Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 124 (8774 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 07-23-2017 2:50 AM
366 online now:
Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus), NoNukes, PaulK, Rrhain, vimesey (5 members, 361 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Tom Larkin
Happy Birthday: anglagard
Post Volume:
Total: 814,419 Year: 19,025/21,208 Month: 1,784/3,111 Week: 5/574 Day: 5/38 Hour: 1/3

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
4142
43
444546Next
Author Topic:   ICANT'S position in the creation debate
Izanagi
Member (Idle past 2686 days)
Posts: 263
Joined: 09-15-2009


Message 631 of 687 (526565)
09-28-2009 11:39 AM
Reply to: Message 630 by ICANT
09-28-2009 11:25 AM


Re: space and time
ICANT writes:

Second the creator of the universe is not subject to the rules He made.
Third since He is not of this universe He is not bound by the laws He wrote for this universe.


Then why not remake the Universe. After Adam and Eve ate the apple, why not just start from scratch again and create two people who will obey when God says don't eat the apple from the tree of knowledge?

The standard answer is that doing that would be a violation of free will. But if, as you say, God is not subject to God's own laws, then God can break the rule of free will whenever God wants. If God is not subject to God's own rules, then God's promises aren't really worth anything, are they? After all, promises are just self-imposed rules one makes to do or not do something.

Why hasn't God created a better world with more obedient followers and why should God's promises have any weight at all if God is not subject to God's own rules and laws?

And don't tell me God has a plan, because if God is omnipotent, God can definitely create a world better than ours. If you do argue that this is the best world God can imagine, then tell me what does having babies die, women raped, people murdered in the most gruesome ways possible, losing a cherished family - tell me how all the pain and suffering in this world fit into God's grand plan?

Edited by Izanagi, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 630 by ICANT, posted 09-28-2009 11:25 AM ICANT has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 633 by ICANT, posted 09-28-2009 12:53 PM Izanagi has responded

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 5625
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 632 of 687 (526573)
09-28-2009 12:29 PM
Reply to: Message 616 by Modulous
09-24-2009 8:53 PM


Re: Light
Hi Mod,

Modulous writes:

I was talking about measuring the speed of light when one is travelling at some speed.

Yes, from a earth traveling at 67,108 mph.

Not taking into consideration the earth is moving with the sun at 560,000 mph as they journey around the milkyway as the milkyway journeys toward the great attractor at 1.3 million mph add in expansion and we are traveling 1.9 million mph sitting in the chair in front of our computer.

So all I wanted to know was how we measure the speed of the signal leaving the spaceship which is traveling at 150,000 km/s headed towards earth.

How do we determine the speed the signal is traveling away from the ship to be 300,000 km/s?

Modulous writes:

Do you know of an experiment which has measured the speed of light leaving us? If not, how can you say that reality proves this as false?

We provided a thought experiment earlier in our conversation.

The one where I was going the speed of light and you were one second behind me and turned on your light. I was traveling at 300,000 km/s and the light was one second behind me at 300,000 km/s.

You said the light could never catch me. Are you now changing your mind?

If it can't catch me from behind it can't run off and leave me if you are sitting right beside me either.

Unless you have an explanation of how it can.

God Bless,


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
This message is a reply to:
 Message 616 by Modulous, posted 09-24-2009 8:53 PM Modulous has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 634 by Modulous, posted 09-28-2009 1:50 PM ICANT has responded

    
ICANT
Member
Posts: 5625
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 633 of 687 (526577)
09-28-2009 12:53 PM
Reply to: Message 631 by Izanagi
09-28-2009 11:39 AM


Re: remake the universe
Hi Izanagi,

Izanagi writes:

Then why not remake the Universe. After Adam and Eve ate the apple, why not just start from scratch again and create two people who will obey when God says don't eat the apple from the tree of knowledge?

He did remake the earth after the first man and woman ate the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

You find that account recorded in Genesis 1:2 through Genesis 2:3.

Izanagi writes:

The standard answer is that doing that would be a violation of free will.

