1. You christians use the same arguments over and over, refuse to listen to the facts when we tell you, and keep yourselves willfully ignorant.
2. Quantum randomness states that something CAN come from nothing but only for brief times. Our universe may have happened by chance but for whatever reason, more than a small amount of matter was created, something on the scale of 10^85 grams.
Yes nice "Let's post a video about universe not being eternal" "What's that the same people made a video that evolution is proven?" "Humbug!" "What the same people made a video dating the earth to billions of years?" "Hogwash!" See how you are pick and choosing.
@MindTheHeart I see, its OK for YOU to refer to someone elses ideas as crap, but oh boo hoo when it all falls on your head!! You gotta have SOME reason to bail on this discussion, because you have nothing to offer but the same tired old spin and excuses for why the bible doesnt really mean what it plainly SAYS.
You appear to have gotten all your information from some die-hard fundamentalist believers. If you check out the original wording of Genesis you would see that the word "create" is not used where you think. The words used about the sun is that God "let there be light", which is very different from "creating" and that he "had made" it at some point in time. God actually "created" the universe, which means to create from nothing - which is stunningly similar to the Big Bang model.
Don't buy into that Kent Hovind crap! There is not a single verse or group of verses in the Bible that gives away the age of the universe or the earth. Among schooled believers it has ALWAYS been common to think of the "days" in Genesis as figurative speech or at least God's own days - obviously because there was no humans around nor any cycle of day and night in the beginning.
@MindTheHeart genesis lists the geneology from adam to abraham, giving the age of each father when the next in line was born, so its very simple math to draw a timeline from adam to abraham. The geneology of jesus listed in matthew lists a different line from adam to jesus, and its not a strech to make simple assumption. The bible lists 77 generations from adam to jesus, which puts the creation of the universe around 4000 BC and noahs flood around 2500BC...
Again, don't buy into that Kent Hovind crap! The way you argue implies that either the fundamentalist way of interpreting the Bible has to be correct - and if not, then to heck with all of it. I would say THANK GOD that fundamentalist interpretation way does not work, because if it did you might as well have become one of those cold besserwisser fundamentalists. God's way of inviting us to a relationship with him is not through that cold and narrow-mided way.
@MindTheHeart ..geneisis denotes the six DAYS of creation with the note" Sunrise and sunset - one DAY, even though the sun is not created until day THREE.
The 4th commandment says you shall work for 6 DAYS and rest on the 7th DAY, GUESS WHY? It goes on to say "because god created the world in 6 DAYS..." the punishment for breaking this commandment is death by stoning, so if god meant six million years, or 6 hundred million years, a LOT OF PEOPLE GOT STONED TO DEATH FOR NOTHING!
What a mess you are making! If you read about other sabbaths, for the land and for the which are mentioned along with man's week, you would see that there are other lenghts to the different sabbaths. This shows that it is not a 24 hour period which is the point, but a natural relationship between work and rest for God's creation which is subject to the laws of nature. God himself is not limited by nature and has his own "days" - which can be "a thousand years".
Furthermore, the Bible does NOT say that the sun was CREATED on day three. It was only VISIBLE from the surface of the earth at that time. The reason is actually pretty simple: Because of thick layers of clouds which covered the earth in the beginning. This is what Job 38 says, and it is also what science says.
Having said that, you also need to know that the biblical genealogies are NOT complete! Names are omitted, and it is clear for everyone to see. Nobody knows how many names that have been left out, but it is clear that it is the most interesting ones, the famous and the infamous, which has been recorded. You might ask "Why couldn't God have filled in all of it so you could know everything?" Well, do you think God wants people who doesn't bother to think a little for themselves?
@MindTheHeart you have either never read the geneology in genesis or you are full of kwrap. AGAIN: It lists A was the father of B, who was the father of C, who was the father of D.... There is NO PLACE to insert more people into the list because it is contiguous from ADAM TO ABRAHAM, and it is picked up from there in other places in the bible.
The bible makes very SPECIFIC claims about things a god did. There is no other way to read it except for what the WORDS SAY.
@iliveon and the 2nd law of thermodynamics states that if the universe was eternal (if energy was eternal) then we would have reached complete entropy and never reached this point in time because you would be applying properties of infinite to the universe.
@iliveon "Because there is a law like gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing...Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist. It is not necessary to invoke God" -Stephen Hawking
Ok, the break down on Hawking. What Hawking meant by a "law like gravity" was that quantum gravity allows for the universe to appear via quantum flux. This theory entails a "wave-function of the universe" however -which Hawking calls "phi." Phi does all of the stuff that God is supposed to do, so according to Hawking we don't need God. The catch is that Phi is self-aware. (according to Orch-OR)
Meaning he was almost right except for one tiny detail: Phi is God
@YouMadButISwag God is a conscious mind without a physical brain, most theist would believe. Phi is not a conscious mind. A deist could believe in a god that made everything, but doesn't interfere. Me being atheist, I do not believe a mind created anything... And I would never call a physical thing a god.
@iliveon phi has no physical units. it is a pure mathematical probability, and can exist as a Platonic entity. phi is a self collapsing wave function, and self collapsing wave functions are minds (Orch-OR model). In addition to literally being a mind, the wave function of the universe is:
Omnipresent: (Via the definition of wave-functions)
@iliveon "So basically you are labeling a pure mathematical, physical property a God?"
No. The wave function of the universe, or phi, is self collapsing [Hawking]. Self collapsing wave functions are minds [ORCH OR]. So, Phi is a mind. Phi can exist as a Platonic entity. Platonic entities [spirits] are abstract entities that exist independently of the sensible world.
No, you're calling it god. I could have something giant with scales, claws, wings and a tail and call it a dragon but it's just an animatronic robot that happens to look like one. I could be white and hairy but that doesn't make me a Yeti.
@Philosophier121 You never directly answered my question. Do you believe god is eternal? I am assuming, though, your answer is yes because you instead jump to explaining why you exempt him. I am rather unsure of your position though. You claim you exempt god from your claim "nothing can be eternal" because he is greater than us? Do you mean to say he is greater than the logic that denies himself the possibility to be eternal?
@Philosophier121 Do you not then believe god is eternal? If so, why exempt him from your previous statement, and if not, then why does he not need a creator?
@Philosophier121 Do you believe in god? Regardless, I, too, agree with your conclusion. Nothing can be eternal. I am merely trying to show the obvious flaw in the first cause argument. Assuming its premises hold true, the conclusion is a leap of faith. All it proves is that a first cause must exist, never implying anything about this cause. Nevertheless, I reject its premises. I do have a model for how I believe the universe began and does not invoke eternality.
Way of the Master is just a bunch of idiots that know nothing of science and dwell proudly in their ignorance by appealing to authority and pressing it upon uneducated individuals. Yes, the universe, OUR universe, had a beginning at the big bang. What is that supposed to imply? That a god had to create it? NO! Just that something created it. It points not to a god but rather an eternal first cause. Why make the assumption that it had to be a sentient entity and not a quantum vacuum?
Due to the holographic principle when combined with the second law of thermodynamics we can now say definitively that the universe is not eternal: watch?v=5xqztxP0SJc
The more beats per second, the greater the work. Before 1902, Tesla already had numerous patents for the use of “radiant energy”, both from “synthetic sources” and from “the natural media” of the universe. The Nazis and the Trilateralists stole Tesla’s flying saucer invention, and the U.S. government helped them take it to Germany, and now conceal it from us. Nikola Tesla was an Atheist/humanist, who detested mysticism, Einstein, Communism, and the Nazis.
Energy can only be expressed in reality, during “changes in form”. Of the two equations, only Tesla’s equation can be correct, since it is the only one taking resonance into account, which is the rate per second at which electromagnetic oscillations or “beats” occur. Without oscillations, nothing is converted in form. The frequency of electromagnetic radiation is the “beats per second”, and the level of “force” or “voltage” at which work is done.
Of the two equations/metaphysics, the Illuminati naturally prefer the latter, since it supports their sales at the gas pump, and the suppression of flying saucer technology via their Big Lie Program.
The equations of Tesla and Einstein are in direct conflict, because Tesla’s equation is consistent with the universe as a dynamic, ever-changing, eternal, infinite perpetual-motion system, while Einstein’s equation describes the universe as a finite, temporary, Big Bang-type event, expanding from an ultimate, fictitious, ‘original explosion’, which is continually winding down.
Mass appears impertinent, and “C = E/R” (i.e. Tesla’s equation, which excludes mass) appears true, saying that, at C, Energy E, is divided by resonant frequency R.
Albert Einstein’s fundamentally subjective and unsound reasoning errors were responsible for the wrongness of his theories, which could not be corrected by all his mathematical mumbo-jumbo. Einstein’s contradictory theory presupposes that mass is not “energy”, since, only during some non-spontaneous process of interconversion of mass into radiant energy, or radiant energy into mass, could “work be done”.
The work of Albert Einstein is useful to the Trilateral Commission, not only for its fuzzy thinking, but also because of its support for the Big Bang, and other Big Lies of Big Science. Einstein was undoubtedly a great mathematician, but metaphysically and epistemologically, he was an idiot.
No single being had the skill to make the world - for how can an immaterial god create that which is material? How could god have made the world without any raw material? If you say he made this first, and then the world, you are face with an endless regression. If you declare that the raw material arose naturally you fall into another fallacy, for the whole universe might thus have been its own creator, and have risen equally naturally.
