The universe was not created for a purpose. All you are doing is showing you confuse the use and meaning of "cause" and "purpose."
Ah yes, both arguments are theories that cannot be observed to date. This is about as relevant as the unicorn you always use. Maybe you do believe in unicorns?!?!
Says you... It supports my philosophy. Tell me if it contradicts In the beginning God said "let there be light", then the universe came into existence.
There are mountains of evidence to support the Big Bang. Not one iota to cause me to believe in some mythical being. I have as few (ZERO) reasons to believe in unicorns as I do to believe in any god.
Yes. Contradicts. There is not one shred of evidence to support any purpose (as you use the word) for the universe. I won't get into your interpretation of a book written by humans at a time when the nature of things was poorly understood. This fairy tale has just as much believability as yours! http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tungusic_creation_myth
Who are you trying to convert here? Before you pop a brain vessel, we can both agree the Big Bang happened.
Lmao, there is no shred of evidence about singularity, yet here you are thinking that isn't a contradiction. Bro your entire debate has been a contradiction
I showed you the best answer in someone else's brilliant words. It directly addresses your confusion. Perhaps if you take the time to read it and let it sink in, you'll see there is no contradiction. Like I've said a few times now (let this sink in): the theory does not explain the cause of the expansion or the origin of everything in the singularity. There is a mountain of evidence that there was a singularity or something like it. You are simply wrong. Let that sink in, too
Wow, you guys had a lot of fun last night. At the risk of setting off another round of philosophical/religious turmoil, I don't think that what you said here is exactly correct, Denny. Here's what Stephen Hawking has to say on the subject of time and singularity: http://www.hawking.org.uk/the-beginning-of-time.html As I understand it, which I'm perfectly willing to say is not all that well, he's not saying that there wasn't a time before 0, he's just saying that everything got reset at the Big Bang and there's no way of measuring or knowing about anything that happened outside of the time frame of our universe. I don't know what all of this means as far as the religious debate goes. I would say that the eternal God, if one exists as Mags and I believe, would have to have existed outside of the space-time of our universe. Genesis 1 says that, "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." It's pretty clear from that statement that he's there at the "beginning" and that for him to do the creating he had to be in existence before the creation. The Bible says that he's eternal and from the standpoint of this universe, that would simply mean that there's no way to test his beginning or end...which is pretty much what the Bible says.
I think you misunderstand Hawking's statement. Events before the big bang are simply not defined because you can't measure time < 0. As far as genesis goes, this creation myth is far more believable: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mbombo. Or put another way, why believe your chosen myth over the many others?
Because there is a mountain of evidence that suggests one. Start with the fact the universe is expanding. Include the fact we can still see the light from the big bang reaching us today. That's the tip of that iceberg. Praise photon. May the light be with you.
Nope. Your "mountain" is the same as any evidence that "the beginning Unicorn said let there be light..." Which is NONE.
The fact that time is not measurable on the other side of the Big Bang doesn't mean that something may not have existed before that event. We just have no way of knowing. There are a lot of reasons why I believe the Bible, but I've found message board debates on religion to be not the place to share personal and deeply held events and feelings. You're happy in your atheism and I'm happy in my faith. Probably should leave it at that.
What he's saying is something like anything /0 is indeterminate. The question of whether the universe is part of something bigger is something many scientists are exploring. No definitive answer yet, But I trust they will find a logical and provable explanation that involves nothing supernatural. I have no gripe with you being happy in your faith. I think there are positives to religion as an institution. It's not all good, but it's also not all bad.
