• 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.

Does 'Goddidit' constitute an explanation?

Status
Not open for further replies.

3sigma

Well-Known Member
Jan 9, 2008
2,339
72
✟3,007.00
Faith
Atheist
No you can't prove that physical empirical evidence is the only way to prove that something exists. If you can't prove it why is that your position?
Because until you can show me non-empirical, sound, objective evidence that can be used to verify the existence of something then empirical evidence is all I can use. You ignored my question in that previous post. Can you show me any such non-empirical, sound, objective evidence? If you can then I will use it. In particular, can you show me any sound, objective evidence—empirical or non-empirical—supporting the claims that your God, heaven, hell, angels, or Satan are real or that you will have eternal life?

To get this thread back on track, can you or any other Christian provide a single instance, ever, where “God did it” has been tested and verified as the true explanation for anything at all?
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,187
52,654
Guam
✟5,151,331.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
To get this thread back on track, can you or any other Christian provide a single instance, ever, where “God did it” has been tested and verified as the true explanation for anything at all?
I assume you mean after the Scientific Method was invented in what, the 18th century?

Are you kidding?
 
Upvote 0

sandwiches

Mas sabe el diablo por viejo que por diablo.
Jun 16, 2009
6,104
124
46
Dallas, Texas
✟29,530.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
I assume you mean after the Scientific Method was invented in what, the 18th century?

Are you kidding?

What's wrong with asking for modern, independent lines of verification?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

BananaSlug

Life is an experiment, experience it!
Aug 26, 2005
2,454
106
41
In a House
✟25,782.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Then you are disagreeing with Consensus cosmology, and not with me. They are the ones who consider such connections to be "anomalous".

I'm not disagreeing with the current understanding of our universe.

That’s not what disproves it.
Consensus Cosmology is of the view that two objects that are billions of light years apart should not be connected.

I did not realize that those images you provided was showing connected objects that are billions of light years apart. Could you provide a link?

“Flying apart” may explain the difference in redshift, but it does not explain the connection.I agree with the “shot out” part, but I don’t agree with the “dark energy” part.

Flying apart explains the difference in redshift. It could be the "elasticity" of the dark matter structure that allows the visible matter of the galaxies to remain connected for a while.

Dark energy is hypothetical, there is no evidence for it other than assumption, so I don’t believe it does anything unless it can be empirically verified that it does.

The evidence for dark energy is the fact that the universe is speeding up in its expansion. The assumption was that eventually the collective gravity of the universe would start to slow expansion or even reverse it. "Dark energy" is an explanation as to why the universe is acting in a manner that contradicts our understanding of gravity. I agree that dark energy is a hypothetical, yet it is still the best explanation as to why.

Electrical discharge can be empirically verified, and does stuff, and would likely be the cause of the “shot out”, since galaxies are electrically driven, as was illustrated before.

You mean that illustration that was created using "mathemagic"?

Objects are “shot out” from galaxies similar to how mass is ejected from the sun during coronal mass ejection – Electrical discharge.
Are you aware that it is Consensus Cosmology that considers it to be “anomalous”, and not me? So it would seem like you are disagreeing with them, since you have an explanation and they don’t.

The question I would think would need to be answered is why are galaxies flying apart in such a manner?

We are in agreement here on the most part, except for the “dark energy” stuff.

Dark energy is just the best explanation at the moment. Once we find out what it is, I hope the name will be changed.

What you are missing is that “two objects separating” is not what disproves it. It is the connection of those two objects that disproves it.

In Consensus Cosmology, two objects that are billions of light years apart being connected is considered to be impossible.

Again, could you provide a link that says the "anomalous" objects are billions of light years apart?

In Plasma Cosmology, all galaxies in the Universe are electrically linked through electrified Cosmic Plasma, similar to how all planets in our solar system are electrically linked to the sun.

So how would plasma cosmology explain Einsteins theory of general relativity and the fact we can observe gravitational lensing?

All Planets are electrically linked to Stars, All Stars are electrically linked to Galaxies, and All Galaxies are electrically linked through Cosmic Plasma, which makes up more than 99% of the Universe, the Electric Universe.

If this cosmic plasma existed, could you propose a way we could observe it? What would we have to look for.

In addition: Redshift:

"Halton C. Arp is a professional astronomer who, earlier in his career, was Edwin Hubble's assistant. He earned the Helen B.Warner prize, the Newcomb Cleveland award and the Alexander von Humboldt Senior Scientist Award. For years he worked at the Mt.Palomar and Mt.Wilson observatories. While there, he developed his well known catalog of "Peculiar Galaxies" that are misshapen or irregular in appearance...

Arp believes that the observed redshift value of any object is made up of two components: the inherent component and the velocity component. The velocity component is the only one recognized by mainstream astronomers. The inherent redshift is a property of the matter in the object. It apparently changes over time in discrete steps.

