|
|
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 15,570 Likes: 4
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 15,570 Likes: 4 |
God created the Heavens, and the earth. How He did it, is not that important. I agree. And I think Apostle Peter would agree too. His trust and faith and hope wasn’t anchored to the Genesis account of a literal 6 day creation, nor was it anchored to theology or any book. He clearly and unequivocally said that his trust and faith and hope were anchored to an event…an event that he and many others saw with their own eyes…the resurrection of Jesus. Very strong points from both you guys. If we can step aside from the normal human quest to satisfy our curiosities and somehow reinforce our relevance by "knowing" how and why events transpired, we sometimes learn more than we can by digging and testing. For me, these discussion sometimes reinforce that view - so much energy and thought given into the "how and why", the picky details and the arguing about evidence and proofs - seems to draw folks away from the glorious fundamentals. I love and enjoy scientific study and exploration, but such a quest cannot rule my existence - so much of the negative stuff encountered by humans comes from self-serving efforts to grasp things simply unavailable to us.
NRA Member - Life, Benefactor, Patron
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 61,003 Likes: 18
Campfire Kahuna
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 61,003 Likes: 18 |
I've read, The way to God, Dwight Moody.
Interesting, Moody was at the Battle of Shilo, things do not change at all.
These premises insured by a Sheltie in Training ,--- and Cooey.o
"May the Good Lord take a likin' to you"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 61,003 Likes: 18
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 61,003 Likes: 18 |
These premises insured by a Sheltie in Training ,--- and Cooey.o
"May the Good Lord take a likin' to you"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 28,867
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 28,867 |
Raspy, How 'bout dueling essays? ESSAY ON WORLD VIEW Rich Coyle (541) 450-4170 richlovessue  msn.com December 6, 1992 The objective of this work is to reduce some thoughts to questions: Then by a progression of thoughts, have the reader come to some reasonable conclusion despite, or as a result of, their dogmas, biases, or generally preconceived notions. We need to start by informing the reader that he or she is opinionated. If we say, "I am not!" this is our opinion, and we hold to it dearly, thus proving we are. It should be added at this time that there are some people (let's hope their numbers are small) who are as one writer put it, “Tossed here and there by every wind of doctrine." Perhaps, though, even these poor folks are opinionated. There is a man, we’ll call him Rick, who used to say after almost every paragraph, "...but I could be wrong." Is this then his opinionated opinion? No, because when he was pressed about something, he would say, "O yea, I guess I was right." His opinion could be changed by anyone he respected. There are also some who are so confident in the views they hold, almost nothing can overcome their biases. If these views cannot be supported by facts, it is irrelevant. Who needs facts when you have a good prejudice? Maybe these individuals are the most fortunate. They are convinced, not because of or despite a lack of any evidence but, by their prejudices. If we decide that someone's positions are bad, what criteria do we utilize, our own prejudice? This brings us to ask about the idea of good and bad; which leads one to include right and wrong. We may consider some of our views to be good or right; and at other times we hold these same positions to be wrong or bad. From where does the concept of good and bad or right and wrong come? What leads us along this path? There are some things that certain people think the absence of is bad; while others consider their presence to be bad. Some would say that these bad things will lead to other bad things which are perhaps even worse. Again the question arises: What is good or bad? Who determines what is good or bad, right or wrong? This results in bigotry. Who's to say bigotry is good or bad, though? If the person who became a bigot was aborted before being born, some would be delighted. Some believe the absence of abortions is wrong. Others might conclude aborting unborn humans is murder. Most everyone agrees that murder is bad, don’t we? We just don't agree when murder is or is not. Euthanasia is against the law. It must be wrong! But then, abortion used to be against the law didn’t it? Some are dead set against euthanasia for any reason. Others feel it is wrong not to practice it in some instances. When I was young, the media told us that homosexuality was "just a disease". We were told that we should feel sorry for homosexuals. Now, aren’t we considered "sick" if we don't indorse the “gay” lifestyle? In the past the idea of an unmarried couple living together was strongly condemned by society. Even the term to describe it is repugnant: Shacking up. Hedonism has replaced thoughtfulness of others. Why? Why are things going this way? Why is there such a thing as "politically correct" in a day of tolerance? Why is it that one can say, "Wrong is not wrong, it is a matter of perspective."? The answer is obvious when one looks at the difference in "Why are there birds and bees?" as being taught now compared to a century ago. Everything was a result of a Creator God. Now we are taught by enlightened thinkers that we are the result of a mindless undirected struggle orchestrated by unguided natural laws. Modern science knows we are a result of a fortuitous arrangement of inorganic matter. There is no creator: We created ourselves. We are at the top of the evolutionary heap. Since there is no Creator God, evolution will eventually do its thing. Man will, by chance, destroy himself and then bacteria will rule. That is...if there is no Creator God.
