I am a christian, i and i strongly belive in my lord jesus christ, and i also belive that if you belive in him and except him as your savior, u will go to heaven. and i also believe that he created the world, not the big bang, or that we came from stupid apes.
i agree to that completaly just i know that many christans wont except that. Is it ok for me to have faith that God did it?
Absolutely that's ok. Everyone is entitled to beliefs. What I disagree with and will argue is when someone tries to tell me that they have proof of their religion and I have to accept it or i'm going to burn for eternity. This is just BS and as soon as people claim to have facts I ask to see them.
Haha gravity is a law, not a theory, that means it is a fact
Actually gravity is a theory. There are laws pertaining to that theory and are provided as evidence as to why the theory of gravity is the best explanation, but it is still a theory.
Saying something is more credible than another is an opinion my friend, not a fact, for in my opinion God created the big bang.
In the realms of science we ascribe credibility based on supporting evidence. If one idea has more evidence than another, even if it is only one piece of evidence, then that idea is considered the predominate explanation until new evidence is discovered which either supports that claim or refutes it.
but these are not reasons that prove God actually exist, only that he might exist.
My bad, that post was actually intended to disprove the might union.
The Might Union, its upper case, does not need to flaunt it's existence. It does not require warship, and has no reason to show itself.
Okay, so if there is popcorn in the sky, then why have we absolutely proven than it's actually condensed (or something like that) water.
They do have there sacred righting, for your information, it is called the Might. It has a dozen books with hundreds of pages gathered from people who speak with the universe.
Absolutely that's ok. Everyone is entitled to beliefs. What I disagree with and will argue is when someone tries to tell me that they have proof of their religion and I have to accept it or i'm going to burn for eternity. This is just BS and as soon as people claim to have facts I ask to see them.
I think some christains go overboard with ignorant preaching to. As for the gravity thing i reaserched and you are right, and i was kinda right, gravity is a fact, and laws make up the theory of gravity.
Haha gravity is a law, not a theory, that means it is a fact.
Congrats. You missed the point.
Replace gravity with plants growing.
How do plants grow? IDK God? Okay.
No, plants don't magically grow because God makes them grow, it's because of photosynthesis. Sure, you can argue God created plants to grow by means of photosynthesis, and you are allowed to think such a thing, but it can't be accepted as fact because there's no evidence supporting God making the plants grow.
If you want to fill in the gaps, then why use something other than God to fill the gaps?
What created the big bang? Nothing, therefore God must have created the universe.
But how about...
What created God? Nothing, therefore the big bang must have created the universe.
How about you theists just accept that the big bang created the universe until it is proven God was responsible?
*strokes chin thoughtfully* Well, innocent until proven guilty comes to mind. You say "accept" in a way that would suggest you find it as a fact. If you want us to accept the big bang happened, then you should probably prove God doesn't exist first.
You can't argue "facts" when debating religion it just ends up pissing people off and making everyone look like an idiot to the other side.
I understand and agree. The facts are that people are killing for each other for the same god so I will not stop debating with people who believe in god. Something has to be done. And what pisses ME off the most is if people say there is no point in debating or there is no point to us talking. Butterfly and hurricane. Pebble and ocean. An endless myriad of unknowns and possibilities. I am prepared to show you all my cards and change my mind with the simple text that people write. Its powerful stuff that should not be underestimated.
Okay, so if there is popcorn in the sky, then why have we absolutely proven than it's actually condensed (or something like that) water.
It is but his tears, for he feels sad that the Cat rules the world. You can not touch him, as you are lesser skins of the Giant Onion.
Interesting. Where could I find these?
Your local Might Union hall probably has one. But non-believers can not read it in full, only peaces of it to get them to convert away from there false gods and head to the Might Union.
Haha. You all missed the point. We don't know what was before the Big Bang. What caused the Big Bang? What was before the Big Bang? The Big Bang theory involve the origins of reality, and we don't know what was before because we weren't there. We can only make observations of the aftermath, and make conclusions about what happened, but it can be just as far-fetched as God.
