ReligionDiscuss General Theology, Religions and Denominations, God's Attributes, Predestination and Free Will, Dispensationalism, Eschatology, Philosophy, Origins, Archaeology, Science, World History and other such topics.
Bible References to the 'Stretching Out of the Heavens':
Job 9:8 “[God] stretches out the heavens”
Ps 104:2 “stretching out heaven like a tent curtain”
Is 40:22 “He ... stretches out the heavens like a curtain and spreads them out like a tent”
Is 42:5 “... God the Lord, who created the heavens and stretched them out”
Is 44:24 “I, the Lord, am the maker of all things, stretching out the heavens by Myself”
Is 45:12 “It is I who made the earth and created man upon it. I stretched out the heavens with My hands”
Is 48:13 “Surely My hand founded the earth and My right hand spread out the heavens.”
Is 51:13 “the Lord your Maker, Who stretched out the heavens and laid the foundations of the earth”
Jer 10:12 “He has stretched out the heavens”
Jer 51:15 “He stretched out the heavens”
Zech 12:1 “the Lord who stretches out the heavens”
References to 'the beginning':
Genesis 1:1 [ The History of Creation ] In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
Mark 13:19 For in those days there will be tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the creation which God created until this time, nor ever shall be.
Ephesians 3:9 and to make all see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the ages has been hidden in God who created all things through Jesus Christ;
Matthew 19:4 And He answered and said to them, “Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’
Mark 10:6 But from the beginning of the creation, God ‘made them male and female.’
vs
Biblical Nonsense
Jos 10:12-13
On the day the LORD gave the Amorites over to Israel, Joshua said to the LORD in the presence of Israel:
“Sun, stand still over Gibeon,
and you, moon, over the Valley of Aijalon.” So the sun stood still, and the moon stopped,
till the nation avenged itself on its enemies,
as it is written in the Book of Jashar. The sun stopped in the middle of the sky and delayed going down about a full day. 14 There has never been a day like it before or since, a day when the LORD listened to a human being. Surely the LORD was fighting for Israel!
How about the atheist's lack of a compelling reason to accept the notion of supernatural effects, agencies, or entities at face value?
I make no claims regarding the existence of such things, as I don't know whether they exist or not.
However, I lack a compelling reason to behave as if they do exist.
Worldwide, estimates suggest that approximately 88%–93% of the population believes in a God or gods (Zuckerman, 2007). Some have argued that belief in God is intuitive, a natural (by-)product of the human mind given its cognitive structure (Bering, 2011; Bloom, 2005; Boyer, 2001; Guthrie, 1993; Preston & Epley, 2005) and social context (Atran, 2002; Wilson, 2002). More specifically, humans may have a number of early-developing, and possibly innate, cognitive tendencies that support belief in God and other supernatural entities.
To finite minds such as ours, infinite complexity and chaos are indistinguishable. It is therefore no argument to say that the universe and all the creatures that dwell therein come about by accident or the permutations of blind law and mechanical forces.
“Creatorship,” as one religious source has it, “is hardly an attribute of God; it is rather the aggregate of his acting nature.” There’s no beginning, no end and no cause. God (infinite complexity) and the universe (effect) just happen. The who made God? argument is therefore a non sequitur and there’s nothing “supernatural” about it, although there is a hierarchical relationship within the whole.
Skeptics don’t have to accept this "infinite complexity" hypothesis, but they cannot logically oppose it. Logic and reason have become bankrupt when they persist, in the face of each recurring universe phenomenon, in basing their objections on referring what is admittedly higher (more complex) back into that which is admittedly lower (more simple).
Chaos is by definition antithetical to order. And complexity is by definition a form of order. So by their respective definitions, ordered complexity (infinite or otherwise) cannot spontaneously spring from chaos.
Everything that exists, exists as an expression of energy. But something is limiting the way all this energy is expressing itself. The energy is not chaotic. And it's the ways in which energy is being limited that define what it has become, is becoming, and will become as it continues to express itself.
So the question of the origin of existence is the question of the origin of energy, and of the limitations inherent within it.
So far, we know nothing at all about the origin of either of these phenomena.
The question of origin stands alone, completely unanswered. And we remain profoundly ignorant about our own nature and purpose as a result. How we deal with this profound ignorance, then, defines who we are (not who/if/what God is).
Since most scientist are certain that 96% of the universe is a mystery to us
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbang123
There was time when scientists were provisionally, tentatively and probationary certain about one galaxy, the Milky Way galaxy, being the sum total of the universe. Now scientists are provisionally, tentatively and probationary certain that the universe contains over 125 billion galaxies.
Those facts should lead everyone (including atheist) to be a little more humble and little less certain of the correctness of our various positions.
It is simply our currently held view on the aftermath of the big bang - it tells us nothing about "what banged?" "why it banged?" or "what existed before it banged?"
Not really. I have never been fond of following incoherent drunks around to try to engage them in reasonable conversation. I may casually read what you post, but unless I see a modicum of interest in pursuing a consistent line of thought, then I will not waste my time responding to you.
I assumed that your ”better theory” was actually referring to a religious claim. But if you are willing to approach the question scientifically – meaning the evidence is the primary arbiter – then great.
Quote:
The observations that lead to DM and DE only lead there if you're tied to the big bang model. Without being tied to that model, an alternate explanation for the origin of the universe has to be assumed.
The galaxies are observed to rotate faster than can be accounted for by the visible mass they contain. If the galaxies were created by (God, aliens, a space warp, whatever) that observation is still valid. NOT tied to the big bang model.
Quote:
The question is, which explanation is better? One that produces a need for invisible and undetectable "dark" concepts, or one that sticks to what is physically possible with what we can see.
