognizing what eternity really means, and why it does not have to have a beginning, not even with a Higgs Boson, which only assumes there was nothing before it, since even Peter Higgs did not have his finger on the true pulse of God.

Ricky Gervais is a whining alley cat. David Barton is a misguided evangelist who never considered that the Sermon on the Mount is likely the best, most practical political platform ever suggested, and which virtually no one understands as such, but is better than anything else out there, Republicans, Democrats, or Communists, Greenies, or whatnots.

But then Higgs Boson is the abject enemy of creatrio ex nihilo, but a whizbang design that had supreme intelligence behind it. Meant as a joke, it is well named "the God particle." Joke's on the rest of physicists who only think they have their middle finger on the pulse.

Well, eternity is because we know...And we also can know that eternity is relative to something, even if something is nothing...Such is the benefit of an organic device with an advanced onboard organic computer.

So that's it is it Faux...Mr Higgs boson has been flitting about forever and therefore.

Not sure that we are going to solve any mysteries with this thread.

Until humans can duplicate creation, they have to give the benefit of the doubt to God. Guessing how it works is still guessing.

LOL...And God isn't a guess.

Actually it was a big smile.

There are many things about God that cannot be explained and guessing the answer is still just guessing.

So, if you cannot explain many things about GOD, then your faith is mostly guesswork isn't it?

Which is sort of what I keep telling you when you harp on about "eyewitness accounts" and stood time testing.

Just be open minded and honest, like your above post is.

Nonetheless, it's always nice to chat.

The Bible covers the life of Jesus but little is said about God his father.

Hmmmm...It was dark...Godfrey snook into the stable, his ego inflated, sought therapy and snook out again.

Mary wasn't sure if it was daft Joe or the Donkey...She guessed it was the Donkey.

Fortunately the baby didn't have tall furry ears...And daft Joe just scratched his head and made a table.

Any wonder you believe someone else wrote the Bible. Your interpretation does not match the current versions.

Well someone wrote "The BIble" in first half of the second millennia...And someone else would be someone else.

And my tale is just as likely to be true as any other tale...Conditioned popularity doesn't necessarily make something factually accurate.

The Bible was not compiled by the first half of the second millennia. The printing press was not yet invented.

Well I wasn't attempting to be perfectly accurate...But at least you now admit that "The Bible" cannot be an authentic eyewitness account of something that occurred in the dim distant past...Good we're making progress.

The Bible maintained the original eyewitness accounts of Jesus and his ministry as it was replicated by scribes hand copying to produce several copies. But once the printing press was invented it became easier to produce more bibles.

HaHa...Mantra.

Nope, you cannot maintain an eyewitness account unless you have a film and audio recording of an event.

Perhaps the Romans had CCTV and hidden microphones...GO check with the Vatican.

You are trying to rewrite history. The Gospels were spread by word of mouth before it was compiled as a book. That’s how the eyewitness accounts were preserved.

Well rewriting history is how "The Bible" came to be as it is today...Whereas I am just stating the obvious.

And I've said all along that that "The Bible" is a collection of hand me down folk tales and myths...It's nice to see that you finally agree.

Now I've just got to restate the obvious to convince you that an eyewitness observation from 2000 years ago could not be preserved.

The gospels have been credited to the four disciples that witnessed Jesus and his ministry. They were with him. That makes it different from old folk tales.

Hmmmm...Not really.

Credit by association perhaps, though in the absence of immediately recorded and irrefutable data, then generational data transfer depends wholly upon ongoing word of mouth repetition, which is likely to become embellished and exaggerated into a mythological format...Hence we arrive at a prophetic magician of fantastic birth, accompanied by associated sycophants and gossip spreaders.

The Gospels were corroborated by the 4 disciples who shared their eyewitness accounts of the life of Jesus whom they followed as his disciples. They remain corroborated.

Well, who or when "the gospels" were "corroborated" and first jotted down is a moot point, even among Christian scholars.

The four blokes who were reputedly mates of Jesus, would certainly have witnessed something, though intervening years between witness and first compilation somewhat diminishes the accuracy of the uncorroborated hand me down tales and certainly allows for the introduction of mythical fantasy into such tales.

Even Bart Ehrman a modern day theology scholar wrote several books about the existence of Jesus and validated its historicity from his reading of ancient manuscripts.

Hmmm...Well yes, that's very easy to do...One doesn't need to be a "theology scholar" to conclude that the Jesus character was based upon a real person.

And copying and reinterpreting old narratives is certainly one way of occupying ones time.

Bart Ehrman went back to the beginning of the Bible which were manuscripts written by scribbles in Hebrew and Greek of the original copies. This brings us to the closest times to the originals. And they confirm the copies were authentic.