"Only Christ is the fullness of God's revelation."
Everyday Hunter
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,280
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,280 |
I do believe that the day will come when all of us will stand before God and give an account of our works, good or bad. For those who also believe this, do you wlyour own good works…despite your sin…to earn your salvation diminishes, in any way, the work that Jesus did for you on the cross…? I’ve heard that most of My life. Yet, Paul says that there is NO CONDEMNATION to those who are in Christ, If there is no condemnation there is no guilt. If there is no guilt how can there be judgement? There is the concept that only the lost will be judged for their sin..... at the Great White Throne judgment. Members of the Body of Christ... if they are even in attendance, will only be observers. Believers will appear at the Bema Seat judgment. There are those who hold that the believers will only be judged for the "quality" of their works. See 1 Corinthians 3:10-15.
The tax collector said: “Lord Jesus, have mercy on me, a sinner.” Jesus said he went home “justified.”
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 18,499 Likes: 1
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 18,499 Likes: 1 |
I do believe that the day will come when all of us will stand before God and give an account of our works, good or bad. For those who also believe this, do you wanna trust in your own good works…despite your sins…to earn your way into God’s good graces, and salvation…?
Or do you wanna stand before God and give an account of your own works, good or bad, with your sins covered by the Blood of the Atonement because you accepted God’s grace…?
And, for those in the first category above, do you feel that trusting in your own good works…despite your sin…to earn your salvation diminishes, in any way, the work that Jesus did for you on the cross…? I’ve heard that most of My life. Yet, Paul says that there is NO CONDEMNATION to those who are in Christ,
If there is no condemnation there is no guilt. If there is no guilt how can there be judgement? Paul also said that we must ALL appear before the judgment seat of Christ, and that each one of us will give an account of our works (good or bad) and receive what is due to us for the things that we’ve done, whether good or bad. The “NO CONDEMNATION to those who are in Christ”, to me, is conclusive that while believers will also be judged after death, they will not be condemned and consigned to eternity apart from God because their sins are covered by the Blood of the Atonement because they’ve accepted God’s grace.
Every day on this side of the ground is a win.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 5,802 Likes: 1
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 5,802 Likes: 1 |
There is plenty of evidence to support the Big Bang. Curious.....name one... You'll need to be prepared to educate yourself and there are plenty of resources out there to help you.
