# God did not Create the Universe, says Hawking



## Padawanbater2 (Sep 2, 2010)

LONDON (Reuters) &#8211; God did not create the universe and the "Big Bang" was an inevitable consequence of the laws of physics, the eminent British theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking argues in a new book.


In "The Grand Design," co-authored with U.S. physicist Leonard Mlodinow, Hawking says a new series of theories made a creator of the universe redundant, according to the Times newspaper which published extracts on Thursday.


"Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist," Hawking writes.


"It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going."


Hawking, 68, who won global recognition with his 1988 book "A Brief History of Time," an account of the origins of the universe, is renowned for his work on black holes, cosmology and quantum physics.


Since 1974, the scientist has worked on marrying the two cornerstones of modern physics -- Albert Einstein's General Theory of Relativity, which concerns gravity and large-scale phenomena, and quantum theory, which covers subatomic particles.


His latest comments suggest he has broken away from previous views he has expressed on religion. Previously, he wrote that the laws of physics meant it was simply not necessary to believe that God had intervened in the Big Bang.


He wrote in A Brief History ... "If we discover a complete theory, it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason -- for then we should know the mind of God."


In his latest book, he said the 1992 discovery of a planet orbiting another star other than the Sun helped deconstruct the view of the father of physics Isaac Newton that the universe could not have arisen out of chaos but was created by God.


"That makes the coincidences of our planetary conditions -- the single Sun, the lucky combination of Earth-Sun distance and solar mass, far less remarkable, and far less compelling evidence that the Earth was carefully designed just to please us human beings," he writes.


Hawking, who is only able to speak through a computer-generated voice synthesizer, has a neuro muscular dystrophy that has progressed over the years and left him almost completely paralyzed.


He began suffering the disease in his early 20s but went on to establish himself as one of the world's leading scientific authorities, and has also made guest appearances in "Star Trek" and the cartoons "Futurama" and "The Simpsons."


Last year he announced he was stepping down as Cambridge University's Lucasian Professor of Mathematics, a position once held by Newton and one he had held since 1979.


"The Grand Design" is due to go on sale next week.


----------



## redivider (Sep 3, 2010)

i wonder what life is like for that guy.

to wake up every day thinking you are one of the most brilliant minds in the world at that point in time. to think that you may be able to figure out the most intimate secrets of the universe. 

you think he would give up all of that, all of the prizes, all of the research, if the devil promised him he would get up from the seat once he did??

that would be the ultimate irony....


----------



## fdd2blk (Sep 3, 2010)

redivider said:


> i wonder what life is like for that guy.
> 
> to wake up every day thinking you are one of the most brilliant minds in the world at that point in time. to think that you may be able to figure out the most intimate secrets of the universe.
> 
> ...


what are you talking about?


----------



## redivider (Sep 3, 2010)

if the devil, one of gods original creations, offered stephen hawking his nerves back (you know, since hawking is disabled) and he could get up, and be normal if hawking were to give up his mind and become a post master, or something of the sort....

that would be the ultimate irony.... 

he makes a case against god existing in his new book......


----------



## fdd2blk (Sep 3, 2010)

redivider said:


> if the devil, one of gods original creations, offered stephen hawking his nerves back (you know, since hawking is disabled) and he could get up, and be normal if hawking were to give up his mind and become a post master, or something of the sort....
> 
> that would be the ultimate irony....
> 
> he makes a case against god existing in his new book......


if a dinosaur ate him it would be kinda funny.


----------



## Balzac89 (Sep 3, 2010)

The most logical conclusion is usually the correct one.


----------



## bobbyhopefeild (Sep 3, 2010)

redivider said:


> if the devil, one of gods original creations, offered stephen hawking his nerves back (you know, since hawking is disabled) and he could get up, and be normal if hawking were to give up his mind and become a post master, or something of the sort....
> 
> that would be the ultimate irony....
> 
> ...


i think your missing the point with this thread


----------



## redivider (Sep 3, 2010)

there's no point to the thread mang.

it's just a copy/pasted article.

i'm giving it a point... what about if hawking goes to church, and a 'miracle healer' actually heals part of his condition??? i mean through a miracle..... what would hawking have to say?????


----------



## Balzac89 (Sep 3, 2010)

redivider said:


> there's no point to the thread mang.
> 
> it's just a copy/pasted article.
> 
> i'm giving it a point... what about if hawking goes to church, and a 'miracle healer' actually heals part of his condition??? i mean through a miracle..... what would hawking have to say?????


What if you were suddenly crippled for life?


----------



## Mr.KushMan (Sep 3, 2010)

The thing is he wouldn't be normal Stephen Hawking if that happened. Right now he is Stephen Hawking, that would be some weird quantum replica! Besides his inability to move allows him to introspect in ways none of us could ever imagine. Which is likely why he is such a champion of his field.

As far as that the universe pulled itself it existence, it has been shown mathematically that nothingness is so unstable universe are constantly being pulled in and out of existence. Its called the plank field where in a vacuum energy is popping into our universe and annihilating itself, which is also why blackholes emit small energy fields that shouldn't technically be there. This area, the plank scale, also reveals the cosmic background radiation that displays an image of what the universe looked like just as it cooled enough to form the hydrogen and helium that inhabits most of it for a good portion of its infancy.

All these things are still technically theoretical, but what isn't. I really hope that a universal equation to everything, likely a very simple fractal equation like; U+2><42.00000000000000000000001. 

Peace


----------



## upthearsenal (Sep 6, 2010)

"Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist," - even if it is _just_ copy/paste, it's fucking brilliant.


----------



## ChronicTron (Sep 17, 2010)

God Created the universe... He coughed sneezed and farted at the same time and the universe was so.


----------



## Raptured (Sep 19, 2010)

upthearsenal said:


> "Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist," - even if it is _just_ copy/paste, it's fucking brilliant.


Nah I don't buy it. I am not religious, but because gravity exists, everything exists?? That isn't brilliant to me at all. Thats a fucking cop out of epic fail. You can't get something from nothing and we are know wheres near understanding these things. All we have is extreme leap of faith like theories to figure out what happend before the big bang. Or why 90% of the universe appears to be missing.. when in fact we are probably just missing a key factor that we cannot comprehend or simply over looked.


----------



## robert 14617 (Sep 19, 2010)

Raptured said:


> Nah I don't buy it. I am not religious, but because gravity exists, everything exists?? That isn't brilliant to me at all. Thats a fucking cop out of epic fail. You can't get something from nothing and we are know wheres near understanding these things. All we have is extreme leap of faith like theories to figure out what happend before the big bang. Or why 90% of the universe appears to be missing.. when in fact we are probably just missing a key factor that we cannot comprehend or simply over looked.


 don't forget we may never understand how rosie odonnel got her own show


----------



## blazin256 (Sep 19, 2010)

[video=youtube;oyL1m0I3IN4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyL1m0I3IN4&feature=related[/video]


----------



## g0dl1ke (Sep 19, 2010)

> "Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist"


 But what created the Spontaneousness ??? lmao its a circle it goes round and round, feel the flow Happy.


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Sep 19, 2010)

Raptured said:


> Nah I don't buy it. I am not religious, but because gravity exists, everything exists?? That isn't brilliant to me at all. Thats a fucking cop out of epic fail. You can't get something from nothing and we are know wheres near understanding these things. All we have is extreme leap of faith like theories to figure out what happend before the big bang. Or why 90% of the universe appears to be missing.. when in fact we are probably just missing a key factor that we cannot comprehend or simply over looked.


[youtube]NfOL_oGgRVk[/youtube]


----------



## Raptured (Sep 20, 2010)

Padawanbater2 said:


> [youtube]NfOL_oGgRVk[/youtube]


Yeah I respect that physicist but that still does nothing to satisfy my overall enlightenment on this particular matter. I know he does but I do not understand what total energy 0 means. Does that mean there is a balance between positive and negative energy? Something had to get the ball rolling at some point.. something had to occur to allow space time to even exist. Or at least the ability to exist.


----------



## HomeGrown&Smoked (Sep 20, 2010)

robert 14617 said:


> don't forget we may never understand how rosie odonnel got her own show


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Sep 20, 2010)

Raptured said:


> Something had to get the ball rolling at some point.. something had to occur to allow space time to even exist. Or at least the ability to exist.



Why do you think this, and how do you *know* this?


----------



## HomeGrown&Smoked (Sep 20, 2010)

Padawanbater2 said:


> Why do you think this, and how do you *know* this?


I would assume the same way you feel the way you do- well studied theorist giving information about their viewpoint. Fun part about it is- no one knows for sure. To make a stand either way requires a certain amount of faith- in either science or religion.


----------



## Mr.KushMan (Sep 20, 2010)

Watch the whole lecture, easy to find. 

There isn't really a way to know how it started because we are trapped from seeing before about 130million years after the Big Bang. It was all plasma and plasma is neutral to the particles that would let one observe the early universe. How it is suspected to start is even a mystery to me. 

From what I can gather there was a nothingness, a void if you will, that is literally nothing. Well this nothing is the resolved universe, its what gives everything all of its weight. Because gravity is an inward force and the nothing, that is everything, is causing the universe to expand it results in a zero energy. Only if the energy is zero(zero point energy) does the universe act as a flat universe which will expand for ever only slowing infinitely reaching an asymptote as to its progression/size ratio.

Confused yet?

Peace


----------



## drinkmugrootbeer (Sep 21, 2010)

I think God did but with the big bang


----------



## Evil Buddies (Sep 22, 2010)

God is the prime creator of all u say the big bang created the universe but the thing that caused the bug bang created the universe. These astrophysicists mostly work on theories, when u present evidence that contradict their theories. They will deny it when the evidence staring them straight in the face. As most of what they talk of is there theory geusses your geuss about the universe is as good as anothers. Some not all of these professors are so set in there ways and narrow minded it makes them become stupid.

evil


----------



## Wordz (Sep 22, 2010)

Evil Buddies said:


> God is the prime creator of all u say the big bang created the universe but the thing that caused the bug bang created the universe. These astrophysicists mostly work on theories, when u present evidence that contradict their theories. They will deny it when the evidence staring them straight in the face. As most of what they talk of is there theory geusses your geuss about the universe is as good as anothers. Some not all of these professors are so set in there ways and narrow minded it makes them become stupid.
> 
> evil


ahahaha stupid professors don't know shit like evil does.


----------



## Evil Buddies (Sep 22, 2010)

Wordz said:


> ahahaha stupid professors don't know shit like evil does.


I said some not all, but yeah the narrowminded professors are stupid i have seen a couple of examples and heard of many more.


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Sep 22, 2010)

Evil Buddies said:


> God is the prime creator of all u say the big bang created the universe but the thing that caused the bug bang created the universe. These astrophysicists mostly work on theories, when u present evidence that contradict their theories. They will deny it when the evidence staring them straight in the face. As most of what they talk of is there theory geusses your geuss about the universe is as good as anothers. Some not all of these professors are so set in there ways and narrow minded it makes them become stupid.
> 
> evil


...Serious man, again with this?

Learn what "theory" means in science.

If you come up with a scientific idea, that's all it is, an idea, a hypothesis, you then continue on using the scientific method, test some shit out, if it doesn't work, you start over with another hypothesis, but if it does, you finally graduate to theory. A theory in science doesn't mean the same as some regular person saying "I have a theory about _______". Theories are *backed up* by evidence and data. 

And no, yours and my guess is not as good as a scientists. That is what they study, they spend their time working on, they get *paid to do*. You and I just bullshit on youtube and RIU... When it comes to shit like that, why kid yourself?

Similarly, you wouldn't go to a mechanic to get your plumbing fixed and you wouldn't go to a plumber to get your bread baked... see what I'm sayin'? They don't call them "experts" for no reason. And don't get me wrong, I'm not saying anyone whose claiming to be an expert in something is one, but for you to straight up discredit science or scientists for coming up with theories that contradict something you might believe in while presenting evidence to back them up is disingenuous. 

Show me proof of any god. You said whatever caused the big bang created the universe... well, what "created" the thing that "created" the big bang? Hmmm smarty pants?


----------



## VICTORYGARDENSHYDRO (Sep 22, 2010)

so YOUR god created the earth, then adam, then eve. Then they had kids and then there kids had kids with each other?
do I understand that correctly?


----------



## Mr.KushMan (Sep 22, 2010)

"When you understand why you reject all other possible gods, you will know why I reject yours."

For "god" to have created the universe it shouldn't be a flat universe because total energy wouldn't be equal to zero(there would be an external source of energy), and it wouldn't expand forever like a fractal, as the size of universe diminishes in speed of expansion, the complexity of the pieces will get more complex.

And technically Adam and Eve had kids then sent one of their kids to a city after murdering his brother, so there were other people, Adam and Eve were just so high they didn't want to leave the garden.

Peace


----------



## VICTORYGARDENSHYDRO (Sep 22, 2010)

Evil Buddies said:


> God is the prime creator of all u say the big bang created the universe but the thing that caused the bug bang created the universe. These astrophysicists mostly work on theories, when u present evidence that contradict their theories. They will deny it when the evidence staring them straight in the face. As most of what they talk of is there theory geusses your geuss about the universe is as good as anothers. Some not all of these professors are so set in there ways and narrow minded it makes them become stupid.
> 
> evil


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7-BBADPAvE&feature=related


----------



## wookieslinger (Sep 22, 2010)

upthearsenal said:


> "Because there is a law such as gravity"


Period. 
Unfortunately our understanding of the graviton is very limited, which is one of most fundamental components of everything. When you can only see 3 walls how can you tell what kind of room you're in..? 
Hawking is grasping for anything now. His vision of God is locked on the religious icon, not one that can be explained via science. His will wants to not believe in God and his mind follows suit. He has lost his true scientific approach. He is still brilliant by all means, but jaded nonetheless. Four decades of couch lock can dampen your spirits..
God+Gravity=Omnipresent.


----------



## Ledfun (Sep 22, 2010)

In another universe that is a trillion, trillion universes from ours, gravity may not exist. How can we apply our standards on something so vastly far from us that most have trouble comprehending just the distances involved?

Now, if you apply a 360 view of space, then on each plane, you can move another trillion, trillion universes away from ours and again in a 360 from any point within that distance.

If a trillion, trillion universes are nothing more than a mere scratch on the surface of existence, then imagine what can exist beyond that. 

The existence of a Deity is a man-made theory based on so little real evidence that when blind faith is removed from the equation, it has no bearing on reality as we know it.

Sure, it's a comforting theory, a soothing blanket upon which we can rest our collective heads and use to cover ourselves to hide from the unknown, but when approached on a logical and factual level, the existence of a Deity is fantasy based on desire, not fact or physics.

Faith is useful to those who find use of it. Those who don't need the use of faith are immune to it.

