It's funny how people always want to KNOW. Unless we know how everything works and where everything comes from and goes, we aren't satisfied. It isn't possible for people to learn everything; did one ever think that maybe all the answers we're seeking are beyond our comprehension? Like proudconservative said (in different words)- it's hard to grasp just how big the universe is, or how long eternity will be, etc. These concepts are just too much to understand. "Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men." 1 Corinthians 1:25 "For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness." 1 Corinthians 3:19. --We just all consider ourselves so learned and smart, but we don't even know the facts to sooo many issues.
no one can comprehend this but like space goes on forever what if earth was here forever? you may laugh but it is because you can not really think of this as you get a headache
I personally lean more towards the evolution theory. I mean, I believe in a bunch of gods and goddesses, but they aren't perfect and they couldn't just create the earth from nothing.
The thing is this: Either way, (believing in either Creationism or Evolution) there is NO WAY to know where EVERYTHING came from. ok sure, GOD supoosedly created this earth and universe and whatnot, but where did God himself come from? The point is, there is so way to know! That's the same as trying to figure out where the very first particle of matter came from. And who are we to know whether or not it (the universe) has ALWAYS been here? We have no witnesses to question, no evidence to analyze specifically. Figuring out(or rather, trying to) how this universe came about,while fun and mind boggling, Seems impossible. It's impossible to ever come to a proven conculsion. (unless, of course, we find out after we die) There will probably NEVER be a way to know where it all began, be it from either point of view.
Oh, and another thing. What if the Bible is just an allegory for evolution in certain ways? I mean, couldn't the bible be taken as an allegory? And if it was, wouldn't it be very very similar to the other faiths of the world, or just morals in a nutshell?
I think the bible is like the story of the tortose and the hare (parodon my spelling). Meaning, there's a moral of the story at the end, but it's not to be taken literally. I mean, the tortose and hare never actually raced and talked to one another. Maybe the bible wasn't meant to be taken literally, but meant as either an Allegory, Cautionary tale, or simply a story to help guide our morals.
"Haha the more I think of the whole big bang/evolution theory, the more I laugh. How can something just "be" there then create something out of "be?" Haha it's funny just asking those questions. Hahaha." Joey Dauben Sorry if I missed this one but,where did God come from?
Inspiration- That would put you in the category of Deist. It's reletively simple, and is more of a philiosophy than a religion. It's simply the belief that God is the grand "watchmaker" of the universe. I'm sort of a pseudo-deist. You sound similar.
Me, personally, I believe in evolution. But even if you believe in evolution, it all had to start somewhere right? I mean... That one cell in the very beginning... It just appeared? Or, the Big Bang... What, it just happened? Doubtful. I do believe in god and I think he created the Big Bang and the first speck of life; I'm not sure what category that puts me under but if someone else is please tell me.
"And there will never be a day when scientists convince me that this massive explosion of space feces somehow knew direction and just suddenly created nine tiny and gigantic spheres,lining up almost perfectly with the sun" (mr. dauben).
there's more in this universe than just eight planets plus the "heavenly" earth. what you didn't get the memo? there's more "spheres" in this world than nine planets. moons. dust. atoms. bubbles(ever notice that when you blow bubbles they're all; perfect). there's solar systems with binary stars. two suns!
oh and while we're waxing phantom elemetary particles, all matter has a gravational force. even light has a gravational pull and can be pulled by gravity. larger masses have larger gravational pull and easily attract anything smaller. it's not rocket science! well it kinda is.
think of the nine planets as the settling of chaotic dust into the nine most highly dense concentrations. their gravitational mass gathered all the debris and a balance occured. if force was not balanced it would have flown into the heaviest near by mass. (the earth is proportionally pulled between the sun and jupitor. moons revolve around other moons.) size is important apparently. relativily speaking. or is it just gravational mass? relatively speaking.
If I'm not mistaken, and I'm sure I can dig it up, Mt. Arrat is actually mentioned in the Bible as the landing pad for the ARK!
Anyone ever take time to realize that the guys coming up with "carbon dating" or conjectures of how old the earth "really is" are um, the ones pushing the whole evolutionary theory in the first place?
Oh, no being biased at all (sarcasm)
And there will never be a day when scientists convince me that this massive explosion of space feces somehow knew direction and just suddenly created nine tiny and gigantic spheres, lining up almost perfectly with the sun, while at the same time creating its own gravitational field, atmosphere(s), PLUS positioning themselves on their own axis points.
Haha the more I think of the whole big bang/evolution theory, the more I laugh.
How can something just "be" there then create something out of "be?"
Scientific dating is accurate when used correctly. If you try to dte a barbie doll in you backyard you'll get wild variations. This is why relatively young or recent materials will get inaccurate readings. Carbon dating is accurate when you test the age of things that are acutally ancient. Dating Techniques An Explication of Radiocarbon Dating
Let me first start off by saying this: Darwin's theory of evolution--> Notice the word "theory". Did anyone ever question the fact that all these ideas on how old the world is, how species evolve, etc. are theories? Ideas that originated from scientists or theorists?
"Evolution is usually portrayed as cumulative mutations. This means that todays primates are on a completely different path than we are. The simple way to visualize this is to find a flow chart of the evolution of species. These can usually be found in a high school biology book." -Dr strangelove
First of all, please spare us the condescending tone, like everyone who disagrees with you is an idiot.