When God created man in His image in Genesis 1:27 He left free will intact. Man still chooses what he does or does not do.

Izanagi writes:

Why hasn't God created a better world with more obedient followers

God didn't mess the world up. Man did that by the choices he has made. God created a perfect universe in Genesis 1:1.

The only way He could make you more obedient is to take away your free will. Which He will not do.

Izanagi writes:

And don't tell me God has a plan,

No God does not have a plan.

God stands at the beginning and views the end as is satisfied with the results.

Izanagi writes:

God can definitely create a world better than ours. If you do argue that this is the best world God can imagine

Sure He can and did. God created a perfect universe man messed things up.

But God will create the universe you think He should have already created. It will be inhabited by people from this universe that chose to believe in Him and trust Him and follow Him.

In that universe there will be no pain, sickness, death, sorrow, and no one who has not accepted God's offer of a free full pardon.

Izanagi writes:

then tell me what does having babies die, women raped, people murdered in the most gruesome ways possible, losing a cherished family - tell me how all the pain and suffering in this world fit into God's grand plan?

As I said God does not have a plan.

All the things you talk about are inflicted by mankind not God.

God Bless,


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
This message is a reply to:
 Message 631 by Izanagi, posted 09-28-2009 11:39 AM Izanagi has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 639 by Izanagi, posted 09-29-2009 12:38 AM ICANT has not yet responded
 Message 662 by caldron68, posted 09-30-2009 9:57 PM ICANT has not yet responded

    
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7410
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 634 of 687 (526588)
09-28-2009 1:50 PM
Reply to: Message 632 by ICANT
09-28-2009 12:29 PM


ICANT's position, please answer the questions about it
Yes, from a earth traveling at 67,108 mph.

No, that is only one possibility. I was talking generally, so that includes the above but also includes to the earth which is travelling at speed.

So all I wanted to know was how we measure the speed of the signal leaving the spaceship which is traveling at 150,000 km/s headed towards earth.

There is no such spaceship that I am aware of. I'm just talking about the light coming from nearby stars. And further, could you please explain to me why the methodology is of importance to this discussion?

We provided a thought experiment earlier in our conversation.

The one where I was going the speed of light and you were one second behind me and turned on your light. I was traveling at 300,000 km/s and the light was one second behind me at 300,000 km/s.

You said the light could never catch me. Are you now changing your mind?

You should specify what you are talking about since numerous experiments, thought and otherwise have been discussed. You did not answer the question, however, about how reality proves it as false.

But yes, the light would never catch up to you. I am not changing my mind.

If it can't catch me from behind it can't run off and leave me if you are sitting right beside me either.

Unless you have an explanation of how it can.

As I said several times, travelling at the speed of light is an important special case that is not relevant to what I am trying to ask you about. We can come back to your questions after we have addressed something a little more basic first:

If we were travelling towards a star at 30 km/s and we measure the light travelling towards us from that star as being exactly the same speed as when we measure it as we travel away from a star at 30km/s...do you agree that this leads to all the unusual effects highlighted in the thought experiments that I described? If so, how do you account for them? Who is right in their observations? Why?

Remember, this thread is about ICANT's position, not mine. So don't counter with questions about my position. Just answer the questions I am asking because they will help clarify what your position actually is for me.

Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 632 by ICANT, posted 09-28-2009 12:29 PM ICANT has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 636 by ICANT, posted 09-28-2009 7:14 PM Modulous has responded

    
onifre
Member (Idle past 420 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 635 of 687 (526606)
09-28-2009 4:40 PM
Reply to: Message 629 by ICANT
09-28-2009 10:43 AM


Re: be honest
Are you saying your evidence for the origin of the universe is the BBT?

No, it is not the origin because, as you have been told 1000 times before, there is no reason to conclude that the universe began from nothing. You are the only one asserting that there needs to be an origin or a beginning, this is your assertion and it continues to be wrong.

In the beginning the heavens and the earth were not "created," in the beginning the earth was not formed. Why do you keep evading these two points? Are you just being stubborn?