From the beginning of our universe, there has been no "nothingness". If there is a passage of time or space within two points of existence, then between those points is distance or a space/time relationship that makes it "something". "Nothing cannot exist. Beyond "this" is "that"...forever.

Our minds, being limited by our minuscule knowledge of existence, can't possibly form an accurate opinion of existence in it's whole. You may as well try to get an electron from an atom of feces to explain String Theory to you.

Just relax and enjoy the trip.


----------



## mindphuk (Sep 22, 2010)

Every time science investigates nature, it is found that even things that appear complex, when we look at their parts, the parts are simpler. Now if we imagine some sort of creator, that assumes that there is something more complicated than the thing that got created. To me that's a step backwards in explaining a philosophically satisfying model. 
- Garret Lisi http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Exceptionally_Simple_Theory_of_Everything


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Sep 22, 2010)

mindphuk said:


> Every time science investigates nature, it is found that even things that appear complex, when we look at their parts, the parts are simpler. Now if we imagine some sort of creator, that assumes that there is something more complicated than the thing that got created. To me that's a step backwards in explaining a philosophically satisfying model.
> - Garret Lisi http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Exceptionally_Simple_Theory_of_Everything



Rofl, I didn't understand a goddamn thing in that link you posted.. 

Maybe I'm a little too stoned...


----------



## mindphuk (Sep 22, 2010)

Padawanbater2 said:


> Rofl, I didn't understand a goddamn thing in that link you posted..
> 
> Maybe I'm a little too stoned...


Very advanced mathematics with geometric points that appear to correspond to every known particle in the standard model and additionally has points representing particles that still haven't been discovered like the Higgs and graviton. The summary is that while investigating the E8 lie group he realized that this can be the single equation (for a geometric shape) for the Theory of Everything that has eluded physicists. 

Watch Garret Lisi explain it himself http://www.ted.com/talks/garrett_lisi_on_his_theory_of_everything.html


----------



## fdd2blk (Sep 22, 2010)

mindphuk said:


> Very advanced mathematics with geometric points that appear to correspond to every known particle in the standard model and additionally has points representing particles that still haven't been discovered like the Higgs and graviton. The summary is that while investigating the E8 lie group he realized that this can be the single equation (for a geometric shape) for the Theory of Everything that has eluded physicists.
> 
> Watch Garret Lisi explain it himself http://www.ted.com/talks/garrett_lisi_on_his_theory_of_everything.html



you made a wrong turn at the hash bar.


----------



## killadelph420 (Sep 29, 2010)

hash bar? where


----------



## swishatwista (Oct 4, 2010)

Raptured said:


> Nah I don't buy it. I am not religious, but because gravity exists, everything exists?? That isn't brilliant to me at all. Thats a fucking cop out of epic fail. You can't get something from nothing and we are know wheres near understanding these things. All we have is extreme leap of faith like theories to figure out what happend before the big bang. Or why 90% of the universe appears to be missing.. when in fact we are probably just missing a key factor that we cannot comprehend or simply over looked.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rissm5YHJQg

This shit is beautiful my dude


----------



## brandon. (Oct 4, 2010)

Evil Buddies said:


> ... These astrophysicists mostly work on theories ...


Maybe it's because he's a theoretical physicist... lol. Theory != Guess by the way.


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Oct 4, 2010)

brandon. said:


> Theory != Guess by the way.


 
Wrong.

Theory does not mean "guess" in science. There are also different degrees of "theory". For instance we have a pretty good idea about the theory of evolution, it is pretty much the accepted theory of how we evolved from primitive life forms to human beings. Same thing with the big bang theory. Both those theories have mountains of evidence to back them up.


----------



## Vento (Oct 4, 2010)

*
WE ARE NOT ALONE ! 

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/09/30/alien_world_gliese_581g/




Stargazing boffins say they have discovered evidence of a potentially habitable world orbiting a star just 20 light-years from Earth. They add that the circumstances of the discovery suggest that the galaxy may be "teeming with potentially habitable planets".
Artist's conception showing the inner four planets of the Gliese 581 system. GJ 581g, potentially habitable, is in the foreground.

The star in question is Gliese 581 in the constellation Libra, whose planets have been in the scientific news for some years now. In particular, boffins have tended to focus on the planet Gliese 581d, which has around seven times the mass of Earth. It lies at such a distance from its dim, red M-class sun as to make it pretty cold, but some scientists say that if conditions on the surface are right liquid water could perhaps exist there.

Now, however, a team of boffins from the Lick-Carnegie Exoplanet Survey have brought a new method into play: that of measuring tiny movements of the star in response to gravitational pulls upon it by its orbiting planets. Compiling 11 years' worth of radial velocity measurements of Gliese 581, the scientists say they have found two new planets, Gliese 581 f and g. It is Gliese 581g, massing about three times what Earth does, that is of interest:

The estimated equilibrium temperature of GJ 581g is 228 K, placing it squarely in the middle of the habitable zone of the star and offering a very compelling case for a potentially habitable planet around a very nearby star.

The given temperature of 228 Kelvin equates to 45 degrees below zero on the everyday Celsius scale, but the Carnegie scientists believe that surface temperatures would average between -31°C and -12°C. As it is very close to its parent star, the planet is liable to be tidally locked - with one face constantly turned to its primary, as the Moon is to Earth here in our solar system. This would lead to blazing heat on the bright side and freezing chill on the dark, and bands of intermediate temperature in between.

Though much more massive than Earth, Gliese 581g is also assessed as being perhaps half again as big. Thus its surface gravity would be anywhere from 1.1 to 1.7 g - good for holding an atmosphere, and quite feasible for humans to walk about in.

The Carnegie team says that the mere fact of Gliese 581g being found almost as soon as the new radial-velocity boffinry tool was put into use suggests that "eta_Earth", the fraction of stars which have potentially-habitable planets, is likely to be large - "on the order of a few tens of percent". They add:

If the local stellar neighborhood is a representative sample of the galaxy as a whole, our Milky Way could be teeming with potentially habitable planets.*


----------



## brandon. (Oct 4, 2010)

Padawanbater2 said:


> Wrong.
> 
> Theory does not mean "guess" in science. There are also different degrees of "theory". For instance we have a pretty good idea about the theory of evolution, it is pretty much the accepted theory of how we evolved from primitive life forms to human beings. Same thing with the big bang theory. Both those theories have mountains of evidence to back them up.


Absolutely, "!=" means does not equal. I don't know how to type the equal sign with a slash through it.


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Oct 4, 2010)

brandon. said:


> Absolutely, "!=" means does not equal. I don't know how to type the equal sign with a slash through it.


Aaaah, that's my mistake then, you are right, sir.


----------



## Johnny Retro (Oct 5, 2010)

How could somthing be created from nothing? its somthing i ponder every fuckin day. What was the start of this? What energy was created that continued to build and build this universe. If only we could have all the answers.


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Oct 5, 2010)

Johnny Retro said:


> How could somthing be created from nothing? its somthing i ponder every fuckin day. What was the start of this? What energy was created that continued to build and build this universe. If only we could have all the answers.



Idk, does "nothing" really ever exist? Think about that... doesn't the very name and definition of what the "nothing" is make it "something"? In that sense, nothing *IS* something. 

But for believers to say "God did it" is a cop out. It doesn't explain anything, it's a useless statement. The big bang and Hawkings ideas are so much more plausible than any religious dogma, the problem is emotion clouds peoples judgment and that I'm afraid we will never escape.


----------



## shishkaboy (Oct 5, 2010)

Padawanbater2 said:


> ...Serious man, again with this?
> 
> Learn what "theory" means in science.
> 
> ...


All i know is all my life there have certain questions that i wanted answer. And for a long time i have been researching and learning about these very subjects this movie will make u question everything if u dont already Would u take the red pill or the blue pill if u were Neo from The Matrix?
http://vimeo.com/13726978 its fuckin scary dude dont kill the messenger


----------



## mindphuk (Oct 6, 2010)

Johnny Retro said:


> How could somthing be created from nothing? its somthing i ponder every fuckin day. What was the start of this? What energy was created that continued to build and build this universe. If only we could have all the answers.


Who says anything was ever created from nothing? It is entirely possible that the universe is eternal and has always existed. Remember, the BB was only the beginning of the _expanding _universe, the start of inflation. Not one single physicist has ever declared that the universe just popped into existence.


----------



## chow (Oct 6, 2010)

There is no such thing as "nothing".Yoy cant sit and do "nothing" as you are sitting,and sitting is doing something,you are breathing etc etc and all these things are doing "something".Even in physics,there is no such thing as "nothing".even in the vacume of space there are still billions of particals colliding with eachother ie doing "something".


----------



## Mr.KushMan (Oct 6, 2010)

Well if there is no nothing, then all space is always completely filled. This would point toward much more stuff than we can quantify, like the dark matter and energy. However to propose that because if someone is doing nothing, they are still doing something, is the same as the physical composition of reality is pretty absurd, this is a question of physics not linguistics.

That being said I am pretty sure that nothing can exist, but not within our flat universe. 

Peace


----------



## thewinghunter (Oct 6, 2010)

after all he didnt say god didnt create universe he said god wasnt necesarry to create it... very different, papers are soo dumb.


----------



## fdd2blk (Oct 6, 2010)

Mr.KushMan said:


> Well if there is no nothing, then all space is always completely filled. This would point toward much more stuff than we can quantify, like the dark matter and energy. However to propose that because if someone is doing nothing, they are still doing something, is the same as the physical composition of reality is pretty absurd, this is a question of physics not linguistics.
> 
> That being said I am pretty sure that nothing can exist, but not within our flat universe.
> 
> Peace



it's not "filled" it just *is*. it does expand and contract though.


----------



## IregAt420 (Oct 7, 2010)

Heres my rebuttal to most theories ive been smashed with. THESE ARE ALL MY OPINION AND IM NOT THRASHING(even if I do seem a bit harsh) ANYONE ELSES OPINION. Yours is yours and I will not condemn it.


Evolution: Come from Apes? I dont see any "people" coming from the sticks sayin "I'm the generation!!!!!" I made it! Sorry, I believe every skeleton that is dubbed proof of our evolution into men is fake. I could possibly become really good with photoshop and slow morph a fox skeleton into my skeleton.

BB: Millions of years? - personally, looking back I see our technological gain being expansive the past 200-300? years? And we have been here for millions? Fire:cooks meat. Stone: cuts meat/defends from animals.etc..its could take a thousand or so years, but dont you think if we had millions of years of history we would be teleporting/ perfect government stance?
--Wheres some evidence of people/things from that long ago? I also dont believe the Grand Canyon took millions of years...Noahs flood could have done that.

Here, let me say this. Whats more sustainable....Nature or Man? Well, from my point of view Nature doesnt govern itself, your either top of food chain or you have some bad ass camo/defensive mech. A big part of our whole human population (including myself most likely) couldnt survive on our own. 

I dont know...thats my little rant.


----------



## mindphuk (Oct 7, 2010)

Mr.KushMan said:


> Well if there is no nothing, then all space is always completely filled. *This would point toward much more stuff than we can quantify*, like the dark matter and energy.
> 
> Peace


 That is not exactly correct. Even in absolute vacuum, at the quantum level, there is the constant popping in and out of existence by virtual particles creating what is called the quantum foam. The net energy can still be zero so there is no more stuff to quantify. Dark matter is something different altogether, it is affected by gravity but not by electromagnetic forces like regular matter. And dark energy, that is a repulsive force that is driving the expansion of the universe.


----------



## mindphuk (Oct 7, 2010)

IregAt420 said:


> Heres my rebuttal to most theories ive been smashed with. THESE ARE ALL MY OPINION AND IM NOT THRASHING(even if I do seem a bit harsh) ANYONE ELSES OPINION. Yours is yours and I will not condemn it.


So you've been 'smashed' by theories?
You might be surprised but scientific theories aren't opinions, they are a model of nature that have been demonstrated time and time again to be pretty good and they get continually better as new theories refine older ones.


> Evolution: Come from Apes? I dont see any "people" coming from the sticks sayin "I'm the generation!!!!!" I made it! Sorry, I believe every skeleton that is dubbed proof of our evolution into men is fake. I could possibly become really good with photoshop and slow morph a fox skeleton into my skeleton.
> 
> BB: Millions of years? - personally, looking back I see our technological gain being expansive the past 200-300? years? And we have been here for millions? Fire:cooks meat. Stone: cuts meat/defends from animals.etc..its could take a thousand or so years, but dont you think if we had millions of years of history we would be teleporting/ perfect government stance?
> --Wheres some evidence of people/things from that long ago? I also dont believe the Grand Canyon took millions of years...Noahs flood could have done that.
> ...


 Why pick on these two little theories? Why not also create a straw man against germ theory or chemistry, or nuclear physics? You know, that whacked out idea about particles too small to see and breaking them apart will create a huge explosion? Oh, wait, I bet you do disagree with the nuclear physicists when they tell you how old the earth is by radiocarbon dating, then I suppose you become the expert then.

Since you get your science education from comic books, maybe picking up a real science textbook might teach you something, like the fact that no one in science says modern humans have been around for millions of years, more like 100-150,000 years and of course writing took until about 10,000 and 6,000 BCE depending on whether you are talking about proto-writing like pictographs and such or true writing. From here, advances in technology can more easily be identified and the speed at which we developed technologically seems to make sense considering the difficulty that it takes to break away from superstition. In fact scientific advances may have been able to come faster had the Church not suppressed the likes of Galileo, Giordano Bruno up to Darwin who put off publishing _Origin of Species_, possibly due to fear of reprisals and in fact when it was published it received numerous attacks from religious groups all of the world.

http://cscs.umich.edu/~crshalizi/White/


----------



## chow (Oct 7, 2010)

mindphuk said:


> That is not exactly correct. Even in absolute vacuum, at the quantum level, there is the constant popping in and out of existence by virtual particles creating what is called the quantum foam. The net energy can still be zero so there is no more stuff to quantify. Dark matter is something different altogether, it is affected by gravity but not by electromagnetic forces like regular matter. And dark energy, that is a repulsive force that is driving the expansion of the universe.


I like this fella..


----------



## IregAt420 (Oct 7, 2010)

well, i know not to express my opinion because I dont know enough big words and my beliefs arent on the same IQ level of mindphuk..

Since you get your science education from comic books <---did I deserve that? You could have just said I was wrong...but then you dont sleep good do you?


----------



## mindphuk (Oct 7, 2010)

IregAt420 said:


> well, i know not to express my opinion because I dont know enough big words and my beliefs arent on the same IQ level of mindphuk..
> 
> Since you get your science education from comic books <---did I deserve that? You could have just said I was wrong...but then you dont sleep good do you?


