AGS Steam Games

Forums → WEPR → [redirected]If God created all things

1849 255530
DrCool1
offline
DrCool1
210 posts
Bard

Here is something to get the brain going. It's been said that God created ALL things. Also it's been said that God is 100 precent pure/good. So God created man and it was said that because of man's sinful actions bad/evil things were created. But if God created ALL things then God created bad/evil things, not man. So by God creating bad/evil things this does not make him 100 precent pure/good.

  • 1,849 Replies
MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,470 posts
Farmer

Theories can be made by one person. A strong theory must be created by a highly credible individual or by many others in order for other people to actually consider it.


No a person can't they can only come up with a hypothesis.

And Einstein produced the the photon theory. Darwin produced the Evolutionary Theory, which was his creation, not something he got a team to come up with.


Alone no, other people had to review there finding before it was considered a scientific theory.


Here is a diagram to help better understand the process. Personally I think I would have preferred the term construct rather then invent a hypothesis and there should be background research between the first two steps here but still I hope you can get the idea.

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y163/MageGrayWolf/scientific_method.jpg
Xervicx
offline
Xervicx
37 posts
Nomad

Okay... I am looking at this diagram and it does not state anywhere that there needs to be more than one person involved in its creation.

Besides, a theory that has been proven wrong is a failed theory. Still a theory, just one that has been proven wrong.

And really, why would the Evolutionary Theory have been called that since it had been created? It was considered as such, who cares if someone legally recognizes it as a theory?

You are stating that it takes more than one person to create a theory... You are wrong. It takes more than one person usually to create a strong, believable theory. An individual, unless they have a lot of power, fame, or influence, they can only create a weak theory until they tell others the theory. It is still a theory.

Not all theories can be tested. Many areas of quantum theory can not be tested at all. Like the theory that states that anything can happen at any time. That can't necessarily be tested or proven wrong. Yet, it is still a theory, and one recognized by many. So even your graph fails at representing theory.

MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,470 posts
Farmer

Part of the testing process is having others independently recreate your findings. So no a single person can not create a theory!

Agoff1101
offline
Agoff1101
49 posts
Nomad

Really? Albert Einstein proved a condition of reality? That is impossible. No one can prove anything really, they can only hope that the evidence supports their claim for that moment. Really, there is no real way to test every element in existence to see if gravity is, and always was, active and consistent. Admit it, there is not.

YES Albert Einstein PROVED that gravity is caused by a bend in space time!!! He knew that nothing on earth was large enough to bend the space time continuum a significant amount so he used the sun. When there was a total solar eclipse he observed the position of certain stars directly next to the eclipse and they were skewed off position because the light from the stars bent around the sun! Actually the light moved in a straight line but the space that it moved through was curved therefore the light curved. His theory that he single-handedly created ALONE and published in 1915, if i remember correctly, has been proved many other times by thousand of people and pictures such as this one right here.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cd/Black_Hole_Milkyway.jpg
now how can you disprove that?
Agoff1101
offline
Agoff1101
49 posts
Nomad

oops
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cd/Black_Hole_Milkyway.jpg

Agoff1101
offline
Agoff1101
49 posts
Nomad

a bit too big but if you scroll over you can see what I'm talking about

Dubness2
offline
Dubness2
389 posts
Nomad

Unicorns= Horses, Dragons= Dinosaurs, Demons= Satan and such, which os part of our religon and when the bible talks about giants it does not refer to 20 foot tall beasts, but more 7-8 feet tall men who got what they wanted through brute force.

Nice job defining except for the Unicorns. Cweb is right about the unicorn translation.
Well, there are many different part of the Bible that apparently have been, ah, hidden... by The Church. Some are rumored to be about Jesus having a wife and children, others say that there are different versions of the fall of the Devil. It wouldn't surprise me.

Hidden? how do you know this? Define. "The Church"
First off the matter and energy was already all there in the singularity thus already present in the expansion so dust didn't just show up. Black holes are a result of very compact mass. considering everythign is closer in the past is it really that hard to picture this happening? As for star formation this is an observed event and I'm not so sure is necessitated by black holes.

How did the matter and enery get there?
demons=satan what's your point? unless you have proof it exists still fantasy. As for giants the Bible only says they were of great size. Besides some religiously minded people think the average human was like 12 feet tall.

The Bible does talk about the giants (8-12ft tall) which were scientifically proven to exist. (searching for article now)
And Agoff that could be a fake picture. I mean wiki is known to be an unreliable site.. Not disagreeing with you though so don't shoot me!
Agoff1101
offline
Agoff1101
49 posts
Nomad

K how about this then
http://lensing.davecoss.com/exam/m31-0lensedimage.gif

deserteagle
offline
deserteagle
1,633 posts
Nomad

Some are rumored to be about Jesus having a wife and children,


Jesus did spend a lot of time hanging out with Mary Magdalene, the prostitute. It wouldn't surprise me if she did some "favors" for the Messiah/" King of the Jews" In Jesus's time, unmarried men were very uncommon and often social outcasts. Many people would have thought "That guy is a loser. He can't get a wife nor can does he own any land" People will not have taken Jesus seriously.

The Bible does talk about the giants (8-12ft tall) which were scientifically proven to exist. (searching for article now)


Along with the "experts" who say Bigfoot and Nessie are out there.

And Agoff that could be a fake picture. I mean wiki is known to be an unreliable site.. Not disagreeing with you though so don't shoot me!


That is a very weak argument. You should give some counter-evidence, not "that pic might be fake"
BeastMode10
offline
BeastMode10
374 posts
Nomad

Your big bang is a theory. Just that, it has not been proven, and neither have God. You put faith in the big bang as much as we put faith in the bible.


There's actually a big difference. Scientific theories for the creation of the universe are supported by evidence. Unfortunately, the bible is not a viable source of evidence. The only way in which the existence of God is maintained is through faith.

Cweb is right about the unicorn translation.


What do you mean by "right"? The point of this forum is to persuade others into recognizing truth in your beliefs through supporting evidence. Please leave this debate if all you wish to do is assume that the bible is correct, and draw weak, unsupported conclusions.
Agoff1101
offline
Agoff1101
49 posts
Nomad

That is a very weak argument. You should give some counter-evidence, not "that pic might be fake"

he just doesn't want me to write a post on how he's wrong and I'm obviously right.
deserteagle
offline
deserteagle
1,633 posts
Nomad

he just doesn't want me to write a post on how he's wrong and I'm obviously right.


Maybe he should take the honorable way out of a debate and stop posting. He's really starting to grab a straws here.
Dubness2
offline
Dubness2
389 posts
Nomad

That is a very weak argument. You should give some counter-evidence, not "that pic might be fake"

You honestly need to read first. I said I wasn't disagreeing with him. I just wanted more evidence with a better source.
Dubness2
offline
Dubness2
389 posts
Nomad

What do you mean by "right"? The point of this forum is to persuade others into recognizing truth in your beliefs through supporting evidence.

You need to check out the Hebrew Biblical translations for the Bible. thats all I was meaning by that. Wow. Some people just don't want to read?
MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,470 posts
Farmer

How did the matter and enery get there?


We don't really know. One possibility as very poorly and childishly stated by cweb118 is that the membrane that our universe sits on and another membrane collided introducing the initial conditions of the big bang. Another possibility is that it has always been here considering matter and energy can not by any known means be created or destroyed.

Remember we really can't say the initial conditions existed for X amount of time since time only existed "after" the Big Bang, and I use the word after loosely here.
Showing 331-345 of 1849