March 20th, 2014
11:14 AM ET

# Does the Big Bang breakthrough offer proof of God?

Opinion by Leslie A. Wickman, special to CNN

(CNN) The remarkable discovery, announced this week, of ripples in the space-time fabric of the universe rocked the world of science - and the world of religion.

Touted as evidence for inflation (a faster-than-the-speed-of-light expansion of our universe), the new discovery of traces of gravity waves affirms scientific concepts in the fields of cosmology, general relativity, and particle physics.

The new discovery also has significant implications for the Judeo-Christian worldview, offering strong support for biblical beliefs.

Here's how.

The prevalent theory of cosmic origins prior to the Big Bang theory was the “Steady State,” which argued that the universe has always existed, without a beginning that necessitated a cause.

However, this new evidence strongly suggests that there was a beginning to our universe.

If the universe did indeed have a beginning, by the simple logic of cause and effect, there had to be an agent – separate and apart from the effect – that caused it.

That sounds a lot like Genesis 1:1 to me: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the Earth.”

So this latest discovery is good news for us believers, as it adds scientific support to the idea that the universe was caused – or created – by something or someone outside it and not dependent on it.

MORE ON CNN: Big Bang breakthrough announced; gravitational waves detected

Atheist-turned-agnostic astronomer Fred Hoyle, who coined the term “Big Bang,” famously stated, “A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics."

As Hoyle saw it, the Big Bang was not a chaotic explosion, but rather a very highly ordered event – one that could not have occurred by random chance.

We also need to remember that God reveals himself both through scripture and creation. The challenge is in seeing how they fit together. A better understanding of each can inform our understanding of the other.

It’s not just about cracking open the Bible and reading whatever we find there from a 21st-century American perspective. We have to study the context, the culture, the genre, the authorship and the original audience to understand the intent.

The creation message in Genesis tells us that God created a special place for humans to live and thrive and be in communion with him; that God wants a relationship with us, and makes provisions for us to have fellowship with him, even after we turn away from him.

So, we know that Genesis was never intended to be a detailed scientific handbook, describing how God created the universe. It imparts a theological, not a scientific, message.

(Imagine how confusing messages about gravity waves and dark matter might be to ancient Hebrew readers.)

As a modern believer and a scientist, when I look up at the sky on a clear starry night, I am reminded that “the heavens declare the glory of God” (Psalm 19:1). I am in awe of the complexity of the physical world, and how all of its pieces fit together so perfectly and synergistically.

In the Old Testament book of Jeremiah, the writer tells us that God “established (his) covenant with day and night, and with the fixed laws of heaven and earth.”

These physical laws established by God to govern interactions between matter and energy result in a finely tuned universe that provides the ideal conditions for life on our planet.

As we observe the complexity of the cosmos, from subatomic particles to dark matter and dark energy, we quickly conclude that there must be a more satisfying explanation than random chance. Properly practiced, science can be an act of worship in looking at God’s revelation of himself in nature.

If God is truly the creator, then he will reveal himself through what he’s created, and science is a tool we can use to uncover those wonders.

Leslie Wickman is director of the Center for Research in Science at Azusa Pacific University. Wickman has also been an engineer for Lockheed Martin Missiles & Space, where she worked on NASA's Hubble Space Telescope and International Space Station programs. The views expressed in this column belong to Wickman.

 The Editors - CNN Belief Blog Filed under: Belief • Christianity • Culture & Science • Faith • Opinion • Science

« Previous entry
###### soundoff(4,918 Responses)
1. guidedans

If you believe in science, then you have admitted that the observable world is your foundation of truth. You are only able to to observe this world through your senses, which I am positive that you know, are flawed. So really, you have founded your logic on a heavily filtered view of the observable world.

We Christians use the Bible as the foundation for our truth.

If you are going to argue all of the fallacies regarding our beliefs, you should really take a deep look at your own in the process.

Matthew 7:3
Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?

March 24, 2014 at 6:10 pm |
• observer

Some "planks" apparently hide unicorns, dragons, talking animals, the sun and moon suddenly stopping, and the idea that all the laws of science are optional.

March 24, 2014 at 6:14 pm |
• guidedans

And some hide the amazing arrogance to believe that you know more than God does.

Funny how those planks work.

March 24, 2014 at 6:16 pm |
• kenmargo

Does god know where that Malaysian plane is?

March 24, 2014 at 6:20 pm |
• hotairace

Everyone knows more than a fictional god. Now, why do you believe your alleged but never proven god is not fictional?

March 24, 2014 at 6:21 pm |
• In Santa We Trust

You have yet to provide evidence that there is a god, evidence that it is the christian god, and evidence that the bible contains its words.

March 24, 2014 at 6:23 pm |
• guidedans

You, nor I, nor anyone will ever prove ANYTHING. That is what I am trying to get at.

Why are you all clamoring around for Proofs? Tell me one thing outside of mathematics that is proven.

You cannot. There is nothing that is proven and nothing that will ever be proven. So stop asking for something to be proven.

Even if God came down and gave everyone a dollar, that would not be Proof of His existence, it could have just been a mass hallucination.

It sounds to me that you all worship proofs and evidence instead of God. You guys want to feel like you are important for finding out something that the rest of the world could not fine.

Godspeed with that. I hope you find the proof you are looking for.

March 24, 2014 at 6:35 pm |
• In Santa We Trust

We have beliefs in gods because ancients tried to make sense of the world and had no knowledge of eclipses, comets, earthquakes, thunder, etc. which they took to be signs from gods. We have explanations for those things and so their imaginings are no longer needed. The texts derived from their imaginings to show the power of "the gods" are equally flawed. Those texts are the only "evidence" of gods and as they are clearly incorrect – what evidence is there?

March 24, 2014 at 6:42 pm |
• kenmargo

Dan you've got to be kidding us with this post. We're not looking for proof. We're asking YOU to provide it since you're making the claim. We have much more important things to do than looking for someone that doesn't exists.

March 24, 2014 at 6:45 pm |
• observer

guidedans

"And some hide the amazing arrogance to believe that you know more than God does."

If your fellow believers have that problem, that is too bad. No atheist or agnostic EVER believed that.

March 24, 2014 at 6:47 pm |
• sam stone

Not to mention the amazing arrogance to think you know the mind of the creator of the universe

March 25, 2014 at 5:46 am |
• hotairace

You should be much more concerned about being unable to provide a single bit of actual evidence for your alleged but never proven gods than what others think. Flaws in other beliefs system due not lend credibility to the dead jew zombie cannibal vampire death cult aka christianity.

March 24, 2014 at 6:16 pm |
• guidedans

Lack of evidence is not proof of lack.

Maybe you should open up to God yourself to find that evidence you so desire.

If you come to Him, He won't let you down.

March 24, 2014 at 6:31 pm |
• kenmargo

I'll take you up on your challenge. I'll go to god. Tell me what bus or flight to catch and I'll be there. If I have to die to see him, Ill pass. Better yet tell god to yell and I'll listen out for him. The first question Id ask is "why are you against abortion when you cause so many miscariages"?

March 24, 2014 at 6:49 pm |
• sam stone

"If you come to Him, He won't let you down."

The same could be said about pretty much any god man has worshipped.

Look up Confirmation Bias and get back to us

March 25, 2014 at 5:51 am |
• hotairace

The old "ya gotta believe to believe" crap. You don't have any actual evidence to support your supernatural nonsense. You are pretending to know things you do not. Astrology is as valid as your cult's beliefs.

March 25, 2014 at 6:27 am |
• kenmargo

We believe the FACTS in science. Science is proven through research and results. Your bible is no different than any other fictional book. Written by man and man's imagination.

March 24, 2014 at 6:17 pm |
• guidedans

You believe in the FACTS of this world, kenmargo.

This world is probably not all that there is. Your senses probably don't give you the full picture. Your brain filters out billions of pieces of information every day.

Why do you trust yourself to provide yourself with truth?

You have a brain that evolved not to ponder questions of the universe, but to survive. If your brain evolved to survive, it is probably not the best tool to use to try and solve the universe's mysteries.

One day, you will realize that we are all very, very, very dumb and that all of this banter is all very idiotic.

March 24, 2014 at 6:26 pm |
• kenmargo

@Dan............The reason I'm not religious really isn't about god at all. The reason is because of people like yourself. Ex. Westboro Baptist Church. the one that says "god kills soldiers because we tolerate gays" They read the same bible you do and this is what they come up with? What about THE FACT the catholic chruch hid s3x abuse by it's priests? So you're right in a way, god doesn't change but the people that worship him do. Based on what I've seen, There's no way I'd worship what you worship.

March 24, 2014 at 6:38 pm |
• guidedans

I apologize for the actions of those who call themselves Christians. I cannot control everyone, but I can try to be a good example to others in this world. I would prefer that you actually get to know me before you cast judgement on me and put in with the bigots and the pedophiles, but that's your business.

You should not let the actions of a few determine your stance on their beliefs. Any beliefs can be misused and altered to further bad causes.

That would be like me saying I would never be an Atheist because I saw what Stalin did and he was an Atheist!

I can tell you that the people I know who are Christians are good, serving, loving people to both Christians and non-Christians alike. I also know some really good atheists.

I don't think you should judge an entire group by the actions of its radical factions.

March 24, 2014 at 6:47 pm |
• kenmargo

No Need to apoligize. You didn't do anything wrong. I'm afraid I might become like one of them if I read the bible so I choose not to.

March 24, 2014 at 6:56 pm |
• Doris

guidedans: "If you believe in science, then you have admitted that the observable world is your foundation of truth.
You are only able to to observe this world through your senses, which I am positive that you know, are flawed. So really, you have founded your logic on a heavily filtered view of the observable world. We Christians use the Bible as the foundation for our truth. If you are going to argue all of the fallacies regarding our beliefs, you should really take a deep look at your own in the process. Matthew 7:3 Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?"

Hmm, let's see – you're complaining about people relying on observation, and senses in trying to best understand the true nature of our experience in the world, and you somehow think it's better to follow those from millennia ago who talked about or wrote about their experiences with the same human limitations, where writings such as the one quoted come mostly from authors unknown (or where authorship is highly questioned). Interesting.....

March 24, 2014 at 6:44 pm |
• kudlak

guidedans
So, does that mean that you don't believe in science?

Any science?

March 24, 2014 at 7:07 pm |
• guidedans

Kudlak,

I believe that science gives us a great insight into this world.

I just don't have much faith in the reality of this world. We don't see the full spectrum of light. We don't hear the whole range of vibrations. We can only taste certain flavors and feel pressure and temperature.

Our bodies are basic and so are our minds. When we become too proud to realize our limitations, it borders on arrogance.

Science is a tool to understand this reality, but I believe in a higher reality that science cannot touch.

March 24, 2014 at 7:49 pm |
• G to the T

Firstly, I don't believe in "mind", but that's another discussion.