He suggests that quasars are typically emitted from their parent galaxies with inherent redshift values of up to z = 2. They continue to move away, with stepwise decreasing inherent redshift. Often, when the inherent redshift value gets down to around z = 0.3, the quasar starts to look like a small galaxy or BL Lac object and begins to fall back, with still decreasing redshift values, toward its parent. He has photos and diagrams of many such family groupings.

Any additional redshift (over and above its inherent value) is indeed indicative of the object's velocity. But the inherent part is an indication of the object's youth and usually makes up the larger fraction of a quasar's total redshift.
"

I still cannot see how this disproves the Big Bang.

Arp originally proposed his theories in the 1960s, however, telescopes and astronomical instrumentation have advanced greatly; the Hubble Space Telescope was launched, multiple 8-10 meter telescopes (such as those at Keck Observatory) have become operational, and detectors such as CCDs are now more widely employed. These new telescopes and new instrumentation have been utilized to examine QSOs further. QSOs are now generally accepted to be very distant galaxies with high redshifts. Moreover, many imaging surveys, most notably the Hubble Deep Field, have found many high-redshift objects that are not QSOs but that appear to be normal galaxies like those found nearby.[5] Moreover, the spectra of the high-redshift galaxies, as seen from X-ray to radio wavelengths, match the spectra of nearby galaxies (particularly galaxies with high levels of star formation activity but also galaxies with normal or extinguished star formation activity) when corrected for redshift effects.[6][7][8]

This explains why objects of two different redshifts are seen to be connected. One is the baby quasar (higher redshift), and the other is the parent galaxy (lower redshift). The baby quasar was "shot out" or ejected from the core of the parent galaxy.

I have no problem with that.
images
images
1080.jpg


As the quasar speeds away by the ejection, a plasma tail trails behind that connects it to its parent galaxy. Eventually the quasar slows down, settles, and cools, becoming a part of a galaxy cluster family. This is how galaxies are born.

So you believe it is the electrostatic force that holds galaxies together? If so, what predictions could you make as to what we would find if this were true?

Mr. Arp’s scientific observations did not go down well with the Big Bang theologians. His scientific observations did not fit their religious belief in the Big Bang model, so he was subsequently excommunicated from among the Consensus.

Arp's hypothesis that quasars are local and contain large intrinsic redshifts has never gained any significant support in the astronomy research community. Arp's work is based on a limited number of specific quasar-galaxy associations. Most astronomers believe these associations are simply the result of chance and point to the hundreds of thousands of quasars documented in more recent redshift surveys. These surveys show quasars to be distributed randomly over the sky, rather than associated with radio galaxies[citation needed]. Furthermore, there is now a detailed model of quasars as the ultraluminous cores of active galactic nuclei, effectively the centers of Seyfert galaxies. This model is consistent with the results of more sensitive observations which have been able to resolve host galaxies around quasars with the same redshift as the quasar. The consistency of the standard quasar model with the assumption that all quasars are at cosmological distances leads most astronomers to apply an Ockham's razor conclusion that intrinsic redshifts do not exist.

I told you earlier that galaxies are not held together or driven by gravity, it’s done by electromagnetism, which is 1000, billion, billion, billion, billion times more powerful than gravity. The infinitely weak force of gravity is secondary to the infinitely powerful force of electromagnetism.

So what evidence would we find of this?

It is the flawed Big Bang model that requires so much non-existent gravity. This is why they have to make up hypothetical dark stuff to account for what they consider to be missing. There is nothing missing. It’s all electromagnetism.
Electromagnetic force move things around. It has been empirically verified to do so in the lab. Dark matter and dark energy has not.

So electromagnetism causes galaxies to appear to have more gravity than the really have? Is it electromagnetism that keeps us on the earth? Is it electromagnetism that causes gravitational lensing?
 
Upvote 0

kenblaster5000

Regular Member
Feb 5, 2007
1,942
102
Las Vegas NV
✟17,740.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Because until you can show me non-empirical, sound, objective evidence that can be used to verify the existence of something then empirical evidence is all I can use. You ignored my question in that previous post. Can you show me any such non-empirical, sound, objective evidence? If you can then I will use it. In particular, can you show me any sound, objective evidence—empirical or non-empirical—supporting the claims that your God, heaven, hell, angels, or Satan are real or that you will have eternal life?

To get this thread back on track, can you or any other Christian provide a single instance, ever, where “God did it” has been tested and verified as the true explanation for anything at all?

We always have to show you God. It is alot easier to help someone who will try to help himself.

Hebrews 11:6

But without faith it is impossible to please Him: for he that cometh to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of them that "diligently" seek Him.
 
Upvote 0

sandwiches

Mas sabe el diablo por viejo que por diablo.
Jun 16, 2009
6,104
124
46
Dallas, Texas
✟29,530.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
We always have to show you God. It is alot easier to help someone who will try to help himself.