 As I said, acceptance of scientific theories is not an opinion and therefore dismissing these theories without first actually understanding them is likewise not an opinion. Saying something is an opinion does not exempt you from harsh criticism when you are so, so wrong. 
As for the comic book remark, that is pretty mild jab at your expense considering how poor your understanding of evolution and paleontology truly is. If you don't like the criticism, then maybe you should take my advice and actually try to learn something about the subjects you so easily dismiss. You come off sounding like a fool when you claim to have a contrary 'opinion' to the experts in the field on a subject that you clearly don't understand.


----------



## Johnny Retro (Oct 7, 2010)

mindphuk said:


> Who says anything was ever created from nothing? It is entirely possible that the universe is eternal and has always existed. Remember, the BB was only the beginning of the _expanding _universe, the start of inflation. Not one single physicist has ever declared that the universe just popped into existence.


Yes, but it started somewhere.
What was that somwhere?


----------



## mindphuk (Oct 7, 2010)

Johnny Retro said:


> Yes, but it started somewhere.
> What was that somwhere?


 If it is eternal, then by definition it did not start somewhere. But the actual answer is that we just don't know yet. We only have evidence of what occurred in the first few ticks of Planck time and after. We can only speculate currently on what happened earlier including how long the small, hot, dense universe existed prior to expansion or what caused it to form in the first place if it was not eternal.


----------



## LightningMcGreen (Oct 7, 2010)

Hey mindphuk, maybe you can help me understand somethin....watched a video posted by researchkitten, an hour long lecture from a Lawrence Krauss, who stated the universe was flat...

Now I know when used in a scientific sense, words like "theory", "nothing", "energy", take a different meaning than what most people define them as...

So my question is...when I think "flat", I think of a 2 dimensional object, like paper (or at least nearly, though it has marginal depth)...so how is this possible, when we live in 3D universe? (or 4, whether you count time)

Possibly a stupid question, but won't know until I ask lol


----------



## brandon. (Oct 7, 2010)

LightningMcGreen said:


> ... so how is this possible, when we live in 3D universe? (or 4, whether you count time)


According to string theory we have a lot more dimensions than just 3. Hard to imagine though...


----------



## LightningMcGreen (Oct 7, 2010)

brandon. said:


> According to string theory we have a lot more dimensions than just 3. Hard to imagine though...


Haha, yeah true, I read Michio Kaku's Physics of the Impossible and currently working on one of his other ones, Hyperspace...also have watched countless lectures on youtube and some of the discovery science shows...I love science, especially cosmology

I dunno though, when I hear someone say "possibly 11 total dimensions, but the others are so infinitesmally small, we could never see them", it just doesn't make much sense to me lol...wonder how many great physicists toke n think of this stuff haha


----------



## IregAt420 (Oct 7, 2010)

mindphuk said:


> As I said, acceptance of scientific theories is not an opinion and therefore dismissing these theories without first actually understanding them is likewise not an opinion. Saying something is an opinion does not exempt you from harsh criticism when you are so, so wrong.
> As for the comic book remark, that is pretty mild jab at your expense considering how poor your understanding of evolution and paleontology truly is. If you don't like the criticism, then maybe you should take my advice and actually try to learn something about the subjects you so easily dismiss. You come off sounding like a fool when you claim to have a contrary 'opinion' to the experts in the field on a subject that you clearly don't understand.


Ok, I posted in a topic that I havent really researched, probably my fault, sorry I dont know a whole lot about the theories, but come on your being a DICK. I didnt mean to upset you by saying I dont think you can throw milk, butter, and flour in the air and you get a FUCKING CAKE.
You dont have to be that knowledgeable to understand that.


----------



## mindphuk (Oct 8, 2010)

IregAt420 said:


> Ok, I posted in a topic that I havent really researched, probably my fault, sorry I dont know a whole lot about the theories, but come on your being a DICK. I didnt mean to upset you by saying I dont think you can throw milk, butter, and flour in the air and you get a FUCKING CAKE.
> You dont have to be that knowledgeable to understand that.


 Call me a dick all you want, that's a personal attack and merely shows the weakness of your claims. This is a debate forum, if you don't want harsh criticism, don't make claims about topics that you don't know enough to defend. Maybe ask questions from one of the scientists here on one of the many threads devoted to evolution and exposing the vast number of creationist and ID bunk for what it really is and that is a complete denial of the evidence in favor of religious dogma. When you come here and make claims about the thousands of hominid fossils that show evidence of our evolution from more primitive species as all fake, not to mention your total lack of understand of the actual claims of evolution, then you deserve to be harshly criticized. Science needs to be defended against the ignorant advances of pseudo-sciences and it will be defended vigorously. Make no mistake, if you make a stupid, unscientific, claim unsupported by any actual evidence in the growing part of this website, you will be criticized very soundly there as well so why do you think this area should be any different? These forums are public and correcting you and your misconceptions are not only a value to you but to everyone reading the thread. 

Now I'm not sure what to make of your rantings about cake. If you think that science, including biological science which is based primarily on the idea of common descent, is easy to understand as a cake recipe, I am sorry to report that it is not as simple as you may think and involve many areas of science including chemistry and now genetics. Many of these topics are not simple to understand and often certain prior knowledge is required to gain understanding. These things can be taught but it also requires an ability to think logically and rationally which some people cannot do especially when it is contrary to dogma. If you're interested, there are some videos that we can post that attempt to simplify these topics but they still require some time commitment. However, please stop whining about being mistreated. Nothing I said was a personal attack as everything was directed at your claims, not you as an individual. Calling me a dick is definitely a personal attack and you can get warned by the mods for it, but I personally don't care. I'd be more interested in whether or not you are interested in learning something new.


----------



## IregAt420 (Oct 8, 2010)

As always I am interested in learning, but like I said, I cant watch those vids or get really involved in the research. I am way to set on my ways that there is a One God that created all this. Dont take it personally, because your belief is yours. Now, I will take back my dick comment, it was unnecessary.

I def dont believe science is simple, especially chemistry. I guess the cake thing was my metaphor for spontaneous earth.


----------



## one11 (Oct 8, 2010)

It is just a dream, go back to sleep people.


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Oct 8, 2010)

IregAt420 said:


> As always I am interested in learning, but like I said, I cant watch those vids or get really involved in the research. I am way to set on my ways that there is a One God that created all this. Dont take it personally, because your belief is yours. Now, I will take back my dick comment, it was unnecessary.
> 
> I def dont believe science is simple, especially chemistry. I guess the cake thing was my metaphor for spontaneous earth.


If you can't watch a 5 minute youtube video or get involved in the research, then you are not interested in learning. 

It takes much, MUCH more than that to understand this stuff. It takes years of training to understand such complex theories. That's why they start out teaching us about biology in 3rd or 4th grade, then you continue to take it all the way till you graduate high school.

I'd like to know though, how do you believe human beings came to be?


----------



## IregAt420 (Oct 8, 2010)

I believe their is a One God above everything. And you guys all want proof huh....well all I can say is look around you. Nature is the most beautiful thing there is here and I see God in it every single day.

I also believe religion has been thwarted. I am not extremist in either way, I just go on with what I believe. I think religion can get in a way of "peoples power", so it has been slowly changed in the ways of man. Thats why we have extremism..

Im not going to watch any youtube video or do any research because I feel no need to. Im solid in what I believe.
-I never was interested in science...but I used to be able to sit down and debate with fellow church goers. And I would argue AGAINST God to see what their answers would be. I wouldn't sit here and say that I believe God created something so vast and complex as the Earth, if I wasn't 100% sure.

And I guess in the end....I'd rather be safe then sorry. But if I'm worm food then everything we have ever done has been a waste.


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Oct 8, 2010)

IregAt420 said:


> I believe their is a One God above everything. And you guys all want proof huh....well all I can say is look around you. Nature is the most beautiful thing there is here and I see God in it every single day.
> 
> I also believe religion has been thwarted. I am not extremist in either way, I just go on with what I believe. I think religion can get in a way of "peoples power", so it has been slowly changed in the ways of man. Thats why we have extremism..
> 
> ...


How could you possibly believe that? 

You see no value in creating a successful future for future generations of human beings? How unbelievable selfish are you to make a statement like that? That's the kind of stuff that infuriates me about believers. They care only about themselves while putting up the false front, and it's extremely sad because in most cases, as with this one, the believer in question can't even see what's happening, of caring about fellow human beings and perpetuating religious lies for some false sense of comfort. 

In the end you'd rather be safe than sorry?

In the end, I'd rather live 80* years of freedom than an eternity of slavery.


----------



## IregAt420 (Oct 8, 2010)

Whoa, I never said I didnt care. If I implied that, then I guess my brain isnt working as well today...

The summer I went to Alaska for a mission trip, I actually almost got SENT HOME for helping the residents carry up their fish. I made a huge deal of it, and got into with the director of the program. Have you not seen any of my other threads? I care a lot about our people and our future. I definitely dont boast or push any certain type of religion on a person.

And I was very skeptical in saying the whole safe than sorry thing, I just really didnt know how else to explain it.Thats def not a way to go about believing in God.

I guess I'm confused about your post. Please inform me where I said anything about not caring about future generations.

Edit: I also dont believe this as a false sense of comfort. Thats like saying Mary Jane is a false sense of happiness. I am not putting up a front, I'm saying what I believe. Im not pushing an agenda for my church, but I will represent my Southern Baptist church because I'm in a way like minded to their beliefs. I enjoy the fellowship.


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Oct 8, 2010)

IregAt420 said:


> I wouldn't sit here and say that I believe God created something so vast and complex as the Earth, if I wasn't 100% sure.


How could you be 100% sure? A *requirement* for belief is *faith*. There is *no proof of any god*. 



IregAt420 said:


> Whoa, I never said I didnt care. If I implied that, then I guess my brain isnt working as well today...
> 
> The summer I went to Alaska for a mission trip, I actually almost got SENT HOME for helping the residents carry up their fish. I made a huge deal of it, and got into with the director of the program. Have you not seen any of my other threads? I care a lot about our people and our future. I definitely dont boast or push any certain type of religion on a person.
> 
> ...





IregAt420 said:


> *And I guess in the end....I'd rather be safe then sorry. **But if I'm worm food then everything we have ever done has been a waste.*


That's exactly what I meant when I said the believer in question can't even see what's happening. 

You admitted you think that without a God running the show, everything every human being has ever accomplished is for nothing. As an atheist, I understand _how_ someone could come up with this viewpoint, but _why_ they'd believe it's true is a mystery...

We build upon our achievements and each one is priceless. It's a step in the direction of progress, and one day we'll have enough answers to answer questions some of the very first humans thought up. 

What's the goal if the whole god story is true about our existence? You die, then what? Serve in heaven for eternity? How does the story end?


----------



## IregAt420 (Oct 8, 2010)

Would it not be a waste? Yes we have had accomplishments that make this world a better or more understandable place. But in the end, what does it all mean? I am very thankful for these accomplishments, but I dont see where it does anybody good...when everyone is gone.

And from what I understand, we wont serve in Heaven. It will be greater than anything we can even imagine...from what I understand. Now, with that being said, I do believe we will have our duties there, as on earth. Praising our God, Worshiping...is that to much to ask for our Creator?

And to bring up slavery...Are we not slaves right now? 8-3 9-5 jobs that dont mean shit. We are doin the dirty work for all the politicians and all the people pulling the strings. They spend every waking moment making us fight between eachother to keep us off their backs. Can you support a family on minimum wage? Its hard enough on food stamps. 

Thats what I meant about religions being merely a TOOL in the scheme of man. You create differences/sects and they all fight between themselves instead of seeing their fucking COMMON GROUND. Which, I believe thats what leads a deep thinking and intellectual individual, like yourself Pad, to Atheism. But please do not take that offensively, I am not judging the fact you are an atheist, just making my point on that subject.

Edit: To answer your first question, I've seen first hand lives being changed by becoming a believer. Not by some miracle man or holy water, but actually giving your life over to God, and living and providing a respectable example for others. I seen a meth addict at church camp quit..just like that. I'm still in contact with him and I even smoked a few J's with him. But he hasnt touched meth since. And he looks sooo much better since...he is a more pleasant being since then. It does require Faith, I have Faith that Our God will prevail over this evil on earth.


----------



## GanjaGirl<3 (Oct 9, 2010)

Hawking is such a silly man.


----------



## rking1985 (Oct 9, 2010)

hawking does make a lot of sense IF you have an open mind.. not secluded to the "facts" of religion. I ask of many of you.. would you not call someone silly if they said they could split a sea in half and defy the laws of gravity?? OF COURSE!! because it is silly. 

Anyone want to throw in some comments about the flying spaghetti monster?

Let's please.


----------



## crackerboy (Oct 10, 2010)

Ponder this. All the knowledge obtained by man is revealed by God. All these scientists are doing is discovering how God does is work. Mans knowledge is foolishness to God. Gods knowledge is foolishness to the unbeliever.


----------



## IregAt420 (Oct 10, 2010)

Obviously, the reason you cant understand it is because you cant appreciate something as sacred as the relationship Moses had with God. He put all of his FAITH and TRUST into God, and look what happens.
My Bible, NIV version:
_Philippians 4:13 I can do everything through him who gives me strength_ 
-Im not trying to be a Bible Thumper...but that verse has always stuck out to me.
Moses saved a RACE of people from certain death. Lead them away from slavery. And with Gods help, crossed the Sea so the Egyptians couldnt catch them. Thats power. God saved Israel.The Holy Land. God secured the Israelites to flourish...and you question Gods power now....someday you will see.

Spaghetti Monster???

----*Please!*


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Oct 10, 2010)

crackerboy said:


> Ponder this. All the knowledge obtained by man is revealed by God. All these scientists are doing is discovering how God does is work. Mans knowledge is foolishness to God. Gods knowledge is foolishness to the unbeliever.


If that were true, why do all the fundamentalists oppose modern science at every opportunity, in every major religion?
 


IregAt420 said:


> Obviously, the reason you cant understand it is because you cant appreciate something as sacred as the relationship Moses had with God. He put all of his FAITH and TRUST into God, and look what happens.
> My Bible, NIV version:
> _Philippians 4:13 I can do everything through him who gives me strength_
> -Im not trying to be a Bible Thumper...but that verse has always stuck out to me.
> ...


No he didn't. That story obviously shouldn't be taken literally, and I've never seen any interpretation that isn't. Nothing about the Exodus is scientifically accurate.


----------



## IregAt420 (Oct 10, 2010)

Yeah, coincidentally.

Show me some proof please of it NOT being accurate. I would like to guess that you don't believe in Noahs Arc and The Flood either.


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Oct 10, 2010)

IregAt420 said:


> Yeah, coincidentally.
> 
> Show me some proof please of it NOT being accurate. I would like to guess that you don't believe in Noahs Arc and The Flood either.


