 |
|
|
|
|
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. |
  About this blog
The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.  |
|
|
|
As with any myth, new revelations are moulded into the archaic system, in this case the Bible/God the Creator. Mankind has been doing this for decades/centuries and obviously is carrying on in like fashion. If a belief in the Creation makes you more comfortable , fine, just do not expect others to "believe" in a fairy tail.
When your in hell and you feel pain and see flames, remember it is only imaginary.
That's the thing about imaginary places – you don't actually go there because they don't exist.
So you don't have to worry about "imaginary" flames in hell FOREVER.
Just because a story is scary does not make it true.
Well what about FOREVER in all caps!?
lunchbreaker wrote: 'Just because a story is scary does not make it true."
Yeah, the scary part is that it is real.
Wilbur, I'm not sure what your ultimate goal is by using the fire and brimestone approach, but you can't strike fear into some one who does not believe what you say. Supposing your approach is to convince someone your God is real and can save their soul. Unless you have convinced them your God is real your threats of hell are wasted cyberspace.
lunchbreaker, you're like 30 seconds from him telling you it's real again. Hope you can withstand this barrage of love and understanding.
Aren't protestants the only ones that still believe in hell? How silly.
Everyone that died already believes in hell. Reason: direct observation.
Let me guess, God told you this?
Don't let it slip your mind that judgement is a deadly sin, dear wilbur.
Don't let it slip your mind that God has instructed me to tell you HE WILL JUDGE you. I will not judge you. GOD WILL JUDGE you. Worry about the PROOF God has against you. You will not escape judgement.
It was never in my mind that god instructed you to do stuff, but that makes total sense now! Thank God you can't get near me.
I get so scared and think I should believe in your one particular God whenever I get to one of the sections where you held Shift down for a couple of words.
You are so persuasive and good, Wilbur.
Won't you feel like a fool when you are face to face with Allah, and have to explain to him why you broke the first commandment and worshiped Jesus as a god.
This is another example of why I find Christianity to be disgusting, so many Christians seem to take pleasure in the idea that those who disagree with them will be tortured for all of eternity.
It's a little sick. This guy thinks he's being completely righteous too.
I feel like there are a few bible stories that warn about that sort of thing.
I must have missed it. Who is taking pleasure in the idea that those who disagree with them will be tortured for all of eternity?
You, Wilbur, clearly, when you made this snide and threatening comment: When your in hell and you feel pain and see flames, remember it is only imaginary.
Why are you playing dumb now? Do you think you'll trick God?
You wilbur. Your comment is a perfect example of someone who appears to take joy in the idea that someone else will be tortured for all of eternity.
distrbnce, I certainly do not avoid hell because I am righteous in my own strength. My righteousness comes directly from Jesus Christ who you think is imaginary. I am your warning, not your cheerleader. You could possibly die in one hour and soon find yourself guilty. I would certainly not feel happy about that. That is why I take your abusive words and keep telling you. Hell is real.
Wilbur, I do not simply believe everything I read.
It's a good practice. I highly recommend it.
You just love fantasizing about the torture of those who don't agree with you. Nice Christian values there.
fantasizing? I am telling you what is in the Bible. I am warning you so you can avoid it. I was responding to someone saying it is imaginary. This belittling of Christianity ends when you die. Then it is TOO LATE. I am telling you before it is TOO LATE. Would it be nicer if I kept your JUDGMENT a secret and then you died and found out that it was TOO LATE?????? That does not sound nice to me. I am telling you how to avoid it. First, stop calling it imaginary. Second, start trying to find God. Third, accept Jesus Christ and repent of your sins. OR burn in hell forever. It is amazing you have to even think about it.
Wipe the froth off your mouth and zip up your pants. You sound deranged.
@wilburw7
You are going to be soooo sorry you broke the first commandment by worshiping Jesus as a god. Allah will make you burn forever.
It is safe to assume that hell is no more real than Hades is until proven otherwise.
ramblingsofnihility, But you are the one that is going to be with Allah forever. Allah is Satan.
NO according to the story Allah is the same god you worship. You do realize that Muslims trace their religion back to Abraham just like Christians and Jews do?
joey3467 wrote: "It is safe to assume that hell is no more real than Hades is until proven otherwise."
I see a problem there. Your sin is easy to prove and you not knowing about hell does not change your judgment. So your first proof could be by direct observation FOREVER.
