A message brought to you by our sponsors -- Ben's Message Board

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

Sunday, May 11, 02:26:02am

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, [7], 8, 9, 10 ]

Subject: A message brought to you by our sponsors

Author:
Damoclese.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 02/24/04 12:10pm
In reply to: BTL 's message, "Did God have a beginning?" on 02/23/04 9:00pm

(1) TIME. No one can point to
>a certain moment as the beginning of time.

Yes they can. Try looking into the singularity that is and was the universe and the Big Bang.

And it is
>fact that, even though our lives end, time does NOT.

Red flag! Red Flag! Danger Will Robinson!!!! A future prediction about the nature of time is logically impossible. Tommorow the universe could end taking what we think of as "time" with it. (note: time in actuality is just a dimension, or in some cases a repetition of regular events)

>(2)SPACE. Astronomers find NO beginning or end to
>space.

Yes they do. Before the big bang, space as we know it didn't exist. What did exist? Who knows. It is certain however that with the regression of time space becomes less and less collapsing into an extremely dense singularity.

>(2) They tell us that the size of the Milky Way is so
>great that a beam of liht traveling at over 186,000
>miles per second (300,000 km/sec) would require
>100,000 years to cross it. Do our minds really
>comprehend such a distace? Yet we accept it because
>scientific evidence supports it.

We accept it tentatively. That's the difference. If you can show differently, and more accurately the distance, they'd adopt your method and you would be a very famous man.

>Which is more reasonable-- that the universe is the
>product of a living, intelligent creator? or that it
>must have arisen simply by chance from a nonliving
>source without intelligent direction? Some persons
>adopt the latter viewpoint because to believe
>otherwise would mean that they woud have to
>acknowledge the exsistence of a creator whose
>qualities they cannot fully comprehend.

As if accepting the universe originated without a creator would be easy to "fully comprehend".

But it is well
>known that scientists do not FULLY comprehend the
>functioning of the genes that are within living cells
>and that determine how these cells will grow. Nor do
>they fully understand the funtioning of the human
>brain. Yet who would deny that these exist?

One can see pictures of cells and brains using different methods. They could just extract a brain. Got any pictures of God? Do you have some God binoculars?

>Drink this in. When is the last time you looked up
>into the sky at night an marvelled at the stars. If
>any one of those were a millemetre out all could go
>pear shaped very quickly. the same with the sun or
>the moon, if they were slightly off we would burn or
>we would freeze etc. To say that these are of
>coincedence is surely short sited.

You're right, they aren't merely coincidence. Once the initial ball got rolling, the universe had to be the way it is because there was no other way for it to be so. If things had been different, then the universe would likely have organized itself differently.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Subject	Author	Date
Worry only about things that CAN BE CHANGED	QUITTNER	02/27/04 12:57pm

A message brought to you by Wade.	Wade A. Tisthammer	02/27/04 2:08pm
But do you quath? -- Damoclese, 02/27/04 3:21pm What's quath? -- Wade A. Tisthammer, 02/27/04 10:41pm old english joke -- Damoclese, 02/28/04 7:54am Time -- BTL, 02/27/04 9:06pm