In a universe where creationists defend how nothing comes from nothing

My iPad is going to die. Check this thread tomorrow. I am the Anti-Christ. I have done seven years of Tribulation and come out the other side. He didn't come back. Some say "I" am Omega. .......it's complicated. This is a well guarded secret. I could be a messiah for the atheists a 2000 false prophet or messiah false. We could all gather in secret and believe something, something, here. But that's stupid and I don't want to do that. Instead I believe in the Rapture and we have all already ascended into Heaven. And I keep my mind open to possibilities. I almost died and not so sure about afterlife, a little nervous and skeptical. I side with the religious and "want" to believe and do, just not so sure about afterlife. Hopefully tomorrow this thread will not die cause I really enjoyed it today. Peace Mr. Angry atheist.

a reply to: letmeon

Huh??? Is it just me or was that complete gibberish??? Perhaps it's just because you were in a hurry because you're ipad is dying. That's better than saying you're just crazy so we'll go with dead ipad for now.

Who's "Mr. Angry Atheist???"

a reply to: mOjOm

Maybe he believes you are the widely popular Youtuber named The Angry Atheist?

*Nope scratch that lol

It's The Amazing Atheist

a reply to: Lucid Lunacy

Ahhh....Why would he think that though??? I've never claimed to be him. I don't even claim to be an atheist either.

Although, I am pretty damn Amazing so I can see why he may have got that part mixed up!!

a reply to: letmeon

I side with the religious and "want" to believe and do

That's one approach to things. If that's your chosen one then have at it.

I side with truth. Not with what I want to be truth.

I would love to believe one day I will start mutating into a superhuman like in the Marvel Universe. I really do want that to happen. It would bring further joy and purpose into my life. Depending on the mutation perhaps even relative eternal life.

Instead of living my life feeling inadequate until that day arrives, I choose instead to live by what's truthful and right in front of me. Right here on Earth and while I'm living on it.

I was talking about the OP. I came to this site for seven years and see a lot of kid atheists. It is my destiny to duel with them. Stand up for what's right. Before my spiritual awakening I tried to destroy religion or something in my insane ramblings and bull in China shop. If you want clarity on the Classified stuff I talked about check my thread the one that's 15 pages long. It explains everything. IPad at 4% battery power. Tomorrow I will duel with you OP, and I am Lucifers Christ so be prepared for a thrashing of a lifetime.

Well then En Garde!



Being one of those 'atheists' [anti-theist more accurately] let our destinies collide! ^_^

I do appreciate that you said you were standing up for what's right. I just wish more religious people understood that's precisely what many of us anti-theists are doing as well.

originally posted by: stosh64
I don't believe I called anyone 'stupid'.

Stupid, laughable, either way below your opinion.

The lazy mans retort.Or false bravado in hopes of silencing opposition without the need for a more literate, enlightened response.

i don't know if it's lazy or unenlightened to call someone or something stupid. Plenty out there are morons plain and simple. You can paint a pretty picture all you like but most are uneducated and lack a basic foundation, believing what ever emotionally appeals.

After all The point of your thread was about the science? Or the lack of your perceived intelligence of the Faithfull?

No, don't confuse faith in god with evidence of god. This thread has nothing to do with faith. This is a science subject addressing the science used to defend god.

As for your ' this is a giant well placed slap in the face'. While you may hope that is the case, I am afraid you are vastly overrating your evaluation of the posted information.

I would very much like to see the in depth evaluation of your analysis for both research papers. Otherwise you're just talking nonsense.

a reply to: andre18


Big Bang is only a theory and I've never needed it for my creationist beliefs.

That aside, just suppose as the universe is one big star type structure and the universe is within as it is exploding
The ruptures as it expands are the black hole, like a balloon that has minute holes and the pressure creates matter to escape, like a black hole but without the required density presumed and like water down a plug hole it drags matter out.

Ta daaaa lol

Not sure why a creationist requires a Big Bang theory, In all honesty in my mind creation is a bit like a surprise birthday party. Turn on the light and everything is there. Food drink presents and guests and the odd crasher.

Regards

a reply to: andre18

I am glad mathematicians have written a proof for this. I have always thought everything that consists of the universe had existed in one form or another before the big bang. There has been a hypothesis that the universe continually condenses then expands in an infinite number of loops.

Once every last star in the universe burns itself out gravity will be the thing that gathers everything back into a mass until it explodes once again.


I think it is fair to say some creationists are not going to be happy with the implications. We may as you said start seeing them argue for the singularity.

