- Jan 10, 2010
- 37,281
- 8,501
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
And you speak and write as if it literally does as well. So why have you not changed your language?
Upvote
0
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
There was no "before" before the Big Bang
- Thread starter Yoder777
- Start date
And you speak and write as if it literally does as well. So why have you not changed your language?
Dmitri Martila
Active Member
Hawking just proved, that cause of Universe is not inside the Universe. Well done, but with wrong attitude. Hawking, love your God!
Upvote
0
No, he didn't. Hawking developed a model of the universe which is self-existent and which yet has a past-finite history. What Hawking showed is that it is not inconsistent to hold that there may have been an ordinally first moment of time in a universe which has never been non-existent.
Upvote
0
Dmitri Martila
Active Member
So, inside your paganic atheism: 1) Universe always was. 2) Universe has started with singularity.
It is logical mistake. Thus, atheism is crazy.
Upvote
0
I do assert that the universe has always existed. I do not assert that the universe started with a singularity.
That latter claim seems to be based upon a very common misunderstanding of what a "singularity" is. A singularity is not an actual proposed state of the universe. A singularity is a indicative of a point where our mathematics breaks down-- most often, due to an undefined value. For example, the function
In physics, when our mathematics gives rise to such a singularity, it is an indication that our model is either incorrect or incomplete. When we encounter a mathematical singularity in physics, we are basically acknowledging that we do not understand how the system we are describing would behave under the conditions which produced the singularity-- nor are we even sure that the system could have those conditions. The Big Bang Singularity is precisely this sort of case. It's simply a point where our calculations fail, and our understanding is cut short.
Upvote
0
Ned Netterville
Newbie
- Feb 9, 2005
- 32
- 10
- 88
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
Upvote
0
Ned Netterville
Newbie
- Feb 9, 2005
- 32
- 10
- 88
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
Even if Hawking's explanation regarding the physical universe was correct, it leaves unexplained how biological life, which current science has found only on the planet Earth, evolved. It is more logical to assume that God caused the Big Bang and assume He gave biological life to the universe than to accept Hawking illogical concept of an un-caused cause.
Upvote
0
How do you figure? Since when is it "more logical" to introduce an entirely ad hoc and unfalsifiable assumption solely on the basis of our lack of knowledge? That's pretty much the very definition of the Argument from Ignorance fallacy.
Upvote
0
Ummm, because I don't believe the earth is flat, supported by pillars, with a dome over it which has stars embedded in it, stars that will one day fall to earth. That's what the bible says and means. Modern books, books written by people who understand modern cosmology, who have a decent education, do not make these mistakes. Does that clear it up?
Last edited:
Upvote
0
- Aug 4, 2013
- 5,080
- 2,544
- 76
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Eastern Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Married
This is without a doubt the stupidest thing I have ever read in my life. What point of mental failure causes a man to think that nothing -- that is, NO THING, not a single thing, a complete total void without any atomic particles, dust, or anything - can suddenly BANG! and produce things?
Idiocy. High level idiocy.
And I'm sorry I can't be more "nice" in describing my feelings about such a complete breakdown of logic and rational thought.
Upvote
0
Current science has only been able to look at other planets for life for a few years, and then only at the handful of stars in our solar system. Let's wait until we have been able to investigate a statistically significant number of stars before declaring life only exists on earth.
Upvote
0
- Aug 4, 2013
- 5,080
- 2,544
- 76
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Eastern Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Married
Black Dog, if there was God, then there was not "nothing." There was something. That "something" it turns out is a rational being capable of thought, creation, and interaction.
When I say nothing - I mean exactly that - not a thing existing anywhere, in any form, in any way. Not even God.
Hope I cleared that up.
BTW - I assume you are familiar with the first of Aquinas's Five Proofs of God - the unmovable cause. Yes?
Upvote
0
Who claimed that "nothing... can suddenly BANG! and produce things?" That's a Straw Man of Big Bang cosmology, and I don't think anyone in this thread has argued for such a proposition.
Upvote
0
OK, we can take it back a step. It is illogical to say it is more likely that an omniscient omnipresent omni.... God came into existence as opposed to atoms. But you say:
"This is without a doubt the stupidest thing I have ever read in my life. What point of mental failure causes a man to think that nothing -- that is, NO THING, not a single thing, a complete total void without any atomic particles, dust, or anything - can suddenly BANG! and produce things?
Idiocy. High level idiocy.
And I'm sorry I can't be more "nice" in describing my feelings about such a complete breakdown of logic and rational thought."
I hope you can see why your statement above makes no sense. And as Boxing Pythagoras points out, that is not what the Big Bang theory says anyways, so you are jousting at windmills.
Upvote
0
Classically, theists do not believe that God "came into existence," at all. God, they assert, is eternal.
Upvote
0
Yeah, I'm willing to bet Light of the East starts using special pleading for their God's existence.
Upvote
0
It's not necessarily special pleading. Special pleading implies that one is offering an exception to a proposition without attempting to justify that exemption. Light of the East mentioned Aquinas' Five Ways, so it seems he is familiar with attempts to justify the idea that one entity is an uncaused cause to the exception of all others.
For example, if I were to say, "The North Pole is the only place on Earth where taking a step in any direction leads directly South," I would not be making a Special Pleading fallacy. There is ample justification for the North Pole's exception to rules of directionality which are generally true elsewhere on the Earth. Similarly, there are theists who believe that they have good justification for positing God's unique eternality. I disagree with their reasoning, but that does not imply that the argument necessarily falls prey to Special Pleading.
Upvote
0
Dmitri Martila
Active Member
So it is now wise to reject God and go to hell? No. A theist is better human, than any atheist. See: our civilization is Christian one, we are dead and killed without our civilization: the pagans will not spear us. Atheists destroy our Christ. So they are bad people.
Upvote
0
I do not believe your claims that deity exists, nor that there exists some repercussion for my disbelief, nor that "our civilization is a Christian one."
Upvote
0
Similar threads