The universe is eternal. Just ask the scientist Nikola Tesla, Fred Hoyle, and many of the Jain scientist of ancient and modern India. Some foolish men declare that a Creator made the world. The doctrine that the world was created is ill-advised, and should be rejected. If god created the world, where was he before creation? If you say he was transcendent then, and needed no support, where is he now?
you do know when they were talking about eternal they meant it would exist forever.....its because of the stretching effect the universe has and it will get so thin that atoms would be ripped apart...
"But every painting has an artisit behind it do they not?"
- The artist in the painting rearranges matter (paint). If you´d apply that logic to the universe, it means you´re arguing for a ´god´ that rearranges already existing matter to create the universe.. But you´re arguing for a god that doesnt just rearranges existing matter/energy, you argue that matter/energy was poofed out of NOTHING in existence! So your analogy fails terribly!..sorry,truth hurts sometimes
The Bang Theory makes no claims as to how the initial mass got there only how space as we know it came to be.
A Deist claim is some form of being was an initiator or first cause without itself having a first cause, not very reasonable but not outrageous.
A theist claim is an anthromorphic God exists who created the universe without having being created, who cares about human opinions of him/herself, handmade the planet in days and has laws for the inhabitants of this speck of rock.
Can there be an infinite 'amount' of energy (substance), or will there always just be a finite amount of energy (substance) no matter how much there is or how large the amount of energy (substance) there is? If there isn't an infinite amount of energy, then energy in all reality is limited and finite, thus there has to be something outside of the realm of energy, something eternal. It couldn't be an eternal void/ vacumn because that would put us back to the "everything came from nothing" delima.
The universe is defined as all that exists. For believers, god exists. Therefore, god is inside the universe. How can one create the universe while having to exist inside of it for the very sake of existing?
Another perspective: The universe is all of existence. To demonstrate that the universe had a beginning, you would have ot demonstrate how existence could at one point not exist.
Actually, the universe as a whole IS eternal if viewed from the whole point. While you cannot regress infinitely backwards, you CAN proceed infinitely forward in time. As in, towards infinity. Furthermore, while the Big Bang was the beginning of the observable universe, we cannot say that the universe at all did not exist before it, only the observable universe as we currently understand and know it and as it behaves under own classification systems.
Well if you were created for your enjoyment than I would agree, but you were not, you were created for the golry of God, and you will give Him glory in one of two ways whether you belive it or not. Worship Him in spirit and truth for eternity, or the smoke of your torment will rise before the throne of God for eternity. And all those who praise Him, knowing that they also deserve Hell, will be all the more gratefull that He sent His Son to save us from our sin. So party it up!
Sounds like a bunch of Anti-Christs talking in circles and how they are not going to believe in God because they would rather fornicate, masterbate, hate, cuss, get drunk and high. I used to be just like that so I am speaking from a experiantial standpoint. God is watching and recording everything you say and do. You will give an account for you life on Judgment day, even if you dont believe you will. That is reality and truth, sorry guys but you only have 2 choices TURN OR BURN! Please Turn!
@WorthDieing4 Which one of the many many Gods wants you to stop drinking? I wont follow any God who wants to rob me of my freedoms and control me, on pain of eternal punishment for a minor indiscretion...
Seems like believing in that god would be a really bad deal. No benefits whatsoever.
@WorthDieing4 what's wrong with masterbating, hating, cussing, getting drunk and high? According to the bible actions doesn't matter, you can do what the fuck you want to just as long as you accept jesus as your saviour.
@WorthDieing4 you just say that god is watching but it doesnt make it true at all, you just base your point on your "beliefs". It's just an invalid information, you can't hope to scare an atheist or make him become a theist with such "statements" of yours.
@Kenoburned My beliefs are based on Jesus rising from the dead. If He is still dead, then you dont have anything to worry about. If He is seated at the right hand of God, youre in big trouble along with all that refuse to humble themselves. Being that, I personaly have been touched by God and the same power that rose Jesus from the dead. I love you enough to tell you that its real, He is real, Hell is real, and you have an unavoidable appointment with death. Please at least consider it.
@WorthDieing4 can you be certain he really rised from the dead? can you be certain Hell is real? No, you can only BELIEVE they are because there are absolutely no evidences that can show they are real. Therefore, you base your point on your beliefs.
@Kenoburned The only proof I have is myself. Before surrending my life to Christ, I was a slave to sin and loved sin. Today I do not live in sin because the power of God through Jesus Christ has delivered me from adiction, hate, lust, anger, greed, lying, adultery. You name it, sin defined who I was and could see no way out. Belive it or not we are all slaves to something, today my master is righteousness. Today I live with a clear consience. Death has lost its sting. JOY UNSPEAKABLE!
*yawn* The statement made in the title of this video is not one which I am qualified to confirm, deny or debate (oh, and judging by your desperate ignorance of most areas of science, you aren't qualified either, thewayofthemaster). What I can say is that even if this statement were true, it would not affect atheism in any way, shape or form, because it doesn't prove even to the smallest degree that any god exists. Fail.
THE BIG BANG WAS NOT THE BEGINNING OF THE UNIVERSE THE BIG BANG WAS THE CREATION OF ALL MATTER INSIDE IT> BEFORE THE BIG BANG WAS THE VACUM OF TOTALITY WHICH IS A VOID SPACE OF ZERO CONTAINING ENERGEY THAT HAS THE ABILITY TO PRODUCE KINETIC ENERGY. this video explains it!
ReligionInTheBin, "All the quantum energy did exist from which this universe emerged".
This statement does lead to a greater problem. Where did quantum energy, matter, mass, motion, force, laws, constants, space, time come from? Was there any design or purpose for the universe to exist? If you are going to say that the universe had emerged from "nothing" or a "multi-verse", then you have shifted the regress problem one step further and would need to explain where the multiverse had come from.
@AustralianAstronomer "Where did quantum energy," There is no such things. "matter," Is a manifestation of energy. "mass," From Higgs Bosons and the Higgs Ocean created by their Higgs Fields. "motion," Applied forces within a certain system. Duh. "force," Is basically the application of an outside energy to a system. "laws," Particles called fundamental particles and bosons. "constants," Are man made mathematical fine tuned to fit our own mathematical models.
"If you are going to say that the universe had emerged from "nothing""
Except that science never affirms that as its official position. Although there is one (credible and plausible theory) that skims around there, but in such an instance nothing is defined as it normally is in science. Which is far different from how you define nothing in your every day life.
You assume they had a beginning. Due to the potential energy of vacuum energy, the universe always was, just as potential point. When a phase transition occurs from potential to kinetic energy from this vacuum energy (ie. big bangs), we get a new "universal bubble," of sorts, in the universe.
"then you have shifted the regress problem one step further and would need to explain where the multiverse had come from."
No I dont.
Something is probably eternal and foundational. I say it´s still physical (though perhaps not based on our physics which is limited and solely based on our direct environment ie our universe)
You say it´s poofed out of absolutely NOTHING by a far complexer intelligent being..which is also completely against all theistic design-arguments..
I did not imply anything about the origins of the universe or the existence of a supreme being. Nor do I dispute that the physical world is existent. Perhaps you should read my comments more carefully before making absurd statements.
If somebody such as yourself has posited that the universe did come about by "something eternal and foundational" then you must prove this claim.
"..universe did come about by "something eternal and foundational" then you must prove this "
Two words: infinite regress.
You even mentioned it yourself. Basic logic dictates that either things can start to exist from absolutely nothing, or something foundational which is eternal has to exist.
The point was, if someone posits the supernatural, the burdon of proof is upon them..*sigh*
An infinite universe is not supported by any empirical evidence. The consensus within modern cosmology is that the universe did have a finite beginning approximately 13.73 billion years ago based upon four lines of evidence:
1) Cosmic microwave background radition discovered by Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson in 1964.
You are 100% NOT an astronomer, please stop embarassing yourself kid!
Infinite regress has NOTHING to do with an infinite universe, you clearly haven´t even heard the basic arguments and counterarguments in this debate O_O
Search google for the word ´infinite regress´..
..you´ll see why I can´t take you serious x_x
Goodbye, I´ll ignore you from here on.
(Please educate yourself and read/watch some regarding the cosmological argument)
"You are 100% NOT an astronomer, please stop embarrassing yourself kid".
The name "AustralianAstronomer" was chosen to reflect two aspects of my personal life: 1) My citizenship (Australian) and 2) My recreational hobby for over 20 years (Astronomy, Cosmology, Planetary Science). In addition, I have joined numerous Star Gazer's Clubs, Geographic Societies and visited the largest planetariums and telescopes in the Southern Hemisphere.
"Infinite regress has NOTHING to do with an infinite universe".
Infinite regress is a concept dealing with an unending causal chain of terms in a sequence. Since you have proposed the concept of something "eternal and foundational" you are implying infinite regression of events within space-time.
"Goodbye, I'll ignore you from here on".
That is because Poxflaza and myself called your bluff. For someone who is "104" years old you are not that bright in philosophy or science.
"Nor do I dispute that the physical world is existent."
That's the exact point I was making, sherlock..
We agree on that, so anything else (like the nonphysical or a god) needs to be backed up by evidence and/or valid and sound logic. In other words, I dont have to prove the universe came from something physical. The theist has to prove it came from something nonphysical.
I'll ignore more comments from you if you cant even grasp simple arguments..
"I did not imply anything about the origins of the universe or the existence of a supreme being."
Looking at all your (nonsensical) comments here towards various people, you certainly do seem to imply something..now either that or you're just a troll (I'm beginning to suspect which one it is).
I dont believe for easecond you're schooled in astronomy.
Perhaps time to actually read up on some logic, philosophy and science books?..
