-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Picture this, dionasaurs everywhere, the ocean going back and forth and all of a sudden a rolex washes up on the beach.
Did the rolex create itself?No, its obvious God was in the beginning and he decided to create stuff, because he can and he did, the world as we know it. He can create what he wants
Did the rolex create itself?No, its obvious God was in the beginning and he decided to create stuff, because he can and he did, the world as we know it. He can create what he wants
W
Ooi, why must I repeat myself constantly?... Let me just say here that based on what I presented in my previous post (post #35) shows that the universe had a beginning. If it had a beginning then logically there must have been something outside of the universe to cause it to happen, because anything that has a beginning has a cause. Now, without knowing anything about that cause, we already know logically that it is spaceless, timeless, immaterial, (since it created space, time, and matter/energy) and based on the fine tuning of the universe it seems to have exhibited an incredible level of intelligence... If that isn't God then I don't know what is.
Besides, you don't have to know anything about God to know that he exists. If you happen upon an stone statue out in the wilderness and know nothing about who made it, do you deny that someone made it? Of course not. You know right off the bat that it is a product of intelligence because natural forces do not create orderly things like stone statues.
You don't have to know where God came from to answer the question of whether he exists.
A 'God of the gaps' argument is when you don't know the answer to a scientific question, and simply say "oh, well, God did it." This is different. The Big Bang and fine tuning are scientifically and philosophically positive evidences for the existence of God. When you take an honest approach and follow the evidence where it leads, it leads straight back to God. You may think agnosticism is the most valid position, but there is a truth out there, the truth is knowable, and logically based on the evidence I'd say God is the greatest conclusion.
What's nonsensical and incoherent is to deny the law of causality which is the entire foundation of science itself. Science is by definition the 'search for causes.' If you're going to deny causality, you might as well deny the rest of science because then there'd be no way of knowing anything about the universe. However contrary to this, we happen to know a lot about the physical world. Everything is highly logical and orderly and rather predictable. We can repeat the same experiment and get the same outcome. With such a consistent world we live in where causes are in literally everything we see and do, it's completely nonsensical to throw out the law of causality, especially for this one topic out of many. You ask for one big miracle so you can explain all the rest. it just doesn't make sense.
I will repeat myself also in saying that the quantum vacuum isn't 'nothing', it is something. It is the quantum vacuum. Particles arise at the quantum level from a sea of particles within the space time membrane amongst other particles and waves. In fact the whole quantum world is a conundrum for scientists due to the principle of nonlocalty - meaning the same particle can be in multiple places at once. The quantum world is not 'nothing' like you and Stephen Hawking suggest, it is a specific something. A weird something, but a something nonetheless.
As for your last statement, I see no need to repeat myself any further.
Besides, you don't have to know anything about God to know that he exists. If you happen upon an stone statue out in the wilderness and know nothing about who made it, do you deny that someone made it? Of course not. You know right off the bat that it is a product of intelligence because natural forces do not create orderly things like stone statues.
You don't have to know where God came from to answer the question of whether he exists.
A 'God of the gaps' argument is when you don't know the answer to a scientific question, and simply say "oh, well, God did it." This is different. The Big Bang and fine tuning are scientifically and philosophically positive evidences for the existence of God. When you take an honest approach and follow the evidence where it leads, it leads straight back to God. You may think agnosticism is the most valid position, but there is a truth out there, the truth is knowable, and logically based on the evidence I'd say God is the greatest conclusion.
What's nonsensical and incoherent is to deny the law of causality which is the entire foundation of science itself. Science is by definition the 'search for causes.' If you're going to deny causality, you might as well deny the rest of science because then there'd be no way of knowing anything about the universe. However contrary to this, we happen to know a lot about the physical world. Everything is highly logical and orderly and rather predictable. We can repeat the same experiment and get the same outcome. With such a consistent world we live in where causes are in literally everything we see and do, it's completely nonsensical to throw out the law of causality, especially for this one topic out of many. You ask for one big miracle so you can explain all the rest. it just doesn't make sense.
I will repeat myself also in saying that the quantum vacuum isn't 'nothing', it is something. It is the quantum vacuum. Particles arise at the quantum level from a sea of particles within the space time membrane amongst other particles and waves. In fact the whole quantum world is a conundrum for scientists due to the principle of nonlocalty - meaning the same particle can be in multiple places at once. The quantum world is not 'nothing' like you and Stephen Hawking suggest, it is a specific something. A weird something, but a something nonetheless.
As for your last statement, I see no need to repeat myself any further.
K
Stonehenge is a perfect example (don't know if I spelled it right). We know someone built it but, we don't know who or why, or even how. Where did the stones come from and how did they move such massive stones. Maybe it was aliens.