What i think is funny is how ypu point out how an atheist can think everything came from nothing lol let me ask you this... who made god? Did he come from nothing? Lol christianity and the sky man is the biggest fail in the history of humanity.. the funny thing is.. you believe it lol but try to talk about atheists for thinking rationally? Quite comical

a reply to: drevill

The Big Bang Theory was quite welcomed by the religious when it was first 'discovered' actually. It's ironic how much opposition towards it there is now. It suggests a 'beginning' and that's also what Genesis suggests.

And no it's not 'just a theory'. Theory means something in science quite different than how we casually throw that word around. Check it out: What is a Scientific Theory?

Matter is energy on the atomic level, and energy cannot be created or destroyed just change form.

Say you have a shovel and want to dig a hole. You can say the space called a hole doesn't exist yet... but after it's dug where did the dirt displaced go to make this hole? The dirt from the hole you supposedly made... just filled another hole of sorts, in order to make the new hole didn't it? So in actuality, the hole already existed... but it only appeared in the location you chose to put it, and the contents taken out... filled the space where the new hole used to be.

It's the same way with the entire universe. It existed and it did not exist, same as the hole above... because all matter in it's current observable state is just a potential for change and constantly is changing or evolving right before our eyes, whether we can personally see it or not... time will flick a particle off of a gold atom and poof there's a lead atom. This is a natural process... the changes or holes we "create" with our opposable thumbs is really no different, other than we control the direction in which the matter changes using our special thumbs.

a reply to: Lucid Lunacy

I'm well aware of theory requirements in science matey boy. I'm not stupid.

I'll stand by my its a theory. It's not proven.

Lemaitre was a catholic priest. his work was the foundation of the theory we know today. Despite that, creationists were about long before this.

a reply to: drevill

I'm well aware of the Catholic priest Georges Lemaître, and the history surrounding the theory matey boy.

The problem with the idea Creationists have it all right, namely with the religious of Abrahamic faiths, is that they pull these bits and pieces out and go 'Aha! Told you so!!' Meanwhile, completely ignoring [or refusing to acknowledge] the blatantly incompatible things in Genesis with science. So sure... if you cherry pick maybe you can make a case. Just hope those people listening aren't all that familiar with Genesis I guess.

a reply to: Lucid Lunacy


Ha ha matey boy.. Brilliant. I'm not cherry picking anything. However feel free, verse by verse the incompatible. However, considering your previous post about a theory in science is still a theory, changeable and modifiable it's the same thing. a load of, ah told you so moments followed by Oh hang on moment. So if you cherry pick perhaps you can make a case. The Big Bang is not a LAW of science.

Christians/religion/scientists don't know it all and don't have all the answers. The same accusations can apply to all.

a reply to: drevill

Not sure if I interpreted that correctly. Are you asking me to backup my claim Genesis is incompatible with science?

Alright.

Day 3 Fruit trees are growing and producing fruit on Earth.

Day 4 The Sun and all the stars are made.

All the stars in the universe were not made after Earth. What cosmologist thinks that?

Without any stars those fruit trees would be frozen, without sunshine, yet somehow thriving for years.

Genesis 1:11-19

11 And God said, “Let the earth sprout vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind, on the earth.” And it was so. 12 The earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed according to their own kinds, and trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening and there was morning, the third day.

14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night. And let them be for signs and for seasons, and for days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the expanse of the heavens to give light upon the earth.” And it was so. 16 And God made the two great lights—the greater light to rule the day and the lesser light to rule the night—and the stars. 17 And God set them in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth, 18 to rule over the day and over the night, and to separate the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening and there was morning, the fourth day.

a reply to: drevill

Christians/religion/scientists don't know it all and don't have all the answers. The same accusations can apply to all.

Absolutely. Science is about discovery. We wouldn't need to discover if we had all the answers. Religion claims to have the answers to many of our biggest questions. I think that's a great disservice to the spirit of discovery. Unless of course religions do in fact have objectively truthful answers. I simply don't see reason to believe that's the case.

originally posted by: drevill
a reply to: andre18

Big Bang is only a theory and I've never needed it for my creationist beliefs.

Then oh lord why did you reply if it doesn't concern you?

Not sure why a creationist requires a Big Bang theory

You already know you don't require it, so trying to imagine someone else's mind is a fruitless effort thats really not worth the speculation.

a reply to: Lucid Lunacy

This one is simple. I have M.E and just need to rest a while. But I'll be back. It's a matter of you read this really
But to go on with

From the kjv

Genesis 1:11

11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so

11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb That will produce seed, and the fruit tree that will produce fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.


Regards