What comments? Please provide an example of one. Personally, I think it is you who is trolling. Reading your comments on this video with Poxflaza and P4GS has clearly demonstrated that. There is no reason to further argue with a person such as yourself who clearly has a lack of knowledge on astronomy and cosmology. Almost every contemporary physicist has accepted that the universe did have a finite beginning. Perhaps you should be reading up on Stephen Hawking's books.
@ReligionInTheBin your an idiot an if anybody actually tried to comprehend your comment they would see your making no sense at all...your comment about the painting counters itself.
@ReligionInTheBin yea and lets all accept your without question that sounds like a better idea right? and it seems you have no life and this video is the only thing making you feel good about yourself waking up every morning hopeing that somebody doesnt agree with you in this video so you can further post your stupidity here.
- I DID reason, instead of just asserting like you blind sheeps do.
- Have you seen the dates of the comments you commented on???...I usually ignore all the contradictory incoherent rambles of...ahum..'christians'. Only once in a while, when they really are as empty and nonsensical as yours, I respond ;)
Ignorance is bliss, keep bashing painful truths instead of being honest, reasonable and educated.
@ReligionInTheBin tipical ignorant fuck on youtube coming to conclusions just because he has a couple of thumbs up on his comment....mister dickhead i realy hate to inform you i am not christian so yea go back to your fantasy world of youtube sitting on your ass bashing christians just because your an elite amongst us and nobody needs to prove you wrong since its a known fact you are and always will be correct no matter what anybody says right?
..so far you've only shown your inabillity to grasp any sort of basic science and logic/philosophy. I only laugh at your insults (typical hypocritical behavior of theists:) so I dont mind you calling me whatever you please.
But if that's all you have, I'm afraid you're the closeminded ignorant ****head ;)
I'm waiting (any similar response I'll ignore though..)
@ReligionI you just expressed how i feel about you perfectly
our conversation is pointless since all your doing is very politely sending me insults and just further goes to show how your just some troll who wants to feel special in youtube since your a failure in real life you seem to have the need to bash on others beliefs and lives how sad
and what makes you think im a thiest? how do you know i just hate ignorant SHITheads like you who go around insulting others and not respecting religions
@ReligionInTheBin yea your right your not worth nobodys time since you just dont care what anybody tells you and you are and forever shall be right correct? i will leave you to your domain wich is this video were you are the one eyed leader who will lead the blind to the "truth" even though believing in god or not is rendered useless in this society and in reality nobody cares about your comments in the world besides this video wich only athiest trolls who give you a thumbs up.
Still no meaning in your words. Mere accusations, nothing to back aything up or even an attempt at commenting on the content of this video and what I said.
You are the perfect definition of a troll.
Just let the grown-ups talk if all you can do is display your ignorance,inabillity to reason and simply yell like a child.
And the fact that you dont see how history, wars,morality, politics and almost everything in life is influenced by religion, shows utter blindness/foolishness..
@ReligionInTheBin okay so every war was started because of religion, and every politician actions are influenced by his or her religion? jesus christ! grow a brain and quit blaming the worlds problems on a book its not religion that sturs shit up its the people trieng to enforce their religion on others so in reality its the peoples fault...the bible has not been responsible for one soul in the history of time.realise ignorant hatefull people are the reason we are how we are.
I would not spend any more of my precious time arguing with ReligionInTheBin. Clearly he is just arguing with people for the sake of playing the devil's advocate. He is the type of person that thinks he is right about everything on subjects he is not even qualified in. I am amazed that people with any common sense could give his comments a thumbs up. He has the audacity to call everyone who argues with him a troll, yet it is him who fits this definition perfectly.
"You both had no single valid argument and I cared to show that".
Au contraire. Both Poxflaza's arguments and mine were perfectly valid and the "best" you could do was set up straw-man arguments and attempt to "rebut" them. Nice try!
"You failed with your contradictory arguments".
Interestingly that you have never pointed out one despite numerous invitations to do so.
In addition, you did posit "something eternal and foundational" but never showed any proof for what this was.
@ReligionInTheBin I'm assuming you're referring to a spatial multiverse theory in which there exists an extremely large, inflating fabric of spacetime in which matter will spontaneously "cool out" when a scalar field's potential reaches a certain limit. Even this model, however, runs into a problem or origination singularity like the Big Bang: since this multiverse spacetime is constantly inflating, that means it was smaller yesterday and the day before and so on and so forth, leading to
@ReligionInTheBin "All the (quantum) energy did exist from which this universe (and perhaps a multi-verse) emerged" - This is speculation, we don't know what happened at the beggining.
..you wont be able to, since matter/energy only changes form.
No speculation, just fact.
Now, you´re free to believe it can be created out of nothing..and yep, THAT would be pure speculation, based upon no logic and no observations. Some even believe that things can be created out of nothing, but it needs a god to do that..eh..nothing. They make videos like the one above ;)
@ReligionInTheBin I wonder when pseudo scientists are going to have the humility to say that science has it's limits... we humans think we know everything. We know nothing really... Cosmology is not yet fully explained! I'm not supporting any theory! I'm just saying we don't know what hapened in the first moments of the Big Bang theory.
"wonder when pseudo scientists are going to have the humility to say that science has it's limits"
The pseudo scientists are the ones who dont understand or simply lie about science in order to form fallacious arguments for the existence of their god.
Every atheist and every scientist understands that science doenst prove or disprove god (due to the increasingly smaller and faguer defined untestable description of god). We´re talking logic and philosophy here.
@ReligionInTheBin That doesn't even come close to explaining how matter originated. Law of conservation of energy states that energy is neither created nor destroyed rather transformed, while you could use this formula now, it still does not in any way account for how the matter and energy got there in the first place. Religion in the bin? I don't think so.
From existing matter (I already answered that in the analogy in the top comment,last sentence)
Your question perfectly shows how this, by theists proposed, analogy fails:
If you compare the universe to the painting and claim it has to have a painter, then that 'painter' (god) would merely rearrange matter and energy, *not* create it out of nothing.
So all these painter/watchmaker/architect analogies fail terribly..sorry
I find it so hard. These people try to force others to become experts on so many different academic fields, but yet refrain of doing some research themselves.
Also, if Newtonian "gravity" is a real force, then why (despite the passing of so many aeons) have the pieces of the asteroid belt not accumulated toward the largest mass of the pieces (named "Ceres")?
All creatures which dream will swear, while still in their dream state, that the things perceived in their dream are "real" and "certain" and "tangible" and "provable" -- until, of course, the creature wakes up....
this makes the existence of God possible. of course, it was already possible. for that matter, so is cold fusion...but if you tell me you have a cold fusion reactor in your basement, i'm gonna be curious, and i'm probably not accept your great-grandfather's journal as corroboration.
it's not about smart. it's about honest. if you pretend to know something you can't know, if you pretend to total certainty, i'm gonna think you're afraid, or insane, or both.
Well worded, and yes, fear (of death, uncertainty etc) is probably one of the major drives behind theistic thinking. That's why most who argue for their religion, dont care to educate themselves on these topics..they rather repeat what has been told to them and hope they can confince themselves probably even more than the person they're debating.
@ReligionInTheB jesus christ your like a robot.a robots purpose is not to please anyone but rather just complete his mission and disregard everything around them that doesnt benefit its mission. all you keep doing is insult me wich proves how immature you really are.but then again the hard headed shall never learn anything besides the half inch of thick skull they have.and how can necrophilia be thiest number one fear if they believe theres an eternal afterlife numbnuts your not making any sense
I agree...They have to throw the F bomb around to show that's the only cool thing about them..Other than that, they believe they came from a cess pool of muck.
Thankfully, we don't believe that about ourselves. We are worth something, whereas atheists believe they are an accident and have no hope or direction.
We're not all bad-mannered. I know religion makes you feel better about hope and direction. But you can have hope and direction and also be correct. Evolution is supported by EVERY peer reviewed scientific paper. Whether God created the cess pool of muck or not, your ancestors of millions of years ago did come from it. Just start learning. You're heart and ego might have to take a hit, but your brain will love it.
Says something about you if you cant enjoy life, love and friends when you have to accept reality (no magic creation from eh..oh wait, a RIB or a pool of muck HAHAHAHA!)
"we don't believe that"
Many theists believe in a much greater god than you do..one who set up evolution and this whole universe with a plan in mind. No need to magically pull bodies out of dirt or ribs.. ;)
Kirk and Ray, you dotards pick up a fucking physics book godammit. I have a ninth grade education and I know a helluva lot more than the two of you put together. Fucking stupid fucks. Oh, I checked out your pulltheplugonatheism site and let me tell you, it perfectly demonstrates how ignorant you shits are. If I was Dawkins I wouldnt waste my time on your pathetic asses either. God is on his way out fuckers.
@homer091 You are in the Father and the Father is in you. If a is b, then b is a. You are in virtue, and virtue is in you. Therefore, he is the giver AND the gift.
God's gift is God himself. If it is some other way, please do tell.
@JFKlone If a is b and b is a. That would mean, according to your logic, that God is human and the human is a God. You sure that's what you want people to take with them from your comment?
@GaolisVideoLog Good point. It would be more accurate to say, in the context of "set theory", that a is IN b, as b is IN a. That is to say, man is IN G-d, and G-d is in man. The drop of water is in the ocean, and the ocean is in the drop of water.
Ray, you dumb shit! The big bang is NOT proof of a non-eternal universe. The big bang just proves that the universe was condensed into a singularity and expanded outward 13.7 billion years ago.
By your own admission, you've claimed to not be scientifically gifted and to not have studied the same issues that you aim to discredit. You're a mindless pawn of your own backwards agenda. Kirk Cameron's a little shit, too. I hope he realizes how stupid croco-duck is. Croco-duck!?! Really!?