There will be the topic of observational evidence that includes the expansion of the universe, cosmic background radiation and nucleosynthesis. No answer...thought so... Refer IndyCA35’s excellent response above. I tried to lead you to self-research but you seem to be quick to give up and put your head in the sand. I wanted your opinion of the Big Bang (BB), I was not saying you are wrong, just wanted your perspective of Big Bang...since you refuse to give me your opinion, here is mine....I am sure this will bore many, but my years of research for the BB is as follows and this is my belief.....one professor gave me an A and the other gave me a C...he was an atheist. Technically, the Big Bang does not describe how the universe ‘began to exist’. The Big Bang describes how a singularity (a speck of infinite heat and density) rapidly expanded and produced everything in the universe. So actually, you have no explanation for how the universe began (or why for that matter). Where did the singularity come from? What caused it? I used to believe that science cannot, by definition, explain the origin of the universe....I kinda still do, but you'll in the see last paragraph. Science relies on the laws of physics, chemistry and other natural laws in order to operate. But these laws were only created after the universe began to exist. Newton came along, when everyone believed that God or gods did everything, and discovered the laws of physics, which then did everything. Thinkers then had two choices - either the laws of physics did everything, and there was no need for God or gods to do anything, or God worked through the laws of physics to make everything happen. The curious thing was that the Newton's people worldview, was entirely dependent upon the universe being infinite in size and time, infinitely old and large. Thus, the laws of physics had always been here, along with the universe itself and everything in it - energy, matter, stars, galaxies, everything had always been there. And thus no need for any deity to have started the whole thing off, no need for a Genesis point, for a creator, since it was not a creation. Creations are created at a moment in time and space, but the laws of physics did all the creating that was needed. This didn’t get rid of God, but it seemed to get rid of the need for God as an explanation. Now stick with me...... Then something terrible happened to the infinitely large, infinitely old universe - Big Bang. Suddenly, the universe had a starting point, a Genesis moment.......It’s important to understand what the Big Bang says - according to hot BB cosmology as predicted by the General Theory (ignoring quantum mechanical problems for the moment) and overwhelmingly and convincingly confirmed by all observations so far, the Big Bang produced space and time. There was no empty universe waiting for something to happen inside of it. The empty universe came into being, vanishingly small for a vanishingly small amount of time, and then almost instantly becoming a cosmos-sized cosmos, expanding from the size of a proton to a quarter billion light years across in a trillionth of a trillionth of a trillionth of a second. And with this universe arrive not just space and time, but the laws of physics - gravity, the strong, weak and electromagnetic forces. And energy. And matter. They all arrived. They didn’t pre-exist the universe, they didn’t pre-exist the Big Bang. Everything came into existence, apparently from nothing. Really nothing. Now. If one bases the non-existence of God on a Newtonian worldview, dependent on an infinite universe in time and space, and one learns that the universe is not infinite, that the laws of physics have not always been there, then suddenly we can have a conversation about God. Worth noting that the science community rejected the idea of Big Bang, of the universe having a starting point, because it sounded too much like religion. Fred Hoyle: “The passionate frenzy with which the Big Bang cosmology is clutched to the corporate scientific bosom evidently arises from a deep-rooted attachment to the first page of Genesis, religious fundamentalism at its strongest.” William Bonner “The underlying motive is, of course, to bring in God as creator. It seems like the opportunity Christian theology has been waiting for ever since science began to depose religion from the minds of rational men in the 17th Century.” And then George Smoot, after winning the Nobel Prize for discovering evidence in the Cosmic Background Explorer (COBE) satellite, that firmly established BB as the way the universe began, said this: “We have observed the oldest and largest structures ever seen in the early universe. These were the primordial seeds of modern-day structures such as galaxies, clusters of galaxies, and so on. If you’re religious, it’s like seeing the face of God.” So scientists largely considered BB as evidence for the existence of God, until BB was shown to be true. Then many of them decided that it wasn’t evidence, after all. That’s not science. That’s just personal bias. And that’s kind of the way we work. There is evidence, but not proof, and we can and do decide whether or not to accept it based upon what we believe to be true. You have a communication issue. You never asked for my opinion, you asked for evidence of the big bang. I provided some info for you to research (there's plenty of info available) but you rejected it and went straight to head in sand. Just because we don't know what happened at the instant of the big bang, or prior, it gives no validity to creation by galaxy farting pixies or whatever else you choose to nominate. I do not have a communication issue, but you absolutely do...You originally said there is plenty of evidence of the big bang....I said name one....you said go look it up...I already knew the theory about big bang but just wanted your opinion. You should have then asked for my opinion. Like I said communication issue.
Whatever you said...everyone knows you are a lying jerk. That's a bold assertion. Point out where you think I lied. Well?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 5,802 Likes: 1
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 5,802 Likes: 1 |
You realise that all you do is critisize the response without addressing the particular issues, either that or ad hominen attacks. You can do better. Not at all correct on your part - read again, and again. You act like the evidence king and made a declarative post about your soul. I simply asked for your evidence/proof. You flunked - posted none. What normal person would not comment on such behavior? No answer = no hall pass for you ! Absence of evidence / evidence of absence is absolutely correct in this case. Have a think about it - put your heart and soul into it 
Whatever you said...everyone knows you are a lying jerk. That's a bold assertion. Point out where you think I lied. Well?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 61,003 Likes: 18
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 61,003 Likes: 18 |
Listening to Les Feldick, Les just said, When God looks at us, He see's something beautiful. Not our sin, but His image.
