A Continued Discussion Concerning God and the Big Bang. (1 Viewer)

[Gandhi>Bush]

A very good question. One that is probably occupying the time and efforts of hundreds, if not thousands, of scientists.

We don't have a complete explanation yet, but it is improving. Just because we do not have an absolutely complete picture of what happened, does not support the idea that some god did it. It just means that it is something that we do not yet know.

You've probably heard it before, but this is just the "god of the gaps". Anytime our knowledge of something comes up against a wall, that is when it is ascribed to a god. When we didn't know what caused lightning, a god did it. When we didn't know what caused diseases, it was God's will. Floods, draughts, volcanoes, earthquakes and any other natural disaster happened because we displeased the gods.

Does the Universe have a beginning, or is it perpetual? Is eternity possible or does time have a beginning, an end?

Is space endless? Is time endless?

At some point was there ever an existence of nothing, an inexistence of everything?

I think these are the questions we would have to nail down.

It seems to me that at some point, there would have to be some sort of force that defies our perceptions of "possible" or "impossible" and speaks into the darkness, if you will.

That is St. Aquinas' argument. That the comet moving in the sky was moved by something, that was created by something that was created by something... And at some point the Cause of the Effect, had no Cause. Something that is always. Aquinas' argument was based on observation. Everything we see in this world begins and ends. People are born and people are buried. Trees are planted and trees whither and die.

 

[F41]

Does the Universe have a beginning, or is it perpetual? Is eternity possible or does time have a beginning, an end?

Is space endless? Is time endless?

The universe and time as we know it does have a beginning. On a Christians standpoint, God created time and therefore created the beginning of time we exist in. God lives outside the realm of time so God has no beginning or end. God created time and God can end time. This may seem incomprehensible to some, but to others it would make perfect sense.

At some point was there ever an existence of nothing, an inexistence of everything?

The Spirit of God has always existed, but the universe we know has not. What is beyond our universe, only God knows. Think of it this way, we live inside a universal globe, we can not go beyond a certain point. There is a barrier between the third heaven and the second heaven. The first heaven is our atmosphere, the second heaven is the vacuum of space and the third heaven is outside the globe we can not penetrate . So in my thinking, There has always been something, but God created everything. Ask yourself where matter came from, did it come from nothing, or did something or someone create it. If matter came from somewhere, then a creator had to call it into existence.

I think these are the questions we would have to nail down.

These really are very good questions for all to consider.

It seems to me that at some point, there would have to be some sort of force that defies our perceptions of "possible" or "impossible" and speaks into the darkness, if you will.

In my opinion, this Force would be the Spirit of God.

That is St. Aquinas' argument. That the comet moving in the sky was moved by something, that was created by something that was created by something... And at some point the Cause of the Effect, had no Cause. Something that is always. Aquinas' argument was based on observation. Everything we see in this world begins and ends. People are born and people are buried. Trees are planted and trees whither and die.

Everything in this world and universe does have a beginning and an end, but outside of the globe of our existence, there is no beginning nor will there ever be an end.

 

[steen]

The universe and time as we know it does have a beginning. On a Christians standpoint, God created time and therefore created the beginning of time we exist in. God lives outside the realm of time so God has no beginning or end. God created time and God can end time.

Evidence, please.

The Spirit of God has always existed, but the universe we know has not. What is beyond our universe, only God knows. Think of it this way, we live inside a universal globe, we can not go beyond a certain point. There is a barrier between the third heaven and the second heaven. The first heaven is our atmosphere, the second heaven is the vacuum of space and the third heaven is outside the globe we can not penetrate .

Please provide evidence for this.... (yeah, and for the rest of your claims as well).

 

[F41]

Evidence, please.

Please provide evidence for this.... (yeah, and for the rest of your claims as well).

Show me evidence of where the space for the universe came from, or where matter came from and how did it get so perfectly organized, how about the laws of the universe (gravity, inertia, etc.), how did this come to be, where did the energy come from to do all this organizing, and when, where, why, and how did life come from non-living matter?