The "big bang" theory addresses the perceived expansionary (i.e. radial) vector, but how does it account for the spin (i.e. angular) vector, seeing as spin, or rotation, is a property of all particles and celestial bodies? Also, the perceived expansion of the universe is based on the Doppler effect creating the observed redshifting of the light emanating from distant stars and galaxies. But, what if the redshifting is caused by Compton scattering through interstellar dust?
Well, then please DO explain, if you can. And, if you can't, then please refer me to some person or publication which can. Failing that, see ya in hell.
Yeah very smart, you use scientific sources to discredit the universe being eternal only because it supports your stance. Yet you deny all scientific sources that evolution happened. Pick science or pick creationism dont mix both.
You cherry pick the bible and you cherry pick science.
But the universe isnt eternal. Check out the big rip. But yes evolution and the big bang is as accurate as gravity makes my pencil keep on falling at school. DAMN YOU NEWTON!!!
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Lets all go to heaven with god for eternity woohooo lets slice our wrists now... ow wait thats a sin... aaah i guess you can confess at the gate no biggy.
In my experience when push comes to shove most people believe that whatever force created the universe must've been inteligent to design it. The debate is about whether or not this is the same force we call god.
If the universe were eternal it would make no difference! God dont need time. I believe god can do things in the past future or present, or if god decided something has always been there it would've always been there.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Not being sarcastic at all,, I for one don't care if the universe is eternal, however, my Soul is eternal, and it will be in Heaven with The Creator, God. I want to say thank You Lord for that assurance, and peace that only comes from You.
Wow, you guys reject evolution but accept the Big Bang Theory without question? Confirmation bias fail.
StygianDysnomia 3 days ago
the big bang shows the universe can't be eternal statically but, it was in a prior quantom state which could.
lxAgnosticxl 1 month ago
1. You christians use the same arguments over and over, refuse to listen to the facts when we tell you, and keep yourselves willfully ignorant.
2. Quantum randomness states that something CAN come from nothing but only for brief times. Our universe may have happened by chance but for whatever reason, more than a small amount of matter was created, something on the scale of 10^85 grams.
3. From where did your god come?
sorry8140 1 month ago
right - the universe is not eternal - therefore the abrahamic god of the jews did it ?
or - the world is round - therefore the flying spaghetti monster made it ?
two equivalent statements
and in what possible effect would this have on atheism?
alex29443 1 month ago
Yes OUR big bang or LITTLE POP is not Eternal but this does not diminish all the other neighboring big bangs
SEE wwwWWWw /,. hydrogenappliances DOTT COMM / bigbang.html
teomeimf 3 months ago
Yes nice "Let's post a video about universe not being eternal" "What's that the same people made a video that evolution is proven?" "Humbug!" "What the same people made a video dating the earth to billions of years?" "Hogwash!" See how you are pick and choosing.
scrap222666 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@scrap222666 Yes OUR big bang or LITTLE POP is not Eternal but this does not diminish all the other neighboring big bangs
SEE wwwWWWw /,. hydrogenappliances DOTT COMM / bigbang.html
teomeimf 3 months ago
@MrHobiecat
And by the way, my time is too valuable to bother answering to kids who use bad language, so if you don't hear from me again, you know the reason.
MindTheHeart 8 months ago
@MindTheHeart I see, its OK for YOU to refer to someone elses ideas as crap, but oh boo hoo when it all falls on your head!! You gotta have SOME reason to bail on this discussion, because you have nothing to offer but the same tired old spin and excuses for why the bible doesnt really mean what it plainly SAYS.
MrHobiecat 8 months ago
@MrHobiecat
You appear to have gotten all your information from some die-hard fundamentalist believers. If you check out the original wording of Genesis you would see that the word "create" is not used where you think. The words used about the sun is that God "let there be light", which is very different from "creating" and that he "had made" it at some point in time. God actually "created" the universe, which means to create from nothing - which is stunningly similar to the Big Bang model.
MindTheHeart 8 months ago
people who believe ancient jewish goat farmers when they wrote the universe was created in six days, 77 generations before the time of jesus
are debating the merits of physics and astronomy.
no matter HOW the universe came into existance, or whether it always existed, it did NOT HAPPEN 6000 years ago, so your bible is still not EVEN wrong
its STILL TOTALLY ABSURD!
MrHobiecat 8 months ago
@MrHobiecat
Don't buy into that Kent Hovind crap! There is not a single verse or group of verses in the Bible that gives away the age of the universe or the earth. Among schooled believers it has ALWAYS been common to think of the "days" in Genesis as figurative speech or at least God's own days - obviously because there was no humans around nor any cycle of day and night in the beginning.
MindTheHeart 8 months ago
@MindTheHeart genesis lists the geneology from adam to abraham, giving the age of each father when the next in line was born, so its very simple math to draw a timeline from adam to abraham. The geneology of jesus listed in matthew lists a different line from adam to jesus, and its not a strech to make simple assumption. The bible lists 77 generations from adam to jesus, which puts the creation of the universe around 4000 BC and noahs flood around 2500BC...
MrHobiecat 8 months ago
@MrHobiecat
Again, don't buy into that Kent Hovind crap! The way you argue implies that either the fundamentalist way of interpreting the Bible has to be correct - and if not, then to heck with all of it. I would say THANK GOD that fundamentalist interpretation way does not work, because if it did you might as well have become one of those cold besserwisser fundamentalists. God's way of inviting us to a relationship with him is not through that cold and narrow-mided way.
MindTheHeart 8 months ago
@MindTheHeart ..geneisis denotes the six DAYS of creation with the note" Sunrise and sunset - one DAY, even though the sun is not created until day THREE.
The 4th commandment says you shall work for 6 DAYS and rest on the 7th DAY, GUESS WHY? It goes on to say "because god created the world in 6 DAYS..." the punishment for breaking this commandment is death by stoning, so if god meant six million years, or 6 hundred million years, a LOT OF PEOPLE GOT STONED TO DEATH FOR NOTHING!
MrHobiecat 8 months ago
@MrHobiecat
What a mess you are making! If you read about other sabbaths, for the land and for the which are mentioned along with man's week, you would see that there are other lenghts to the different sabbaths. This shows that it is not a 24 hour period which is the point, but a natural relationship between work and rest for God's creation which is subject to the laws of nature. God himself is not limited by nature and has his own "days" - which can be "a thousand years".
MindTheHeart 8 months ago
@MrHobiecat
Furthermore, the Bible does NOT say that the sun was CREATED on day three. It was only VISIBLE from the surface of the earth at that time. The reason is actually pretty simple: Because of thick layers of clouds which covered the earth in the beginning. This is what Job 38 says, and it is also what science says.
MindTheHeart 8 months ago
@MrHobiecat
Having said that, you also need to know that the biblical genealogies are NOT complete! Names are omitted, and it is clear for everyone to see. Nobody knows how many names that have been left out, but it is clear that it is the most interesting ones, the famous and the infamous, which has been recorded. You might ask "Why couldn't God have filled in all of it so you could know everything?" Well, do you think God wants people who doesn't bother to think a little for themselves?
MindTheHeart 8 months ago
@MindTheHeart you have either never read the geneology in genesis or you are full of kwrap. AGAIN: It lists A was the father of B, who was the father of C, who was the father of D.... There is NO PLACE to insert more people into the list because it is contiguous from ADAM TO ABRAHAM, and it is picked up from there in other places in the bible.
The bible makes very SPECIFIC claims about things a god did. There is no other way to read it except for what the WORDS SAY.
MrHobiecat 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Just because our universe used to be a singularity does not mean the energy it formed from wasn’t. eternal.
sloosh6000 9 months ago
Just because our universe used to be a singularity does not mean the energy it formed from wasn’t.
sloosh6000 9 months ago
What caused God? Secondly Matter cannot be created nor destroyed=eternal
iliveon 10 months ago
@iliveon and the 2nd law of thermodynamics states that if the universe was eternal (if energy was eternal) then we would have reached complete entropy and never reached this point in time because you would be applying properties of infinite to the universe.
YouMadButISwag 9 months ago
@YouMadButISwag You don't know physics, can you stop? Do you even know what energy is?
iliveon 9 months ago
@iliveon "Because there is a law like gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing...Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist. It is not necessary to invoke God" -Stephen Hawking
cont..
YouMadButISwag 9 months ago
@iliveon ...cont.
Ok, the break down on Hawking. What Hawking meant by a "law like gravity" was that quantum gravity allows for the universe to appear via quantum flux. This theory entails a "wave-function of the universe" however -which Hawking calls "phi." Phi does all of the stuff that God is supposed to do, so according to Hawking we don't need God. The catch is that Phi is self-aware. (according to Orch-OR)
Meaning he was almost right except for one tiny detail: Phi is God
YouMadButISwag 9 months ago
@YouMadButISwag God is a conscious mind without a physical brain, most theist would believe. Phi is not a conscious mind. A deist could believe in a god that made everything, but doesn't interfere. Me being atheist, I do not believe a mind created anything... And I would never call a physical thing a god.
iliveon 9 months ago
@iliveon phi has no physical units. it is a pure mathematical probability, and can exist as a Platonic entity. phi is a self collapsing wave function, and self collapsing wave functions are minds (Orch-OR model). In addition to literally being a mind, the wave function of the universe is:
Omnipresent: (Via the definition of wave-functions)
Omnipotent (Via the Zeno effect)
Omniscient (via the holographic principle)
& Eternal (via the Wheeler-DeWitt equation)
... otherwise known as God
YouMadButISwag 9 months ago
@YouMadButISwag So basically you are labeling a pure mathematical, physical property a God?
iliveon 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@iliveon "So basically you are labeling a pure mathematical, physical property a God?"