Science doesn't work like that. You are the one making the claim right, so it's your responsibility to prove the claim you're making. I can make claims all day long, the reason the scientific community doesn't take every single random claim made by anybody seriously is because it would take too much time. Claims are prioritized by plausibility, accuracy, evidence, etc. 

So the claim is - Moses parted the Red Sea. Start with that. Show me any piece of evidence to support the theory that any human being could accomplish that task. How would someone do it? We'll get into the plagues after that...


No, I do not believe Noah's arc and the flood are real either. I don't believe the Earth is 6,000 years old. I don't believe snakes can speak and people are made of dirt... No, I believe in a 21st century scientific and medical consensus. (you do too, you just don't realize it) 

Those stories are impossible. Especially Noah's Arc.


----------



## IregAt420 (Oct 10, 2010)

It really is hard to argue with an Atheist...lol. Relentless. I've told you I cannot provide any evidence proving it happened. But again you will say you dont believe in Faith. Or, "Blind Faith" as the scientifically orientated person would say. I have Faith God is real. He is here with us everywhere we look. I also believe in the Devil, and that is what you see everyday when you watch T.V. for the last 4 hours of your day. News...everything. Materialistic bullshit being flashed in front of your kids eyes everyday. And the same people that own the Media, own every other major corporation.

I believe in GOD because I dont see God everyday. Every prophecy known to man in The Bible has came true, except for one if I'm correct. Which means the Anti-Christ has been at work for centuries. Atheist and Agnostic alike fall for his tricks of propaganda and "science".


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Oct 10, 2010)

IregAt420 said:


> It really is hard to argue with an Atheist...lol. Relentless. I've told you I cannot provide any evidence proving it happened. But again you will say you dont believe in Faith. Or, "Blind Faith" as the scientifically orientated person would say. I have Faith God is real. He is here with us everywhere we look. I also believe in the Devil, and that is what you see everyday when you watch T.V. for the last 4 hours of your day. News...everything. Materialistic bullshit being flashed in front of your kids eyes everyday. And the same people that own the Media, own every other major corporation.
> 
> I believe in GOD because I dont see God everyday. Every prophecy known to man in The Bible has came true, except for one if I'm correct. Which means the Anti-Christ has been at work for centuries. Atheist and Agnostic alike fall for his tricks of propaganda and "science".


"Faith" "blind faith" - what's the difference?

Why do you associate everything you think is good with "God" and everything you think is bad with "the Devil"? Don't you see this as a *preconceived *judgment, before anything ever even happens? If it's bad, it's automatically the Devil, but if something good happens, like you win the lottery or catch all the greens, it's God's handiwork... Why isn't it consistent? 

Can God do anything wrong? Or is everything God does right, because it's God? That's a simple enough question, right? For example, what if God decided to kill a thousand babies via strangulation, because for whatever reason, in his infinite wisdom, he felt that was the most appropriate way to get rid of this group of evil babies... 

OK, so forget everything else... in that scenario, are God's actions justified? 

I'm just curious about how you'd answer that...

PS. There is no such thing as a 'prophecy'...


----------



## LightningMcGreen (Oct 10, 2010)

To say the Devil whispers in the ear of man (through t.v., propaganda, "science") and leans him to his side is to say nobody can think for themselves...and thats not really true, otherwise there wouldn't be athiests. You speak of science as one of the Devil's tools, but I don't see how the discovery of chemotherapy for a cancer patient or removing a brain tumor is evil. God didn't heal such people, medical science and man did.

Why would I believe that Noah's Arc was the only boat that would float at the time? What was wrong with everyone else's boat at the time? And how did was he able to get all the critters to come to him, at once? How was the boat environmentally friendly enough to support every type of life, from marine, to arctic to tropical? 

Let's also say, YOU go to heaven, but your mother or your child doesn't (just for example). How can YOU achieve total nirvana and serenity up in heaven, when you're mourning for those loved ones who weren't so fortunate to make it with you?


----------



## one11 (Oct 10, 2010)

The only way to find truth. Is to drop all your beliefs. Drop everything anyones ever told you. Only then can you find silence. In that silence, truth is revealed. Our minds are like computers. And they've been programmed at a very early sensitive age with these contradicting 'traditional' beliefs. Anyone knows the age of aquarius is peaking? Man is evolving. Not the older ones. They will die out, and the young should thank Jesus and Muhammad they do. Because the old will destroy the Earth. The Young are different. They're the sprouting seeds of a new man. A more conscious, awakened man.


----------



## Evil Buddies (Oct 10, 2010)

one11 said:


> The only way to find truth. Is to drop all your beliefs. Drop everything anyones ever told you. Only then can you find silence. In that silence, truth is revealed. Our minds are like computers. And they've been programmed at a very early sensitive age with these contradicting 'traditional' beliefs. Anyone knows the age of aquarius is peaking? Man is evolving. Not the older ones. They will die out, and the young should thank Jesus and Muhammad they do. Because the old will destroy the Earth. The Young are different. They're the sprouting seeds of a new man. A more conscious, awakened man.


Do u believe that new age spiritual religion its all part of the nwo agenda. One world religion based on spirituality and that we can become gods. Thats the devils religion to try and convince people there is no god. 

Evil


----------



## photogenic (Oct 10, 2010)

yawn another genius tells us there is no god

there is a certain irony that this guy is crippled, but I don't think it's particularly funny. Also how Terrence McKenna died of brain cancer.

God always gets the last laugh.


----------



## Brazko (Oct 10, 2010)

Here are some scientific terms to understand;

Energy - is the ability to do work.

Work - is the amount of energy transferred by force

Force - is any influence that causes a free body to undergo an acceleration


Could the Universe have always existed? Yes, it couldv'e been a tiny pebble in the void of space, however this explains nothing it was simply Energy.

Is the Universe expanding and (possibly) contracting (cyclic)? Yes (theoretically speaking, I believe), however this explains nothing it is simply Work being revealed.

What was the force that caused our Universe to expand and contract? Gravity, It is the only force that permeates throughout everything we know within the physical universe. 

So, until we are able to percieve the source of Gravity, we will never clearly understand from a scientific point of view of how the Universe was created. Our modern scientific method/technology is based on a 4 dimensional reality. It cannot surpass this hurdle until it adapts a new method in order to apply a new technology. Our tools indicate 11 dimenisions but cannot confirm them because we use 4 dimensional tools. I say, use the right tool!! Spatial


----------



## IregAt420 (Oct 10, 2010)

You know, I believe a scientific mind can become to wrapped up in complexity...Pad do you believe ANYTHING is simple?

-There is a war on earth. And its raged since the dawn of time. Its the war of Good vs Evil. God vs Devil. It really is that SIMPLE!!!!!!
Atheism is a product of the Devil pushing the false fact that there is no Devil, and there is no God. 

I'm not going to sit here and try to justify myself because it doesnt matter what I say, you will not believe it.

I think its funny you guys spend all day questioning the Bible and its stories and PROPHECIES(how is there no such thing???) But you dont question the MEN who put all these wacked out fuckin theories in place.

And from a website that has been (coincidentally) deleted off the internet (wakeupproject) there was an interview with a man that was highly involved in spirit worshiping. He said that the Devil himself would tell the people involved that HE HIMSELF trained Darwin. So obviously, you make a religion of "no god", and the Devil wins.


----------



## crackerboy (Oct 10, 2010)

The reason man rejects the Bible is because it points out their flaws. But man is to proud to admit they are slaves to their sins and idols. So they reject God because they prefer not to be judged. Their money and possessions do not pass judgment on them. Man is to proud to ask for forgiveness. The atheist thinks that he is in control of his own life but he is still a servant. They are serving possessions instead of God. Atheism is the truest form of selfishness and pride.


----------



## LightningMcGreen (Oct 10, 2010)

IregAt420 said:


> I think its funny you guys spend all day questioning the Bible and its stories and PROPHECIES(how is there no such thing???) But you dont question the MEN who put all these wacked out fuckin theories in place.


The same men who wrote those "whacked out fuckin theories" are the same that "interpreted" and printed the bible. Difference is, it's not the men we question in science, it's the numbers, measurements, and evidence.


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Oct 10, 2010)

LightningMcGreen said:


> To say the Devil whispers in the ear of man (through t.v., propaganda, "science") and leans him to his side is to say nobody can think for themselves...and thats not really true, otherwise there wouldn't be athiests. You speak of science as one of the Devil's tools, but I don't see how the discovery of chemotherapy for a cancer patient or removing a brain tumor is evil. God didn't heal such people, medical science and man did.
> 
> Why would I believe that Noah's Arc was the only boat that would float at the time? What was wrong with everyone else's boat at the time? And how did was he able to get all the critters to come to him, at once? How was the boat environmentally friendly enough to support every type of life, from marine, to arctic to tropical?
> 
> Let's also say, YOU go to heaven, but your mother or your child doesn't (just for example). How can YOU achieve total nirvana and serenity up in heaven, when you're mourning for those loved ones who weren't so fortunate to make it with you?


+rep. I had exactly the same questions you just asked early on when I started researching all of this. It's always interesting to see how believers respond to them, especially that last one. I hear the most unusual answers trying to be passed off as logic...

I'm an atheist, both my parents are Christian, so how could they expect to exist in any kind of contentment in Heaven *knowing* I'd be *burning in a lake of fire*, much less what they'd consider "paradise"? They couldn't. It's a paradox. It's impossible. And every believer *knows that*. The interesting part is the dishonesty in their attempt at justification for abandoning a family member for God. They know, deep down, that it's wrong, and that they shouldn't do it, but they've been indoctrinated into battling with their own conscience. 
 


photogenic said:


> yawn another genius tells us there is no god


Why do smart people come to similar conclusions regarding the existence of God?
 


IregAt420 said:


> You know, I believe a scientific mind can become to wrapped up in complexity...Pad do you believe ANYTHING is simple?
> 
> -There is a war on earth. And its raged since the dawn of time. Its the war of Good vs Evil. God vs Devil. It really is that SIMPLE!!!!!!
> Atheism is a product of the Devil pushing the false fact that there is no Devil, and there is no God.
> ...


Occam's Razor, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor

Explain to me how you discern what reality actually is from all these different influences from the Devil and from God. How do you know atheism is a "product of the Devil"? 

There is no such thing as a prophecy because prophecies can be self fulfilled or fulfilled by followers. There's absolutely nothing divine or magical about it. I can write something down, say it'll happen in 35 years, then 35 years later come back and "fulfill my prophecy", bada-bing bada-boom, prophecy fulfilled! Better yet, I write something down, then I die, a few centuries later my followers come back and "fulfill my prophecy", and I'm magically pronounced a Saint or a Messiah... Prophecy works exactly the same way horiscopes work.

The science goes through the academic triathlon/gauntlet before it ever reaches the point of belief. It's pretty safe to say this stuff is right. Religion on the other hand... well, take a look, any old fool can get on any street corner in America and spout off about their religion and be taken seriously... What's that tell you? 
 


crackerboy said:


> The reason man rejects the Bible is because it points out their flaws.


Couldn't be more *WRONG*. 

This man rejects the Bible because it divides people, dehumanizes people, is scientifically inaccurate, subjugates nonbelievers and believers of other faiths to unequal human rights, is morally reprehensible, lacks common sense, is dictated by fanatics, and makes the world a much worse place. 



crackerboy said:


> The atheist thinks that he is in control of his own life but he is still a servant. Atheism is the truest form of selfishness and pride.


Believers are slaves to imaginary beings and ancient beliefs. There are over 6 billion people with imaginary friends on this planet.

Doing good deeds to pay for your ticket into heaven seems a bit more selfish, but hey, that's just me... As an atheist, I do good things for people because I know they appreciate it, and it makes their life a little easier, not to look good in the eyes of the creator.


----------



## IregAt420 (Oct 10, 2010)

Again you compare something as little as a prophecy by a HUMAN to the prophecy of the end of the world.

On the subject of your parents, you ask how can they go on doing them while you do you? Its called Freedom of Choice. You choose to burn in hell. We are all SOULS. This is a temporary body and our kids/parents etc are all a part of this temporary life. We will all be a part of one in Heaven, not mourning our idiot kids who chose to follow Darwin blindly into the pits of hell.


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Oct 11, 2010)

IregAt420 said:


> Again you compare something as little as a prophecy by a HUMAN to the prophecy of the end of the world.
> 
> On the subject of your parents, you ask how can they go on doing them while you do you? Its called Freedom of Choice. You choose to burn in hell. We are all SOULS. This is a temporary body and our kids/parents etc are all a part of this temporary life. We will all be a part of one in Heaven, not mourning our idiot kids who chose to follow Darwin blindly into the pits of hell.


...couple things...

...the world is still here, no end yet...

You misunderstood my [and LightningMcGreen's] point. I'll reword it and put it another way...

Heaven is supposed to be what we would consider "paradise", right? That's what all the biblical scholars teach and that's what the Bible says. Now consider your idea of paradise on Earth... Does your idea of paradise consist of your family members being left behind? Could you enjoy yourself in paradise knowing the people who were left behind were being tortured every minute you were gone? Of course you couldn't, right? How can this "paradise" exist then? Explain that.

On that last bit... how many times does it need to be said? RELIGION props up people as leaders to be followed for their judgment to be unquestioned (like the Pope), SCIENCE doesn't need any person to lean on. It stands by itself. That's why when fundies make up names like "Darwinist" - it's really actually pretty stupid and ironic... we'd believe the shit if Steve Baker thought it up and put it together... Who the hell is Steve Baker? Beats the fuck out of me, because that's not what's important. The SCIENCE stands by itself, Charles Darwin was the first person to logically put it all together, the actual theory of evolution has nothing to do with HIM. 

How old are you, if you don't mind me asking? What's your background in science, religion, education?


----------



## IregAt420 (Oct 11, 2010)

Im 20. Not much background in science. What I do know about religion, has mostly been recent research on my own part, which is probably why my posts are so scattered. 

I want to say that I dont go to church. I dont follow any set religion. I just, believe in God. I dont look at religion and say, "I need that". No, I dont need shit.

My point of posting on this thread, was to argue and see your rebuttal Pad. I have enjoyed it.....but I think I'm digging myself deeper into things I dont really understand. So I'm going to save myself embarrassment. lol 

+rep for holding your own, before this I didnt think Atheists' were THAT hard to argue with.

Once I get some more ground under my feet I'll have to find your more recent posts lol


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Oct 11, 2010)

IregAt420 said:


> Im 20. Not much background in science. What I do know about religion, has mostly been recent research on my own part, which is probably why my posts are so scattered.
> 
> I want to say that I dont go to church. I dont follow any set religion. I just, believe in God. I dont look at religion and say, "I need that". No, I dont need shit.
> 
> ...


Keep researching religions for yourself, you're on the right path. Take a look at the history and origins, it'll lead you to much bigger things.

And always ask yourself these important questions, there's nothing wrong with questioning anything.