"Science is a tool to understand this reality, but I believe in a higher reality that science cannot touch."

And yet somehow you base your belief using that same said "basic" body and "mind"?

March 25, 2014 at 8:05 am |
• igaftr

guide
Because science is a tool to understand reality, the only thing that science can't touch, is anything that doesn't exist.
Thank you for showing the depths of delusion it requires to believe so strongly in things there is NO indication or evidence for. You choose to live in your own reality.

March 25, 2014 at 8:12 am |
• noheavononearth

You use an old relic of a book created by men thousands of years ago as your truth? That's like a scientologist stating that he or she uses dianetics from Ron Hubbard, a Science Fiction writer, as the truth for their cult....I mean religion.
Christianity is a large cult, a culture of old grown men, some whom like young boys and hypocritically forgive the sins of others in the name of their statue...er god. It has no purpose but to have the lemmings...er people of the world to follow the commands of a few, from thousands of years ago, despite the inability of the house of god to get anything correct about the universe....what's that? The earth is not flat, everything does not revolve around the earth....women are equal to men and deserve to determine if they wish to accept modern medicine via birth control, and even get rid of a few cells before it becomes a living being.....
absolutely pathetic. I think I will read Dr Seuss........similar to the bible but a lot easier to read and understand, is not judgemental and is a lot more progressive and modern than the bible.....

March 24, 2014 at 10:31 pm |
2. MidwestKen

Good debate recently at Greer Heard, Sean Carrol v Will Lane Craig. I think it's on youtube.
Unfortunately, like here they are basically talking past (pun intended) each other.

March 24, 2014 at 4:51 pm |
• Blessed are the Cheesemakers

You see one Craig debate you have seen them all. He never has anything new to impart...much like his religion.

March 24, 2014 at 5:29 pm |
3. kenmargo

I feel I have proof god doesn't exist.

The biggest shootings that have made news:

We prayed after every shooting, yet the shootings continue. Either god doesn't care or doesn't exist becaue obviously prayers didn't work. Since the Sandy Hook shooting there have been over 40 school shootings. They didn't make the papers because there wasn't 'enough blood shed" If god doesn't answer these prayers, no other prayer is worth answering.

March 24, 2014 at 4:48 pm |
• SeaVik

Yes, it has already been proven that prayers don't work and in fact, can hurt. And this study was done by a religious organization! Obviously, they were hoping for a different outcome...

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/31/health/31pray.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

March 24, 2014 at 4:50 pm |
• nepawoods

The whole God hypothesis has been carefully constructed to be unfalsifiable. It will never be disproven.

March 24, 2014 at 5:11 pm |
• kenmargo

Oh it has been proven to be a load of crap. The religious whack jobs don't want to accept it. Why, Becaue it would make them look foolish. Imagine giving money to someone and finding out later you've been had! It'll make your toes curl.

March 24, 2014 at 5:49 pm |
• Jeff Williams

Ahhh...God didn't shoot anyone. People with free will choose to. If God restrained everything to do as He pleased and forced your existence to follow His plan would you love and serve Him?

March 24, 2014 at 5:56 pm |
• otoh2

That's the **only** other option that a real smart, powerful god would possibly have to choose from? Really?

March 24, 2014 at 6:02 pm |
• otoh2

p.s. Besides that, as portrayed, this "God" character IS forcing the issue, by way of eternal torture (or oblivion) if one does not submit.

March 24, 2014 at 6:04 pm |
• otoh2

Believe or Burn (eternally)

Love Me or Lose (eternally)

Worship Me or Writhe (eternally)

March 24, 2014 at 6:09 pm |
• Reality

Taking your god down a notch and more:

As per the famous contemporary theologian, Edward Schillebeeckx, his God is not omniscient. Please read, pause and contemplate the following by Schillebeeckx:

Church: The Human Story of God,

"Christians (et al) must give up a perverse, unhealthy and inhuman doctrine of predestination without in so doing making God the great scapegoat of history."

"Nothing is determined in advance: in nature there is chance and determinism; in the world of human activity there is possibility of free choices.

Therefore the historical future is not known even to God, otherwise we and our history would be merely a puppet show in which God holds the strings.

For God, too, history is an adventure, an open history for and of men and women."

March 24, 2014 at 6:05 pm |
• Reality

JC's family and friends had it right 2000 years ago ( Mark 3: 21 "And when his friends heard of it, they went out to lay hold on him: for they said, He is beside himself.")

Said passage is one of the few judged to be authentic by most contemporary NT scholars. e.g. See Professor Ludemann's conclusion in his book, Jesus After 2000 Years, p. 24 and p. 694.

Actually, Jesus was a bit "touched". After all he thought he spoke to Satan, thought he changed water into wine, thought he raised Lazarus from the dead etc. In today's world, said Jesus would be declared legally insane.

Or did P, M, M, L and J simply make him into a first century magic-man via their epistles and gospels of semi-fiction? Most contemporary NT experts after thorough analyses of all the scriptures go with the latter magic-man conclusion with J's gospel being mostly fiction.

Obviously, today's followers of Paul et al's "magic-man" are also a bit on the odd side believing in all the Christian mumbo jumbo about bodies resurrecting, and exorcisms, and miracles, and "magic-man atonement, and infallible, old, European/Utah white men, and 24/7 body/blood sacrifices followed by consumption of said sacrifices. Yummy!!!!

So why do we really care what a first century CE, illiterate, god-myth, long-dead, preacher/magic man would do or say.

March 24, 2014 at 6:13 pm |
• kenmargo

Thanks for mentioning the "free will" nonsense. You just proved again that praying is a waste of time. If people are going to do whatever they want, why waste time praying.

"If God restrained everything to do as he pleased and forced your existence to follow His plan would you love and serve Him"

I would think if god could "force" me to do things, I would love and serve him. It would also prove god exists.

March 24, 2014 at 6:12 pm |
• kudlak

Jeff Williams
Yet God supposedly does twist some things unnaturally in what is commonly called a "miracle". He'll save some people from certain death, even people who didn't even ask him too, but he won't save everyone that he could.

That's more like having a Superman who saves some people, but is also observed taking breaks and letting some people just die when it's obvious that he could have saved them too. Somehow, I doubt that people would see that Superman as being as big a hero as the usual one who gets depressed because he can't save everyone.

The God who only saves a select few people isn't doing it to help them, but is simply showing off to everyone else, isn't he?

March 24, 2014 at 7:18 pm |
4. SeaVik

No believers have been able or willing to answer my question. Again, given we know the bible is factually incorrect, why would anyone believe in the Christian version of a god? It is incredibly unlikely that there is any god at all, but since we know the Christian version does not exist, why not at least believe in something that MIGHT be true, no matter how unlikely?

March 24, 2014 at 4:35 pm |
• kenmargo

Christian, Allah or any god you can think of, NONE of them are worth the time of day.

March 24, 2014 at 4:51 pm |
• nepawoods

Not to argue their side, but the Catholics don't believe the Bible is supposed to be what science is supposed to be. They believe Genesis has a spiritual message, but that it isn't speaking literally of how things were "created". And it goes back that way at least as far as St. Augustine, who wrote of believers expounding on science matters:

"It is a disgraceful and a dangerous thing for an unbeliever to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of scripture, talking nonsense on these topics. Many non-Christians are well-versed in Natural knowledge, so they can detect vast ignorance in such a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The danger is obvious – the failure to conform interpretation to demonstrated knowledge opens the interpreter, and by extension, Christianity as a whole, to ridicule for being unlearned."

March 24, 2014 at 5:20 pm |
• SeaVik

So each person just gets to make up their own version of god? In that case, at least all but one are wrong.

March 24, 2014 at 8:40 pm |
• jknbt

which facts do you find incorrect?

March 24, 2014 at 6:28 pm |
• SeaVik

Science finds most of them to be incorrect. The creation of the universe is an obvious one. Turning water into wine and walking on water are a couple more. The list goes on.

March 24, 2014 at 8:38 pm |
5. snowr14

Honestly, people who use/can-use this as an evidence of existence of god does not really need this to believe in god. They already would have belief to consider this an evidence.

March 24, 2014 at 4:01 pm |
• ausphor

Apologetics is the art of keeping up the BS in relation to new discoveries, that is all.

March 24, 2014 at 4:07 pm |
• nepawoods

I'm sure there are many people who believe in God who know that the articles logic is completely bogus. One need not disagree with a conclusion (such as "God exists") to see an argument for it is fatally flawed.

March 24, 2014 at 4:09 pm |
• Vic

What many people need to understand that to us Christian believers, God is explained to us Theologically, Metaphysically, and Naturally; therefore, it is not a leap to conclude that God dd it. When we study our existence, we use Special Revelation—Scriptures, Natural Revelation—this existence, Theology, Metaphysics, and Empirical Science.

Whatever scientific discovery pointing to God is but part of the "Natural Revelation."

March 24, 2014 at 4:12 pm |
• Vic

"You need to understand is that to us Christian believers"

"God did it"

March 24, 2014 at 4:14 pm |
• Vic

"What many people need to understand is that.."

Sorry about that. I posted this earlier in another context, and did an incomplete editing.

March 24, 2014 at 4:17 pm |
• Blessed are the Cheesemakers

Quoting Vic

“you assume that you know the Form of the Metaphysical Supernatural with your argument, which is impossible.”

March 21, 2014 at 7:12 pm |

March 24, 2014 at 4:25 pm |
• Vic

Not at all!

If you can't know the "form" of something DOES NOT mean you can't know it exists. Think of Gravity for example, we don't know what the heck it is, yet we know what it does, it attracts objects at an acceleration rate of 9.81 m/s^2 or 32.2 ft/s^2—in the case of Earth.

March 24, 2014 at 4:34 pm |
• SeaVik

Did you really just compare gravity to the concept of god? Gravity is observable and more importantly, real. There is zero observable evidence for any gods. Literally zero.

March 24, 2014 at 4:38 pm |
• hotairace

Well there is a piece of bad fiction aka The Babble that some claim is the word of some alleged, but never proven, god . . .

March 24, 2014 at 4:42 pm |
• Vic

To us, Christian believers, this existence, the universe and life in it, is a "Prima Facie" circumstantial evidence of God, hence "Natural revelation," as well as the Logical Must "First Cause," hence Metaphysics.

March 24, 2014 at 4:43 pm |
• hotairace

Too bad you don't have any actual evidence to back up your beliefs. A member of the dead jew zombie cannibal vampire death cult aka christianity has no more evidence for their silliness than does an astrologer.

March 24, 2014 at 4:46 pm |
• SeaVik

Vic, I meant real evidence, as in:

Evidence: the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid

March 24, 2014 at 4:48 pm |
• Vic

This existence, the universe and life in it, is but real and factual, and along the pragmatic Logical Must "First Cause", we can certainly conclude that there is a Supernatural Metaphysical Being behind it all. The fact that we cannot empirically account for that Being is in itself evidence that Being Is Metaphysical.

