Jesus Freaks...why do you believe?

[yodermk]

Really, you're arguing from an impossible view. You're saying that because everything fits together so perfectly it has to be god. But if it didn't fit together perfectly we wouldn't be sitting here typing, because we wouldn't exist. Who is to say that our universe isn't the millionth try?

It's like saying Ray Comfort has a point when he explains that bananas fit our hands so perfectly that god must exist....

Well, I don't think Ray Comfort's view are "ridiculous" as mentioned above, but I can see why not all find them convincing. He could do a lot better.

I'm saying there has to be *something* that exists beyond time and space that has the capacity to create time and space dimensions, and has to be be able to "get it right" with mind-boggling precision.

I'm also going to argue that the God of the Bible fits all the evidence we have *perfectly*, and in more detail than you likely expect. (And this from a book that was written over 2500 years ago.) Can you name any other theory that comes close?

Sure, we can speculate about "quantum foam" or some other "natural" process that would spawn off Big Bangs. But that is theoretical physics stretched to the max, and there is no conceivable way that it could be tested. So you are left with faith -- will it be some bizarre physics that makes string theory look simple, or in a personal God who has left plenty to show for Himself?

[MeDeFe]

when you say "ten to the 50th" and "ten to the 120th", do you mean 10^50 and 10^120 ?

[zobots]

I do believe so.... I remember reading in a science text that the odds of the universe forming the way it did randomly is something to the tune of 10^120 or some such........this same text claims only 10^50 atoms believed to exist in the universe. Outlandish numbers that I can't comprehend with my own mind, yet still interesting.

[MeDeFe]

Well, the universe forming randomly, and I mean completely randomly, is not something I have heard any scientist claim so far.

[yodermk]

when you say "ten to the 50th" and "ten to the 120th", do you mean 10^50 and 10^120 ?

Yes.

I do believe so.... I remember reading in a science text that the odds of the universe forming the way it did randomly is something to the tune of 10^120 or some such........this same text claims only 10^50 atoms believed to exist in the universe. Outlandish numbers that I can't comprehend with my own mind, yet still interesting.

Well I wouldn't say "one chance in 10^120" -- that's a bit different than saying it must be fine-tuned to one part in that.

And I agree that science doesn't say it formed randomly. Scientists recognize that that would make no sense at all. Yet what other theories do you have?

Seriously, that's a challenge. Name one reasonably well-developed theory that explains the existence and fine-tuning of the universe even close to as well as the God of the Bible explains it.

And I will get to that tonight.

[Snorri1234]

Seriously, that's a challenge. Name one reasonably well-developed theory that explains the existence and fine-tuning of the universe even close to as well as the God of the Bible explains it.

But that's the problem. God doesn't explain anything. Because it basically says "God did it" all the time. In the end it's the same explanation scientifically. Because any reasonable person would ask: "But how did God do it?"

Pointing to the seeming perfectness of the universe doesn't do anything, because we cannot actually comprehend how else the universe would be. If gravitation worked differently, we wouldn't have the slighest clue how life could exist or if it even could exist , but that's irrelevant. Who is to say there aren't a bunch of other universes which have totally different mechanisms but also work? Because the mistake your making is that an universe couldn't function in any other way than ours, since taking away one piece of a constant would totally flip the universe. This is the same as the "irreducible complexity" argument often used by creationists. You're looking at the end-result and claim, and say there is only way it could've become like that, i.e. it was created like that.

In an infinitely large universe, everything is possible.

[vtmarik]

In an infinitely large universe, everything is possible.

It's good to see a fellow student of the Douglas Adams' School of Galactic Theory.

[unriggable]

Name one reasonably well-developed theory that explains the existence and fine-tuning of the universe even close to as well as the God of the Bible explains it.

You have no idea what you're talking about do you?

God and the Bible doesn't explain why there are fossils of a bunch of creatures in the ground, nor why the universe is expanding, nor why some people are born without appendices.

[vtmarik]

Here's an interesting video that I don't expect any of the psycho-faithful to agree with:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrgYfRXKDhw

[MeDeFe]

Some good points, some not so good.

[zobots]

But that's the problem. God doesn't explain anything. Because it basically says "God did it" all the time. In the end it's the same explanation scientifically. Because any reasonable person would ask: "But how did God do it?"

According to the Bible, God created everything. There is a certain level of "super natural" associated with that. To try to use natural science to explain super natural is foolish to attempt. You can't teach someone to read English only having access to the Chinese alphabet. That is where the element of faith comes in, and the source of the large part of ridicule. Can we Christians explain <i>how</i> God did anything? No. We simply accept it. If I tell you that my name is Kevin, you would most likely simply accept it as fact. The scale of importance is obviously not the same, however the concept is.