----------



## brandon. (Oct 11, 2010)

I love the statistics that show atheist/agnostic people are generally better educated than those who believe in god.

I have a question. Forgive me, I'm not very versed in organized religions. If you're not suppose to believe in another god (commandment - Do not have any other gods before me), does that mean EVERY single person of other religions are going to hell?


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Oct 11, 2010)

brandon. said:


> I love the statistics that show atheist/agnostic people are generally better educated than those who believe in god.
> 
> I have a question. Forgive me, I'm not very versed in organized religions. If you're not suppose to believe in another god (commandment - Do not have any other gods before me), does that mean EVERY single person of other religions are going to hell?


Yes. That's in each religion I've studied.


----------



## LightningMcGreen (Oct 11, 2010)

Inconsistency and grey areas are the reasons I don't follow organized religion. 

It seems the inner framework of Christianity constantly changes to suit the changes of society. For instance, back in the days of old, there were no female clergymen, and homosexuality was an abomination of God, bar none. Now that women have rights, and gays are slowly getting there, it's now accepted to be a female part of the church, or to be gay and still come to mass on sundays and be just as big a part of the group as the next person. People sometimes confuse this with "evolution" of the church, but really it's just a facelift that sometimes entirely contradicts their teachings.

Science however, DOES evolve, but the guidelines stay the same. For instance, 2+2=4. That always has been, is, and always will be a fact. It doesn't change; it's observable, and can be repeated time and time again with the same results. The only thing that ever changes is science is our perspective of the world with new discoveries following those mathmatical guidelines. And the only way this can happens (as with almost all great discoveries of mankind) is if someone is smart enough to be able to step outside the box, and test the limits of the imagination, with sometimes no moral or ethical boundaries (i.e. string theory, stem cell research).


----------



## IregAt420 (Oct 11, 2010)

brandon. said:


> I love the statistics that show atheist/agnostic people are generally better educated than those who believe in god.
> 
> I have a question. Forgive me, I'm not very versed in organized religions. If you're not suppose to believe in another god (commandment - Do not have any other gods before me), does that mean EVERY single person of other religions are going to hell?


If there is one constant in ALL religions, its that God is the creator. What that commandment means is do not have Idols. Dont worship anyone but the One God our Creator. 

Depending on what other religions your talking about, I'd answer your question with a no.


----------



## Evil Buddies (Oct 12, 2010)

Mention the measurement problem to scientists and this will wind them up do some research on the measurement problem this is evidence of a higher power imo

Evil


----------



## ginjawarrior (Oct 12, 2010)

lol why do people always turn to a "higher power" when theres something they dont understand?

for you evil buddies 

[youtube]IVbnciQYMiM[/youtube]


----------



## Evil Buddies (Oct 12, 2010)

ginjawarrior said:


> lol why do people always turn to a "higher power" when theres something they dont understand?
> 
> for you evil buddies
> 
> [youtube]IVbnciQYMiM[/youtube]


I'm not gonna even watch it


----------



## Evil Buddies (Oct 12, 2010)

This is a video explaining the Measurement theory is interesting 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJThU1jDT2o&feature=related

This relates to the holographic theory that we live if any of u have studied or have knowledge on this will know what i mean.

Enjoy

Evil


----------



## ginjawarrior (Oct 12, 2010)

Evil Buddies said:


> This is a video explaining the Measurement theory is interesting
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJThU1jDT2o&feature=related
> 
> ...


typical "the secret" documentary type snippets of real scientific theories followed up by snake oil spiritualists making up what it really means....

i read and researched alot into this the measurement theory does bring up some very interesting stuff and theories by real scientist's
however it has been hijacked by pseudoscience/ spiritualist who have picked apart bits they like and made alot of money from stuff like the secret

if the universe is a hologram then there is no higher being there is one, you and your consciousness creating everything you see... when you split a holligram down in halfs or quarters what you are left every time is a copy of the whole so if the universe is a hologram then you are too and as you are part of the universe you are a copy of it..
bullshit....

i really hate these docu's where they take serious science cut it and "add" their views


----------



## ginjawarrior (Oct 12, 2010)

a slightly more scientific look at our origins

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00vdkmj/Horizon_20102011_What_Happened_Before_the_Big_Bang/


----------



## crackerboy (Oct 12, 2010)

LightningMcGreen said:


> Inconsistency and grey areas are the reasons I don't follow organized religion.
> 
> "It seems the inner framework of Christianity constantly changes to suit the changes of society. For instance, back in the days of old, there were no female clergymen, and homosexuality was an abomination of God, bar none. Now that women have rights, and gays are slowly getting there, it's now accepted to be a female part of the church, or to be gay and still come to mass on sundays and be just as big a part of the group as the next person. People sometimes confuse this with "evolution" of the church, but really it's just a facelift that sometimes entirely contradicts their teachings"





LightningMcGreen said:


> No the Bible has not changed over time. The only think that changes is mans attempt to make the Bible say what they want it to say. Once again if you all would take the time and study what the Bible really says than you will see that it warns us of that man will try to twist the Bible to fit there needs. The Bible talks about all of this. Just study what it says. Read it for yourself. Take the time to find out who wrote each book of the Bible and who it was written to. People keep making the fatal mistake of thinking because men claim to be Christians and do evil, that means that the Bible is evil. Spend time in the word and God will reveal the truth to you.


----------



## crackerboy (Oct 12, 2010)

brandon. said:


> I love the statistics that show atheist/agnostic people are generally better educated than those who believe in god.
> 
> I have a question. Forgive me, I'm not very versed in organized religions. If you're not suppose to believe in another god (commandment - Do not have any other gods before me), does that mean EVERY single person of other religions are going to hell?



Well lets take a second to understand where the three of the four major religions of the world came from. All three, Jews, Muslims, and Christians all worship the same God. That is the God of the old testament. The main difference is that the Muslims believe that the promise land was promised to them and not the Jews. And both the Jews and the Muslims deny that Jesus is the son of God. But all three religions read from the old testament. They just disagree about the new Covenant. Either way they all worship the same Father.


----------



## LightningMcGreen (Oct 12, 2010)

crackerboy said:


> No the Bible has not changed over time. The only think that changes is mans attempt to make the Bible say what they want it to say.


Wasn't talking about the bible...I meant the organized religion as a whole.

Although of course the bible predicts of people trying to bastardize it...such acts are inevitable with religion, which is why there are so many sects (especially with christianity)...but just because I predict that the sun will rise tomorrow, doesn't make my words prophetic.

Plus, you say the three "major" religions that all follow the same God. Why are you so quick to dismiss all other deities? What makes the jewish, muslim, and christian faith so special above krishna, buddah, or any other gods?


----------



## crackerboy (Oct 12, 2010)

LightningMcGreen said:


> Wasn't talking about the bible...I meant the organized religion as a whole.
> 
> Although of course the bible predicts of people trying to bastardize it...such acts are inevitable with religion, which is why there are so many sects (especially with christianity)...but just because I predict that the sun will rise tomorrow, doesn't make my words prophetic.
> 
> Plus, you say the three "major" religions that all follow the same God. Why are you so quick to dismiss all other deities? What makes the jewish, muslim, and christian faith so special above krishna, buddah, or any other gods?




Well I did not mean to dismiss anything. All I was saying is statistically speaking those are the three most dominant (as they have the most followers). Man has a way of corrupting everything he touches including religion. The Bible gives us instruction on how to identify these corruptions and avoid them. It tells us how to live good and holy lives. I ask you to show me a passage that tells man to do evil and I will help you to understand what it is really telling you to do. If you take any one passage you can twist it. But if you read that whole chapter or book than you will see the real context in which it was intended.


----------



## mindphuk (Oct 12, 2010)

Evil Buddies said:


> Mention the measurement problem to scientists and this will wind them up do some research on the measurement problem this is evidence of a higher power imo
> 
> Evil


How exactly does the measurement problem tell us there is a higher power? All scientific problems and paradoxes only tell us we don't understand everything yet. Saying "this" or "that" problem is evidence for a deity is just another version of the god of the gaps argument or argument from ignorance. Funny how these types of arguments have to get more sophisticated as science learns more about our world and eliminates more and more reasons that need a creator to explain. One day you might realize that saying that a god did something is actually a non-answer and doesn't explain a thing, if anything, creates even more questions.


----------



## mindphuk (Oct 12, 2010)

ginjawarrior said:


> typical "the secret" documentary type snippets of real scientific theories followed up by snake oil spiritualists making up what it really means....
> 
> i read and researched alot into this the measurement theory does bring up some very interesting stuff and theories by real scientist's
> however it has been hijacked by pseudoscience/ spiritualist who have picked apart bits they like and made alot of money from stuff like the secret


 +1 ("You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to ginjawarrior again.")


----------



## Evil Buddies (Oct 13, 2010)

mindphuk said:


> How exactly does the measurement problem tell us there is a higher power? All scientific problems and paradoxes only tell us we don't understand everything yet. Saying "this" or "that" problem is evidence for a deity is just another version of the god of the gaps argument or argument from ignorance. Funny how these types of arguments have to get more sophisticated as science learns more about our world and eliminates more and more reasons that need a creator to explain. One day you might realize that saying that a god did something is actually a non-answer and doesn't explain a thing, if anything, creates even more questions.


Yes it creates questions that science can't explain it. If it defies the laws of physics if and it shows that our concious creates the world we live in. To me it suggests that it is a supernatural phenomenon that leads to a higher power. The power of conciousness is our real power is the only thing we can say really exists. I will post a video on the holographic theory which ties in with the measurement problem.

To me the higher power in this case is one of conciousness u assumed i meant God which I never. I said a higher power as it is something that we cant explain that a higher power governs beyond our world and dimension of physics.

Evil


----------



## Evil Buddies (Oct 13, 2010)

To me i respect that everyone has the right to believe whatever they want. I look at religion like this Most religions believe in a one God and the different religions is the different way people worship God. One thing that is said in all religions that if everyone was to follow this world would be a better place. Do to others the way u would like to be treated. people should believe what they want without forcing their views on others and saying their religion is right. You can tell people what u believe but dont say ur way is right just say this is what i believe. There is a lot of similarities in religions we should be focussing on that instead of the differences. We should be respecting what we believe and the main thing in religions is peace love and unity.


----------



## Evil Buddies (Oct 13, 2010)

Holographic universe series in 5 parts a good interesting watch that i hope will open up ur mind and get that grey matter thinking. I haven't watched this in ages but will watch it again now. 

Part 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vnvM_YAwX4I
Part 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YG9FO7JGWq4&feature=related
Part 3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yydx1vvUVlc&feature=related
Part 4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_YMpns3WUA&feature=related
Part 5 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6t2rPiV6S_A&feature=related

Evil


----------



## Evil Buddies (Oct 13, 2010)

ginjawarrior said:


> typical "the secret" documentary type snippets of real scientific theories followed up by snake oil spiritualists making up what it really means....
> 
> i read and researched alot into this the measurement theory does bring up some very interesting stuff and theories by real scientist's
> however it has been hijacked by pseudoscience/ spiritualist who have picked apart bits they like and made alot of money from stuff like the secret
> ...


The measurement problem isnt a theory its real. The holographic universe theory is a theory with a bit of fact thrown in. Yes I know what u mean they throw their theory in without just sticking to and focussing on the facts. This is how they make their money by using fact and making a story out of it. If people didnt do this we wouldnt get the great films that we enjoy to watch. But they should either stick to the science stuff or make a science fiction book or movie on their theories.

Evil


----------



## LightningMcGreen (Oct 13, 2010)

crackerboy said:


> I ask you to show me a passage that tells man to do evil and I will help you to understand what it is really telling you to do. If you take any one passage you can twist it.


*
Exodus 21:7* And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do.

That's pretty clear cut. I don't think anyone should sell their kid....


----------



## crackerboy (Oct 13, 2010)

LightningMcGreen said:


> *
> Exodus 21:7* And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do.
> 
> That's pretty clear cut. I don't think anyone should sell their kid....



I believe that this passage is really talking about slavery. Once again read the whole chapter in context. The title of that chapter is The Law Concerning Servants. The law of the slave guaranteed freedom after a specified period of 6 years (Exodus 21:2) unless the slave himself chose to stay. Yes this passage talks about very difficult realities of that time. This passage is giving instruction to be fair with the servants and to free them. It is not saying that it is ok to have slaves, it just acknowledges the reality of them and then instructs you to be fair and free them.


----------



## LightningMcGreen (Oct 13, 2010)

crackerboy said:


> I believe that this passage is really talking about slavery. Once again read the whole chapter in context. The title of that chapter is The Law Concerning Servants. The law of the slave guaranteed freedom after a specified period of 6 years (Exodus 21:2) unless the slave himself chose to stay. Yes this passage talks about very difficult realities of that time. This passage is giving instruction to be fair with the servants and to free them. It is not saying that it is ok to have slaves, it just acknowledges the reality of them and then instructs you to be fair and free them.


If it's not ok to have slaves, then why not just come out and say that? Why wait for hundreds and hundreds of years before mankind finally wakes up and says "You know what? This slavery thing is just inhumane. Let's not do it anymore." 

*Exodus 21:15* "And he that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death." <----Kill unruly children. I mean...really?


----------



## crackerboy (Oct 14, 2010)

LightningMcGreen said:


> If it's not ok to have slaves, then why not just come out and say that? Why wait for hundreds and hundreds of years before mankind finally wakes up and says "You know what? This slavery thing is just inhumane. Let's not do it anymore."
> 
> *Exodus 21:15* "And he that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death." <----Kill unruly children. I mean...really?




Its not talking about just unruly children. Its referring to children who physically attach their parents. In those days it was not uncommon for children to kill their elderly parents for the inheritance (property rights and such). Also God takes the 5th command seriously. The relationship between a child and his parents is suppose to be a representation of the relationship between God and his children.


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Oct 14, 2010)

crackerboy said:


> Its not talking about just unruly children. Its referring to children who physically attach their parents. In those days it was not uncommon for children to kill their elderly parents for the inheritance (property rights and such). Also God takes the 5th command seriously. The relationship between a child and his parents is suppose to be a representation of the relationship between God and his children.


Ever hear of moving the goal posts?


----------



## mindphuk (Oct 14, 2010)

crackerboy said:


> Its not talking about just unruly children. Its referring to children who physically attach their parents. In those days it was not uncommon for children to kill their elderly parents for the inheritance (property rights and such). Also God takes the 5th command seriously. The relationship between a child and his parents is suppose to be a representation of the relationship between God and his children.


 What about Exodus 21:17? "And he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death."


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Oct 14, 2010)

mindphuk said:


> What about Exodus 21:17? "And he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death."


...but that was the OT. 

(you and me both know it will continue on like this...)


