Higgs Boson

[stovebolts]

I am weary of breaking rules here. I'd rather steer onto a nuetral playing field, which is why I suggested those spots.

I'd hate to post a link to " Anti-christian" Websites... Even if it is in a PM, I am still weary of it. This site has a lot of retrictions. All of the rebuttals I have I referance them from secular, or atheistic sites, and therefore can't post them.

I thought you were here to learn the truth... Looks like your agenda is clear. You simply want to prove us wrong... Busted.

 

[stovebolts]

That it has no end does not mean it is not covering distance. You can pick any point that you choose along the way and call it a point.

For instance, one full rotation of the earth is considered a day as denoted by its position to the sun, yet each day it is a different relation to the son which we note as seasons.

So we measure the time it takes to get from one point to the next. Again, time involves distance, but it is not distance. Time requires matter, energy and space aka distance.

As far as a beginning, did time exist before the big bang? What started time?

Time started when actions started, and the earliest action was the big Bang. Therefore it started at that time. Time is a measurement of actions. You don't need distance to measure time. Not at all. Time can pass by without you going anywhere.as long as time has a beginning, it works, it doesn't at all need an end. What do you constitute as an end marker for time?

Lets start with this first.

Time started when actions started, and the earliest action was the big Bang. Therefore it started at that time.

You've missed it entirely haven't you? Tell ya what, stop trying to win an argument and maybe we can both learn something huh? As I stated earlier, "Time requires matter, energy and space aka distance."

Action is energy, and it comes from matter. To expand or contract, it needs space aka distance.

Supposing the Big bang theory is correct, you must admit that before the big bang, matter, energy and space existed. Thus, time existed before the big bang.

If you can understand this, then you'll see just how silly your assertion is.

Note: The reason I responded to Alex on this matter is because Scripture is clear. Genesis 1:1 In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. I don't expect you to accept this, so let us not waste our time arguing about it.

You don't need distance to measure time.

Ok... so why do we measure a day by one full rotation of the earth? You do understand that our clocks are based on the heavenly bodies don't you?

Time can pass by without you going anywhere

Now that's just silly. Do you honestly believe that if you sit perfectly still, that all of time will just stop? Sounds like you've found the fountain of youth, but it sounds kinda boring to me... Please explain how you can simply freeze time... This should be interesting. Oh, by the way, how fast is the earth traveling through space again? Maybe what it comes down to is a simple awareness. Simply put, everything moves, even your keyboard when it's just seemingly sitting there. Why? Because it consists of atoms, and atoms are moving all the time, even if you can't see them move...

as long as time has a beginning, it works, it doesn't at all need an end.

Your post made me think of this by Augustine.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/augustine/confessions.txt

Thus it comes out that time present, which we found was the only time that could be called "long," has been cut down to the space of scarcely a single day. But let us examine even that, for one day is never present as a whole. For it is made up of twenty-four hours, divided between night and day. The first of these hours has the rest of them as future, and the last of them has the rest as past; but any of those between has those that preceded it as past and those that succeed it as future. And that one hour itself passes away in fleeting fractions. The part of it that has fled is past; what remains is still future. If any fraction of time be conceived that cannot now be divided even into the most minute momentary point, this alone is what we may call time present. But this flies so rapidly from future to past that it cannot be extended by any delay. For if it is extended, it is then divided into past and future. But the present has no extension whatever.

What do you constitute as an end marker for time?

Infinity...

 

[Atothetheist]

I thought you were here to learn the truth... Looks like your agenda is clear. You simply want to prove us wrong... Busted.

I do, and discussing a persons beliefs in a nuetral zone should help me get one step closer. The reason why I am weary is because I don't want to get banned.

Thanks for jumping to conclusions.