Am I to assume you honestly believe that everything came from nothing?

Your eyes are closed so therefore you are blind because you belong to the world and God is not your Father, how then can you see what all is before you?

You ask for evidence and I say to you, your evidence awaits within your demise when you come face to face with God, this is when you will have understanding, unless you take the dirty from your eyes, then, and only then will you see and comprehend all that is about you.

 

[steen]

Show me evidence of where the space for the universe came from, or where matter came from and how did it get so perfectly organized, how about the laws of the universe (gravity, inertia, etc.), how did this come to be, where did the energy come from to do all this organizing, and when, where, why, and how did life come from non-living matter?

How does that prove your previous claims? You made claims, and now your evidence is "I can't imagine anything else? How is that evidence of anything?

Am I to assume you honestly believe that everything came from nothing?

Huh? I am merely asking you to provide evidence for your claims.

Your eyes are closed so therefore you are blind because you belong to the world and God is not your Father, how then can you see what all is before you?

Could you please cease lying about me? I am a Christian and find your false accusation very insulting and blasphemous.

You ask for evidence and I say to you, your evidence awaits within your demise when you come face to face with God, this is when you will have understanding, unless you take the dirty from your eyes, then, and only then will you see and comprehend all that is about you.

Pascal's Wager is never evidence for anything.

Again, I ask you. Do you have ANY actual evidence for the litany of claims you spewed, other than making up lies about others and bearing false witness?

 

[Apostle13]

Could you please cease lying about me? I am a Christian and find your false accusation very insulting and blasphemous.

Steen I am surprised to read this, as I have read many of your previous posts and although I do not recall you ever stating yourself as being an atheist it was on my part logically assumed based on their content.
What exactly is your take on creation? Genesis account?

 

[F41]

How does that prove your previous claims? You made claims, and now your evidence is "I can't imagine anything else? How is that evidence of anything?

Huh? I am merely asking you to provide evidence for your claims.

Could you please cease lying about me? I am a Christian and find your false accusation very insulting and blasphemous.

Pascal's Wager is never evidence for anything.

Again, I ask you. Do you have ANY actual evidence for the litany of claims you spewed, other than making up lies about others and bearing false witness?

If I missjudged you, I apologize, but you gave me the impression that you were not a Christian and now I know better, again I apologize.

Being a Christian yourself, do you require evidence? What you have learned through your Christian life, does it not give you the faith and knowledge of God and his nature? Do you not talk to him, and does he not answer? What exactly is it you doubt and I will try to help as much as I can? I do not claim to have all the answers, no one does.

 

[steen]

Steen I am surprised to read this, as I have read many of your previous posts and although I do not recall you ever stating yourself as being an atheist it was on my part logically assumed based on their content.
What exactly is your take on creation? Genesis account?

The Bible is about the answers to our "why" questions. Genesis tells us why God matters.

The Bible is not a science textbook. The Bible tells us "why." Science tells us "what" and "how." They complement each others beautifully into a greater whole, but each are poorly suited to intrude into each other's sphere.

 

[steen]

If I missjudged you, I apologize, but you gave me the impression that you were not a Christian and now I know better, again I apologize.

Thank you. Apology accepted. I am just fed up with those who try to impose an artificial dichotomy and insisting that it must be one OR the other.

Being a Christian yourself, do you require evidence?

Not about God, but about science, yes I do.

What you have learned through your Christian life, does it not give you the faith and knowledge of God and his nature? Do you not talk to him, and does he not answer? What exactly is it you doubt and I will try to help as much as I can? I do not claim to have all the answers, no one does.

I have no doubt about God. I have doubts about the claims made about science that I know to be outright false because the evidence shows so.

I have great problem with those who use God as an excuse to bear false witness about science, just involving god in petty politics.