This is YOUR thread, YOU asked the question.

"Show me the scientific evidence AGAINST Gen 1:1 and Gen 2:7, that is all you asked. The BB covers "heaven and the earth being created" by showing that it wasn't "created" from nothingness and the earth wasn't form at the BB. Period. Thats what you asked for, why are you evading these points?

This has nothing to do with the origin of the universe, your thread is in reference to Gen 1:1 and Gen 2:7 and the scientific evidence against it.

The Bible in Genesis 2:7 says God imparted life to man first.

Do you have a better explanation of how life began to exist on earth?

Wtf are you talking about ICANT?

All I have to give you evidence for is man not being the first species, why are you evading that point?

Man evoled just like every other species, show me evidence for man being the first species. Are you actually saying that science hasn't shown that man was not the first species on earth?

All you asked is fior the evidence AGAINST Gen 2:7, all I have to show you is the evidence that man was not the first species, period. You're playing all these other bullshit games just to avoid dealing with that point. Man was not the first species on eath, Gen 2:7 is disproven.

Your evading these points and looking like an asshole in the process.

You call yourself an honest man and yet have not been honest in this debate...Oh the shame...

- Oni


This message is a reply to:
 Message 629 by ICANT, posted 09-28-2009 10:43 AM ICANT has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 637 by ICANT, posted 09-28-2009 8:27 PM onifre has responded

    
ICANT
Member
Posts: 5625
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 636 of 687 (526621)
09-28-2009 7:14 PM
Reply to: Message 634 by Modulous
09-28-2009 1:50 PM


Re: ICANT's position, please answer the questions about it
Hi Mod,

Modulous writes:

I am asking because they will help clarify what your position actually is for me.

I can clarify my position for you. I don't have one yet.

I am working on it that is the reason I keep asking the dumb questions I ask.

From what I have read there are those who belive light has no speed limit. Some believe it is constant to the backbody of the universe. Some believe it is relative to each frame viewing it.

At the moment I would lean toward the speed of light being constant relative to the universe.

God Bless,


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
This message is a reply to:
 Message 634 by Modulous, posted 09-28-2009 1:50 PM Modulous has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 644 by Modulous, posted 09-29-2009 6:26 AM ICANT has not yet responded

    
ICANT
Member
Posts: 5625
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 637 of 687 (526629)
09-28-2009 8:27 PM
Reply to: Message 635 by onifre
09-28-2009 4:40 PM


Re: Life
Hi oni,

onifre writes:

Man evoled just like every other species, show me evidence for man being the first species. Are you actually saying that science hasn't shown that man was not the first species on earth?

Since science does not know how the universe began to exist. Science has no way of knowing when the universe began to exist.

You say we can deduce from cosmology that the universe is 13.7 billion years old.

Actually that is only as far as man can see.

In the message you are replying to I asked you:

Me writes:

It would be great if you could produce the scientific evidence of how life began to exist on earth, so you would have something to evolve.

If you can't do that then, Would you please present your scientific evidence including the immediate common ancestor of the great ape and man?

Since science does not know how life began to exist, how can science say what that life form was or when that first life began to exist.

You do remember my position is that the universe has always existed in some form. Just not necessarily as you see it today. It could have been melted down and remodeled thousands of times.

The Bible tells me it was created 1 time in Genesis 1:1 which took place in the beginning. If I go with my Hebrew teachers translation of the word translated beginning as beginnings. That would cover as many beginnings as there was.

The Bible then tells me there was a remodeling job that took place in Genesis 1:2 - Genesis 2:3.
2 Peter 3:10-13 tells me it is going to melt one more time, and there is going to be a new heaven and earth.

So your assertions does not mean anything except they are your opinions. Which you are welcome to have.

God Bless,


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
This message is a reply to:
 Message 635 by onifre, posted 09-28-2009 4:40 PM onifre has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 638 by onifre, posted 09-28-2009 8:45 PM ICANT has not yet responded

    
onifre
Member (Idle past 420 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 638 of 687 (526636)
09-28-2009 8:45 PM
Reply to: Message 637 by ICANT
09-28-2009 8:27 PM


Re: Life
Hi ICANT,

Since science does not know how the universe began to exist.