No. The wave function of the universe, or phi, is self collapsing [Hawking]. Self collapsing wave functions are minds [ORCH OR]. So, Phi is a mind. Phi can exist as a Platonic entity. Platonic entities [spirits] are abstract entities that exist independently of the sensible world.
YouMadButISwag 9 months ago
@YouMadButISwag "... otherwise known as God"
No, you're calling it god. I could have something giant with scales, claws, wings and a tail and call it a dragon but it's just an animatronic robot that happens to look like one. I could be white and hairy but that doesn't make me a Yeti.
viridismonasteriense 9 months ago
Every building has a builder, every painting has a painter.
And every builder and every painter have parents.
fail argument is fail.
imperator332 10 months ago 2
@Philosophier121 Okay, fair enough. Thank you for the response. In that case I have nothing more to ask or say. Good discussion.
HaveFaithInScience 11 months ago
@Philosophier121 You never directly answered my question. Do you believe god is eternal? I am assuming, though, your answer is yes because you instead jump to explaining why you exempt him. I am rather unsure of your position though. You claim you exempt god from your claim "nothing can be eternal" because he is greater than us? Do you mean to say he is greater than the logic that denies himself the possibility to be eternal?
HaveFaithInScience 11 months ago
@Philosophier121 Do you not then believe god is eternal? If so, why exempt him from your previous statement, and if not, then why does he not need a creator?
HaveFaithInScience 11 months ago
@Philosophier121 Do you believe in god? Regardless, I, too, agree with your conclusion. Nothing can be eternal. I am merely trying to show the obvious flaw in the first cause argument. Assuming its premises hold true, the conclusion is a leap of faith. All it proves is that a first cause must exist, never implying anything about this cause. Nevertheless, I reject its premises. I do have a model for how I believe the universe began and does not invoke eternality.
HaveFaithInScience 11 months ago
Way of the Master is just a bunch of idiots that know nothing of science and dwell proudly in their ignorance by appealing to authority and pressing it upon uneducated individuals. Yes, the universe, OUR universe, had a beginning at the big bang. What is that supposed to imply? That a god had to create it? NO! Just that something created it. It points not to a god but rather an eternal first cause. Why make the assumption that it had to be a sentient entity and not a quantum vacuum?
HaveFaithInScience 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Due to the holographic principle when combined with the second law of thermodynamics we can now say definitively that the universe is not eternal: watch?v=5xqztxP0SJc
JohananRaatz 11 months ago
The more beats per second, the greater the work. Before 1902, Tesla already had numerous patents for the use of “radiant energy”, both from “synthetic sources” and from “the natural media” of the universe. The Nazis and the Trilateralists stole Tesla’s flying saucer invention, and the U.S. government helped them take it to Germany, and now conceal it from us. Nikola Tesla was an Atheist/humanist, who detested mysticism, Einstein, Communism, and the Nazis.
apollomiami83 1 year ago
Energy can only be expressed in reality, during “changes in form”. Of the two equations, only Tesla’s equation can be correct, since it is the only one taking resonance into account, which is the rate per second at which electromagnetic oscillations or “beats” occur. Without oscillations, nothing is converted in form. The frequency of electromagnetic radiation is the “beats per second”, and the level of “force” or “voltage” at which work is done.
apollomiami83 1 year ago
Of the two equations/metaphysics, the Illuminati naturally prefer the latter, since it supports their sales at the gas pump, and the suppression of flying saucer technology via their Big Lie Program.
apollomiami83 1 year ago
The equations of Tesla and Einstein are in direct conflict, because Tesla’s equation is consistent with the universe as a dynamic, ever-changing, eternal, infinite perpetual-motion system, while Einstein’s equation describes the universe as a finite, temporary, Big Bang-type event, expanding from an ultimate, fictitious, ‘original explosion’, which is continually winding down.
apollomiami83 1 year ago
Mass appears impertinent, and “C = E/R” (i.e. Tesla’s equation, which excludes mass) appears true, saying that, at C, Energy E, is divided by resonant frequency R.
apollomiami83 1 year ago
Albert Einstein’s fundamentally subjective and unsound reasoning errors were responsible for the wrongness of his theories, which could not be corrected by all his mathematical mumbo-jumbo. Einstein’s contradictory theory presupposes that mass is not “energy”, since, only during some non-spontaneous process of interconversion of mass into radiant energy, or radiant energy into mass, could “work be done”.
apollomiami83 1 year ago
The work of Albert Einstein is useful to the Trilateral Commission, not only for its fuzzy thinking, but also because of its support for the Big Bang, and other Big Lies of Big Science. Einstein was undoubtedly a great mathematician, but metaphysically and epistemologically, he was an idiot.
apollomiami83 1 year ago
No single being had the skill to make the world - for how can an immaterial god create that which is material? How could god have made the world without any raw material? If you say he made this first, and then the world, you are face with an endless regression. If you declare that the raw material arose naturally you fall into another fallacy, for the whole universe might thus have been its own creator, and have risen equally naturally.
apollomiami83 1 year ago
The universe is eternal. Just ask the scientist Nikola Tesla, Fred Hoyle, and many of the Jain scientist of ancient and modern India. Some foolish men declare that a Creator made the world. The doctrine that the world was created is ill-advised, and should be rejected. If god created the world, where was he before creation? If you say he was transcendent then, and needed no support, where is he now?
apollomiami83 1 year ago
OKAY? So the universe isnt eternal..well, if it CANNOT be; How come your sky god is??? *lol* /But Please
PimpMyMind 1 year ago
@PimpMyMind f it CANNOT be; How come your sky god is???
Here's how:
1.) The wave-function of the universe is self-collapsing.
2.) Self-collapsing wave-functions are minds. (Penrose's quantum mind model Orch-OR)
3.) Therefore the wave-function of the universe is a mind: watch?v=Kj8UdHuP5l8
JohananRaatz 11 months ago
you do know when they were talking about eternal they meant it would exist forever.....its because of the stretching effect the universe has and it will get so thin that atoms would be ripped apart...
BladedArrowTBGamer 1 year ago
Existence is impossible to create. Stop listening to your Pastor and get educated.
hubpages com/hub/CREATION-is-IMPOSSIBLE-Space-Matter-Motion-are-ETERNAL
hubpages com/hub/UNCAUSED-FIRST-CAUSE-Argument-for-Creation-REFUTED
fatfist 1 year ago
@fatfist so that mean i eternal i just change state i mena that obserable even in the univers matter changes state.
TheLovesoul1 1 year ago
@TheLovesoul1
"so that mean i eternal "
You gotta talk coherently, love.
Your atoms are eternal. You are entity that was assembled from eternal atoms. Your atoms get recycled eternally.
This is basic stuff, love.
fatfist 1 year ago
@AIVIBITION
"But every painting has an artisit behind it do they not?"
- The artist in the painting rearranges matter (paint). If you´d apply that logic to the universe, it means you´re arguing for a ´god´ that rearranges already existing matter to create the universe.. But you´re arguing for a god that doesnt just rearranges existing matter/energy, you argue that matter/energy was poofed out of NOTHING in existence! So your analogy fails terribly!..sorry,truth hurts sometimes
ReligionInTheBin 1 year ago 21
@ReligionInTheBin
The Big Bang says the same thing. That everything just exploded from nothing.
SethS117 9 months ago
@SethS117
The Bang Theory makes no claims as to how the initial mass got there only how space as we know it came to be.
A Deist claim is some form of being was an initiator or first cause without itself having a first cause, not very reasonable but not outrageous.
A theist claim is an anthromorphic God exists who created the universe without having being created, who cares about human opinions of him/herself, handmade the planet in days and has laws for the inhabitants of this speck of rock.
Chinomareno 9 months ago
Can there be an infinite 'amount' of energy (substance), or will there always just be a finite amount of energy (substance) no matter how much there is or how large the amount of energy (substance) there is? If there isn't an infinite amount of energy, then energy in all reality is limited and finite, thus there has to be something outside of the realm of energy, something eternal. It couldn't be an eternal void/ vacumn because that would put us back to the "everything came from nothing" delima.
starsheild7 1 year ago
@AIVIBITION
One thing may be true, so I'm going to apply it to everything and just assume it's true! Woohoo!
We have science to test for bullshit claims like this for a reason.
chbrules 1 year ago
@chbrules I was just responding to the analogy ReligionInTheBin was giving I wasn't applying it to everything.
GFunkMachine 1 year ago
The universe is defined as all that exists. For believers, god exists. Therefore, god is inside the universe. How can one create the universe while having to exist inside of it for the very sake of existing?
Another perspective: The universe is all of existence. To demonstrate that the universe had a beginning, you would have ot demonstrate how existence could at one point not exist.
Good luck.
chbrules 1 year ago
Okay, so scientists used modern cosmology and astrophysics to determine that the universe is expanding and not eternal.
Therefore Atheism is wrong.
I... I just... what? Are you sure the way of the master is not just some amazing Monty Python sketch or something?
A0DBOB 1 year ago
Actually, the universe as a whole IS eternal if viewed from the whole point. While you cannot regress infinitely backwards, you CAN proceed infinitely forward in time. As in, towards infinity. Furthermore, while the Big Bang was the beginning of the observable universe, we cannot say that the universe at all did not exist before it, only the observable universe as we currently understand and know it and as it behaves under own classification systems.
tskasa1 1 year ago
The big bang doesn't prove that the universe had a definite beginning, it only proves OUR universe did. I follow a Multiverse theory.