 

[Apostle13]

The Bible is about the answers to our "why" questions. Genesis tells us why God matters.

The Bible is not a science textbook. The Bible tells us "why." Science tells us "what" and "how." They complement each others beautifully into a greater whole, but each are poorly suited to intrude into each other's sphere.

I can largely agree with this as I believe the correlating facts of both science and bible are what is needed in order to determine more accurately what is truth. Nonetheless, the answers always seem quite vague. I guess this is where faith factors in... To what degree can only be at an individuals own personal level. Weather it be faith in God, faith in science, more so in one, or less in the other.
Thats not even yet considering how much "The Flying Spaghetti Monster" could factor in...lol

 

[F41]

Not about God, but about science, yes I do.

I have no doubt about God. I have doubts about the claims made about science that I know to be outright false because the evidence shows so.

I have great problem with those who use God as an excuse to bear false witness about science, just involving god in petty politics.

Science of man and science of God as you know would be different. I do not claim all science is wrong, as a matter of fact, science in school was my favorite subject along with history. The bible does teach science but it does not explain all. If God intended us to know he would have, but I believe he wanted us to have faith more then the requirement of evidence.

Lets look at two scientist as an example. If one followed the bible and consulted God and asked him, God could and most likely would give him understanding. Now look at the one who does not look to God and he has to try to find the answers on his own. He is not going to always find these answers and he will most likely be wrong in his findings at times. Gods science is infallible were mans is fallible.

There is science in the bible and I can prove it. Take a look at (Heb 11.3)

"By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that the things which are seen were not made of things which are visible."

This says the worlds are not made of the visible things. The universe is made of things that are invisible such as atoms, neutrons, protons, electrons, quarks, etc. It`s fascinating to me that the Bible knew this fact long before the science of man discovered the atomic structure of matter.

(Isa 40.22a) says: "It is God who sits above the circle of the earth, and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers"

the Bible describes the earth's as a circle, When did science of man discover the earth is round?

(Job 26.7) Says "God stretches out the north over empty space; he hangs the earth on nothing."

Our earth is suspended upon "nothing," an invisible force that we now know as gravity. Science is what can give us answers to what God already knows and identifies the wonders God has made. But when they take God out of science is when I have a problem.

 

[tecoyah]

But when they take God out of science is when I have a problem.

Then I hate to say it.....'Yer gonna have alot of problems.

 

[MrFungus420]

Science of man and science of God as you know would be different.

There is no "science of God". Science consists of observation, hypothesis and testing, not just blind acceptance, especially blind acceptance in the face of virtually no supporting evidence.

I do not claim all science is wrong,

So, I guess that means that you only think that science is wrong when it doesn't agree with your opinions.

as a matter of fact, science in school was my favorite subject along with history. The bible does teach science but it does not explain all.

Science is predicated on observation. It is a process through which we gain understanding and an explanation. The Bible doesn't teach that in any way. The Bible just says that it's claims are true, no explanation at all.

If God intended us to know he would have,

So, I guess that God didn't intend for us to understand things like medicine since He didn't explain it.

but I believe he wanted us to have faith more then the requirement of evidence.

More likely, the people who wrote the Bible wanted it's adherents to have faith in spite of evidence to the contrary.

Lets look at two scientist as an example. If one followed the bible and consulted God and asked him, God could and most likely would give him understanding. Now look at the one who does not look to God and he has to try to find the answers on his own. He is not going to always find these answers and he will most likely be wrong in his findings at times.

Again, science relies on observtion, hypothesis and testing. Not asking God for the answer.

Let's assume for a moment that what you said is true. Why doesn't a "scientist" like you described here ask God how to cure cancer? According to your claim, the scientist "could and most likely would" then have the cure.

Further, if all that it requires is following the Bible and consulting God, then why have many (if not all) of the most significant advances come about through the trial and error methods that man has come up with? Why have the advances come from scientists employing these trial and error methods and not from ordinary people (read: non-scientists) who follow the Bible and consult God.

