[Rev. M. Rodimer]

Re: Hello, all.

Matter is just energy in disguise. And the law of conservation says that energy cannot be created or destroyed. Thus the energy may always have existed, in different forms. The truth is that we don't know though.

Finally, a bit of honesty. You don't know.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang

Answering a question by linking to Wikipedia is your idea of "intellectual discussion"?

If all your responses will be as well-considered as this, we should be finished "intellectually discussing" in about 10 minutes!

That page does not explain WHY the massively-dense universe would expand, against the pull of its own intense gravitational field. That's the question I asked. How about just admitting that you don't know, instead of expecting me to do your homework for you?

[Rev. Edward Clement]

Re: Hello, all.

The theist has the burden of proof, as they make the positive claim that a deity/god exists. All I must do, being the atheist, is refute their claims and "evidence."

Friend, you are all wrong. When an individual comes to a True-Christian(tm) Forum that is run by the Lord through True-Christians(tm), thus meaning that all the members of this Church know God, you must provide the evidence for your claim.

You should know that but sadly, your idols, such as Richard Dawkins, know nothing of real knowledge that comes through knowing Jesus.

James
1:5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.

[MissKage]

Re: Hello, all.

That's a neat little dodge, but doesn't answer the question. Matter came from somewhere. Where did it come from? Are you suggesting it created itself? Wouldn't that make you a pantheist?

Matter is just energy in disguise. And the law of conservation says that energy cannot be created or destroyed. Thus the energy may always have existed, in different forms. The truth is that we don't know though.

Then explain why it would expand. Gravity causes contraction, not expansion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang

[Rev. M. Rodimer]

Re: Hello, all.

We don't know where the singularity came from,

At least you acknowledge this.

Prior to the Big Bang, space-time would not have existed, and causation requires time, thus the Big Bang does not need a cause.

That's a neat little dodge, but doesn't answer the question. Matter came from somewhere. Where did it come from? Are you suggesting it created itself? Wouldn't that make you a pantheist?

The Big Bang isn't an explosion, it's an expansion.

Then explain why it would expand. Gravity causes contraction, not expansion.

[MissKage]

Re: Hello, all.

One more atheist claiming he wants "intellectual discussion" when really he's here to proselytize and try to convert us to his false religion of Darwin-worship and Scientism.

Science isn't a religion.

OK, go ahead. Explain where the wad of energy/matter that formed the universe in the Big Bang came from

We don't know where the singularity came from, lol. If your going to make the argument that God made it:

Prior to the Big Bang, space-time would not have existed, and causation requires time, thus the Big Bang does not need a cause.

and why something that dense, with such an intense gravitational field, would (or even could) explode.

*facepalm*

The Big Bang isn't an explosion, it's an expansion.

[James Hutchins]

Re: Hello, all.

. . . and here we go.

One more atheist claiming he wants "intellectual discussion" when really he's here to proselytize and try to convert us to his false religion of Darwin-worship and Scientism.

OK, go ahead. Explain where the wad of energy/matter that formed the universe in the Big Bang came from, and why something that dense, with such an intense gravitational field, would (or even could) explode.

LOL, I want to hear how it was all by chance. I guess I have my farm, plane, truck and vast auto collection 'by chance' too.

[James Hutchins]

Re: Hello, all.

False. You are claiming absolute certainty that a god exists, and as such you hold the BoP to proof (the Judeo-Christian) God exists. Had I stated I was absolute certain that God did not exist, I would have the BoP, but I did not, thus you are required to proof God exists.

Wrongly shifting the Burden of Proof will do nothing.

Friend, you can back pedal and talk for an hour but you still are simply telling people a pack of lies. You claimed you came here for an intellectual discussion. However when asked for proofs to back up your claims, you refuse. How is that intellectual? Tell me friend, are you about to enter your second year at a secular college?
So you can yammer all you want, you still have to back up your claims, claims you made in your very first post.

Come clean friend, you know came here because you know you want to feel Jesus.

[Rev. M. Rodimer]

Re: Hello, all.

*Sigh*

How exactly is there evidence for a deity? You *do* know there is scientific explanations for the universe's existence? [The Big Bang theory (to explain how the universe was caused) and abiogenesis (to explain how life was created)].

. . . and here we go.

One more atheist claiming he wants "intellectual discussion" when really he's here to proselytize and try to convert us to his false religion of Darwin-worship and Scientism.

OK, go ahead. Explain where the wad of energy/matter that formed the universe in the Big Bang came from, and why something that dense, with such an intense gravitational field, would (or even could) explode.

[MissKage]

Re: Hello, all.

I see. So you have no proof. Gotchya

God 1
God Hater 0

False. You are claiming absolute certainty that a god exists, and as such you hold the BoP to proof (the Judeo-Christian) God exists. Had I stated I was absolute certain that God did not exist, I would have the BoP, but I did not, thus you are required to proof God exists.

Wrongly shifting the Burden of Proof will do nothing.

[James Hutchins]

Re: Hello, all.

The theist has the burden of proof, as they make the positive claim that a deity/god exists. All I must do, being the atheist, is refute their claims and "evidence."

I see. So you have no proof. Gotchya

God 1
God Hater 0

[Zechariah Smyth]

Re: Hello, all.

A. OK, keep moving the goalposts. Typical.

B. I'm not mocking him, I'm describing him. Way to put words in to my mouth.

[MissKage]

Re: Hello, all.

A. A Short History of Time

Actually, no. Hawking states the laws of the universe give a definition of god, not that he necessarily exists. Once the M-Theory has a substantial amount of evidence, a god will not be needed for the cause of the universe.

B. He's NOT a hero to me, and anyone can see that he drools, DUH.[/QUOTE]

I still don't see why you mock Hawking... He has a brilliant amount of intelligence.

[Zechariah Smyth]

When did Stephen Hawking *every* involve a god in the Big Bang theory?

And how exactly is Hawking a "drooling retard hero," in your words?

A. A Short History of Time

B. He's NOT a hero to me, and anyone can see that he drools, DUH.

[MissKage]

Re: Hello, all.

You can explain better than GOD??????



Even your drooling retard hero Hawking invokes God when speaking of the so-called Big Bang.

YiC,

Zech

When did Stephen Hawking *every* involve a god in the Big Bang theory?

And how exactly is Hawking a "drooling retard hero," in your words?

[MissKage]

Re: Hello, all.

Friend, you stated you do not believe in Him and I asked you to prove it. You have failed to do so. You cannot weasel your answers via the proofs supplied by others. Where is the 'intellect' you so boldly pronouced you had the capacity to share?

The theist has the burden of proof, as they make the positive claim that a deity/god exists. All I must do, being the atheist, is refute their claims and "evidence."