 

[Atothetheist]

Now that's just silly. Do you honestly believe that if you sit perfectly still, that all of time will just stop? Sounds like you've found the fountain of youth, but it sounds kinda boring to me... Please explain how you can simply freeze time... This should be interesting. Oh, by the way, how fast is the earth traveling through space again? Maybe what it comes down to is a simple awareness. Simply put, everything moves, even your keyboard when it's just seemingly sitting there. Why? Because it consists of atoms, and atoms are moving all the time, even if you can't see them move

Wow..... Ok. I have said time is a meaurement of action. So while your still, other things are moving, time hasn't stopped. Neither have you, your heart is still beating, thats an action. It's simply ludacris to state that if you stand perfectly still, time stops. Way to misrepresent my argument. Thank you for contriciting yourself. As soon as ALL actions stop, the measurement of actions stops, TIME STOPS.

You seem to try to make me out as an idiot, but I am not. It is not possible to sit perfectly still anyways, you breathe, your heary beats, blood is pumped through your veins, you have cells preforming there actions. All of which, if you realize, keep going no matter if you stay still or not.

What exactly do you mean by distance, I am getting quite confused.

 

[Atothetheist]

You've missed it entirely haven't you? Tell ya what, stop trying to win an argument and maybe we can both learn something huh? As I stated earlier, "Time requires matter, energy and space aka distance."

Action is energy, and it comes from matter. To expand or contract, it needs space aka distance.

Supposing the Big bang theory is correct, you must admit that before the big bang, matter, energy and space existed. Thus, time existed before the big bang.

If you can understand this, then you'll see just how silly your assertion is.

Note: The reason I responded to Alex on this matter is because Scripture is clear. Genesis 1:1 In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. I don't expect you to accept this, so let us not waste our time arguing about it.

Matter only existed in the point of singularity, or the Primeval Atom. Actions started when it caused the bang, so no. It is not right to assume that actions predate the big bang. There may have been distance, because infinity is what it was. When the actions started, thats when time started.

Where do you go off supposing there was energy before the big bang? That is the evidence you have?

http://phys.org/news/2010-11-scientists-glimpse-universe-big.html

http://curiosity.discovery.com/question/time-before-big-bang

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=no-evidence-of-time-before-big


thank you for at least hinting you don't think is true. Maybe when you sit down and read a couple of science journals about the subject, you would get what I am saying.

 

[stovebolts]

I do, and discussing a persons beliefs in a nuetral zone should help me get one step closer. The reason why I am weary is because I don't want to get banned.

Thanks for jumping to conclusions.

may I kindly suggest that if your agenda is to prove Christianity wrong, then not only are you on the wrong forum, but you have already closed your ears to any truths that you may have otherwise learned. This is why you do not understand what I've written.

I would also suggest to you that there are Christians who enjoy debating with athiests. I am not one of them. I find absolutly no pleasure in discussing any type of a topic where the other persons goal is to disect and attempt to shred every word I type. Be it truth or error. That type of discourse leads to prideful boasts and does not allow for error, lest one be made to feel foolish. That, in my opinion is not conducive to finding any sort of truth, but it is without lack for folly.

Grace and peace.

 

[Atothetheist]

may I kindly suggest that if your agenda is to prove Christianity wrong, then not only are you on the wrong forum, but you have already closed your ears to any truths that you may have otherwise learned. This is why you do not understand what I've written.

I would also suggest to you that there are Christians who enjoy debating with athiests. I am not one of them. I find absolutly no pleasure in discussing any type of a topic where the other persons goal is to disect and attempt to shred every word I type. Be it truth or error. That type of discourse leads to prideful boasts and does not allow for error, lest one be made to feel foolish. That, in my opinion is not conducive to finding any sort of truth, but it is without lack for folly.

Grace and peace.

I am on here to learn the truth, and by saying I am closeminded for not listening to your claims which are only supported in the bible, also what I don't believe, is kind of mean. Notice i wasn't trying ot disprove God or christianity, I was talking about time. You and I were discussing something outside of the normal tennets of the faith.

I am honestly trying to learn the truth. I will give you this, if the bible is true, abd meant to be taken literally, then you are right, there can be no debate about it. But until I see some kind of evidence that the Bible is true, and this is what I came on here to see, I have questions that I need answers to. And if your answers goes against science, then you will have to show me show extraordinary evidence to back up your claim.

