Here you go you dumbs$%&#@

[46Tbird]

This thread has really gotten too long to bother with a response, but...

If Christianity is true, then people wouldnt be saying they believe in it, then running away from it as documented in the decline of attendance as compared to 25, 50, or even 100 years ago.

Good to know that widespread belief in an event is what determines its factuality. lmao

[Maddhattter]

Of course the big bang theory does not require the belief (emphasis: belief) that the sigularity came from "nowhere", or for that matter the belief that there is any singularity at all.

The big bang theory would require the belief in a singularity. It's a core part of the theory, as it stands today. If you remove the singularity, you no longer have the big bang theory, you'd have a different (albeit similar) hypothesis.

"It simplifies acceptance of the theory for those so inclined by now ignoring that tough question it raises and instead simply assuming that the universe "is" and always "has been". Magical almost."

I don't see how it simplifies anything. This singularity could simply be the result of a recurring process of compression/expansion. If that's the case, then the universe has always "been", just in a different form. So, it doesn't avoid those questions. It just doesn't attempt to answer those questions because they are outside of its purview.

I remember a Star Trek episode where Spocks brain was in a globe. That's about as relevant as someone saying "Well, you could just be a brain in a vat."

I saw that episode on Netflix not too long ago and I agree it bears no relevance to the topic that we've been discussing.

The expansion vs. the gravitational pull of the combined mass of the universe requires an input force!

No, it doesn't. The expansion would have literally had all the energy in existence already present and available withing it.

Entropy tells you that a force can't come from nothing.

No, it doesn't. Entropy tells us that active energy is expended when work is performed, returning it to a state of potential energy until it's used for work by another system. As far as we are aware energy does not "come" from anywhere. Energy is always conserved, that is, it is never created anew or destroyed - this is called the First Law of Thermodynamics. Thus, when an object does work on another object, the energy can only be converted and/or transferred, but never lost or generated anew. In a sense, energy is like perfect money - transferred but always preserved, assuming no inflation or deflation.

There are no perpetual motion machines.

Correct, as of now. If we can discover a method of harnessing other types of energy it's possible we might discover how to make one someday.

Energy would indeed have to be created by some means in order to cause the expansion against the force of gravity (which we can measure so it too is real).

Sure, we can measure gravity and the energy required to escape it. However, per the first law of thermodynamics, energy is never created or destroyed, it only changes forms. It becomes another type of energy.

Entropy can be measured so it is also real.

I've never seen anyone attempt to argue that entropy isn't real. Entropy is a measure of the "disorder" of a system. What "disorder" refers to is really the number of different microscopic states a system can be in, given that the system has a particular fixed composition, volume, energy, pressure, and temperature. "Microscopic states", meaning the exact states of all the molecules making up the system.we can't see which particular microscopic state a system is in, people often like to say that entropy is quantitative measure of how uncertain or ignorant one is about the exact, detailed, microscopic state of a system. Or, another popular way of saying this is that entropy measures the microscopic disorder of a system.

As a simple example, suppose that you put a marble in a large box, and shook the box around, and you didn't look inside afterwards. Then the marble could be anywhere in the box. Because the box is large, there are many possible places inside the box that the marble could be, so the marble in the box has a high entropy. Now suppose you put the marble in a tiny box and shook up the box. Now, even though you shook the box, you pretty much know where the marble is, because the box is small. In this case we say that the marble in the box has low entropy.

The Big Bang is just a "theory" and it can easily be disproven by real tangible scientific measurements.

The big bang is a "theory" like gravity is a "theory", like germs are "theory", and pregnancy is a "theory". They all could be disproven by science. That's how science works. The catch is, evidence must be provided that demonstrates the untenable nature of that theory. As no evidence has made any such demonstration at this time, these "theories" are going to be relied upon for their model building applications, like it has been for many years.

[Maddhattter]

I still think your logic is skewed by thinking that the number of believers is relevant to the authenticity of the Bible's content.

I agree. An argument from popularity(or bandwagon fallacy) is fallacious no matter which side is using it.

[SS Junk]

Best I recall, every time I've been asked for evidence on a claim I've made, I've provided it.

Jajajajajajajajajaja

[The King]

The big bang theory would require the belief in a singularity. It's a core part of the theory, as it stands today. If you remove the singularity, you no longer have the big bang theory, you'd have a different (albeit similar) hypothesis.

Belief?

I saw that episode on Netflix not too long ago and I agree it bears no relevance to the topic that we've been discussing.

Also irrelevant to the topic that we've been discussing as someone saying "Well, you could just be a brain in a vat."

[Maddhattter]

Belief?

'Accept' would have been a better word. My apologies for any confusion.

Still, accepting the big bang theory requires that you also accept the existence of a singularity in the same way that accepting Jesus as a divine being requires that you accept that a divine exist.

[The King]

'Accept' would have been a better word. My apologies for any confusion.

Still, accepting the big bang theory requires that you also accept the existence of a singularity in the same way that accepting Jesus as a divine being requires that you accept that a divine exist.

