The Bible

[Mighty AC]

Betsy, do you believe the Earth exists and contains life?

[betsy]

FACT: SCIENCE DISCOVERS THE UNIVERSE HAD A BEGINNING.

In the 20th century, the assumption that the universe had always existed was debunked when science discovered it actually had a beginning.

Genesis 1 (The Bible), however, had known and stated that it had a beginning, several thousands of years before science did.

In fact, the Bible begins with this declaration:

GENESIS 1

The Beginning

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

[Sleipnir]

FACT: SCIENCE DISCOVERS THE UNIVERSE HAD A BEGINNING.

It doesn't take a rocket scientists to come to that conclusion.

I'm sorry but stating the obvious isn't what one would consider 'proof' that the bible is right

Behold....ice melts in the heat!

But...freezes in the cold!

[Mighty AC]

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

So terse. That phrase glosses over a 9 billion year gap in which the creation of a few hundred billion galaxies, each containing hundreds of billions of stars and trillions of planets occurred. Odd that such info would be omitted...don't ya think?

[Sleipnir]

So terse. That phrase glosses over a 9 billion year gap in which the creation of a few hundred billion galaxies, each containing hundreds of billions of stars and trillions of planets occurred. Odd that such info would be omitted...don't ya think?

Well apparently Jehovah sat around for 9 billion years twiddling his thumb not knowing what to do next

[betsy]

So terse. That phrase glosses over a 9 billion year gap in which the creation of a few hundred billion galaxies, each containing hundreds of billions of stars and trillions of planets occurred. Odd that such info would be omitted...don't ya think?

Oh AC, you're either in denial....or you're not getting it.

At least the Bible had simply described it. Written by some primitive so-called dessert scrabbers.....without any technological aid - not even a pair of binoculars! Ha-ha-ha

Your science however only caught on in the 20th century! Their previous ASSUMPTION - emphasis on that other ASSUMPTION - that the universe had always existed, suddenly thrown out and proven wrong! And what did the current finding supports?

Voila!

The Bible.

Of course.

[betsy]

So when you combine that latest fact with all other cosmology-related declarations from the Bible that science now supports (specially about stretching universe)....with all those bang-on "coincidences"......one would be deemed stupid if he dismisses the Bible outright, and yet he swallows assumptions after assumptions that doesn't even give any single solid evidence!

That's not even counting the other facts that are supported by other areas of science.

Edited December 4, 2012 by betsy

[betsy]

It doesn't take a rocket scientists to come to that conclusion.

ON the contrary.....

Oh yeah, it does take a ROCKET scientist, among other types of scientist, to come to that. Someone who'd specialize in that field and understand about it. You figure a biologist would?

A very, very, very slow rocket, though.

Came to that conclusion only in the 20th century. With the help of massive high-tech!

And only to confirm what's already been known thousands of years ago!

Edited December 4, 2012 by betsy

[Sleipnir]

ON the contrary.....

Oh yeah, it does take a ROCKET scientist, among other types of scientist, to come to that. Someone who'd specialize in that field and understand about it. You figure a biologist would?

A very, very, very slow rocket, though.

Came to that conclusion only in the 20th century. With the help of massive high-tech!

And only to confirm what's already been known thousands of years ago!

lol can't believe I didn't see that pun coming...

What I'm referring to is the concept of the universe having a beginning. Many religions prior to the Bible claims that there is a beginning to the universe.

[Mighty AC]

At least the Bible had simply described it. Written by some primitive so-called dessert scrabbers.....without any technological aid - not even a pair of binoculars! Ha-ha-ha

Ummm, what would they need binoculars or technology for?

[GostHacked]

Oh AC, you're either in denial....or you're not getting it.

At least the Bible had simply described it. Written by some primitive so-called dessert scrabbers.....without any technological aid - not even a pair of binoculars! Ha-ha-ha

Your science however only caught on in the 20th century! Their previous ASSUMPTION - emphasis on that other ASSUMPTION - that the universe had always existed, suddenly thrown out and proven wrong! And what did the current finding supports?

Voila!

The Bible.

Of course.

Which version of the bible are we talking about? And why is that specific version superior over the others?

[Mighty AC]

FACT: Hinduism Correct About Creation

Ages before the Bible and science the Hindus knew of TRUTHS that scientists are just discovering now. Nice that science is finally confirming what the faithful have known for over 5,000 years!!!

