New Images Support 'Big Bang' Theory
-
Judah Himango wrote:
I am convinced that if you do not have an open mind to God--if you are only out there to disprove his existence--then even miracles will not convince you, as it did not convince people with closed minds and hard hearts in the past. You've got to have an open mind to the existence of God before you will find proof either way.
Not necessarily true. I'm sure you've heard of a dude named CS Lewis[^], who actually set out to prove that God did not exist...and subsequently became one of the most powerful authors of the Christian faith. :)
They dress you up in white satin, And give you your very own pair of wings In August and Everything After
I'm after everything
And St. Augustine.
-
Drew Stainton wrote:
Kind of cracks me up.
yup. unfortunately for cosmology and biology, there are centuries of religious/faith-based stories to overcome. luckily, the bible didn't try to teach mathematics or chemistry - we'd never get anywhere. Cleek | Image Toolkits | Thumbnail maker
-
We struggle to understand our own universe (and we're still far from understanding it). What makes you think that science is capable of describing the properties of existence before the big bang. It was clearly nothing like our current universe. I doubt science will ever be able to provide an answer to that specific question.
espeir wrote:
What makes you think that science is capable of describing the properties of existence before the big bang.
at heart, i don't believe eternal ignorance is inevitable, for any subject. it may take decades, centuries, millennia for us to figure it out. but, if it can be known, we will know it.
espeir wrote:
It was clearly nothing like our current universe.
so, you can know what it was like, but science can't ? Cleek | Image Toolkits | Thumbnail maker
-
And St. Augustine.
And then there was that Paul the apostle guy... :rolleyes:
They dress you up in white satin, And give you your very own pair of wings In August and Everything After
I'm after everything
-
Bassam Abdul-Baki wrote:
What's outside the marble?[^]
The marble bag :omg: Go watch Men in Black[^] if you don't believe me... :laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:
Found on Bash.org [erno] hm. I've lost a machine.. literally _lost_. it responds to ping, it works completely, I just can't figure out where in my apartment it is.
-- modified at 9:05 Friday 17th March, 2006
Seriously, who voted me down? Anyone who has seen the movie knows it was a joke.
Found on Bash.org [erno] hm. I've lost a machine.. literally _lost_. it responds to ping, it works completely, I just can't figure out where in my apartment it is.
-
Tim Carmichael wrote:
But, if proof is required, Jesus died and rose from the dead. Proof of God's existence
sorry. even if Jesus did come back to life, that would not necessarily prove anything about God. it might prove that zombies really happen, that Jesus wasn't actually dead, that some human or natural action caused him to start breathing again, etc.. only faith gets you from a story about a zombie to "Proof of God's existence" Cleek | Image Toolkits | Thumbnail maker
Chris Losinger wrote:
even if Jesus did come back to life, that would not necessarily prove anything about God. it might prove that zombies really happen, that Jesus wasn't actually dead, that some human or natural action caused him to start breathing again, etc..
:laugh: Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
The Ultimate Grid - The #1 MFC grid out there! -
Judah Himango wrote:
I am convinced that if you do not have an open mind to God--if you are only out there to disprove his existence--then even miracles will not convince you, as it did not convince people with closed minds and hard hearts in the past. You've got to have an open mind to the existence of God before you will find proof either way.
Not necessarily true. I'm sure you've heard of a dude named CS Lewis[^], who actually set out to prove that God did not exist...and subsequently became one of the most powerful authors of the Christian faith. :)
They dress you up in white satin, And give you your very own pair of wings In August and Everything After
I'm after everything
Good point David. Likewise, Paul was sort of the lead persecutor of the believers in Messiah, only to have Messiah confront him and totally change him, not only making Paul see where he was going wrong, but going as far as turning him into one of the greatest followers of God, worldly speaking. That is some real grace and forgiveness there. It's as if God said, "Hey, I'll completely erase your past mistakes and make you a better person if you just follow me." That is awesome. As I understand it, Lewis was changed with the help from another author, J.R.R. Tolkien. Kind of cool when you think about it. :cool: It seems to me both of these guys had some sort of opening in thier minds, there must have been a place and a point at which they would let truth in and let their doubts fade away. Even though both of these men were probably convinced of the rightness of their wrongs, they obviously were not completely shut out to the possibility of God, there had to be some opening in their hearts and minds. That, or God did the opening for them, IMO.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Moral Muscle The apostle Paul, modernly speaking: Epistles of Paul Judah Himango
-
espeir wrote:
What makes you think that science is capable of describing the properties of existence before the big bang.
at heart, i don't believe eternal ignorance is inevitable, for any subject. it may take decades, centuries, millennia for us to figure it out. but, if it can be known, we will know it.
espeir wrote:
It was clearly nothing like our current universe.
so, you can know what it was like, but science can't ? Cleek | Image Toolkits | Thumbnail maker
Chris Losinger wrote:
so, you can know what it was like, but science can't ?
