| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| lets play " whack a moehle " | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Apr 12 2009, 09:34 PM (1,920 Views) | |
| Deleted User | Apr 14 2009, 08:21 AM Post #31 |
|
Deleted User
|
Let's make it interesting despite breeze's "winning" pastery. Let's pull a few things discussed together. Hawking in A Brief History of Time describes the universe as finite but unbounded. Creationists seem to latch onto the finite part, but ignore the unbounded. And I think this is where this author, or Hugh Ross, get it wrong. The following PBS presentation is the simplest explanation I can find: NO-BOUNDARY UNIVERSE
Of course that, A Brief History of Time, was published in 1988, and much has likely changed. |
|
|
| ngc1514 | Apr 14 2009, 10:56 AM Post #32 |
![]()
Moderator
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The biggest mistake Hawking made - and one he has since retracted - in A Brief History of Time was the supposed reversal of time's arrow if the universe had enough mass to slow and reverse the cosmological expansion. Yes, even people of Hawking's intellect make mistakes. The difference between science and religion is that science understands fallible researchers screw the pooch every now and then. The honorable ones admit the mistake and attempt to see where things went wrong. It's how things move forward from ignorance to knowledge. |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Apr 14 2009, 06:42 PM Post #33 |
|
Deleted User
|
Definitely, one mistake Creationists make is they tend to see authorities making statements when science is about the ideas. Darwin is often the focus of attention in attacks on evolutionary theory, but he was competing with Wallace to get the ideas published first, and as I've pointed out, the ideas were fairly common in science at the time. --- Looks like breeze has thrown in the towel. This thread was started with the intent to prove Creationism. After a paste or two he's given up and switched back to attacking science. I guess a paste or two is about all there is of the substance of Creation Science. |
|
|
| ngc1514 | Apr 14 2009, 08:21 PM Post #34 |
![]()
Moderator
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
But... there is no substance to "creation science." "Science" being the operative word. You have to admit watching fundamentalist kooks try to bend the beginning of Genesis to fit the discoveries of the last 400 years is pretty amusing. It's even funnier when the guy posting the lunacy has no idea what he's posting and is unable to see that some of the material directly counters the position of the New Earth Creationists. Even his oft quoted Dr. Ross - while affirming the universe was formed during a Big-Bang-like event around 14 billion years ago (obviously Ross is not a YEC), still says
No, it really doesn't. ANY of the major deities proposed by man over the last 10,000 years might have been the creator of the universe. The bible contains just one of thousands of creation myths men have embraced since they started keeping records. It's just gained steam as the creation myth accepted by a small (and diminishing) number of believers - most of whom appear to live in the United States. Claiming that "The physical evidence points clearly..." is a statement not based on any evidence presented before the author makes this rather startling claim. Before further snipping, poor ol' breeze should decide whether he's a young or old earth creationist. Posting non-comprehended data from both sides of the creationist fence weakens, rather than strengthens (as well as showing his lack of comprehension of that which he posts) his argument... if he had the cojones to make and defend one. Oh yeah, the Ross stuff came from here: http://www.reasons.org/rtbs-creation-model/tcm-big-bang/beginner%E2%80%99s%E2%80%94and-expert%E2%80%99s%E2%80%94guide-big-bang-sifting-facts-fictions (That's called a citation, Breeze. Shows I'm not posting another person's work as my own.) |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Apr 14 2009, 08:59 PM Post #35 |
|
Deleted User
|
"there is no substance to 'creation science.'" Hot air. |
|
|
| the breeze | Apr 14 2009, 09:50 PM Post #36 |
the breeze
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Even Time Itself Was Created As Steven Hawking, one of the three authors, boasted many years thereafter, we proved that time was created. We proved that time has a beginning. But through his contacts with certain Christians like his wife Jane, who's an Anglican, as a friend of mine from Cal Tech, Don Page, who had daily Bible studies with Steven and Jane Hawking while he was doing research pointed out, if you prove that time has a beginning, that it was created, it eliminates all theological possibilities but Jesus Christ. Of all world religions, only Judeo-Christian theology says Time has a beginning Why? Because if you were to open up the Holy books of the religions of the world, only one of them would describe God as a being that creates the universe independent of time, space, matter and energy. The other Holy books describe God as creating within time. The Bible states that God creates independent of time. That's the difference. Some verses that you might be familiar with: The first verse which states, “In the Beginning, God created the Heavens and the Earth…” The Hebrew words for heavens and Earth literally refer to the entire physical cosmos of matter, energy space and time. The universe. Hebrews 11:3 makes it more specific stating, “The universe that we detect was made from that which we cannot detect.” We can make detections within matter, energy, length, width, height and time, but not beyond. Eight places in the Bible tell us that God created time. I'll give you two examples: 2 Timothy 1:9 which states, “The Grace of God that we now experience was put into effect before the beginning of time” and Titus 1:2 which states, “The hope that we have in Jesus Christ was given to us before the beginning of time.” The three things that the Apostle Paul was saying in those two verses were that time is beginning, that God created the time dimension of our universe and, most importantly, that God has the capacity to operate through cause and effect before the time dimension of our universe even exists. Your friendly neighborhood physicist will tell