I sort of have the feeling Wilbur has never read the Bible.
"Allah is Satan."
Please provide credible, convincing, verifiable evidence of this.
whoa there buddy...you're in a Belief Blog...there's no room for credible, convincing, verifiable evidence around here.
joey3467 wrote:" NO according to the story Allah is the same god you worship. You do realize that Muslims trace their religion back to Abraham just like Christians and Jews do?"
No. I do not causally make that comment. The Qur'an has most of the Book of Revelation in it. The main difference is that the Islamic Messiah (Mahdi) is in the place of the anti-Christ. The good guys and the bad guys are switched around.
Oh boy! Good guys and bad guys!
*fun*
Yes same god, they just wrote a different story about it.
Doris, Are you a Satanist?
@wilburw7
You said, "Doris, Are you a Satanist?"
You do realize that Satan and your imaginary friend are both part of your fairy tale, right? How likely do you think it is to believe one is real while believing the other is fictional?
You obviously don't realize that some Satanists say God is imaginary.
@wilburw7
You said, "You obviously don't realize that some Satanists say God is imaginary."
I guess you're right. Once people abandon reality there really is no accounting for what nonsense they latch on to. Once rational thought is tossed by the wayside, consistency in their reasoning is probably a little too much to expect. A good example is how some people will believe Yahweh is real while denying that the Tooth Fairy is, even though the case for both is virtually identical.
But enough about others, do you really think that Doris has gone off the deep end?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62Qfbrc1jdo
wilburw7
You keep maintaining that you are not stupid but continue to post ridiculous comments.
Genius, when there is a question mark on the end of a sentence, it is a question not a statement.
Well the answer is no, dear.
LOL – I go to get coffee and come back and the weird just get weirder..lol
If I had to worship a supernatural being from the bible, it would be satan.
At least this being cared about humanity. He gave us knowledge.
Yahweh, on the other hand, systematically killed many of us.
Does the Big Bang breakthrough offer proof of God?
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLO.....only an IDIOT would even write something so stupid.....if this is proof of any god then one must ask what does the word GOD mean....apparently it means anything one wants it to mean.....and nothing at the same time.
Uh, you aren't even making a new argument. You're still just saying, "Oh yeah, well who started the BIG BANG?!"
Sorry, but that's not a convincing argument.
Watch this video. These are people that actually understand the universe: http://youtu.be/ZlfIVEy_YOA
Reading your adorable musings on how the universe works is hilarious. Keep it up, religion, you're running out of gaps!
If there is one constant in the universe, it is that the religious will find any way possible to point to a god.
The premise in this piece, of course, is nonsense.
Attention:
pseudo scientist, intellectuals, atheist and conspiracy theorist and other assorted crack-pots, if you are searching for God good luck.
That you lump scientists in with "other assorted crackpots" goes a long way to revealing your bias.
Who needs facts when you have faith, right?
You'll note what it was preface with.
That you lump intellectuals in with "other assorted crackpots" goes a long way to revealing your bias.
Who needs facts when you have faith, right?
@Joeseph Eclaire
You said, "pseudo scientist, intellectuals, atheist and conspiracy theorist and other assorted crack-pots, if you are searching for God good luck."
Why would intellectuals and atheists search for fictional characters?
When you figure that out let the rest of us in on it. Because as it stands today they seem more concern about it then even Christians do.
Strange I'd say. Must be their weak belief system perhaps.
Do you have any objective evidence of a god? Or can you only attempt criticism of those who do not share your delusion?
@Joeseph Eclaire
You said, "When you figure that out let the rest of us in on it. Because as it stands today they seem more concern about it then even Christians do."
Questioning believers and asking them to provide support for their claims is hardly to search for those fictional characters. It is often an attempt to get the believer to think about and evaluate their beliefs. Atheists don't really expect to get a rational answer (it would be a first, should that happen).
Don't take this the wrong way. If you believe you have a rational argument to make in support of gods, please do share. If it stands up, you will convince and convert.
You said, "Strange I'd say. Must be their weak belief system perhaps."
You must be a believer. You are clearly clueless about atheism. Atheism isn't a belief system. It's absence of belief.
This article's assertions fell apart with "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."
Claiming that there "had to be" an agent, which is a unsupported assumption, the author then automatically leaps to the conclusion that "God" (by which the author surely means the Judeo-Christian deity) had to be involved. One could just as easily say "aliens from outside the universe" did it.