----------



## crackerboy (Oct 14, 2010)

The definition of smite - To destroy the life of by beating, or by weapons of any kind; to slay by a blow; to kill; as, to smite one with the sword, or with an arrow or other instrument.


Therefor to smite is to kill. That then means that Exodus 21:15 says that if a child kills his parents than he or she shall be put to death. So if a child kills his parents they are violating two commandments.


----------



## crackerboy (Oct 14, 2010)

Padawanbater2 said:


> ...but that was the OT.
> 
> (you and me both know it will continue on like this...)




That is true, what people need to realize that the old testament is the law that convicts us of our sins. The new testament is the new covenant, the good news that Jesus was the ultimate sacrifice for our sins. He came to save us from the convictions. All men sin but only Jesus saves.


----------



## mindphuk (Oct 14, 2010)

crackerboy said:


> The definition of smite - To destroy the life of by beating, or by weapons of any kind; to slay by a blow; to kill; as, to smite one with the sword, or with an arrow or other instrument.
> 
> 
> Therefor to smite is to kill. That then means that Exodus 21:15 says that if a child kills his parents than he or she shall be put to death. So if a child kills his parents they are violating two commandments.


Nice of you to completely ignore the cursing aspect of Ex 21:17 that I brought up.


----------



## mindphuk (Oct 14, 2010)

crackerboy said:


> That is true, what people need to realize that the old testament is the law that convicts us of our sins. The new testament is the new covenant, the good news that Jesus was the ultimate sacrifice for our sins. He came to save us from the convictions. All men sin but only Jesus saves.


 &#8220;Yet for all that, when they are in the land of their enemies, I will not cast them away, nor shall I abhor them, to utterly destroy them and break My covenant with them; for I am the Lord their God. But for their sake I will remember the covenant of their ancestors, whom I brought out of the land of Egypt in the sight of the nations, that I might be their God: I am the Lord.&#8221; 
(Lev. 26:44&#8211;45)


----------



## R3DROCk9 (Oct 14, 2010)

God is real. Jesus is a fraud.


----------



## LightningMcGreen (Oct 14, 2010)

Yeah...he bypassed a couple more questions too...


----------



## crackerboy (Oct 14, 2010)

mindphuk said:


> Nice of you to completely ignore the cursing aspect of Ex 21:17 that I brought up.



sorry if you felt left out. I don't spend all of my time on this site. Besides that Exodus 21:15 & 17 go hand and hand. I think that I have proven my point. This could potentially go on for ever. My point was simple. That point is that most people do just as you all are doing. You are not looking at those passages in the proper context. So yes, when you only read those individual passages they can seem to say something completely different. But if you just take the time and study instead of nit pick than you will see the true meanings.


----------



## crackerboy (Oct 14, 2010)

LightningMcGreen said:


> Yeah...he bypassed a couple more questions too...


What did I bypass? Did I not do as I said I would and debunk your claims. Like I said in my last post. I proved my point. Why don't you try looking at something other than the usual passages. Dig deeper, read more, and come back with something of real substance.


----------



## crackerboy (Oct 14, 2010)

mindphuk said:


> &#8220;Yet for all that, when they are in the land of their enemies, I will not cast them away, nor shall I abhor them, to utterly destroy them and break My covenant with them; for I am the Lord their God. But for their sake I will remember the covenant of their ancestors, whom I brought out of the land of Egypt in the sight of the nations, that I might be their God: I am the Lord.&#8221;
> (Lev. 26:44&#8211;45)




This chapter is called the promise of Blessing and Retribution. This whole chapter is about how God will keep his promise even when we are unfaithful. I really don't see how this shows God or the Bible in a negative way. It actually confirms what I have been saying. This is referring to the old covenant which was replaced by Jesus and his new covenant.


----------



## crackerboy (Oct 14, 2010)

R3DROCk9 said:


> God is real. Jesus is a fraud.



WOW!! You really provided a solid argument and insight for this debate. Thanks for the input. Could you please expand on this concept of yours with some supporting evidence or something.


----------



## mindphuk (Oct 14, 2010)

crackerboy said:


> sorry if you felt left out. I don't spend all of my time on this site. Besides that Exodus 21:15 & 17 go hand and hand. I think that I have proven my point. This could potentially go on for ever. My point was simple. That point is that most people do just as you all are doing. You are not looking at those passages in the proper context. So yes, when you only read those individual passages they can seem to say something completely different. But if you just take the time and study instead of nit pick than you will see the true meanings.


So with a wave of your hand you dismiss the idea that execution of children that curse their parents is not evil, yet you provide no explanation except to say that I'm reading out of context and that it goes hand-in-hand with smiting parents. You said you would explain yet you don't even go to the trouble of putting it in context and describing how it is similar to your answer for Ex 21:15.



crackerboy said:


> This chapter is called the promise of Blessing and Retribution. This whole chapter is about how God will keep his promise even when we are unfaithful. I really don't see how this shows God or the Bible in a negative way. It actually confirms what I have been saying. This is referring to the old covenant which was replaced by Jesus and his new covenant.


 Yes, it is referring to the old covenant telling the Hebrews that it will remain in effect. IOW, God doesn't change his mind. He might make a new covenant with people but that doesn't replace the ones he already made. The Mosaic covenant should be considered in full force and effect yet Xtians want to disregard almost all of it (except the Decalogue and any passage that pertains to homosexuals).


[youtube]OtIyx687ytk[/youtube]


----------



## IregAt420 (Oct 14, 2010)

I think is IMAGE of Jesus is a fraud now a days.

-If you remember correctly I mentioned Idol worship?

I mean seriously...Mind Control. The media controls/censors EVERYTHING. So why not control Religion?? Something that is so powerful in EVERY SINGLE PERSONS LIFE. No matter what, you make a conscious decision(Sometime in your life) about whether or not you believe in God!

God will always be there for you. You just have to trust Him. 

I love Moses story. He saved a NATION! The Israelites. Ever heard of the Holy Land, The Promised Land? Our Saviour Jesus Christ came then. Now, the Devil has control over the masses. There will be a False Messiah!!!!!!! He will be powerful. Like no other being we have ever fathomed. But dont fret...We will all be saved. He will come again!


----------



## mindphuk (Oct 14, 2010)

IregAt420 said:


> I think is IMAGE of Jesus is a fraud now a days.
> 
> -If you remember correctly I mentioned Idol worship?
> 
> ...


So I guess the false messiah and the anti-christ didn't read Revelation, otherwise they would know they don't win.


----------



## LightningMcGreen (Oct 15, 2010)

crackerboy said:


> What did I bypass? Did I not do as I said I would and debunk your claims. Like I said in my last post. I proved my point. Why don't you try looking at something other than the usual passages. Dig deeper, read more, and come back with something of real substance.


Here were the one's you failed to answer...

-Does everyone who follows a totally different religion other than christianity go to hell? 

-What makes your God so much more special, and credible, than all the others?


----------



## crackerboy (Oct 15, 2010)

mindphuk said:


> So with a wave of your hand you dismiss the idea that execution of children that curse their parents is not evil, yet you provide no explanation except to say that I'm reading out of context and that it goes hand-in-hand with smiting parents. You said you would explain yet you don't even go to the trouble of putting it in context and describing how it is similar to your answer for Ex 21:15.
> 
> 
> Yes, it is referring to the old covenant telling the Hebrews that it will remain in effect. IOW, God doesn't change his mind. He might make a new covenant with people but that doesn't replace the ones he already made. The Mosaic covenant should be considered in full force and effect yet Xtians want to disregard almost all of it (except the Decalogue and any passage that pertains to homosexuals).
> ...



Fine if you must make me do your homework for you than I will explain what the word curse meant to the Hebrew people. It did not have the same meaning as we use it today. The Hebrews believed that when you cursed someone that you where not just calling them an ass hole like today. When one person cursed another they where essentially releasing demons on that person and that curse would become literal. This is a form of paganism. So yes it is very serious business. 


I will admit that I did not watch the video. I will do so later, But as for your second comment you are correct that Gods promise to the Hebrew people will always stand. What the new covenant does is provide forgiveness. So once again yes we are to still follow the law of the old testament and yes man continually breaks these laws and as you said try and pick and choose which law they want to follow. All you are doing is telling us about the corruption of man not God or the Bible. You continually prove my point. Thank you.


----------



## crackerboy (Oct 15, 2010)

LightningMcGreen said:


> Here were the one's you failed to answer...
> 
> -Does everyone who follows a totally different religion other than christianity go to hell?
> 
> -What makes your God so much more special, and credible, than all the others?



Ok so to the first question the answer is yes. I know that this seems hard to understand or accept. But the Bible is clear. There is only one way to go to heaven and that is through the saving grace of Jesus. The law convicts us of our sins and every man sins including myself. But if you do not repent of those sins and ask God for forgiveness than you will surely go to hell. I will answer your second question later. Im out of time.


----------



## mindphuk (Oct 15, 2010)

crackerboy said:


> Fine if you must make me do your homework for you than I will explain what the word curse meant to the Hebrew people.


Oh, I see, now you're doing my homework? What happened to the offer, " I ask you to show me a passage that tells man to do evil and I will help you to understand what it is really telling you to do." ? Don't go around blaming me for not researching something you said you would explain. 


> It did not have the same meaning as we use it today. The Hebrews believed that when you cursed someone that you where not just calling them an ass hole like today. When one person cursed another they where essentially releasing demons on that person and that curse would become literal. This is a form of paganism. So yes it is very serious business.


 It's only serious business if it is true. An all-powerful god should realize that there is no such thing as a literal curse and he wouldn't condemn people to death for superstitious nonsense. You can't have it both ways, that the bible was either written by god and should demonstrate that by giving us answers and moral guidance that could not be known by men at the time, or it was merely written by superstitious, bronze-age goat herders that created their own laws and only attributed them to a god. If that's the case, then we should give the book no more relevance than Homer or Plato and our belief in Yahweh should be no stronger than it is for Zeus and should give the story of Noah and the ark no more credence than Atlantis.


----------



## crackerboy (Oct 15, 2010)

mindphuk said:


> Oh, I see, now you're doing my homework? What happened to the offer, " I ask you to show me a passage that tells man to do evil and I will help you to understand what it is really telling you to do." ? Don't go around blaming me for not researching something you said you would explain.
> 
> It's only serious business if it is true. An all-powerful god should realize that there is no such thing as a literal curse and he wouldn't condemn people to death for superstitious nonsense. You can't have it both ways, that the bible was either written by god and should demonstrate that by giving us answers and moral guidance that could not be known by men at the time, or it was merely written by superstitious, bronze-age goat herders that created their own laws and only attributed them to a god. If that's the case, then we should give the book no more relevance than Homer or Plato and our belief in Yahweh should be no stronger than it is for Zeus and should give the story of Noah and the ark no more credence than Atlantis.




Look you are missing the point. All you are trying to do is stump me. And all I am trying to do is to get you to see that you should look deeper than just the surface. If you are going to take a stance on these issues shouldn't you do the proper research on them. My problem with your point of views is that you and most other people on here have obviously never really spent the time to understand what you read. This whole thread started with a scientific discussion. But when it comes to the facts about God nobody did any research they just settled with whatever they have heard. There is nothing scientific about that. As for your response, its not superstition demons are real.

But with all that said I will still try and answer whatever questions you have. If you are really interested in knowing than I will help. I will say that I am not a Bible scholar by no means. But I have done my fair share of reading and studying. So there are indeed some things that I still don't know. But if all you are going to do is try and find one of my many weaknesses and just to attach it than don't bother.


----------



## LightningMcGreen (Oct 15, 2010)

The problem is the lines are blurred...commandment 6, "Thou shall not kill"....but yet it's ok to kill if there's and act of adultery:

Deuteronomy 22:22 "If a man is found sleeping with another man's wife, both the man who slept with her and the woman *must die.*"


...among other sins, such as the unruly child discussion. So you're telling me that it's not ok to kill for personal reasons, but God believes in capital punishment? Again...seems a contradiction to the commandment.


And to condemn a man to infinite torture in the afterlife for being brought up in a different set of beliefs is fascism, plain and simple.


----------



## mindphuk (Oct 15, 2010)

crackerboy said:


> Look you are missing the point. All you are trying to do is stump me. And all I am trying to do is to get you to see that you should look deeper than just the surface.


I'm not trying to stump you, I'm trying to see how you reconcile inherently contradictory claims about a book supposedly written by a perfect and moral being.




> If you are going to take a stance on these issues shouldn't you do the proper research on them.


I have done the research. I have studied religions for years, I started out by reading the Tanakh in both English and Hebrew. I have been on archeological digs in the Holy Land and have studied comparative religion and studied the NT, Quran, the Bhagavad Gita and other ancient texts. Atheists in general tend to be more literate in religion than you probably realize. 



> My problem with your point of views is that you and most other people on here have obviously never really spent the time to understand what you read.


No, the problem is that we don't automatically accept your explanations. You seem to imply that reading the text will automatically make things clear, if only we understood it properly when in fact you have to make many concessions and rationalizations to believe that these writings are any more factual than Homer's Odyssey. 


> This whole thread started with a scientific discussion. But when it comes to the facts about God nobody did any research they just settled with whatever they have heard. There is nothing scientific about that. As for your response, its not superstition demons are real.


Yea, sure, demons live among us. Any evidence for that besides an ancient book full of other superstitious claims? 


> But with all that said I will still try and answer whatever questions you have. If you are really interested in knowing than I will help. I will say that I am not a Bible scholar by no means. But I have done my fair share of reading and studying. So there are indeed some things that I still don't know. But if all you are going to do is try and find one of my many weaknesses and just to attach it than don't bother.


It is the many weaknesses that drive us away from religion. If you have some evidence or support of the claims made in the bible, then by all means, I and others here would certainly be interested in hearing them.


----------



## crackerboy (Oct 15, 2010)

"God vs.Science"






 
"Let me explain the problem science has with religion." The atheist
Professor of Philosophy pauses before his class and then asks one of his new
students to stand.

"You're a Christian, aren't you son?"

"Yes sir," the student says.

"So you believe in God?" 

"Absolutely."

"Is God good?"

"Sure! God's good."

"Is God all-powerful? Can God do anything?"

"Yes."

"Are you good or evil?

"The Bible says I'm evil."

The professor grins knowingly. "Aha! The Bible!" He considers for a
moment. "Here's one for you. Let's say there's a sick person over here and
you can cure him. You can do it. Would you help him? Would you try?"

"Yes sir, I would."

"So you're good...?"

"I wouldn't say that."

"But why not say that? You'd help a sick and maimed person if you could.
Most of us would if we could. But God doesn't."

The student does not answer, so the professor continues. "He doesn't, does
he? My brother was a Christian who died of cancer, even though he prayed to
Jesus to heal him. How is this Jesus good? Hmmm? Can you answer that
one?"

