Follower of Christ
Literal 6 Day Creationist<br />''An Evening and a
I hope you didnt misunderstand.
I said the MATH was out of ITS league.
the math may look good on paper, but it doesnt prove anything.
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.
The Question with only one answer.
- Thread starter SBfaithful
- Start date
I said the MATH was out of ITS league.
the math may look good on paper, but it doesnt prove anything.
That is where faith comes into play. God is everything. Science relies on facts the Bible relies on faith.
Provide the facts and I will provide the faith. JK
Upvote
0
The only way that nothing could include God is if God was nothing. Which is a bit of a contradiction, I would think.
Upvote
0
Sorry FoC
It is out of my league.
I never took much interest in math.
I don't see how it could prove anything.
It is out of my league.
I never took much interest in math.
I don't see how it could prove anything.
Upvote
0
Follower of Christ
Literal 6 Day Creationist<br />''An Evening and a
Obviously for God to exist when there is nothing, it must be inferred as nothing physical.
"we not considering the things seen, but the things not being seen; for the things being seen are not lasting, but the things not being seen are everlasting. "
(2 Corinthians 4:18 LITV)
Upvote
0
Heh, I have a semi complex caculator program on my computer and I just put in stuff till it equaled 0. 
But really, the math doesnt matter, just the fact that that long thing says the same as Zero. So the universe could be two really huge equations that end up equaling zero. Since energy cant be created or destroyed, only changed. Having a balanced amount of energy come from zero energy doesnt violate the laws of thermodynamics (I dont believe)
As I mentioned, im not too versed in the most resent info on the big bang, however the idea is that at some point around 15 (or is it 13 i can never remember) billion years ago, the big bang went all bangy. But it really wasnt an explosion but more like an expansion. One interesting thing is that at the very begining of the big bang current physics break down. So as far as we can tell, Anything was possible. Also since the big bang also created time (well, spaceTime) even if the big bang has a very low chance of ever happening, it also had an infinite amount of time to happen.
But really, the math doesnt matter, just the fact that that long thing says the same as Zero. So the universe could be two really huge equations that end up equaling zero. Since energy cant be created or destroyed, only changed. Having a balanced amount of energy come from zero energy doesnt violate the laws of thermodynamics (I dont believe)
As I mentioned, im not too versed in the most resent info on the big bang, however the idea is that at some point around 15 (or is it 13 i can never remember) billion years ago, the big bang went all bangy. But it really wasnt an explosion but more like an expansion. One interesting thing is that at the very begining of the big bang current physics break down. So as far as we can tell, Anything was possible. Also since the big bang also created time (well, spaceTime) even if the big bang has a very low chance of ever happening, it also had an infinite amount of time to happen.
Upvote
0
What went all bangy?2nd April 2003 at 06:33 AM Arikay said this in Post #26
Heh, I have a semi complex caculator program on my computer and I just put in stuff till it equaled 0.
But really, the math doesnt matter, just the fact that that long thing says the same as Zero. So the universe could be two really huge equations that end up equaling zero. Since energy cant be created or destroyed, only changed. Having a balanced amount of energy come from zero energy doesnt violate the laws of thermodynamics (I dont believe)
As I mentioned, im not too versed in the most resent info on the big bang, however the idea is that at some point around 15 (or is it 13 i can never remember) billion years ago, the big bang went all bangy. But it really wasnt an explosion but more like an expansion. One interesting thing is that at the very begining of the big bang current physics break down. So as far as we can tell, Anything was possible. Also since the big bang also created time (well, spaceTime) even if the big bang has a very low chance of ever happening, it also had an infinite amount of time to happen.
What was expanded?
Questions I think there are no answers for.
Upvote
0
The Websters Dictionary plant explodes.
In the course of this explosion all the debris that falls from the sky just so happens to land on the ground and produce the 2004 Websters dictionary.
Page by page
Letter by letter
No mistakes.
Given an infinite amount of time and explosions of course could this happen?
I think not.
How did the Big Bang get it so perfect on the first bang.
Or was it the first bang?
In the course of this explosion all the debris that falls from the sky just so happens to land on the ground and produce the 2004 Websters dictionary.
Page by page
Letter by letter
No mistakes.
Given an infinite amount of time and explosions of course could this happen?
I think not.
How did the Big Bang get it so perfect on the first bang.
Or was it the first bang?
Upvote
0
Unfortunatly im not sure, but there are scientists here who could probably tell you what the theory is.
One thing to remember is that lack of knowledge is not the place for god. Just because we dont understand, doesnt mean that god did it.
We didnt understand why lighting happend. So we said god did it.
We then found out what makes lighting.
We didnt understand why animals are like they are, so we said god did it.
We then found out about evolution.
We didnt understand where life came from, so we say god did it.
