A Challenge

[Paleface2500]

quote No, it could logically be that the universe is simply expanding. Increasing in size. Why do you conclude the universe has no parameters simply because it is expanding? Is it not logical to conclude that IF the universe is finite.. the parameters are simply growing? OR the parameters are very large and there is much room for the cosmos to expand? end quote

Do you was what finite means? It is the opposite of infinite. The universe is finite and is expanding which is consistent with the big bang theory.

[Jack]

What bothers me is that science never ceases to attempt to disprove His existance.

That's your perception. I doubt many scientists would agree with the way you pose that question. If, through science, we learn what causes lightening, does that mean we set out to disprove god does? No. Science asks questions and seeks answers consistent with the other things we've learned through scientific inquiry. If what we learn counters what you believe, then you have to decide which to accept. Disproving your beliefs, or any other theist's beliefs, are not motivations for scientists. Understanding is.

Most science when pertaining to evolution and creation of our universe is mere speculation and educated guesses.

Evolution has been the subject of thousands of experiments. Do we understand it absolutely? No. Creation is indeed an unknown as yet.

Man trying to explain what he does not yet understand with educated guesses backed by more educated guesses and ridiculous theories.

This does describe theism. To try to apply it to science indicates a lack of familiarity with the scientific process.

[Paleface2500]

]

Quote by: littlebear Gods Mercenary said, "You can't use science to prove God, it's as simple as that." Who would want to? I accept His existance through faith. What bothers me is that science never ceases to attempt to disprove His existance. I cannot understand why. What do they hope to accomplish? Do they view people's belief in Him as a threat? Do they seek to exalt themselves above Him? I am reminded of a quote, "Me thinks she protests too much." The amount of effort science puts into disproving the existance of God may be hiding some deep seated sense of infeority. I have great difficulty with Christians who attempt to prove their God's existance by scientific evidence or methodology. At the end of all arguments, one must accept God by faith and on no other basis. Will we attempt to prove our faith? Not me. Will I ask the world to think better of me because I can offer scientific reasons for my faith? Not a chance. Will I seek to lead the lost to Christ by filling their heads with scientific proofs? Not hardly. I will ask them to believe in Him as I do, by faith.

Don’t presume to sit hear and judge me on how I exercise my faith. We are all different I fight my battles the way I chose and by my own set of morals. I use the tools given to me and if science is the tool then so be it!

If you can carry on a better argument then you better climb down from your ivory tower and deliver it.

[Paleface2500]

Quote by: RickSp So I see you that you would rather play word games than debate. Your choice.

:rolleyes:

[Paleface2500]

Quote by: Isherwood That's your perception. I doubt many scientists would agree with the way you pose that question. If, through science, we learn what causes lightening, does that mean we set out to disprove god does? No. Science asks questions and seeks answers consistent with the other things we've learned through scientific inquiry. If what we learn counters what you believe, then you have to decide which to accept. Disproving your beliefs, or any other theist's beliefs, are not motivations for scientists. Understanding is. Evolution has been the subject of thousands of experiments. Do we understand it absolutely? No. Creation is indeed an unknown as yet. This does describe theism. To try to apply it to science indicates a lack of familiarity with the scientific process.

you tapp dancing again

[Lullaby Chainer]

Quote by: Paleface2500 Do you was what finite means? It is the opposite of infinite. The universe is finite and is expanding which is consistent with the big bang theory.

Why do you say the universe is finite?

An expanding universe is indeed consistent with the BB theory.. what are you trying to say by this?

[Paleface2500]

Quote by: Lullaby Chainer You know my response to this! Please address it. I won't quote it again, I trust you've seen it by now.

Do you know what finite means? It is the opposite of infinite. The universe is finite and is expanding which is consistent with the big bang theory. After reading your post I have come to the conclusions that you have probley read up on universal expansion theory but don’t really understand it.

[Lullaby Chainer]

Quote by: Paleface2500 Do you was what finite means? It is the opposite of infinite. The universe is finite and is expanding which is consistent with the big bang theory.

Why do you say the universe is finite?

An expanding universe is indeed consistent with the BB theory.. what are you trying to say by this?

Quote by: Paleface2500 After reading your post I have come to the conclusions that you have probley read up on universal expansion theory but don’t really understand it.

Why's that?

[Jack]

you tapp dancing again

One liners do not a debate make. If you have something to submit that contradicts my post, do so.

[Paleface2500]

If the universe is finite it means it has an end and if the universe has an end it has a beginning, hence the big bang. Now if we believe in Newton’s 1st 2nd and 3rd law we have to ask ourselves what started this in motion.
All you have done is skirt the issue an obviously not taken the time to actually understand my first post. Had you actually understood it I wouldn’t be trying to explain this all over again. This just proves that you are not interested in debating; only throwing out half ass answers to questions you don’t; really understand.

[Jack]

You've asked us to debate the proposition that god (and you've never said which one) is responsible for creation. You've mentioned Newtonian physics. We obviously can't debate the notion of gods with logic and science. That leaves us with debating Newton. I don't think many of us consider Newton wrong, but we've admitted that how the universe came to be in keeping with Newtonian physics is at present unknown to us. This again leaves us without much to debate. I've even offered a suggestion that perhaps the universe is as eternal as your god, and got no reply.