Sorry, but "I don't know, so it had to be God" is not a valid claim.
You can't cite something as proof of your argument if you have to preface it with "That sounds a lot like...". The cause-and-effect argument only makes sense to us since we live in a linear time domain, and we have no reason to assume there was linear time before the Big Bang. You also seem too eager to assume the 'agent that caused the Big Bang' was your favorite deity and not some other natural event.
The author of this article has so eloquently drawn the obvious conclusions as to questions around origins which the Bible has so clearly laid out.
The latest evidence in support of the BB theory is a find that strengthens theories on Big Bang.
This latest evidence for "inflation" supports the expansion of space in the early universe at a rate much faster than the speed of light.
The inflationary epoch lasted from 10^-36 seconds after the Big Bang to sometime between 10^-33 and 10^-32 seconds.
Although, most of these discoveries are still parts of the big puzzle, it comes as no surprise that any discovery around the origins will ultimately align itself with what is already written in the Bible.
One of the best posts on belief blog as it relates to scientific discoveries and its theological relevance.
Kudos on a well written article!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0DT6uljSbg&feature=player_detailpage
Silly. Those that in effect claim absolutes regarding the unknown trap themselves in the details of the unknown, often over terminology. The technique used in this video, of course, tries to appear as a passive claim, but really it essentially is an absolute claim. The key term being misused for convenience is "supernatural". Also, I have to assume the person that made this video subscribes to the Abrahamic God. If they were to actually say so where ever they use the term, then the leap from their claim of necessary creator to their particular god would make that leap, ergo they conveniently leave that part out.
would make that leap obvious
Nobody knows where the first matter came from, and the people who wrote the bible were no different.
If my understanding of the theory of inflation is correct, then yes, we do know where the matter in our universe came from. It condensed out of the very hot, early universe. What is unknown is the origin of the infitessimly tiny kernel that inflated to become our universe. That kernel contained no matter.
That video is accurate in the funniest way.
The way to make an atheist's head explode is to be loudly stupid at them.
The person that made that video has no understanding of logic.
"The author of this article has so eloquently drawn the obvious conclusions as to questions around origins which the Bible has so clearly laid out."
What about it makes is so obvious?
What in the Bible so clearly lays out the origin of the universe? Is there any physics in it? Or just that God said let it be, so it came to be?
Jesus and Satan were having an on-going argument about who was better on the computer. They had been going at it for days, and frankly God was tired of hearing all the bickering.
Finally fed up, God said, 'THAT'S IT! I have had enough. I am going to set up a test that will run for two hours, and from those results, I will judge who does the better job.'
So Satan and Jesus sat down at the keyboards and typed away.
They moused.
They faxed.
They e-mailed.
They e-mailed with attachments.
They downloaded.
They did spreadsheets!
They wrote reports.
They created labels and cards.
They created charts and graphs.
They did some genealogy reports .
They did every job known to man.
Jesus worked with heavenly efficiency and Satan was faster than hell.
Then, ten minutes before their time was up, lightning suddenly flashed across the sky, thunder rolled, rain poured, and, of course, the power went off..
Satan stared at his blank screen and screamed every curse word known in the underworld.
Jesus just sighed..
Finally the electricity came back on, and each of them restarted their computers. Satan started searching frantically, screaming:
'It's gone! It's all GONE! 'I lost everything when the power went out!'
Meanwhile, Jesus quietly started printing out all of his files from the past two hours of work.
Satan observed this and became irate.
'Wait!' he screamed. 'That's not fair! He cheated! How come he has all his work and I don't have any?'
God just shrugged and said,
JESUS SAVES....
Leaving aside lame arguments as to whether it provides some type of support for the Abrahamic religions, the author seems to have missed the entire point of the new discovery. The Big Bang has been settled science for over 50 years, ever since the discovery of the cosmic microwave background radiation. What was announced last week was experimental support for inflation, which was first proposed about 30 years ago as a way around some difficulties arising from the original Big Bang model. Supersymmetry is another idea meant to solve some similar problems, but so far, is lacking in experimental verification. If none is found, it will probably been abandoned at some point. That's how science is supposed to work.