Sorry if I sounded mean or offensive, I sincerely want to get down to the root of it, and see which one stands up to scrutiny.

 

[stovebolts]

Matter only existed in the point of singularity, or the Primeval Atom. Actions started when it caused the bang, so no. It is not right to assume that actions predate the big bang. There may have been distance, because infinity is what it was. When the actions started, thats when time started.

Where do you go off supposing there was energy before the big bang? That is the evidence you have?

Where there is matter, there is energy, where there is energy, there is space. Where there is space, there is time. It's really that simple.

You may state in your theory that we start measuring time when the big bang occurred, but you cannot say that time did not exist before the big bang. That would be analogous to saying that we start the new year on January 1st, but before that date, there was no other date.

Singular, from dictionary.com

4. Astronomy . (in general relativity) the mathematical representation of a black hole.

If you are looking for truth, you may start with the below quote from Rambam. btw, it's from a non-Christian source, but then again, Paul quoted many truths outside of Torah that the even the gentiles understood as truth.

"Truth does not become more true if the whole world were to accept it; nor does it become less true if the whole world were to reject it." --- Maimonides

 

[Atothetheist]

Where there is matter, there is energy, where there is energy, there is space. Where there is space, there is time. It's really that simple.

You may state in your theory that we start measuring time when the big bang occurred, but you cannot say that time did not exist before the big bang. That would be analogous to saying that we start the new year on January 1st, but before that date, there was no other date.

Singular, from dictionary.com

4. Astronomy . (in general relativity) the mathematical representation of a black hole.

If you are looking for truth, you may start with the below quote from Rambam. btw, it's from a non-Christian source, but then again, Paul quoted many truths outside of Torah that the even the gentiles understood as truth.

"Truth does not become more true if the whole world were to accept it; nor does it become less true if the whole world were to reject it." --- Maimonides

Maimonides didn't believe in jesus either.

Good quote, same could apply to you.

 

[duari91]

I am on here to learn the truth, and by saying I am closeminded for not listening to your claims which are only supported in the bible, also what I don't believe, is kind of mean. Notice i wasn't trying ot disprove God or christianity, I was talking about time. You and I were discussing something outside of the normal tennets of the faith.

I am honestly trying to learn the truth. I will give you this, if the bible is true, abd meant to be taken literally, then you are right, there can be no debate about it. But until I see some kind of evidence that the Bible is true, and this is what I came on here to see, I have questions that I need answers to. And if your answers goes against science, then you will have to show me show extraordinary evidence to back up your claim.

Sorry if I sounded mean or offensive, I sincerely want to get down to the root of it, and see which one stands up to scrutiny.

You aren't necessarily understanding the meaning of the bible. If God wanted to, he could appear in your room right now and discuss the meaning of life with you. However; he doesn't. You see, God want's to fellowship with people who only want to be with him. The only way of doing that is by creating something called faith. He has given us enough evidence so that we may have faith, while at the same time withholding evidence so that faith doesn't become none existent.

Would you believe in God if he appeared to you? Probably, but here is the kicker. A lot of people still would NOT. God says it himself in the bible. Some people in the world are truly blind, and no matter what they know or see, they will remain that way forever. God could reveal to all of us that heaven exists with physical proof, though people will still try to denounce it.

Since you are a logical thinker, let me ask you a question for you to ponder. Say your wrong about there being no God. If you died today, which place would you choose? Heaven or Hell? Eternal glory or eternal suffering? Why gamble eternal suffering? Once you make your choice here, there is no going back.

Where we are when we die is forever no matter what place we are in.

 

[Atothetheist]

You aren't necessarily understanding the meaning of the bible. If God wanted to, he could appear in your room right now and discuss the meaning of life with you. However; he doesn't. You see, God want's to fellowship with people who only want to be with him. The only way of doing that is by creating something called faith. He has given us enough evidence so that we may have faith, while at the same time withholding evidence so that faith doesn't become none existent.

Would you believe in God if he appeared to you? Probably, but here is the kicker. A lot of people still would NOT. God says it himself in the bible. Some people in the world are truly blind, and no matter what they know or see, they will remain that way forever. God could reveal to all of us that heaven exists with physical proof, though people will still try to denounce it.