We can end this easy, show me the evidence that the universe had to begin to exist.

Since science does not know how life began to exist, how can science say what that life form was or when that first life began to exist.

No, that's not how this goes, ICANT. That's you being evasive.

YOUR thread is about showing you the evidence, period.

Science has plenty of evidence to show you that man was not the first species on this planet. Whether you agree with that evidence or not is irrelevant. Your point in your OP was for someone to show you the evidence.

You are not qualified to judge the veracity of the evidence because you, ICANT, are not a scientist. Therefore, whatever you may think about it doesn't matter.

Gen 1:1 "In the beginning god created the heavens and the earth"

- According to the scientific evidence: Neither a moment of "beginning" from nothing to something took place, nor was the earth made at the moment of the BB.

That's the scientific evidence you asked for, whether you agree with it or not.

Gen 2:7 "And the LORD God formed man [of] the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul."

- According to the scientific evidence: The first life forms on earth were single celled organisms, not humans.

- According to the scientific evidence: Humans are not formed from dirt, humans are formed by the process of reproduction.

That's the scientific evidence you asked for, whether you agree with it or not.

So your assertions does not mean anything except they are your opinions. Which you are welcome to have.

As are you welcome to them as well. But I'm just focused on your questions in your OP, not questions about the orgin of the universe (which is your assertion that the universe needs a beginning) nor am I interested in questions about the origin of life. Your OP doesn't ask any of that. It simply asks for the scientific evidence in regards to - AND ONLY IN REGARDS TO - Gen 1:1 and Gen 2:7.

- Oni


This message is a reply to:
 Message 637 by ICANT, posted 09-28-2009 8:27 PM ICANT has not yet responded

    
Izanagi
Member (Idle past 2686 days)
Posts: 263
Joined: 09-15-2009


Message 639 of 687 (526664)
09-29-2009 12:38 AM
Reply to: Message 633 by ICANT
09-28-2009 12:53 PM


Re: remake the universe
ICANT writes:

He did remake the earth after the first man and woman ate the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

You find that account recorded in Genesis 1:2 through Genesis 2:3.


You didn't answer my question. I asked why God didn't just simply create another Adam and another Eve. An Adam and Eve v.1.1, if you will. And also, God did not recreate the world. God kicked Adam and Eve out of the Garden of Eden and punished them for eating the apple. If I'm wrong, show me the passage where it says God recreated everything after Adam and Eve ate the apple.

ICANT writes:

God didn't mess the world up. Man did that by the choices he has made. God created a perfect universe in Genesis 1:1.

The only way He could make you more obedient is to take away your free will. Which He will not do.


Why not? God sees the suffering of the people in the world. If God is a good god, and if part of being being good means doing something to ease the suffering of others, then God could easily just wave a hand and create a world with no suffering. God could easily create humans who make the right choice all the time, right? So why not just start over and create humans who always make the right choice?

You say God will not take away free will. Why? What is it about free will that prevents God from taking it away?

ICANT writes:

No God does not have a plan.

God stands at the beginning and views the end as is satisfied with the results.


Then I am wholly unimpressed by your God. Once again, tell me why God does nothing to eliminate the suffering of the people God created. If you argue that God won't take away free will, tell me for what reasons God won't take away free will.

ICANT writes:

Sure He can and did. God created a perfect universe man messed things up.

But God will create the universe you think He should have already created. It will be inhabited by people from this universe that chose to believe in Him and trust Him and follow Him.

In that universe there will be no pain, sickness, death, sorrow, and no one who has not accepted God's offer of a free full pardon.


Then why doesn't God do that now? We know God has no problem wiping out vast populations of people who sin, free will be damned. Why not wave a hand and create that world now?

ICANT writes:

All the things you talk about are inflicted by mankind not God.