There is a difference between proven science and theories. Albert Einstein theorized about Gravitational Waves back in 1916 but they were never proven. This is the first time in history they detect what they believe are the theorized Gravitational Waves that are proof of faster than the speed of light expansion of the universe. And still yet, this discovery will go through great scrutiny before it is confirmed.
Theoretical Physics is NOT proven science.
A theory is what one or more hypotheses become once they have been verified and accepted to be true. A theory is an explanation of a set of related observations or events based upon proven hypotheses and verified multiple times by detached groups of researchers. Unfortunately, even some scientists often use the term "theory" in a more colloquial sense, when they really mean to say "hypothesis."
In general, both a scientific theory and a scientific law are accepted to be true by the scientific community as a whole. Both are used to make predictions of events. Both are used to advance technology.
Of course "spooky physics" is theoretical, and often less than theoretical....
Is this suppose to be some kind of an argument to what rongoodman said? rongoodman provided what was theorized, and then what was shown to verify what was theorized. He then gave an example of something theorized, and stated we would have to wait to see if it can be verified.
What exactly was the purpose of your post?
I have a feeling Vic didn't fully comprehend what was asserted.
And so it comes back to one of the fundamental differences between believers and non-believers.
The believer says that the entire Universe exists as it does simply to have us in it because we are unique and the predilect object of Creation. In other words, the universal environment is adapted to us.
The non-believer contends that we are but one of countless enti/ties that have adapted to the environments in which we developed.
I cannot believe that The Creator is anthropocentric – that the rest of the universe is simply window dressing because God really concentrated when making The Earth as opposed to, say – the Andromeda galaxy.
"I cannot believe that The Creator is anthropocentric"
--------
That's because God isn't. The entire universe was created by God and for God to give Him glory. More than anything in this universe, God loves the Son. The fact that we are saved in the process of the Father glorifying the Son and the Son returning that glory to the Father is almost incidental.
Theo, a little advice: When you make a post, try to remember that many of us don't believe your god fantasies. Even those who do share your belief in a god don't necessarily agree with your version. If you leave your wild beliefs out of your argument, you'll have a much better chance of making a point that is logical to anyone other than you.
"If you leave your wild beliefs out of your argument, you'll have a much better chance of making a point that is logical to anyone other than you"
--------
So why didn't you give that advice to Doc when he insinuated that God is anthropocentric?
HIs position is logical and yours is far-fetched. He isn't trying to convince anyone that fairies exist, you are.
I am persuaded that a refusal to believe in God isn't logical, or rational for that matter. In order for your statement to make sense, you would first have to prove to me how infinite causal chains CAN exist. Because that's what you're left with if there is no first cause that is itself uncaused.
"I am persuaded that a refusal to believe in God isn't logical, or rational for that matter. In order for your statement to make sense, you would first have to prove to me how infinite causal chains CAN exist. Because that's what you're left with if there is no first cause that is itself uncaused."
But an enti-ty with no first cause, and the knowledge and ability to create a universe from nothing, IS logical to you. Interesting.
I don't know the answer and neither do you. The difference is, you have provided a hypothesis for which you have no evidence whatsoever. You're using theoretical (and faulty) logic to "prove" that there must be a god to solve for your missing knowledge. The problem is that even your unsupported hypothesis is logically impossible. The fact is no one has conceived of a logical explanation yet. You can accept that reality or deny it, but it doesn't change that fact.
"The entire universe was created by God and for God to give Him glory."
All this to glority himself, eh corn pone?
More evidence that your god is a vindictive, petty pr1ck and you are a snivelling sycophant
Does the potter not have the right to make from the same lump of clay some vessels for noble use and some for base use?
We are not talking about a potter here, corn pone
The whole purpose in creation and of our salvation is to accrue to the glory of God: In the counsels of eternity past, before creation, the Father proclaimed His love for the Son, and desired to express that love by giving Him a gift; that gift was in the form of a redeemed humanity – love often shows itself in gifts, and divine love gives divinely, and without limits. The Father, in an expression of His love for His Son, determined that He would create a world, and that He would allow that world to fall into sin, and that He would recover from it a redeemed humanity that He would then give to His Son as a bride to Him so that this redeemed humanity could forever and ever, for all eternity glorify His Son. Paul tells us in 1 Corinthians 15:24 that when the end comes, and all who will be redeemed by God have been redeemed, The Son will then take that redeemed humanity and Himself and turn over that gift back to God in a reciprocal act of love. (John 17)
"The whole purpose in creation and of our salvation is to accrue to the glory of God."
