The Big Bang Theory

[Swartzstrom]

Now, before we can start this discussion, those who do not know must know what the Big Bang Theory is. Anyone?

[Dark*Demon]

i know what it is :)

[Tama Drummer]

Sure... things just go "boom!" and "bang!" and wallah! Earth. Something has to cause them to bang, so where did those things come from? The Little Bang?

[Aro23r]

Haven't we had this discussion in the Evolution Thread. Evolution goes hand-in-hand with the big bang theory.

[Swartzstrom]

I meant type the definition you idiot :P

Anyways, the Big Bang Theory is the hypothesis that a huge ball of matter was compressed into a less-huge ball of matter. All of a sudden a massive explosion occured, creating the Universe as we know it.

Now most scientists believe that this is how the Universe was created, as opposed to the God create Earth/Universe in six days thing.

There is a major flaw in The Big-Bang Theory that favors the Bible by a gigantic amount. Anyone know what it is?

[Scroll Lock]

yea, another flaw, i think, is the expanding universe theory

all planets\heavenly bodys are tinted red and blue, one means its moving farther away and one means its moving closer, but most seem to be moving farther away, suggesting the universe is always expanding, wich kinda kills the big bang theory in that if its still being created, wheres the banging noise? kidding, i don't know how it kills that but for some reason, i recall it killing that, does anybody know if it does?

[Swartzstrom]

yea, another flaw, i think, is the expanding universe theory

all planets\heavenly bodys are tinted red and blue, one means its moving farther away and one means its moving closer, but most seem to be moving farther away, suggesting the universe is always expanding, wich kinda kills the big bang theory in that if its still being created, wheres the banging noise? kidding, i don't know how it kills that but for some reason, i recall it killing that, does anybody know if it does?

Actually, the Expanding Universe favors the Big Bang Theory. An explosion goes out in 360 Degrees, as most well know. And with an explosion of that magnitude, it's no suprise that it would still be occuring as we continue out everyday activities.

I was referring to a different flaw. Anybody wanna guess? That's one guess down, two guesses left.

[Scroll Lock]

shitter, i lost

question: is the flaw scientific, scientific*theoryetical, or biblical?

[Swartzstrom]

shitter, i lost

question: is the flaw scientific, scientific*theoryetical, or biblical?

It's a cross between the three, actually.

Come on, use common sense.

[Scroll Lock]

why arnt we all dead? cause inside an explosion theres uhh, fire?

::feels dumb::

[Swartzstrom]

Think before you post?

There is an easy counter to the Big-Bang Theory, just think about it.

[TheBlazedAce]

One of the largest flaw I recall is the actual size of the universe is impossible under the current assumption that no matter can accelerate to the speed of light. In other words in the current estimation of the age of the universe and the size of it, if it started at a single point and expanded outwards to be the size of the current universe it would have had to expand faster than the speed of light. This suggests a theory that at one point in time the speed of light was indeed different then it is now and isn't a constant, but is a function of time or perhaps more variables. Regardless, under the current laws involving ideas such as the big bang this is a flaw causing it to be impossible, or so it seems.

[Scroll Lock]

Black holes! Cause the explosion would have got stuck in them. ?? rofl, sorry

[Swartzstrom]

What I'm talking about only requires 1 sentence. When 20 posts in this thread have come to pass, I'll say it.

[Scroll Lock]

Matter is the result of previous matter, it can't be created or distroyed.

[Office_Shredder]

Just a note:
It was recently discovered that once the acceleration due to gravity caused by an object decreases beneath the acceleration necessary for an object that started accelerating at the approximate start of the universe, instead of becoming quadratic with distance the force applied becomes linear.

So gravity isn't actually constant -_-

A supposed flaw is that an explosion doesn't decrease order, but increases it.... and some people claim that the big bang increased order by creating the universe. Of course, this isn't true as a near-singular universe would have a hell of a lot of order...

[Swartzstrom]

The information itself is right, but your guess is wrong.

Wait, what the hell am I talking about? Your information is actually unconfirmed. How would we know if it cannot be created or destroyed? It is impossible to tell at the current state and time. We might find out as technology advances. Emphasis on might .

[Scroll Lock]

The universe is a marble, in the hands of a gynormis alien's hand. There are thousands just like it, and they watch us squerm for answers to their amusment. Is that what you ment?

Edit: Yea, at our curent level of science, we havent been able to create or distroy matter. but good point

[Swartzstrom]

What is wrong with you people? One sentence! Think, use the brain God gave you!

[Scroll Lock]

post 20

[Office_Shredder]

The information itself is right, but your guess is wrong.

Wait, what the hell am I talking about? Your information is actually unconfirmed. How would we know if it cannot be created or destroyed? It is impossible to tell at the current state and time. We might find out as technology advances. Emphasis on might .

Well, we know quite well that energy cannot be created or destroyed. And we know quite well that matter is a form of energy.

So I believe we quite well know that matter cannot be created or destroyed

[Swartzstrom]

Well, we know quite well that energy cannot be created or destroyed. And we know quite well that matter is a form of energy.

So I believe we quite well know that matter cannot be created or destroyed


If we knew matter couldn't be created or destroyed, then why are scientists assigned to try and create and destroy matter?

And the answer is: Where did it come from?

[Realist]

Haven't we had this discussion in the Evolution Thread. Evolution goes hand-in-hand with the big bang theory.

Uhh...no.

Two completely different concepts, two completely different fields.

[Scroll Lock]

"And the answer is: Where did it come from?"

So the answer is a question. Thats exactly what i said anyway, matter can't be created or distroyed.

[Swartzstrom]

"And the answer is: Where did it come from?"

So the answer is a question. Thats exactly what i said anyway, matter can't be created or distroyed.

If matter cannot be created, then how does matter exist?

[Scroll Lock]

and thats the statement killing the big bang theory, kinda like i said

[Swartzstrom]

and thats the statement killing the big bang theory, kinda like i said

What you and I said are two completely different things.

You said that matter cannot be created or destroyed. The problem with that is if it cannot be created, where did it come from?

[Scroll Lock]

therefore making the big bang theory inconclusive

[Swartzstrom]

therefore making the big bang theory inconclusive

No. Therefore making the Big-Bang Theory complete nonsense to begin with.

I've got to go, I'll talk later.

[Scroll Lock]

yea, but its still the flaw, and i still said it, and you still rejected it only to say it reworded right then


its all good though

[Aro23r]

Uhh...no.

Two completely different concepts, two completely different fields.

That may be, but it's damn near impossible to believe one and not the other.

[Scroll Lock]

Both are theorys.

[Realist]

That may be, but it's damn near impossible to believe one and not the other.

It's very easy to believe one and not the other...they aren't in any way connected.

[Aro23r]

Prove it.

[Realist]

:rolleyes:

[Aro23r]

I'm serious. Your cockiness and reputation mean nothing.

[Realist]

It's a silly thing to ask me to prove. Common sense doesn't need proving. In any case, the burden of proof would be on you since it was you who made the baseless assertion.