These premises insured by a Sheltie in Training ,--- and Cooey.o
"May the Good Lord take a likin' to you"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,409
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,409 |
Raspy, How 'bout dueling essays? ESSAY ON WORLD VIEW Rich Coyle (541) 450-4170 richlovessue msn.com December 6, 1992 The objective of this work is to reduce some thoughts to questions: Then by a progression of thoughts, have the reader come to some reasonable conclusion despite, or as a result of, their dogmas, biases, or generally preconceived notions. We need to start by informing the reader that he or she is opinionated. If we say, "I am not!" this is our opinion, and we hold to it dearly, thus proving we are. It should be added at this time that there are some people (let's hope their numbers are small) who are as one writer put it, “Tossed here and there by every wind of doctrine." Perhaps, though, even these poor folks are opinionated. There is a man, we’ll call him Rick, who used to say after almost every paragraph, "...but I could be wrong." Is this then his opinionated opinion? No, because when he was pressed about something, he would say, "O yea, I guess I was right." His opinion could be changed by anyone he respected. There are also some who are so confident in the views they hold, almost nothing can overcome their biases. If these views cannot be supported by facts, it is irrelevant. Who needs facts when you have a good prejudice? Maybe these individuals are the most fortunate. They are convinced, not because of or despite a lack of any evidence but, by their prejudices. If we decide that someone's positions are bad, what criteria do we utilize, our own prejudice? This brings us to ask about the idea of good and bad; which leads one to include right and wrong. We may consider some of our views to be good or right; and at other times we hold these same positions to be wrong or bad. From where does the concept of good and bad or right and wrong come? What leads us along this path? There are some things that certain people think the absence of is bad; while others consider their presence to be bad. Some would say that these bad things will lead to other bad things which are perhaps even worse. Again the question arises: What is good or bad? Who determines what is good or bad, right or wrong? This results in bigotry. Who's to say bigotry is good or bad, though? If the person who became a bigot was aborted before being born, some would be delighted. Some believe the absence of abortions is wrong. Others might conclude aborting unborn humans is murder. Most everyone agrees that murder is bad, don’t we? We just don't agree when murder is or is not. Euthanasia is against the law. It must be wrong! But then, abortion used to be against the law didn’t it? Some are dead set against euthanasia for any reason. Others feel it is wrong not to practice it in some instances. When I was young, the media told us that homosexuality was "just a disease". We were told that we should feel sorry for homosexuals. Now, aren’t we considered "sick" if we don't indorse the “gay” lifestyle? In the past the idea of an unmarried couple living together was strongly condemned by society. Even the term to describe it is repugnant: Shacking up. Hedonism has replaced thoughtfulness of others. Why? Why are things going this way? Why is there such a thing as "politically correct" in a day of tolerance? Why is it that one can say, "Wrong is not wrong, it is a matter of perspective."? The answer is obvious when one looks at the difference in "Why are there birds and bees?" as being taught now compared to a century ago. Everything was a result of a Creator God. Now we are taught by enlightened thinkers that we are the result of a mindless undirected struggle orchestrated by unguided natural laws. Modern science knows we are a result of a fortuitous arrangement of inorganic matter. There is no creator: We created ourselves. We are at the top of the evolutionary heap. Since there is no Creator God, evolution will eventually do its thing. Man will, by chance, destroy himself and then bacteria will rule. That is...if there is no Creator God. Interesting....last sentence, that is a BIG if....
Illegitimi non carborundum
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 61,003 Likes: 18
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 61,003 Likes: 18 |
It may be just me, but It all rings so true.