No, it's not. When you start with your wild opinion, you immediately undermine any possible valid point you might have. See what I mean?
And how does one go about verifying anything you have stated to be true?
The same way that you research anything – systemmatically and logically.
"The same way that you research anything – systemmatically and logically."
Please provide the systematical methods and logic that was used to verify what you have presented to be true.
@Theo
The moment you invoke a supernatural explanation for natural phenomena, systematic logic is no longer applicable but it takes faith to believe in the supernatural.
Once a proposition has been accepted on faith, said proposition is no longer amenable to examination by reason.
"Once a proposition has been accepted on faith, said proposition is no longer amenable to examination by reason."
--------–
I disagree. Some truths, although non-observable, can be deduced logically, and taken on faith that it exists, even though it may never be observed with our eyes. In one example, forensics. One can logically deduce who committed a crime by observing related data, even though the actual crime was never observed. Logic and reason produce factual results based on observations of the given data.
@Theo
You seem to be saying that forensics relies on faith.
That would be news to forensic pathologists everywhere. You should let them know that their application of the scientific method to the interpretation of evidence is no more or less credible than solving crimes with psychic powers.
"Logic and reason produce factual results based on observations of the given data."
Please provide the given data, and the logic and reason used, that verifies your conclusions.
Logically? Gosh, corn pone, you are about as far from logic as just about anyone here, with the exception of salero
So before God had created the universe, let alone humanity and thus His own fleshly incarnation in the form of Jesus, He wanted to show His love for Himself by giving Himself a gift.
For His own edification, He created humanity with inherent flaws so that He could take human form and sacrifice Himself to Himself in order to redeem the creation He made to be imperfect in the first place.
Makes perfect sense.
It does if you see God as being the only being worthy of glory.
Gosh, Theo, you start with the supposition that god is good and have the temerity to say you are being logical?
I think that kudzu has choked off some cognitive function
glo·ry/ˈglɔri, ˈgloʊri/ Show Spelled [glawr-ee, glohr-ee] Show IPA
noun, plural glo·ries.
1. very great praise, honor, or distinction bestowed by common consent; renown: to win glory on the field of battle.
2. something that is a source of honor, fame, or admiration; a distinguished ornament or an object of pride: a sonnet that is one of the glories of English poetry.
3. adoring praise or worshipful thanksgiving: Give glory to God.
4. resplendent beauty or magnificence: the glory of autumn.
5. a state of great splendor, magnificence, or prosperity.
Most of the above definitions recquire a conscience being to give the glory to God. So Theo, you have stated that the purpose of the universe is to give glory to God, but humans are the only thing in the universe capable of giving it. How is that not anthropocentric?
Theo, the core premise of your crazy religion, this Jesus-salvation rubbish that you keep harping about is ludicrous and stupid from the get-go. How is it that your omnipotent being couldn't do his saving bit without the whole silly Jesus hoopla? And how was Jesus' death a "sacrifice", when an omnipotent being could just pop up a replacement son any time with less than a snap of his fingers?
Furthermore, it is also ludicrous that an omnipotent being needs "glory" and worship like you are claiming. Pretty pathetic "god" that you've made for yourself there, stupid.
Ask the questions. Break the chains. Join the movement.
Be free of Christianity and other superstitions.
http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/
Well Doc, God created all those alien species out there too! Oh wait? Were those mentioned in the Bible?
There is no god – period end of story-time – get on with your life
How did you determine God does not exist?
Through science, we know that the god described in the bible doesn't exist. We can't prove there isn't another version of god, but it is so far-fetched that it requires a leap of faith to give it any credence.
chrave1956 wrote: "There is no god – period end of story-time"
That does not say anything about the Bible.
Arthur Schawlow
(Nobel Prize winner in Physics.Development of the laser and laser spectroscopy) wrote:
"We are fortunate to have the Bible, and especially the New Testament, which tells so much about God in widely accessible, human terms."
Arthur Schawlow
(Nobel Prize winner in Physics.Development of the laser and laser spectroscopy) wrote:
"We are fortunate to have the Bible, and especially the New Testament, which tells so much about God in widely accessible, human terms."
I don't know why you like to provide so many quotes. I don't care who these people are. If they cannot provide credible, convincing, verifiable evidence for their statements, they are completely meaningless.
Wilbur, nice try at an appeal to authority. As Christians get more desperate to defend their crazy fiction, they desperately seek out the few remaining scientists who support that fiction. However, by and large, the scientific community does not back your Christian rubbish.
I determined the Christian god doesn't exist by reading the bible and comparing it to reality. When they didn't mesh I realized the Bible has to be wrong.
That pretty much sums it up.
" Does the Big Bang breakthrough offer proof of God?"
How many times does it have to be said that there is no PROOF of God. Apart from said being breaking into space/time/history and revealing himself, PROOF will always remain elusive.
The nontheists face a similar dilemma.
I disagree. God can present Himself to humans and that is direct observational proof. There can be no proof that God does not exist because you can't look everywhere and verify God does not exist. But there can be proof of God just like there can be proof of anything.
"But there can be proof of God just like there can be proof of anything."
There can be proof of magical unicorns and intergalactic fire breathing dragons too, but we just haven't found that proof yet. So the question is, why should anyone believe anything without some kind of credible, convincing, verifiable evidence?
@wilburw7
You said, "God can present Himself to humans and that is direct observational proof."
Now if it did that in a verifiable way, or alternatively to everyone instead of a few select people, we wouldn't have this discussion. As long as your "proof" requires taking your word for it, I'll pass. To an outsider, personal experience is indistinguishable from schizophrenia.
You said, "There can be no proof that God does not exist because you can't look everywhere and verify God does not exist."
True, but that is a poor standard to accept the proposition under. By that same standard you should, with the same veracity, believe in the Tooth Fairy. Not doing so would be hypocritical.
You said, "But there can be proof of God just like there can be proof of anything."
Until such proof is rendered, it is prudent to remain skeptical.
Wilbur said "There can be no proof that God does not exist because you can't look everywhere and verify God does not exist."
This is true. Only if your lucky. Same thing goes for Satan. My wife's groin doctor knows a guy that saw Satan walking around over in Elizabeth in broad daylight. True. This guy says Satan went around a corner and turned himself into a dumpster in the blink of an eye. You don't want to mess with God or Satan either one.
I will accept your personal experiences as evidence that god exists as soon as you are willing to accept my personal experiences as evidence that god doesn't exist.
Wilbur7
A lot of this is semantics. I differentiate between the terms proof and evidence.
You are stating something very close to what I'd say as a nontheist. There is no proof (evidence). Yet you come to a completely different conclusion than I do. I do not believe you would do so on any other subject.
You are also stating something very different to what most Christians would say: God revealed himself many times throughout the bible and does so still today, through answered prayers, miracles, moral support..
Sun
You are equating the terms " proof" and " evidence", which is the cause of your confusion in understanding my statement.
I am okay with that distinction between evidence and proof. But the evidence, for you, consti.tutes enough of a proof for you to believe. If you are defining proof as 100% certainty, then nothing outside of mathematics can be proven.
" ... then nothing outside of mathematics can be proven." This simply is not so. Any individual on the planet could at this very moment come into my study, observe and verify that I am typing on the computer, and then, with 100% absolute proof make the truth statement, " devin is typing on the computer." There are an infinite number of events that can be determined with absolute certainty.
No, you are not really there typing on the computer. You are just a brain in a vat, in a Matrix style world.
http://www.iep.utm.edu/brainvat/
You see how we could open a can of worms here. My quibble is that 100% certainty is not a practical standard for proof.
Sun
Forgot to address your second paragraph. " Miracles, prayer, moral support" are all means of subjective "evidence." While as a Christian I may fully embrace these concepts, I recognize that they are not objective, tangible events that can be subjected to and verified by the scientific method, what I would define as 100% proof.
You must understand that what I am saying in no wise diminishes my certainty of faith. I'm simply using precise definitions, those which most of the Christians I know would agree too.
Does the Quantum Computing breakthrough offer proof of God?
I'm not sure, but hal 9001 sure is all jiggy over the whole thing..
Samantha digs it too.
hrough the quantum fluctuations of chronometric tachyon fields, one can surmise that at its core, the Universe is composed of Heinsenberg pulse waves interacting on the quantum level.
Of course, these gravimetric oscillations can only be observed indirectly, but by noting their influence on the sub-atomic quantum flanging, the ferfanational matrices of gestalt knoncleotides proves, beyond a doubt, that the entire fabric of reality as we perceive it is nothing more than the passing whimsy of quantum midichlorians.
Quantum quantum quantum.
Quantum.
Buy my new book.
– Deepak Chopra
Doc
Cute, although I only understood about a quarter of the words. Still trying to figure out how cloud computing works.
Humans have been trying to explain our universe as far back as we can tell. The first settlements were around religious temples, before we had agriculture. Almost every society and tribe had their God and religion. There have been thousands of guesses. That's what these religions were/are, guesses at what started us. Most are quite imaginative.
Then came science in a disciplined way in just the last 500 years. Instead of thousands of explanations, there is one. Science books in India, Russia, France, Bolivia, etc. are the same. That should be a clue. Thousands of fanciful guesses around powerful Gods based on subjective imagination, or one unified explanation based on verified tests/objective evidence.
Theists like the author are whistling past the graveyard. I strong suspect entirely different results could have been found, and the author would have said exactly the same thing–how it was confirmed the Bible, and God's existence, and so on.
I have to wonder–if there were still supporters of the God Helios, and they were shown the sun through a telescope (with a filter to avoid damaging their eyes) which would show that clearly–the sun was not a huge glowing chariot–would they say "wow–Helios' chariot is actually a sphere! This confirms my belief in Helios!"
Does the Evolution breakthrough offer proof of God?
Science is only to be used to support religious claims....any science that would conflict with the religion is to be ignored...silly!
I am amused by the selective skepticism of religious people. When there is scientifically developed knowledge of a process that threatens their belief, they apply strict skepticism. They will find the most tenuous explanation to bring doubt on the results. In the next breath, they will quote scripture and assert things as fact with absolutely no objective evidence, skepticism right out the window. They don't even see it happening, it's mind boggling.
Gotta love when they use dating methods to prove their own needs but reject those same dating methods when they show just how old everything is...
I come from a family of very logical, rational people who are also religious, though not at all fanatical. Science in no way threatens their belief but they would never use their logic and reason to examine their belief. It is in a special catagory all by itself....but that is equally mind boggling to me.
Cheese,
From my own experience (over 3 decades) it comes from a foundation of fear that supports a tenuous faith.
Exactly. All humans have selection bias, but religious people seem to have it at a pathological level.
ssq41
There is fear and guilt, (Catholic, what else could there be). But there are a host of other systems at work, much of them social. It is just a lack a lack of critical thinking applied in one area that confounds me.
I liked a quote I heard recently but I can't remember exactly. It was something to the effect of...
"All people are really good at fooling themselves and intelligent people are really smart in their effort". Which I think goes to your point boston.
Cheese,
You're right...a whole host...political, social, emotional, physical, mental...in other words, it's being human in the disquise of being something special and "unique"; an odd need we humans seem to have.
My oldest brother committed suicide while still an evangelical...I'm persona non-grata from my conservative Catholic/Evangelical family (despite my 10 years in the military and love affair with Rush Limbaugh...LOL!)
Social indeed!
I told my Catholic mother that the foundation of Catholocism is based on quilt. She didn't like that at all...but she didn't argue with me either.....which goes back to my earlier post.
I kinda feel like once you're past a perceived half-way mark of life, it's a lot more difficult to give up those beliefs. By that point you've probably lost several loved ones, and are convinced they're in the sky looking down or something.
Logical people probably see the evidence, and really struggle with it. It's sad.
Right. Because we Christians know that God exists by divine revelation so we know that anything that directly disagrees with it, must be wrong.
Matthew 16:15
Jesus asked: “But who do you say that I am?” 16 Simon Peter answered and said, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” 17 Jesus answered and said to him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven."
Please note that the scripture given was NOT offered to give proof of God's existence in even the tiniest way. Logic and reason will not tell you that God exists. If you seek God, then he will let you know He exists by divine revelation. It might be that at some point he shows you He exists, but that is very unlikely. Then you die and then the judgement.
Please explain what divine revelation is, and how it can be verified.
A scoop of imagination with a dash of confirmation bias.
You just tell yourself you had one.
♰ ♰ ♰ Jesus Christ Is Lord ♰ ♰ ♰
John 14:6
"6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me"" (NASB)
The Quran Challenge Please listen to it since it is an amazing challenge and since the crowd here is typically of a higher IQ than the average population, I urge you to take this challenge!
http://youtu.be/4hbDVwweUsk
Oh goodness what is this, L Ron Hubbadullah Hubbadullah?
heard it?