[Paleface2500]

Quote by: Isherwood You've asked us to debate the proposition that god (and you've never said which one) is responsible for creation. You've mentioned Newtonian physics. We obviously can't debate the notion of gods with logic and science. That leaves us with debating Newton. I don't think many of us consider Newton wrong, but we've admitted that how the universe came to be in keeping with Newtonian physics is at present unknown to us. This again leaves us without much to debate. I've even offered a suggestion that perhaps the universe is as eternal as your god, and got no reply.

If the universe was eternal then it would not be finite. This theory is inconsistent with modern universal expansion theory. Telescopes have already proven that the universe is expanding.

You know very well which god I speak of .

[Lullaby Chainer]

Quote by: Paleface2500 If the universe is finite it means it has an end and if the universe has an end it has a beginning, hence the big bang. Now if we believe in Newton’s 1st 2nd and 3rd law we have to ask ourselves what started this in motion.

Like I said..

Why a god? Why your god? Why a man-made god?

Why not nature?

There are plenty of philosophical explanations, mind you, that soundly explain this without the need for gods.

Such as a universe that expands and implodes due to gravity. Perhaps the universe is on a cycle of expansion and implosion that has lasted for an eternity.

Such as a super string theory that claims that our universe was created by a collision of other-dimension fibers. These fibers could also be infinite.

Quote by: Paleface2500 All you have done is skirt the issue an obviously not taken the time to actually understand my first post. Had you actually understood it I wouldn’t be trying to explain this all over again. This just proves that you are not interested in debating; only throwing out half ass answers to questions you don’t; really understand.

Um.. then respond to my post and explain why you aren't satisfied? All you've done is ignore it.. then ask the same questions pretending no one's answering you. In a debate, you need to address someone that addresses you if you aren't happy with their answer.. and granted most people won't be happy with their fellow debaters' answers.. hence debates last a long time.

[Jack]

Something eternally expanding and contracting wouldn't violate any part of the expansion theory. We are now witnessing the expansion. Billions of years ago we may have been witnessing its contraction. Science offers no theory I know of for what happened previous to the Big Bang. We just don't know yet.

If you are suggesting the Christian god created everything, then how do you know it was this particular god? Why not one of the other gods worshiped around the world?

[Paleface2500]

Quote by: Lullaby Chainer Like I said.. Why a god? Why your god? Why a man-made god? Why not nature? There are plenty of philosophical explanations, mind you, that soundly explain this without the need for gods. Such as a universe that expands and implodes due to gravity. Perhaps the universe is on a cycle of expansion and implosion that has lasted for an eternity. Such as a super string theory that claims that our universe was created by a collision of other-dimension fibers. These fibers could also be infinite. Um.. then respond to my post and explain why you aren't satisfied? All you've done is ignore it.. then ask the same questions pretending no one's answering you. In a debate, you need to address someone that addresses you if you aren't happy with their answer.. and granted most people won't be happy with their fellow debaters' answers.. hence debates last a long time.

I’m not satisfied because you have failed to prove to me anything. You have came with nothing but what iffs . Let’s say for the sake of argument that the universe was constantly expanding and contracting, something still started it all. If Newton’s laws ring true on our planet, then they are certainly true for outer space.

Nothing just starts on it’s one. I keep telling you this and I can’t get it to sink in. some external force acted upon our universe setting things in motion. Once again, I believe this external force to be god.

[Lullaby Chainer]

Quote by: Paleface2500 I’m not satisfied because you have failed to prove to me anything. You have came with nothing but what iffs .

I think that's quite appropriate as I view the god theory as a big what if.

Quote by: Paleface2500 Let’s say for the sake of argument that the universe was constantly expanding and contracting, something still started it all. If Newton’s laws ring true on our planet, then they are certainly true for outer space.

I think I've found the source of our confusion. Couldn't the universe be eternal? Without a start? That's what I mean in my argument.. not that the universe is infinitely large (though it could be). I hope there wasn't any confusion there.

Quote by: Paleface2500 Nothing just starts on it’s one. I keep telling you this and I can’t get it to sink in. some external force acted upon our universe setting things in motion. Once again, I believe this external force to be god.

Yes.. and.. like I've said.

Why a god? Why your god? Why a man-made god?

Why not nature?

[Gods_Mercenary]

It doesn't prove God, it proves, at most, that there is a force out there that we don't understand.

[Paleface2500]

[quote]I think I've found the source of our confusion. Couldn't the universe be eternal? Without a start? That's what I mean in my argument.. not that the universe is infinitely large (though it could be). I hope there wasn't any confusion there.[quote]

No! Because it is expanding and or contracting which suggest it had a beginning.

Why a god? Why your god? Why a man-made god? Why not nature?

Please see post #1 for you answer.

[Paleface2500]

Quote by: Gods_Mercenary It doesn't prove God, it proves, at most, that there is a force out there that we don't understand.

Yes and that force is God. God is that external force that set things in motion.Argue this you have to argue with Newton and sound scientific principles. There are some so called scientific principles that are undeniable.

1. Newton’s 1st 2nd and 3rd law
2. Bernoulli’s principle

Among others

[Jack]

Nothing just starts on it’s one. I keep telling you this and I can’t get it to sink in. some external force acted upon our universe setting things in motion. Once again, I believe this external force to be god.

Then you've denied the possible existence of your god, who claims to have no beginning. An eternally expanding and contracting universe wouldn't have a beginning or end. Either eternity is possible or impossible on that scale. If it's impossible for physics, why should we allow its possibility for gods? If it's possible for your god, you must allow that it's also possible in physics. There might very well be an entirely different explanation. We will continue to question and seek answers. You already have yours. We are seeking answers for the millions of us who don't accept your theology.