you that time is defined as that dimension or realm in which cause and effect phenomena take place. What the Apostle Paul is telling us in these two places and in the six other portions of Scripture, is that we are confined to a single dimension of time. In fact it's worse than that. We're confined to half of a line of time. Time, for us, is a line that goes forward only. Have you ever noticed that you cannot stop or reverse the arrow of time? No matter what you do, it just keeps going forward in one direction. Any entity confined to half of the line of time, must have a beginning and must be created. I can walk home tonight, and that's it. It's the simplest, most rigorous proof of the existence of God. We're confined, and the entire universe is confined to half of the line of time. Therefore, the universe must be created and we must be created. But God is not so confined. When I present this evidence to atheists, their most frequent response is the same one I got from both of my sons when they were three years of age. It's, “If God created us, then who created God?” God: Not Confined by Time My sons and the atheists are assuming that God is confined to time in the same way that we are. But the Bible and the equations of General Relativity tell us that the entity that brought the universe into existence is not confined in time like we are, or the way that the universe is. God can move and operate in at least two dimensions of time. In two dimensions of time, time becomes a plane, like a sheet of paper, length and width. In a plane, you can have as many lines as you want and as many directions as you want. It would be possible for God to dwell on a time line running through a sheet of paper that's infinitely long, and that never crosses or touches the timeline of our universe. As such, God would have no beginning, no end and he would not be created. Sound familiar? |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Apr 15 2009, 12:37 AM Post #37 |
|
Deleted User
|
You're really losing it, breeze, you already posted that. |
|
|
| ngc1514 | Apr 15 2009, 02:00 AM Post #38 |
![]()
Moderator
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
And posted it without any citations. You have got to stop stealing other people's work, breezy. |
![]() |
|
| the breeze | Apr 15 2009, 10:34 PM Post #39 |
the breeze
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Why the God of Modern Physics Matches the God of the Bible Both John Chapter One and Colossians Chapter One make that claim about God; He has no beginning, no end and He is not created. The Bible is the only Holy book that makes that statement about God. What I've done for you in these few minutes is to establish the doctrine of the independent transcendence of the Creator. But we can go beyond this abstract, rigorous proof of the existence of the God of the Bible. It's Jesus Christ because we proved that the Creator must be an independent, transcendent being. What I've discovered, even on the University campus, is that audiences much prefer tangible proof for the existence of God, to the abstract proof of the existence of God. Today we have that, thanks to the efforts of astronomers in measuring the universe. Ours is the only generation of man that has ever lived to witness the measuring of the universe. This wasn't the case 15 years ago. Measuring The Universe Ours is a privileged generation because we have seen the measuring of the universe. The theological significance is that if you can measure the universe, you are measuring the creation. If you can measure the creation, you are measuring the Creator himself. Not all of his characteristics, of course, but many that are theologically significant. What we've discovered in measuring the universe is that the third assumption of Emanuel Kant; that we have infinite time, the universe is static and that we have an infinite supply of building blocks for life isn't true. We proved that the universe isn't static, that time isn't infinite. It's finite. The age of the universe is only 1,000,000,000,000,000,000 seconds (10 to the 18th power). We also discovered that we do not have an infinite supply of building blocks. In fact, we discovered that it takes exquisite design to get any building blocks at all. Molecules, without which, life is impossible. Atoms must be able to assemble in the molecules in order to gain sufficient complexity for life chemistry to proceed. That applies to any conceivable kind of life. |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Apr 15 2009, 11:15 PM Post #40 |
|
Deleted User
|
"Why the God of Modern Physics Matches the God of the Bible " Most of this has been covered earlier. Modern physics does not have a God, breeze. How foolish. Your pastry author is off topic in his title. "It's Jesus Christ because we proved that the Creator must be an independent, transcendent being." Non-sequitar. "What I've discovered, even on the University campus, is that audiences much prefer tangible proof for the existence of God, to the abstract proof of the existence of God." One, science does not prove--so the author is way off topic. Two, theology has not provided abstract proof of God's existence. "The theological significance is that if you can measure the universe, you are measuring the creation. If you can measure the creation, you are measuring the Creator himself." Non-sequitar. What this doofus is doing is setting up conclusions that take a logical form but are rationally meaningless. Then he looks for a facts and calls it proof. Problem is, his fact isn't truly a fact. "Emanuel Kant" Wasn't a physicist. "It's finite." But unbounded. "We also discovered that we do not have an infinite supply of building blocks." Yes, the laws of conservation which say energy and mass cannot be created or destroyed, only transformed. Gen 1:1 "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." The Hebrew word for created implies creating something from nothing, which defies the laws of physics. From beginning to end, your pastry author is wrong. Also, breeze, did you throw in the towel on proving Creation Science correct? You've abandoned it the last few days. Give up so easy? |
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · RV AND CAMPING DISCUSSION · Next Topic » |









![]](http://z3.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)

12:41 AM Jul 14
