|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,902 Year: 4,159/9,624 Month: 1,030/974 Week: 357/286 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Creation | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.6 |
Hi Tangle
Tangle writes: The universe does not have to have had a beginning, it could have always existed,. This is just one hypothesis: How could the universe have always existed since it would have been in equilibrium a long time before 13.7 billion years ago?"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18348 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
Just a quick question on your book---and keep in mind that I am a believer in God known through Jesus Christ whom I accepted into my heart in 1993.
You say to ringo: I CANT writes: He will likely claim that your beliefs are themselves an assertion and have no fact to back them up...in the sense of an objective, verifiable and replicable fact. I know your arguments...they make more sense than Faiths do...but your whole thing about owning guns and the right to bear arms takes credibility away from your otherwise sound and heartfelt beliefs regarding our Creator. I respect your age and your experience, though I fear that many church folks only hear (and only choose to listen) to like-minded beliefs and have no familiarity with the disciplines of the educated minds within secular science. If you have any scientific evidence that is not based on an assumption would you please present it and give me permission to use it in my book on creation? So my question: Do you believe that secular science and scientists are in any way deceived if they are not believers in Jesus Christ and/or the Bible?Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain " ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 441 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
ICANT writes:
We do have evidence about the origin of the universe. It doesn't point to any Creator.
Creation is the subject of this discussion and there is nobody who has presented any scientific evidence supporting creation. Which is the origin of the universe. ICANT writes:
Assumptions are based on scientific evidence. If you have any scientific evidence that is not based on an assumption....And our geese will blot out the sun.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.6 |
Hi caffeine,
Google earliest artificial insemination preformed on humans You get this information in the second paragraph.
quote: Below is the actual address but I prefer you use the search above.earliest artificial insemination preformed on humans - Google Search 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."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18348 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
We do have evidence about the origin of the universe. It doesn't point to any Creator.
Actually it does. You trust your own rationality and preassumptions. Granted you use evidence when available.
Assumptions are based on scientific evidence. Which is why you don't believe. The jury is still out on preponderance of evidence regarding a Creator or not. I don't see them having certainty beyond a reasonable doubt. Looks like a hung jury to me. Like i said before, at best we are both in the same boat. We don't know.Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain " ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 441 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Phat writes:
How is that possible when you yourself claim that the creator is invisible?
Actually it does. Phat writes:
And we're talking about evidence.
You trust your own rationality and preassumptions. Granted you use evidence when available. Phat writes:
No it isn't. There is no evidence for a creator - and by your own ideas about your creator, there can never be any. The jury is still out on preponderance of evidence regarding a Creator or not.And our geese will blot out the sun.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18348 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
How is that possible when you yourself claim that the creator is invisible? Because the "creator" that you point to is your own conclusions. I am the same way. As I said, we are in the same boat.
And we're talking about evidence. As I have said before, an absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. If we don't get the default assumption, neither do you.
There is no evidence for a creator - and by your own ideas about your creator, there can never be any. I'll give you that...up to this point in time. We can never know what there may or may not be at a future point. Besides...there is no evidence for Loki or a spaghetti monster. Can there ever be any? I don't know and neither do you. You have your ideas and I have mine.Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain " ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 441 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
That doesn't answer the question. I confirm that I am in a boat from which no creator can be detected. I'm asking how YOU can claim that there is evidence for a creator when YOU also claim that the creator is invisible.
Because the "creator" that you point to is your own conclusions. I am the same way. As I said, we are in the same boat. Phat writes:
That's irrelevant here because you're claiming that there IS evidence.
As I have said before, an absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Phat writes:
Of course there can be. There can be evidence for anything that exists. Besides...there is no evidence for Loki or a spaghetti monster. Can there ever be any?And our geese will blot out the sun.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9514 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.8 |
ICANT writes: How could the universe have always existed since it would have been in equilibrium a long time before 13.7 billion years ago? How the hell would I know? I'm no cosmic physicist and neither are you. I'm just pointing out to you that those that are physicists and do this work have differing hypotheses about the universe, there's not just the one that you've cherry picked because you imagine it helps your position.Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona "Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.6 |
Hi Phat
Phat writes: So my question: Do you believe that secular science and scientists are in any way deceived if they are not believers in Jesus Christ and/or the Bible? If they are deceived it is by themselves. You can not make a person do anything they don' want to do.Neither can you make a person believe anything they don't want to believe. Message 1293ringo says:
quote: The definition of assumption is: quote: Therefore an assumption is not based on evidence of any kind. For Hawking's instanton to be workable you have to assume it existed in an absence of existence as there would be no vacuum for it to begin to exist in. No evidence of any kind has ever been presented. For the little pin point sized universe to exist requires an assumption that it existed. No evidence of any kind has ever been presented. So when someone tells me an assumption is based on scientific evidence I begin to wonder how many loose screws they have upstairs.
Phat writes: but your whole thing about owning guns and the right to bear arms takes credibility away from your otherwise sound and heartfelt beliefs regarding our Creator. I joined the military and took an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States of America. That Constitution says: quote:Notice I put the comma before the t just like it is in the constitution. which makes the statement "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." separate from what preceded the comma. Since I took an oath twice to uphold the Constitution I will always support the 2nd amendment to the Constitution. Had that amendment not been added the Constitution would never have been ratified. Because of where the people came from and the things they were subjected too. 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."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.6 |
Hi Tangle,
Tangle writes: How the hell would I know? I'm no cosmic physicist and neither are you. No I am no cosmologist but I quoted one, Alan Guth. If you care to refute that the universe would be in equilibrium if it was eternal please do so. The Big Bang Theory requires a beginning to exist some 13.7 billion years ago. 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."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.6 |
Hi ringo,
ringo writes: That doesn't answer the question. I confirm that I am in a boat from which no creator can be detected. I'm asking how YOU can claim that there is evidence for a creator when YOU also claim that the creator is invisible. Who said God was invisible? It was not me. Moses viewed the hinder parts of God in:
quote: Jesus walked around on earth for 33 1/2 years He was God.
quote:This was Jesus speaking. ringo writes: Of course there can be. There can be evidence for anything that exists. The universe exists so present the evidence for the origin of the universe. If the universe had no beginning and is eternal present the evidence that shows the universe would not be in equilibrium if it was eternal. 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."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.6 |
Hi ringo,
ringo writes: We do have evidence about the origin of the universe. It doesn't point to any Creator. I am going to assume that "WE" includes you.Since you have the evidence would you please present it in this thread. ringo writes: Assumptions are based on scientific evidence. Please explain how that, 'a thing that is accepted as true or as certain to happen, without proof.' is based on any kind of evidence? 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."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9514 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.8 |
ICANT writes: No I am no cosmologist but I quoted one, Alan Guth. And I quoted another couple that said the universe could have always existed.
If you care to refute that the universe would be in equilibrium if it was eternal please do so. Those aruments can only take place between the very few people that understand the physics, neither you nor I do. All we can do is honestly report on the work as it proceeds. You have no business picking a side that you think supports your religious argument whilst pretending that it's settled science and that no other position exists it isn't and it doesn't.
The Big Bang Theory requires a beginning to exist some 13.7 billion years ago. You haven't the first idea what the Big Bang is, never mind whether anything existed before it. You're miles out of your depth arguing dishonestly.Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona "Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 441 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
ICANT writes:
Paul did:
Who said God was invisible?quote:The author of Job did: quote: ICANT writes:
The universe exists so present the evidence for the origin of the universe.quote: And our geese will blot out the sun.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024