HaveFaithInScience 1 year ago
All the physicists presented as authorities on the universe in the History channel doc were atheists!
pwnUgood 1 year ago
Well if you were created for your enjoyment than I would agree, but you were not, you were created for the golry of God, and you will give Him glory in one of two ways whether you belive it or not. Worship Him in spirit and truth for eternity, or the smoke of your torment will rise before the throne of God for eternity. And all those who praise Him, knowing that they also deserve Hell, will be all the more gratefull that He sent His Son to save us from our sin. So party it up!
WorthDieing4 1 year ago
Sounds like a bunch of Anti-Christs talking in circles and how they are not going to believe in God because they would rather fornicate, masterbate, hate, cuss, get drunk and high. I used to be just like that so I am speaking from a experiantial standpoint. God is watching and recording everything you say and do. You will give an account for you life on Judgment day, even if you dont believe you will. That is reality and truth, sorry guys but you only have 2 choices TURN OR BURN! Please Turn!
WorthDieing4 1 year ago
@WorthDieing4 Which one of the many many Gods wants you to stop drinking? I wont follow any God who wants to rob me of my freedoms and control me, on pain of eternal punishment for a minor indiscretion...
Seems like believing in that god would be a really bad deal. No benefits whatsoever.
genericmember1 1 year ago
@WorthDieing4 what's wrong with masterbating, hating, cussing, getting drunk and high? According to the bible actions doesn't matter, you can do what the fuck you want to just as long as you accept jesus as your saviour.
Homofob07 1 year ago
@WorthDieing4 you just say that god is watching but it doesnt make it true at all, you just base your point on your "beliefs". It's just an invalid information, you can't hope to scare an atheist or make him become a theist with such "statements" of yours.
Kenoburned 1 year ago
@Kenoburned My beliefs are based on Jesus rising from the dead. If He is still dead, then you dont have anything to worry about. If He is seated at the right hand of God, youre in big trouble along with all that refuse to humble themselves. Being that, I personaly have been touched by God and the same power that rose Jesus from the dead. I love you enough to tell you that its real, He is real, Hell is real, and you have an unavoidable appointment with death. Please at least consider it.
WorthDieing4 1 year ago
@WorthDieing4 can you be certain he really rised from the dead? can you be certain Hell is real? No, you can only BELIEVE they are because there are absolutely no evidences that can show they are real. Therefore, you base your point on your beliefs.
Kenoburned 1 year ago
@Kenoburned The only proof I have is myself. Before surrending my life to Christ, I was a slave to sin and loved sin. Today I do not live in sin because the power of God through Jesus Christ has delivered me from adiction, hate, lust, anger, greed, lying, adultery. You name it, sin defined who I was and could see no way out. Belive it or not we are all slaves to something, today my master is righteousness. Today I live with a clear consience. Death has lost its sting. JOY UNSPEAKABLE!
WorthDieing4 1 year ago
@WorthDieing4 You see now? your proof is yourself! same thing with atheists, their proof is themselves :)
Kenoburned 1 year ago
*yawn* The statement made in the title of this video is not one which I am qualified to confirm, deny or debate (oh, and judging by your desperate ignorance of most areas of science, you aren't qualified either, thewayofthemaster). What I can say is that even if this statement were true, it would not affect atheism in any way, shape or form, because it doesn't prove even to the smallest degree that any god exists. Fail.
TheWhole7ruth 1 year ago
THE BIG BANG WAS NOT THE BEGINNING OF THE UNIVERSE THE BIG BANG WAS THE CREATION OF ALL MATTER INSIDE IT> BEFORE THE BIG BANG WAS THE VACUM OF TOTALITY WHICH IS A VOID SPACE OF ZERO CONTAINING ENERGEY THAT HAS THE ABILITY TO PRODUCE KINETIC ENERGY. this video explains it!
//ww w(.)youtube(.)c om/watch?v=UprgjJFAzLo
linksfiery22 1 year ago
A painting had a beginning.
A painting is just the name we give to the arrangement of paint on a canvas
Does that mean it was magically created out of nothing?..no
All the matter of the painting already existed, it was "just" rearranged
The universe had a beginning
The universe is usually seen (by nitwits) as the state it is now
Does it mean it´s magically created?..no
All the (quantum) energy did exist from which this universe (and perhaps a multi-verse) emerged..Religion In The Bin!
ReligionInTheBin 1 year ago 47
ReligionInTheBin, "All the quantum energy did exist from which this universe emerged".
This statement does lead to a greater problem. Where did quantum energy, matter, mass, motion, force, laws, constants, space, time come from? Was there any design or purpose for the universe to exist? If you are going to say that the universe had emerged from "nothing" or a "multi-verse", then you have shifted the regress problem one step further and would need to explain where the multiverse had come from.
AustralianAstronomer 1 year ago
tskasa1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AustralianAstronomer
"space,"
Has always existed.
"time"
Has always existed. It's just that time as we measure it didn't "exist."
"Was there any design or purpose for the universe to exist?"
No. None. At. All.
"then you have shifted the regress problem one step further and would need to explain where the multiverse had come from."
Exact same problem with God.
tskasa1 1 year ago
@AustralianAstronomer
"If you are going to say that the universe had emerged from "nothing""
Except that science never affirms that as its official position. Although there is one (credible and plausible theory) that skims around there, but in such an instance nothing is defined as it normally is in science. Which is far different from how you define nothing in your every day life.
tskasa1 1 year ago
@AustralianAstronomer
You assume they had a beginning. Due to the potential energy of vacuum energy, the universe always was, just as potential point. When a phase transition occurs from potential to kinetic energy from this vacuum energy (ie. big bangs), we get a new "universal bubble," of sorts, in the universe.
chbrules 1 year ago
@AustralianAstronomer
"then you have shifted the regress problem one step further and would need to explain where the multiverse had come from."
No I dont.
Something is probably eternal and foundational. I say it´s still physical (though perhaps not based on our physics which is limited and solely based on our direct environment ie our universe)
You say it´s poofed out of absolutely NOTHING by a far complexer intelligent being..which is also completely against all theistic design-arguments..
ReligionInTheBin 1 year ago 8
@ReligionInTheBin
"You say it's poofed out of absolutely NOTHING by a far complexer intelligent being".
A bit of a straw-man argument there. I did not imply the existence of a supreme being to account for the origins of the universe.
"Something is probably eternal and foundational. I say it's still physical".
This is pure speculation, based upon NO empirical evidence. No rebuttal is necessary to this statement.
AustralianAstronomer 1 year ago
@AustralianAstronomer
"I did not imply the existence of a supreme being to account for the origins of the universe."
What do you imply then?..
"This is pure speculation, based upon NO empirical evidence. No rebuttal is necessary to this statement"
Bogus!
We both accept the physical world exists (with 'world' I mean reality).
If you posit, or wait, you dont... ;)
Well, if somebody posits the existence of something nonphysical, the burdon of proof is ENTIRELY upon them..nice try though.
ReligionInTheBin 1 year ago 4
@ReligionInTheBin
"What do you imply then?"
I did not imply anything about the origins of the universe or the existence of a supreme being. Nor do I dispute that the physical world is existent. Perhaps you should read my comments more carefully before making absurd statements.
If somebody such as yourself has posited that the universe did come about by "something eternal and foundational" then you must prove this claim.
AustralianAstronomer 1 year ago
@AustralianAstronomer
You're not really an astronomer are you?..
I feel like I'm talking to a child here.
"..universe did come about by "something eternal and foundational" then you must prove this "
Two words: infinite regress.
You even mentioned it yourself. Basic logic dictates that either things can start to exist from absolutely nothing, or something foundational which is eternal has to exist.
The point was, if someone posits the supernatural, the burdon of proof is upon them..*sigh*
ReligionInTheBin 1 year ago 4
"Two words: infinite regress."
An infinite universe is not supported by any empirical evidence. The consensus within modern cosmology is that the universe did have a finite beginning approximately 13.73 billion years ago based upon four lines of evidence:
1) Cosmic microwave background radition discovered by Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson in 1964.
2) Hubble's law and the expansion of space.
3) Abundance of primordial elements.
4) Galaxy formation and evolution.
Get yourself an education!
AustralianAstronomer 1 year ago
@AustralianAstronomer
HHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAHAH
You are 100% NOT an astronomer, please stop embarassing yourself kid!
Infinite regress has NOTHING to do with an infinite universe, you clearly haven´t even heard the basic arguments and counterarguments in this debate O_O
Search google for the word ´infinite regress´..
..you´ll see why I can´t take you serious x_x
Goodbye, I´ll ignore you from here on.
(Please educate yourself and read/watch some regarding the cosmological argument)
ReligionInTheBin 1 year ago 3
@ReligionInTheBin
"You are 100% NOT an astronomer, please stop embarrassing yourself kid".
The name "AustralianAstronomer" was chosen to reflect two aspects of my personal life: 1) My citizenship (Australian) and 2) My recreational hobby for over 20 years (Astronomy, Cosmology, Planetary Science). In addition, I have joined numerous Star Gazer's Clubs, Geographic Societies and visited the largest planetariums and telescopes in the Southern Hemisphere.
AustralianAstronomer 1 year ago 2
@ReligionInTheBin
"Infinite regress has NOTHING to do with an infinite universe".
Infinite regress is a concept dealing with an unending causal chain of terms in a sequence. Since you have proposed the concept of something "eternal and foundational" you are implying infinite regression of events within space-time.
"Goodbye, I'll ignore you from here on".
That is because Poxflaza and myself called your bluff. For someone who is "104" years old you are not that bright in philosophy or science.
