www.christiananswers.net

[LawnOven]

Have anyone been to this site: http://www.christiananswers.net/menu-at1.html ?
I think it’s kind of interesting. The way in which it carefully leaves out parts in the bible which perhaps answer a question but not in the way they want it to shows are remarkable amount of finesse/ gall.

I like this one, the answer to “who created god?”, which plays an amazing game of semantics combined with a poor understanding of physics

http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c039.html#r1

and I really enjoyed how they managed to find a way for the bible to be against abortion, leaving out all those messy details of god approved pregnant mothers being ripped open and child sacrifice.

http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-bibleandabortion.html


the bible really cracks me up sometimes.

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by LawnOven
I like this one, the answer to “who created god?”, which plays an amazing game of semantics combined with a poor understanding of physics

http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c039.html#r1Interestingly, they did get one aspect right that I've tried to explain many times to the "but what came before the Big Bang?" crowd.
In addition, Einstein’s general relativity, which has much experimental support, shows that time is linked to matter and space. So time itself would have begun along with matter and space.
Of course, the site doesn't give any explination who God doen't have a begining when existance "prior" to the beginning of the universe has no meaning without there also being time.

Still, bravo on getting one thing right, at least.

edited to add:
Whoops. Towards the end of that same page, they try to work through any possible objections. One of which is they try to answer the question "Are the premises true?", which is very intellectually honest of them to do. Unfortunately, they miss the biggest premise of all: "God is the creator of time."

Ah, well. "A" for effort.

[komencanto]

How would you actually rebut this argument?
Its nonsence, but nice sounding nonsence. How does one tear it down. Yahweh?

[Lord Kenneth]

God, unlike the universe, had no beginning, so doesn’t need a cause.

Completely ridiculous. How can something "not have a beginning", in this fashion, when it's possible that the all the energy in the universe could have existed for all eternity (prior to the big bang)? They've basically just ignored the fact that current theories support that all matter/energy in the universe has always existed in one form or another.

It seems that their argument is little more than "Well, we define God as being infinite and as the creator, and coming before time, so there! Refute that, skeptic!"

Also interesting is that fact that if God is restrained by time then he is also restrained/effected by space itself(something they fail to mention), thus he is not "outside" or beyond our reality.

[Yahweh]

Originally posted by Lord Kenneth
Why ask him? He doesn't know anything about science or philosophy...
The reference was obviously directed toward me, it was completely unnecesary, it was rude, you wont bait me into engaging in another game with you. Calm down and play nice.

[Yahweh]

Originally posted by Upchurch
Interestingly, they did get one aspect right that I've tried to explain many times to the "but what came before the Big Bang?" crowd.
Ok, I dont consider myself too well versed in some of those early universe theories, or theoretical particle physics, or quantum physics in general, but consider this quote:
In addition, Einstein’s general relativity, which has much experimental support, shows that time is linked to matter and space. So time itself would have begun along with matter and space.
So far, Einstein's General Relativity is holding pretty well, it doesnt look like it will be "wrong" anytime soon. If time is linked to matter and space, then it is perfectly rational to say "nothing came before the big bang". Without matter and space, time could not exist. What came before the big bang? Nothing because events cannot occur outside of time. (No its not an evasive and/or convenient answer, its physics). As for the "cause" of the universe, if we accept Quantum Theory, it says something along the lines of "energy can spontaneously arise from a vacuum". I would assume this vacuum would probably be deeper than the ones found between the spaces between galaxies. I would say more, but I dont have the aquired knowledge to elaborate too much further.

(If anyone see what I said to be inaccurate or incomplete, please feel free to correct me).

[ImpyTimpy]

Huh... What happened to turn you into nothing more then a troll? Did I miss something?

Originally posted by Lord Kenneth
Why ask him? He doesn't know anything about science or philosophy...

[ImpyTimpy]

I absolutely hate sites like that one. They are using some seemingly family friendly themes to promote their own brand of religious brain washing. I notice LawnOven has already pointed out how they are very selective with their answers (take parts of the bible that support their arguments, ignore the rest). That's how religious fanatics are bred.