Since you are a logical thinker, let me ask you a question for you to ponder. Say your wrong about there being no God. If you died today, which place would you choose? Heaven or Hell? Eternal glory or eternal suffering? Why gamble eternal suffering? Once you make your choice here, there is no going back.

Where we are when we die is forever no matter what place we are in.

I would like to be in heaven, no suffering there... But Paschel's wager isn't anything I haven't encountered.

It's not just your God that is possible. Let me ask you a question

What if Allah was real, and the christian God was fake, would you be willing to gamble your eternal soul on God?

It isn't The christian God or unbelief. There are other gods. Any one of them could be true, and then we both are going to their versions of hell or whatever.

 

[duari91]

I would like to be in heaven, no suffering there... But Paschel's wager isn't anything I haven't encountered.

It's not just your God that is possible. Let me ask you a question

What if Allah was real, and the christian God was fake, would you be willing to gamble your eternal soul on God?

It isn't The christian God or unbelief. There are other gods. Any one of them could be true, and then we both are going to their versions of hell or whatever.

Muslims aren't men of God. There doctrine is to kill those who disbelieve there teachings, and that alone. Do I pray to an "Allah" to kill those who defy my religion? No. I follow the teachings of Christ, who said that no one gets to the father but through him. Jesus didn't come to this world to tell us to kill one another, he came here to bring the understanding of sin to another level, and to teach us to forgive/forget/love thy neighbor.

I am not gambling if what I believe is the truth. God won't punish me for following the teachings of his son.

God is the only one. He proved this by raising Jesus from the dead. He proved it by splitting the seas. He proved it by allow a book called the "holy bible" to be formed so that we could learn what he has to offer.

You can choose to believe in a buddah, an Allah, or whatever else there is. However; that won't save you from judgement. If you want to be judged and go to heaven, why don't you explore christianity? It's the only doctrine of truth, the works in the bible prove it.

 

[DarkHorseRising]

What if Allah was real, and the christian God was fake, would you be willing to gamble your eternal soul on God?

If I had to pick between Allah and Satan, I'm not sure which I would choose. Probably Satan, just because Allah requires you to kill innocents in order to follow him, and then "rewards" you with a supply of virgins you're expected to rape.

Let's just say it is a choice I hope never to have to make. God rocks, I'm so, so glad He is there.

 

[stovebolts]

Maimonides didn't believe in jesus either.

Good quote, same could apply to you.

Maimonides didn't believe Jesus was the Messiah. He had quite the debate with the Catholics over it and actually made them look quiet stupid.

As far as the quote, it applies to all of us, even Rambam. We all hold truth, and we all hold error. Our truths may not coincide, but they do coexist.

John 18:37-38 Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end have I been born, and to this end am I come into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice. Pilate saith unto him, What is truth? And when he had said this, he went out again unto the Jews, and saith unto them, I find no crime in him.

Tell me, is this true?

1 Corinthians 1:22 Seeing that Jews ask for signs, and Greeks seek after wisdom:
1 Corinthians 1:23 but we preach Christ crucified, unto Jews a stumblingblock, and unto Gentiles foolishness;

Are we not fools in the eyes of those who seek wisdom?

Is this also true?

1 Corinthians 15:12-16 Now if Christ is preached that he hath been raised from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there is no resurrection of the dead, neither hath Christ been raised: and if Christ hath not been raised, then is our preaching vain, your faith also is vain. Yea, we are found false witnesses of God; because we witnessed of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, neither hath Christ been raised:

 

[duari91]

If I had to pick between Allah and Satan, I'm not sure which I would choose. Probably Satan, just because Allah requires you to kill innocents in order to follow him, and then "rewards" you with a supply of virgins you're expected to rape.

Let's just say it is a choice I hope never to have to make. God rocks, I'm so, so glad He is there.

You stated it better than I did. Allah conflicts the teachings of Jesus. Any teachings that conflict/contradict what Jesus did/said isn't the truth.

Well said.