These premises insured by a Sheltie in Training ,--- and Cooey.o
"May the Good Lord take a likin' to you"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,409
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,409 |
You realise that all you do is critisize the response without addressing the particular issues, either that or ad hominen attacks. You can do better. Not at all correct on your part - read again, and again. You act like the evidence king and made a declarative post about your soul. I simply asked for your evidence/proof. You flunked - posted none. What normal person would not comment on such behavior? No answer = no hall pass for you ! Absence of evidence / evidence of absence is absolutely correct in this case. Have a think about it - put your heart and soul into it As Kipling says....Words are, of course, the most powerful drug used by mankind.
Illegitimi non carborundum
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 61,003 Likes: 18
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 61,003 Likes: 18 |
Time for, This, again. ![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/u2SXN7Z.jpg)
These premises insured by a Sheltie in Training ,--- and Cooey.o
"May the Good Lord take a likin' to you"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,409
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,409 |
Listening to Les Feldick, Les just said, When God looks at us, He see's something beautiful. Not our sin, but His image. Beautiful...
Illegitimi non carborundum
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,409
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,409 |
There is plenty of evidence to support the Big Bang. Curious.....name one... You'll need to be prepared to educate yourself and there are plenty of resources out there to help you.
There will be the topic of observational evidence that includes the expansion of the universe, cosmic background radiation and nucleosynthesis. No answer...thought so... Refer IndyCA35’s excellent response above. I tried to lead you to self-research but you seem to be quick to give up and put your head in the sand. I wanted your opinion of the Big Bang (BB), I was not saying you are wrong, just wanted your perspective of Big Bang...since you refuse to give me your opinion, here is mine....I am sure this will bore many, but my years of research for the BB is as follows and this is my belief.....one professor gave me an A and the other gave me a C...he was an atheist. Technically, the Big Bang does not describe how the universe ‘began to exist’. The Big Bang describes how a singularity (a speck of infinite heat and density) rapidly expanded and produced everything in the universe. So actually, you have no explanation for how the universe began (or why for that matter). Where did the singularity come from? What caused it? I used to believe that science cannot, by definition, explain the origin of the universe....I kinda still do, but you'll in the see last paragraph. Science relies on the laws of physics, chemistry and other natural laws in order to operate. But these laws were only created after the universe began to exist. Newton came along, when everyone believed that God or gods did everything, and discovered the laws of physics, which then did everything. Thinkers then had two choices - either the laws of physics did everything, and there was no need for God or gods to do anything, or God worked through the laws of physics to make everything happen. The curious thing was that the Newton's people worldview, was entirely dependent upon the universe being infinite in size and time, infinitely old and large. Thus, the laws of physics had always been here, along with the universe itself and everything in it - energy, matter, stars, galaxies, everything had always been there. And thus no need for any deity to have started the whole thing off, no need for a Genesis point, for a creator, since it was not a creation. Creations are created at a moment in time and space, but the laws of physics did all the creating that was needed. This didn’t get rid of God, but it seemed to get rid of the need for God as an explanation. Now stick with me...... Then something terrible happened to the infinitely large, infinitely old universe - Big Bang. Suddenly, the universe had a starting point, a Genesis moment.......It’s important to understand what the Big Bang says - according to hot BB cosmology as predicted by the General Theory (ignoring quantum mechanical problems for the moment) and overwhelmingly and convincingly confirmed by all observations so far, the Big Bang produced space and time. There was no empty universe waiting for something to happen inside of it. The empty universe came into being, vanishingly small for a vanishingly small amount of time, and then almost instantly becoming a cosmos-sized cosmos, expanding from the size of a proton to a quarter billion light years across in a trillionth of a trillionth of a trillionth of a second. And with this universe arrive not just space and time, but the laws of physics - gravity, the strong, weak and electromagnetic forces. And energy. And matter. They all arrived. They didn’t pre-exist the universe, they didn’t pre-exist the Big Bang. Everything came into existence, apparently from nothing. Really nothing. Now. If one bases the non-existence of God on a Newtonian worldview, dependent on an infinite universe in time and space, and one learns that the universe