[Yahweh]

Originally posted by ImpyTimpy
I absolutely hate sites like that one. They are using some seemingly family friendly themes to promote their own brand of religious brain washing. I notice LawnOven has already pointed out how they are very selective with their answers (take parts of the bible that support their arguments, ignore the rest). That's how religious fanatics are bred.
I like the site. At least the way they go about making their point is (to some degree) acceptable, a whole helluva lot better than "Just have faith" (which is not an answer) and "If you dont have faith you go to Hell" (threats and plays on emotion dont do much to convice me).

[Zep]

having looked closer, it seems to be nothing more than a front for Ken Ham and AnswersinGenesis. All the "answers" seem to be "authored" by KH.

And for a complete and full rebuttal to ALL the AiG arguments, you need look no further than here (http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/default.htm).

[Abdul Alhazred]

Originally posted by Yahweh
As for the "cause" of the universe, if we accept Quantum Theory, it says something along the lines of "energy can spontaneously arise from a vacuum".

(If anyone see what I said to be inaccurate or incomplete, please feel free to correct me).

This line of reasoning also permits the infinite regress of question begging.

Why does the vacuum have the properties that is does? You can't say that it's "nothing" and therefore has no properties, because energy can arise spontaneously because of those properties.

Once you push it that far back, Quantum theory itself becomes the God of the gaps.

Still a better place to start thinking about it than Big Guy who loves us and treats us like s**t, I say.

[Yahweh]

Originally posted by Abdul Alhazred
Why does the vacuum have the properties that is does? You can't say that it's "nothing" and therefore has no properties, because energy can arise spontaneously because of those properties.
Most people are familiar with Newtonian Physics (the one with those Laws of Thermodynamics), Quantum Mechanics is Quantum Physics (which is an extension of statistical mechanics based on Quantum Theory, it deals with the behavior of tiny tiny atoms and elementary particles on a Quantum level).

Once you push it that far back, Quantum theory itself becomes the God of the gaps.
Quantum Theory has a little more solid grounding than God of the Gaps. Quantum Theory has the word "theory" in its name (wow!... before anyone calls be for "bad logic", I'm just humoring myself), a theory is a set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena. God of the Gaps is "I cant explain it, God musta did it". Quantum Theory is better rooted than God of the Gaps.

But again, I dont know enough about Quantum Theory to say too much about it.

(If I remember correctly, one of my kids told me Quantum Mechanics was invented to help prove the existence of God, I'm not entirely sure of the accuracy of that but I've seen the same thing written on the internet in a few places...)

Still a better place to start thinking about it than Big Guy who loves us and treats us like s**t, I say.
:) Agreed.

[EdipisReks]

Originally posted by Yahweh


(If I remember correctly, one of my kids told me Quantum Mechanics was invented to help prove the existence of God, I'm not entirely sure of the accuracy of that but I've seen the same thing written on the internet in a few places...)


that's a joke, right?

[Abdul Alhazred]

Originally posted by Yahweh

Quantum Theory has a little more solid grounding than God of the Gaps.

As a general description of the universe, yes. But once you start talking about the properties of a universeless void, I think you've reached the gap.

[Yahweh]

Originally posted by EdipisReks
that's a joke, right?
Believe it or not, kids will say almost anything regardless of the fact that their sources are questionable and they have no working knowledge of the subject at hand in the first place. They might use key words which they have no understanding of to get their point across (ever heard of "Quantum Consciousness"). Or even make up facts entirely "The bible is supported by Science".

Do a Google Search (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=quantum+mechanics+god&btnG=Google+Search), you'll find plenty of websites that might give you a chuckle or two (http://www.angelfire.com/mt/montalk/quantumgod.html) (I havent had time to read that particular article in full), this one (http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-305.htm) is also worth a read.

[ImpyTimpy]

That's exactly why I hate it - it comes accross as a rational thought but when you disect it it's nothing but religious brain washing dressed up in pretty colours. It's targetting people who are impressed by rational sounding arguments (that is everyone) but don't have the ability or the time to reason them through themselves (almost everyone).