To just state a single simple counterexample, a biologist with a deep understanding of evolution need not know a great deal of the big bang theory and may therefore face it with agnostic ambivalence.

[Aro23r]

Again you dodge the question.

If you believe evolution, you believe everything began with "organic soup." That's indisputable, it's the definition of evolution. However, by believing evolution, you automatically dismiss God as a Creator, because believing that causes a belief in all life coming forth as is all at once, not a "slow changing process." That leads one to wonder what created the universe. As of right now, the Big Bang Theory accounts for that "organic soup." The Big Bang occurs and the matter and energy emerges.

Now, if you believe in the Big Bang, one must wonder where life comes from. The Big Bang does allow for the possibility that everything and everyone appeared all at once. However, that is very unlikely given possible combinations of elements and molecules. Therefore, one then wonders, again, where everything came from. The Big Bang Theory, as mentioned before, allows for something to be created from the nothing. A simple homogeneous blob of stuff ("organic soup") could very easily be created. Then, the theory of evolution unfolds.

Please respond and don't dodge it again, like you always do and just did.

[WlfBane]

I created the universe.

Live with it

[max2k106]

If we knew matter couldn't be created or destroyed, then why are scientists assigned to try and create and destroy matter?

And the answer is: Where did it come from?

What is this? A Hitch-hiker's Guide To The Galaxy? . . . the meaning of life is 7 . . . wtf is that supposed to mean?

as i have said in many a thread before, we cannot understand where the material for the big bang came from because our brains are not developed enough. Although we don't like to think this way, we are not an advanced species. . . we are advanced compared to other species on earth. It's like trying to teach a fly to do math . . . you just can't because 1. It's brain wont understand and 2. you'll probly squish it

and if you're arguing that god created the universe, then where did he come from? it all comes down to a simple answer of us not knowing shit about this universe

our brains are not developed enough for us to understand neither the meaning of life, nor how the universe was create, etc . . . face it, we're just stupid

[WlfBane]

omfg it's Max! You still exist!

w00t!

I finally got my guitar - A peavey Raptor exp

Pretty nifty but i'm pants on it xD

[max2k106]

omfg it's Max! You still exist!

w00t!

I finally got my guitar - A peavey Raptor exp

Pretty nifty but i'm pants on it xD

wadaya mean I still exist? . . . I didn't leave or anything . . . huh?

[WlfBane]

Thought you did...

Wow you have some patience hanging around here o.o;;

I came on 30 min ago to say something and here I am posting away... sigh... I hate forums...

[Realist]

Aro23r,

You seem to have some messed up idea of "dodging the question"--there never was a question to dodge until you made this post, simply not enough information.

If you believe evolution, you believe everything began with "organic soup."

Not exactly, but not worth contesting. I'll let it slide.

However, by believing evolution, you automatically dismiss God as a Creator, because believing that causes a belief in all life coming forth as is all at once, not a "slow changing process."

Wah! Big unsupported and false statement there!

Why couldn't God have created the evolution process? Lots of liberal religions believe this. You're forgetting that God != Fundamentalist Christianity.

In fact, since 90+% or so of Americans believe in God, and I think at least half of educated Americans believe in evolution (though the stat is fearfully low), I would estimate that at least 50% of Ameicans believe in both God and evolution in some form. In more secular states where fundamentalism is weaker I'd suspect the number to be much higher. Certaintly, my personal experience with liberals tells me that the vast majority believe both in God (a Christian God, who created the world) and in evolution. Most biologists believe in God, and pretty much every one accepts evolution.

You're also forgetting, of course, that logically consistent beliefs is not a very high value in many parts of America right now (though there are many logically consistent beliefs in both a Creator God and evolution, Deism, for example).

Now, if you believe in the Big Bang, one must wonder where life comes from.

Uhh...why? Some people only care about some aspects of science. In fact, I've living evidence of the falsity of your statement. I'm that "ambivalent bioligist" though I'm not actually a biologist at all. I don't study the big bang because it doesn't interest me all that much; on the other hand, I have looked deeply into evolution because it fascinated me and I entirely believe in it.

[Realist]

This convo is sort of (entirely) irrevelant, it doesn't say anything grand about the world or anything, I just started it because I've noticed that you seem to love to make these totally unsupported short posts to show off your knowledge of things you really don't know all that much about.

[Scroll Lock]

primordial mud

explains where life came from

[Tama Drummer]

If we knew matter couldn't be created or destroyed, then why are scientists assigned to try and create and destroy matter?

And the answer is: Where did it come from?

Isn't that what I said in my earlier post to this thread?
Or did I word it that it doesn't mean what I meant...

[Scroll Lock]

i said it also, he just didn't want anybody to be right so he could continue his rant

[Amaroth]

Realist,

Reading through all your posts, it's obvious that you prefer the theories of science rather than religion. For a long, long time, I too would have completely doubted the existance of any so-called "Higher power." Science provided facts. Religion provided fairy tales. I happened to be one of the (unfortunate) select few that saw past those fairy tales. I refused to believe that a man walked on water. I refused to believe that somehow enough water was produced to flood the entire planet, then dissapear. I refused to believe that rivers would be turned to blood.

But since then my outlook has significantly changed. I still wouldn't say I'm religous. Truth be told, I'm nowhere near religous. Nor am I spiritual. But I now do not doubt the possibility of forces still unknown to human civilization. The way I look at it (now), we can't prove it's there. But there was a major factor that I had dismissed for so many years... We can't prove that it's there... now....

Right now, all scientific laws and theories make the existance of a higher force look more like a Disney movie than a global following. But seven-hundered years ago, all scientific laws and theories made the entire world absolutly positive that Earth was flat. Why? Because they had not yet developed the technology or means to even think otherwise. It's not that they couldn't disprove that the Earth was flat, it's that they didn't even start to think it wasn't. Today, scientists instantly dismiss the idea of a higher force. With today's science, they're right. But perhaps over the next few years, decades, centuries, milleniums, whatever, someone will stumble across something that proves the mind exists after the physical body has expired, or something like that. Just like how the idea of a oliptical planet came to be, a boat sailed past the horizon, and for some reason did not fall off the edge of the planet. People saw that and began to question the laws. Over time, more and more people began to believe it was round. Then in the sixties, when man finally went into space, it was confirmed.

It could be the same case with a higher force. We just can't find it now because we don't know what to look for.

[TheBlazedAce]

If we knew matter couldn't be created or destroyed, then why are scientists assigned to try and create and destroy matter?

And the answer is: Where did it come from?