The student remains silent. "No, you can't, can you?" the professor says.
He takes a sip of water from a glass on his desk to give the student time to relax. 
    "Let's start again, young fella. Is God good?"

"Er..yes," the student says.

"Is Satan good?"

The student doesn't hesitate on this one. "No."

Then where does Satan come from?"

The student falters. "From God."

"That's right. God made Satan, didn't he? Tell me, son, is there evil in this world?"

"Yes, sir."

"Evil's everywhere, isn't it? And God did make everything, correct?"

"Yes."

"So who created evil?" The professor continued, "If God created everything,
then God created evil, since evil exists, and according to the principle
that our works define who we are, then God is evil."

Again, the student has no answer.

"Is there sickness? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All these terrible
things, do they exist in this world?"

The student squirms on his feet. "Yes."

"So who created them?"

The student does not answer again, so the professor repeats his questions.
"Who created them?"

There is still no answer. Suddenly the lecturer breaks away to pace in
front of the classroom. The class is mesmerized. "Tell me," he continues
onto another student. "Do you believe in Jesus Christ, son?"

The student's voice betrays him and cracks. "Yes, Professor, I do."

The old man stops pacing. "Science says you have five senses you use to
identify and observe the world around you. Have you ever seen Jesus?"

"No, sir, I've never seen Him."

"Then tell us if you've ever heard Jesus?"

"No, sir, I have not."

"Have you ever felt your Jesus, tasted your Jesus or smelt your Jesus? Have
you ever had any sensory perception of Jesus Christ, or God for that
matter?"

"No, sir, I'm afraid I haven't."

"Yet you still believe in Him?"

"Yes."

"According to the rules of empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol,
science says your God doesn't exist. What do you say to that, son?"

"Nothing." the student replies. "I only have my Faith."

"Yes, faith," the professor repeats. "And that is the problem science has
with God. There is no evidence, only faith."

The student stands quietly for a moment, before asking a question of his
own. "Professor, is there such thing as heat?"

"Yes."

"And is there such a thing as cold?"

"Yes, son, there's cold, too."

"No sir, there isn't."

The professor turns to face the student, obviously interested. The room
suddenly becomes very quiet. The student begins to explain. "You can have
lots of heat, even more heat, super-heat, mega-yeat, unlimited heat, white
heat, a little heat or no heat, but we don't have anything called 'cold'.
We can go down to 458 degrees below zero, which is no heat, but we can't go
any further after that. There is no such thing as cold, otherwise we would
be able to go colder than the lowest, -458 degrees. Everybody or object is
susceptible to study when it has or transmits energy, and heat is what makes
a body or matter have or transmit energy. Absolute zero (-458 F) is the
total absence of heat. You see, sir, cold is only a word we use to describe
the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold. Heat we can measure in
thermal units because heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat,
sir, just the absence of it." ​ 
Silence across the room. A pen drops somewhere in the classroom, sounding
like a hammer. "What about darkness, professor? Is there such a thing as
darkness?"

"Yes." the professor replies without hesitation. "What is night if it isn't darkness?"


"You're wrong again, sir. Darkness is not something: it is the absence of
something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing
light, but if you have no light constantly you have nothing and it's called
darkness, isn't it? That's the meaing we use to define the word. In
reality, darkness isn't. If it were, you would be able to make darkness
darker, wouldn't you?"

The professor begins to smile at the student in front of him. This will be
a good semester. "So what point are you making, young man?"

"Yes, professor, my point is, your philosophical premise is flawed to start
with, and so your conclusion must also be flawed."

The professor's face cannot hide his surprise this time. "Flawed? Can you
explain how?"

"You are working on the premise of duality." the student explains. "You
argue that there is life and then there's death; a good God and a bad God.
You are viewing the concept of God as something finite, something we can
measure. Sir, science can't even explain a thought. It uses electricity
and magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one.
To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that
death cannot exist as a substantive thing. Death is not the opposite of
life, just the absence of it. Now tell me, professor, do you teach your
students that they evolved from a monkey?"

"If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, young man, yes,
of course I do."

"Have you observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?"

The professor begins to shake his head, still smiling, as he realizes where
the argument is going. A very good semester, indeed.

"Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot
even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor, are you not teaching
your opinion, sir? Are you now not a scientist, but a preacher?"

The class is in uproar. The student remains silent until the commotion has
subsided. "To continue the point you were making earlier to the other
student, let me give you an example of what I mean." The students looks
around the room. "Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the
professor's brain?" The class breaks out into laughter. "Is there anyone
here who has ever heard the professor's brain, touched or smelt the
professor's brain? No one appears to have done so. So, according to the
established rules of empirical, stable, demonstrable protocol, science says
that you have no brain, with all due respect, sir. So if science says you
have no brain, how can we trust your lectures, sir?"

Now the room is silent. The professor just stares at the student, his face
unreadable. Finally, after what seems an eternity, the old man answers, "I
guess you'll have to take them on faith."

"Now, you accept that there is faith, and, in fact, faith exists with life."
the student continues. "Now, sir, is there such a thing as evil?"

Now uncertain, the professor responds, "Of course, there is. We see it
every day. It is in the daily example of man's inhumanity to man. It is in
the multitude of crime and violence everywhere in the world. These
manifestations are nothing else but evil."

To this the student replied, "Evil does not exist, sir, or at least it does
not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God. It is just like
darkness and cold, a word that man has created to describe the absence of
God. God did not create evil. Evil is the result of what happens when man
does not have God's love present in his heart. It's like the cold that
comes when there is no heat or the darkness that comes when there is no
light."

The professor sat down.


That student was Albert Einstein...​ 
​


----------



## crackerboy (Oct 15, 2010)

watch these videos. Tell me what you think.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qyc_Y2s9go&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbPMJdmSe5U&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yR2E0Xo_HRU&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASVtu0VYp58&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bimunuj08hU&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0KoXU2VqZB0&feature=related


----------



## crackerboy (Oct 15, 2010)

one more for you all to think about. He explains it better than I can.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FeJdSyghrs&feature=related


----------



## mindphuk (Oct 15, 2010)

crackerboy said:


> "You're a Christian, aren't you son?"
> 
> "Yes sir," the student says.
> .
> ...


 Why do theists rely so much on fictional stories to say what they mean? This story is very cute but full of fail! It uses equivocation and switches colloquial meanings with scientific ones and providing absolutely no support for these particular meaning of the words including "evil" and "good." And to top it off, Einstein was Jewish, not Xtian. 

So evil is the absence of god, but god is everywhere and inside everything, therefore there is no evil.


----------



## LorDeMO (Oct 15, 2010)

@Crackerboy That's just another bullshit situation that never happened and gets past around on the Internet even though there is no truth in it - much like the one about Abortion and Beethoven.


----------



## LorDeMO (Oct 15, 2010)

mindphuk said:


> Why do theists rely so much on fictional stories to say what they mean?


It all comes down to facts and evidence. They have neither so let's just go ahead and make some up... word of mouth is still a pretty powerful tool to utilise.


----------



## crackerboy (Oct 15, 2010)

LorDeMO said:


> @Crackerboy That's just another bullshit situation that never happened and gets past around on the Internet even though there is no truth in it - much like the one about Abortion and Beethoven.


Its not that I necessarily that I think it is true. I just thought it gave an interesting way of thinking about the contrast to good and evil.


----------



## LorDeMO (Oct 15, 2010)

I see what you mean but I found it quite tedious to read, it's like a hundred other fictional stories (of supposed fact!) that I have read.


----------



## crackerboy (Oct 15, 2010)

LorDeMO said:


> It all comes down to facts and evidence. They have neither so let's just go ahead and make some up... word of mouth is still a pretty powerful tool to utilise.



If you want to talk about facts and scientific evidence. How bout the Bible said that the world was round thousands of years before Columbus. It also said that the world spins on an axes thousands of years before science figured it out. Watch the last video that I posted. It is all verifiable, you can look it up yourself.


----------



## mindphuk (Oct 15, 2010)

crackerboy said:


> one more for you all to think about. He explains it better than I can.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FeJdSyghrs&feature=related


 I can tell you from watching just a few minutes of this, I'm not sure I'm ready to sit down watching it all. First, he presumes what he is trying to demonstrate, begging the question. He wants to prove the bible isn't from man but divine, yet starts off claiming that the things Jesus said, his philosophy, could not have come from man. Which is clearly a bullshit premise from the get go.


----------



## crackerboy (Oct 15, 2010)

mindphuk said:


> I can tell you from watching just a few minutes of this, I'm not sure I'm ready to sit down watching it all. First, he presumes what he is trying to demonstrate, begging the question. He wants to prove the bible isn't from man but divine, yet starts off claiming that the things Jesus said, his philosophy, could not have come from man. Which is clearly a bullshit premise from the get go.


you can't call it bullshit if you did not listen to his entire argument.


----------



## mindphuk (Oct 15, 2010)

crackerboy said:


> If you want to talk about facts and scientific evidence. How bout the Bible said that the world was round thousands of years before Columbus. It also said that the world spins on an axes thousands of years before science figured it out. Watch the last video that I posted. It is all verifiable, you can look it up yourself.


 The bible speaks of a world round like a flat disc, not a spherical one. It says the earth is su It speaks of the celestial bodies inserted in a dome-like structure covering the flat earth which itself was supported by pillars. Please now provide the texts you think describe the earth rotating on an axis to create our day.

Here's something else you should know, Columbus had nothing to do with discovering the earth was a sphere. Eratosthenes fairly accurately calculated the circumference of the earth at least 200 years before Jesus. The idea of a spherical earth was not unknown in ancient times yet the bible is never unequivocally clear on this particular scientific matter. If it was so clear and unambigious in the bible, why did it take so long for The Church to accept the heliocentric model of the solar system? What about the story in Joshua where the sun stood still and did not go down for a "whole day?" Would god have been more accurate if he said the earth stopped spinning thus lengthening the day?

Keep trying to find evidence of unknown science in the bible. If it were there, it wouldn't be too hard to convince skeptics but the truth is that everything has to be re-interpreted in order to comply with current knowledge and understanding.


----------



## mindphuk (Oct 15, 2010)

crackerboy said:


> you can't call it bullshit if you did not listen to his entire argument.


 Really? One false premise is all that is needed to destroy an argument. He created a false premise AND a formal fallacy. BTW, I did listen to the entire clip and nothing he said makes any difference. His claims about OT prophecies is incorrect as is his assumption that there were 500 witnesses to his resurrection when the only evidence of that is the book that attempts to claim his divinity in the first place. Of course believers will write about events as if they actually occurred if they themselves believe the veracity of the story to begin with. Yet we have no independent sources by the Romans or the Hebrews that any of the events surrounding the resurrection actually took place. How do you KNOW these are not merely stories? How do you distinguish them from the multitudes of other religious texts that describe incredible, supernatural events being attributed to other gods? This was the basis for the question in the beginning of the video and he fails to answer it tremendously.


----------



## crackerboy (Oct 15, 2010)

mindphuk said:


> The bible speaks of a world round like a flat disc, not a spherical one. It says the earth is su It speaks of the celestial bodies inserted in a dome-like structure covering the flat earth which itself was supported by pillars. Please now provide the texts you think describe the earth rotating on an axis to create our day.
> 
> Here's something else you should know, Columbus had nothing to do with discovering the earth was a sphere. Eratosthenes fairly accurately calculated the circumference of the earth at least 200 years before Jesus. The idea of a spherical earth was not unknown in ancient times yet the bible is never unequivocally clear on this particular scientific matter. If it was so clear and unambigious in the bible, why did it take so long for The Church to accept the heliocentric model of the solar system? What about the story in Joshua where the sun stood still and did not go down for a "whole day?" Would god have been more accurate if he said the earth stopped spinning thus lengthening the day?
> 
> Keep trying to find evidence of unknown science in the bible. If it were there, it wouldn't be too hard to convince skeptics but the truth is that everything has to be re-interpreted in order to comply with current knowledge and understanding.


If you want the passages than watch the video. He tells you every passage. And you are wrong the Bible specifically says sphere. Just watch them. Or are you afraid that he may cast doubt of your own knowledge. All the video's are part of the same sermon. You must watch all of them to get the point.


----------



## LorDeMO (Oct 15, 2010)

Give it up dude, you clearly have been owned by someone much more intellegent than you (mindphuk) ..


----------



## crackerboy (Oct 15, 2010)

yeah its easy to make random claims about a series of videos that he did not even bother to watch. I was totally owned huh. Maybe its more like you where fooled.


----------



## LorDeMO (Oct 15, 2010)

Is it lonely up there on your pedestal?


----------



## mindphuk (Oct 15, 2010)

crackerboy said:


> If you want the passages than watch the video. He tells you every passage. And you are wrong the Bible specifically says sphere. Just watch them. Or are you afraid that he may cast doubt of your own knowledge. All the video's are part of the same sermon. You must watch all of them to get the point.


 I'm not going to watch an hour of this guy when I have already provided a counter argument. If everything he says is so good, then you should be able to counter my arguments by summarizing his points here in this thread without forcing everyone to spend an hour listening to him drone on. You appear to be under the assumption that his arguments are somehow new, they aren't. They are old canards that have been repeatedly debunked by thinking people. Even many theists disagree with his conclusions. 

I'm glad you found his arguments convincing yet you have only heard one side and then made up your mind. How about the fact that there is no word in Aramaic or ancient Hebrew that means "sphere?" How can the bible say sphere specifically when it doesn't have a word to do so?


----------



## crackerboy (Oct 15, 2010)

LorDeMO said:


> Is it lonely up there on your pedestal?


What are you even talking about? Pedestal? Do you even have an argument? Can you contribute to the debate with any sort of knowledge. Even though I strongly disagree with mindphuk's point of view and opinions, I do respect his intellect. He obviously puts real thought into his posts. You on the other hand are what? riding his coat tails?


----------



## crackerboy (Oct 15, 2010)

mindphuk said:


> I'm not going to watch an hour of this guy when I have already provided a counter argument. If everything he says is so good, then you should be able to counter my arguments by summarizing his points here in this thread without forcing everyone to spend an hour listening to him drone on. You appear to be under the assumption that his arguments are somehow new, they aren't. They are old canards that have been repeatedly debunked by thinking people. Even many theists disagree with his conclusions.
> 
> I'm glad you found his arguments convincing yet you have only heard one side and then made up your mind. How about the fact that there is no word in Aramaic or ancient Hebrew that means "sphere?" How can the bible say sphere specifically when it doesn't have a word to do so?


Look he covers a lot of info in this sermon. It is a lot to summarize. How can you make an argument against his argument if you have not listened to his argument? Your argument is based on less than 1/6th of his sermon. You are making groundless claims based on what you think he is going to say. That makes no sense at all.