AustralianAstronomer 1 year ago
Reageren op deze video... Continue:
"Nor do I dispute that the physical world is existent."
That's the exact point I was making, sherlock..
We agree on that, so anything else (like the nonphysical or a god) needs to be backed up by evidence and/or valid and sound logic. In other words, I dont have to prove the universe came from something physical. The theist has to prove it came from something nonphysical.
I'll ignore more comments from you if you cant even grasp simple arguments..
ReligionInTheBin 1 year ago 3
@AustralianAstronomer
"I did not imply anything about the origins of the universe or the existence of a supreme being."
Looking at all your (nonsensical) comments here towards various people, you certainly do seem to imply something..now either that or you're just a troll (I'm beginning to suspect which one it is).
I dont believe for easecond you're schooled in astronomy.
Perhaps time to actually read up on some logic, philosophy and science books?..
ReligionInTheBin 1 year ago 3
@ReligionInTheBin
What comments? Please provide an example of one. Personally, I think it is you who is trolling. Reading your comments on this video with Poxflaza and P4GS has clearly demonstrated that. There is no reason to further argue with a person such as yourself who clearly has a lack of knowledge on astronomy and cosmology. Almost every contemporary physicist has accepted that the universe did have a finite beginning. Perhaps you should be reading up on Stephen Hawking's books.
AustralianAstronomer 1 year ago
@ReligionInTheBin your an idiot an if anybody actually tried to comprehend your comment they would see your making no sense at all...your comment about the painting counters itself.
poxflaza 1 year ago
@poxflaza
Hahaha!
Ok, let´s just accept your assertions without any reasoning...on faith..much like your whole worldview is based on..excellent idea ;)
ReligionInTheBin 1 year ago 6
@ReligionInTheBin yea and lets all accept your without question that sounds like a better idea right? and it seems you have no life and this video is the only thing making you feel good about yourself waking up every morning hopeing that somebody doesnt agree with you in this video so you can further post your stupidity here.
poxflaza 1 year ago
@poxflaza
Haha, you make no sense at all..
- I DID reason, instead of just asserting like you blind sheeps do.
- Have you seen the dates of the comments you commented on???...I usually ignore all the contradictory incoherent rambles of...ahum..'christians'. Only once in a while, when they really are as empty and nonsensical as yours, I respond ;)
Ignorance is bliss, keep bashing painful truths instead of being honest, reasonable and educated.
Cheers!
ReligionInTheBin 1 year ago 8
@ReligionInTheBin tipical ignorant fuck on youtube coming to conclusions just because he has a couple of thumbs up on his comment....mister dickhead i realy hate to inform you i am not christian so yea go back to your fantasy world of youtube sitting on your ass bashing christians just because your an elite amongst us and nobody needs to prove you wrong since its a known fact you are and always will be correct no matter what anybody says right?
poxflaza 1 year ago
@poxflaza
Well, start 'correcting' me..
..so far you've only shown your inabillity to grasp any sort of basic science and logic/philosophy. I only laugh at your insults (typical hypocritical behavior of theists:) so I dont mind you calling me whatever you please.
But if that's all you have, I'm afraid you're the closeminded ignorant ****head ;)
I'm waiting (any similar response I'll ignore though..)
Good luck, cheers
ReligionInTheBin 1 year ago 2
@ReligionI you just expressed how i feel about you perfectly
our conversation is pointless since all your doing is very politely sending me insults and just further goes to show how your just some troll who wants to feel special in youtube since your a failure in real life you seem to have the need to bash on others beliefs and lives how sad
and what makes you think im a thiest? how do you know i just hate ignorant SHITheads like you who go around insulting others and not respecting religions
poxflaza 1 year ago
@poxflaza
Pot...kettle..
I still merely here hypocritical ramblings. NO argument whatsoever.
Again, pot...kettle
Still waiting, if you call somebody ignorant, you should be able to form some sort of argument and 'correct' them.
So far, you seem not that educated, reasonable or even interested in an honest discussion. Seems like you're the troll..
Sadly enough for you, I stay on topic and all you've done is show more ignorance and lack of arguments.
Goodbye kid, keep lying to yourself
ReligionInTheBin 1 year ago 6
@ReligionInTheBin yea your right your not worth nobodys time since you just dont care what anybody tells you and you are and forever shall be right correct? i will leave you to your domain wich is this video were you are the one eyed leader who will lead the blind to the "truth" even though believing in god or not is rendered useless in this society and in reality nobody cares about your comments in the world besides this video wich only athiest trolls who give you a thumbs up.
poxflaza 1 year ago
@poxflaza
Still no meaning in your words. Mere accusations, nothing to back aything up or even an attempt at commenting on the content of this video and what I said.
You are the perfect definition of a troll.
Just let the grown-ups talk if all you can do is display your ignorance,inabillity to reason and simply yell like a child.
And the fact that you dont see how history, wars,morality, politics and almost everything in life is influenced by religion, shows utter blindness/foolishness..
Adios
ReligionInTheBin 1 year ago 3
@ReligionInTheBin okay so every war was started because of religion, and every politician actions are influenced by his or her religion? jesus christ! grow a brain and quit blaming the worlds problems on a book its not religion that sturs shit up its the people trieng to enforce their religion on others so in reality its the peoples fault...the bible has not been responsible for one soul in the history of time.realise ignorant hatefull people are the reason we are how we are.
poxflaza 1 year ago
@poxflaza
Last comment, since you are clearly either a 15 year old indoctrinated rather unintelligent kid, or..I have no hope for you.
You claimed that 'nobody cared' about these questions and religion had almost no place in people's lifes.
I merely stated it does and many things are..(listen carefully now) INFLUENCED by religion.
Your strawman that you make of it shows your weakness of your initial comment.
But, yes..many (politicians) would admit that their entire life is influenced by it.
ReligionInTheBin 1 year ago 6
@poxflaza
I would not spend any more of my precious time arguing with ReligionInTheBin. Clearly he is just arguing with people for the sake of playing the devil's advocate. He is the type of person that thinks he is right about everything on subjects he is not even qualified in. I am amazed that people with any common sense could give his comments a thumbs up. He has the audacity to call everyone who argues with him a troll, yet it is him who fits this definition perfectly.
AustralianAstronomer 1 year ago
@AustralianAstronomer
LOL
"He has the audacity to call everyone who argues with him a troll"
You both had no single valid argument and I cared to show that. Poxflaza didnt even try, he was a troll from the beginning on..
You failed with your contradictory arguments, and couldnt defend them, so therefore you call me a troll..typical.
Funny how you spend all your time showing the universe had a beginning,while I never argued against that ;)
Take some philosophy classes
ReligionInTheBin 1 year ago 3
@ReligionInTheBin
"You both had no single valid argument and I cared to show that".
Au contraire. Both Poxflaza's arguments and mine were perfectly valid and the "best" you could do was set up straw-man arguments and attempt to "rebut" them. Nice try!
"You failed with your contradictory arguments".
Interestingly that you have never pointed out one despite numerous invitations to do so.
In addition, you did posit "something eternal and foundational" but never showed any proof for what this was.
AustralianAstronomer 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AustralianAstronomer Yes OUR big bang or LITTLE POP is not Eternal but this does not diminish all the other neighboring big bangs
SEE wwwWWWw /,. hydrogenappliances DOTT COMM / bigbang.html
teomeimf 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Respond to this video... Yes OUR big bang or LITTLE POP is not Eternal but this does not diminish all the other neighboring big bangs
SEE wwwWWWw /,. hydrogenappliances DOTT COMM / bigbang.html
teomeimf 3 months ago
@ReligionInTheBin I'm assuming you're referring to a spatial multiverse theory in which there exists an extremely large, inflating fabric of spacetime in which matter will spontaneously "cool out" when a scalar field's potential reaches a certain limit. Even this model, however, runs into a problem or origination singularity like the Big Bang: since this multiverse spacetime is constantly inflating, that means it was smaller yesterday and the day before and so on and so forth, leading to
p4gs 1 year ago
@ReligionInTheBin "All the (quantum) energy did exist from which this universe (and perhaps a multi-verse) emerged" - This is speculation, we don't know what happened at the beggining.
Teralek 1 year ago
@Teralek
Nonsense,
show me how energy matter can be created..
..you wont be able to, since matter/energy only changes form.
No speculation, just fact.
Now, you´re free to believe it can be created out of nothing..and yep, THAT would be pure speculation, based upon no logic and no observations. Some even believe that things can be created out of nothing, but it needs a god to do that..eh..nothing. They make videos like the one above ;)
ReligionInTheBin 1 year ago 11
@ReligionInTheBin I wonder when pseudo scientists are going to have the humility to say that science has it's limits... we humans think we know everything. We know nothing really... Cosmology is not yet fully explained! I'm not supporting any theory! I'm just saying we don't know what hapened in the first moments of the Big Bang theory.
Teralek 1 year ago
@Teralek
"wonder when pseudo scientists are going to have the humility to say that science has it's limits"
The pseudo scientists are the ones who dont understand or simply lie about science in order to form fallacious arguments for the existence of their god.
Every atheist and every scientist understands that science doenst prove or disprove god (due to the increasingly smaller and faguer defined untestable description of god). We´re talking logic and philosophy here.
ReligionInTheBin 1 year ago 5
This has been flagged as spam show
@ReligionInTheBin Yes OUR big bang or LITTLE POP is not Eternal but this does not diminish all the other neighboring big bangs
SEE wwwWWWw /,. hydrogenappliances DOTT COMM / bigbang.html
teomeimf 3 months ago
@ReligionInTheBin That doesn't even come close to explaining how matter originated. Law of conservation of energy states that energy is neither created nor destroyed rather transformed, while you could use this formula now, it still does not in any way account for how the matter and energy got there in the first place. Religion in the bin? I don't think so.