Honestly, enough is enough. The stupidity everyone on this forum spews out of their mouths has to end. In the evolution thread I heard a theory that we came from dogs?! Another thing that everyone doesn't seem to understand. We didn't come from monkeys you imbecilles, we came from apes! (Another example of people talking about a theory and having no clue about it) Matter can neither be created nor destroyed. The total energy of any system MUST be conserved. How old are you Swartzstrom?! Have you not taken any physics yet? You're arguing against the big bang theory and you don't even know Newton's three laws?! Have you ever read even an article on the concept?! The shere idiocy behind all this is that so many people on this forum keep going at it like they know what they're talking about and no one does! The big bang didn't "create matter out of nothing". The big bang assumes the matter was always there, just at one time was an infinitely dense ball. The reasoning behind this is that since the universe is now expanding outwards in all equal directions that means it must have been expanding this way for a very long time, if not forever, which means that the matter must have been at an incredibly dense point at one time. Then it was wondered why it didn't just stay that way due to gravity, so some explosion due to the extremely large amount of energy compressed into a single point caused the expansion of all matter outwards. It never says anywhere that matter was created. In fact right now people aren't 100% sure if the universe doesn't just continuously expand and then once gravity "catches up to it" contracts again to the single point and another big bang occurs. Scientists that currently try to "create and destroy matter" are considered by most of the scientific world as just plain stupid. Have you ever read the book Voodoo Science? It's a great book discussing the plain idiocy of inventors who try to create machines that create energy from nothing, or false medicines or any such sciences most peopel believe but are plainly not true because they contradict basic laws that have been proven long ago. I'm asking people for the last time STOP TALKING ABOUT WHAT YOU HAVE NO CLUE ABOUT!

[Scroll Lock]

i know the entire scientific standpoint behind this topic, so stfu

[TheBlazedAce]

Scroll Lock, I obviously didn't mean that to every single person who ever posted on this forum. But you have to agree with me that there are many that what I said applies to.

[Scroll Lock]

yea thats definitly true, over reacted :-x

[Tama Drummer]

STOP TALKING ABOUT WHAT YOU HAVE NO CLUE ABOUT!

Does anyone really know what they're talking about? I mean, aren't all scientific statements just theories? The only reason people accept scientific laws and other stuff such as that is because noone can prove them wrong, no?

And if you really think the level of "stupidity" in the forums in overwhelming, leave. Nobody is forcing you to stay.

[Scroll Lock]

I mean, aren't all scientific statements just theories?

The Theory of Gravity, yes i know you went on to explain laws, but look at that.

[TheBlazedAce]

Does anyone really know what they're talking about? I mean, aren't all scientific statements just theories? The only reason people accept scientific laws and other stuff such as that is because noone can prove them wrong, no?

And if you really think the level of "stupidity" in the forums in overwhelming, leave. Nobody is forcing you to stay.

Theories are only accepted when their is almost an indenyable amount of proof for them. If a theory is ever proven wrong even once it is considered wrong. They are theories yes, but to mistate a theory is just about making things up off the top of your head. These theories took centuries to develop, countless hours of research, and usually there is a lot of evidence. The Big Bang theory is a fairly recent theory but just the way I explained it's based off of evidence we've found from actual observations we've had in our universe. It is indeed just a theory, just something a lot of mathematicians think about while taking a dump.

[Amaroth]

And what is your opinion one what I said above, Blazed?

[TheBlazedAce]

It's a good conclusion amaroth. The only querral I have is that we knew the earth wasn't flat way more then 700 years ago. And we definitely didn't need to take a picture of the earth from outer space to prove it. I don't form an opinion off of everything really. I was just blasting off steam because lately so many threads specifically about debates have come up and they are subjects I believe should be taken seriously, yet people who don't have the first clue about the subject are making ridiculous notions and mistating countless amounts of information. It's just a mockery on all the people who probably dedicated their lives to making these theories. You guys have any idea how long it took darwin to just take his voyage where he got most of his evidence for his published book about the theory of evolution? Then some people just make up something off the top of their heads or some rumor they heard and in a few days make up a pathetic excuse of a theory that doesn't make any sense and usually is completely false, making both sides of the argument seem more stupid. Both sides are horribly arguing their points and that's why I usually stay out of these forum debates, but sometimes enough is just enough.

[Realist]

Ach,

The fact that we haven't found "God" doesn't mean it does exist either. We have to look at the evidence. There is no evidence for God, so believing in it is nothing different than just making something up.

There were no scientific laws and theories 700 years ago. The scientific revolution causing the birth of modern science didn't occur until around the 18th century. True, we have significantly revised scientific knowledge since then, based on new evidence. But this evidence doesn't lend any support to God.

No intelligent person would deny the possibility that God exists. But you've got to look at what is likely, or you have no way to filter probable truth from improbable.

[TheBlazedAce]

I seriously have not factored in god to any of my discussions. I'm seriously not here to debate his existance because I find it goes nowhere. It's all occam's razor, or basically if it makes more sense to you. I don't want to debate the existance of god for the very reasons you state realist. It's not a theory that's based on evidence, but rather it's based on belief. There's no evidence that truly proves in any way god does or doesn't exist (if the evidence itself is too easily refutable it's not credible alright). I'm not here to debate belief, I want to debate provable theories.

[Amaroth]

Ach,

The fact that we haven't found "God" doesn't mean it does exist either. We have to look at the evidence. There is no evidence for God, so believing in it is nothing different than just making something up.

There were no scientific laws and theories 700 years ago. The scientific revolution causing the birth of modern science didn't occur until around the 18th century. True, we have significantly revised scientific knowledge since then, based on new evidence. But this evidence doesn't lend any support to God.

No intelligent person would deny the possibility that God exists. But you've got to look at what is likely, or you have no way to filter probable truth from improbable.

Realist,
I agree. I was only using the world being flat as an example. You're right, what is likely is that their is not God. But like you said, Science was revised and proved alot wrong. Perhaps it will be revised again and prove more wrong. What we're saying wrong.

Blazed,
By the time man went into space, the majority of the world believed the world was not flat, now. But there were a select few who still doubted it. Seeing Earth from an outside view finally proved it to the small sect of non-believers that remained.

[Scroll Lock]

However, its not a circle. And the the ratio of us vs. the planet, it is flat.

[Scroll Lock]

I'd like to direct your attention to this,

http://www.anim8or.com/gallery/gallery11/spaceship.jpg

considering this topic is going nowhere, i think thats a pritty spaceship.

[drakonfire]

okay couple of things and then i have homework to do

first, why another debate thread? havent we learned these go no where yet?
[/rant]

realist, your right, there are several 'christians' who believe in evolution as well as God, but i have to point something out, a christian is supposed to accept the Bible as God inspired and God breathed, meaning it is infallible (bar messed up translations and whatnot) and since the Bible states that God created man in 1 (count them ONE) day, anyone who claims to believe both is, IMO, confused and more than a little off base somewhere, you cant have it both ways, believe one, or believe the other, not two peices that contradict each other
(yes i am aware of the passage of scripture that states a day with God is as a thousand years and a thousand years as a day, but even IF that were applied to genesis, 6k years is not enough for the theory of evolution to work with)


[/two cents]

now my question, if God didnt create the "primordial sludge" and the big bang didnt... what did? or do you just accept evolution and not really give a crap about the origins of the universe because it is not provable either way? (though i agree with aro, the ToE is somewhat reliant on lots of time, which so far as i know, only the BBT supplies)

[kyrios24]

I've gotta go, so I'll make it quick. Xyx, good as usual. Blaze, I'm liking it. Most of you (not Ach, I just don't agree with him) are making complete fools out of yourselves, not that this is in any way out of the ordinary. Swartzstrom, I mean, what the hell? What do you think, you've taken this completely ELEMENTARY LAW, which, as Blaze said, you probably haven't even seen yet (basic chem), and you think you've disproven the big bang theory. Go call up the Nobel Prize Foundation! You're a surefire winner! Now, I'm not claiming to know that much about the theory surrounding this, although I wish I did. However, I think I can safely say that my lack of background is nothing compared to your ignorance and stupidity! I'm not talking to swartzstrom only, I'm talking to all you people. Yes, you too, scroll. What with this rubbish and the evolution thread, I'm surprised the vast majority of the forum hasn't been the object of a stupidity-incited lynching already.