It's well known that the laws of our universe break down the closer you get to the actual big bang (in very small fractions of a second). Matter, space and time just don't exist at that point and reproducing the big bang is just not going to ever be possible. Let's just say that I'm not optimistic that our brains are capable of ever learning (and reasonably proving) what the universe was like before the and at the instant of the big bang. There is simply no comparitive perception we can apply to that sort of universe.
-
Seriously, who voted me down? Anyone who has seen the movie knows it was a joke.
Found on Bash.org [erno] hm. I've lost a machine.. literally _lost_. it responds to ping, it works completely, I just can't figure out where in my apartment it is.
I didn't vote you down, but weren't those galaxies?
-
Tim Carmichael wrote:
If there is nothing outside the marble (including space without matter in it), where does the marble expand to?
From my understanding, space is curved onto itself; which means theoretically you can start from a point, keep traveling in a straight line, and end up at your starting point - much like walking around the earth. Cheers, Vikram.
I don't know and you don't either. Militant Agnostic
"The universe is shaped exactly like the earth if you go straight long enough you'll end up where you were"- Modest Mouse, Third Planet BW
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
-- Steven Wright -
Chris Losinger wrote:
so, you can know what it was like, but science can't ?
It's well known that the laws of our universe break down the closer you get to the actual big bang (in very small fractions of a second). Matter, space and time just don't exist at that point and reproducing the big bang is just not going to ever be possible. Let's just say that I'm not optimistic that our brains are capable of ever learning (and reasonably proving) what the universe was like before the and at the instant of the big bang. There is simply no comparitive perception we can apply to that sort of universe.
espeir wrote:
It's well known that the laws of our universe break down the closer you get to the actual big bang
that probably means we don't yet know "the laws of the universe". our incomplete understanding of, for example, gravity and black holes suggests the same thing. but, before Newton, we barely understood the mechanics of falling objects. and it took another 300 years before we even began to understand the physics of flying objects. when people say things like "Let's just say that I'm not optimistic that our brains are capable of ever learning...." i wonder what people were saying when Kepler proposed his laws of planetary motion. were they saying "Let's just say that I'm not optimistic that our brains are capable of ever learning what controls the movements of the planets" ? probably Cleek | Image Toolkits | Thumbnail maker
-
Gary Kirkham wrote:
Why do people find the statement, "God created the heavens and the earth" somehow less believable?
Because it is unbelievable? At least these scientists are examining an event to decipher and explain what happened without dismissing it as the creation of an omnipotent and unseen deity and are putting forward both theories and evidence to support their claims. Where is the tangible, verifiable evidence of your god? www.merrens.com
www.bkmrx.comdigital man wrote:
Where is the tangible, verifiable evidence of your god?
It's all around you. Open your eyes.
-
Gary Kirkham wrote:
Why do people find the statement, "God created the heavens and the earth" somehow less believable?
Because it is unbelievable? At least these scientists are examining an event to decipher and explain what happened without dismissing it as the creation of an omnipotent and unseen deity and are putting forward both theories and evidence to support their claims. Where is the tangible, verifiable evidence of your god? www.merrens.com
www.bkmrx.comdigital man wrote:
Where is the tangible, verifiable evidence of your god?
leaving that question alone for a second ( and I *can* answer it ), do you suppose the existence of a God excludes the existence of any evidence of His handywork ? Assuming there was a big bang ( and I have no trouble with that ), does that prove that no God was involved ? Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++
-
For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures. Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. Gary Kirkham Forever Forgiven and Alive in the Spirit He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose. - Jim Elliot Me blog, You read
Good point... Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++
-
espeir wrote:
It's well known that the laws of our universe break down the closer you get to the actual big bang
that probably means we don't yet know "the laws of the universe". our incomplete understanding of, for example, gravity and black holes suggests the same thing. but, before Newton, we barely understood the mechanics of falling objects. and it took another 300 years before we even began to understand the physics of flying objects. when people say things like "Let's just say that I'm not optimistic that our brains are capable of ever learning...." i wonder what people were saying when Kepler proposed his laws of planetary motion. were they saying "Let's just say that I'm not optimistic that our brains are capable of ever learning what controls the movements of the planets" ? probably Cleek | Image Toolkits | Thumbnail maker
I think it might be possible, but I'm not optimistic. We're certainly capable of understanding nature beyond our direct observations, but it gets awfully weird. There is also no way to verify any of it.
-
Gary Kirkham wrote:
Why do people find the statement, "God created the heavens and the earth" somehow less believable?