The Hindu Story:

This is not the first world, nor is it the first universe. There have been and will be many more worlds and universes than there are drops of water in the holy river Ganges. The universes are made by Lord Brahma the Creator, maintained by Lord Vishnu the Preserver and destroyed by Lord Shiva. Since the universes must be destroyed before they can be recreated, Lord Shiva is called the Destroyer and Re-creator. These three gods are all forms of Supreme One and part of the Supreme One. The Supreme One is behind and beyond all.

http://www.innovatio...du_creation.htm

The Science:

THE Big Bang might not have been the beginning of the universe, but just the start of a new chapter.

Scientists have found rings of radiation in the cosmos that may be older than the Big Bang, suggesting that event was just the latest in a series of rebirths, Wiredreports.

http://www.news.com....r-1225963294939

The bible is a joke, it had the advantage of 3,000 years of accumulated knowledge and still got it wrong!!

[cybercoma]

That is the funniest parody I've ever seen on this forum. haha

[Sleipnir]

lol that was funny, but true nonetheless @ MightyAC

Edited December 5, 2012 by Sleipnir

[Sleipnir]

f he dismisses the Bible outright, and yet he swallows assumptions after assumptions that doesn't even give any single solid evidence!

That's not even counting the other facts that are supported by other areas of science.

"3,000 years before the Bible and science the Hindus knew of TRUTHS that scientists are just discovering now. Nice that science is finally confirming what the faithful have known for over 5,000 years!!!"

Sorry AC - I had to repeat that

[g_bambino]

So Betsy, how was your god created?

She already said her god was created by faith. Extending her logic, then: since God was created by faith and God created the universe, everything around us exists solely because some Christians believe it does. Someone tell Stephen Hawking he can retire now. And don't piss betsy off, or she'll believe you're a potato beetle and *presto!*, you are one.

[betsy]

name='Mighty AC' timestamp='1354635699' post='860264']

FACT: Hinduism Correct About Creation

Ages before the Bible and science the Hindus knew of TRUTHS that scientists are just discovering now.

Nice that science is finally confirming what the faithful have known for over 5,000 years!!!

The Hindu Story:

http://www.innovatio...du_creation.htm

And? What about it?

Be reminded that what I've listed on this topic are facts.

Cite which part of the Hindu creation is a fact that's supported by science. Seems like you're kinda lost and floundering....

Edited December 5, 2012 by betsy

[betsy]

][/b]

The Science:

http://www.news.com....r-1225963294939

The bible is a joke, it had the advantage of 3,000 years of accumulated knowledge and still got it wrong!!

Here's what your article says:

]THE Big Bang might not have been the beginning of the universe, but just the start of a new chapter. [/b]

Scientists have found rings of radiation in the cosmos that may be older than the Big Bang, suggesting that event was just the latest in a series of rebirths, Wiredreports.

----

However he added that there was not enough detail to assess the reality of the circles yet.

http://www.news.com....r-1225963294939

Well...well...well....it feels like deja vu all over again. I see the same-old, same-old phrase, "MIGHT NOT HAVE BEEN," and "MAY BE."

So, it's just another assumption!

AND now they're talking "rebirths."

Even if that so-called "rebirth" proved to be true .....you're still back at the same old problem. There's still the issue that the universe had a beginning! Here are some scientists who say so....and that includes Stephen Hawking!

"Here are some quotes from university websites by scientists who knowthat the universe had a beginning:

• "The conclusion of this lecture is that the universe has not existed forever. Rather, the universe, and time itself, had a beginning in the Big Bang, about 15 billion years ago." Stephen Hawking The Beginning of Time
  
• "Scientists generally agree that "the Big Bang" birthed the universe about 15 billion years ago." Tom Parisi, Northern Illinois University
  
• "As a result of the Big Bang (the tremendous explosion which marked the beginning of our Universe), the universe is expanding and most of the galaxies within it are moving away from each other." CalTech
  
• "The Big Bang model of the universe's birth is the most widely accepted model that has ever been conceived for the scientific origin of everything." Stuart Robbins, Case Western Reserve University
  
• "Many once believed that the universe had no beginning or end and was truly infinite. Through the inception of the Big Bang theory, however, no longer could the universe be considered infinite. The universe was forced to take on the properties of a finite phenomenon, possessing a history and a beginning." Chris LaRocco and Blair Rothstein, University of Michigan
  