Jeff sends his regards, and tells us that the Flat Earth Society (http://www.alaska.net/~clund/e_djublonskopf/Flatearthsociety.htm) has not yet "faded off the map," so to speak.

Xyx, I think the number was <50% pro-evolution (I hate you, america), but let's say 50 for the sake of argument. Probably almost everyone in the 10% of the population that is correct - oops, did I say correct? I meant the unbelievers - believes in evolution, leaving roughly 40% who believe in both god and evolution. Sorry, I couldn't resist. :)

Lastly, I would like to announce that: Aro got pwnt.

Thank you.

[Realist]

Drak, for the first half of your post, I actually agree with you. Liberal religion disgusts me. Of course it is relativism that provides the justification for holding such contradictory views, but I didn't need to say that.

or do you just accept evolution and not really give a crap about the origins of the universe because it is not provable either way?

Yeah. Evolution is important for my social/philosophical ideas. The big bang isn't really. So I just don't pay much attention to it. I tend to glaze over astrophysics.

[Realist]

Xyx, I think the number was <50% pro-evolution (I hate you, america), but let's say 50 for the sake of argument. Probably almost everyone in the 10% of the population that is correct - oops, did I say correct? I meant the unbelievers - believes in evolution, leaving roughly 40% who believe in both god and evolution. Sorry, I couldn't resist. :)

Yes, I think that's more correct. My numbers make no sense. Thank you.

[Bottle]

And the answer is: Where did it come from?
There's a good counter to that as well.

Where did God come from?

I haven't read past this post, because I don't have time. We have had this discussion before, in many threads (including RD, but I'll be blowed if I'm searching through 1000 pages to find it). If scientists and theologians can't come up with an answer, how can we? It's all personal belief.

If someone's already said this on page 3 or onwards, I apologise. :)

[Realist]

There is one answer that best fits the known evidence. Anyone who doesn't accept this answer is either too ignorant, unaware, too stupid, purposely trying not to arrive at the correct conclusion, or otherwise flawed in some way.

[TheBlazedAce]

There is one answer that best fits the known evidence. Anyone who doesn't accept this answer is either too ignorant, unaware, too stupid, purposely trying not to arrive at the correct conclusion, or otherwise flawed in some way.

I completely agree with that statement. *rep point given*

[actgfin1234]

(To Swartz and Lord Eric)

the big bang theory isn't about the creation of matter, it's about the formation of the universe, in the big bang theory matter already existed, in infinately small space, it doesn't give an explination to it's creation, which makes what tyou two have been talking about completely off topic

and on the subject of what the "flaw" is in the Big Bang theory, The one you were asking people for is whether or not god created everything, which can be argued until you're blue in the face; and I really don't have time for that.

about Aro and Realist. I hate to take sides. While The big bang and evolution are two completely different topics, they COULD go hand in hand in the thought that if the big bang theory is what actually created the universe, then, evolution is what people think, got us here. However, if the universe was god's doing, then evolution, is nonexistant. I'm leaning towards the big bang theory, and evolution, until someone can prove me otherwise. I'm just that stubborn.

@ lord eric's "marble" statement. How many universes do you think there are?
The universe is all matter and energy, including the earth, the galaxies, and the contents of intergalactic space, regarded as a whole. meaning more than one universe would contradict the definition of universe. Did you mean galaxies?

Well, I've got to go shovel some snow

Act

[Scroll Lock]

The marble statement was actually a joke, it was the end of a movie i watched awhile back.

"The Big Bang Theory is the dominant scientific theory about the origin of the universe. According to the big bang, the universe was created sometime between 10 billion and 20 billion years ago from a cosmic explosion that hurled matter and in all directions.
In 1927, the Belgian priest Georges Lemaître was the first to propose that the universe began with the explosion of a primeval atom. His proposal came after observing the red shift in distant nebulas by astronomers to a model of the universe based on relativity. Years later, Edwin Hubble found experimental evidence to help justify Lemaître's theory. He found that distant galaxies in every direction are going away from us with speeds proportional to their distance.

The big bang was initially suggested because it explains why distant galaxies are traveling away from us at great speeds. The theory also predicts the existence of cosmic background radiation (the glow left over from the explosion itself). The Big Bang Theory received its strongest confirmation when this radiation was discovered in 1964 by Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson, who later won the Nobel Prize for this discovery.

Although the Big Bang Theory is widely accepted, it probably will never be proved; consequentially, leaving a number of tough, unanswered questions. "

You are right, but thats not what i was ment. So let me try and rephrase
Where did the matter come from is not explained, and really the universe was already there, it just wasn't filled with shit until the boom. Then it wasn't even organized, it took 15billion years to organize into bodys and structures.



however this is getting boring, i got a better topic
What if there was no matter, no nothing, just black emptyness, no life, no computers, no earth. Why did there have to be something? What if there never was anything? Scary, ey?

[TheBlazedAce]

Very Good input Scroll Lock. I did forget to mention the afterglow being found as radiation in the form of microwaves due to the doppler effect. I don't like your postilation though. What if my head was chopped off? It's a scary thing isn't it?

If there was no matter none of us would exist today. What kind of discussion did you expect to arise from your question?

[actgfin1234]

I've got a discussion. Can someone help prove to me that there is a god?

[TheBlazedAce]

I've got a discussion. Can someone help prove to me that there is a god?
No.

[King 6]

Now really does it really matter how it was made its how its going to end v.v.
Duhhh i think we all know how eart is going to end and if you dont i pitty you.

As far as big bang theroy man there are so many ways on how people think the earth was mad point being they have no edivance v.v

As far as a god i really dont get that.

Adam and Eve where the first people on the earth right?

Then that would make Adam and Eve the godiests right?

Because jesus was post to be god right?

Then if thats true how could that be if Adam and Eve where first humans?

Ohhh ya, as far as the big bang theroy goes the earth will die just as every other plante will.
It will become bigger and bigger then it will explode and causeing us to die.

Just let it hope that earth goes before the sun.

Because if the sun goes not olny will we freez it will set the hole gravation thing out of wack causeing all kind of plantes crashing together.Or when the sun explodes it will cause a black hole which then would suck all plantes into it.

Well thats all i got to say.

[S_K_O_F]

Realist,
I agree. I was only using the world being flat as an example. You're right, what is likely is that their is not God. But like you said, Science was revised and proved alot wrong. Perhaps it will be revised again and prove more wrong. What we're saying wrong.