Gods science is infallible were mans is fallible.

Let's see, man's science: diseases are often cause by bacteria and viruses, antibiotics can treat the former, and vaccines can help prevent the latter. Man's science has given us medications and surgeries to heal us.

God's "science":
James 5:14-15: Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord: And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up.

Which seems more fallible, the science of medicine, or God's "science" of having the elders pray to heal someone?

There is science in the bible and I can prove it.

Good luck.

Take a look at (Heb 11.3)

"By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that the things which are seen were not made of things which are visible."

This says the worlds are not made of the visible things. The universe is made of things that are invisible such as atoms, neutrons, protons, electrons, quarks, etc. It`s fascinating to me that the Bible knew this fact long before the science of man discovered the atomic structure of matter.

Looks to me like it is saying that the things which are seen are made of the word of God, something not visible.

(Isa 40.22a) says: "It is God who sits above the circle of the earth, and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers"

the Bible describes the earth's as a circle, When did science of man discover the earth is round?

Except that the Earth isn't a circle, it is a sphere (an oblate spheroid, if you want to get technical). If this would have refered to the Earth as an orb, ball or sphere, then it may have been appropriate.

The ancient Mesopotamians and Sumerians also viewed the Earth as a round disc, so, it seems that this idea predates Christianity. Norse mythology has the earth as being round. Some Native American traditions have the Earth as being round (admittedly, the back of a giant turtle, but that is round, and, has the advantage of being hemispherical, at least).

So, the idea of the Earth being round is in no way limited to the Bible, or even it's early followers. It is common to many mythologies.

Around 240 bce, Eratosthenes was able to calculate, to within 2%, the circumference of the Earth.

(Job 26.7) Says "God stretches out the north over empty space; he hangs the earth on nothing."

Our earth is suspended upon "nothing," an invisible force that we now know as gravity.

But, in 1 Samuel 2:8, it says that "the pillars of the earth are the LORD's, and he hath set the world upon them." So, the Bible also claims that the world is set upon pillars.

Science is what can give us answers to what God already knows and identifies the wonders God has made. But when they take God out of science is when I have a problem.

Well, since science is the study of natural phenomenon, there has never been a place for God in science.

If you fall back on the idea that everything was done by God, then there is no reason to try to figure anything out. It is all God's will. Scientific study becomes meaningless, because God can change anything and everything at any time, rendering everything that we have learned absolutely meaningless. There is no reason for anything other than God. There is no explanation for anything other than God.

 

[steen]

I can largely agree with this as I believe the correlating facts of both science and bible are what is needed in order to determine more accurately what is truth.

I must disagree with you. It is the facts of science and the faith of the Bible that come together. There is no faith in science and no fact in the Bible. The bible is NOT a science textbook any more than science is a guide for faithful living. The truth is the WHY of the Bible and the WHAT/HOW of science. They complement each other. Trying to substitute one for the other is a perversion, however. Trying to claim scientific facts based on the Bible is blasphemy. Trying to claim Faith from science is dishonesty. In either case, it is showing lack of integrity and lack of adherence to both science and God.

Nonetheless, the answers always seem quite vague.

When you seek the answer not appropriate for where you are looking, yes. Do you have any doubt about the Faith per the Bible? Do you have any doubt of the veracity of scientific findings? You shouldn't. Both are valid in their own spheres. But if you use science to 'prove" anything for/against God, then you are in error. And if you use the Bible to try to "prove" scientific 'facts' then you are a blasphemer. In either case, it is a perversion.

I guess this is where faith factors in... To what degree can only be at an individuals own personal level. Weather it be faith in God, faith in science, more so in one, or less in the other.

There is no more "faith" in science than there is a need for "proof" of faith. You are trying to mix the two. It can lead to nothing but problems for you.