VilianR 1 year ago
@ReligionInTheBin where did the paint and the canvas come from?
mariomario8888 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mariomario8888
"where did the paint and the canvas come from?"
From existing matter (I already answered that in the analogy in the top comment,last sentence)
Your question perfectly shows how this, by theists proposed, analogy fails:
If you compare the universe to the painting and claim it has to have a painter, then that 'painter' (god) would merely rearrange matter and energy, *not* create it out of nothing.
So all these painter/watchmaker/architect analogies fail terribly..sorry
ReligionInTheBin 11 months ago
@ReligionInTheBin "Does it mean it´s magically created?..no"
You're right it wasn't created by magic. It was created by a universal Orch-OR wave-function collapse: watch?v=ee2jtmhyO8Q
JohananRaatz 11 months ago
@ReligionInTheBin Where did the energy come from?
jdswiney 10 months ago
You do realize they meant the universe as we know it? We have no idea what was before the singularity.
TheScienceFoundation 1 year ago
I find it so hard. These people try to force others to become experts on so many different academic fields, but yet refrain of doing some research themselves.
GaolisVideoLog 1 year ago
Also, if Newtonian "gravity" is a real force, then why (despite the passing of so many aeons) have the pieces of the asteroid belt not accumulated toward the largest mass of the pieces (named "Ceres")?
JFKlone 1 year ago
All creatures which dream will swear, while still in their dream state, that the things perceived in their dream are "real" and "certain" and "tangible" and "provable" -- until, of course, the creature wakes up....
JFKlone 1 year ago
The only things that appear to eternal are change and the end.
slicingwater 1 year ago
this makes the existence of God possible. of course, it was already possible. for that matter, so is cold fusion...but if you tell me you have a cold fusion reactor in your basement, i'm gonna be curious, and i'm probably not accept your great-grandfather's journal as corroboration.
it's not about smart. it's about honest. if you pretend to know something you can't know, if you pretend to total certainty, i'm gonna think you're afraid, or insane, or both.
theotocopolis 1 year ago
@theotocopolis
Well worded, and yes, fear (of death, uncertainty etc) is probably one of the major drives behind theistic thinking. That's why most who argue for their religion, dont care to educate themselves on these topics..they rather repeat what has been told to them and hope they can confince themselves probably even more than the person they're debating.
ReligionInTheBin 1 year ago 5
@ReligionInTheB jesus christ your like a robot.a robots purpose is not to please anyone but rather just complete his mission and disregard everything around them that doesnt benefit its mission. all you keep doing is insult me wich proves how immature you really are.but then again the hard headed shall never learn anything besides the half inch of thick skull they have.and how can necrophilia be thiest number one fear if they believe theres an eternal afterlife numbnuts your not making any sense
poxflaza 1 year ago
Whats the point of this video? "The universe is not eternal" So?
Houshalter 1 year ago
I always enjoy the ranting and raving of so called intelligent atheists.
The foul language just shows how clever they all are!
Psalms 53:1 The fool has said in his heart, "There is no God." They are corrupt, and have done abominable iniquity; There is none who does good.
IDH77 1 year ago
I agree...They have to throw the F bomb around to show that's the only cool thing about them..Other than that, they believe they came from a cess pool of muck.
Thankfully, we don't believe that about ourselves. We are worth something, whereas atheists believe they are an accident and have no hope or direction.
Michelle062970 1 year ago
@Michelle062970
We're not all bad-mannered. I know religion makes you feel better about hope and direction. But you can have hope and direction and also be correct. Evolution is supported by EVERY peer reviewed scientific paper. Whether God created the cess pool of muck or not, your ancestors of millions of years ago did come from it. Just start learning. You're heart and ego might have to take a hit, but your brain will love it.
leighgridley 1 year ago
Amen.
JFKlone 1 year ago
@Michelle062970
"they believe they came from a cess pool of muck"
Ghaha doesnt make you feel very special eh..!
Says something about you if you cant enjoy life, love and friends when you have to accept reality (no magic creation from eh..oh wait, a RIB or a pool of muck HAHAHAHA!)
"we don't believe that"
Many theists believe in a much greater god than you do..one who set up evolution and this whole universe with a plan in mind. No need to magically pull bodies out of dirt or ribs.. ;)
ReligionInTheBin 1 year ago 27
@ReligionInTheBin what are you trying to say?
mariomario8888 11 months ago
Amen.
JFKlone 1 year ago
Kirk and Ray, you dotards pick up a fucking physics book godammit. I have a ninth grade education and I know a helluva lot more than the two of you put together. Fucking stupid fucks. Oh, I checked out your pulltheplugonatheism site and let me tell you, it perfectly demonstrates how ignorant you shits are. If I was Dawkins I wouldnt waste my time on your pathetic asses either. God is on his way out fuckers.
TheCartDoctor 1 year ago 5
Indeed, we can see that God (virtue) is not in you. When did you see Him on his way out?
JFKlone 1 year ago
do you define god as virtue or virtue as god?
homer091 1 year ago
@homer091 He is the giver and the gift.
JFKlone 1 year ago
thats not what i asked
homer091 1 year ago
@homer091 You are in the Father and the Father is in you. If a is b, then b is a. You are in virtue, and virtue is in you. Therefore, he is the giver AND the gift.
God's gift is God himself. If it is some other way, please do tell.
JFKlone 1 year ago
@JFKlone If a is b and b is a. That would mean, according to your logic, that God is human and the human is a God. You sure that's what you want people to take with them from your comment?
GaolisVideoLog 1 year ago
@GaolisVideoLog Good point. It would be more accurate to say, in the context of "set theory", that a is IN b, as b is IN a. That is to say, man is IN G-d, and G-d is in man. The drop of water is in the ocean, and the ocean is in the drop of water.
JFKlone 1 year ago
@JFKlone Yeah, that sounds better. I can live with that. :)
GaolisVideoLog 1 year ago
@GaolisVideoLog ...except that the logical conclusion from "a is element of b" (or a is in b) and "b is element of a" is "a equals b"
Schraupe 1 year ago
Ray, you dumb shit! The big bang is NOT proof of a non-eternal universe. The big bang just proves that the universe was condensed into a singularity and expanded outward 13.7 billion years ago.
By your own admission, you've claimed to not be scientifically gifted and to not have studied the same issues that you aim to discredit. You're a mindless pawn of your own backwards agenda. Kirk Cameron's a little shit, too. I hope he realizes how stupid croco-duck is. Croco-duck!?! Really!?
giggletronics 2 years ago 2
The "big bang" theory addresses the perceived expansionary (i.e. radial) vector, but how does it account for the spin (i.e. angular) vector, seeing as spin, or rotation, is a property of all particles and celestial bodies? Also, the perceived expansion of the universe is based on the Doppler effect creating the observed redshifting of the light emanating from distant stars and galaxies. But, what if the redshifting is caused by Compton scattering through interstellar dust?
JFKlone 1 year ago
@JFKlone
Spin could be explained by interaction
between different bodies with mass. What
if the Compton thing? Well, if it is so then
evidence will favor that over current
theories. It does not appear to be the case.
Go back to your internet forums, please.
giggletronics 1 year ago
"Spin could be explained..."
Well, then please DO explain, if you can. And, if you can't, then please refer me to some person or publication which can. Failing that, see ya in hell.
JFKlone 1 year ago
@JFKlone
"Could be". I'm not positive. I should have
taken into account that you're a mindless follower
and that whenever something reaches beyond the
scope of your knowledge or humanity's current
understanding, that you cheaply and
typically pawn it off to god. Hell? Right. An idea
stolen from the zoroastrians.
giggletronics 1 year ago
Yeah very smart, you use scientific sources to discredit the universe being eternal only because it supports your stance. Yet you deny all scientific sources that evolution happened. Pick science or pick creationism dont mix both.
You cherry pick the bible and you cherry pick science.
Ryosuke1208 2 years ago
But the universe isnt eternal. Check out the big rip. But yes evolution and the big bang is as accurate as gravity makes my pencil keep on falling at school. DAMN YOU NEWTON!!!
DarkZerkerX 2 years ago
bulshit
RayneMarina 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
jesus is love
christianliver 2 years ago
by love i assume you mean "not the son of god"
giggletronics 2 years ago
LOL very funny.
nessik13 2 years ago
In 1965 brown acid was being taken by people and it is clear the two guys with this finding were high.
adamsfunnyfilms 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Lets all go to heaven with god for eternity woohooo lets slice our wrists now... ow wait thats a sin... aaah i guess you can confess at the gate no biggy.
xenitro 3 years ago
Sigh, more creationist taking things out of context and quote-mining.
You do realize that is a sin based on your religion right?
mecher3k 3 years ago 3
News Flash: Atheists don't claim that the universe is eternal! This is a disgusting strawman.
Tonio31 3 years ago 2
In my experience when push comes to shove most people believe that whatever force created the universe must've been inteligent to design it. The debate is about whether or not this is the same force we call god.
If the universe were eternal it would make no difference! God dont need time. I believe god can do things in the past future or present, or if god decided something has always been there it would've always been there.
ReubenAStern 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Not being sarcastic at all,, I for one don't care if the universe is eternal, however, my Soul is eternal, and it will be in Heaven with The Creator, God. I want to say thank You Lord for that assurance, and peace that only comes from You.
John
Pensacola FL.
WORRO01 3 years ago
its very selfish to think that you are deserving of eternal life based on one life time of meaningless shit
MarcusA1987 2 years ago 4