- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,856,187
- 52,654
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
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.
That too.It's myopic because it deals with reality?
The bacteria is growing within the space of the petri dish.Most certainly.
So, you'd say a petri dish is still coming into being because there's bacteria growing inside of it?
Sounds like God-energy being transformed into other forms of energy.There is no such belief in Hinduism. In general, the universe is viewed as being eternal and cyclic.
Sounds like God-energy being transformed into other forms of energy.
Scientists agree the universe has a cause. They simply dont know what that cause is. We creationsits call that cause God. If scientists are able to find the cause they will find God.You have your cart well in front of your horse I'm afraid......before you can consider whether or not your god has a cause, you first have to demonstrate that it even exists...!
Im not the one asserting God has no cause. If, as scientists asserts, energy has no cause and God is pure energy (God-energy), then God has no cause.But regardless of that, if you assert that your god is without cause, simply because you "have no reason", then equally there is no reason that matter/energy has no cause...
Just because you have no basis doesnt mean there is none. Not all evidence must be physical, especially if God Himself is not physical.That's yet another baseless assertion....
All versions of God says God did it.Humans have "known" many things that have turned out to be completely wrong....what level of arrogance permits you to claim that your version of god is any more likely to have existed than any of the other 3000 or so that man has invented over time...?
Our deity is pure energy (God-energy), and scientists agree energy has no cause.No....I'm pointing out a very basic logical fallacy...you make the (unsubstantiated) claim that everything exists must have a cause. Having established that 'rule', you immediately violate it by then asserting that your deity is exempt...! It's a piece of self-serving special pleading.....
Well, I will admit I don't know God perfectly, but I do know He is only revealed through His Son:But of course you're not confused. You've found the answer to everything. It's everyone else who happens to think like you, but who differs on the specific theological details, that is confused.
Many scientists and evolutionists agree that reality is not limited to the physical.It's myopic because it deals with reality?That's because science is myopic.
Not knowing where a place is doesnt mean there is no place.
Indeed. And it does nothing to indicate whether the dish is forming or not.The bacteria is growing within the space of the petri dish.
Agreed. It was merely an example.According to the Big Bang model, galaxies do not develop within space like bacteria.
Note that we have an event horizon which we cannot observe past (allegedly).The galaxies and the space exist as one "rubber sheet" that is expanding from an infinitesimal point (singularity) in the distant past.
"This singularity is sometimes called "the Big Bang", but the term can also refer to the early hot, dense phase itself, which can be considered the "birth" of our Universe." - Source.
The "birth" of our Universe suggests the Universe didn't always exist.
Many scientists and evolutionists agree that reality is not limited to the physical.
In other words, many scientists and evolutionists agree that science is myopic.
Okay then -- science is blind.The fact that many scientists think science cannot answer questions it was not intended to answer does not mean that they think science is myopic. It just means that they think there are questions or claims which cannot be addressed by science, even in principle.
As I'm fond of saying, when science can build a machine that can do this:To what?
You really don't know much about DNA, do you?
FYI, you are talking to biologists. We've seen DNA. We know what a gene looks like, we have a sense of how similar or different various species are. In short, you'll have to be a bit more specific than "DNA says this".
Steady-state, I believe, and no, I wasn't implying that. I was merely pointing out the worthlessness of bare assertions.
Wait...did matter and energy always exist or was there a time before the big bang that nothing existed?
Matter and energy have existed for the whole of time. There was no 'time before the big bang that nothing existed', because if there was time then something (i.e. time itself) existed, and if nothing existed time did not exist.
To put it another way, time (or rather space-time) is as essential a part of the universe as matter and energy. One cannot have a space-time continuum without it being part of a universe. The fact that the age of the universe appears to be finite does not necessarily mean that the universe had a beginning. After all, the surface area of the Earth is finite (510 million square kilometres), but that doesn't mean that that we can fall off of the edge.
Where is your EMPIRICAL evidence for this? The Bible is not empirical evidence.
I could not find it; however I do know what OMNIPOTENCE means.Congratulation on being admitted to the typo police. You can get promoted quickly from what I post.
What is your point? You are trying show that your God is omnipotent, and I will demand you bring forth EMPIRICAL evidence for your claimOkay, let's skip omnipotence andd start with your EMPIRICAL evidence. That goes back to myu first question---where did all of the matter in the universe originate.
(that is if you know the meaning of empirical).
DUUUUH.
A book written by bronze age goat herders is irrelevant to science. I want EMPIRICAL evidence.
There is no EMPIRICAL evicence as to HOW OR when the universe came into being. We both accept what we beleive by faith alone.
So now we must use some simple logic. Do you know what logic is?
It is impossible for matter to create itself out of nothing. Therefore there must have been a cause. Now I will bring the Bible into it. I vote for God to have been the cause. Who do you vote for?
I have more EMPIRICAL evidence in the first chapter of Genesis than you do for all that the TOE praeaches.
It's myopic because it deals with reality?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?