Thats not even yet considering how much "The Flying Spaghetti Monster" could factor in...lol

Just as much as any other belief you seek to establish through proof rather than faith.

If you seek to establish science through faith, you are ignorant. If you seek to establish faith through proof, then your faith is as weak as the Israelites who needed a Golden Calf to have faith.

That is the problem with creationism. It is the "Golden Calf" of those who are weak int he faith.

 

[steen]

Science of man and science of God as you know would be different.

Science is exploration of the world around us. To claim that God needs science is to say that God needs to explore to gain understanding, which is a gross demeaning of God.

I do not claim all science is wrong, as a matter of fact, science in school was my favorite subject along with history.

But you ARE saying that Faith must be used to prove science.

The bible does teach science but it does not explain all.

The Bible teach the "why" of living. It is NOT a science textbook. You are perverting the Bible in your quest for a "proof" of God in your weak faith. If your faith was solid, it would not be shaken by science, just like if science is strong, it won't be shaken by Faith. You are showing weakness in faith in your desperate need to "prove" God. Like the Doubting Thomas who had to FEEL Jesus wounds to believe or like the Israelites who needed the tangible evidence of the Golden Calf for their faith to feel secure.

When your faith is so weak that you need to misrepresent science or espouse ignorance to justify your faith, then you have a problem.

If God intended us to know he would have, but I believe he wanted us to have faith more then the requirement of evidence.

God want us to have Faith in the bible and its message, yes. But you are trying to claim that God wants us to not explore, not investigate, living like ignorant beasts of the field.

Lets look at two scientist as an example. If one followed the bible and consulted God and asked him, God could and most likely would give him understanding. Now look at the one who does not look to God and he has to try to find the answers on his own. He is not going to always find these answers and he will most likely be wrong in his findings at times. Gods science is infallible were mans is fallible.

I can not accept your simplistic claim. I believe you are outright wrong. I believe you are insulting God. You are burying your dinar instead of being a good steward of knowledge.

There is science in the bible and I can prove it. Take a look at (Heb 11.3)

"By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that the things which are seen were not made of things which are visible."

This says the worlds are not made of the visible things. The universe is made of things that are invisible such as atoms, neutrons, protons, electrons, quarks, etc.

But they are not invisible. You are quote mining the Bible to "prove" your god. Why does your god need proof?

And, incidentally, you didn't prove anything. proof is evidence that others will reach the same conclusion from if having full knowledge and access to all the information. You proclaimed an OPINION as "proof." So you are USING God's word for your "proof," you are bearing false witness IN GOD'S NAME. I think you need to rethink your views when this is what you have come to. You are certainly NOT bringing honor to God's name by using it to bear false witness.

It`s fascinating to me that the Bible knew this fact long before the science of man discovered the atomic structure of matter.

You are reaching. You are quote mining and misrepresenting God's word. Why the need for blasphemy?

(Isa 40.22a) says: "It is God who sits above the circle of the earth, and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers"

the Bible describes the earth's as a circle, When did science of man discover the earth is round?

The earth is a globe, not a circle.

(Job 26.7) Says "God stretches out the north over empty space; he hangs the earth on nothing."

Our earth is suspended upon "nothing," an invisible force that we now know as gravity.

So it is not "nothing." And what is that about the "north"? There is a direction to the nothingness? Your argument seems contrived.

Science is what can give us answers to what God already knows

Perhaps. But it also gives us answer to what we don't know, answers you reject because you imagine that God knows otherwise, for some reason. As if you have had God tell you all the scientific facts through the Bible which specifically tells you that it is not telling you everything.

and identifies the wonders God has made. But when they take God out of science is when I have a problem.

God is weakened and cheapened if God is IN science. God is beyond it. You are the one why try to "prove" God, who can not handle God based on faith alone. That is where your struggle lies and that is why you reject the realities that God has allowed us to find through Scientific exploration.

