It's ILLOGICAL to think God didn't Create the Universe

It might be more accurate to say that God is a mathematician. Certainly the universe appears to run to a set of mathematical rules.

I just watched Noah movie, here is the video clip of creation


This is only because of our shortsightness when we were told of creation in Genesis that we interpret the message so wrongly, we see it only from perspective of earthlings. Light ( energy ) was created on first day of creation, light is energy which travels as waves , sun and moon was created at fourth day.

Big Bang evidence supports Biblical creation, says Orthodox physicist

One doesn’t have to believe in God to accept the Bible’s point of view on the Big Bang, Aviezer said. “It’s an example of Divine irony that it took atheistic scientists like Dirac and all the others to point out the truth of the Torah. At this point I think we can say that creation is a scientific fact.”

Piran is not convinced. “I am by no means a Biblical scholar, but it seems to me that you can’t just take one passage and ignore the rest. What is described in the formation of the heavens and the earth, not to mention the Biblical account of where life came from, of course has nothing to do with science,” he said.

For Aviezer, however, those issues are not relevant to the Big Bang itself. “What happens in the rest of creation is another question,” he said. “It’s the Big Bang – the explosion of a highly concentrated chunk of energy that appeared out of nowhere to create the universe – that is being described when God says ‘let there be light.’ For 3,000 years no one really understood what ‘the light’ of Genesis was, with different interpretations talking about a ‘spiritual light,’ Aviezer said. “Now, thanks to the Big Bang theory, we can understand exactly what it means, on a physical level.”

LINK

It is intresting how pieces are locking together and old texts are making sense.

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
Even as the OP may be correct is it not reasonable to also ask, ''is it logical to believe that all of this was created by some super being sitting on a throne with scores of heavenly agents hanging around singing is praises for all eternity?

Were is the ''logic'' in believing that this super dude told a couple of children don't eat this particular fruit or you and all your descendants will live in sin under the spell of another invisible being that the first super dude created in the first place and that this other super being had somehow managed to turn evil and the first super being shrugged his shoulders and blamed those two kids for all the problems to follow. Where is the ''logic'' in that?

To me, what is logical is to take that which we are finding about the nature of our existence and trying to understand it in CONCERT with those old fantasy stories, not interpreting these things we are finding as if those fantasies are the bedrock TEMPLATE in understanding them. This means being willing to ditch those fantasy stories and discover the underpinning of those stories that those ancient people were forced to believe just like the people on a swaying bridge begin to walk in sync with that swaying bridge.

That's why the whole Bible works together in "CONCERT" to help us understand, not just one individual story.

While many here choose to ditch the stories in favor of a generic higher consciousness, one needs to ask themselves where this consciousness came from, and as a human race, what has been given to us to try and understand it. For many, the Bible comes closer to answering those questions than any other source, even though we may not understand some of it from a human standpoint.

It tells us that God's ways and thoughts are higher than ours and no one is capable of completely understanding the mind of God...at least while we are here on earth. Earth was never meant to be our permanent home, which is why we experience human death and live on through a more spiritual existence afterwards.

The story of Adam and Eve shows us that sin and disobedience helps us to understand the difference between good and evil. How can you appreciate the good if you don't understand what comes with evil? God gave us free will to choose between the two. As long as there is free will, there is no such thing as a collective consciousness. In the end, God separates good from evil, even though he allows the higher principalities of darkness to influence us while we are here on earth. It will not remain that way forever.

We can ask ourselves all day long why God allowed us knowledge of good and evil and why we are all (both angels and humans) given free will to choose between them. Would we appreciate God if we didn't know the alternative? If we all took a vote, would we vote for the side of free will? Is the ability to choose more important to some than being forced into a permanent state of perfection and good?

Just wanted to share this excellent video on creationism.

I particularly enjoyed the part on the complexity of the dna molecule consisting of 4 Dimensions and how all the layers need to function at the outset and complete infeasibility of this occurring naturally by random mutations.



The entire video is well worth a watch. At one point in time, I scoffed at intelligent design, but there are legimate shortcomings of the big bang and evolution.