March 24, 2014 at 4:53 pm |
• Vic

"and along with the pragmatic Logical Must..."

March 24, 2014 at 4:57 pm |
• hotairace

Or just a figment of man's imagination, given how long the search has been on, with no actual traces of said alleged god ...

March 24, 2014 at 5:00 pm |
• believerfred

hotairace
The search has not been on to find evidence of God. The scientific search has been to explain an alternative to God and none has been found. You could say science has proven the truth about God. God is incomparable to anything known or knowable by man.

March 24, 2014 at 5:09 pm |
• hotairace

So your best evidence for your alleged but never proven god is that it was alleged first and requires no evidence?

March 24, 2014 at 5:12 pm |
• believerfred

hotairace
The best evidence is lives transformed by the power of Word (true scripture) alone. Where in the first century there were only 1 in 350,000 who believed there are today 1 in 7.

March 24, 2014 at 5:21 pm |
• Blessed are the Cheesemakers

"If you can't know the "form" of something DOES NOT mean you can't know it exists."

But you do claim to know the form...and you contradict yourself. Gravity can be measured...lets measure your god...oh that's right you can't. Nice try Vic.

March 24, 2014 at 5:22 pm |
• Blessed are the Cheesemakers

"The best evidence is lives transformed by the power of Word (true scripture) alone.'

And people's lives have been transformed through the Quran, and Budda, and Confucious, and Joseph Smith...
So those are all equally evidenced and therefore true. You are just so ethnocentric you can't see their 'evidence".

March 24, 2014 at 5:27 pm |
• believerfred

hotairace
There are about 31,000 verses in the Bible and less than 200 are claimed by atheists to be false or contradicting even though theologians who study the Bible prove that the vast majority of the 200 are simply not understood by atheists. Most of todays self help books simply employ truths and principles out of the Bible. What is the track record for the other Holy Books?

March 24, 2014 at 5:29 pm |
• Vic

Do you believe "consciousness" exists? Can you empirically account for or measure "consciousness?!"

Consciousness dwarfed top Quantum Physicists by their own admission that the entire discipline of Empirical Science cannot account for consciousness.

March 24, 2014 at 5:33 pm |
• Blessed are the Cheesemakers

"even though theologians who study the Bible prove that the vast majority of the 200 are simply not understood by atheists."

Wow, you mean theologians come up with arguments to rationalize their belief...I had no idea.

March 24, 2014 at 5:34 pm |
• believerfred

Blessed are the Cheesemakers
Quran and Joseph Smith are rooted in foundations of the Abrahamic God so you would expect such results. Gods principles work for the betterment of man even though man likes to put mans spin on the truth. That spin always ends with nonsense but the truth is absolute.

March 24, 2014 at 5:35 pm |
• Blessed are the Cheesemakers

" Can you empirically account for or measure "consciousness?!"

Yes.

March 24, 2014 at 5:35 pm |
• hotairace

None of your attempts at deflecting attention away from the lack of any actual evidence for your alleged but never proven god enhance your argument for said alleged but never proven god.

March 24, 2014 at 5:36 pm |
• hotairace

I believe that all so called holy books are crap – mere man written bullsh!t. Any truths they contain are very generic and not unique to any cult's Great Book of Bullsh!t.

March 24, 2014 at 5:39 pm |
• Blessed are the Cheesemakers

'Quran and Joseph Smith are rooted in foundations of the Abrahamic God so you would expect such results.'

And they directly contradict your belief. What about Scientology? And you didn't account for Budda or Confucious. Transforming people's lives in no way addresses the truth of the claim.

March 24, 2014 at 5:40 pm |
• Vic

The entire discipline of Empirical Science CANNOT account for consciousness. It is "metaphysical."

What Quantum Physics/Mechanics observes are the manifestations and/or effects of consciousness, e.g. neurological signals, but NOT the cause of consciousness.

March 24, 2014 at 5:42 pm |
• believerfred

Blessed are the Cheesemakers
Gautama Buddha was around say 400-500BC which was after the Torah. Solomon had greater words than Buddha and we could speculate where the absolute truths that were the foundation of their expressions came from. I say they came from the oral traditions of the Hebrew and you would claim they came from monkeys. Either way the existence of some good words from Buddha only supports an origin of absolute it cannot discredit it.

March 24, 2014 at 5:44 pm |
• Blessed are the Cheesemakers

"The entire discipline of Empirical Science CANNOT account for consciousness. It is "metaphysical."

Vic,

That wasn't the complete question, you skipped the "or measured" part. We can measure consciousness. Not being very honest in your response Vic.

March 24, 2014 at 5:47 pm |
• Vic

The entire discipline of Empirical Science CANNOT account for nor measure the CAUSE of consciousness.

March 24, 2014 at 5:50 pm |
• Vic

The entire discipline of Empirical Science CANNOT account for nor measure the CAUSE of consciousness. It is "metaphysical."

March 24, 2014 at 5:53 pm |
• Blessed are the Cheesemakers

"I say they came from the oral traditions of the Hebrew and you would claim they came from monkeys.'

I don't care what you say I only care what you can demonstrate to be true. Making claims by themselv isn't interesting. And I have never said anything of the such about monkeys...you are being dishonest again.

March 24, 2014 at 5:53 pm |
• hotairace

The Babble does not account for consciousness. It merely provides an argument, with no evidence, unsupported claims in other words.

March 24, 2014 at 5:56 pm |
• believerfred

Blessed are the Cheesesmaker
Confucious time was also about the time of Buddha so the same argument would apply. Scientology is an example of abuse of the power in Gods Word. This is no different than people who used the Bible to justify the African Slave Trade or Hitler who used Christianity to stir up hate against the Jew. The root problem was the desire of man over the truth of God. Nothing changes everything remains rooted in that tree in the Garden.
Even atheist Stalin knew the power of the absolute truth of God to free the slaves as God promised. You also know the power of the Word because you spend all day attempting to discredit the word itself revealing any alternative to be void of hope in something you can have faith in (i.e. assurance).

March 24, 2014 at 5:58 pm |
• Vic

Genesis 2:7
"7 Then the Lord God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being." (NASB)

March 24, 2014 at 5:58 pm |
• Blessed are the Cheesemakers

Vic, naughty naughty,

you changed the question...that's just not honest. Your question was...

"Do you believe "consciousness" exists? Can you empirically account for or measure "consciousness?!"

And we can measure consciouness. Just like we can measure gravity. You are moving the goal posts. If I can't trust you to be honest in your arguments how can I trust you to be honest about your religion? "Liars for Jesus"

March 24, 2014 at 5:58 pm |
• Vic

I haven't changed anything.

March 24, 2014 at 6:02 pm |
• Blessed are the Cheesemakers

fred you are wasting your time,

If you can't objestively demonstrate that you know what is and isn't "absolute truth" you can make claims all day and it isn't going to change anything. I don't trust you anymore than I trust what a Scientologist says.

March 24, 2014 at 6:05 pm |
• Doris

Vic: "[gravity] we don't know what the heck it is"

comedy gold as they say...

March 24, 2014 at 6:09 pm |
• believerfred

Blessed are the Cheesemakers
" I have never said anything of the such about monkeys"
=>We have records going back to 400 BC that the oral traditions of the Hebrew are valid (Dead Sea Scrolls which before discovery the athiests claimed were all made up in 170AD). We have evidence that these Hebrews took pride in their detail of bringing the Word of God forward without error. Your position that oral tradition never existed is nonsense. Your position that these Hebrew just made things up going back to the earliest traditions of Judah is without evidence.
=>You once claimed to hang your relative moralism hat on social evolution. That is monkey business so you did say it. Because social evolution is based on observation of present day primate behavior and retroactively applied a few hundred thousand years. Again, without evidence.

March 24, 2014 at 6:11 pm |
• midwest rail

Fred says the best evidence is lives transformed....
If the evidence available on these pages is any indication, you guys need to review the basic definition of evidence.

March 24, 2014 at 6:11 pm |
• Blessed are the Cheesemakers

Vic said...."I haven't changed anything."

Really? Here is you original question….

“Do you believe "consciousness" exists? Can you empirically account for or measure "consciousness?!"

Now here is how you falsely rephrased it…

“The entire discipline of Empirical Science CANNOT account for nor measure the CAUSE of consciousness.”

Measuring something and accounting for the cause of something is not the same. Your questions are NOT the same. This all started with you saying we can’t account for gravity…I replied by saying we can measure gravity. Then you asked if we could account measure for or MEASURE consciousness. And we can MEASURE it…just like gravity. Your argument and comparison failed so you tried to change the question and you got caught.
.

March 24, 2014 at 6:14 pm |
• believerfred

Blessed are the cheesemakers
"If you can't objestively demonstrate that you know what is and isn't "absolute truth""
=>sure I can. You and I disagree on the origin of truth. I say it came from God and you say it came from monkeys. One of us is wrong so we must seek out someone who both of us would accept as knowing which is right or wrong. Would you agree?

March 24, 2014 at 6:19 pm |
• Blessed are the Cheesemakers

=>We have evidence that these Hebrews took pride in their detail of bringing the Word of God forward without error.

I never claimed theydidn't exist. The fact that they existed is not proof they can from a god. Youa re conflating 2 seperate issues.

=>You once claimed to hang your relative moralism hat on social evolution. That is monkey business so you did say it.

It isn't "monkey buisness" evolution doesn't say we came from monkeys. And your religious moral relativism is worse..

March 24, 2014 at 6:23 pm |
• Vic

To the beloved readers, don't be misled by contorted meanings.

Accounting for or measuring "consciousness" that Quantum Physics/Mechanics CANNOT achieve concerns the CAUSE/ORIGIN of it, whether the expression is implicit or explicit.

March 24, 2014 at 6:26 pm |
• Doris

True, Blessed, Vic has changed the argument.

March 24, 2014 at 6:26 pm |
• Blessed are the Cheesemakers

"One of us is wrong so we must seek out someone who both of us would accept as knowing which is right or wrong. Would you agree?"

First... good luck finding someone we would both accept as "knowing" that answer. Second, demonstrating the truth of a claim isn't going to come from some 3rd party saying .."it is true". They themselves would have to objectively demonstrate it.

March 24, 2014 at 6:27 pm |
• Blessed are the Cheesemakers

No it doesn't Vic,

Gravity can be measured even though we don't completely understand the cause. Same with consciousness. You are moving the goalposts and are not being honest.

I am glad it is apparent to you Doris.

March 24, 2014 at 6:32 pm |
• believerfred

midwest rail
That is the problem, atheist continue think evidence must fit a particular standard which never applied in the first place. We have a different threshold of viable evidence when falsifying patterns of subatomic particles then we do in allowable applications of tensors in quantum mechanics when limiting amplitude to falsify the same apparent mass. These rules are agreed to by consensus which is also true in the soft sciences (evaluating if Charmin feels better than Northern quilted tissues where a bears butt is the defining factor and the response of the cub is evidence)

March 24, 2014 at 6:32 pm |
• Vic

Actually, you just testified to my correctness.