Reasonable, thanks.

[Mongoose]

What was a local phenomenon?

Christanity spread through the known world a lot quicker and broader than you're thinking. Once again, the more you talk, the more I'm thinking that you're either trolling or there's not enough spaghetti in the bowl to make a full meal. I still think your logic is skewed by thinking that the number of believers is relevant to the authenticity of the Bible's content.

:YAWN:

And it`s coming to an end.

a Believer = Money for that religion in both terms of actually currency and power.

More Believers = More Currency & Power

Less = Less

Like many other things in this world Christiany was: Born, it lived, it`s now in ill health, and soon will die.

[The King]

Like many other things in this world Christiany was: Born, it lived, it`s now in ill health, and soon will die.

Very similar to what Jesus did on our behalf, thanks for unintentionally providing the analogy.

[Forever_frost]

Considering we're reaching the end of the church age, not surprised numbers are dropping. The trigger is pulled when everyone has heard the word and the work starts on the Temple. I'm rather interested in watching Israel at the moment. When they start on that, I'm just going to kick back and enjoy the ride.

[Mongoose]

I will agree with the bolded part only. What Mongoose just did is make an argumentum ad populum, a logical fallacy. Something can be true, untrue or false regardless of how many people believe it. I will agree with Mongoose that declining church attendance can mean that more and more people are not "needing" the church, but that doesn't speak to their beliefs. People can believe something but not engage in supporting the social structure that is associated.

And what you describe is called a hypocrite

Lots of those claim to be Christians.

If something is true, it cannot be refused. If it isnt being practiced, then it must be untrue, replaced, or disproven. One simply cannot say they are something, then not live to the standards. The Churches have as you said made themselves "not needed". Watch what happens later when the children of those people "not needing" the church become adults and it wasnt instilled in them that they need to go to church. That being said, give it another 10 years on the other stuff as the Churches decline and lose their monetary and political power.

Who would have ever thought you would see gay marriage being legal in your lifetime?

[Mongoose]

Considering we're reaching the end of the church age, not surprised numbers are dropping. The trigger is pulled when everyone has heard the word and the work starts on the Temple. I'm rather interested in watching Israel at the moment. When they start on that, I'm just going to kick back and enjoy the ride.

And after they build the Temple and nothing happens?

[Forever_frost]

And what you describe is called a hypocrite

Lots of those claim to be Christians.

If something is true, it cannot be refused. If it isnt being practiced, then it must be untrue, replaced, or disproven. One simply cannot say they are something, then not live to the standards. The Churches have as you said made themselves "not needed". Watch what happens later when the children of those people "not needing" the church become adults and it wasnt instilled in them that they need to go to church. That being said, give it another 10 years on the other stuff as the Churches decline and lose their monetary and political power.

Who would have ever thought you would see gay marriage being legal in your lifetime?

Your argument lacks sense. If I'm black but 'do not act it', am I still black? What about if I'm a Chevy guy and hang out with Mustang people but don't tout how great the 350 is? Am I still a Chevy guy despite me not boring you with it?

Tell me, is the standard me beating you over the head with my faith or me living it to the best of my ability?

[Mongoose]

Your argument lacks sense. If I'm black but 'do not act it', am I still black? What about if I'm a Chevy guy and hang out with Mustang people but don't tout how great the 350 is? Am I still a Chevy guy despite me not boring you with it?

Tell me, is the standard me beating you over the head with my faith or me living it to the best of my ability?

Nope, this is an argument about faith. We both know at the end of the day we`ll never change each other mind`s

But I do know that in real life, we`ll defend each other`s right to choose.

[Maddhattter]

And what you describe is called a hypocrite

Not necessarily. They may not believe they are called to preach, the may believe they are not called to support because doing so would keep them from supporting themselves. Could they be hypocrites, sure. However, their personal beliefs could simply not jive with other groups or individual's beliefs.

Lots of those claim to be Christians.

And lots claim to be a lot of other things as well. That doesn't make them hypocrites, nor does it make the claim of christianity untrue.

If something is true, it cannot be refused.

Incorrect. The truth is refused all the time. You can speak to any anti-vaccination proponent to illustrate this.

If it isnt being practiced, then it must be untrue, replaced, or disproven.

This is not true. If it isn't being practiced, the only thing that means is that it isn't being practiced. Now, you could argue that there is a corollary, but correlation != causation.

One simply cannot say they are something, then not live to the standards.

One can. Entire groups can. It happens all the time.

The Churches have as you said made themselves "not needed". Watch what happens later when the children of those people "not needing" the church become adults and it wasnt instilled in them that they need to go to church. That being said, give it another 10 years on the other stuff as the Churches decline and lose their monetary and political power.

Even if nobody believed, it wouldn't follow that any god claim is true or untrue. All people not believing demonstrates is that people don't believe.

Who would have ever thought you would see gay marriage being legal in your lifetime?

I've always felt it was inevitable. We're a secular country/society. There's not secular reason to deny their marriage and extend the same rights to their partners that heterosexual partners get in marriage.