Because it is unbelievable? At least these scientists are examining an event to decipher and explain what happened without dismissing it as the creation of an omnipotent and unseen deity and are putting forward both theories and evidence to support their claims. Where is the tangible, verifiable evidence of your god? www.merrens.com
www.bkmrx.com -
See, there you go again, passing the blame for your actions to your god. What a perfect life you must have: you can say and do as you please and when it all goes tits up you can pass the buck. And why are you so easily offended by words? I don't know you or him or anyone here and you can say what you like to me (actually you can to my face as many will atest) and I don't get offended. I might laugh but offended? No. www.merrens.com
www.bkmrx.com -
xlr8td wrote:
My question for the unbelievers is - "who flicked the marble to cause the explosion?"
And mine for believers is who flicked the nothing to create the god(s). In either case you've got an uncaused cause, or infinite regress. :D Or in other words "You can't trick me that easily, it's turtles all the way down".
I think asking questions like "who created God" or "what caused God to do xyz" is really futile because it's all high philosophical fluff. Both questions introduce our human concept of linear time, invalidating the questions before they can be answered.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Moral Muscle The apostle Paul, modernly speaking: Epistles of Paul Judah Himango
-
Faith is for the weak of mind: you use your faith as a crutch to duck the responsibilities and consequences that life throws at you. How easy it is to push the blame on to your god for everything you don't like about the world.
Tim Carmichael wrote:
evidence of my senses
What sense is that then? Your time travel sense?
Tim Carmichael wrote:
eye-witness accounts of people who WERE alive at the time of the events
Where can I find copies of the these independent accounts of this supposed event? Don't say bible cos that does not count. You'd be using the bible to argue for the existnece of a character depicted therein. Be like me saying that the great spaghetti monster is real cos it's on a web site. www.merrens.com
www.bkmrx.comdigital man wrote:
Where can I find copies of the these independent accounts of this supposed event?
You asked, so here are some: From the Book of Mormon 3rd Nephi Chapter 11[^] 1 AND now it came to pass that there were a great multitude gathered together, of the people of Nephi, round about the temple which was in the land Bountiful; and they were marveling and wondering one with another, and were showing one to another the great and marvelous change which had taken place. 2 And they were also conversing about this Jesus Christ, of whom the sign had been given concerning his death. 3 And it came to pass that while they were thus conversing one with another, they heard a voice as if it came out of heaven; and they cast their eyes round about, for they understood not the voice which they heard; and it was not a harsh voice, neither was it a loud voice; nevertheless, and notwithstanding it being a small voice it did pierce them that did hear to the center, insomuch that there was no part of their frame that it did not cause to quake; yea, it did pierce them to the very soul, and did cause their hearts to burn. 4 And it came to pass that again they heard the voice, and they understood it not. 5 And again the third time they did hear the voice, and did open their ears to hear it; and their eyes were towards the sound thereof; and they did look steadfastly towards heaven, from whence the sound came. 6 And behold, the third time they did understand the voice which they heard; and it said unto them: 7 Behold my Beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased, in whom I have glorified my name—hear ye him. 8 And it came to pass, as they understood they cast their eyes up again towards heaven; and behold, they saw a Man descending out of heaven; and he was clothed in a white robe; and he came down and stood in the midst of them; and the eyes of the whole multitude were turned upon him, and they durst not open their mouths, even one to another, and wist not what it meant, for they thought it was an angel that had appeared unto them. 9 And it came to pass that he stretched forth his hand and spake unto the people, saying: 10 Behold, I am Jesus Christ, whom the prophets testified shall come into the world. 11 And
-
What kind of proof are you looking for? An early follower of Jesus put it this way: the evidence of God is all around us; we don't need a miraculous, supernatural "God was here!" kind of event to prove him, do we? Is that what you're looking for? If it is, you might be disappointed, because you are not the first to ask for such proof of God:
Later a few scholars and teachers got on him. "Teacher, we want to see your credentials. Give us some hard evidence that God is in this. How about a miracle?" Jesus said, "You're looking for proof, but you're looking for the wrong kind. All you want is something to titillate your curiosity, satisfy your lust for miracles. Because of this, the only proof you're going to get is what looks like the absence of proof.
What I am convinced of is that people who are looking for this kind of proof are out to disprove the existence of God. They aren't really looking for miracles, they're just out to disprove God's existence by the absence of miracles. If that is you, then there is nothing I can say to convince you otherwise; in fact, Jesus performed miracles himself witnessed by not only his followers, but also by people who were out to disprove his existence such as secular historians and the Judaic scribes, both groups of people saw the miracles, yet refused to believe anyways because they already had their made up their minds, there was no convincing them. I am convinced that if you do not have an open mind to God--if you are only out there to disprove his existence--then even miracles will not convince you, as it did not convince people with closed minds and hard hearts in the past. You've got to have an open mind to the existence of God before you will find proof either way.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Moral Muscle The apostle Paul, modernly speaking: Epistles of Paul Judah Himango
Judah Himango wrote:
I am convinced
Well written, well said!