Consciousness is just Gravity, we don't know what it is but we know what it does, simple math.

March 24, 2014 at 6:37 pm |
• Vic

Actually, you just testified to my correctness.

Consciousness is just like Gravity, we don't know what it is but we know what it does, simple math.

March 24, 2014 at 6:37 pm |
• Blessed are the Cheesemakers

"That is the problem, theists continue think evidence doesn't require a standard, they can just makes claims and assert what is true."

fixed that for ya fred...

March 24, 2014 at 6:41 pm |
• Blessed are the Cheesemakers

Vic

Consciousness is just like Gravity, we don't know what it is but we know what it does, but we can measure it. And taking this back to where it started I asked you to measure god. You then made the false comparison from "god" to "gravity" and then "consciouness" and I thumped your argument.

Still waiting for you to measure god...or ANYTHING supernatural.
.

March 24, 2014 at 6:51 pm |
• Vic

You cannot measure God, gravity, or consciousness, you can only measure what they do, that is Creation, attraction of objects, and being aware and coherent, respectively.

March 24, 2014 at 6:56 pm |
• Vic

They are all metaphysical.

March 24, 2014 at 6:56 pm |
• believerfred

Blessed are the Cheesemakers
It is not just theists as even Jesus said to the Sadducees no further evidence will be given you except the sign of Jonah. The reason was simple because they already knew yet they demanded one more sign. All the evidence would not have changed what was in their hearts or what was about to happen (Jesus would be their traditional perfect sacrifice for the atonement of sin).
If the plan of creation was to create souls that loved God and loved each other as themselves through scientific formula or some form of robotics verifiable by objective standards with USDA stamp of "choice Christian" on their heart God would have done that. Yet the plan as we know it is through life in a fallen world where we reveal who we truly are absent of robotics for brains and actions (which only reveal the soul of the controller) and dependent on faith.

March 24, 2014 at 6:57 pm |
• Blessed are the Cheesemakers

"You cannot measure God, gravity, or consciousness, you can only measure what they do"

Except for god...you can't measure what god does.

March 24, 2014 at 6:59 pm |
• Vic

CREATION

March 24, 2014 at 7:03 pm |
• Blessed are the Cheesemakers

"It is not just theists as even Jesus said to the Sadducees no further evidence will be given you except the sign of Jonah.'

fred, you can't prove Jesus said that...

or even that he existed in the first place (not saying he didn't, just that there are strong arguments he may not have.

So the rest of that post is moot.

March 24, 2014 at 7:04 pm |
• Blessed are the Cheesemakers

"CREATION"....isn't a measurment of god....and it certainly isn't a measurement of your god.

March 24, 2014 at 7:08 pm |
• believerfred

Blessed is the cheesmaker
"They themselves would have to objectively demonstrate it."
=>So you concede a higher authority exists so long as that authority satisfies your desires. Is there anything you accept that does not have objective evidence to support it? How about beauty? Can you say you actually know that you came from some random inorganic matter that found it way to earth a few billion years ago?

March 24, 2014 at 7:18 pm |
• believerfred

Blessed are the cheesemakers
"fred, you can't prove Jesus said that..or even that he existed in the first place."

=>Praise the Lord we are the verge of a breakthrough. You are beginning to see the light! Pause that moment. What is in your heart and mind at this moment is exactly what Jesus was talking about. You confirm, as evident by your thought and action the absolute truth of the Bible. No further sign has been given to you other than the sign of Jonah.
You see the writing of another unknown unverifiable figment of someone's imagination also said in the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word came and was the light into the darkness..
=>Looks like the truth is everywhere you look. If it is not the truth please tell me a lie you find in the Words of Jesus. If you cannot find a lie could you default to the possibility that God is self evident?

March 24, 2014 at 7:33 pm |
• kudlak

Vic
Can you prove that the universe was a "creation", and not something that just naturally formed?

Why believe in gravity and not angels simply pushing everything downwards if you're so into metaphysical causes? Who's to say that prayers an't answered through some kind of telekinetic process by other human beings, who maybe use special crystals? Maybe invisible unicorns are all around us, saving some people while causing others to die in freak accidents? Maybe we'll all be so much happier if we just come to terms with our past lives, or our Thetans?

See, once you open yourself to believing in the metaphysical then you really don't have any reasonable means of determining which bit of woo woo is actually the active force.

March 24, 2014 at 7:33 pm |
• Blessed are the Cheesemakers

"So you concede a higher authority exists so long as that authority satisfies your desires."

fred,

Umm, no not even a little bit. What I concede is that if a claim can be demonstrated to be true I will accept it. It has nothing to do with a 'higher authority". It has to do with the demonstration of what is true. I can tell you this fred, I will change my mind regarding my belief in god if it was ever able to be demonstrated. What would change your mind?

"Is there anything you accept that does not have objective evidence to support it?"

Not that I know of...but if and when I find something that does not have "objective evidence" I will stop accepting it as 'true"

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, it is subjective. But the concept of beauty is objective.

"Can you say you actually know that you came from some random inorganic matter that found it way to earth a few billion years ago?"

No I can't. "I don't know" is a pefectly reasonable answer to unknown questions. What is not reasonable is to claim you do know when you can't demonstrate that knowledge.

March 24, 2014 at 7:38 pm |
• Blessed are the Cheesemakers

"You confirm, as evident by your thought and action the absolute truth of the Bible. No further sign has been given to you other than the sign of Jonah."

fred,

So you are saying that Jesus said (or may not have said) that no further proof would be given. And since I DON'T have further proof....what he said (or may not have said) was true and therfore he was right. That is some wacky logic right there. Wow...I am without words.

"If it is not the truth please tell me a lie you find in the Words of Jesus."

I only care what can be objectively proven that he did say....you are attempting to shift the burden of proof.

March 24, 2014 at 7:52 pm |
• believerfred

Blessed are the Chesemakers
=>There was the failure of God to replace lost limbs until I realized all of our physical existence (including body parts) is how we experience this fallen world as it is. If we are blessed with beauty and health or disease it is the non physical that embodies the essence of who we are or what we were created to be. It is man that is limited to the physical falsifiable structure resulting out of the natural laws that govern the natural not the essence of man or the love of God which is the image of God within man.
I would fail to believe if the love of God was not reflected or present in creation.

"Is there anything you accept that does not have objective evidence to support it?"
=>Yes, I do believe in many things that are highly improbable or unrealistic. Not Bigfoot or aliens

March 24, 2014 at 8:03 pm |
• believerfred

Blessed are the Cheesemakers
In the verse I was referring to the religious leaders already had their mind made up due to other reasons. Their decision has nothing to do with evidence or lack of evidence but their heart (soul). Hearts are hardened for a variety of reasons as is the ability to see God.
Lack of physical objective evidence is part of the plan from the very beginning. Consider God spoke creation into existence (yep it was by the Word of God).

March 24, 2014 at 8:14 pm |
• Blessed are the Cheesemakers

(...."Is there anything you accept that does not have objective evidence to support it?")

I was actually just quoting your question and then I responded to it...this wasn't meant as a question to you. But just out of curiosity what non-religious thing do you believe that is "highly improbable or unrealistic."?

March 24, 2014 at 8:17 pm |
• Blessed are the Cheesemakers

"Lack of physical objective evidence is part of the plan from the very beginning. Consider God spoke creation into existence (yep it was by the Word of God)."

I don't find that to be a very good plan. According to that view god gave us the ability to reason and understand the world using logic based on the evidence...but he purposely witholds evidence of his existence...which somehow (to you) proves his existence. That sounds more like the efforts of other humans to try and "sell snake oil" rather than the bringer of "absolute truth".

March 24, 2014 at 8:25 pm |
• therealpeace2all

@Blessed are the Cheesemakers

Hello, my friend! Hope you've been well.

@believerfred

Hello to you too.

Peace...

March 24, 2014 at 8:36 pm |
• Blessed are the Cheesemakers

Doing well peace

I wish you the best...and fred as well.

March 24, 2014 at 8:44 pm |
• believerfred

Blessed are the Cheesemakers
We created this apparent physical reality thinking we have capacity to fine tune a perfect destiny without the ability to know where that path actually leads. In the process we created monsters and perhaps even multiverse over time Modern man is where our preexistent selves started to lose contact (our bearing) with the true reality which is not physical. We are not as tethered as we were in the beginning becoming lost in the physical we set into motion.
God and what is left of truth is lost and the best thing we have left is a few pieces of parchment that retain some of the oral tradition of long ago. We are lost in ourselves and looking for the way back.
Something about the Glory of God is a homing beacon perhaps.
When you look at the abstract math necessary to infer mass in apparent subatomic particles I see evidence of the physical that does not exist except by tensor.

March 24, 2014 at 8:45 pm |
• believerfred

therealpeace2all
Blessed are the cheesemakers
I am glad to see you two together. It reminds me of the verse "blessed are the peacemakers for they will be called sons of God"
I must switch to airplane mode so have a good evening and remember the construct you create may be your own.

March 24, 2014 at 8:56 pm |
• Blessed are the Cheesemakers

fred,

I have no reason to accept your claims in that post as being true. Humans have a long history of making claims that turned out to be false. Some humans were dishonest...other humans were honest but they turned out to be wrong.

Understand fred, I don't claim there is no god...I just am not convinced there is....but that still makes me an atheist. And if your god's plan is to withold evidence I guess according to his plan I will stay that way.

March 24, 2014 at 8:57 pm |
• Blessed are the Cheesemakers

" so have a good evening and remember the construct you create may be your own."

Better mine than some others person's...claimed to be god's.

March 24, 2014 at 9:00 pm |
• midwest rail

fred, that may have been your most amazing non-answer yet. Your continued obfuscation makes my point more succinctly than I originally did. Thank you.

March 25, 2014 at 7:28 am |
• joey3467

fred, I would put the chance that aliens, or at least other life in the universe, exists to be approaching 100% and the chance that the Christian god exits to be near 0%

March 25, 2014 at 12:43 pm |
• bostontola

Vic,
Then where did/does all the Christian violence come from?

March 24, 2014 at 4:15 pm |
• nepawoods

You don't use sound reasoning. We understand.

March 24, 2014 at 4:20 pm |
• Vic

To the beloved readers, don't be misled by contorted meanings.

Accounting for or measuring "consciousness" that Quantum Physics/Mechanics CANNOT achieve concerns the CAUSE/ORIGIN of it, regardless if the expression is implicit or explicit.