[Snorri1234]

But that's the problem. God doesn't explain anything. Because it basically says "God did it" all the time. In the end it's the same explanation scientifically. Because any reasonable person would ask: "But how did God do it?"

According to the Bible, God created everything. There is a certain level of "super natural" associated with that. To try to use natural science to explain super natural is foolish to attempt. You can't teach someone to read English only having access to the Chinese alphabet. That is where the element of faith comes in, and the source of the large part of ridicule. Can we Christians explain <i>how</i> God did anything? No. We simply accept it. If I tell you that my name is Kevin, you would most likely simply accept it as fact. The scale of importance is obviously not the same, however the concept is.

Then you should never, ever say "god is the explanation" ever again!

Supernatural isn't a good argument, because I might as well go around saying the whole world is filled with fairies who push everything down and attack people who believe in "gravity" but when I ask for proof they give false proof and I see through their lies because I haven't been indoctrinated by their so called science.

I know it's a question of faith! The problem is the people who actually think that creationism has any evidence behind it. I'm fine with people who say they believe and it's up to me to believe, I'm not fine with people who think they know the truth and I'm obviously misguided because I believe in science.

[yankeefan984]

But that's the problem. God doesn't explain anything. Because it basically says "God did it" all the time. In the end it's the same explanation scientifically. Because any reasonable person would ask: "But how did God do it?"

According to the Bible, God created everything. There is a certain level of "super natural" associated with that. To try to use natural science to explain super natural is foolish to attempt. You can't teach someone to read English only having access to the Chinese alphabet. That is where the element of faith comes in, and the source of the large part of ridicule. Can we Christians explain <i>how</i> God did anything? No. We simply accept it. If I tell you that my name is Kevin, you would most likely simply accept it as fact. The scale of importance is obviously not the same, however the concept is.

umm but there is evidence. cambrien explosion anyone?
Then you should never, ever say "god is the explanation" ever again!

Supernatural isn't a good argument, because I might as well go around saying the whole world is filled with fairies who push everything down and attack people who believe in "gravity" but when I ask for proof they give false proof and I see through their lies because I haven't been indoctrinated by their so called science.

I know it's a question of faith! The problem is the people who actually think that creationism has any evidence behind it. I'm fine with people who say they believe and it's up to me to believe, I'm not fine with people who think they know the truth and I'm obviously misguided because I believe in science.

[daddy1gringo]

Actually 2 questions from John 5:

1. Jesus healed a man at Bethesda. There were a number of people there suffering. Why didn't he heal all of them, or at least more of them?

Well, the short answer is that I don't know. Sometimes I know why he does or doesn't do something and sometimes not. But I do know a couple of things that may be helpful.

We don't know for sure that he didn't heal others. The 20th-21st century idea of clinical or news-story writing was not necessarily how things were written in the 1st century. That doesn't mean it's not true There are cases where, for instance, one gospel writer tells of, say, a blind man who Jesus healed. Another writer, aparently speaking of the same event, mentions there were two. It's not a contradiction. The first chronicler is telling the story of what happened to the blind man and the presence of the other is just a distraction. For the second, the presence of the two is relevant to what he wants to say.

So he may have healed others there that day, though I can't say that he did.

Sometimes it says in a particular place he healed all of them. Other places it says he "healed many" which technically could mean he healed them all, but probably not. In at least one case it says "he could not heal many there because of their unbelief" I'll get into always understanding what he does and why in the main post I'm working on

2. "Jesus gave them this answer: 'I tell you the truth, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does."

Other Christians tell me that the Father & the Son are equal. Huh? It seems like he is contradicting himself here.

This is one of the finer points of "theology" where "Jesus Freaks" who agree on the essentials may disagree. Jesus says that in his father's house there are many rooms, but there's only one door, and he's it. So I'll give you my take on it, which I think is in accord with what we do know for sure and makes it understandable. First, understand that I don't necessarily speak for all Christians, and second that any explanation from our 4-dimensional understanding is bound to be flawed, like my celestial spreadsheet.

Each of us has a body, we have a soul, which consists of the intellect, will and emotions, and we also have a spirit, that God-given "who-I-am-inside." God is a spirit. The difference between Jesus and the rest of us is that the spirit in him was/is God. God chose to "take up" or inhabit flesh, and that's who Jesus was/is You want to know God's character, what he is like? Look at Jesus. (The rest of our spirits are made in his image, but are not him)

In this sense, Jesus is fully God, and no less. Colossians 2:10 -- "In Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily."