----------



## mindphuk (Oct 15, 2010)

crackerboy said:


> Look he covers a lot of info in this sermon. It is a lot to summarize. How can you make an argument against his argument if you have not listened to his argument? Your argument is based on less than 1/6th of his sermon. You are making groundless claims based on what you think he is going to say. That makes no sense at all.


I didn't ask you to summarize all of the videos, just the part about what we were talking about -- the circle of the earth with a firmament above, using language that is non-ambiguously wrong, i.e. the sun standing still vs. the earth stopped spinning. 
As I said, I watched the last one you posted. I also skimmed the others. I saw the same arguments apologists have used for ages. Besides, how can I be incorrect when as I pointed out there is no word that could have been used that actually meant sphere but as I pointed out, there could have been countless ways for God to have been able to unambiguously make these issues clear yet time and again, it becomes a simple matter to interpret passages so as they conflict with known science. Did God not realize that language and science would evolve the way it did? Would he not realize the problem of dumbing things down for those bronze age folks and still having it apply to us post-enlightenment rationalists? Shouldn't he understand the problem of taking poetic license (as some apologists explain away inconsistencies and contradictions) vs. everything being literal?


----------



## Evil Buddies (Oct 16, 2010)

I think its funny how u lot are arguing over the god thing. If people dont believe in god its their right as its people right to believe in god. So whos gonna win an arguement when u all disagree with each others beliefs. No one coz ur wasting ur time should respect what people believe. One saying i got and it is You can't reason with Ignorance, so why bother.

evil


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Oct 16, 2010)

Evil Buddies said:


> I think its funny how u lot are arguing over the god thing. If people dont believe in god its their right as its people right to believe in god. So whos gonna win an arguement when u all disagree with each others beliefs. No one coz ur wasting ur time should respect what people believe. One saying i got and it is You can't reason with Ignorance, so why bother.
> 
> evil


Belief, of ANYTHING, is not a *right.* What the hell kind of shit is that?

You have the right to believe the sky is red. Sure. But that doesn't make it red. Your fanatical faith that the sky is red STILL doesn't make it red. So the *RIGHT* you believe you have to believe or not in God has *NOTHING* to do with what we are talking about.

We're talking about accuracy. What's CORRECT. What's scientifically applicable. What's measurable. What's real. What's testable. What's tangible. What's observable. SCIENCE.

Religions should be criticized and none of them should be given ANY amount of respect without having done that first, which coincidentally 99% of the (American anyway) population has never fucking done.

Fuck organized religion.


----------



## Evil Buddies (Oct 16, 2010)

Padawanbater2 said:


> Belief, of ANYTHING, is not a *right.* What the hell kind of shit is that?
> 
> You have the right to believe the sky is red. Sure. But that doesn't make it red. Your fanatical faith that the sky is red STILL doesn't make it red. So the *RIGHT* you believe you have to believe or not in God has *NOTHING* to do with what we are talking about.
> 
> ...


----------



## jewgrow (Oct 16, 2010)

Were basing too much of our information off of the big bang. I am in no way a supporter of religion, but the big bang...no.


----------



## mindphuk (Oct 16, 2010)

Evil Buddies said:


> The measurement problem seems to defy ur logic of science and physics, all is not what it may appear to seem.


 You keep mentioning the measurement problem but that is only one area of physics where we have incomplete answers. As I asked before, how does not understanding everything make the probability of a god more likely? There have been various attempts to resolve the problem and one day we might succeed just like how we learned about other puzzles that nature gave us. Pointing out areas that science doesn't completely understand in no way disqualifies the things that we do understand and does nothing to make your argument any stronger. 


And yes, people are free to believe what they want to, however, as soon as they put their beliefs out there, they are open to criticism. I am confident that my beliefs are able to be backed up by empirical evidence. I know that the theist's argument cannot and I do have a problem when these people think their unsupported beliefs deserve equal time in schools or when they are used to create laws that discriminate against others.


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Oct 16, 2010)

Evil Buddies said:


> Wether u like it or not people are going to believe what they want. Even if theres no evidence in it, a religious person is going to believe what they want regardless of what people say. Whatever u tell them they are going to argue, yes people can believe what they want even if its not true. A belief is a belief and to argue against someones belief seems pointless to me. The measurement problem seems to defy ur logic of science and physics, all is not what it may appear to seem. If u lot want to argue about peoples beliefs its up to u but to me its a battle of which no one wins. So will leave u to get back to ur debate of science vs God.
> 
> The title of this thread which u created is God did not create the universe so how is this thread not about God ???
> Evil


That's what we need to change. You can't just go around believing whatever you want. That's dangerous and it has *incredibly bad *implications for the rest of us. It's extremely important that people understand that. 

People can believe whatever they want, you're right about that, but people with unscientific beliefs or beliefs based on ancient codes of morality shouldn't be taken seriously in any context. They shouldn't be able to hold public office because the public should be smart enough to know that someone that uneducated or unintelligent does not hold the *countries* best interest at heart. Right now the majority of the public, especially in America, is under the illusion that the tenets of organized religion _are moral_, and as such they go unquestioned throughout the centuries. 

Our presidents, our, what everybody views to be "leaders" in our country are almost all exclusively Christian, so when someone questions something they do, to the majority of the population, they're questioning the faith. See how this shit works? 
 


jewgrow said:


> Were basing too much of our information off of the big bang. I am in no way a supporter of religion, but the big bang...no.


I would love to hear what you base that on.

From where I sit, the BB model seems to be pretty accurate.

Hubbles observations alone confirm a singularity and an expanding universe.

Why do you think it's inaccurate?


----------



## mindphuk (Oct 16, 2010)

jewgrow said:


> Were basing too much of our information off of the big bang. I am in no way a supporter of religion, but the big bang...no.


 What exactly do you mean? The big bang is the result of information derived from observation. What "information" do we base on the BB?


----------



## IregAt420 (Oct 16, 2010)

crackerboy said:


> What are you even talking about? Pedestal? Do you even have an argument? Can you contribute to the debate with any sort of knowledge. Even though I strongly disagree with mindphuk's point of view and opinions, I do respect his intellect. He obviously puts real thought into his posts. You on the other hand are what? riding his coat tails?


Hahahahaha! +1 to you sir.


----------



## Evil Buddies (Oct 17, 2010)

The way i see it a belief is something that u believe to be true but without physical evidence and proof. People can believe what they want as long as they dont force their views that there is no physical evidence or proof of. I mention the measurement problem coz it proves that somethings science cant explain with out our understanding of our knowledge and laws of physics. As it is something we dont understand a higher power governs beyond our world and dimension of physics. It doesnt have to be God it could be something 4 dimensional that our defies the laws of physics in the 3 dimensional world.

Evil


----------



## Evil Buddies (Oct 17, 2010)

Padawanbater2 said:


> That's what we need to change. You can't just go around believing whatever you want. That's dangerous and it has *incredibly bad *implications for the rest of us. It's extremely important that people understand that.
> 
> People can believe whatever they want, you're right about that, but people with unscientific beliefs or beliefs based on ancient codes of morality shouldn't be taken seriously in any context. They shouldn't be able to hold public office because the public should be smart enough to know that someone that uneducated or unintelligent does not hold the *countries* best interest at heart. Right now the majority of the public, especially in America, is under the illusion that the tenets of organized religion _are moral_, and as such they go unquestioned throughout the centuries.
> 
> ...


The leader of america and Government arent christian they are satanic devil worshippers. That do sacred rituals to their demon gods like molloch at bohemian grove. These are the people that govern and rule america frightening i think.

Evil


----------



## jewgrow (Oct 17, 2010)

well first off, I dont disagree with the FACTS, but most of the big bang is theory. The universe was not created from nothing, it had to be created from something we perceive as nothing; dark matter is a good candidate if you ask me. but as for information were basing off of it, just turn on the history channel when its about space...then tell me how much of that you believe


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Oct 17, 2010)

Evil Buddies said:


> The leader of america and Government arent christian they are satanic devil worshippers. That do sacred rituals to their demon gods like molloch at bohemian grove. These are the people that govern and rule america frightening i think.
> 
> Evil


Well this thread just took a turn for the worse...


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Oct 17, 2010)

jewgrow said:


> well first off, I dont disagree with the FACTS, but most of the big bang is theory. The universe was not created from nothing, it had to be created from something we perceive as nothing; dark matter is a good candidate if you ask me. but as for information were basing off of it, just turn on the history channel when its about space...then tell me how much of that you believe


Big bang doesn't say the universe came from nothing. 

The history channel has programs that focus on ghosts, UFO's, 2012 conspiracy perpetuation... it doesn't surprise me the shit they talk about regarding space _might _be a little off. But then again, who the hell thinks watching something from this history channel is equal to a formal education in astrophysics?


----------



## jewgrow (Oct 17, 2010)

duh....just listen to obama's yes we can chant backwards


----------



## Padawanbater2 (Oct 17, 2010)

jewgrow said:


> duh....just listen to obama's yes we can chant backwards


I must have missed that...


----------



## mindphuk (Oct 17, 2010)

Evil Buddies said:


> The way i see it a belief is something that u believe to be true but without physical evidence and proof. People can believe what they want as long as they dont force their views that there is no physical evidence or proof of. I mention the measurement problem coz it proves that somethings science cant explain with out our understanding of our knowledge and laws of physics. As it is something we dont understand a higher power governs beyond our world and dimension of physics. It doesnt have to be God it could be something 4 dimensional that our defies the laws of physics in the 3 dimensional world.
> 
> Evil


Belief is anything you hold to be true, things both with and without evidence. A strong belief in something to be true without any evidence is called faith. As I said, people are free to believe whatever they want but if they make those beliefs public, then they open themselves up to criticism. 
It would have been nice if you answered my question on the measurement problem rather than just summarize what I already said. As I pointed out there are still many areas in science we don't have answers to but you seem to focus on the measurement problem and I asked why. Do you think a higher power makes the decision as to the final state of a collapsed waveform of every particle? Sorry, I just don't understand your thinking on how and why a consciousness needs to be involved in determining the actual physical state of a particle once it is observed. It seems to me that even though science doesn't fully understand it, that it is probably a natural process. Besides, some ideas, like the many-worlds hypothesis, eliminates the measurement problem altogether. Gaps in our knowledge do not imply a god and I am really having a hard time understanding how this specific gap can be answered by the introduction of such a being. 



jewgrow said:


> well first off, I dont disagree with the FACTS, but most of the big bang is theory. The universe was not created from nothing, it had to be created from something we perceive as nothing; dark matter is a good candidate if you ask me. but as for information were basing off of it, just turn on the history channel when its about space...then tell me how much of that you believe


Please learn some science, especially the meaning of scientific theory. A theory is not a guess or hunch, it is a solid model of nature that explain the facts we observe. Theories do not somehow get elevated to facts, they remain a theory and get improved upon over time. Is it a 'fact' that bacteria and viruses cause disease? No, it is part of germ theory. Is it a fact that splitting atoms releases massive amounts of energy? No, it is part of a theory borne from special relativity. We test these theories all of the time and they appear to be accurate and eventually become indistinguishable from fact yet nature has a way of throwing us curve balls and a theory can be amended and improved to become even more accurate and precise. In science, we reserve the use of the word 'fact' to mean the data collected, the observations we make. A theory is always a composite of a lot of facts with some reasoning as to why these facts behave as they do. A theory is about the why and how things occur, the mechanism behind the facts that we can see. 

Second, the BBT does not say the universe came from nothing although that is common to hear similar statements in many popularized science shows and articles but it is misleading and ultimately incorrect. The only thing that the BBT says for sure is that at one point, approximately 13.7 bya, our universe existed in a small, hot, dense state and then something happened and it began to expand rapidly. The theory does not answer (yet) what preceded this extremely small, hot universe or where it came from if it didn't always exist.


----------



## Evil Buddies (Oct 18, 2010)

The measurement problem is a problem and if i knew the problem it wouldnt be the measurement problem. I dont think u understand what im saying so i will say it again a final time. We live in a 3D world we are limited to 3D and the physics in 3D. Now the physics in 4D or higher might have different laws of physics. Now that different laws of physics is governed by a higher power. I use the words higher power as we cant imagine or comprehend what it is. It is something that we dont know that controls it wether its due to the physics of 4D. Maybe it could be due to what makes up our world is displayed to us by our 5 sences. Maybe our bodies is not possible of knowing other things that cant be picked up by just the 5 sences we have. Our conciousness determines the behaviour of atoms. Now if our conciousness that u believe is just thought. Then how could our conciousness if not connected to anything else but our body, how can that change the appearance of an atom. To me it suggests that our conciousness is connected to atoms in some way. That we can manipulate atoms with our own thought and conciousness. I dont have all the answers I can only show u the way I see it. 

Evil


----------



## mindphuk (Oct 18, 2010)

Evil Buddies said:


> The measurement problem is a problem and if i knew the problem it wouldnt be the measurement problem. I dont think u understand what im saying so i will say it again a final time. We live in a 3D world we are limited to 3D and the physics in 3D. Now the physics in 4D or higher might have different laws of physics. Now that different laws of physics is governed by a higher power. I use the words higher power as we cant imagine or comprehend what it is. It is something that we dont know that controls it wether its due to the physics of 4D. Maybe it could be due to what makes up our world is displayed to us by our 5 sences. Maybe our bodies is not possible of knowing other things that cant be picked up by just the 5 sences we have. Our conciousness determines the behaviour of atoms. Now if our conciousness that u believe is just thought. Then how could our conciousness if not connected to anything else but our body, how can that change the appearance of an atom. To me it suggests that our conciousness is connected to atoms in some way. That we can manipulate atoms with our own thought and conciousness. I dont have all the answers I can only show u the way I see it.
> 
> Evil


Thanks for clarifying that. First off, we don't necessarily live in a 3d world. Spacetime is 4 dimensions and current physics hypothesizes as many as 10 spatial dimensions plus time for 11 total. The extra dimensions may be very small and curled up into Calabi-Yau shapes. No where is there evidence that more dimensions has different physics, especially if the extra dimensions are required/responsible for the physics we observe. Higher dimensions either exist or they don't but the physics of this particular universe appears consistent no matter how many dimensions there turn out to be. 
The idea that consciousness affects atoms is only partially correct. It is the act of observation which defines the characteristics of a particle and that entails more than just an existing disembodied consciousness, it requires interaction with that particle. Even our eyes are instruments that interact with photons. This is the basis of what Heisenberg told us that the very act of observing a subatomic particle influences it, not in some esoteric mystical way but because particles are affected directly by the other particles we use to detect them. There is absolutely no evidence that mere thought will affect the subatomic and sounds more like a misunderstanding of quantum field theory. So far everything in particle physics, even the gaps in our knowledge like the measurement problem all can potentially be explained in a naturalistic way. There is no need to invoke a deity.


----------