March 24, 2014 at 6:24 pm |
• kudlak

March 24, 2014 at 7:35 pm |
6. bostontola

A few of the generic flaws in the logical causal proofs of God (Like the one Dr. Wickman used):

1. They ignore the alternatives. In particular, the natural alternatives. When these causal arguments were first conceived (go all the way back to the Greeks, but also include Thomas Aquinas), human understanding of mathematical physics didn't exist. There are now purely natural alternative hypotheses. To prove the God hypothesis, you now have to disprove the alternatives.

2. They usually incorporate a premise that infinite regress is impossible. That has not been proven. Again, way back before physics understood how to describe and quantify mass-energy, it seemed like an infinitude of causes would require an infinite amount of energy.

3. They assume the cause must be intelligent/self aware/puposeful. I've not heard even a reasonable explanation of this one.

March 24, 2014 at 3:45 pm |
7. hotairace

So where are the scholarly articles published in reputable peer-reviewed scientific journals that successfully conclude with "some god did it"?

March 24, 2014 at 3:45 pm |
8. Vic

♰ ♰ ♰ Jesus Christ Is Lord ♰ ♰ ♰

This discovery, if confirmed—that would be sometime in August, is the Holy Grail of astrophysical predictions, the expansion of the universe. The Holy Bible spoke of the expansion of the universe millennia past.

Early on:
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2014/03/20/does-the-big-bang-breakthrough-offer-proof-of-god/comment-page-16/#comment-2971087

March 24, 2014 at 3:33 pm |
• ausphor

Vic
Quit it. Trying to imply you can find logical peer reviewed science on some religious website. It just shows what a phony and a liar you are. Your brain and beliefs are stuck in the year 20 CE.

March 24, 2014 at 3:46 pm |
• kudlak

Where does the Bible say that God created an expanding universe, specifically? I remember "curtains" and "a firmament", but those things are solids, correct? Similarly, "separated" does not mean "toss in either direction to continue moving forever".

March 24, 2014 at 7:42 pm |
9. Robert Brown

Yes, all of creation is proof of God.

March 24, 2014 at 3:23 pm |
• bostontola

Robert,
You must have a very low standard of proof.

March 24, 2014 at 3:26 pm |
• Robert Brown

Could be, or it may be my condition that causes me to see God in the beauty of nature.

March 24, 2014 at 3:36 pm |
• kenmargo

Oh yeah, It's a condition. It's the result of brainwashing. It's called delusional-i-tis. It causes people to give money to churches so the rev. can pay off his Benz.

March 24, 2014 at 3:44 pm |
• bostontola

Robert,
If God created some people with better antennae for God than others, then imposed an infinite penalty for the people with poor antennae (hell), that God would be immoral.

March 24, 2014 at 3:47 pm |
• ausphor

RB
You may have convinced yourself, good luck convincing anyone else that can already think for themselves, brainwashing children is quite easy, you get zero points for that.

March 24, 2014 at 3:49 pm |
• Robert Brown

kenmargo

“It causes people to give money to churches so the rev. can pay off his Benz.”

This is sad but true, there are people who do this.

You may not believe this but there are actually pastors who work a day job and are not paid by their church.

March 24, 2014 at 3:58 pm |
• Robert Brown

Bostontola,

Yes, it would be unfair. I don’t think God is unfair. I think he waits until a person comes to the end of themselves, before he presents his offer.

March 24, 2014 at 3:59 pm |
• Theo Phileo

Bostontola,
Does the potter not have the right to make from the same lump of clay, some vessels for noble use and some for base? Do not see this world as anthropocentric, but theocentric. It's not all about man and his happiness, it is all about God and His glorification.

March 24, 2014 at 4:00 pm |
• Robert Brown

Ausphor,

What in the world are you talking about, brainwashing children?

March 24, 2014 at 4:05 pm |
• ausphor

You must have missed the clip on children at bible camp. Do you claim this type of conduct is not carried out by Christians, don't lie now, Robert.

March 24, 2014 at 4:10 pm |
• bostontola

Theo,
I personally don't have an anthropocentric view of universe. To the contrary. If I had to pick a word it would be nature-centric. I see humans as (potentially one of many of) nature's way to become self aware. While that is cool, it doesn't place us above any other life. Why? Simple, we can't live without them. We are part of vast ecosystems, we can't live in isolation. The coolest part of all? Nature can do it all on its own.

March 24, 2014 at 4:12 pm |
• Robert Brown

I must have missed it. I don’t know of any Christians who brainwash children.

March 24, 2014 at 4:16 pm |
• nepawoods

Ausphor wrote "brainwashing children is quite easy". Religious ed classes are brainwashing. It doesn't employ techniques that would be required to brainwash an adult, so it may not look like brainwashing to you. It doesn't employ those techniques because with children, it isn't necessary.

March 24, 2014 at 4:24 pm |
• ausphor

RB
Just one small example. Google Marjoe Gortner, read about his life, it may change your view on brainwashing children for fun and profit. Lots of other example if you are willing to investigate. Passing strange that you missed the bible camp video it has been posted several times on this blog. Willful ignorance perhaps, like Sgt. Schultz.

March 24, 2014 at 4:27 pm |
• Akira

Theo,
God should have created better lapdogs if that's all you think He wanted.

March 24, 2014 at 4:36 pm |
• ausphor

Akira
Or a laptop for that matter so he could communicate with us in real time.

March 24, 2014 at 5:03 pm |
• ausphor

RB
Just one more example or two. Have you ever attended a sunday school class, I have were I pointed out that the story was silly and didn't make sense and was punished for doing so, I am sure others have had the same experience. Have you ever been to a Christmas pageant where little children are playing out the nativity scene? Subtle brainwashing for the lambs so that they grow up to be good sheep.

March 24, 2014 at 5:34 pm |
• sam stone

What condition is that, Robert?

Gullibility?

March 24, 2014 at 6:04 pm |
• In Santa We Trust

And your evidence that a god created our universe and all life in it is?

March 24, 2014 at 3:28 pm |
• Robert Brown

I met God one day and he said he did it.

March 24, 2014 at 3:36 pm |
• kenmargo

March 24, 2014 at 3:40 pm |
• Robert Brown

I met him spiritually Ken. Sorry for the confusion.

March 24, 2014 at 3:52 pm |
• hotairace

How do you know you were not just hallucinating?

March 24, 2014 at 3:58 pm |
• Robert Brown

How confident are you that you are not hallucinating right now ace? That is how confident I am that I wasn’t hallucinating.

March 24, 2014 at 4:04 pm |
• hotairace

I suppose I might have just imagined a pretty good Montreal Smoked Meat sandwich with a nice cold Export, but the mustard stains suggest I did not. In any event, I'm not the one making claims for the supernatural, for which there is not a single bit of actual (factual, objective, verifiable, independent, non-hearsay) evidence. Enjoy your delusions but please stay away from children.

March 24, 2014 at 4:11 pm |
• Blessed are the Cheesemakers

I met god one day and he said he didn't do it.

March 24, 2014 at 4:28 pm |
• noheavononearth

You don't know of any adults that brainwashed children? How about virtually every single person of religious persuasion, including almost all Christians. It is called childhood indoctrination. Being a Christian or of any of the other hundred religions (must be lots of gods in existence....right Robert?) is not biologically pre-programmed. It is acquired from typically one's parents and or other adults in society. You may have met god spiritually, which is akin to a hallucination as you clearly state what you believe, and I may believe in Santa bit that does not establish his existence. It is beyond comprehension that we must take the word of those who were indoctrinated, with no evidence but a poorly written relic of a fable from thousands of years ago that guide those who are "believers" and nothing else.

March 24, 2014 at 10:02 pm |
• Vic

To us, Christian believers, God is explained Theologically, Metaphysically, and Naturally. When we study our existence, we use Special Revelation—Scriptures, Natural Revelation—this existence, Theology, Metaphysics, and Empirical Science.

Whatever scientific discovery pointing to God is but part of the "Natural Revelation."

March 24, 2014 at 4:33 pm |
• Akira

Why study anything at all when your pat answer is "God did it?"

March 24, 2014 at 4:48 pm |
• kenmargo

You're right Rob, When a dog creates a pile of crap, It's proof of god.

March 24, 2014 at 3:37 pm |
• lunchbreaker

Mr. Brown, I thought you were a young earth creationist.

March 24, 2014 at 3:38 pm |
• Robert Brown

I believe God is the creator. I am open as to when.

March 24, 2014 at 3:49 pm |
• lunchbreaker

Fair enough.

March 24, 2014 at 4:13 pm |
• guidedans

R.B.

God Bless. There is a lot of negativity on this blog. You would think that the "Belief Blog" would have more people talking about their beliefs, not just people ranting about how you shouldn't believe anything.

Keep up the good work.

March 24, 2014 at 5:45 pm |
• sam stone

guidedans: red herring. no one is suggesting that people not believe anything. are you being disengenuou, or do you merely have very poor comprehension skills?

March 24, 2014 at 6:15 pm |
• Chris

Or, if you're Hindu, all of creation IS God, and God is all of creation.

Hinduism and Buddhism fit MUCH better with our current understanding of science than any of the Abrahamic religions ever have.

March 24, 2014 at 5:51 pm |
• kudlak

Again, can you prove that the universe is a "creation"?

March 24, 2014 at 7:43 pm |
10. Plato

Do you require physical evidence to prove God?

March 24, 2014 at 3:19 pm |
• observer

Plato,

Nope. He could just take LESS THAN 5 SECONDS to make an announcement simultaneously to the entire world "This is God. Follow my Bible."

March 24, 2014 at 3:21 pm |
• bostontola

Objective evidence is necessary.

March 24, 2014 at 3:22 pm |
• Plato

If a plane as big as a Boeing 777 can go missing and tracked by the use of frequency waves using this formula:f = \left( \frac{c + v_\text{r}}{c + v_\text{s}} \right) f_0 \, without any kind of physical evidence then definitely a trigonometric wave model can be established for tracking the super natural.

A wink and a smile!

March 24, 2014 at 3:25 pm |
• Akira

So God can be found at the bottom of the south Indian Ocean?

March 24, 2014 at 3:29 pm |
• kenmargo

They say god is everywhere!

March 24, 2014 at 3:41 pm |
• Plato

1 Corinthians 1:18,19

March 24, 2014 at 3:52 pm |
• G to the T

Ah... another Paulian.

March 26, 2014 at 7:57 pm |
11. bostontola

"The cause must be itself uncaused because an infinite series of causes is impossible." This is not proven.

"The cause must transcend space and time, since it created space and time. Transcends the space-time of our observable universe.

"It must be unimaginably powerful, since it created all matter and energy" This is also not proven. The observable universe has close to zero net mass-energy by the most recent calculations by physicists. It's hard to get an exact figure, but there are consistent hypotheses that yield zero net mass-energy.

The most important thing is, the cause does not need to be intelligent. Our universe could be spawning other universes that we can't access, and our universe could have been spawned by some other universe. Just like the cause of a star going nova doesn't require an intelligence to make that happen, universes can be spawned naturally. We can't prove these things as yet. We don't have to. If the mechanisms adhere to natural laws, that means there are valid alternatives to supernatural causes. The valid alternatives obviate the logic of "proving God" by these logical means.