is not infinite, that the laws of physics have not always been there, then suddenly we can have a conversation about God. Worth noting that the science community rejected the idea of Big Bang, of the universe having a starting point, because it sounded too much like religion. Fred Hoyle: “The passionate frenzy with which the Big Bang cosmology is clutched to the corporate scientific bosom evidently arises from a deep-rooted attachment to the first page of Genesis, religious fundamentalism at its strongest.” William Bonner “The underlying motive is, of course, to bring in God as creator. It seems like the opportunity Christian theology has been waiting for ever since science began to depose religion from the minds of rational men in the 17th Century.” And then George Smoot, after winning the Nobel Prize for discovering evidence in the Cosmic Background Explorer (COBE) satellite, that firmly established BB as the way the universe began, said this: “We have observed the oldest and largest structures ever seen in the early universe. These were the primordial seeds of modern-day structures such as galaxies, clusters of galaxies, and so on. If you’re religious, it’s like seeing the face of God.” So scientists largely considered BB as evidence for the existence of God, until BB was shown to be true. Then many of them decided that it wasn’t evidence, after all. That’s not science. That’s just personal bias. And that’s kind of the way we work. There is evidence, but not proof, and we can and do decide whether or not to accept it based upon what we believe to be true. You have a communication issue. You never asked for my opinion, you asked for evidence of the big bang. I provided some info for you to research (there's plenty of info available) but you rejected it and went straight to head in sand. Just because we don't know what happened at the instant of the big bang, or prior, it gives no validity to creation by galaxy farting pixies or whatever else you choose to nominate. I do not have a communication issue, but you absolutely do...You originally said there is plenty of evidence of the big bang....I said name one....you said go look it up...I already knew the theory about big bang but just wanted your opinion. You should have then asked for my opinion. Like I said communication issue. I give...I am asking your opine of the Big Bang Theory.
Illegitimi non carborundum
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 20,824
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 20,824 |
The millions praying for Trumps victory, didn't seem to work?
Originally Posted by Judman
PS, if you think Trump is “good” you’re way stupider than I thought! Haha
Sorry, trump is a no tax payin pile of shiit.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 5,802 Likes: 1
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 5,802 Likes: 1 |
There is plenty of evidence to support the Big Bang. Curious.....name one... You'll need to be prepared to educate yourself and there are plenty of resources out there to help you.
There will be the topic of observational evidence that includes the expansion of the universe, cosmic background radiation and nucleosynthesis. No answer...thought so... Refer IndyCA35’s excellent response above. I tried to lead you to self-research but you seem to be quick to give up and put your head in the sand. I wanted your opinion of the Big Bang (BB), I was not saying you are wrong, just wanted your perspective of Big Bang...since you refuse to give me your opinion, here is mine....I am sure this will bore many, but my years of research for the BB is as follows and this is my belief.....one professor gave me an A and the other gave me a C...he was an atheist. Technically, the Big Bang does not describe how the universe ‘began to exist’. The Big Bang describes how a singularity (a speck of infinite heat and density) rapidly expanded and produced everything in the universe. So actually, you have no explanation for how the universe began (or why for that matter). Where did the singularity come from? What caused it? I used to believe that science cannot, by definition, explain the origin of the universe....I kinda still do, but you'll in the see last paragraph. Science relies on the laws of physics, chemistry and other natural laws in order to operate. But these laws were only created after the universe began to exist. Newton came along, when everyone believed that God or gods did everything, and discovered the laws of physics, which then did everything. Thinkers then had two choices - either the laws of physics did everything, and there was no need for God or gods to do anything, or God worked through the laws of physics to make everything happen. The curious thing was that the Newton's people worldview, was entirely dependent upon the universe being infinite in size and time, infinitely old and large. Thus, the laws of physics had always been here, along with the universe itself and everything in it - energy, matter, stars, galaxies, everything had always been there. And thus no need for any deity to have started the whole thing off, no need for a Genesis point, for a creator, since it was not a creation. Creations are created at a moment in time and space, but the laws of physics did all the creating that was needed. This didn’t get rid of God, but it seemed to get rid of the need for God as an explanation. Now stick with me...... Then something terrible happened to the infinitely