Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
I did not say that the universe was eternal, I said that God is eternal. I don't understand your reply.
Originally posted by Regret
If existence is eternal, as science claims, an atheist could claim that is why it doesn't need a creator. The idea that God does not need a creator for this very reason, makes the claim that existence is eternal and thus there is no need for a creator of anything a valid argument. If your argument to God's creator is valid, this claim is also valid by the same logic. Arguments must be made correctly, regardless of the truth of the belief, especially when all participating in the debate do not agree.
What do you mean by "existence?" I need to first establish this definition in the shade that you mean.
Originally posted by Imperial_SamuraYes. Existence being anything existing. Science holds that matter/energy cannot be created or destroyed, hence it is eternal. Thus, matter/energy, the components of existence, have always existed, thus existence is not in need of a creator.
Maybe in simple terms matter of one form or another?
Originally posted by Regret
Yes. Existence being anything existing. Science holds that matter/energy cannot be created or destroyed, hence it is eternal. Thus, matter/energy, the components of existence, have always existed, thus existence is not in need of a creator.
But scientists unanimously concur and conclude that the universe is expanding. Thus, it has a beginning and it is not eternal.
Originally posted by JesusIsAliveYes the universe is expanding, but everything in it has always existed. Expansion does not imply nonexistence. A beginning to expansion, yes, beginning to existence, no.
But scientists unanimously concur and conclude that the universe is expanding. Thus, it has a beginning and it is not eternal.
Originally posted by Regret
Yes the universe is expanding, but everything in it has always existed. Expansion does not imply nonexistence. A beginning to expansion, yes, beginning to existence, no.
Regret...Regret...Reeeegret: you cannot see the absurdity in that statement? If the universe is expanding (and that is what the scientific community affirms) then that implies, hints, suggests, and means that everything in it had a beginning as well.
Originally posted by JesusIsAliveYes, as it is now, there was a beginning, but everything existed, not in the form it has now. Matter and energy are not created or made, they existed.
Regret...Regret...Reeeegret: you cannot see the absurdity in that statement? If the universe is expanding (and that is what the scientific community affirms) then that implies, hints, suggests, and means that everything in it had a beginning as well.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
But scientists unanimously concur and conclude that the universe is expanding. Thus, it has a beginning and it is not eternal.
It was a popular theory of the "crunch" - that with time gravity would draw it all back into a new super dense spot and so on.
Maybe that happened before? Maybe not. It doesn't matter, even if there isn't another big bang there will still be existence forever - since the matter will still be drifting around in one form or another. It can expand forever and get to the point where there isn't a single star left, but technically there will still be matter.
Originally posted by Regret
Yes, as it is now, there was a beginning, but everything existed, not in the form it has now. Matter and energy are not created or made, they existed.
That contradicts the Bible. Matter came into being by God's Word. Now, matter cannot be created nor destroyed (unless God wills otherwise).
Originally posted by JesusIsAliveNowhere does the Bible state "And God said let there be matter" Sorry, the Bible is silent as to whether or not it always existed.
That contradicts the Bible. Matter came into being by God's Word. Now, matter cannot be created nor destroyed (unless God wills otherwise).
Regardless, that is not what is being discussed, scientists claim such, thus an atheist can claim that there is no need for a creator because matter/energy have always existed. This is the statement you made as to why God did not need a creator, he has always existed, and so needed no creator.
Originally posted by Regret
Nowhere does the Bible state "And God said let there be matter" Sorry, the Bible is silent as to whether or not it always existed.Regardless, that is not what is being discussed, scientists claim such, thus an atheist can claim that there is no need for a creator because matter/energy have always existed. This is the statement you made as to why God did not need a creator, he has always existed, and so needed no creator.
What was I thinking? Regret you are right...
Sike! (or is it psych?)
Regret, an atheist can claim anything that he/she wants that doesn't make it so. I can claim that I am from Mars and that women are from Venus but that does not make what I said true.
The Bible reveals that in the beginning (before the universe and everything in it existed) God created the Heavens (outer space) and the earth. That means or implies that God created matter. You have to know how to infer implicit information.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Regret, an atheist can claim anything that he/she wants that doesn't make it so. I can claim that I am from Mars and that women are from Venus but that does not make what I said true.The Bible reveals that in the beginning (before the universe and everything in it existed) God created the Heavens (outer space) and the earth. That means or implies that God created matter. You have to know how to infer implicit information.
Though typically if an athiest makes a claim that is obvious fiction it is recognised as such - especially if it lack proof.
The difference is what a scientist claims with usally have logical reasoning behind it, and perhaps evidence to support it. Your claim is supported by... the Bible.
Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
Though typically if an athiest makes a claim that is obvious fiction it is recognised as such - especially if it lack proof.The difference is what a scientist claims with usally have logical reasoning behind it, and perhaps evidence to support it. Your claim is supported by... the Bible.
Which I have already stated that I presuppose is Truth; therefore, its contents are facts and can thus be used to substantiate my statements.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Which I have already stated that I presuppose is Truth; therefore, its contents are facts and can thus be used to substantiate my statements.
And logically my support of the scientific theories posses equally accurate facts that I can use to substantiate my statements, ergo you would be more then happy to give them equal weight considering the proof one can draw on?
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Again, what are those facts?
Tell me - have you ever been in a science class?
Or do you simply go to conferances and tell scientists who have dedicated their lives to those fields and feel they know what they are doing that they have no evidence compared with the Bible?
Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
Tell me - have you ever been in a science class?Or do you simply go to conferances and tell scientists who have dedicated their lives to those fields and feel they know what they are doing that they have no evidence compared with the Bible?
I got a B in General Biology for Non-Majors.