He became subservient in that he became like us. Becoming human he accepted our limitations. He got tired. He could only be in one place at a time.

This is a controversial one: he didn't always know everything. Several times it says "WHEN he knew X, he did Y" That indicates to me that there was a time when he did not know X. Yes at various times he knew things supernaturally, including some of those X's, but that same type of "word-of-knowledge" revelation is available to us. It is necessary first to be "born again, from above" so you can see the kingdom of God, as you noticed in John 3. (greek "anothen" means both "again" and "from above") But I'm getting off track.

The point is that as a human being, he was dependent on the father for direction, power and wisdom, just like a Christian is supposed to be. I believe that it's not like Jesus remembered walking out of heaven. He started as a baby like all of us and had to learn to talk and think. The things that make it seem as if he just knew everything all the time have another explanation. Obviously, since his spirit was/is one with God, all the means of communication available between God and man were perfectly clear for him. God can illuminate the scriptures for you. You can have a daily walking conversation with him where he can speak to your heart. He can also give specific prophetic visions and knowledge.

Some of this stuff, some Christians would disagree with me on, but I hope it clears up that there's not necessarily a contradiction.

[beezer]

Well said Mr. Gringo!

But are you truly a gringo?

[yodermk]

But that's the problem. God doesn't explain anything. Because it basically says "God did it" all the time. In the end it's the same explanation scientifically. Because any reasonable person would ask: "But how did God do it?"

Methinks you and Unrig don't quite see the point.

Of course the God of the Bible, assuming He exists, would be an explanation for this stuff! At least the original creation of the universe if nothing else.

The point is that something must be true to account for the creation of time and space dimensions along with matter and energy. The exact what is probably beyond science in any case. Either theology or metaphysics, take your pick.

I agree that we should ask how God did it. Science can explain much of the rest of the story, but not (I think) the absolute beginning.

Pointing to the seeming perfectness of the universe doesn't do anything, because we cannot actually comprehend how else the universe would be. If gravitation worked differently, we wouldn't have the slighest clue how life could exist or if it even could exist , but that's irrelevant.

I've already addressed that. If gravity were different by more than one part in ten to the umpteenth power, the universe never could have produced "just right" stars for rocky planets. It's not even theoretically conceivable that any kind of advanced life could exist without rocky planets.

Who is to say there aren't a bunch of other universes which have totally different mechanisms but also work? Because the mistake your making is that an universe couldn't function in any other way than ours, since taking away one piece of a constant would totally flip the universe.

What is to say that there ARE a bunch of other universes?

Either way ..... faith!

I'm trying to lay down a complete foundation showing that faith in the God of the Bible is the most reasonable choice. Don't worry, this topic is just the start.

In an infinitely large universe, everything is possible.

If our universe was truly infinite (and there is legitimate debate about that), then that certainly mitigates the "rare earth" argument. But I haven't even gotten to the rare earth argument -- I'm talking about the mechanics of the universe as a whole!

If our universe is finite, then the rare earth argument adds a lot to my argument, because there are a staggering number of aspects of a planet that have to be "just right" in order to sustain advanced life. In fact I think it could be shown that multiplying the inverse of the probabilities of each aspect naturally occurring greatly exceeds the maximum possible number of planets in the observable universe.

If our universe is infinite, you have another problem. What kind of force possibly could have created a truly infinite amount of matter and sent it hurling outwards?

[joecoolfrog]

You atheists are a cynical bunch,just accept the obvious and think of all the benefits;

Education would be marvelously streamlined,no need for any branch of the sciences so the entire school week could be split between biblical studies and promotion of the favoured religion.

No ghastly medical or insurance bills, everything is part of Gods great design so simply live,or die, with the consequences.

No tax money being wasted by the church government on minority projects and lifestyles,there will be none !

No emotional wastage,simply love God and marry a sturdy,faithful wife.

Oh the list goes on but I must put in a quick word for the endless new entertainment possibilities, I have a screenplay already written for the next big blockbuster about Frogs (Plagues of )

[Iliad]

You atheists are a cynical bunch,just accept the obvious and think of all the benefits;

Education would be marvelously streamlined,no need for any branch of the sciences so the entire school week could be split between biblical studies and promotion of the favoured religion.

No ghastly medical or insurance bills, everything is part of Gods great design so simply live,or die, with the consequences.

No tax money being wasted by the church government on minority projects and lifestyles,there will be none !

No emotional wastage,simply love God and marry a sturdy,faithful wife.

