well if any of u r familiar with the law of conservation and mass, then u know that it states that matter cannot be created from nothing, or completely destroyed. so evolutionists say this, then turn around and say the big bang created the universe as we know it. WTF!!?!?!?!the universe went from non existent to existent in a fraction of a nanosecond! and where did the bigbang come from? nothing? nope, because if the law of conservation and mass is true, then the bigbang isnt. simple...
The Big Bang is not contradictory to God creating the universe at all.
Yes, but a lot of people do not seem to realize this, sadly. It's the same thing with evolution. The theories do not necessarily completely get God out of the picture, because they are not about creationism. Simply ideas on how the world and universe got to the point where they are today.
Now evolution vs. creationism is the one thing I am unsure of. First of all, I believe that God created everything. Evolution is not a creative process. However, I am still skeptical of several parts of evolution, particularly when it comes to adaptive evolution. I'm also a little skeptical of the methods the Intelligent Design movement is using at the moment. Who knows? After all, God is omnipotent; he could change species down here if he wanted.
After all, God is omnipotent; he could change species down here if he wanted.
Exactly! And as far as I can tell, God is not quite so blunt in dealing with happenings on Earth anymore. A subtle nudge here and there, a poke or two every once in a while should be enough. I don't see why a lot of Christians take the Bible word for word...
I understand that they have the belief that the Bible is quite literally God's word, but leaving no room for error almost seems more blasphemous to me than actually going out and blatantly sinning. As you stated, God is, after all, omnipotent. Creation could have happened any number of ways.
Idk, the bing bang seems more logical than a bearded man in the clouds making everything, including beards, men, and clouds, even after he himself was around
I understand that they have the belief that the Bible is quite literally God's word, but leaving no room for error almost seems more blasphemous to me than actually going out and blatantly sinning. As you stated, God is, after all, omnipotent. Creation could have happened any number of ways.
Now there are definite difference between copying errors and actual errors in the material itself. We don't have any of the original manuscripts of the books of the Bible (nor do we have any of almost any famed ancient classic either), so I do acknowledge that the Bible as we have it could have some error. However, materially there are no doctrines that have been broken by such errors; the message is still the same. All the same, the Bible should be taken as literally as possible, seeing as they were divinely inspired and meant to be read with a single correct interpretation under God.
Now back to creation. The Bible doesn't specifically mention what God did to create the universe. But I think that with the scientific evidence we have, the Big Bang is most plausible. Steady-state theory has been argued away a long time ago.
Now back to creation. The Bible doesn't specifically mention what God did to create the universe. But I think that with the scientific evidence we have, the Big Bang is most plausible. Steady-state theory has been argued away a long time ago.
Ya but that doesn't fit with the "fact" God made the earth in 6 days.
14 And God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth." And it was so. 16 God made two great lightsâ"the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morningâ"the fourth day.
Now near the top it is quoted saying big bang most plausible now if nothing can be created from nothing why do we even have laws of matter? It makes no sense only one answer truly makes sense and there was a creator he did it in six days it was his word he made everything and it was good he rested.
now if nothing can be created from nothing why do we even have laws of matter?
Because God made them. As I've said before, the Big Bang and God's creation need not contradict each other. Is it not implausible to say that he might have used the Big Bang, which we have the best scientific evidence for at the moment, to create the universe?
because if you look at the earth if the earth is just 10,000 feet closer to the sun we would all be crispy fried just 10,000 feet father away and there you be a lot of AG popsicles around
I'm not sure where you're getting this 10,000 feet number. The amount of sun that hits Mars would be enough to sustain life and it's very roughly 46 million miles away. We're in a very small window when you look at the scale of say galaxies, but within a solar system it's decently sized at least.
We are still in a very small scale. Mars might get just enough (though I doubt it), but in the big picture it is too unstable to support life. Its axis is very wobbly without a large moon to stabilize it; it lacks plate tectonics to keep its surface temperature under control; its orbit is far too erratic; and it lacks large water sources to keep temperature stable.
Yes, but if Earth were in it's place with it's moon it would be a livable enviroment, that was the original point. There might not be the same amount of temperate land and ice ages could potentially bring out even larger extintions, but the fact remains that there's a relatively large window of opurtunity within a solar system where energy flow from the star or stars is great enough to sustain life.