Invisible, yes. Undetectable, no. The very observations that didn’t fit with existing theory show that something is there. That something is detected (so far) in the same way as many other invisible things are – gravity, magnetism electric fields, etc. – by its influence on things we can see and measure.
As to which explanation is better, in my prior post I asked how your “better theory” explains the anomalous rotation rate of galaxies. Science says there is more mass in those galaxies than we can see, but you don't like that explanation. Your explanation is?
I assumed that your ”better theory” was actually referring to a religious claim. But if you are willing to approach the question scientifically – meaning the evidence is the primary arbiter – then great.
Of course we need evidence to do science, but I reckon we might differ a little philosophically.
The assumptions we hold are just as important in determining the conclusions we might reach as the evidence.
But, yes. Evidence.
Quote:
The galaxies are observed to rotate faster than can be accounted for by the visible mass they contain.
Uh .. no. They rotate too fast according to the big bang model without dark matter.If the galaxies were created by (God, aliens, a space warp, whatever) that observation is still valid. NOT tied to the big bang model.[/quote]The observation is how fast they rotate. You may not include the assumption as an observation.
Quote:
Invisible, yes. Undetectable, no. The very observations that didn’t fit with existing theory show that something is there. That something is detected (so far) in the same way as many other invisible things are – gravity, magnetism electric fields, etc. – by its influence on things we can see and measure.
You're measuring gravity.
Quote:
As to which explanation is better, in my prior post I asked how your “better theory” explains the anomalous rotation rate of galaxies. Science says there is more mass in those galaxies than we can see, but you don't like that explanation. Your explanation is?
Spiral Galaxies. If spiral galaxies formed billions of years ago, their arms should be wrapped more tightly around their centers than they are. Also, nearer galaxies should show much more “wrap” than more distant spiral galaxies. However, if space was recently stretched out, spiral galaxies could appear as they do.
Location: A spacious corner office overlooking the River Phlegethon
Rep Power: 50220
Atheist
More right than left
Slogan/motto:
"Do what thou wilt" shall be the hole in the floor.
Reputation:
April 30th, 2012, 10:20 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbang123
OBJECTIVE REALITY – There is a near universal prevalence of religious faith in every human society
You have hit upon the answer - the reason why a majority of unrelated cultures believe in the supernatural.
Or could the following be the reason?
THEORY regarding the underlying reason for that objective reality (guesswork)
Supernatural explanation per the theist and this semi-deist (me)
The result of a mental/spiritual vacuum in humans constructed by the Creator
Having formulated your theory, the task before you now is to test it.
What methodology do you propose for detecting this alleged "mental/spiritual vacuum"?
And how does your theory account for those in whom this alleged "mental/spiritual vacuum" appears to be absent?
"If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker that came along would destroy civilization."
Location: A spacious corner office overlooking the River Phlegethon
Rep Power: 50220
Atheist
More right than left
Slogan/motto:
"Do what thou wilt" shall be the hole in the floor.
Reputation:
April 30th, 2012, 10:24 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavisBJ
As to which explanation is better, in my prior post I asked how your “better theory” explains the anomalous rotation rate of galaxies. Science says there is more mass in those galaxies than we can see, but you don't like that explanation. Your explanation is?
Stripe's explanation is that God makes the galaxies spin and recede at whatever speed He wants them to.
He lacks the confidence to actually come out and say this, however...
"If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker that came along would destroy civilization."
I have never been fond of following incoherent drunks around to try to engage them in reasonable conversation. I may casually read what you post, but unless I see a modicum of interest in pursuing a consistent line of thought, then I will not waste my time responding to you.
sorry you feel that way
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbang123
Worldwide, estimates suggest that approximately 88%–93% of the population believes in a God or gods (Zuckerman, 2007). Some have argued that belief in God is intuitive, a natural (by-)product of the human mind given its cognitive structure (Bering, 2011; Bloom, 2005; Boyer, 2001; Guthrie, 1993; Preston & Epley, 2005) and social context (Atran, 2002; Wilson, 2002). More specifically, humans may have a number of early-developing, and possibly innate, cognitive tendencies that support belief in God and other supernatural entities.
Worldwide, estimates suggest that approximately 88%–93% of the population believes in a God or gods (Zuckerman, 2007). Some have argued that belief in God is intuitive, a natural (by-)product of the human mind given its cognitive structure (Bering, 2011; Bloom, 2005; Boyer, 2001; Guthrie, 1993; Preston & Epley, 2005) and social context (Atran, 2002; Wilson, 2002). More specifically, humans may have a number of early-developing, and possibly innate, cognitive tendencies that support belief in God and other supernatural entities.
So by their respective definitions, ordered complexity (infinite or otherwise) cannot spontaneously spring from chaos.
This is not necessarily the case. Think outside the temporal box.
Quote:
Everything that exists, exists as an expression of energy. But something is limiting the way all this energy is expressing itself.
Precisely. Which is why I linked to Michael Shermer's article in Scientific American. Scientifically speaking, "something" can indeed come from "nothing." Even Shermer would agree that something and nothing exist together in sort of a tension-relationship and that the sum of all things is zero. Shermer simply fails to recognize that this tension-relationship entails a time-transcending, self-limiting and self-organizing process -- which is to say there is no beginning or end to the infinite and dynamic complexity (God) and that the spacetime universe is an emergent property or "shadow" of this complexity.
I tend to agree with George Berkeley who wrote:
Quote:
We should believe that God has dealt more bountifully with the sons of men than to give them a strong desire for that knowledge which he had placed quite out of their reach.
“Behind the barricades of pre-established structures, the foxes of the intellect may engage in clever reasoning, but the lion of Being continues to roar outside the gate.” ~ Tarthang Tulku
Linear Mode