 

[Apostle13]

I must disagree with you. It is the facts of science and the faith of the Bible that come together. There is no faith in science and no fact in the Bible. The bible is NOT a science textbook any more than science is a guide for faithful living. The truth is the WHY of the Bible and the WHAT/HOW of science. They complement each other. Trying to substitute one for the other is a perversion, however. Trying to claim scientific facts based on the Bible is blasphemy. Trying to claim Faith from science is dishonesty. In either case, it is showing lack of integrity and lack of adherence to both science and God.

When you seek the answer not appropriate for where you are looking, yes. Do you have any doubt about the Faith per the Bible? Do you have any doubt of the veracity of scientific findings? You shouldn't. Both are valid in their own spheres. But if you use science to 'prove" anything for/against God, then you are in error. And if you use the Bible to try to "prove" scientific 'facts' then you are a blasphemer. In either case, it is a perversion.

There is no more "faith" in science than there is a need for "proof" of faith. You are trying to mix the two. It can lead to nothing but problems for you.

Just as much as any other belief you seek to establish through proof rather than faith.

If you seek to establish science through faith, you are ignorant. If you seek to establish faith through proof, then your faith is as weak as the Israelites who needed a Golden Calf to have faith.

That is the problem with creationism. It is the "Golden Calf" of those who are weak int he faith.

In as much God is a God of many, he is truly, equally, a God of even just one, but acceptance thru faith is vital and key. Faith alone is proof enough to them that rightly profess it. One can say "I am a Christian" and still not being. In light of our very different views concerning faith I am inclined to believe that we are traveling distinct and separate roads to eternity... I am prayerfully hopeful of all whom I encounter on these forums. I find comfort in the knowing of them who do not blatantly deny the reason/existence of God, as I do see professed atheism as a deep well with muddy walls. Here your arguments are weak and vague for the quantity of my own faith is not limited to that which is altogether scientifically proven. Neither is it based on any method of mythology, as many by reason, their own lack of faith, might wish to argue. Faith is rather a matured notion, and yes, it is a growing process. Our own personal experiences with God landmark these elevated plains toward its maturity. In order to acquire these we must seek him with our whole heart and much diligence in doing so. Also the bible tells us Faith comes by hearing and the hearing of the word. Whereby we are encouraged to come to this knowledge of the truth. I have determined by my own past experiences, any compromising of God's word will only hinder that which is faith, from this, that which is key, to a knowledge that shines so brilliantly a light, on what is real and TRUTH.
Faith, prayer in Jesus name, and diligence, will set straight any persons path.

 

[steen]

Is there any particular reason why you saw the need to bear false witness about me here?

 

[Apostle13]

Is there any particular reason why you saw the need to bear false witness about me here?

Is this then not your primary defense mechanism... Railing accusations ?

 

[Sir_Alec]

Is this then not your primary defense mechanism... Railing accusations ?

Its everyone's defense mechanism whether its said in one's head or to other people.

 

[cherokee]

Maybe the big crunch created the big bang...

 

[steen]

Is this then not your primary defense mechanism... Railing accusations ?

Actually, when you are bearing false witness about me, it is perfectly acceptable for me to call you on it.

 

[F41]

Maybe the big crunch created the big bang...

Cause and Effect, What caused The Big Crunch? :mrgreen:

I want to address others, however I need more time due to my work. I am not ignoring anyone.

 

[Apostle13]

Its everyone's defense mechanism whether its said in one's head or to other people.

That's deep...:roll:

 

[Sir_Alec]

That's deep...:roll:

I did not expect that kind of reply from you :doh

 

[Apostle13]

Actually, when you are bearing false witness about me, it is perfectly acceptable for me to call you on it.

Your umm... Acusation has no merit here, as that was not my doing, nor intention. If you imploded internally on this what I have written I can only guess it may well be a signature sign of denial pertaining to your own convictions. The same is true for external consequence (explode). If it were my nature that I were to "bear false witness" I would simply call you out for the idiot that you are..:2razz: