Just to point out that the LHC was not trying to get particles to light speed, nothing other than light (taht we know of) can travel at light speed. They were trying to get particles going very quickly, but not light speed.
Anyhow the problem with arguing from the bible is, and always will be, interpretation. Don’t get me wrong, I’m a Christian, but the Bible is not the infallible word of God, the Bible says that if I were to look lustfully at a woman then I should tear out my eye (Matthew 5:27-30) and that a child who curses his parents should be stoned to death (21:18-21) even in very Fundamentalist societies this does not occur. The Bible is the interpretation of God that the human author had at the time, an indirect revelation, which he wrote down. The books of the Bible are seperated by hundreds of years, they wre never meant to be read together.
That is why I do not believe that the Bible should be taken as the literal, infallible, word of God but rather as a revealing glimpse of God’s nature. Therefore i take the creation story as a metaphor. note that there are actually two creation stories anyway, both Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 have different accounts, showing that it cannot be God’s literal word, unless the world was created twice…
Ok, I’m even a bit confused by these arguments right now XD. Can we drop it and start something else?
Not that you won. Series face. Not that you won…
WALL-E: The Bible, like I said, is the basic beliefs of the Christian religion. The reason I don’t use it is not because it’s not this, but the fact that priests over the years have edited it in who knows where (For example, the removal of the book of Mary) and you can’t be sure what to believe. I know Jesus and I talk to God and I remember this from when I was young, faith, hope and love are the good things He gave us, and the greatest is love…starts singing “Where Were You When the World Stopped Turning”
And the Quaker religion, from what I know, doesn’t believe you need a priest or the Bible or anything.
I just came up with new proof of God, and the book for English helped me think it up!
So you see the book is about the history of zero and how it came to be, how it effects math, and just ideas about the infinite and void. It’s actually very interesting.
You see, the universe had to start somewhere. It started nothing.
0
Zero cannot be changed on it’s own. It will stay nothing forever. Multiplication cannot even change it.
0x3=0
0 will not change on it’s own. However, if another force, say
0+4=4
It will change, and can continue to change
4x5=20
20+3=23
23+6=29
You get the idea. The point is, nothing can only change and become more if another force (God) makes it.
But where did God come from? There must have been a beginning for God, too. You can’t have one set of rules for science and then make an exception for God and religion. Scientists can tell us how the Big Bang happened, but they cannot tell us the force behind it or if anything started the Big Bang. Where is your proof that someone started the Big Bang at all? I could say that the Flying Spaghetti Monster started the Big Bang and my belief would have just as much credibility as yours: one of personal opinion with no scientific basis.
You have to take out the concept of time, since time is an object that has had to be created, as Einstein figured. Something created the time, whether some glitch in reality or a God, its your choice.
God is a being, a force, with no solid form, unlike the universe. While evolution is physical, thus needing a beginning, God is not. God can be nothing, and everything. Thus, God can be there when there is nothing.
And time doesn’t matter. Nothing can sit there for a long, long time, and time and never become more then nothing.
Say you have a plastic square. (plastic since it has no sign of being able to decompose) And you have nothing in it. No air, it’s a vacuum. Nothing. The jar will always hold nothing, until someone opens or breaks it.
Evolution can only happen if something was there in the first place. A species cannot evolve without any species TO evolve.
Okay, so, um, the argument we’ve got here is: “Evolution can’t have been started by nothing. It may, in fact, have been started by a higher power. Coincidentally, my Christian idea of a single God fits this description; therefore, he created the universe”?
I mean, aside from the fact that every religion and creation myth ever invented has just as much validity as the Christian one ('sup, Gaea and Uranus?), “God created the universe because I am including all of you in assuming that he exists, therefore modifying this entire argument to give me a headstart, much like a race, by assuming he’s already been here this whole time - despite there being no logical basis for this, hence the debate - and instead making the argument about whether or not God - who, as you’ll recall, exists, because I said so - has been sitting here twiddling his thumbs while the Big Bang coincidentally happened nearby” isn’t really a logical argument. :[
You cannot go into a creation vs. evolution debate saying that there’s no scientific proof for the Big Bang while giving yourself and the big man upstairs a “Get Out of Logic Free” card. This is sounding like one of those recipes that starts off reasonable and easy to follow and then is suddenly like “Now take out your PROTO-BLAST BLEND-A-TRON 5000” right in the middle, presumptuously assuming you have one at hand.
And I know there is no logical, convincing end to this argument with these parameters, because no one can truly prove their point in this particular debate. All I’m trying to convince anyone of is exactly this. Which may be completely futile, but if even one person comes away from this thread thinking “Maybe God isn’t a scientific argument after all”, I’m good.
Rac_Rules - I’m not sure your 0 x 0 = 0 and vacuum arguments stand up here. We already have proof that the Big Bang is the likely cause of the creation of our universe. Where’s your proof that God started the Big Bang and the Flying Spaghetti Monster didn’t? The answer is you don’t have any more proof over my claim that the FSM started the Big Bang and that God did.
Something? Like the Flying Spaghetti Monster? And isn’t evolution just incremental changes of a species and then it eventually turns into a new species? As far as I know with my limited knowledge of evolution, there is no set goal in mind for the changing of species, but they are just adaptations to the environment.
What I’m saying is I’m defending creationism, that an outside force created the world, not just God. I just say God because it’s what I believe. Since there are so many different creationist beliefs, teaching one cannot be called teaching creationism since that leaves so many uncovered. Since we have a freedom of religion, the only way to respect that is to teach NO religion, thus Atheism. I’ m not saying that teachers should be able to say there is no creator, but leave creation out of it and let kids decide what they want to believe.
I’m am, at least in this argument, defending the the idea of creationism, not just God.
