P
phooney
Guest
After all these posts on these two threads, I can hardly believe your continuing willful ignorance about what Atheism and Agnosticism are.
- Status
O
oneGODoneCHURCH
Guest
B
bluestarsneyes
Guest
WOW! I’m totally confused why would someone that does NOT believe in God spend this much time defending his lack of faith?
Is that rude? I don’t mean it to be…but it is really bizzare…I mean I guess the point is to convince Catholics that an Atheist read the bible and thinks it’s rubbish? Um…okay…what exactly is the point because there are too many pages to figure it out?
Is that rude? I don’t mean it to be…but it is really bizzare…I mean I guess the point is to convince Catholics that an Atheist read the bible and thinks it’s rubbish? Um…okay…what exactly is the point because there are too many pages to figure it out?
S
steve_b
Guest
Regarding the seen vs the unseen,
I’ve heard that science is backing away from the big bang theory. Why? Because it points to a beginning for everything. And according to science, something can’t come from nothing. The big bang as you might guess, is causing the science community some problems when in debate. ((((((
)))))))) Yet they keep putting dates on everything. Puting an age to things and events admits a beginning.map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni/uni_101age.html
the law of causality says every finite thing is caused by something other than itself. IOW,
- the universe had a beginning as we see in the above link. If you don’t like that link, do your own search for the age of the universe.
- Anything with a beginning i.e. the universe, must have been caused by something else, based on the law of causality.
- Therefore the universe was caused by something or someone, right? Which do you choose? And I want to know what was it like 1 second before the universe was caused? Science doesn’t like the word creation in this application
Another law is that of thermodynamics which states that in a closed, isolated system (the universe) the amount of usable energy is continually decreasing (entropy). If the usable energy, in the universe is decreasing, the universe then is finite and not eternal, raising the same question, who/what started the universe?
Intelligent Design
- All complex systems require a designer.
- there is great design in the universe.
- there must be a designer of the universe.
IMO it takes far more effort to disbelieve, than to believe in God.
A
_A
Guest
I would say because the sciences are advancing and old theories are being discarded in favour of new ones.
A
_A
Guest
I am here to learn, and to share what I have learned. Why are you here?
A
_A
Guest
N
notself
Guest
Science is not backing away from the Big Bang according to the very link you provided. Did you read it all the way to the end?Regarding the seen vs the unseen,
I’ve heard that science is backing away from the big bang theory. Why? Because it points to a beginning for everything. And according to science, something can’t come from nothing. The big bang as you might guess, is causing the science community some problems when in debate. ((((((
map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni/uni_101age.html
The estimate of the age of the Universe is measured from the point of the Big Bang. There is no estimate for the age of the singularity from which the Universe started. There is no theory that accounts for any part of the singularity because at the singularity the laws of physics do not apply.
It is not the only theory for the origin of the Universe as we know it. It is just the most popular. We have a long way to go and many more observations to make.
M
Mr.Bee
Guest
So what? Yeah, it’s new, but it’s a far cry from being wonderful. It causing just as many problems as it’s solving.
One can still lie. In fact it’s really easy to lie.
I’m not convinced at this science and social phenomenon we call the “world wide web” just as you’re not convinced of what my faith claims to profess.
Am I understanding this right?
Kinda angry sounding. I’m disturbed by this statement but not sure how to respond.
I can only guess that your opinion of God is a reflection of your opinion of mankind. A presumption I admit, hopefully I’m wrong.
Man, ever since we came to consciousness, has had to deal with the fact that we’re not in control. (News Flash!!) Even if you don’t believe in God and put your faith in science, you’re still not in control.
We all kinda need to come to terms with that.
Nice! It’s like, “If life (or death) gives you lemons, make lemonade”
M
Mr.Bee
Guest
Neato!
I think optical illusions are fun, but I’m not impressed
Some people are impressed however.
Have you heard of this guy Derren Brown? he’s some British TV personality and he’s got a bunch of videos on Youtube, here’s one that’s appropriate for the thread:
youtube.com/watch?v=2Sq-YUdq1OI
One can never be sure what’s real or not on TV, some of it stupid, but this is thought provoking.
S
Socrates4Jesus
Guest
**(A) From personal experience:**My oldest son once wrote on a bookmark in his Bible when he was young, "I know God is real because every question i have about him has an answer."I have to say that there were times in my life when i’d ask God a question and receive the answer immediately. Whatever question i had in the morning, i received an answer by reading the Bible, listening to a Bible teacher on the the radio, or hearing a pastor teach Sunday morning. I’d ask myself, “How did they know i asked God that question today?” This happened to often to be mere coincidence.
**(B) From objective evidence:**Before i became a Christian, i was a skeptic. I had my doubts and asked a lot of questions. I was not a cynic, as i was willing to at least accept the possibility that i might be wrong in thinking there were no good answers to my questions. After i learned that there were reasonable answers to my questions, i realized faith was not a blind leap into a dark pit, but a step into the light of day.Perhaps the strongest objective evidence is the fact that the authors of the Bible predict history many hundreds of times with 100% accuracy 100% of the time. One might chalk up a few predictions as lucky guesses, but hundreds of them? Never has one prediction in the Bible been shown to be false. So, i asked myself, “How did the biblical authors accomplish what the writers of no other written religious works have been able to come close to doing?” That same day i received the answer in Moses’ words: “You may say to yourselves, ‘How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the LORD?’ If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the LORD does not take place or come true, that is a message the LORD has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously. Do not be afraid of him.” *(Deuteronomy 18:21-22)*There are no other religions, besides Judaism and Christianity, that dare to prove their gods exist(s) by doing what only an omniscient being could do - predict the future without error and with such frequency, detail and accuracy.