The video also mentions that if you do away with Adam and Eve then it negates the bible, so it is paramount to hold onto it literally, so Christians indorsing evolution and getting on the science bandwagon may want to be careful. It is always a good thing to ask for wisdom and discernment, especially these days.

a reply to: dollukka

Big Bang evidence supports Biblical creation, says Orthodox physicist

The Bible tells us that creation will end the same way...

2 Peter 3:10

10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

a reply to: neoholographic

Digging the concepts of resonance, being the kinda animating-force, of the projected dualistic ' world '.

If resonance is there : then why must we add the complexities, of the concepts of reason and logic, as necessities ?

Because God said so ?

Would it be ' logical ' for one whom doesn't believe in God, nor reason, nor logic :
to believe that this existence must be created by God, because that's ' logical ' , of because God said so ?

My experience here is a swirling flux of mostly balanced order and chaos, without reason nor logic.
Continuous through this inner-worlds // outer-worlds experience.

It seems different experiences are here.
Will they collide dualistically, or mesh harmoniously ?

a reply to: Deetermined

That's why the whole Bible works together in "CONCERT" to help us understand, not just one individual story.

I'm down with that and I also agree with

For many, the Bible comes closer to answering those questions than any other source, even though we may not understand some of it from a human standpoint.

For those ''many'' fine. Use it as a guide. However

one needs to ask themselves where this consciousness came from, and as a human race, what has been given to us to try and understand it.

It's this part about ''what has been given to us to try and understand it'' that determines it's real value. The question of just ''who'' or ''what'' is the source of this ''giving'' is paramount. Only two potential sources come to my mind. One is what we can term an supernatural source with the other being a collection of musings and considerations of men from the long ago past who wrote down their thoughts which were then collected by other men to be used to establish and govern their tribal standards.

Putting that more succinctly, reaching up or reaching down. For me, choosing which of that existential conundrum to give serious consideration to is simple. Do I want to believe in a God that has written us a book of his rules that is in so many cases vague and incomprehensible all the while commanding complete obedience to it's precepts to the exclusion of all other sets of precepts?

I weigh those two possibilities in my hands before me, feeling their weight in either hand and find one to have no weight at all leaving the other to be evaluated by it's own criteria in concert with all the other avenues of human speculation.

The same goes for Jesus. Jesus, God, or man. Was Jesus Gods attempt to reach man, or man's attempt to reach God. And therein I guess lies, for some, the resolution of salvation or damnation. Again, no choice for me. What value to me is there in believing Jesus to be God, come down for all those reasons only to leave a record in one book followed by a history riddled with carnage and confusion over how to exactly discover and interpret the truth of it all, followed by a wide splintering of those who believe in it into a vast assortment of schools all promoting the idea that it is they who have managed the best understanding of what it means.

Nope, I'll go with the ideas of men that are collected in the Bible and that Jesus was one of those men.

If there wasn't a heaven, we wouldn't need god. Therefore we only care about god so we can go to eternal paradise in the afterlife. It's basic consumer culture.

This is kind of stuff I come to ATS for. Yes, it's been beaten to death but there something so facinating in people trying to relay what they percieve to be true based on their experience and knowledge when it comes to religion.
I can't deney that life sometimes feels like there is more to it than the everyday physical world.
I understand the collective comfort and guidance it can provide, but that's where it ends for me.

As far as religion goes, we don't even have to try and answer difficult questions.
All we need to do is look at our history.
I can't imagine any kind of benevolent deity going along with that, ever

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

You said:

Putting that more succinctly, reaching up or reaching down. For me, choosing which of that existential conundrum to give serious consideration to is simple. Do I want to believe in a God that has written us a book of his rules that is in so many cases vague and incomprehensible all the while commanding complete obedience to it's precepts to the exclusion of all other sets of precepts?

What exactly is vague and incomprehensible?

Are you saying you can't comprehend it? It looks like Billions of people comprehend it enough to be followers of Christ. Why can't you comprehend it?

I comprehend it just fine.

It makes more sense to me than an infinite multiverse where thousands of new universe have to form just for me to watch ESPN in the morning.

You prove the Bible right though. It says the carnal mind is at enmity with God. How can you comprehend that which is spiritual?

Tell me, why is it comprehensible to say logic, reason and awareness came from non reason, logic and awareness?

originally posted by: Deetermined
a reply to: dollukka

Big Bang evidence supports Biblical creation, says Orthodox physicist

The Bible tells us that creation will end the same way...