Blazed,
By the time man went into space, the majority of the world believed the world was not flat, now. But there were a select few who still doubted it. Seeing Earth from an outside view finally proved it to the small sect of non-believers that remained.

it has been well known, since before columbus sailed, that the earth was indeed a sphere and not flat

scientists of those days had already found a circumference for the earth

regardless of what your elementary school teacher told you about people believing the earth was flat...anyone who was intelligent back in those days knew the earth was a sphere

[Northwind]

Now really does it really matter how it was made its how its going to end v.v. . . . Well thats all i got to say.
What in the name of all that is holy was that? Son, sniffing that glue is apparently not doing you any good. From now on, you can only use Elmer's.

(No King, we don't eat it. No. Seriously. NO. Put it down! Don't eat that! No. No.

Oooh gross, I don't care if it is non-toxic, it can't be good for you to eat that much of it. Anyone got a glass of water handy? I think King has glued his mouth shut.)

[King 6]

lol v.v i got lost in saying that all ~_~"

[kyrios24]

a. I think we should all ignore King 6.

b. God and evolution can certainly go hand in hand. There's actually a very common theory around nowadays called intelligent design, which states that a god or a higher being created something relatively simple, a state which has since altered and "improved" (that is, if you can call the advent of humans an improvement, god forbid) through the process of evolution. I honestly don't see why everyone here is saying that they are contradictory. Is intelligent design really that hard to swallow? Not saying I believe it, but... it should be a nice happy medium for some of you unstupid people. Of which, I must say, there are pitifully few.

c. Sorry if somebody has said this, but even the Greeks (probably not all of them, but there were scientists who studied it) knew that the Earth was round. Ptolemy, I believe, did quite a bit of work on the subject, as did somebody whose name was or closely resembled Aratosthenes. This A-fellow very nearly exactly (you know you like the adverbs) measured the circumference of the Earth - I believe he used shadows and such. That's the GREEKS, people, the Greeks. Columbus sailed exactly because he believed the world to be round. However, he throught it was considerably smaller than it actually is, and that he would reach Asia; if America weren't between Europe and Asia, well, goodbye Columbus's supplies and goodbye Columbus, good riddance. By the way, did you know that the glorified image of Columbus is ALL WRONG? He was a freakin' tyrant over the Native Americans... he made a mistake "finding" America and gets honored for it. He deserves an anti-day. I'm not even kidding. It's hard to believe how many natives he killed. Back on topic... finally, when Magellan circumnavigated the globe, that was pretty damn conclusive. Don't set your dates for mass acceptance any later than that.

d. No problem xyx, I couldn't resist. :)

e. No.
Ahaha! Rep point! For this one and your excellent bashing job last night.

[drakonfire]

okay, first, king, upshut and know what your talking about before making a post next time

Adam and eve were the first humans (this is my belief, as stated in the Bible) God made them along with everything else, they messed up, so many many many years later, God became flesh (Jesus, and dont question that, its the whole trinity thing again and i really dont feel like going there) Jesus was not a man before Adam and Eve, He became one later to pay the debt that no human could


and the earth will NOT explode, wth did that come from? and if the sun were to explode we would be vaporized, not frozen

sry ky, i just oculdnt resist the urge

b. God and evolution can certainly go hand in hand. There's actually a very common theory around nowadays called intelligent design, which states that a god or a higher being created something relatively simple, a state which has since altered and "improved" (that is, if you can call the advent of humans an improvement, god forbid) through the process of evolution. I honestly don't see why everyone here is saying that they are contradictory. Is intelligent design really that hard to swallow? Not saying I believe it, but... it should be a nice happy medium for some of you unstupid people. Of which, I must say, there are pitifully few.

NOT the God of the Bible, i'm sorry ky, if you read the Bible and add up all the years (even saying that the creation took 6k years instead of 6 days... i'm a litaralist btw, i believe it was done in 6 days) you cannot possibly come up with enough time for evolution to have occured... now i wont say it is beyond Gods power to have done it this way, but that isn't what the Bible says he did, so, in my belief it did not happen that way

and to scroll: that movie you saw? that was MIB (the first one... come on guys "the galaxy is on orion's belt")

[Scroll Lock]

o yea, lol, i don't tend to remember shit about movies, im weird

[kyrios24]

Waiiiiiiit... we've been talking God from the bible here the whole time? If so, my bad. :o

[Office_Shredder]

king, without the sun I'm pretty sure gravity will keep on chugging ;)

Anywho, back to intelligent conversation:
Kyrios, while to our standards Columbus was a tyrant, in his day his actions were the norm. I kind of find it weird that people hold history to a standard that back then would have been more radical than even the radicals would consider. I mean, slavery persevered for another 400ish years into the land of the free for crying out loud, you expect Columbus to not have any slaves? And naturally, the whole slavery issue was what led to the deaths of native americans.... while I don't admire Columbus for having slaves and killing native americans, you certainly can't call him the worst despot of the time. In fact, that he was arrested for treating indians inhumanely says something of the monarchs of Spain at the time (even if this was right after the Inquisition).

On him finding America as a mistake: most great discoveries in history weren't what was intended... one example I always remember is that the discoverer of non-Euclidean geometry found it trying to prove Euclid's 5th postulate (that parallel lines never cross). He spent the last five pages of his research paper cursing how irrational and anti-Christian his theory was. Digression aside, even if Columbus didn't know what he discovered, he was still the only one bold enough to go out and find it. It's easy enough for you to state now that he was stupid for not knowing what he found, but discoveries (especially in travelling to lands you've never been to), are never exactly easy to identify. Keep in mind Columbus really had little to no clue as to what Japan looked like, or what the language spoken there was.

[Aro23r]

My bad, xyx.

[lildj05]

aro pwns!!! i dno y, he just does

[Office_Shredder]

lil, stop trying to suck up to the mods

[TheBlazedAce]

Aro seems like the desperate type, and if lildj is offering up his "services" then that can only lead to one thing where I'm concerned.

[Office_Shredder]

lildj needs to find a new customer?

Not even aro would go that low... .I think

[Scroll Lock]

O! O! I found a flaw!!

Okay, inertia, an object in motion stays in motion until acted on by an outside force. So the matter gets hurled into all directions by the bangboom, but what stops it? Okay that kind supports the expanding universe theory in that its still going outward. Come on guys, back on topic!

[TheBlazedAce]

You don't understand Scroll Lock. Remember when he said where does the matter come from? That was supposed to be the so called "flaw". Since it doesn't even apply to the big bang theory then that wasn't the flaw. The big bang theory wouldn't be so widely accepted if there was a very blatant flaw in it. Most theories are considered void once a flaw is found in them. If they are proven wrong even once they can't be considered true.

[max2k106]

O! O! I found a flaw!!

