God's not dead

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

There was a cause. It has no particular purpose.

100% correct!

Lmao!!!

Cause definition

1.
a person or thing that acts, happens, or exists in such a way that some specific thing happens as a result; the producer of an effect:
You have been the cause of much anxiety. What was the cause of the accident?


The hole is getting deeper
 
Damn Denny must be beating his head in the keyboard by now. No wonder barfo loves to debate him. It's too easy
 
Why? Singularity existed before time was ever even an option

It came into being at the instant time began. Your scientist quote said that. Do you want to pick and choose what he said is right or wrong now? He's your witness.

:lol:
 
It came into being at the instant time began. Your scientist quote said that. Do you want to pick and choose what he said is right or wrong now? He's your witness.

:lol:

Wait so you think singularity just poof?! Really?!?!

Look who believes in magic now?!?!
 
Why did Japan make your car? For a purpose.

Why did the universe begin to exist? For a purpose

The universe was not created for a purpose.

All you are doing is showing you confuse the use and meaning of "cause" and "purpose."
 
The universe was not created for a purpose.

All you are doing is showing you confuse the use and meaning of "cause" and "purpose."

Says you...

It supports my philosophy. Tell me if it contradicts

In the beginning God said "let there be light", then the universe came into existence.
 
Ah yes, both arguments are theories that cannot be observed to date.

This is about as relevant as the unicorn you always use. Maybe you do believe in unicorns?!?!

There are mountains of evidence to support the Big Bang. Not one iota to cause me to believe in some mythical being.

I have as few (ZERO) reasons to believe in unicorns as I do to believe in any god.
 
Says you...

It supports my philosophy. Tell me if it contradicts

In the beginning God said "let there be light", then the universe came into existence.

Yes. Contradicts.

There is not one shred of evidence to support any purpose (as you use the word) for the universe.

I won't get into your interpretation of a book written by humans at a time when the nature of things was poorly understood.

This fairy tale has just as much believability as yours!

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tungusic_creation_myth
 
There are mountains of evidence to support the Big Bang. Not one iota to cause me to believe in some mythical being.

I have as few (ZERO) reasons to believe in unicorns as I do to believe in any god.

Who are you trying to convert here? Before you pop a brain vessel, we can both agree the Big Bang happened.
 
Yes. Contradicts.

There is not one shred of evidence to support any purpose (as you use the word) for the universe.

I won't get into your interpretation of a book written by humans at a time when the nature of things was poorly understood.

This fairy tale has just as much believability as yours!

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tungusic_creation_myth

Lmao, there is no shred of evidence about singularity, yet here you are thinking that isn't a contradiction.

Bro your entire debate has been a contradiction
 
Lmao, there is no shred of evidence about singularity, yet here you are thinking that isn't a contradiction.

Bro your entire debate has been a contradiction

I showed you the best answer in someone else's brilliant words. It directly addresses your confusion. Perhaps if you take the time to read it and let it sink in, you'll see there is no contradiction.

Like I've said a few times now (let this sink in): the theory does not explain the cause of the expansion or the origin of everything in the singularity.

There is a mountain of evidence that there was a singularity or something like it. You are simply wrong. Let that sink in, too :)
 
The singularity was there at time=0. There was no time < 0.

Wow, you guys had a lot of fun last night.

At the risk of setting off another round of philosophical/religious turmoil, I don't think that what you said here is exactly correct, Denny. Here's what Stephen Hawking has to say on the subject of time and singularity:

At this time, the Big Bang, all the matter in the universe, would have been on top of itself. The density would have been infinite. It would have been what is called, a singularity. At a singularity, all the laws of physics would have broken down. This means that the state of the universe, after the Big Bang, will not depend on anything that may have happened before, because the deterministic laws that govern the universe will break down in the Big Bang. The universe will evolve from the Big Bang, completely independently of what it was like before. Even the amount of matter in the universe, can be different to what it was before the Big Bang, as the Law of Conservation of Matter, will break down at the Big Bang.