March 24, 2014 at 3:13 pm |
12. colin31714

Since the issue of prayer has come up, I am again going to suggest that prayer be made part of every school's curriculum in the USA. It should not be permissible, it should be mandatory.

We do it in the following manner. Upon entry into high school, each child “adopts” a wounded veteran or other person who has a visible and incurable condition, such as a lost leg, arm or eye. Not some ambiguous, internal condition, but an open and obvious one.

Each day the children pray to God that the person recover their lost appendage. We hold prayer sessions every Monday morning for every week/month and year of their entire high school experience. Those children who have other beliefs can bow, chant, jiggle an amulet, stare into a crystal or do whatever they wish to “pray” for their chosen ailing person.

Five years later, at their graduation, prayer can put up or shut up. We parade the injured people through the graduation ceremony so the children can see the results of their 5 solid years of constant prayer. Just how many limbs, eyes or ears do you think will have re-grown? And why are you so sure of that? Millions of prayers for hundreds of thousands of wounded people ignored? Does God hate amputees? Why does he always have to hide his medical miracles inside the body of the sick, where things are less medically certain?

The doubtless, consistent and universal failure of their prayers will help the students understand:

(i) that there is no god listening and that praying is a futile exercise when the results can REALLY be tested;

(ii) the frailties of their religious leaders as they scurry for excuses –“god won’t be tested”, “god moves in mysterious ways,” “perhaps the people have been healed spiritually”, etc; and

(iii) the weakness of human nature (and a basic lesson in politics) as the religious right moves to shut the experiments down.

March 24, 2014 at 2:53 pm |
• nepawoods

I love it.

March 24, 2014 at 2:57 pm |
• Theo Phileo

If God is all-powerful and if Jesus promised to do anything we ask (or so the reasoning goes), then why won’t God ever heal amputees when we pray for them? The fact that an amputee stays an amputee is "proof" to some that God does not exist, that prayer is useless, that so-called healings are coincidence, and that religion is a myth.

It is an argument based on a wrong view of God and a misrepresentation of Scripture. The line of reasoning employed in the "why won’t God heal amputees" argument makes at least seven false assumptions:

Assumption 1: God has never healed an amputee.
Assumption 2: God’s goodness and love require Him to heal everyone.
Assumption 3: God still performs miracles today just as He did in the past.
Assumption 4: God is bound to say "yes" to any prayer offered in faith.
Assumption 5: God’s future healing (at the resurrection) cannot compensate for earthly suffering.
Assumption 6: God’s plan is subject to man’s approval.
Assumption 7: God does not exist.

In one sense, the question of why God doesn’t heal amputees is a "gotcha" question, comparable to "Can God make a rock too big for Him to lift?" and is designed not to seek for truth but to discredit faith. In another sense, it can be a valid question with a biblical answer. That answer, in short, would be something like this: "God can heal amputees and will heal every one of them who trusts Christ as Savior. The healing will come, not as the result of our demanding it now, but in God’s own time, possibly in this life, but definitely in Heaven. Until that time, we walk by faith, trusting the God who redeems us in Christ and promises the resurrection of the body.

March 24, 2014 at 3:09 pm |
• observer

Theo Phileo,

March 24, 2014 at 3:13 pm |
• Doc Vestibule

Live Again (The Fall of Man)

The road is narrow, the horizon wide
And to say what's waiting on the other side
Is so rewarding and the ultimate prize
But what good is something if you can't have it until you die?

Desperate, tenacious, clinging like a grain of sand
Watching its foundation wash away
Drunk with the assertions they know they can't defend
Confident that they might live again

– Dr. Greg Graffin

March 24, 2014 at 3:13 pm |
• Robert Brown

“But what good is something if you can't have it until you die?”
Tell Gregg that the blessings of God are here and now, heaven is the icing on the cake.

“Desperate, tenacious, clinging like a grain of sand”
If Gregg sees faith as desperately striving to hold on to something, no wonder he doesn’t think highly of it.
Faith is calm assurance, resting in the power the God. It is peace and rest.
Let go and let God.

March 24, 2014 at 3:46 pm |
• ausphor

Theo
Assumption 7 is correct, gods do not exist in reality, they are all man made. How old do you believe your supernatural universe is, you have either ducked the question or I missed the answer?

March 24, 2014 at 3:15 pm |
• Theo Phileo

"Assumption 7 is correct, gods do not exist in reality, they are all man made."
------------
I have offered evidence to the affirmative of the existence of God numerous times. I would love to see you furnish proof to the opposite just once.

"How old do you believe your supernatural universe is, you have either ducked the question or I missed the answer?"
----------–
I don't duck questions... If I answer some and not others – I'm typing on here in between jobs, so I'm not on all the time.
I don't know how old observational science claims that the earth and the universe is. But then, observations can only go so far, and if there are no experiments that can be devised to test certain observations, then we are forced to take our conclusions on faith – "origins" is one of these areas.

Because we all have paradigms that are informed from our beliefs, when we all observe the same evidence – the same rocks, the same stars, the same bones – we draw conclusions based on our paradigms. My paradigm, informed by my belief tells me that I cannot always go by what I see, and anyone who has seen a mirage knows this to be true. Therefore we explain the implicit by the explicit.

God, in speaking to Moses, who would write the Genesis account explained the creation account where everything was created mature. Therefore my observations of the natural world are somewhat skewed. Because we are not given exact dates regarding creation, one must gather from what information we do have, that is, geneologies and accounts of kings and their reigns, and so forth.

Creation can be implicitly determined to be set around 4000BC by the explicit information found in the record of the OT.

March 24, 2014 at 3:25 pm |
• observer

Theo Phileo,

Any idea which year it was when God stopped the sun and moon in their orbit for a day?

March 24, 2014 at 3:31 pm |
• ausphor

Theo
Kind of a trick question sorry. Why would you use a premise from William Lane Craig when he does not like you believe in young earth creationism, just interested. It seems to be an apologist trait to pick and chose what they believe in the bible and also phrases from their so called Christian experts but leave out what they do not agree with.

March 24, 2014 at 3:35 pm |
• SeaVik

Theo, you have never offered any evidence. You simply keep repeating your strange way of thinking. Essentially, you say that there must be something before there was anything and if that something wasn't part of anything, this doesn't make any sense so that something must have been god. It's a childlike way of thinking. The most surprising thing is that you seem to confidently believe that this actually makes sense and proves something.

March 24, 2014 at 3:37 pm |
• Reality

Wrong again Theo as Moses did not exist or do you have proof that he did exist other than the Jewish scribe-written OT??? Even 1.5 million Conservative Jews and their rabbis have concluded that Moses did not exist. Ditto for Abraham.

March 24, 2014 at 3:37 pm |
• Theo Phileo

"Kind of a trick question sorry. Why would you use a premise from William Lane Craig when he does not like you believe in young earth creationism, just interested. It seems to be an apologist trait to pick and chose what they believe in the bible and also phrases from their so called Christian experts but leave out what they do not agree with."
--------
If there was any similarity between my answer and Craig's it was coincidental. I have heard him speak once in my life so far, and don't listen to him on a regular basis. I based my statements on the plain reading of the Bible, as well as gleamings from men like Ussher and Sir Robert Anderson who have done work in the field of Biblical Chronologies.

And of course we pick and choose how we agree or disagree with various apologists. Our measuring rod is the Bible, and when apologists stray from the clear reading of the Bible, we must disagree, whether it is Craig, or Luther.

March 24, 2014 at 3:55 pm |
• Theo Phileo

"Any idea which year it was when God stopped the sun and moon in their orbit for a day?"
---------
Nope. No clue. But I think the topic was covered in Sir Robert Anderson's book "The Coming Prince." But it has been a while since I read it and I could be mistaken there.

March 24, 2014 at 4:04 pm |
• ausphor

Theo
But don't you understand why some find you phony as you so carefully try and pick the fly sh!t out of the pepper? Christianity has never had much in common since Luther, scam artists here hustlers there and all proclaiming the bible as "truth". 41,000 different sects each trying to out "holy" each other. You and Vic with your young earth beliefs are probably right up there with the holy rollers and JW's as the most ridiculous.

March 24, 2014 at 4:04 pm |
• Theo Phileo

"But don't you understand why some find you phony as you so carefully try and pick the fly @$%& out of the pepper?" ----------------- What sets most people's teeth on edge is to see someone explaining the Bible. To them, if you have to explain it, then it's phoney. Well, math is straightforward, logical, systemmatic, and meaningful. There is also just ONE answer to a mathematical inquiry. Why this works well in a trigonometry class and not in theology is beyond me. "Christianity has never had much in common since Luther" ---------------- Luther sparked a reformation to bring the church BACK to the Bible, from which it had strayed so far with the hellish amalgamation between the government and the church known as catholicism... I'd say that is still going strong in much of Christendom. "scam artists here hustlers there and all proclaiming the bible as "truth". ------------ And if it was up to him, Joel Osteen would be their leader... "41,000 different sects each trying to out "holy" each other." ------------– Do not make the mistake of thinking that just because there are many counterfeits, there is no truth. No on counterfeit's a fake, and just because there are counterfeit$20 bills in circulation, you don't stop using money.

"You and Vic with your young earth beliefs are probably right up there with the holy rollers and JW's as the most ridiculous."
--------------
You are enti.tled to your opinion, of course.

March 24, 2014 at 4:15 pm |
• ausphor

Vic
I do not know why so many sects diss the RCC so much. Lets face the fact that if the Catholics did not get the scam up and running and keep it going for 1500 years the rest of your lot wouldn't exist. Why can't we all just get along, the Christian sects, I mean.

March 24, 2014 at 4:39 pm |
• In Santa We Trust

Do you have evidence of a god healing an amputee?

March 24, 2014 at 3:24 pm |
• Akira

I'm having Live4Him flashbacks.

March 24, 2014 at 3:32 pm |
• Theo Phileo

Not personally, no. But so what? Does not seeing a thing happen automatically mean that it could never happen, or has never happened?

March 24, 2014 at 4:05 pm |
• ausphor

Akira
Get yourself a stiff drink, like a certain Shakespeare character that name is not to be mentioned even in jest.

March 24, 2014 at 4:42 pm |
• In Santa We Trust

It matters because you said it existed – there is no verified evidence of an amputee being healed, so you were making it up.

March 24, 2014 at 4:45 pm |
• Robert Brown

Very good Theo.

March 24, 2014 at 3:27 pm |
13. truthfollower01

IGA,

"There is one place you are being dishonest, since there are many possibilities OTHER than goddidit to explain why."

What are these other possibilities you speak of? I am honestly asking this.

