The Passion...

[msmpls]

The problem is that it didn't really happen. 
Science could be just as easily used to explain why Mary Poppins "flys" if you are interested...

How do you know it didn't happen?
And yes, please do explain to me (with jargon...just like I did) how Mary Poppins flies.

[torgosPizza]

The whole idea is that god is above and beyond natural law--he created natural law of course--and thus science isn't applicable. A miracle is a miracle because it violates natural law.

Here's an interesting argument about why god cannot be outside of space-time, with several objections and other arguments. Worth a read if you're interested.

It is not just impossible for God to have "created" the universe from outside space-time. Without a significant amount of qualification it is incoherent, even if we do our best to remove any temporal limitations on the idea of "creation" by allowing it to be atemporal "contingency." Without time there is no direction to contingency and no way in which an entity can be said to be the creator or the created.

Of course, it may be possible to qualify the idea of "creation" by God to avoid these problems, but any logical argument can be defeated by redefining your way out of it. The issue would really be whether any such redefinition or clarification made sense and did not start to weaken various theological claims.

Here's the full thing: http://www.machineslikeus.com/articles/CanGodExist.html

[Tarantulas]

"What sort of crap can we sling to explain this away"

That is the start and end of any effort to use "science" to try and back some religious concept.

I have no idea where you have gotten your extreme bias from, or how many Chrisitan scientists you have actually spoken to about this matter, or how many theologians you have interviewed, or how much philosophy you have studied, but since you have a perception of reality that I don't agree with, I'm jsut oing to step aside and say "It's all good, homes...."

And to set the record straight, I agree with you on several key issues -- the greta flood didn't cause the Grand Canyon. But just as many idiots can be found on either side of the fence, bro... So I won't clump you up with them if you don't clump me up with them either.

I gots me carne fries and a sobe, so I'm all happy

The problem is that you can't pick and choose what your christian "scientific" community puts forth as factual information.

You believe all of it, or none of it.... same as the bible.

Cafeteria christianity is why your faith is failing...

[torgosPizza]

The problem is that it didn't really happen.
Science could be just as easily used to explain why Mary Poppins "flys" if you are interested...

How do you know it didn't happen?
And yes, please do explain to me (with jargon...just like I did) how Mary Poppins flies.

Sherry Bobbins can FLY?

"So long, superman!"

I thought it wasn't FLYING, it's just.. falling sideways!

Or better yet - you have to throw yourself at the ground and miss!

[msmpls]

just let it go msmpls lol -- I'll share some ants with you if you wish!

I s'pose your right.
You know what the funny thing is? I'm not even a Christian and I'm defending the Bible! or science or....shit I'm all confused



let's go get some ants and let this one die...

[Tarantulas]

The problem is that it didn't really happen.
Science could be just as easily used to explain why Mary Poppins "flys" if you are interested...

How do you know it didn't happen?
And yes, please do explain to me (with jargon...just like I did) how Mary Poppins flies.

I know it didn't happen because outside our religious texts, it doesn't exist in actual history.

Same thing with the Israelites leaving Egypt... there are no records of this happening outside the bible.  The Egyptians didn't write about, NO ONE WROTE ABOUT IT.  Why?  Because it didn't happen.  Actual scientific proof that it didn't happen?  If some folks wander around for 40 years, they are going to leave some archaeological evidence behind.  And guess what?  They didn't.

One might argue that history was poorly recorded in those days or why would the Egyptians write about such a "crushing defeat"... but the people who put forward the latter of those ideas are the people who desperately want to prove the bible right and give it some "credibility"

This "credibility" is the same fluff that Saul used when he claimed the church was "hundreds of years old" when out of the blue one day he started talking about Jesus (some 60 some odd years after Jesus' supposed death)... plenty of time to build the guy up and create some miracles for him to have had performed.  Throw in some actual historical figures for good measure... VIOLA! It now sounds credible!

And now, something for the kiddies....

Why Mary Poppins flies:

Science answer:  Because updrafts catch her specially made umbrella producing lift that gives her the appearance of flight.  Also, don't take the brown acid.

Religious answer:  Because Mary Poppins wills it to be so.  Oh, and if you do happen to figure out a scientific answer, its because that's how she did it as well...

[J-Proof]

The problem is that you can't pick and choose what your christian "scientific" community puts forth as factual information.

You believe all of it, or none of it.... same as the bible.

That's a heinous generalization since anybody can say anything about Chrisitanity and you think I should believe it =P

Einstein disagreed with the findings at Copenhagen, but the findings of Copenhagen are still taught as an integral part of physics.

I DO NOT need to believe everything some Christian says, jsut as you do NOT need to believe everything that a scientist says.

