[Herra Tohtori]

What I find interesting is that science can't explain the Big Bang...it can't tell you what was there before the bing bang. It can't explain the creation of the universe..only the events and laws AFTER it's creation.

That's because physics only applies when universe exists (duh)...

The dilemma of the original reason is not really a valid critique to the Big Ban theory, since it doesn't seem to be valid for questioning the God's existence before universe. Whether or not you move the burden of being the original something that made things happen from chance, or coincidence, or whatever it was that made the big bang occur, to a conscious powerful entity, you will always have the dilemma of something emerging from nothingness at some point - be it God or the universe directly.

Thinking that Big Bang required someone to will it to happen leads us no where and just adds a lot of assumed complexion to the already befuddling hypotheses about how the big bang (a pretty much established cosmohistorical reality, unlike God) may or may not have happened and why.


What I'm trying to say is that while it is true that the Big Bang theory and cosmology and physics only can model things with varying accuracy down to the T=0 and not before, assuming God won't really explain the universe either, since it doesn't say where God came from, and why, and when and how...


By the way, explaining the Big Bang itself is not terribly difficult, it involves a massive quantum fluctuation that ends up with inbalanced amount of matter and anti-matter. More challenging thing is to explain why this seemingly started time and space as well - and where the quantum fluctuation of vacuum could occur before there vas a space to have vacuum in.

[DarkBasilisk]

I'm going to drop in to agree with jdjtcagle's initial post. There are a number of atheists on this board yes but there are still a number of people with various religious beliefs, and it is somewhat offensive and definitely annoying to keep using vulgarities and flaming whenever religion is brought up. If you don't want to be Christian fine, its arguably better than being one of the people who just shows up to church out of habit and complains that the sermon is taking too long. However all this nonsense serves no purpose other than to make you seem like a jerk to the majority of people reading the post. If you have a rational reason for your position, keep it, but don't be so arrogant to assume you know more than everyone and are completely sure you're justified in attacking someone else's position. I for instance could have phrased that last part *if you think you have a rational reason...* but I'm not going to make the same mistake. I completely acknowledge the possibility I might be wrong, and generally try to avoid religious discussions since I'm at a phase where I'm not always sure of what I believe.

But for right now, I've experienced some things that make me at open to the possibility of God, and some very good people I know seem to be pretty sure. So I'll stay Christian for now. Anyways, if true Christianity is followed it's not going to hurt anyone, quite the opposite in a lot of cases (Thou shall not kill, Thou shall not bear false witness against thy neighbor, treat your neighbor as you would yourself). As such, I'll support laughing at some of the stupid groups (especially the WBC, I frigging hate those guys), but general shots against religion are annoying and pointless. If they're not doing anything wrong leave them alone, what are you going to do, poke fun at them in the afterlife when you can prove them wrong? Oh wait, you probably don't believe in one. So what's the problem?

[Mefustae]

**** me, what is it with all the thin-skinned people these days? Swantz refers to a group of people as bastards, and suddenly he's on trial for committing a hate-crime.

It's barely even a swear word, people! If he'd used 'c*nt', that could be considered vulgar. But 'bastards'? How do you people even survive on the internet?!

[Aardwolf]

Think about this: if an atheist is in an environment where he is surrounded by theists, trying to convert the atheist with threats of hellfire and whatnot,

The atheist isn't going to be very comfortable, even if they don't do anything physical to him. CCfC (Campus Crusade for Christ), for example, has a habit of badgering people on campus, putting speakers in public places to detail why everyone must embrace jesus or face eternal damnation and detailing how the bible is literal truth, etc.

It's like if you were a black person and you walked through a crowd of white people discussing skinning all blacks and covering them with white paint.

[Ghostavo]

(...)If you have a rational reason for your position, keep it, but don't be so arrogant to assume you know more than everyone and are completely sure you're justified in attacking someone else's position. I for instance could have phrased that last part *if you think you have a rational reason...* but I'm not going to make the same mistake.

(...)

So what's the problem?

You know he actually asked for those, so we are not pulling these things out of our arses, right?

If one could show me how it is more reasonable to believe that something can come from nothing out of nowhere caused by nothing fully charged with energy I would take one huge step away from theism. If one could show me a better explanation for our moral experience than theism, I would take another huge step away from theism. Unfortunately, however, atheists have not been able to provide superior explanations to theism.

Of course science and religion are not mutually exclusive, but when religion starts to want to explain things in the natural world (as opposed to the supernatural one) things start to get ugly.

I'd swear, if mathematics wasn't absolutely true with no possible way to doubt it, we'd be having a go at the value of pi.

[jdjtcagle]

Of course science and religion are not mutually exclusive, but when religion starts to want to explain things in the natural world (as opposed to the supernatural one) things start to get ugly.

I'd swear, if mathematics wasn't absolutely true with no possible way to doubt it, we'd be having a go at the value of pi.

There is a huge tenancy to see a huge gulf between science and religion in the realm of "knowledge".  Scientific knowledge is viewed as true knowledge, while religious knowledge is viewed as tentative knowledge at best, if not just plain 'ol fantasy. They are categorically separate. Yes, some Christians oppose the scientific endeavor as somehow anti-Christian at its core, or dismiss out-of-hand specific scientific assertions in light of religious presuppositions.