Okay, inertia, an object in motion stays in motion until acted on by an outside force. So the matter gets hurled into all directions by the bangboom, but what stops it? Okay that kind supports the expanding universe theory in that its still going outward. Come on guys, back on topic!

what stops it? gravity, the forces that exist between every object :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[Scroll Lock]

ace, i never said it was the flaw, i just was saying it wasnt explained in it

max, i wasn't aware there was gravity in space

[max2k106]

what do you think keeps the moon from flying out of the Earth's orbit? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[Scroll Lock]

that little bit of gravity cant amount to stopping the expanding of the entire universe

[max2k106]

no it cant, the universe is still expanding, but some of the objects that had a high velocity from the explosion slowed down because of the gravity and attraction to each other, the universe is still expanding, just not everything is moving as fast as it was

[Scroll Lock]

so i found evidence that supports both the expanding universe theory, and the big bangor theory

thats cool, i didnt even mean to do that

[max2k106]

isnt the expanding universe part of the big bang theory? :confused: :confused:

[Scroll Lock]

could be, ill look that up

[Scroll Lock]

Okay, the hubble sent us proof that the expanding universe theory is infact happening, the only reason it isn't a law is because we can't test it, we only have observations. However, the expanding universe theory is irrefutable evidence of either the big bang, or something making matter travel out from a point, 360d. The fact that some things seem to be moving faster and some slower, is because of how close the matter was to the point. Scientists theorize that the only force great enough to slow the expanding universe, is black holes.

Okay, now whats a black hole? A black hole is a spot where matter got all stuck togather, that means more gravity. The hubble got a shot of a ball of matter the size of our solar system, meaning the gravity is almost 1.3billion times stronger then the suns. Considering the sun has alot more gravity then our planet, this ball of matter would pull with unforgiving force anything relativly close to it.

[drakonfire]

could be, ill look that up

it is

2 basic 'flaws' i'm aware of with the BBT, and they arent really 'flaws' they are just things it fails to explain, making the BBT just as much of a leap of faith as God (and i'll take God any day of the week thank you) (edit: yes i'm aware both these have been pointed out, but for claritys sake i'm putting them both in one post)

matter cannot be created nor destroyed (where did the original matter come from?)

an object in motion tends to stay in motion until acted upon by an outside force (so... where did the original motion for all this come from? i mean even the bang had to be acted upon by something)

[Scroll Lock]

if the matter when it was created, was close togather, and the two types of matter had a reaction creating the motion

[TheBlazedAce]

it is

2 basic 'flaws' i'm aware of with the BBT, and they arent really 'flaws' they are just things it fails to explain, making the BBT just as much of a leap of faith as God (and i'll take God any day of the week thank you) (edit: yes i'm aware both these have been pointed out, but for claritys sake i'm putting them both in one post)

matter cannot be created nor destroyed (where did the original matter come from?)

an object in motion tends to stay in motion until acted upon by an outside force (so... where did the original motion for all this come from? i mean even the bang had to be acted upon by something)

Don't you agree it's a lot easier to agree with fundamental laws then try and make ridiculous notions to dispute them? Matter cannot be created nor destroyed. All matter that is here was always here. If you're going to ask where matter came from if god doesn't exist why not ask the question of where god came from? If it's possible the he was always here then why isn't it possible that matter was always here?

First you must agree with the following things, all of which are true beyond a doubt. Objects attract each other and this force is called gravity. When objects collide they either stay together or bounce off each other. The only thing keeping objects from being ripped apart to come together is that when they touch the electrons on their outsides reppel each other and keep them from touching completely. If enough mass was compressed to a small enough point then with the knowledge that the force of gravity is proportional to the product of the massed and 1/ the distance between them sqaured indicates the force could become larger then the force of the electrons repelling each other and stopping them from fully touching so the matter would each pull themselves into each other. Assuming that all matter in the entire universe was actually compressed to almost a single point the amount of energy inside would be so tremendous and because all the forces interacting with each other, gravity, electromagnetic force, small force, large force are each compounding then this could cause a tremendous explosion powerful enough to create what is well known as the big bang.

[Scroll Lock]

BOOM!

well put

[kyrios24]

OS- I didn't say he was the worst despot of the time, but he certainly wasn't a guy I'd like to meet. Didn't say he was stupid either, or that I resented that he didn't know what he had found. I give that he had guts to try for Asia like he did, but the fact remains that it was a mistake, and that he did enslave the Native Americans and work them to death. There really should be no columbus day... but I don't mind having school off, so ya know. I guess I can live with it.:cool:

[Aro23r]

lildj needs to find a new customer?

Not even aro would go that low... .I think

I don't even know who this guy is. But, seriously, xyx, was it really that hard to simply say it instead of taking up like four posts which you knew would obviously lead up to it?

[drakonfire]

All matter that is here was always here. If you're going to ask where matter came from if god doesn't exist why not ask the question of where god came from? If it's possible the he was always here then why isn't it possible that matter was always here?

and with these questions your view (anyones view) becomes a matter of faith instead of a collection of 'facts', thats all i was trying to say

as was said in another post, and taken from the Bible, as for me and mine, we will serve the Lord

[Scroll Lock]

drakon, not at all,

most faiths say you can't even be curious into this shit were talking about

the facts cant explain it all

so really its a matter of we cant explain it yet, and if you want to settle with that, or if you want to explore the facts

[Bottle]

Where did all the matter come from seems to be the most prevalent anti-BBT question here.

My answer: the matter has existed for all time. The total mass of the universe is such that eventually, the rate of increase in volume of the universe (initially positive due to the massive explosion in the BB) will become negative, ie. the effect of gravity will slow down the matter so much that it starts contracting again. At some point, all the matter will be comprerssed into a tiny, infinitely dense ball once again. The energy contained within this will be such that it is no longer stable, and after reaching a certain density and size it will explode again in another Big Bang. This will eventually contract again, explode, expand, contract, etc. for eternity. So the initial matter was never created, it has always been in existence.

That is just one theory of course.

[Office_Shredder]

bottle, it's interesting you bring that theory up... assuming you're familiar with it, I have to pose a question to you:
When the universe begins to detract again, will all spontaneous processes have negative entropy (since the total universe will begin to have negative entropy)? Or is the retraction actually positive in entropy in some way (and if so, how)?

[drakonfire]

drakon, not at all,

most faiths say you can't even be curious into this shit were talking about


this seems to be a popular belief, where did it come from? i'm sick of hearing it, "true believers dont question" no, sorry, i question God a lot, questioning is the only way to grow in my faith, that attitude of you cant question it because it "just is" is a cult mentality that has no place being connected with christianity, all the wise christians i know encourage me to question God, and seek answers, i've found my answer to the beginning in my faith in God, thats enough for me

and bottle, i've heard that theory to, but the same question still pertains, where did the original matter come from... if you just believe it was, how is that different or any more rational than my belief in God?

[/rant]

sry, i've been getting ticked lately at some ppls views of christianity, where this whole "you arent allowed to question it" this came from i have no idea, but let me put and end to it right now, that isn't how it is

[/rant really]

[Bottle]

bottle, it's interesting you bring that theory up... assuming you're familiar with it, I have to pose a question to you:
When the universe begins to detract again, will all spontaneous processes have negative entropy (since the total universe will begin to have negative entropy)? Or is the retraction actually positive in entropy in some way (and if so, how)?
And will time start to flow backwards when it does?