There is no proof of species evolving. Yes, according to those charts, there should be a specific split between humans and primates- but that missing link has never been found. Where's the link that is part human part chimp? About dating: "When testing lava from 1880-1 in Hawaii, it dated at 160 mill. to 3 bill. yrs (Geophysical Reserve #73 7/15/68 and Science Mag. #168 10/11/68). Furthermore, C14 dating "doesn't take into account the many variables that can change" C14 amts. in living things (i.e. Val Elen radiation belts-> radiation belts which, because of the weakening magnetic field, are also weakening over time and the control of the c14 deposited on the earth). C14 has also been shown as unreliable when "it dated a live mollusk as being dead for 2300 yrs and freshly killed seals as being dead 1300 yrs". Consider this: there should be about 54 ft. of cosmic dust on the moon if it had been accumulating for 4.5 bill. yrs, but there was found to be only several inches (indicating that the dust was collecting for less than 10,000 yrs). Also: "Great tidal waves and geological unheavals occurred across the face of the earth and it was these events that produced the sediment layers that we find at fossil digs. This is proven by the fact that fossils from many diferent tiers on the geological column [representing time] are found in the same layers. All these creatures lived and died at the same time therefore their fossils are found intermixed across the layers" (reference the following, found on AltaVista under Earth Sciences-Paleontology: Burgess Shale field in BC; Antelope Springs Utah; Love Bowl beds in Archer Fla.; Siwallic Hills in India; bay of Fundy NS). In other words- materials (e.g. a tree) passed through several sedimentary layers, which according to the geological column, represented millions of years. Plausible? A lot of what is accepted today as truth can easily be questioned as false. I'm not going to base my entire conception of being upon a handful of mens' opinions. I'd sooner take God's word over someone who knows as much as the next guy... and if you question my belief as to whether it is based on truth ("how do you know it's God's word?")...well frankly, I'd rather take my chances and err on the side of God than man. Try reading: "The Battle for the Beginning...Creation, Evolution and the Bible." -John MacArthur
That topic was directed at nsyncgirl, who asks me how I know Jesus to be a common Jewish name at one time if I wasn't actually there. Sorry if I offended you somehow, geminiangel. It was a sarcastic comment directed at someone else.
on what the big bang is, if you are going by what you have leanred in most high school gen science classes that is a watered down versiions. If I remember correctly there are 3 postulates on the big bang. Its too late for me to remember anything accuarately right now. Oh and things that go by the laws and theories of science which are supported by evidence that is tangible is rediculus compared to a story made up by people??
There is no other possible way for me to know that Jesus was a common Jewish name at one time. It's not like I could have read this in a book or magazine article. (Specifically Jesus is related to Joshua, in terms of the roots of the two names.)
I know that Julius was once the Ceaser of Rome for a similar reason - I was there.
quote: A bunch of matter in space came together in a dot about the size of the period at the end of this sentence. It then spun around until it exploded and there was the universe. (That being the way it was explained in a science textbook.) OK, well 1 law of science basically says if something goes around and around and then you let it go it will keep spinning in the same direction. If that is correct, which it is since it is a law, then all of the planets should be spinning in the same direction. Two of the planets are spinning opposite the others. Explain this to me because if that is true then you are saying one of the LAWS of science is a lie.
First, that is only one theory (and an oversimplified and flawed one at that, what is this spinning?), there are many others out there. If you love science, read that link I posted before. Second, Newton's first law of physics is: "An object in motion tends to stay in motion, and an object at rest tend to stay at rest,unless acted upon by an outside force" Now, in the scenario you posted, everything was "spinning" in one direction, but as things expanded and consolidated, they created pockets of gravity, or force, which pulled and tugged on eachother, changing directions of movement.
quote: There are mountains on the ocean floor because the Earth was once overcome by water, hint...The Flood.
That is complete conjecture and is not supported by any evidence that I know of. On the other hand, the traditional geological history of the world is supported quite well. The areas where we find underwater ridges are heavily volcanic, or have been heavily volcanic in the past. For example, the Mid-Atlantic ridge, or the Hawaiian Islands.
quote: but the facts that Christians do have make our law of creation look pretty good, but so many people come up with idiotic excuses so that God does not look real, much like the theory of evolution.
I'd say it's the exact opposite. Christians making idiotic and non-collaborative ideas that actuall damage the case for God. While the scientific crowd has a well developed and supported history of our world and space, one that still allows, and in some cases makes logical, a devine entity.
Buffyfannum1: I too love science. I however believe in creationism. Evolutionism makes no sense. Your big bang and my big bang are two totally different bangs. The Big Bang Theory: A bunch of matter in space came together in a dot about the size of the period at the end of this sentence. It then spun around until it exploded and there was the universe. (That being the way it was explained in a science textbook.) OK, well 1 law of science basically says if something goes around and around and then you let it go it will keep spinning in the same direction. If that is correct, which it is since it is a law, then all of the planets should be spinning in the same direction. Two of the planets are spinning opposite the others. Explain this to me because if that is true then you are saying one of the LAWS of science is a lie. Donte: How do you know Jesus was a very popular name in that time? Were you there? Have you even read the Bible? Where in the history books is there a man named Jesus other than Jesus Christ? The people of Turkey claim they found Noah's Ark on Mt. Ararat. There are mountains on the ocean floor because the Earth was once overcome by water, hint...The Flood. I do not know if they found Noah's ark, but the facts that Christians do have make our law of creation look pretty good, but so many people come up with idiotic excuses so that God does not look real, much like the theory of evolution.
In regards to the "ark" on Mt. Arrarat, no one has "scoured" the mountain, and several who have made expeditions have reported seeing some kind of large structure. The CIA has even classified an anomaly from satilite photos. Something is there, but no one has really been able (at least those interested) to get a good excavation or expedition there.
Topics 
)