When we don't know we begin to speculate and use our knowledge to try and explain it. When the fact is we really don't know. What do we know? we know the earth is here, we know it got it here some how. We have an ancient book that has stood the test of time that tells us how it got here. But that would mean that there is a God and if there is a God. Then, we must be accountable Him. That's the heart of the problem. Man doesn't want to be accountable to no one but himself. So we come with brilliant and somewhat convincing ways to give an alternative.
It takes more faith to believe that all this happened by chance than it does to believe the God of the bible.
When we don't know we begin to speculate and use our knowledge to try and explain it. When the fact is we really don't know. What do we know? we know the earth is here, we know it got it here some how. We have an ancient book that has stood the test of time that tells us how it got here. But that would mean that there is a God and if there is a God. Then, we must be accountable Him. That's the heart of the problem. Man doesn't want to be accountable to no one but himself. So we come with brilliant and somewhat convincing ways to give an alternative.
It takes more faith to believe that all this happened by chance than it does to believe the God of the bible.
The options are pretty limited really. Either it's always been there or it started at some point.
And if it was started by some point then what started it?
As we are throwing the word 'Logic' around a lot, lets look at all options
Option 1) it's always been there.
This cannot be believed by a theist because the bible clearly states god created it.
This can be believed by an atheist because it indicates no divine creator, yet most atheists choose not to believe this option for some reason.
So Option 1 isn't an option.
Option 2) It started at some point!
Both sides of the fence believe this and both agree there was some some sort of happening that triggered it all.
But this is where it falls apart lol.
Did it appear from nothing or did god make it? It's certainly easier to digest that someone designed it all rather something just appearing from nothing. Even as an atheist I will admit that.
The watch on the beach analogy certainly has some merit.
But... I would hardly call it a 'great' desgin considering the millions of species and animals who have perished on the earth since life began. Severe Weather effects are devastating and often fatal, the lands are badly positioned causing major earthquakes and The planet itself is filled with idiots, psychos, dangerous people, dangerous animals, dangerous germs, dangerous plants and dangerous foodstuff.
We don't have dominion over everything. Germs and micro organisms have dominion over us and can wipe us out in our millions. Hurricanes, tsunamis and tornados can destroy entire cities and leave thousands dead.
If it was designed by a divine being, you've got to concede it was poorly done.
So imagine you pick that watch up on the beach, it doesn't work properly, the glass is cracked, the springs are rusted and the gears are broken. Yeah you'll concede it was made, but you'll also toss it back realising it was a poor job.
And if it was started by some point then what started it?
As we are throwing the word 'Logic' around a lot, lets look at all options
Option 1) it's always been there.
This cannot be believed by a theist because the bible clearly states god created it.
This can be believed by an atheist because it indicates no divine creator, yet most atheists choose not to believe this option for some reason.
So Option 1 isn't an option.
Option 2) It started at some point!
Both sides of the fence believe this and both agree there was some some sort of happening that triggered it all.
But this is where it falls apart lol.
Did it appear from nothing or did god make it? It's certainly easier to digest that someone designed it all rather something just appearing from nothing. Even as an atheist I will admit that.
The watch on the beach analogy certainly has some merit.
But... I would hardly call it a 'great' desgin considering the millions of species and animals who have perished on the earth since life began. Severe Weather effects are devastating and often fatal, the lands are badly positioned causing major earthquakes and The planet itself is filled with idiots, psychos, dangerous people, dangerous animals, dangerous germs, dangerous plants and dangerous foodstuff.
We don't have dominion over everything. Germs and micro organisms have dominion over us and can wipe us out in our millions. Hurricanes, tsunamis and tornados can destroy entire cities and leave thousands dead.
If it was designed by a divine being, you've got to concede it was poorly done.
So imagine you pick that watch up on the beach, it doesn't work properly, the glass is cracked, the springs are rusted and the gears are broken. Yeah you'll concede it was made, but you'll also toss it back realising it was a poor job.
V
Actually, it is. Extreme research has been done an several possible answers have already been rolled out. Science is still working, and succeeding, in explaining this random event. Saying this isn't possible is rather ignorant. You can easily find explanations and papers done by well known scientists everywhere. as for God? Maybe he had a hand in this. I don't know. none of us do. not one person can say for certain that either side is right. If god created the universe than who created God? He cant have always existed. Who created him? Im not trying to start fights, simply saying that in this time the more believable cause of the universe is through a random energy event which lead to more complexities as time went on.
D
1) You claim "extreme research" has been done and yet you fail to post a link. Sorry but that means your claims have no veracity.
2) You claim I am ignorant simply because I claim I claim it is life forming out of non-living things is imposible. Read this article and then see who is being ignorant. SCIENTISTS SPEAK ABOUT DNA
Science for the proponents of evolution is their tower of babel. They use science to disprove God by showing us the smoke and mirrors of a still unproven theory that life spontaneously came randomly from non living things.