Me, I have no idea, I'm not a cosmologist but a mathematician/chemist, so all I know is from my A-Level Physics classes and a few discussions with my uni friends who do Physics :)

[Office_Shredder]

math/chemistry? Cool... and I thought all chemists were nerds... but if you do math too you're cool :D

[Bottle]

Mathematicians are nerds too :)

[Office_Shredder]

Are not!

Wait.... huge pimples.... triple thick rimmed glasses..... freshly pressed shirt and tie.... lined shirt pockets in case one of my pens leaks in it!

Oh god no!

[Scroll Lock]

you obviously don't know what your talking about

christianity does not allow for the question of gods existance, by questioning the fact that he created us or not, is questioning his very existance

drakonfire, if you allow yourself to take part in the questioning of gods existance, and you still want to be christian, by advice is repent



i believe in a god, i was christian until i took earth science in school, now i don't believe in the bible or anything, but i do believe in a divine being

[drakonfire]

christianity does not allow for the question of gods existance, by questioning the fact that he created us or not, is questioning his very existance

scroll, i think you misunderstand christianity, if God never allowed for us to question things, then i'm hellbound and so is everyone else i know, it is okay to ask questions, Jesus' disciples did it all the time, "how?" "why?" and "what does it mean?" are some of the most common questions from their mouths

the question for believers i think, is whether or not we are willing to accept His answers

it is not questioning that is forbidden scroll, its slander

[Scroll Lock]

the disciples never questioned god's existance

[drakonfire]

the issue for them never came up, but in todays society it comes up a LOT

where in the Bible does it state "thou shalt not question My existance"?

and did i ever question God's existance? no, i said i quesiton God, i'm sorry if that translated badly, i meant i question his methods sometimes, why he lets things happen, the normal perfectly human questions to ask

regardless i do not think God would condemn a person who asking the question "does God really exist?" because if that person wholeheartedly goes after the honest answer, i believe they'll find Him, and he'll be waiting with open arms, not a scowl asking them why they even thought to question His existance

but then again, thats all just my 2 cents, i definitely do not speak for God

[Scroll Lock]

Your just repeating yourself now, no he won't condemn someone who asks that question, nor will he condemn someone who steals.

Its commen knowledge you can't question god's existance if you believe in god. You would simply be a hypocrite ontop of it being against the church. I think you need to ask someone at your church this question.

[TheBlazedAce]

and with these questions your view (anyones view) becomes a matter of faith instead of a collection of 'facts', thats all i was trying to say

as was said in another post, and taken from the Bible, as for me and mine, we will serve the Lord

How in the world is agreeing with the fundamental law that's already been proven without a doubt to be true faith?! Matter can not be created or destroyed. By saying how was the matter "created" you're contradicted that statement. I'm saying the opposite, the fundamental law holds true if all matter always existed, it was never created and none was ever destroyed. This is just logical.

Agreeing with a book written by people about one devine being creating and controlling everything with literally no evidence or reasoning is faith. (I could say much more but I do not intend to insult anyone's belief in any way so I'll leave it at that)

[Terps rock]

sry

[Cephas]

Your just repeating yourself now, no he won't condemn someone who asks that question, nor will he condemn someone who steals.

Its commen knowledge you can't question god's existance if you believe in god. You would simply be a hypocrite ontop of it being against the church. I think you need to ask someone at your church this question.
Eric, where do you get off making the statement that God does not condem a thief? Theft is expressly forbidden in the Bible, right from petty theft right down through to tax evasion.

What common knowledge do you plumb to determine that we can can not question God's existence? It has never been part of common knowledge to my knoledge. Perhaps I only apply to uncommon knowledge? Doubt is not uncommon, and if there is a person out there who says that they have never doubted, I would be inclined to say that they are the hyppocrites that you are calling Drakonfire (and myself).

[Scroll Lock]

"Eric, where do you get off making the statement that God does not condem a thief? Theft is expressly forbidden in the Bible, right from petty theft right down through to tax evasion."

You obviously are just talking out your ass. I don't wana be mean, but think before you post. God is all forgiving or w/e bullshit they teach. He forgives for almost everything, remember? People do doubt, but it is taught that you shouldn't doubt. Plain and simple, i don't wana have a religious discussion, but if your saying that god doesnt forgive people, then you obviously have no idea what your talking about according to the bible.

[Northwind]

Thank you Scroll for your enlightened essay. The next time I have questions about Christianity, I will be sure to turn to you. You really gave that dumb ol' Cephas the what-for. I am sure that he will see the error of his ways and come crawling for your approval.

I must note, however, that that point that he made and the point that you made in response have absolutely nothing to do with each other.

Still though, WELL SPOKEN!

[Scroll Lock]

Thank you Scroll for your enlightened essay. The next time I have questions about Christianity, I will be sure to turn to you. You really gave that dumb ol' Cephas the what-for. I am sure that he will see the error of his ways and come crawling for your approval.

I must note, however, that that point that he made and the point that you made in response have absolutely nothing to do with each other.

Still though, WELL SPOKEN!

they have everything to do with eachother, god doesnt condemn a theif, he forgives

cephas isnt dumb, i was friends with him, but he is talking out his ass saying god condemns anybody that goes against the bible

[Cephas]

Am I now, Eric? Let me give you a scenario:

Two families have been told what steps they need to take to protect their firstborn son from the Angel of Death passing through Egypt. Each takes the steps, slaying a lamb, and putting the blood where they were told to put it. Now the night is upon them. One family is rejoicing in God's provision and protection, feasting and enjoying themselves. Another family is sitting up in a silent vigil of worry, biting fingernails and anxiously looking at their precious eldest son. Is one less protected than the other?

No. The one that doubts is just as safe as the other. However, he that doubts robs himself of enjoyment. The Bible clearly teaches that we should not worry about things, but not that we should not question things. In the acts, the Berean church is commended for their diligence in searching the scriptures to ensure that what they were taught was in accord with them.

Now, where are you getting the impression that I have in any way implied that God does not forgive people? I will state that forgiveness is opened to all people, but not everyone accepts it, and therefore not everyone is forgiven. How do you see things?

EDIT: NW, how are we not talking the same thing here? Dumb 'ol Cephas must be missing something...

Eric, the sinner is condemned, no ifs, ands or buts. However, forgiveness is still available. I didn't say anything in the condemnation is final.

[Scroll Lock]

I'll address the first part in a second, the second part

"Now, where are you getting the impression that I have in any way implied that God does not forgive people? I will state that forgiveness is opened to all people, but not everyone accepts it, and therefore not everyone is forgiven. How do you see things?"

you clealy implied god condemns theifs, and where is it written that you have to believe in god to be forgiven

"Eric, where do you get off making the statement that God does not condem a thief? Theft is expressly forbidden in the Bible, right from petty theft right down through to tax evasion."

[Scroll Lock]

Questioning god, would be the same as questioning your fait, am i correct?