Oh the list goes on but I must put in a quick word for the endless new entertainment possibilities, I have a screenplay already written for the next big blockbuster about Frogs (Plagues of )

I seriously hope that was sarcasm.

[yodermk]

All right, I've tried to show what cosmology says about God. Now let's see what the Bible says about cosmology!

(Then we can get on to other interesting topics.)

First, the Bible repeatedly says that God created everything from nothing, or at least no ordinary thing:

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. (Gen 1:1)

By faith, we understand that the universe has been framed by the word of God, so that what is seen has not been made out of things which are visible. (Hebrews 11:3)

All things were made through him. Without him was not anything made that has been made. (John 1:3)

This is a fundamental aspect of the Big Bang. The universe comes out of nowhere. (Well, at least it seems to. We can't be 100% sure how things worked in the first 10^-42 seconds or so of the universe's existence.)

The other fundamental aspect of the Big Bang is constant cosmic expansion. Here's what the Bible has to say about that:

He alone stretches out the heavens and treads on the waves of the sea. (Job 9:8)

He wraps himself in light as with a garment; he stretches out the heavens like a tent (Psalm 104:2)

He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in. (Isaiah 40:22)

This is what God the LORD says— he who created the heavens and stretched them out, who spread out the earth and all that comes out of it, who gives breath to its people, and life to those who walk on it: (Isaiah 42:5)

This is what the LORD says— your Redeemer, who formed you in the womb: I am the LORD, who has made all things, who alone stretched out the heavens, who spread out the earth by myself, (Isaiah 44:24)

It is I who made the earth and created mankind upon it. My own hands stretched out the heavens; I marshaled their starry hosts. (Isaiah 45:12)

that you forget the LORD your Maker, who stretched out the heavens and laid the foundations of the earth, that you live in constant terror every day because of the wrath of the oppressor, who is bent on destruction? For where is the wrath of the oppressor? (Isaiah 51:13)

But God made the earth by his power; he founded the world by his wisdom and stretched out the heavens by his understanding. (Jeremiah 10:12)

He made the earth by his power; he founded the world by his wisdom and stretched out the heavens by his understanding. (Jer 51:15)

This is the word of the LORD concerning Israel. The LORD, who stretches out the heavens, who lays the foundation of the earth, and who forms the spirit of man within him, declares: (Zechariah 12:1)

Any questions?

Job, King David, Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Zechariah ALL base their reputation on the fact that the heavens are being stretched out. Here are some observations.

Notice Is. 42:5 "He created the heavens and stretched them out." There are the two main aspects of Big Bang cosmology in one tiny phrase!

Jeremiah twice says that He "stretched out the heavens by His understanding." This seems to me to be a strong reference to the incredible fine-tuning we see in our universe. He even repeated it so it must be important.

Two verses speak about stretching the heavens "like a tent". This is an interesting analogy. As a tent is a 2D surface to a 3D interior, the universe seems to be a 3D surface of a 4D interior.

Even the phrase "stretching out the heavens" seems to be amazingly well chosen. Relativity shows us how even the fabric of space is literally being stretched out with the expansion.

Another fundamental property of our Big Bang universe is the second law of thermodynamics, with entropy always increasing. I think this is alluded to in Romans 8: 8:20 For the creation was subjected to vanity, not of its own will, but because of him who subjected it, in hope 8:21 that the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of decay into the liberty of the glory of the children of God. 8:22 For we know that the whole creation groans and travails in pain together until now.

Yet Another aspect of our universe that I have mentioned is that, as calculated by general relativity, time itself began at the moment of creation of matter and energy. Here we go: "in hope of eternal life, which God, who can’t lie, promised before time began;" (Titus 1:2). (There are a couple more possible references to the creation of time, but this seems the strongest to me.)

2 Peter 3:8 also talks of a God who must necessarily transcend our cosmic timeline: "But don’t forget this one thing, beloved, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day."

So there you have it. We have various books of the Bible repeatedly affirming that:
* God created everything from nothing
* The universe underwent expansion
* God exists outside of time and knew what He had planned for us even outside of time

Seriously folks --- if you wanted to describe Big Bang cosmology and general relativity to a group of ancients, could you think of a more accurate way to do it?

Challenge: Can you name any other religious holy book that even approaches this level of scientific detail?

[Iliad]

but it's still not scientific and religious.

[got tonkaed]

yoder, i guess im a little conflicted because im not really interested in getting too involved into this discussion. We have different views about the nature of the supreme being discussed here, that are at present probably irreprable. Because of this, its difficult to believe we can come to some kind of consenus.