However, there are current hypothesis that might know (abiogenesis).
We didnt understand how the universe started, so we said god did it.
We then found out about the big bang.
There is a very big problem with putting god in science. Eventually he will get pushed out.
Scientifically the best place for god is Before the big bang. Even if we could show how the big bang happend, since we Cant measure anything before the big bang (as it created everything we see and can measure) then its (currently) impossible to say god couldnt have done it.
One thing to remember is that lack of knowledge is not the place for god. Just because we dont understand, doesnt mean that god did it.
We didnt understand why lighting happend. So we said god did it.
We then found out what makes lighting.
We didnt understand why animals are like they are, so we said god did it.
We then found out about evolution.
We didnt understand where life came from, so we say god did it.
However, there are current hypothesis that might know (abiogenesis).
We didnt understand how the universe started, so we said god did it.
We then found out about the big bang.
There is a very big problem with putting god in science. Eventually he will get pushed out.
Scientifically the best place for god is Before the big bang. Even if we could show how the big bang happend, since we Cant measure anything before the big bang (as it created everything we see and can measure) then its (currently) impossible to say god couldnt have done it.
Upvote
0
Unfortunatly thats not a good analogy. For two basic reasons (well im sure for more, but I can currently think of two )
1) The explosion of the plant is not a good example of the big bang. As it wasnt an explosion in the normal sense.
2) It assumes that the big bangs goal was Humans and everything as we see it. However we just happend to come about as the universe grew up. The universe seems to be geared towards life, however its not geared dirrectly towards us, it just ended up that way as time went along.
Another thing,
Given an infinite amount of time and explosions it could happen.
)1) The explosion of the plant is not a good example of the big bang. As it wasnt an explosion in the normal sense.
2) It assumes that the big bangs goal was Humans and everything as we see it. However we just happend to come about as the universe grew up. The universe seems to be geared towards life, however its not geared dirrectly towards us, it just ended up that way as time went along.
Another thing,
Given an infinite amount of time and explosions it could happen.
Upvote
0
Implosion, Explosion, whatever it was it did not come into existence from nothing.
Exodus 3:14
And God said unto Moses, "I am that I am."...(KJV)
Exodus 3:14
And God said unto Moses, "I am that I am."...(KJV)
Upvote
0
Well it was neither. as I mentioned its easier to think of it as an odd type of expansion.
The problem is that you are making an assumption. You are assuming it did not come into existence from nothing. But we dont know that.
The problem is that you are making an assumption. You are assuming it did not come into existence from nothing. But we dont know that.
Upvote
0
Yep, Faith is the biggest assumption.
With science, there is evidence that support the theory. There is plenty of evidence for the big Bang, and none for god (and none for the lack of god as well).
Believing in faith is the biggest assumption anyone can make.
(one thing to note, im not christian, but I do believe in faith, so dont think im saying its a bad thing, just something that cant compare to science, because its completly different).
With science, there is evidence that support the theory. There is plenty of evidence for the big Bang, and none for god (and none for the lack of god as well).
Believing in faith is the biggest assumption anyone can make.
(one thing to note, im not christian, but I do believe in faith, so dont think im saying its a bad thing, just something that cant compare to science, because its completly different).
Upvote
0
Faith has to be based on assumptions.
The Big Bang is also based on faith.
It is not fact.
I noted earlier that if all the answers were laid out before us there would be no reason for faith in God.
It would be fact.
I asume that the Bible is true and correct.
No one has proven that wrong yet.
For every study that shows one thing.
I will provide the study that shows the other.
The Big Bang is also based on faith.
It is not fact.
I noted earlier that if all the answers were laid out before us there would be no reason for faith in God.
It would be fact.
I asume that the Bible is true and correct.
No one has proven that wrong yet.
For every study that shows one thing.
I will provide the study that shows the other.
Upvote
0
You were there?
Is this a fact.
Please, provide evidence.
Upvote
0
The difference is that there is more evidence for the big bang than there is for god.
Well, you assume that the bible is true, but its been shown that at the very least, genesis is not a literal account of creation or of the flood, etc.
So, do you believe that everytime a lightning bolt strikes, its god doing it?
As I said before, its dangerous to put god inside science, as science moves on, but the bible doesnt. So god slowly gets squeezed out of science. Lighting and earth quake gods got squeezed out by science. Just like the literal interpretation of the bible.
Well, you assume that the bible is true, but its been shown that at the very least, genesis is not a literal account of creation or of the flood, etc.
So, do you believe that everytime a lightning bolt strikes, its god doing it?
As I said before, its dangerous to put god inside science, as science moves on, but the bible doesnt. So god slowly gets squeezed out of science. Lighting and earth quake gods got squeezed out by science. Just like the literal interpretation of the bible.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