2 Peter 3:10

10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

Good point

a reply to: Jubei42

You would think if there's any form of afterlife or hereafter, we would be more frequently visited by happy customers who want to share their personal experiences. I've never seen a commercial for heaven, never met anybody who spent significant time there and brought back a t shirt to prove it, no post cards or phone calls or employees who want to spread the good news and encourage society to qualify for benefits or reserve their custom ethereal suite for everlasting retirement. It's so weird how people just die and then you never ever hear from them again.

originally posted by: Deetermined
a reply to: dollukka

Big Bang evidence supports Biblical creation, says Orthodox physicist

The Bible tells us that creation will end the same way...

2 Peter 3:10

10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

You do realize that is referring to people not to the literal universe and physical earth? The terms "new heaven" and "new earth" appear several times in the Bible and in each instance it refers to people. The "heavens" being the ruling body, and the "earth" the subjects of the government ruling.

Let me give you an example. 2 Peter chapter 3, the very chapter you quoted, look a little before verse 10 that you quoted and we see a heavens and earth before the world was destroyed in Noah's day:

"For they deliberately ignore this fact, that long ago there were heavens and an earth standing firmly out of water and in the midst of water by the word of God; and that by those means the world of that time suffered destruction when it was flooded with water."-2 Peter 3:5, 6.

What do you think when Peter said that the world of Noah's day suffered destruction? Does the heaven and earth still exist? Isn't it obvious he is referring to the world of wicked people at that time? Now notice the next verse:

"But by the same word the heavens and the earth that now exist are reserved for fire and are being kept until the day of judgment and of destruction of the ungodly people". verse 7.

The wicked world of human society with its governments and political powers its "heavens" and the mass of wicked human society alienated from God, the "earth" will be destroyed at Armageddon by fire. Not the literal earth. Notice it says "the heavens and the earth that now exist" meaning they did not exist before the flood which we read about in the preceding verse, where the heavens and earth of that time were destroyed by means of water. He even says just that, the destruction of the coming heaven and earth is the "destruction of the ungodly people."

Prophecy tells us that there will be a great crowd that survives the great tribulation on earth into the "new world" at Revelation 7:9, 10. And that righteous humans will live forever on earth, and that the meek will inherit the earth:

"The righteous will possess the earth, And they will live forever on it."-Psalm 37:29.

"Happy are the mild-tempered, since they will inherit the earth."-Matthew 5:5.

a reply to: TzarChasm

Well, thats not really true. To their credit, they've been heavily promoting heaven.
It's one of their main attractions.
They don't let us know, ofcourse, because they're having such a good time.
Maybe they have us on pray-per-view, who knows.
I don't

Before my grandmother died, I asked her can you give me a sign? Anything?
Guess what happend

a reply to: Jubei42

She's waiting for you to pick up a Ouija board so you can politely invite her to tea?

a reply to: dollukka

It's the other way around though, father of the Big Bang theory was Georges Lemaître a catholic priest. So it's save to say the whole thing was from the get go heavily influenced by bible bias.

originally posted by: neoholographic
What exactly is vague and incomprehensible?

According to the Gospel of John, what did Jesus say about bearing his own witness?
(a) “If I bear witness to myself, my testimony is not true” (John 5:3 1)
(b) “Even if I do bear witness to myself, my testimony is true” (John 8:14)

When Jesus entered Jerusalem did he cleanse the temple that same day?
(a) Yes (Matthew 21:12)
(b) No. He went into the temple and looked around, but since it was very late he did nothing. Instead, he went to Bethany to spend the night and returned the next morning to cleanse the temple (Mark I 1:1- 17).

The Gospels say that Jesus cursed a fig tree. Did the tree wither at once?
(a) Yes. (Matthew 21:19)
(b) No. It withered overnight (Mark II: 20)

Did Judas kiss Jesus?
(a) Yes (Matthew 26:48-50)
(b) No. Judas could not get close enough to Jesus to kiss him (John 18:3-12)

What did Jesus say about Peter’s denial?
(a) “The cock will not crow till you have denied me three times” (John 13:38).
(b) “Before the cock crows twice you will deny me three times” (Mark 14:30) . When the cock crowed once, the three denials were not yet complete (see Mark 14:72). Therefore prediction (a) failed.