A
_A
Guest
It would seem, but I really like what we have accomplished, as a race, through communicating. I think this latest communications advance will lead to more successes.
It’s always been easy to lie, but with that many more watching, it is now harder to get away with it
My opinion of god is a reflection of the god of the old testament, and his new persona, Jesus.
If he is indeed all-powerful and all-knowing, then he created torture, suffering and infomercials because that is how he wanted it.
You certainly could not act against the will of an all-powerful being.
I am not in need of faith. I do not ‘believe’ in science. It is simply winning more of my acceptance because it keeps getting more and more correct, and more and more accurate.
A
_A
Guest
Can’t watch at work, I will have a look later.
A
_A
Guest
The astrology pages work the same way. Does this mean they are right too?
Don’t you remember on the other thread how phooney and I showed you that the one prophecy you pulled out was incorrect in several of it’s details? It certainly doesn’t fit as ‘100% accurate’.
Except the one that you offered us in the last thread, right? How many more errors before you stop saying that they are 100% right, all the time?
So the fact that that prophecy you offered, since it was refuted, at least partly, proves that the bible is wrong? Or does it just prove that that particular book is wrong?
S
steve_b
Guest
steve_b:
A,
A:
- You posted the premise I gave but skipped over the simple examples given for explaining design vs natural cause/effect
- I picked the universe, because that’s the biggest thing most people can imagine outside of God. The universe according to science had a beginning. Just do a search on the age of the universe. The universe isn’t eternal so there is no infinite regress in that example.But it should get one to think, how did the universe start.
- even science can’t ignore design.
Or maybe just really really really good at who He is.
A:
No, it just means the designer had a plan
A:
Is science comfortable with infinite regression as an answer?
A:
I would suggest they are both hard, but faith IMO is harder.
S
steve_b
Guest
Yes I read it.
I picked that link BECAUSE it uses the big bang. That doesn’t take away from what I said earlier that science is having a problem with that theory in debates. The reason is, anytime one poses a beginning, one poses creation of something, which therefore poses a creator. It’s almost inescapable.
Not:
An estimare which you know is a purely arbitrary measurement. Just as the theory of the big bang . But it is science’s way of dating everything and bringing it to its beginning
Not:
Objects at rest stay at rest unless acted upon. I think Hobbs said that. Things don’t just explode on their own. Objects don’t just sit there for a billion or trillion years and all of a sudden go
BANG!
unless acted upon
N
notself
Guest
What makes you think the singularity was at rest?
As for your statement about an object staying at rest unless acted upon, that is a theory of physics by Newton. Hobbs was a philosopher.
Physics as we know it does not apply at the level of the singularity. Here is an excellent site that discusses the Big Bang and the fact that the Univers has no center.
astro.ucla.edu/~wright/nocenter.html
And something on the size of the universe.
astro.ucla.edu/~wright/infpoint.html
There is more on this site, but I thought you would find these two sections interesting.
S
steve_b
Guest
What makes you think it wasn’t?
Not:
thanks for finding the origin.Not:
Thanks for the sites. You realize, because there is so much that is unknown, they can’t make many of the statements they make difinitive, because there is no proof yet. It is theory.
P
phooney
Guest
@oneGODoneCHURCH
“global warming”
There are people saying the earth isn’t warming up? Regardless, scientific theories are always falsifiable, and thus when new evidence contradicts it, then the theory has to change. It is called progress, and it’s a good thing. I’m guessing that the issue you mentioned is subject to a number of ongoing studies for (according to you) 80 years or more. You might somehow think this is a negative characteristic, a weakness, but scientific theories are untouchable except by contrary evidence and give us the most reasonable expectations about the nature of reality possible to us as finite beings with only natural senses and natural tools available to us to collect information with.
If you say you have a soul through which a divine being grants you information, then cough up some evidence for it. Anybody else could just as easily say they have an invisible, untouchable, unsmellable, silent and tasteless pirate ship in a bottle though which the Flying Spaghetti Monster reveals how he tinkers with Scientists’ measurements to keep us in the dark about reality for his own amusement.
“global warming”
There are people saying the earth isn’t warming up? Regardless, scientific theories are always falsifiable, and thus when new evidence contradicts it, then the theory has to change. It is called progress, and it’s a good thing. I’m guessing that the issue you mentioned is subject to a number of ongoing studies for (according to you) 80 years or more. You might somehow think this is a negative characteristic, a weakness, but scientific theories are untouchable except by contrary evidence and give us the most reasonable expectations about the nature of reality possible to us as finite beings with only natural senses and natural tools available to us to collect information with.
If you say you have a soul through which a divine being grants you information, then cough up some evidence for it. Anybody else could just as easily say they have an invisible, untouchable, unsmellable, silent and tasteless pirate ship in a bottle though which the Flying Spaghetti Monster reveals how he tinkers with Scientists’ measurements to keep us in the dark about reality for his own amusement.
P
phooney
Guest
@bluestarsneyes
“WOW! I’m totally confused why would someone that does NOT believe in God spend this much time defending his lack of faith?”
While I don’t believe in any God, I believe in the existence of Theists and irrational beliefs, and the fact that they have an effect on this world, for better or for worse. I also think the question of whether there is a God is a very important one, no matter what ‘side’ is right. As an added bonus, it’s quite an interesting topic and has led me to study a wide variety of topics that I may not have otherwise studied.
“WOW! I’m totally confused why would someone that does NOT believe in God spend this much time defending his lack of faith?”
While I don’t believe in any God, I believe in the existence of Theists and irrational beliefs, and the fact that they have an effect on this world, for better or for worse. I also think the question of whether there is a God is a very important one, no matter what ‘side’ is right. As an added bonus, it’s quite an interesting topic and has led me to study a wide variety of topics that I may not have otherwise studied.
- Status