Hebrews 11:6

But without faith it is impossible to please Him: for he that cometh to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of them that "diligently" seek Him.

It's fine if you think we need faith see or experience God. However, that's exactly 3sigma's point. That there is no independently verifiable evidence of a deity regardless of belief.
 
Upvote 0

dawiyd

Veteran
Apr 2, 2006
1,753
123
✟2,566.00
Faith
Judaism
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
Hebrews 11:1

Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

If any of you were sincere and diligent enough to seek after Him, He would be faithful to His word and meet you there.

Christianity and NT definitions seem pretty big on faith as things "hoped for" but yet, these don't inspire any confidence.
 
Upvote 0

BananaSlug

Life is an experiment, experience it!
Aug 26, 2005
2,454
106
41
In a House
✟25,782.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Hebrews 11:1

Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

If any of you were sincere and diligent enough to seek after Him, He would be faithful to His word and meet you there.

15 For He says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion.” 16 So then it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy. Romans 9:15-16

18 Therefore He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens. 19 You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who has resisted His will?” 20 But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, “Why have you made me like this?” 21 Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor? Romans 9:18-21

It doesn't matter how diligent we are, it doesn't matter how sincere we are. God will have compassion on whomever he wants and he will harden whoever he wants. We have no choice in the matter.
 
Upvote 0

kenblaster5000

Regular Member
Feb 5, 2007
1,942
102
Las Vegas NV
✟17,740.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
I am more than a champ:

Romans 8:37-39

37. Nay, in all things we are more than conquerors through Him that loved us.

38. For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,

39. Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,187
52,654
Guam
✟5,151,331.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
What's wrong with asking for modern, independent lines of verification?
Well, as the saying goes, "You would have had to have been there."

Fact of the matter is though, God picked you to be born in this dispensation, not the last one, so you're gonna have to use your faith, not your eyes.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,187
52,654
Guam
✟5,151,331.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
You guys sound smart. I bet your mommies are very proud of you.
I've seen some mommies and daddies stick their kids on a church bus so the church could "baby sit" them for a couple hours each week.

It's sad, but that really breaks my heart when I see kids attend church w/o their parents.
 
Upvote 0

kenblaster5000

Regular Member
Feb 5, 2007
1,942
102
Las Vegas NV
✟17,740.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
15 For He says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion.” 16 So then it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy. Romans 9:15-16

18 Therefore He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens. 19 You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who has resisted His will?” 20 But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, “Why have you made me like this?” 21 Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor? Romans 9:18-21

It doesn't matter how diligent we are, it doesn't matter how sincere we are. God will have compassion on whomever he wants and he will harden whoever he wants. We have no choice in the matter.

Ezekiel 11:18-21

18. And they shall come thither, and they shall take away all the detestable things thereof and all the abominations thereof from thence.
19. and I will give them one heart, and I will put a new spirit within you; and I will take the stony heart out of their flesh, and will give them an heart of flesh:
20. That they may walk in my statutes, and keep mine ordinances, and do them: and they shall be my people, and I will be their God.
21. But as for them whose heart walketh after the heart of their detestable things and their abominations, I will recompense their way upon their own heads, saith the Lord God.
 
Upvote 0

BananaSlug

Life is an experiment, experience it!
Aug 26, 2005
2,454
106
41
In a House
✟25,782.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Ezekiel 11:18-21

18. And they shall come thither, and they shall take away all the detestable things thereof and all the abominations thereof from thence.
19. and I will give them one heart, and I will put a new spirit within you; and I will take the stony heart out of their flesh, and will give them an heart of flesh:
20. That they may walk in my statutes, and keep mine ordinances, and do them: and they shall be my people, and I will be their God.
21. But as for them whose heart walketh after the heart of their detestable things and their abominations, I will recompense their way upon their own heads, saith the Lord God.

NT>OT. We have no choice in the matter, unless you want to explain why you believe Paul was lying.
 
Upvote 0

kenblaster5000

Regular Member
Feb 5, 2007
1,942
102
Las Vegas NV
✟17,740.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
I've seen some mommies and daddies stick their kids on a church bus so the church could "baby sit" them for a couple hours each week.

It's sad, but that really breaks my heart when I see kids attend church w/o their parents.

Parents can do some silly things out of uneducated fear of the Lord. Fear of the Lord is good, but when people fear Him without the knowledge of Him, then you have parents having them baptized because of their conscience, thinking the children are going to go to heaven. That is not the case. Many people die from a lack of knowledge. I have asked my daughter for instance if she accepts Jesus Christ into her heart. It is important to ask Him in and to confess Him.

Sometimes parents have to do what they can at the time to make ends meet. At least those children will have a chance to get to know about the Lord, provided it isn't Jehovah's Witness or Mormon.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.