Did Jesus bear his own cross?
(a) Yes (John 19:17)
(b) No (Matthew 27:31-32)

Did Jesus die before the curtain of the temple was torn?
(a) Yes(Matthew27:50-5 1;MarklS:37-38)
(b) No. After the curtain was torn, then Jesus crying with a loud voice, said, “Father, into thy hands I commit my spirit!” And having said this he breathed his last (Luke 23:45-46)

Did Jesus say anything secretly?
(a) No. “I have said nothing secretly” (John 18:20)
(b) Yes. “He did not speak to them without a parable, but privately to his own disciples he explained everything” (Mark 4:34). The disciples asked him “Why do you speak to them in parables?” He said, “To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given” (Matthew 13: 1 0-11)

Where was Jesus at the sixth hour on the day of the crucifixion?
(a) On the cross (Mark 15:23)
(b) In Pilate’s court (John 19:14)

The gospels say that two thieves were crucified along with Jesus. Did both thieves mock Jesus?
(a) Yes (Mark 15:32)
(b) No. One of them mocked Jesus, the other defended Jesus (Luke 23:43)

Did Jesus ascend to Paradise the same day of the crucifixion?
(a) Yes. He said to the thief who defended him, “Today you will be with me in Paradise” (Luke 23:43)
(b) No. He said to Mary Magdelene two days later, “I have not yet ascended to the Father” (John 20:17)

When Paul was on the road to Damascus he saw a light and heard a voice. Did those who were with him hear the voice?
(a) Yes(Acts9:7)
(b) No(Acts22:9)

When Paul saw the light he fell to the ground. Did his traveling companions also fall to the ground?
(a) Yes (Acts 26:14)
(b) No (Acts 9:7)

Did the voice spell out on the spot what Paul’s duties were to be?
(a) Yes (Acts 26:16-18)
(b) No. The voice commanded Paul to go into the city of Damascus and there he will be told what he must do. (Acts9:7;22: 10)

When the Israelites dwelt in #tin they committed adultery with the daughters of Moab. God struck them with a plague. How many people died in that plague?
(a) Twenty-four thousand (Numbers 25:1 and 9)
(b) Twenty-three thousand (I Corinthians 10:8)

How many members of the house of Jacob came to Egypt?
(a) Seventy souls (Genesis 4&27)
(b) Seventy-five souls (Acts 7:14)

What did Judas do with the blood money he received for betraying Jesus?
(a) He bought a field (Acts 1: 18)
(b) He threw all of it into the temple and went away. The priests could not put the blood money into the temple treasury, so they used it to buy a field to bury strangers (Matthew 27:5)

How did Judas die?
(a) After he threw the money into the temple he went away and hanged himself (Matthew 27:5)
(b) After he bought the field with the price of his evil deed he fell headlong and burst open in the middle and all his bowels gushed out (Acts 1:18)

Why is the field called “Field of Blood”?
(a) Because the priests bought it with the blood money (Matthew 27:8)
(b) Because of the bloody death of Judas therein (Acts 1:19)

Who is a ransom for whom?
(a) “The Son of Man came…to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45). “Christ Jesus who gave himself as a ransom for all… “(I Timothy 2:5-6)
(b) “The wicked is a ransom for the righteous, and the faithless for the upright” (Proverbs 21:18)

Is the law of Moses useful?
(a) Yes. “All scripture is… profitable…” (2 Timothy 3:16)
(b) No. “. . . A former commandment is set aside because of its weakness and uselessness… “(Hebrews 7:18)

What was the exact wording on the cross?
(a) “This is Jesus the King of the Jews” (Matthew 27:37)
(b) “The King of the Jews” (Mark 15:26)
(c) “This is the King of the Jews” (Luke 23:38)
(d) “Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews” (John 19:19)

Did Herod want to kill John the Baptist?
(a) Yes (Matthew 14:5)
(b) No. It was Herodias, the wife of Herod who wanted to kill him. But Herod knew that he was a righteous man and kept him safe (Mark 6:20)