• "The scientific evidence is now overwhelming that the Universe began with a "Big Bang" ~15 billion (15,000,000,000 or 15E9) years ago." "The Big Bang theory is the most widely accepted theory of the creation of the Universe." Dr. van der Pluijm, University of Michigan
  
• "The present location and velocities of galaxies are a result of a primordial blast known as the BIG BANG. It marked: THE BEGINNING OF THE UNIVERSE! THE BEGINNING OF TIME!" Terry Herter, Cornell University
  
• "That radiation is residual heat from the Big Bang, the event that sparked the beginning of the universe some 13 billion years ago." Craig Hogan, University of Washington
  
• "Most scientists agree that the universe began some 12 to 20 billion years ago in what has come to be known as the Big Bang (a term coined by the English astrophysicist Fred Hoyle in 1950." University of Illinois
  
• "The universe cannot be infinitely large or infinitely old (it evolves in time)." Nilakshi Veerabathina, Georgia State University ()
  
• "The universe had a beginning. There was once nothing and now there is something." Janna Levin, Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics at Cambridge University
  
• "Today scientists generally believe the universe was created in a violent explosion called the Big Bang." Susan Terebey, Department of Physics and Astronomy, California State University Los Angeles
  
• "Evidence suggests that our universe began as an incredibly hot and dense region referred to as a singularity." Stephen T. Abedon, Ohio State University
  
• "A large body of astrophysical observations now clearly points to a beginning for our universe about 15 billion years ago in a cataclysmic outpouring of elementary particles. There is, in fact, no evidence that any of the particles of matter with which we are now familiar existed before this great event." Louis J. Clavelli, Ph.D., Professor of Physics, University of Alabama
  
• "Now, after decades of observing and thinking, we have come to answer confidently the question of the origin of our universe... with what is known as the "big bang"." Yuki D. Takahashi, Caltech
  
• "The theory is the conceptual and the calculational tool used by particle physicists to describe the structure of the hadrons and the beginning of the universe." Keh-Fei Liu, University of Kentucky.
  
• "The three-part lecture series includes: "How the Universe Began," "The Dark Side of the Universe: Dark Matter and Dark Energy" and "Cosmic Inflation: The Dynamite Behind the Big Bang?" (Lectures by Michael S. Turner, Bruce V. and Diana M. Rauner at Penn State University)
  
• "Travel back in time to the beginning of the Universe: The Big Bang" Douglas Miller, University of Arizona
  
• "Beginning of the Universe 20.0 billion yr ago" Charly Mallery, University of Miami
  
• "At the beginning the universe was extremely hot and dense (more about this later) and as it expanded it cooled." Syracuse University
  
• "THE UNIVERSE AND ALL OF SPACE ARE EXPANDING FROM A BIG BANG BEGINNING" Center for Cosmological Physics, University of Chicago
  
• "Gamow realized that at a point a few minutes after its beginning, the universe would behave as a giant nuclear reactor." Valparaiso University, Department of Physics and Astronomy
  
• "I'll also include what the time is since the creation of the Universe, and an estimate of the temperature of the Universe at each point." Siobahn M. Morgan, University of Northern Iowa.
  
• "The Universe is thought to have formed between 6-20 billion years ago (Ga) as a result of the "Big Bang" Kevin P. Hefferan, University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point
  
• "The dominant idea of Cosmology is that the Universe had a beginning." Adam Frank, University of Rochester Department of Physics & Astronomy
  
• "The hot dense phase is generally regarded as the beginning of the universe, and the time since the beginning is, by definition, the age of the universe." Harrison B. Prosper, Florida State University
  
• "One of the major hypotheses on which modern cosmology is based is that the Universe originated in an explosion called the Big Bang, in which all energy (and matter) that exists today was created." Eric S. Rowland, UC Santa Cruz
  
• "Together with Roger Penrose, I developed a new set of mathematical techniques, for dealing with this and similar problems. We showed that if General Relativity was correct, any reasonable model of the universe must start with a singularity. This would mean that science could predict that the universe must have had a beginning, but that it could not predict how the universe should begin: for that one would have to appeal to God." Stephen W. Hawking "Origin of the Universe" lecture."
  
• http://www.godandsci.../beginning.html
  

Just when you thought you'd swept it aside, the same question comes back to haunt you - except with a few changes.

DID ANYONE EVER OBSERVE SOMETHING BEING BORN OUT OF NOTHING?

Edited December 5, 2012 by betsy

[betsy]

MightyAC, do you realize what you just did?