Same thing with pseudo science. It sounds smart (and people get suckered in), but when you break it down it's nothing but b******t.

Originally posted by Yahweh

I like the site. At least the way they go about making their point is (to some degree) acceptable, a whole helluva lot better than "Just have faith" (which is not an answer) and "If you dont have faith you go to Hell" (threats and plays on emotion dont do much to convice me).

[Lord Kenneth]

Originally posted by EdipisReks


that's a joke, right?

No, it's an outright lie.

[Yahweh]

Originally posted by Lord Kenneth
No, it's an outright lie.
Excellent refution![/sarcasm]

There is no reason for that, there was no provocation on my part. I dont tend to respond well to those who abuse the safety behind a computer monitor and the internet...

This will be the third time I have had to tell you: Play nice.

[Lord Kenneth]

Oh, the lies and irony.

If anyone wants the full scoop on this crap, PM me.

[Yahzi]

I'm with Impy. Sites like this pretend to be rational, until you poke them. Then it becomes obvious that it's all just window dressing. I think that's worse than honest fundy stupidity.

Yahweh
Not sure what your point is... when Kenneth says it's a lie, he's right. It is a lie that QM was invented to prove god. He didn't say you were lying, or even that your student was... just that the originator of this claim was lying. Which is unquestionable.

Kenneth
Yahweh knows a heck of a lot more about physics and philosophy than you do. What exactly was your point?

[Lord Kenneth]

Originally posted by Yahzi
Kenneth
Yahweh knows a heck of a lot more about physics and philosophy than you do. What exactly was your point?

Hilarious! What do you base this on? If you didn't notice, his replies to this topic weren't even very relevent. He just posts some well-known garble to sound intelligent and profound, but he did NOT actually address much of the main points of the article

Oh, and yes, I did say that Yahweh's fantasy was a lie.

[komencanto]

Dude, Lord Kenneth, how do you end up fighting people so much.

Chill out man, play nice, enjoy yourself.

[QuarkChild]

Originally posted by Yahweh


So far, Einstein's General Relativity is holding pretty well, it doesnt look like it will be "wrong" anytime soon. If time is linked to matter and space, then it is perfectly rational to say "nothing came before the big bang".

(If anyone see what I said to be inaccurate or incomplete, please feel free to correct me).
Actually, I think General Relativity breaks down if extrapolated back in time too far. I don't think you can apply any conclusions of GR to the Big Bang.

But you might want to ask Tez, just to be sure. I'm not too well-versed in cosmology, and I don't take my first GR class for another couple of months.

[Fun2BFree]

I still don't understand why this supports the Christian notions of God...nor why a God can always exist but be totally without any real proof of existing but a universe which clearly exists all around us cannot have always existed...

and about this before time stuff---people have such a hard time grasping the whole following time back to the beginning.....that is because time is not in the three dimensions we touch and feel every day....so what about space?...take any object and cut it down to a smaller size..keep doing this forever and sooner or later you are down to something taking up some amount of space which you can then cut in half..so what is there just after you get down to the smallest possible space?

[Lord Kenneth]

Originally posted by komencanto
Dude, Lord Kenneth, how do you end up fighting people so much.

Chill out man, play nice, enjoy yourself.

Don't you know my reasons?

The only one not playing nice is Yahweh. If you want to know how I know he lies PM me.

[Keneke]

Man, that Montalk link Yahweh provided really smacked me in the head with laughter. I read 10 paragraphs about defining God mathematically, get bored, skip to the end, and he's talking about zero-point energy. What the heck did I miss? Screw it.


Funny link, thanks.

[Marvel Frozen]

Man, that Montalk link Yahweh provided really smacked me in the head with laughter. I read 10 paragraphs about defining God mathematically, get bored, skip to the end, and he's talking about zero-point energy. What the heck did I miss? Screw it.

If they're talking about zero-point energy, then it's probably best that you didn't read all of it.