Science is not the enemy of religion anymore than religion is the enemy of science (from the perspective of outsiders)...  If I took the bible and the book of nature (from a "christian" perspective) then they should not contradict on another if God wrote them both.  If they appear to contradict it is only the problem of the interpreter of the one, the other, or the both. While it is clear that not every scientific position floating around out there is in line with Christianity, the process of doing science itself is not opposed to Christianity.

[TrashMan]

What I find interesting is that science can't explain the Big Bang...it can't tell you what was there before the bing bang. It can't explain the creation of the universe..only the events and laws AFTER it's creation.

That's because physics only applies when universe exists (duh)...

The dilemma of the original reason is not really a valid critique to the Big Ban theory, since it doesn't seem to be valid for questioning the God's existence before universe. Whether or not you move the burden of being the original something that made things happen from chance, or coincidence, or whatever it was that made the big bang occur, to a conscious powerful entity, you will always have the dilemma of something emerging from nothingness at some point - be it God or the universe directly.

You're getting me wrong, I'm not speaking against the Big Bang theory. If fact, I wholly agree with what you said. And that was exactly my point. That we cna't get all the answers...and that eventually, we'll get to the "but what happened before?" question...that we cannot answer.

And the fact that something came out of nothing...is mind bogling.

What I'm trying to say is that while it is true that the Big Bang theory and cosmology and physics only can model things with varying accuracy down to the T=0 and not before, assuming God won't really explain the universe either, since it doesn't say where God came from, and why, and when and how...

Well, not really. The universe itself is tied by it's own laws.. since it's material and all. You can't call the universe eternal because of it.
God (Allah, Jehovah), being beyond any laws is also beyond time. Ergo, Him being eternal and always present makes more sense than just "*puf*, the universe was created...erm..just so"

[TrashMan]

Think about this: if an atheist is in an environment where he is surrounded by theists, trying to convert the atheist with threats of hellfire and whatnot,

The atheist isn't going to be very comfortable, even if they don't do anything physical to him. CCfC (Campus Crusade for Christ), for example, has a habit of badgering people on campus, putting speakers in public places to detail why everyone must embrace jesus or face eternal damnation and detailing how the bible is literal truth, etc.

It's like if you were a black person and you walked through a crowd of white people discussing skinning all blacks and covering them with white paint.

CCC are idiots. Sadly, there's no way to get rid of them. You will find them in every ideology, race, faith (or lack thereof), group.

[Kazan]

I'd swear, if mathematics wasn't absolutely true with no possible way to doubt it, we'd be having a go at the value of pi.

the fundies DID have a go at the value of pi when it first became possible to calculate it with more accuracy than "3"

because the bible says "pi = 3"

[Kazan]

Think about this: if an atheist is in an environment where he is surrounded by theists, trying to convert the atheist with threats of hellfire and whatnot,

The atheist isn't going to be very comfortable, even if they don't do anything physical to him. CCfC (Campus Crusade for Christ), for example, has a habit of badgering people on campus, putting speakers in public places to detail why everyone must embrace jesus or face eternal damnation and detailing how the bible is literal truth, etc.

It's like if you were a black person and you walked through a crowd of white people discussing skinning all blacks and covering them with white paint.

CCC are idiots. Sadly, there's no way to get rid of them. You will find them in every ideology, race, faith (or lack thereof), group.

yes they are.. i got one of their campus-loudmouth-corner-preachers they import to claim in front of an audience that he is without sin.

doesn't the bible say something about making such a claim 

[TrashMan]

Hey, we got all kinds of whackos on this planet..We got people marrying bikes and TV sets. We got people believing moon is made of cheese, immortal alien named Xenu, Elvis in space and XZY more things.

There's over 6 000 000 000 of us...we're talking a lot of morons among that number here.

[Kazan]

immortal alien named Xenu

because that's any less plausable than the abrahamic beliefs

[NGTM-1R]

because the bible says "pi = 3"

Got a passage to quote? That's stretching it.

[Ghostavo]

The bible refers to the radius of a circle and then it's area making an indirect reference to the value of pi. The values were 4 and 12 IIRC, hence making pi = 12/4 = 3. I don't remember the passage where all this is refered, but it's the reason why I posted the pi thing. Even the most hardened bible fan will not dare to make the statement that pi = 3.

[Mefustae]

Even the most hardened bible fan will not dare to make the statement that pi = 3.

Let's not go nuts, here. I think you're slightly moderately vastly overestimating the intelligence of fundamentalist Christians.

[TrashMan]

immortal alien named Xenu

because that's any less plausable than the abrahamic beliefs

Oh, by far.

[Nuclear1]

The Bible Pi passage is in 1 Kings either 7:23 or 17:23.

Since the measurements are in cubits, which are measured by forearm length, the writer would have had to round on the number. Not that I'm defending any one side here, I'm just saying the writer probably wanted to not turn verses 23 through 78 into the exact number of cubits that made up the molten sea he was describing.

[Kazan]

because the bible says "pi = 3"

Got a passage to quote? That's stretching it.

some fundies took this to mean "pi = 3"

yes.. it's an unreasonable stretch in assuming they were being accurate to three sigfigs when only one is being given.. but they're fundies not scientists

And he made a molten sea, ten cubits from the one brim to the other: it was round all about, and his height was five cubits: and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about.

[Polpolion]

Where does it say in there that it's a circle? All it says is that it's round.

[Nuclear1]

Exactly. To imply that the verse is measuring pi you'd have to assume round=circular.