Then why hasn't God remade man into something better, a human v.2? God can do it, so what is stopping God? Is God so sadistic that the sight of people in pain and suffering is pleasurable?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 633 by ICANT, posted 09-28-2009 12:53 PM ICANT has not yet responded

  
Guiri
Junior Member (Idle past 2762 days)
Posts: 10
Joined: 09-29-2009


Message 640 of 687 (526706)
09-29-2009 5:37 AM
Reply to: Message 510 by greyseal
09-14-2009 4:05 PM


Re: Time changes
So lets get this right. GPS is corrected for SR Show me the proof! no self professed experts or "I read it somewhere on a WIKI". Check on the website for GPS "no mention". It is obvious that NASA wasted their time and billions of dollars with Gravity Probe B, they could have just asked the GPS Center.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 510 by greyseal, posted 09-14-2009 4:05 PM greyseal has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 641 by Guiri, posted 09-29-2009 5:42 AM Guiri has not yet responded

    
Guiri
Junior Member (Idle past 2762 days)
Posts: 10
Joined: 09-29-2009


Message 641 of 687 (526707)
09-29-2009 5:42 AM
Reply to: Message 640 by Guiri
09-29-2009 5:37 AM


Re: Time changes
Wrong subject
Whats up with this forum? Back button screws up the subject.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 640 by Guiri, posted 09-29-2009 5:37 AM Guiri has not yet responded

    
Guiri
Junior Member (Idle past 2762 days)
Posts: 10
Joined: 09-29-2009


Message 642 of 687 (526708)
09-29-2009 5:42 AM
Reply to: Message 510 by greyseal
09-14-2009 4:05 PM


Re: Time changes
I give up

Edited by Guiri, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 510 by greyseal, posted 09-14-2009 4:05 PM greyseal has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 643 by greyseal, posted 09-29-2009 6:10 AM Guiri has responded

    
greyseal
Member (Idle past 1331 days)
Posts: 464
Joined: 08-11-2009


Message 643 of 687 (526711)
09-29-2009 6:10 AM
Reply to: Message 642 by Guiri
09-29-2009 5:42 AM


Re: Time changes
y hai thar. i c u liek time dilation.

http://triangulum.nl/Werkgroepen/document.../GPS%20essay.pdf

of course, that's math, it doesn't prove they DO - but I don't have a GPS satellite in my back pocket, so it'll have to do.

bye now!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 642 by Guiri, posted 09-29-2009 5:42 AM Guiri has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 645 by Guiri, posted 09-29-2009 4:45 PM greyseal has responded

    
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7410
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 644 of 687 (526713)
09-29-2009 6:26 AM
Reply to: Message 636 by ICANT
09-28-2009 7:14 PM


Again....
I can clarify my position for you. I don't have one yet.

You seem to have a definite position with regards to space and time. That is tightly related to the discussion on the speed of light. So again, do you agree that if the speed of light was constantly measured the same regardless of the observer - then this would result in the unusual circumstances I raised 200 posts ago in Message 483? Specifically of interest is the laser on a train experiment.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 636 by ICANT, posted 09-28-2009 7:14 PM ICANT has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 647 by Guiri, posted 09-29-2009 5:04 PM Modulous has acknowledged this reply

    
Guiri
Junior Member (Idle past 2762 days)
Posts: 10
Joined: 09-29-2009


Message 645 of 687 (526920)
09-29-2009 4:45 PM
Reply to: Message 643 by greyseal
09-29-2009 6:10 AM


Re: Time changes
Hi,
In your essay you forgot to include the gravitational influence of the moon! The gravitational force would also affect the time. So I guess the GPS center would have to correct for that too, otherwise it would be a bit werewolfish (wouldnt work when there is a full moon). Good luck with the complexity of the calculation of that scenario.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 643 by greyseal, posted 09-29-2009 6:10 AM greyseal has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 646 by Perdition, posted 09-29-2009 5:02 PM Guiri has responded
 Message 653 by greyseal, posted 09-30-2009 1:44 AM Guiri has not yet responded

    
RewPrev1
...
4142
43
444546Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017