[Cephas]

I'll address the first part in a second, the second part

"Now, where are you getting the impression that I have in any way implied that God does not forgive people? I will state that forgiveness is opened to all people, but not everyone accepts it, and therefore not everyone is forgiven. How do you see things?"
you clealy implied god condemns theifs
"Eric, where do you get off making the statement that God does not condem a thief? Theft is expressly forbidden in the Bible, right from petty theft right down through to tax evasion."
I added an edit to my response when you clarified what you were saying. See above.

The thief is clearly condemned, as are his actions. Condemnation does not imply that God can not forgive though...
Questioning god, would be the same as questioning your fait, am i correct?
Not necessarily. I can question why something is happening, and ultimately, that is questioning God. Does that undermine my faith? I don't see it that way, do you?

[Scroll Lock]

Well, thats not how i see it so maybe we got our singles crossed. I see condemned as not having the ability to be forgiven

[Cephas]

Then perhaps we are closer to being on the same page than you first thought. BTW, I was busy adding an edit to my last message when you put in yours, you can see that too.

[Scroll Lock]

Yea, but i still see questioning god as questioning faith, and questioning faith is not allowed.

[Cephas]

Yea, but i still see questioning god as questioning faith, and questioning faith is not allowed.
This is killing my beautiful low post count...
Funny how you seem to put 'faith' above God. Now, give me a sound reason to believe that questioning is not allowed. Nothing along the lines of 'common sense', or because you think it. Something solid that holds some weight.

[Scroll Lock]

Let me lead you to why i think this...

Believing in God is a Faith.

Faith can't be questioned because it wouldn't be called faith(confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing).

Therefore questioning your belief in god, is against the faith of christianity.

[Cephas]

As drakonfire stated, what you are describing is a cult mentality. "Do, but do not question." The commendation of the Berean church, which I mentioned earlier, indicates to me that a Christian is encouraged to question, and thereby, delve deeper into their understanding of God.

[Scroll Lock]

but then its not faith, its just unsteady belief

maybe i just view religions as cults, but thats how it looks to me

[drakonfire]

but then its not faith, its just unsteady belief

maybe i just view religions as cults, but thats how it looks to me


if i may step back into the convo here, scroll i think this is the problem, you view christianity as another faith, or rather, religion, this is the trip point for a lot of people

christianity, IMO is more about a relationship with Christ and God, and its a wonderful relationship too, but as in any relationship, you tend to question the other person sometimes, except God is perfect, so He nevers questions you, and you shouldnt really need to question Him, but it happens, and He understands that and is always waiting with the answers you seek, as long as you seek them earnestly

[Scroll Lock]

yea, well, its still not allowed, faith, its called faith for a reason

[Cephas]

yea, well, its still not allowed, faith, its called faith for a reason
I have faith that my rolling office chair will hold me up. But when it swings back suddenly, I have doubts...

[Scroll Lock]

so, sence ur comparing it like that

you'll have doubts when... the sky is falling?

[TheBlazedAce]

so, sence ur comparing it like that

you'll have doubts when... the sky is falling?

Woah! What's happening outside?! The sky is falling! SNOW!

[Bottle]

Hmm. The Big Bang Theory thread has become the Why Should We Believe In God thread.

[Blexican]

Hmm. The Big Bang Theory thread has become the Why Should We Believe In God thread.
Again!! ;)

[Northwind]

Cephas - You made the point I was trying to make.
The thief is clearly condemned, as are his actions. Condemnation does not imply that God can not forgive though...
Scroll's response to you completely missed the point that both are possible. Condemnation and forgiveness are two separate ideas and Scroll has conflated the two.

As for his idea that faith=never questioning, I think he is the only one here who doesn't get it. (Maybe he got his "singles" crossed.:) ) You know, you aren't required to continually beat your head against the wall for no chance of gain.

[Office_Shredder]

Alright, here's a way of looking at faith that even scrolll should understand (even though he doesn't seem to understand a whole lot :rolleyes: ).

If you have faith in something, you believe it to be true. If I have faith in god, I believe that god exists. If I have faith in god's benevolence, I believe that he will be compassionate. This does not require me to accept that god is compassionate when he smashes Asia with a tidal wave, nor does it require me to accept that god is compassionate if a family member was murdered. Me having faith in god's benevolence means that when I see an example of him not being benevolent, I have several choices:
A.) Blindly be stupid like scroll lock suggests and go "Yuck yuck! I'm sure he's still compassionate"
B.) Become a cynical mass murderer
C.) Ask god WHY he was not benevolent in my view at that point in time.

The natural conclusion after pondering (C) is that god's benevolency does not extend to wholesale protection for the human race, which helps to further my understanding of the god I have faith in.

See.... questioning that which you believe allows you to get a better understanding of what you believe in... it doesn't mean you don't believe in it anymore

[Scroll Lock]

Religion is choise A, and really, thats the only meaning of faith, look it up buddy, you should be able to understand what definition is? right?

edit: lets try and get back on topic, cause i do like the original topic, so once your done trying to redefine faith, lets get back to bbt

[Bottle]

A.) Blindly be stupid

Religion is choise A
And thus Scroll Lock proves that Religion is blind and stupid. :)

[Office_Shredder]

dictionary.com first definition of "faith":
Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.

Just because I have confident belief in the truth of something doesn't mean I can't question aspects about it.... for example, just because I believe god exists doesn't mean I can't question god.

[S_K_O_F]

Hmm. The Big Bang Theory thread has become the Why Should We Believe In God thread.

yes...it is unfortunate

*coming from a person that believes the big bang theory is bunk*

it is unfortunate though that people are so intent on disproving each other that they forget how to converse in a civil manner

[Office_Shredder]

It's unfortunate that scroll lock joins in on these kinds of conversations

[Scroll Lock]

look back, its unfortunate that you guys bring religion into the mix, cause its not my subjest, i see it as a testbook defintion, while you see it as a loose guide for life

i think i contributed well to the big bang theory, just maybe not to the religious view of it in your eyes

[Office_Shredder]

scroll lock, you can't view personal belief as a "textbook definition"

Just in case you already missed that

[Scroll Lock]

see, came out wrong again, thats not what i ment

ill put it the way you put it

i view religions as cults, plain and simple, but that truely doesn't matter, lets get back to the theory

[Swartzstrom]

You know...
I figured that this thread would have died by now... :P

[TheBlazedAce]

You know...
I figured that this thread would have died by now... :P

It was almost dead, one of the last on the first page, before you said that.

[Scroll Lock]

i liked it, until some idiot, who will remain nameless, turned it into a religion thread

[Swartzstrom]

Who did that?

[drakonfire]

Who did that?
me

i only followed the logical course of the thread, the BBT cannot be proved or disproved, making it, in my mind, just as much a leap of faith as beliving in God
[/2 cents]
my last post on the subject, its been fun

[Scroll Lock]

actually, not only u, dont take the blame, was partly my fault

[TheBlazedAce]

I've got a discussion. Can someone help prove to me that there is a god?

Surprisingly enough it wasn't you drakonfire.

[Scroll Lock]

it was actfin! actually, i think it was my fault for feeding the flames

[drakonfire]

okay, i lied, not my last post and not all my fault... i must have missed act's post... we all helped it along, lol, the rest of my previous post still stands though ;)