large, infinitely old universe - Big Bang. Suddenly, the universe had a starting point, a Genesis moment.......It’s important to understand what the Big Bang says - according to hot BB cosmology as predicted by the General Theory (ignoring quantum mechanical problems for the moment) and overwhelmingly and convincingly confirmed by all observations so far, the Big Bang produced space and time. There was no empty universe waiting for something to happen inside of it. The empty universe came into being, vanishingly small for a vanishingly small amount of time, and then almost instantly becoming a cosmos-sized cosmos, expanding from the size of a proton to a quarter billion light years across in a trillionth of a trillionth of a trillionth of a second. And with this universe arrive not just space and time, but the laws of physics - gravity, the strong, weak and electromagnetic forces. And energy. And matter. They all arrived. They didn’t pre-exist the universe, they didn’t pre-exist the Big Bang. Everything came into existence, apparently from nothing. Really nothing. Now. If one bases the non-existence of God on a Newtonian worldview, dependent on an infinite universe in time and space, and one learns that the universe is not infinite, that the laws of physics have not always been there, then suddenly we can have a conversation about God. Worth noting that the science community rejected the idea of Big Bang, of the universe having a starting point, because it sounded too much like religion. Fred Hoyle: “The passionate frenzy with which the Big Bang cosmology is clutched to the corporate scientific bosom evidently arises from a deep-rooted attachment to the first page of Genesis, religious fundamentalism at its strongest.” William Bonner “The underlying motive is, of course, to bring in God as creator. It seems like the opportunity Christian theology has been waiting for ever since science began to depose religion from the minds of rational men in the 17th Century.” And then George Smoot, after winning the Nobel Prize for discovering evidence in the Cosmic Background Explorer (COBE) satellite, that firmly established BB as the way the universe began, said this: “We have observed the oldest and largest structures ever seen in the early universe. These were the primordial seeds of modern-day structures such as galaxies, clusters of galaxies, and so on. If you’re religious, it’s like seeing the face of God.” So scientists largely considered BB as evidence for the existence of God, until BB was shown to be true. Then many of them decided that it wasn’t evidence, after all. That’s not science. That’s just personal bias. And that’s kind of the way we work. There is evidence, but not proof, and we can and do decide whether or not to accept it based upon what we believe to be true. You have a communication issue. You never asked for my opinion, you asked for evidence of the big bang. I provided some info for you to research (there's plenty of info available) but you rejected it and went straight to head in sand. Just because we don't know what happened at the instant of the big bang, or prior, it gives no validity to creation by galaxy farting pixies or whatever else you choose to nominate. I do not have a communication issue, but you absolutely do...You originally said there is plenty of evidence of the big bang....I said name one....you said go look it up...I already knew the theory about big bang but just wanted your opinion. You should have then asked for my opinion. Like I said communication issue. I give...I am asking your opine of the Big Bang Theory. In my opinion the Big Bang Theory is, rad, awesome and brilliant. It makes me happy and grateful that there great minds out there who are working towards understanding things and so that we learn and can work to make life better for us all. Generally humble people who don't rely on donations for faith healing to fund their works.
Whatever you said...everyone knows you are a lying jerk. That's a bold assertion. Point out where you think I lied. Well?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 61,003 Likes: 18
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 61,003 Likes: 18 |
I read a while back, Prayers are always answered, many times the answerer is not no, but not yet.
These premises insured by a Sheltie in Training ,--- and Cooey.o
"May the Good Lord take a likin' to you"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 20,824
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 20,824 |
I read a while back, Prayers are always answered, many times the answerer is not no, but not yet. Do you believe that?
Originally Posted by Judman
PS, if you think Trump is “good” you’re way stupider than I thought! Haha
Sorry, trump is a no tax payin pile of shiit.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 61,003 Likes: 18
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 61,003 Likes: 18 |
These premises insured by a Sheltie in Training ,--- and Cooey.o
"May the Good Lord take a likin' to you"
|
|
|
|
|
569 members (10gaugeman, 1234, 160user, 17CalFan, 10gaugemag, 16penny, 54 invisible),
1,907
guests, and
1,164
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,192,875
Posts18,497,647
Members73,980
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
![[Linked Image from quotefancy.com]](https://quotefancy.com/media/wallpaper/3840x2160/1859724-D-L-Moody-Quote-The-measure-of-a-man-is-not-how-many-servants-he.jpg)