March 24, 2014 at 2:31 pm |
• observer

truthfollower01,

Zeus, the Great Pumpkin, a committee of zombies, etc. etc.

March 24, 2014 at 2:33 pm |
• truthfollower01

Observer, you may have missed my initial post.

"To paraphrase Christian philosopher William Lane Craig, the cause of the universe must be a transcendent cause beyond the universe. The cause must be itself uncaused because an infinite series of causes is impossible. The cause must transcend space and time, since it created space and time. It must be unimaginably powerful, since it created all matter and energy."

The question revolves around where the supposed discrepancies are in my statement and what alternatives you may propose.

March 24, 2014 at 2:43 pm |
• observer

truthfollower01,

You have quoted ONE Christian who believes that time and space were CREATED. Of course, he also thinks that God was not CREATED.

March 24, 2014 at 2:47 pm |
• truthfollower01

Where is the problem with this?

March 24, 2014 at 2:48 pm |
• observer

truthfollower01,

The obvious problem is the logic that the existence of time and space show they MUST have been created, but the existence of God doesn't require a creator.

March 24, 2014 at 2:53 pm |
• lunchbreaker

I agreed with that statment up until he used the word create. I'm a big fan of the word "cause."

March 24, 2014 at 2:56 pm |
• ausphor

truth
The problem with this is William Lane Craig, not exactly an unbiased source, you can do better, try.

March 24, 2014 at 3:19 pm |
• truthfollower01

Ausphor, biased or unbiased doesn't change the weight of the arguments. You need to interact with the arguments to show where the problem is.

March 24, 2014 at 4:41 pm |
• In Santa We Trust

Actually bostontola answered these elsewhere which I can't find. Let's start with "... an infinite series of causes is impossible." Where is the evidence for that? And how does that mean a god did it. If a god can just exist so can whatever was pre-Big Bang.

March 24, 2014 at 4:48 pm |
• sam stone

is truthfollower01 the repackaged topher/gopher?

March 25, 2014 at 6:23 am |
• joey3467

Until you prove exactly what happened the number of possibilities is basically infinite.

March 24, 2014 at 2:43 pm |
14. bostontola

Last night's Cosmos was excellent, and in stark contrast to Dr. Wickman's opinion piece. Cosmos episode 3 was more about the history of science than science itself, but it also illuminated an interesting subject: The Judeo-Christian religious structure is founded on fear. Use fear to control people.

The ignorance of the people of that time regarding how the natural world worked made creating and leveraging fear easy. The religious leaders also took advantage of people's selection bias, and showed that good things came from God if you played ball, and catastrophic things happened if you didn't. There's only 1 book in the history of literature that has genocide at biblical proportions, the OT bible. If you crossed Yahweh, look out.

Christianity then stepped up the fear with hell. Now death was the least of your worries, now you get an eternity of pain for rejecting Jesus. The fear of death was not enough. Christianity invented the ultimate source of fear, eternal pain. It's really quite ingenious if you are a dealer of fear.

March 24, 2014 at 2:19 pm |
• distrbnce

Can't wait! I don't have cable so I have to wait a day for it to arrive on Hulu...

March 24, 2014 at 2:23 pm |
• bostontola

It was a good one, I am a big science history fan, so it was very well done. I'm going to watch it again tonight.

March 24, 2014 at 2:29 pm |
• ausphor

dstrbnce
I also only get the major networks on over the air HDTV. Where can I go on the internet to view the show. BTW Carl Sagan's version really peeked my interest in the Cosmos and physics.

March 24, 2014 at 2:41 pm |
• ausphor

peaked?

March 24, 2014 at 2:44 pm |
• bostontola

piqued.

March 24, 2014 at 2:51 pm |
• otoh2

ausphor,

You are looking for the word "piqued".

It's a bit of a tricky one, though. Your use of it is:

3. to excite (interest, curiosity, etc.): Her curiosity was piqued by the gossip.

- It can also mean the following, however:

1. to affect with sharp irritation and resentment, especially by some wound to pride: She was greatly piqued when they refused her invitation.
2. to wound (the pride, vanity, etc.).
4. to arouse an emotion or provoke to action: to pique someone to answer a challenge.
6. to arouse pique in someone: an action that piqued when it was meant to soothe.
7. a feeling of irritation or resentment, as from a wound to pride or self-esteem: to be in a pique.

(More than you ever wanted to know, I'll bet! Sorry.)

March 24, 2014 at 2:59 pm |
• ausphor

Thanks.

March 24, 2014 at 3:10 pm |
• distrbnce

It's on fox's website for viewing I'm pretty sure. Yep, I rewatched the original in the lead up to this one. What a guy~!

March 26, 2014 at 2:34 pm |
• jknbt

where have you been going to church? Where I go I hear a bright gospel of happiness, wholeness, about a life of love and service to God and fellow man. My religion is a religion of hope and happiness, full of the love of God and good works. It provides clear moral direction and purpose in life...for eternity....This whole Jesus business is just wonderful, you ought to check it out...He is dealing with me in terms of life and his creative miracle faith every day....
Nope, no fear here, except that I might goof up and miss some of his blessings...
"Taste and See that the Lord is Good. Blessed is the man who trusts in HIm" Ps. 34:8

March 24, 2014 at 2:30 pm |
• nepawoods

Nobody going to hell according to your religion?

March 24, 2014 at 2:32 pm |
• jknbt

hell was created for the devil and his angels....the wicked who take sides with the devil and will not repent have a special place in hell reserved for them...
see Rev. 20:15. and NO APOLOGIES for this belief, either. Whoever goes to hell goes there by their own personal free choice. It is not God's will for any to perish. see 2 Pet. 3:9

March 24, 2014 at 2:38 pm |
• nepawoods

So people who reject Christianity because the believe it is false are OK. Fine, but your church is the exception then.

March 24, 2014 at 2:54 pm |
• jknbt

hello...see Heb. 10:26-31....go to biblegateway.com if you don't have a bible handy.

and no, my church doesn't teach it is ok to reject Christ. It is not my place to judge, but the Bible does speak to the matter.

March 25, 2014 at 12:36 pm |
• bostontola

jknbt,
If I don't accept Jesus as my savior, will I go to hell?

March 24, 2014 at 2:50 pm |
• jknbt

boston–at the very least you will miss out on the party–you really are missing out a lot you are not even aware of...

but to answer your question, see Heb. 10:26-31. If you don't have a bible handy, go to http://www.biblegateway.com/

If you end up in hell someday, don't blame God. You sent yourself there through your own stubborn, hard-headed, hard-hearted rejection of Christ.
a hypothetical analogy: If there was one sure medicine that would cure inoperable brain cancer, and if you had it, and if you refused to take the medicine the doctor prescribes for you (that he knows will work), then you have NO ONE BUT YOURSELF to blame for the awesome eventual consequences.

March 24, 2014 at 6:25 pm |
• jknbt

boston– see Heb. 10:26-31. If you don't have a bible handy, go to http://www.biblegateway.com/

If you end up in hell someday, don't blame God. You sent yourself there through your own stubborn, hard-headed, hard-hearted rejection of Christ.
a hypothetical analogy: If there was one sure medicine that would cure inoperable brain cancer, and if you had it, and if you refused to take the medicine the doctor prescribes for you (that he knows will work), then you have NO ONE BUT YOURSELF to blame for the awesome eventual consequences.

March 24, 2014 at 6:30 pm |
• G to the T

"If you end up in hell someday, don't blame God."

I wouldn't. I'd blame his followers. So far I've seen few "fruits" that didn't come with a razor inside. And I no longer believe the bible could be a divinely inspired piece (esp. since the most basic question would be – which version?).

If Yahweh exists, he already knows what I believe and why. Personally, I feel justified in my disbelief, it is my honest conclusion. Should I be dishonest with myself?

March 26, 2014 at 8:03 pm |
• truthfollower01

You seem to give the impression that God is worshipped ONLY because to do otherwise results in eternity in hell. Have you considered that God is to be worshipped because He is the greatest Being and is the only One worthy of praise and admiration.

March 24, 2014 at 2:39 pm |
• observer

Most of Christianity depends on bribes (heaven) and threats (hell). God doesn't care at all if you are a great person if you have never heard of him.

March 24, 2014 at 2:43 pm |
• colin31714

Indeed, and where it gets real silly is where you have God being both the carrot and the stick.

March 24, 2014 at 2:58 pm |
• In Santa We Trust

Do you have any evidence that a god exists and that a god created a whole universe for a small tribe occupying a few hundred square miles of the middle east?

March 24, 2014 at 2:43 pm |
• joey3467

If god exists as described in the bible he is nothing but a mass murdering psychopath, and not worthy of being worshiped by anyone.

March 24, 2014 at 2:52 pm |
• bostontola

truth,
There are many reasons in different priorities for different people. But fear was a key element historically and still is today. Just read through this blog and see how many times a Christian tells an atheist to conform before they die or it will be too late. Christians use this often.

March 24, 2014 at 2:54 pm |
15. jknbt

God is real to me as shown by a lifetime of answered prayers....

and yes, the big bang theory agrees with what Gen. 1 says...the first creation of God is light. This is what the astrophysicists says also, that the light turned into the first stars & galaxies....so the Genesis account is scientifically accurate. Contrast that account with other creation stories from ancient religions. None of them have the level of accuracy that genesis has. That is proof to me of the bible's inspiration.

go to the REASONS TO BELIEVE website for some high level resources teaching the creation event.

March 24, 2014 at 1:41 pm |
• Dyslexic doG

ahhhh, the workings of a cult addled mind ...

March 24, 2014 at 1:43 pm |
• jknbt

ahh..the response of a closed bigoted mind....

March 24, 2014 at 2:08 pm |
• SeaVik

"so the Genesis account is scientifically accurate."

Are you serious? You think that using the word "light" in Genesis gives you enough evidence to conclude that the account is scientifically accurate?!? That might be the dumbest thing I've seen written here and that is saying a LOT.

March 24, 2014 at 1:47 pm |
• jknbt

...."he created the heavens & the earth"....the blueprints for the universe came first
...."without form, void, darkness on the face of the deep"...for the first 300,000 years after the b.b., even light didn't exist
..."face of the waters"....energy was so dense that it was like water
..."light"....photons erupted from the energy field about 300,000 years after b.b.
..."darkness"...the microwave background radiation is lumpy to this day with pockets of energy & pockets of emptiness (dark)
..."earth...and seas"....creation of the earth with oceans
..."grass...herb"....appearance first of plant life on the earth
..."firmaments in heaven"....parting of the original cloud cover on earth so the sun moon & stars are visible
....life in the sea & birds, about 580 million years ago
....life on land, about 500 million years ago
...creation of humans....

Hey SeaVik, everything here in gen 1 is exactly in the order it should be. No other ancient religion produced a creation account that exactly lines up with what science is telling us. yes, this is EVIDENCE OF INSPIRATION.
that is why the Bible is true.
* and your worldview is SHOCKINGLY LIMITED is you are so wise in your conceits that you can't allow the merest possibility that I just might be right about what I am saying here....open your mind a little, bud, you might learn something!