A miracle has yet to be demonstrated. Even with the things you claim are miracles they can't be directly linked with God. The only reason you do see them as having some connection is because you have a preconceived conclusion and your trying to make the facts fit it.
Can the pixies be directly identified using the five senses? If so then the analogy is, again, moot.
Can God? Your argument that we can't scientifically prove God is because we can't detecting him with our five sense since he is metaphysical. If not being able to detect magic pixies with our five senses because they are metaphysical moots the argument then it also moots yours.
Then were did god come from? Use that answer and apply it to matter and viola! That how matter got here.
The application here works better as well since we are starting with the most simplistic rather then the most complex.
wow your so smart i did alot of reasearch, and i fnd some thing out, the big bang theory is just as credible as God, for there is no proof that either happened or exsisted/esist. Some scientist beilive in this thoery and have (dare i say it) FAITH in it, but isn't that frowned upon in the scientific would, faith in osmething that cannot be prooven?
A theory is formed from the observed evidence. God doesn't have this. Since the Big Bang theory is based on the observed evidence it is not faith. Honestly I'm getting a little sick of having to repeat myself on this particular fallacy, especially to those of you like yourself who have been around long enough to know that this argument is a fallacies since it has been shot down every time it has been used here.
I believe in it so it's right to me; the fact is that most of the world could care less about empirical evidence; talk emotions and feelings then you have people's attention. Arguing religion involves arguing against an individual not arguing against the religion itself.
But that still doesn't offer any validity to the belief itself.
but for the unkown i think athiest and christians should agree that god did it, and that we should both try to prove this wrong be reaserching it and learning more about the universe, but until we find another anwser, or never find another anwser, we could just agree on sayiing god did it as a temorary, or to some a pernament explanation.
So if there isn't an answer you just say it happened by magic? Your accepting an answer without sufficient evidence.
As for questioning my faith, go ahead, i recomend it, i even recomend questioning your own belifs time to time, thats whats keeps us on the road to anwsers and not a society where openmindedness is frowned upon.
If you really cared about the truth you wouldn't be just asserting "God did it" to circumvent your discomfort with not knowing.
Haha gravity is a law, not a theory, that means it is a fact.
*strokes chin thoughtfully* Well, innocent until proven guilty comes to mind. You say "accept" in a way that would suggest you find it as a fact. If you want us to accept the big bang happened, then you should probably prove God doesn't exist first.
I will do that, but first you must meet my demands.
Either:
A. Prove God exists.
or
B. Prove to me that it's possible to prove something's nonexistence.
It's impossible to prove something's nonexistence.
In fact, if you're going to use the "You can't prove God didn't create the universe, therefore God did it" argument, then you can't disprove the Big Bang theory, and therefore you must accept it.
As for the "innocent until proven guilty" part, let me adjust it some. You need evidence to prove someone committed a crime before you condemn them for it. You can't say creationism is fact until you have evidence that it happened. Same exact concept. What you said goes more along the lines of "guilty until proven innocent," which is unfair and makes no sense and by all means proven unreliable and often impossible.
We can only make observations of the aftermath, and make conclusions about what happened, but it can be just as far-fetched as God.
The Big Bang Theory is not accepted as fact by scientists because there is not enough evidence. Therefore, the space is void. If it is as far fetched as God, then we should believe in God no more, no less, than the Big Bang. In that case, we should not believe either one to be fact, but a mere plausibility.
The Big Bang Theory is not accepted as fact by scientists because there is not enough evidence. Therefore, the space is void. If it is as far fetched as God, then we should believe in God no more, no less, than the Big Bang. In that case, we should not believe either one to be fact, but a mere plausibility.
Now we see eye-to-eye. If a scientist told a man in 15th century France that there were going to be devices that could record real life, he would've said you were a mad man.