Who was the tenth disciple of Jesus in the list of twelve?
(a) Thaddaeus (Matthew 10: 1-4; Mark 3:13 -19)
(b) Judas son of James is the corresponding name in Luke’s gospel (Luke 6:12-16)

Jesus saw a man sitat the tax collector’s office and called him to be his disciple. What was his name?
(a) Matthew (Matthew 9:9)
(b) Levi (Mark 2:14; Luke 5:27)

Was Jesus crucified on the daytime before the Passover meal or the daytime after?
(a) After (Mark 14:12-17)
(b) Before. Before the feast of the Passover (John 1) Judas went out at night (John 13:30). The other disciples thought he was going out to buy supplies to prepare for the Passover meal (John 13:29). When Jesus was arrested, the Jews did not enter Pilate’s judgment hail because they wanted to stay clean to eat the Passover (John 18:28). When the judgment was pronounced against Jesus, it was about the sixth hour on the day of Preparation for the Passover (John 19:14)

Did Jesus pray to The Father to prevent the crucifixion?
(a) Yes. (Matthew 26:39; Mark 14:36; Luke 22:42)
(b) No. (John 12:27)

In the gospels which say that Jesus prayed to avoid the cross, how many times did ‘he move away from his disciples to pray?
(a) Three (Matthew 26:36-46 and Mark 14:32-42)
(b) One. No opening is left for another two times. (Luke 22:39-46)

Matthew and Mark agree that Jesus went away and prayed three times. What were the words of the second prayer?
(a) Mark does not give the words but he says that the words were the same as the first prayer (Mark 14:3 9)
(b) Matthew gives us the words, and we can see that they are not the same as in the first (Matthew 26:42)

...and many more

a reply to: Peeple

Just as men can play an essential role in the engineering of a tampon, a Catholic priest can calculate the equations to describe natural astrophysics.

a reply to: TzarChasm

They sure can. The question is if a little penis is the absolute best form a tampon could have?
And Big Bang Theory... I mean if you have to adjust lambda over and over to make it work for each new discovery made and it still doesn't make sense, there should be a point where you think: maybe it doesn't work.

originally posted by: Deetermined

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
Even as the OP may be correct is it not reasonable to also ask, ''is it logical to believe that all of this was created by some super being sitting on a throne with scores of heavenly agents hanging around singing is praises for all eternity?

Were is the ''logic'' in believing that this super dude told a couple of children don't eat this particular fruit or you and all your descendants will live in sin under the spell of another invisible being that the first super dude created in the first place and that this other super being had somehow managed to turn evil and the first super being shrugged his shoulders and blamed those two kids for all the problems to follow. Where is the ''logic'' in that?

To me, what is logical is to take that which we are finding about the nature of our existence and trying to understand it in CONCERT with those old fantasy stories, not interpreting these things we are finding as if those fantasies are the bedrock TEMPLATE in understanding them. This means being willing to ditch those fantasy stories and discover the underpinning of those stories that those ancient people were forced to believe just like the people on a swaying bridge begin to walk in sync with that swaying bridge.

That's why the whole Bible works together in "CONCERT" to help us understand, not just one individual story.

While many here choose to ditch the stories in favor of a generic higher consciousness, one needs to ask themselves where this consciousness came from, and as a human race, what has been given to us to try and understand it. For many, the Bible comes closer to answering those questions than any other source, even though we may not understand some of it from a human standpoint.

It tells us that God's ways and thoughts are higher than ours and no one is capable of completely understanding the mind of God...at least while we are here on earth. Earth was never meant to be our permanent home, which is why we experience human death and live on through a more spiritual existence afterwards.

The story of Adam and Eve shows us that sin and disobedience helps us to understand the difference between good and evil. How can you appreciate the good if you don't understand what comes with evil? God gave us free will to choose between the two. As long as there is free will, there is no such thing as a collective consciousness. In the end, God separates good from evil, even though he allows the higher principalities of darkness to influence us while we are here on earth. It will not remain that way forever.

We can ask ourselves all day long why God allowed us knowledge of good and evil and why we are all (both angels and humans) given free will to choose between them. Would we appreciate God if we didn't know the alternative? If we all took a vote, would we vote for the side of free will? Is the ability to choose more important to some than being forced into a permanent state of perfection and good?

Excellent points