However with regards to your last post there were a few things that struck me as perhaps out of place. Correlation does not necessarily equate causality, as you seem to suggest throughout the post specifically with the occurence of similar themes throughout the bible. There is perhaps a less sinster explanation for the repetition, specifically (and i draw from a bit of guiscards expertise here) the nature of the world being described in the jewish holy texts fits it neatly with many of the other conventions at the time, especially within eastern thought. Since the ideas were out there, it does not seem unreasonable to question, although they are placed in a specific set of texts, whether or not this is some sense of divine revelation or more of a common understanding of the times.

Likewise, and i level this charge rather lightly, you could certainly be questioned for tailoring these verses to a particular case. The bible is a pretty big book, and seemingly for the number of verses which correlate to some of the things we may know about big bang, there are other verses which seem to suggest things which stand in contradiction to this science. Of course there is always the potential that a supreme soverign being was attempting to help the people of the time make sense of things, but if we look at this critically, this is a rather convient catch all. It is easy to take this evidence and tie it into a theory (not to knock your investigative work, its a good collection of verses) which can be treated as much stronger than it may be.

As you suggest, these things must be taken on faith. For both the believer and seeker, a high incidence such as this of verses which relate to a scientific phenonmona may constitue a foundation for expeirential faith. However, in a book as old and as closely held on to as the bible, there is infrequently the oppertunity to put it under as sharp a light as some other books. Certainly it is not difficult to make textual arguments about many things out of the bible, this does not make any of them more true becuase of the fact.

[Neutrino]

Seriously, that's a challenge. Name one reasonably well-developed theory that explains the existence and fine-tuning of the universe even close to as well as the God of the Bible explains it.

Weak Anthropic Principle: "We see the universe the way it is because we exist"

If the universe were different (read: incompatable with life) then we would never have existed. No matter how unlikely it is, eventualy one universe will be created with exactly compatable physical laws.

[MeDeFe]

yodermk, most of what you collected there is what I would refer to as "poetic freedom", you make up something that sounds darn impressive, or which simply has a nice rythm to to it, and there you go.

[joecoolfrog]

You atheists are a cynical bunch,just accept the obvious and think of all the benefits;

Education would be marvelously streamlined,no need for any branch of the sciences so the entire school week could be split between biblical studies and promotion of the favoured religion.

No ghastly medical or insurance bills, everything is part of Gods great design so simply live,or die, with the consequences.

No tax money being wasted by the church government on minority projects and lifestyles,there will be none !

No emotional wastage,simply love God and marry a sturdy,faithful wife.

Oh the list goes on but I must put in a quick word for the endless new entertainment possibilities, I have a screenplay already written for the next big blockbuster about Frogs (Plagues of )

I seriously hope that was sarcasm.

Yep you caught me out
Actually I think if there was a god it would want us to have fun and for me that means plenty of beer and lithe young women. Therefore I shall consider my impending trip to Thailand to be important missionery work,plane leaves in 5 hours so cya in 3 weeks

[yodermk]

got tonkaed: Sure I think one should look at the things you mentioned. But just a "common understanding of the times?" Well for one, the timespan between Job, the Psalm, and Zechariah was probably over 500 years. Maybe closer to 1000.

Not to sound mean, but how much detail has to be there for you to recognize that maybe, just maybe, it actually *was* divinely inspired?

FWIW, Jeremiah also hits on another important point of science. 33:25 says that the laws of heaven and earth are fixed. Certainly this has proven to be true.

And yes, I figured that someone would point out that other verses in the Bible seem to contradict Big Bang cosmology. I was waiting. Unfortunately this is an area of disagreement among Christians, including probably some here. I used to be a young earth creationist myself, but when it became clear that the overwhelming evidence contradicted that position, I started to question my faith. I then did a more complete study of what the Bible says about Creation, and came to the conclusion that a young earth is just as unsound Biblically as it is scientifically.

Sure, a hyper-literal reading of the English version of Genesis 1 does certainly imply that Creation happened over a 6*24 hour period. However, that is taking a cursory view, and as one digs deeper into the text and cross references it to other parts of the Bible, it falls apart pretty fast. I actually have a more in-depth view of Genesis 1, which I will probably post sometime. I do believe that it is scientifically accurate when interpreted though broader definitions of the Hebrew words involved.

Neutrino: Sure I'm familiar with WAP. But it seems a cop-out to me. How do you KNOW that a suitable universe MUST have happened? Sure, because we are in one. But why?

MeDeFe: Maybe you should think about the implications a *little* harder!

Joe: Hope you have fun! Travel is great...