March 24, 2014 at 2:04 pm |
• SeaVik

Dude, you believe Genesis is accurate. You're in no position to tell anyone to open their mind. Your position is a joke, even to most of your fellow Christians.

March 24, 2014 at 2:13 pm |
• ausphor

jknbt
And here I thought that the first life on earth developed at deep sea vents with the correct combination of chemicals and energy. How are you going to square the creation story when life, no matter how primitive, is discovered on another planet, moon or asteroid? In detail, please.

March 24, 2014 at 2:15 pm |
• Doc Vestibule

If the sun, moon and stars were created on the 4th day, as it says in Genesis, how was there light?
How did plant life exist on day 3, before the Sun was made?

March 24, 2014 at 2:17 pm |
• nepawoods

First you say "the first creation of God is light. This is what the astrophysicists says also", now you say "for the first 300,000 years after the b.b., even light didn't exist" ... and both you say to claim consistency with the Bible.

March 24, 2014 at 2:17 pm |
• jknbt

hello ausfor– you are speculating...you have no evidence of life anywhere but here on earth...

and by the way, it won't hurt my faith at all if eventually it is found that life is widespread in the universe. whenever God does something he does it big and in a showy way. I wouldn't be surprised at all if life is widespread in the universe. When he made the garden of eden, it covered the whole middle east. my idea of a garden is the 30 x 60 plot of my backyard. His idea of a garden covers half a continent.

March 24, 2014 at 2:21 pm |
• MidwestKen

@jknbt,
You are incorrect.
The earth, not "blue prints", was not created at the same time as the universe, but 9+ billion years later.
Energy is not like water.
Birds did not appear before land animals, especialy since their ancestors were land animals, i.e. dinos.

Just to name a few..

March 24, 2014 at 2:22 pm |
• distrbnce

It's crazy when even The Pope and Pat Robertson would agree that creationism is nonsense, so many still hold on to the ignorant literal interpretations.

People didn't take genesis literally until this century, in this ridiculous country.

March 24, 2014 at 2:33 pm |
• ausphor

jknbt
Well I see you are a good apologist, I am happy for you. Your also an evolutionist that is also a good sign since god has been evolving along with the increase of knowledge that mankind has acquired. Pity that god/jesus still seems like it/he is still stuck in the first century, can't figure out modern technology to communicate with his desperately seeking believers.

March 24, 2014 at 2:34 pm |
• Doc Vestibule

Genesis is accurate?
Which came first – plants or the sun?

Do you think that females are actually rib-clones?
That snakes, donkeys and flaming foliage can talk?
That just a few thousand years ago, human beings lived 1,000 years?

March 24, 2014 at 1:49 pm |
• jknbt

1) the sun was there all along, the viewer could not see it through the cloud cover...there was enough light for photosynthesis
2) modern stem cell research proves that life can be cloned from just a few cells, so why not a whole rib?
3) no, donkeys, snakes, & plants don't verbalize...you need a larynx to do that...they do communicate spiritually (telepathically)
4) science has discovered telomeres at the end of each dna strand. If correctly repaired when the cell splits, the next cell is identical. if not, the cell ages. after a few bad copies, it stops reproducing. something is keeping the telomeres intact in giant tortises that live 300 years and dawn redwoods that live 2500 years. How are your telomeres, by the way?

March 24, 2014 at 2:15 pm |
• SeaVik

"no, donkeys, snakes, & plants don't verbalize...you need a larynx to do that...they do communicate spiritually (telepathically)"

This is good stuff, thanks for the laughs! Keep 'em coming.

March 24, 2014 at 2:19 pm |
• Doc Vestibule

Are all animals telepathic, or just the Bible ones?
So the sun was already there (even though Genesis says otherwise) and even though it's rays could not be detected, somehow it could still be used for photosynthesis?

March 24, 2014 at 2:20 pm |
• Doc Vestibule

I know what telomeres are and the role telomerase plays in their longevity.
However, excess tolomerase = cancer.
Were Adam, Noah and their kin riddled with tumours?

March 24, 2014 at 2:29 pm |
• neverbeenhappieratheist

"Dear God, please make the sky blue today..."

"Well would ya look at that, I prayed for a blue sky and low and behold, there it is! Will the powers of God never cease!"

"Dear God, I pray to thee, please make our water wet..."

"Well would ya look at that..."

"Well would ya look at that...that theres Gods will...I know cause it happened..."

March 24, 2014 at 1:53 pm |
• guidedans

God Bless!

Answered prayers will always just be coincidences to those who don't believe. We know differently though.

March 24, 2014 at 1:55 pm |
• observer

guidedans,

Then you also know about how MANY MANY prayers are not answerered.

March 24, 2014 at 1:57 pm |
• Doc Vestibule

I have a magic talisman that protects me from crocodile attack.
Some scoff at my belief, but since I've yet to be consumed by any swamp creatures, I know better.

March 24, 2014 at 1:58 pm |
• Doc Vestibule

o The John Templeton Foundation funded a 10 year, \$2.4 million dollar study involving 1,800 cardiac patients to measure the effectiveness of intecessory prayer.
The patients were broken into three groups. Two were prayed for; the third was not. Half the patients who received the prayers were told that they were being prayed for; half were told that they might or might not receive prayers.
Analyzing complications in the 30 days after the operations, the researchers found no differences between those patients who were prayed for and those who were not.
Over the longer term, patients who knew they were being prayed for had a higher rate of post-operative complications like abnormal heart rhythms, perhaps because of the expectations the prayers created, the researchers suggested.
A 1997 study at the University of New Mexico, involving 40 alcoholics in rehabilitation, found that the men and women who knew they were being prayed for actually fared worse.

March 24, 2014 at 2:00 pm |
• guidedans

Deuteronomy 6:16 Do not put the Lord your God to the test ...

Do you really think God doesn't know when he's being flimflammed?

March 24, 2014 at 2:26 pm |
• observer

guidedans

"Deuteronomy 6:16 Do not put the Lord your God to the test ..."

Why is God afraid to be tested for validity? Seems like if he was perfect, he'd welcome people who would fail in trying to prove he was wrong.

March 24, 2014 at 2:31 pm |
• colin31714

guidedans – why does God never cure amputees, but will "cure" cancer patients and others whose condition is internal and uncertain at the drop of a prayer?

March 24, 2014 at 2:42 pm |
• nepawoods

No, light didn't come first. The universe was too dense early on for light to exist.

March 24, 2014 at 1:56 pm |
• nepawoods

Cite one astrophysicist, or any reputable source, saying that "light turned into the first stars & galaxies".

March 24, 2014 at 2:04 pm |
• colin31714

jknbt, you said, "God is real to me as shown by a lifetime of answered prayers...."

So, a being powerful enough to create the entire Universe and its billions of galaxies is somehow monitoring your mind, knowing when you pray and intervening to alter what would otherwise be the course of events in order to answer them, hey?

Doesn't seem a little far fetched?

What about all those millions of Hindus who believe that Lord Brahma answers their prayers? Are they wrong? Likewise with Allah and millions of Muslims?

What's more likely, Christians have a bee line to the creator of the Universe or that many people in many different religions all believe their prayers are answered because they see results through that prism and very much want to believe it?

March 24, 2014 at 2:40 pm |
16. Lucifer's Evil Twin

Why isn't the scientific community calling this women out for this creationist idiocy? Are they that worried about getting pulled into the useless miasma that is religion in this country.

March 24, 2014 at 1:37 pm |
17. Doc Vestibule

What kind of God would take Oderus Urungus from us at the tender age of 50?
R.I.P. Scu,mdog.

March 24, 2014 at 1:36 pm |
• lunchbreaker

Meat Sandwich?

March 24, 2014 at 2:00 pm |
18. Akira

Test

March 24, 2014 at 1:34 pm |
19. SeaVik

Question. Given that we know for a fact that much, if not all, of the bible is a work of fiction, why would anyone believe in the Christian god? Believing in any version of god seems incredibly illogical given the complete lack of evidence. But even if you do make the leap in logic and believe in a god, why would you believe in a version that is described in a book that we know to be a work of fiction? Why would you let this book of fiction shape your life in any way? It is just so weird to me that people don't see the glaring idiocy of it.

March 24, 2014 at 1:19 pm |
• distrbnce

The maternal bond is a strong one. Mom wouldn't lie to me. This is real.

March 24, 2014 at 1:31 pm |
• Dyslexic doG

cognitive dissonance.

March 24, 2014 at 1:44 pm |
20. distrbnce

Met many nice atheists on here. Are any of you on Quora? Lez be frins http://qr.ae/1EVHs

(I realize putting my real info out there could lead to death threats from christians, c'est la vie)

March 24, 2014 at 1:19 pm |
• Akira

If they're sending you those, they're violating the tenets of their faith.

Now, that would be hypocritical.

March 24, 2014 at 1:35 pm |
• Akira

If two more comments suddenly show up, it's because they were put under moderation.

March 24, 2014 at 1:37 pm |
• distrbnce

Please... they're not supposed to work on the sabbath either.

I live in the American South, Akira. It's a scary place to have an open mind.

March 24, 2014 at 1:38 pm |
• Akira

True, that. My comment was more tongue-in-cheek than anything.

The South can be a wonderful place. But I agree with you, bless your heart. (Another tongue-in-cheek comment...)

March 24, 2014 at 1:47 pm |
• ausphor

Any time I drive down south on a golf trip I take my plastic jesus out of the glove compartment and put it on the dashboard just in case I get stopped. BTW great song plastic jesus.

March 24, 2014 at 1:48 pm |
• distrbnce

Amazing what a little idol will do.

March 24, 2014 at 1:50 pm |
• Doc Vestibule

Other great Jesus songs:
American Jesus
Chocolate Jesus
Jesus Built My Hotrod
Jesus Christ Pose

March 24, 2014 at 1:51 pm |
• lunchbreaker

You have a favorite college football team?

March 24, 2014 at 2:02 pm |
• ausphor

The wife uses the line "Thank you officer for protecting us while we are still here on earth." Works very well for her that and her ample bosom.

March 24, 2014 at 2:08 pm |
• Woody

Doc, how could you leave out the classic "Drop kick me Jesus through the goalposts of life"?

March 24, 2014 at 2:13 pm |
• Akira

March 24, 2014 at 2:15 pm |
• ausphor

Akira
Sacrilige, I only ever had but one bobble head and that was Joe Namath, for obvious reasons.

March 24, 2014 at 2:25 pm |
• Akira

Phew, ausphor. You nearly gave me the vapors.

March 24, 2014 at 4:59 pm |
• fellfromgrace1965

Let's not forget "Big Butter Jesus".

March 24, 2014 at 10:17 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
« Previous entry