Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
-
Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
Begging the Question?
- Thread starter Oats
- Start date
jasoncran
Member
some athiests say. here i will show you that your case isnt all atheists say this. some say we dont know.
The evolution of the universe from a time about10^-36 seconds after the beginning to the present can be described by the laws of physics as we know them. That the interaction of energy and particles shortly after the big bang and since that time has created the universe we live in today requires no more of a leap of faith than believing that a rock exists when you drop it on your foot. The steps in the process of the evolution of the universe according to the big bang theory are a logical consequence of applying the experimentally verified interactions of particles and energy which we call the laws of physics.
When the question is asked: "What started it all?", one can believe that a Creator is reponsible. This explanation is perfectly valid - but it is not the only possible explanation that one can imagine:
from spaceport and a thread i started on the big bang theory.
I don't think I've ever heard an atheist actually say that he believes the universe came from nothing. Most of us admit that there is simply not enough evidence at the time to determine how the universe actually began. From what I know, neither of the two major competing theories, the Big Bang and String theory, have enough evidence to reach a conclusion.
jasoncran
Member
actually string theory is more of a hypothesis. the only part of that has any possible evidence is the holographic model.
tim-from-pa
Member
Even Albert Einstein stated,
"The most incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it is comprehensible."
I often thought the same thing. How can inanimate objects behave in a comprehensible fashion if they are in effect "non-being" and totally unconscious? how can unconsciousness behave in a fashion that makes sense to a being?
Einstein then in effect was talking about God, although his God was an impersonal cosmic intelligence of some sort--- not a personal God as we know.
Either way, it takes a plan, order and reasoning to make and understand universal laws. That's enough proof of a God to me. And if atheists are really truly honest with themselves, they are really agnostics, as to say there is "no God" is an equally strong assertion as saying there is one. The real issue is that they don't know the nature or personage of such a God, and mistake that struggle with believing there is no God.
"The most incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it is comprehensible."
I often thought the same thing. How can inanimate objects behave in a comprehensible fashion if they are in effect "non-being" and totally unconscious? how can unconsciousness behave in a fashion that makes sense to a being?
Einstein then in effect was talking about God, although his God was an impersonal cosmic intelligence of some sort--- not a personal God as we know.
Either way, it takes a plan, order and reasoning to make and understand universal laws. That's enough proof of a God to me. And if atheists are really truly honest with themselves, they are really agnostics, as to say there is "no God" is an equally strong assertion as saying there is one. The real issue is that they don't know the nature or personage of such a God, and mistake that struggle with believing there is no God.