I hope you aren't like that person that was on here trying to sell everyone a bunch of triangles.
You should know me by now – concise and to the point. No gimmicks involved. This is a real challenge!
So like a video of a PowerPoint presentation? You know I took PowerPoint off of my computer because I hate all the trouble you go through just to see a few images that someone stuck together as if they were George Lucas...
It is an actual video with someone speaking (no image of him) about the Quran and the challenge. A quick 3 minute video that is worth watch. Indeed, you owe it to yourself!
OK I watched. Anything from 1400 some years ago is well just really old stuff from 1400 some years ago. Like I say to Christians, demonstrate objectively your god and then we can see if any human words really reflect said god. What is apparent to me is, just as with Christianity, the conflicted nature of the subjective interpretations of such writings as manifested by the followers of such writings.
So it is easier to memorize...so what?
600 pages! The irony is that those who memorize this book come from different backgrounds and regions in the world (the vast majority of whom can't speak Arabic or carry a conversation in Arabic but yet have those 600 pages memorized by heart.
I guess you are right. It is easy to memorize (divinely made easy perhaps). Now get back to the challenge – would be a disservice if you pass on this challenge. Really!
Quick starting the educational process for islamtheanswer: (he or she has yet to refute any of this)
from the studies of Armstrong, Rushdie, Hirsi Ali, Richardson and Bayhaqi–
The Five Steps To Deprogram 1400 Years of Islamic Myths:
( –The Steps take less than two minutes to finish- simply amazing, two minutes to bring peace and rationality to over one billion lost souls- Priceless!!!)
Are you ready?
Using "The 77 Branches of Islamic "faith" a collection compiled by Imam Bayhaqi as a starting point. In it, he explains the essential virtues that reflect true "faith" (iman) through related Qur’anic verses and Prophetic sayings." i.e. a nice summary of the Koran and Islamic beliefs.
The First Five of the 77 Branches:
"1. Belief in Allah"
aka as God, Yahweh, Zeus, Jehovah, Mother Nature, etc. should be added to your self-cleansing neurons.
"2. To believe that everything other than Allah was non-existent. Thereafter, Allah Most High created these things and subsequently they came into existence."
Evolution and the Big Bang or the "Gi-b G-nab" (when the universe starts to recycle) are more plausible and the "akas" for Allah should be included if you continue to be a "crea-tionist".
"3. To believe in the existence of angels."
A major item for neuron cleansing. Angels/de-vils are the mythical creations of ancient civilizations, e.g. Hitt-ites, to explain/define natural events, contacts with their gods, big birds, sudden winds, protectors during the dark nights, etc. No "pretty/ug-ly wingy thingies" ever visited or talked to Mohammed, Jesus, Mary or Joseph or Joe Smith. Today we would classify angels as f–airies and "tin–ker be-lls". Modern de-vils are classified as the de-mons of the de-mented.
"4. To believe that all the heavenly books that were sent to the different prophets are true. However, apart from the Quran, all other books are not valid anymore."
Another major item to delete. There are no books written in the spirit state of Heaven (if there is one) just as there are no angels to write/publish/distribute them. The Koran, OT, NT etc. are simply books written by humans for humans.
Prophets were invented by ancient scribes typically to keep the un-educated masses in line. Today we call them for-tune tellers.
Prophecies are also invali-dated by the natural/God/Allah gifts of Free Will and Future.
"5. To believe that all the prophets are true. However, we are commanded to follow the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) alone."
Mohammed spent thirty days "fasting" (the Ramadan legend) in a hot cave before his first contact with Allah aka God etc. via a "pretty wingy thingy". Common sense demands a neuron deletion of #5. #5 is also the major source of Islamic vi-olence i.e. turning Mohammed's "fast, hunger-driven" hallu-cinations into horrible reality for unbelievers.
Walk these Five Steps and we guarantee a complete recovery from your Islamic ways!!!!
Unfortunately, there are not many Muslim commentators/readers on this blog so the "two-minute" cure is not getting to those who need it. If you have a Muslim friend, send him a copy and help save the world.
Analogous steps are available at your request for deprogramming the myths of Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism and Paganism..
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
That as no challenge, just rambling.......