[J-Proof]

Same thing with the Israelites leaving Egypt... there are no records of this happening outside the bible.  The Egyptians didn't write about, NO ONE WROTE ABOUT IT.  Why?  Because it didn't happen.  Actual scientific proof that it didn't happen?  If some folks wander around for 40 years, they are going to leave some archaeological evidence behind.  And guess what?  They didn't.
well...

Sort of like the Big Bang Theory....

[msmpls]

Same thing with the Israelites leaving Egypt... there are no records of this happening outside the bible.  The Egyptians didn't write about, NO ONE WROTE ABOUT IT.  Why?  Because it didn't happen.  Actual scientific proof that it didn't happen?  If some folks wander around for 40 years, they are going to leave some archaeological evidence behind.  And guess what?  They didn't.
well...

Sort of like the Big Bang Theory....

yeah except no one was around for millions upon millions of years after the Big Bang....so no, it's not really like that at all.

[Phantom of Krankor]

Either way, 90% of Americans believe in god. So it doesn't matter really...

[torgosPizza]

Sort of like the Big Bang Theory....

Well, except for ...

Recently, NASA has made some astounding discoveries which lend themselves to the proof of the Big Bang theory. Most importantly, astronomers using the Astro-2 observatory were able to confirm one of the requirements for the foundation of the universe through the Big Bang. In June, 1995, scientists were able to detect primordial helium, such as deuterium, in the far reaches of the universe. These findings are consistent with an important aspect of the Big Bang theory that a mixture of hydrogen and helium was created at the beginning of the universe.

In addition, the Hubble telescope, named after the father of Big Bang theory, has provided certain clues as to what elements were present following creation. Astronomers using Hubble have found the element boron in extremely ancient stars. They postulate that its presence could be either a remnant of energetic events at the birth of galaxies or it could indicate that boron is even older, dating back to the Big Bang itself. If the latter is true, scientists will be forced once again to modify their theory for the birth of the universe and events immediately afterward because, according to the present theory, such a heavy and complex atom could not have existed.

In this manner we can see that the research will never be truly complete. Our hunger for knowledge will never be satiated. So to answer the question, what now, is an impossibility. The path we take from here will only be determined by our own discoveries and questions. We are engaged in a never-ending cycle of questions and answers where one will inevitably lead to the other.

and just last year ...

New NASA space-probe observations of the oldest light in the cosmos are the most direct evidence yet that the universe expanded extremely quickly immediately after the big bang, physicists say.

Charles Bennett of Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland, led the team overseeing NASA's Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP). He and colleagues announced the new results Thursday in a teleconference.

Previous experiments—including WMAP results released in 2003—had provided strong evidence for the rapid-expansion theory, called inflation, that was first proposed by physicist Alan Guth in 1980.

In the trillion-trillionth of a second after the big bang, the universe expanded from the size of a gumball to astronomical proportions, according to the inflation theory. The universe then settled into a more leisurely pace of expansion over the past 13.7 billion years or so.

Smoking Gun

WMAP now has the most convincing evidence yet for inflation: a reading of the light released just after the big bang. This cosmic afterglow, known as microwave background, is made of a similar type of radiation to that which carries signals to a TV antenna.

The afterglow is as valuable to a cosmologist as the earliest fossils are to a paleontologist. It is the oldest radiation ever detected, still traveling almost 14 billion years after it was emitted.

The microwaves bathe the entire universe in a perpetual buzz, reaching Earth from all directions. The buzz is virtually uniform, but not quite.

Tiny variations at different points in space allow scientists to draw maps of the early universe, as the WMAP team has done with unprecedented detail.

These cosmic baby pictures show us a time when the universe was a smooth, fiery broth, when stars and galaxies had yet to form under the pull of gravity (photo: another view of the early universe).

Finer Points

The team said cosmologists will now be able to delve into the finer details of how inflation happened.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/03/0317_060317_big_bang.html

http://www.umich.edu/~gs265/bigbang.htm

[torgosPizza]

Either way, 90% of Americans believe in god. So it doesn't matter really...

But 85% of Swedes don't believe in god. And actually the number of believers in the U.S. is closer to 80% - the numbers of believers seems to be dropping every year. So I think it does matter. Maybe not as important an issue as others are making it out to be, but it's a topic worthy of discussion no matter what.

[RobtheBarbarian]

I'm eagerly awaiting the moment when here, on these very forums, you all decide once and for all whether there is a God or not.

I think a more practical discussion is whether or not it's possible to change someone's mind once they believe/disbelieve in a God.

[Sinflux]

But 85% of Swedes don't believe in god.

23% actually

[Conor]

Either way, 90% of Americans believe in god. So it doesn't matter really...

http://www.geocities.com/siliconvalley/vista/2359/sounds/Homer/openmoth.wav