Since events before the Big Bang have no observational consequences, one may as well cut them out of the theory, and say that time began at the Big Bang. Events before the Big Bang, are simply not defined, because there's no way one could measure what happened at them.

http://www.hawking.org.uk/the-beginning-of-time.html

As I understand it, which I'm perfectly willing to say is not all that well, he's not saying that there wasn't a time before 0, he's just saying that everything got reset at the Big Bang and there's no way of measuring or knowing about anything that happened outside of the time frame of our universe.

I don't know what all of this means as far as the religious debate goes. I would say that the eternal God, if one exists as Mags and I believe, would have to have existed outside of the space-time of our universe. Genesis 1 says that, "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." It's pretty clear from that statement that he's there at the "beginning" and that for him to do the creating he had to be in existence before the creation. The Bible says that he's eternal and from the standpoint of this universe, that would simply mean that there's no way to test his beginning or end...which is pretty much what the Bible says.
 
Wow, you guys had a lot of fun last night.

At the risk of setting off another round of philosophical/religious turmoil, I don't think that what you said here is exactly correct, Denny. Here's what Stephen Hawking has to say on the subject of time and singularity:



http://www.hawking.org.uk/the-beginning-of-time.html

As I understand it, which I'm perfectly willing to say is not all that well, he's not saying that there wasn't a time before 0, he's just saying that everything got reset at the Big Bang and there's no way of measuring or knowing about anything that happened outside of the time frame of our universe.

I don't know what all of this means as far as the religious debate goes. I would say that the eternal God, if one exists as Mags and I believe, would have to have existed outside of the space-time of our universe. Genesis 1 says that, "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." It's pretty clear from that statement that he's there at the "beginning" and that for him to do the creating he had to be in existence before the creation. The Bible says that he's eternal and from the standpoint of this universe, that would simply mean that there's no way to test his beginning or end...which is pretty much what the Bible says.

I think you misunderstand Hawking's statement. Events before the big bang are simply not defined because you can't measure time < 0.

As far as genesis goes, this creation myth is far more believable: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mbombo. Or put another way, why believe your chosen myth over the many others?
 
I think you misunderstand Hawking's statement. Events before the big bang are simply not defined because you can't measure time < 0.

As far as genesis goes, this creation myth is far more believable: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mbombo. Or put another way, why believe your chosen myth over the many others?

Let there be light

Why do you believe in the myth of singularity?
 
Let there be light

Why do you believe in the myth of singularity?

Because there is a mountain of evidence that suggests one. Start with the fact the universe is expanding. Include the fact we can still see the light from the big bang reaching us today. That's the tip of that iceberg.

Praise photon. May the light be with you.
 
Because there is a mountain of evidence that suggests one. Start with the fact the universe is expanding. Include the fact we can still see the light from the big bang reaching us today. That's the tip of that iceberg.

Praise photon. May the light be with you.

Or a mountain of evidence that the beginning God said let there be light and the universe expanded.
 
Or a mountain of evidence that the beginning God said let there be light and the universe expanded.

Nope.

Your "mountain" is the same as any evidence that "the beginning Unicorn said let there be light..."

Which is NONE.
 
I think you misunderstand Hawking's statement. Events before the big bang are simply not defined because you can't measure time < 0.

The universe will evolve from the Big Bang, completely independently of what it was like before.

The fact that time is not measurable on the other side of the Big Bang doesn't mean that something may not have existed before that event. We just have no way of knowing.

As far as genesis goes, this creation myth is far more believable: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mbombo. Or put another way, why believe your chosen myth over the many others?

There are a lot of reasons why I believe the Bible, but I've found message board debates on religion to be not the place to share personal and deeply held events and feelings. You're happy in your atheism and I'm happy in my faith. Probably should leave it at that.
 
The fact that time is not measurable on the other side of the Big Bang doesn't mean that something may have existed before that event. We just have no way of knowing.



There are a lot of reasons why I believe the Bible, but I've found message board debates on religion to be not the place to share personal and deeply held events and feelings. You're happy in your atheism and I'm happy in my faith. Probably should leave it at that.

What he's saying is something like anything /0 is indeterminate.

The question of whether the universe is part of something bigger is something many scientists are exploring. No definitive answer yet, But I trust they will find a logical and provable explanation that involves nothing supernatural.

I have no gripe with you being happy in your faith. I think there are positives to religion as an institution. It's not all good, but it's also not all bad.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top