 

[Atothetheist]

Muslims aren't men of God. There doctrine is to kill those who disbelieve there teachings, and that alone. Do I pray to an "Allah" to kill those who defy my religion? No. I follow the teachings of Christ, who said that no one gets to the father but through him. Jesus didn't come to this world to tell us to kill one another, he came here to bring the understanding of sin to another level, and to teach us to forgive/forget/love thy neighbor.

I am not gambling if what I believe is the truth. God won't punish me for following the teachings of his son.

God is the only one. He proved this by raising Jesus from the dead. He proved it by splitting the seas. He proved it by allow a book called the "holy bible" to be formed so that we could learn what he has to offer.

You can choose to believe in a buddah, an Allah, or whatever else there is. However; that won't save you from judgement. If you want to be judged and go to heaven, why don't you explore christianity? It's the only doctrine of truth, the works in the bible prove it.

Your missing the point. What if the Muslim Version of God is real, then you'd be in their version of Hell, are you sure you want to risk it? Betting your eternal soul on the Christian one? See how stupid this question really is?

Of we both are wrong, we both suffer, and we should have believed in Islam. Are you sure you want to make that bet? If Christianity was the only one that claimed God, and claimed hell, then it would be a valid question.

I would rather truly believe it, then believe it because I am afraid of it turning out to be true.

 

[Atothetheist]

And no the works in the bible Don't prove anything. You have to believe the bible is true in order to believe the works are true. And since I don't believe in the bible, it doesn't prove a thing to me.

 

[duari91]

Your missing the point. What if the Muslim Version of God is real, then you'd be in their version of Hell, are you sure you want to risk it? Betting your eternal soul on the Christian one? See how stupid this question really is?

Of we both are wrong, we both suffer, and we should have believed in Islam. Are you sure you want to make that bet? If Christianity was the only one that claimed God, and claimed hell, then it would be a valid question.

I would rather truly believe it, then believe it because I am afraid of it turning out to be true.

Of course I wan't to make that bet, because you are raising an extension from my question that doesn't make sense. This is basically what your saying. "What if Allah was the true God." If we was the true God, then surely he would be intelligent enough to know that he sent a messiah to preach love and kindness, only to contradict himself and say you need to kill to be rewarded.

I'll say it again, our doctrine is the only one of truth. No other religion can boast that. Our doctrine doesn't contradict itself.

God is all knowing = perfect = does not contradict himself.

See where I am going with this? You are stretching an extension that is so far from the truth.

 

[Grazer]

And no the works in the bible Don't prove anything. You have to believe the bible is true in order to believe the works are true. And since I don't believe in the bible, it doesn't prove a thing to me.

Then what's the point of a discussion on theology/philosophy/afterlife since all religions would use their respective books to support their points. Disallow one disallow them all. Seems a bit of a pointless question.

 

[Atothetheist]

Of course I wan't to make that bet, because you are raising an extension from my question that doesn't make sense. This is basically what your saying. "What if Allah was the true God." If we was the true God, then surely he would be intelligent enough to know that he sent a messiah to preach love and kindness, only to contradict himself and say you need to kill to be rewarded.

I'll say it again, our doctrine is the only one of truth. No other religion can boast that. Our doctrine doesn't contradict itself.

God is all knowing = perfect = does not contradict himself.

See where I am going with this? You are stretching an extension that is so far from the truth.

.....
.....
....
..
.

.... This is really frustrating. In the Bible, the old testament specifically, it tells you to kill people who worship other Gods... If God doesn't EVER contridict himself, then why not do it now?

This is extremely annoying. I was asking a counter question. Muslims don't believe Jesus was the Messiah... Or at least thats what I think they don't believe. So...

You know what... I'm done. This question is stupid.

This is a better one: If God is fake, then you have wasted so much time tyoing these answers, and then I assume you go to church, and you have wasted your time praying, and you have wasted your time believing in something which is not true. That's what you have lost if your Wrong. If you were a young earth creationist, thenl you have completely wasted your time argueing, and not reading up on science simply because you believe in the Bible....

If God was fake, would you waste your time still believing in him?