You provided a proof that your Big Bang is just an assumption - an assumption that's about to be de-bunked at that, (if the latest assumption happens to be true) - debunked just like the old assumption that the universe had always existed!

Just like I've said before.....Assumption upon assumption upon assumption.....etc..,

Therefore, in a strange twist....you ended up giving support to my argument instead!

How ironic....you ending up supporting my statement....just like science happens to support the Bible!

And based on your senseless comment below...

The bible is a joke, it had the advantage of 3,000 years of accumulated knowledge and still got it wrong!!

....it shows we're not even on the same page! I

think you've run out of steam....sometime ago. So I wouldn't be responding unless there's something worth responding to.

....

[Sleipnir]

You provided a proof that your Big Bang is just an assumption - an assumption that's about to be de-bunked at that, (if the latest assumption happens to be true)

Do you not know what 'proof' is, or 'assumption' for that matter?

[Sleipnir]

.just like science happens to support the Bible!

No it doesn't lol

Edited December 5, 2012 by Sleipnir

[Mighty AC]

AND now they're talking "rebirths."

Even if that so-called "rebirth" proved to be true .....you're still back at the same old problem. There's still the issue that the universe had a beginning! Here are some scientists who say so....and that includes Stephen Hawking!

Problem? Why would that be a problem! That means that science is proving what we've known for 5,000 years!! Even one of the greatest physicists in the history of the earth is helping to confirm that Hinduism is true!! Statistics show that the Hindu creation story is 10∞ times more probable than the Bible!!!

DID ANYONE EVER OBSERVE SOMETHING BEING BORN OUT OF NOTHING?

YES!!! The lords Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva many times. As confirmed by SCIENCE!!!

[Mighty AC]

FACT: Hindu Creation Story The Closest To Modern Cosmological Models

Betsy mentioned Stephen Hawking, but even scientists that can walk and talk admit that Hinduism creation is the closest to SCIENTIFIC TRUTH!!

According to Fritjof Capra:

This idea of a periodically expanding and contracting universe, which involves a scale of time and space of vast proportions, has arisen not only in modern cosmology, but also in ancient Indian mythology. Experiencing the universe as an organic and rhythmically moving cosmos, the Hindus were able to develop evolutionary cosmologies which come very close to our modern scientific models.

According to Carl Sagan:

The Hindu religion is the only one of the world's great faiths dedicated to the idea that the Cosmos itself undergoes an immense, indeed an infinite, number of deaths and rebirths. It is the only religion in which time scales correspond to those of modern scientific cosmology. Its cycles run from our ordinary day and night to a day and night of Brahma, 8.64 billion years long, longer than the age of the Earth or the Sun and about half the time since the Big Bang.

[Sleipnir]

FACT: Hindu Creation Story The Closest To Modern Cosmological Models

Praise the divine Surya for the warmth that will be provided during the coldest time of the year.

May the divine Aditya give us longer light period after the winter solstice.

[betsy]

FACT: Hindu Creation Story The Closest To Modern Cosmological Models

Betsy mentioned Stephen Hawking, but even scientists that can walk and talk admit that Hinduism creation is the closest to SCIENTIFIC TRUTH!!

According to Fritjof Capra:

According to Carl Sagan:

They do say all that, don't they?

They're all spouting off their personal opinion.....and basing it on their ASSUMPTION!

We're talking about facts supported by science. NOT personal opinion - or wishful thinking - by atheist scientists.

Sagan:

The Hindu religion is the only one of the world's great faiths dedicated to the idea that the Cosmos itself undergoes an immense, indeed an infinite, number of deaths and rebirths. It is the only religion in which time scales correspond to those of modern scientific cosmology. Its cycles run from our ordinary day and night to a day and night of Brahma, 8.64 billion years long, longer than the age of the Earth or the Sun and about half the time since the Big Bang.

IDEA, Mighty AC. Idea.

As for the time scales - Sagan clearly based it on young earth creationists. But as we know, Christians are not all young earth believers! Therefore, that next statement of Sagan's is wrong.

A lot of these rabid atheist scientists just want to latch on the young-earth creationists - and are either ignorant of Christianity or simply disregarding other facts (that not all Chrisians believe in young earth).

So what can we deduce of a scientist who can easily turn a blind eye on a fact - then spout off with total disregard of that fact? Clearly, credibility-wise....one has to question such method, don't we? Very un-scientific, to say the least.

Edited December 5, 2012 by betsy