2) You claim I am ignorant simply because I claim I claim it is life forming out of non-living things is imposible. Read this article and then see who is being ignorant. SCIENTISTS SPEAK ABOUT DNA
Science for the proponents of evolution is their tower of babel. They use science to disprove God by showing us the smoke and mirrors of a still unproven theory that life spontaneously came randomly from non living things.
You basically just said "I don't know what happened so I believe God did it." The honest answer is just "I don't know."
And fine tuned for life?
The universe is extremely hostile to life. Extinction level events have nearly eliminated complex life on Earth on five separate occasions. Of all the species that have ever lived 99.9% are now extinct. Furthermore, normal matter like stars and planets occupy less than 0.0000000000000000000042 percent of the observable universe. Life constitutes an even smaller fraction of that matter again. If the universe is fine-tuned for anything it is for the creation of black holes and empty space.
There is nothing to suggest that human life, our planet or our universe are uniquely privileged nor intended. On the contrary, the sheer scale of the universe in both spaceand time and our understanding of its development indicate we are non-central to the scheme of things; mere products of chance, physical laws and evolution. To believe otherwise amounts to an argument from incredulity and a hubris mix of anthropocentrism and god of the gaps thinking.
The conditions that we observe, namely, those around our Sun and on Earth, simply seem fine-tuned to us because we evolved to suit them. We cannot prove that all otherpossible forms of life would be infeasible with a different set of conditions or constants because the only universe that we can observe is the one we occupy. Indeed, modelling suggests star formation (a necessary precursor to our form of biology) may be viable under a number of different universal conditions.
Without actual proof of creation, naturalistic explanations for the properties of this universe cannot be wholly ruled out. It is possible an infinity of universes exist, all with different conditions and forms of life. The fact that our particular universe has the physical constants we observe may be no more to the point than the fact a hand of cards, dealt from a shuffled deck, is the one a hypothetical player holds. Though the chances of any one universe being hospitable to life might be low, the conditional probability of a form of life observing a set of constants suitable to it is exactly unity. That is to say, every possible universe would ‘appear’ fine-tuned to the form of life it harbours, while all those inhospitable universes would never be observed by life at all.
And fine tuned for life?
The universe is extremely hostile to life. Extinction level events have nearly eliminated complex life on Earth on five separate occasions. Of all the species that have ever lived 99.9% are now extinct. Furthermore, normal matter like stars and planets occupy less than 0.0000000000000000000042 percent of the observable universe. Life constitutes an even smaller fraction of that matter again. If the universe is fine-tuned for anything it is for the creation of black holes and empty space.
There is nothing to suggest that human life, our planet or our universe are uniquely privileged nor intended. On the contrary, the sheer scale of the universe in both spaceand time and our understanding of its development indicate we are non-central to the scheme of things; mere products of chance, physical laws and evolution. To believe otherwise amounts to an argument from incredulity and a hubris mix of anthropocentrism and god of the gaps thinking.
The conditions that we observe, namely, those around our Sun and on Earth, simply seem fine-tuned to us because we evolved to suit them. We cannot prove that all otherpossible forms of life would be infeasible with a different set of conditions or constants because the only universe that we can observe is the one we occupy. Indeed, modelling suggests star formation (a necessary precursor to our form of biology) may be viable under a number of different universal conditions.
Without actual proof of creation, naturalistic explanations for the properties of this universe cannot be wholly ruled out. It is possible an infinity of universes exist, all with different conditions and forms of life. The fact that our particular universe has the physical constants we observe may be no more to the point than the fact a hand of cards, dealt from a shuffled deck, is the one a hypothetical player holds. Though the chances of any one universe being hospitable to life might be low, the conditional probability of a form of life observing a set of constants suitable to it is exactly unity. That is to say, every possible universe would ‘appear’ fine-tuned to the form of life it harbours, while all those inhospitable universes would never be observed by life at all.
Last edited:
D
This is a classic example of "look at my orange and not your apple". You are comparing logic to faith and then claim our faith is not logical. This is just plain stupid. The entire point of faith is it is not dependent on facts.
Is there anything more foolish than a person pointing to facts and figures in a faith based forum? We as Christians believe the bible to be God's word. In all honesty that is exactly what we believe. Your attack on our faith is like lecturing on needle point a mechanics trade school. Your argument is so far out of place here it makes me wonder if you know the difference between faith and facts.
P
Yes, it's totally illogical to say the Universe came from nothing without a creator, even if random fluctuations caused the big bang what caused these random fluctuations? And then by chance we find ourselves as intelligent highly intelligent creatures on a finely tuned planet just the correct distance from our sun? You only have to look at the beauty of our planet and animals on our planet to see something put alot of thought and love into it's design.......The fool has said in his heart, there is no God!
D
Once again you fall back on your apple when this forum is talking about oranges. You are still trying to point us to facts even when we gather here because of our faith. You are so infatuated with facts that you even imply faith is somehow supported with facts.
faith - definition of faith by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.
Last edited by a moderator: