100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: has the "big bang theory" become a religious belief? | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Thats conjecture. Im looking for actual supportive evidence that is not based on what funch determines is "truth or reality". Here is a example of non subjective supportive evidence since it would appear that some clarification is indeed warranted. Authored by American diplomat Joel Barlow in 1796, the following treaty was sent to the floor of the Senate, June 7, 1797, where it was read aloud in its entirety and unanimously approved. John Adams, having seen the treaty, signed it and proudly proclaimed it to the Nation. Article 11 Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries. "Krimsa" you keep quoting words that happen hundreds of years ago but you fail to recognize what those words have resulted in today ....jefferson as you say didn't have any idea what his actions would lead to...but you have the priviledge to see the end results ...their actions lead to the instillation of christianity ..but you are in denial of this fact for all you know they could have planned this from the beginning That is still not evidence. Since I disagree with that statement entirely. Please explain this Article. If you could show me something external that I might debate, then we could continue. Lay your cards down. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thats conjecture. Im looking for actual supportive evidence that is not based on what funch determines is "truth or reality". Here is a example of non subjective supportive evidence since it would appear that some clarification is indeed warranted. Authored by American diplomat Joel Barlow in 1796, the following treaty was sent to the floor of the Senate, June 7, 1797, where it was read aloud in its entirety and unanimously approved. John Adams, having seen the treaty, signed it and proudly proclaimed it to the Nation. Article 11 Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries. "Krimsa" you keep quoting words that happen hundreds of years ago but you fail to recognize what those words have resulted in today ....jefferson as you say didn't have any idea what his actions would lead to...but you have the priviledge to see the end results ...their actions lead to the instillation of christianity ..but you are in denial of this fact for all you know they could have planned this from the beginning That is still not evidence. Since I disagree with that statement entirely. Please explain this Article. If you could show me something external that I might debate, then we could continue. Lay your cards down. "Krimsa" you have to learn not to believe everything you read ...as you see the article wasn't wrote the paper it was written on since this country is christian ... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thats conjecture. Im looking for actual supportive evidence that is not based on what funch determines is "truth or reality". Here is a example of non subjective supportive evidence since it would appear that some clarification is indeed warranted. Authored by American diplomat Joel Barlow in 1796, the following treaty was sent to the floor of the Senate, June 7, 1797, where it was read aloud in its entirety and unanimously approved. John Adams, having seen the treaty, signed it and proudly proclaimed it to the Nation. Article 11 Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries. "Krimsa" you keep quoting words that happen hundreds of years ago but you fail to recognize what those words have resulted in today ....jefferson as you say didn't have any idea what his actions would lead to...but you have the priviledge to see the end results ...their actions lead to the instillation of christianity ..but you are in denial of this fact for all you know they could have planned this from the beginning That is still not evidence. Since I disagree with that statement entirely. Please explain this Article. If you could show me something external that I might debate, then we could continue. Lay your cards down. "Krimsa" you have to learn not to believe everything you read ...as you see the article wasn't wrote the paper it was written on since this country is christian ... Okay Funch. Explain to me why I should not take this Article at face value? Then you can explain a plausible reason for its existence. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
invisible
on
Tue 10/28/08 10:10 AM
|
|
funches,
your saying it is so doesn't make it so. You can argue until the cows come home, before anyone buys it, you will have to prove that you are right. You don't believe in any evidence, why would anyone believe you without any. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Okay Funch. Explain to me why I should not take this Article at face value? Then you can explain a plausible reason for its existence. because "Krimsa" explain what the article can do when it comes to George Bush ... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
funches, your saying it is so doesn't make it so. You can argue until the cows come home, before anyone buys it, you will have to prove that you are right. You don't believe in any evidence, why would anyone believe you without any. "Invisible" only point I trying to get around is believers in God only have faith ..believers in the big bang only have hope ...but neither have enough evidence to called it fact beyond the mind and/or faith |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
funches, your saying it is so doesn't make it so. You can argue until the cows come home, before anyone buys it, you will have to prove that you are right. You don't believe in any evidence, why would anyone believe you without any. "Invisible" only point I trying to get around is believers in God only have faith ..believers in the big bang only have hope ...but neither have enough evidence to called it fact beyond the mind and/or faith Well, why don't you answer questions then? Do you think you are so far above anyone else that you don't have to? I have been following these threads from the beginning, and all anyone got of you was avoidance. Answer all the questions you were asked honestly (if you can) and then come back and ask. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
funches, your saying it is so doesn't make it so. You can argue until the cows come home, before anyone buys it, you will have to prove that you are right. You don't believe in any evidence, why would anyone believe you without any. "Invisible" only point I trying to get around is believers in God only have faith ..believers in the big bang only have hope ...but neither have enough evidence to called it fact beyond the mind and/or faith Well, why don't you answer questions then? Do you think you are so far above anyone else that you don't have to? I have been following these threads from the beginning, and all anyone got of you was avoidance. Answer all the questions you were asked honestly (if you can) and then come back and ask. "Invisible" since I just answered your question your statememnt is somewhat delusional besides I answer everyone's question they just don't like the answer and then find excuses for blame but sometime I may condense their post so I can provide a reasonable answer but they assume that I didn't address their entire post also most people just "google cut and paste" stuff from the internet and play like it's their own thoughts when clearly it's not |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
funches, your saying it is so doesn't make it so. You can argue until the cows come home, before anyone buys it, you will have to prove that you are right. You don't believe in any evidence, why would anyone believe you without any. "Invisible" only point I trying to get around is believers in God only have faith ..believers in the big bang only have hope ...but neither have enough evidence to called it fact beyond the mind and/or faith Well, why don't you answer questions then? Do you think you are so far above anyone else that you don't have to? I have been following these threads from the beginning, and all anyone got of you was avoidance. Answer all the questions you were asked honestly (if you can) and then come back and ask. "Invisible" since I just answered your question your statememnt is somewhat delusional besides I answer everyone's question they just don't like the answer and then find excuses for blame but sometime I may condense their post so I can provide a reasonable answer but they assume that I didn't address their entire post also most people just "google cut and paste" stuff from the internet and play like it's their own thoughts when clearly it's not This is a blatant lie. Or are you telling me I either not able to read or comprehend? How do you determine what is someones thought and what is not? You just play it by ear. You don't like what they are saying and accuse them of not being able to think. If you only want to play by your own rules, which you invent as you go along, then this is clearly not a place of discussion for you. You should post a thread "funches soapbox" and you will be grant, all by your little self. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
funches, your saying it is so doesn't make it so. You can argue until the cows come home, before anyone buys it, you will have to prove that you are right. You don't believe in any evidence, why would anyone believe you without any. "Invisible" only point I trying to get around is believers in God only have faith ..believers in the big bang only have hope ...but neither have enough evidence to called it fact beyond the mind and/or faith Well, why don't you answer questions then? Do you think you are so far above anyone else that you don't have to? I have been following these threads from the beginning, and all anyone got of you was avoidance. Answer all the questions you were asked honestly (if you can) and then come back and ask. "Invisible" since I just answered your question your statememnt is somewhat delusional besides I answer everyone's question they just don't like the answer and then find excuses for blame but sometime I may condense their post so I can provide a reasonable answer but they assume that I didn't address their entire post also most people just "google cut and paste" stuff from the internet and play like it's their own thoughts when clearly it's not This is a blatant lie. Or are you telling me I am either not able to read or to comprehend? How do you determine what is someones thought and what is not? You just play it by ear. You don't like what they are saying and accuse them of not being able to think. If you only want to play by your own rules, which you invent as you go along, then this is clearly not a place of discussion for you. You should post a thread "funches soapbox" and you will be grant, all by your little self. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funch you need to not insult people's intelligence. Its not very nice. Cant you just stick with the issue itself?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a blatant lie. Or are you telling me I am either not able to read or to comprehend? How do you determine what is someones thought and what is not? You just play it by ear. You don't like what they are saying and accuse them of not being able to think. If you only want to play by your own rules, which you invent as you go along, then this is clearly not a place of discussion for you. You should post a thread "funches soapbox" and you will be grant, all by your little self. "Invisible" can you submit a question of yours that I did not address? ...if the answer is no that should be an indication that you may be delusional and being a false witness against your neighbor ...don't have me tell Jesus on you |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funch you need to not insult people's intelligence. Its not very nice. Cant you just stick with the issue itself? "Krimsa" who's intelligence did I insult? ...are you once again trying to go off topic |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funch you need to not insult people's intelligence. Its not very nice. Cant you just stick with the issue itself? "Krimsa" who's intelligence did I insult? ...are you once again trying to go off topic You are insulting everyones intelligence by telling them they don't think on their own. You insulted mine by determining that I'm not able to either read properly or to comprehend what I read. BTW: I wasn't talking about my own questions, I was talking about all the questions that were asked of you in the 2 threads, of which most you avoided answering. Answering a question with a question is not an answer, even you should know that. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funch you need to not insult people's intelligence. Its not very nice. Cant you just stick with the issue itself? "Krimsa" who's intelligence did I insult? ...are you once again trying to go off topic You are insulting everyones intelligence by telling them they don't think on their own. You insulted mine by determining that I'm not able to either read properly or to comprehend what I read. BTW: I wasn't talking about my own questions, I was talking about all the questions that were asked of you in the 2 threads, of which most you avoided answering. Answering a question with a question is not an answer, even you should know that. "Invisible" the theory is if you "google cut and paste' an article or answer then how is that your own thought or words ...that is when I say put the article into your own thoughts ..that requires one to think for themselves...it's not an insult ..it's a reality |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funch you need to not insult people's intelligence. Its not very nice. Cant you just stick with the issue itself? "Krimsa" who's intelligence did I insult? ...are you once again trying to go off topic You are insulting everyones intelligence by telling them they don't think on their own. You insulted mine by determining that I'm not able to either read properly or to comprehend what I read. BTW: I wasn't talking about my own questions, I was talking about all the questions that were asked of you in the 2 threads, of which most you avoided answering. Answering a question with a question is not an answer, even you should know that. "Invisible" the theory is if you "google cut and paste' an article or answer then how is that your own thought or words ...that is when I say put the article into your own thoughts ..that requires one to think for themselves...it's not an insult ..it's a reality And what if the article expresses the thought better than oneself can. Some people are not that good with words as you think you are. I find most of your arguments quite empty when I take the big words you care to use away |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And what if the article expresses the thought better than oneself can. Some people are not that good with words as you think you are. I find most of your arguments quite empty when I take the big words you care to use away an if the article express better than you can then it would be appropiate to invite the one that wrote the article to the discussion ..because question may arise and if you the reader of the article can't answer them then if means you have learned nothing from the article ...you guys simply have got to break your "google cut and paste' addictions also "Invisible" can you provide some examples of these big words I supposely use so the rest of the forum can see what I mean about you're acting delusional come on...place the biggest word I used in this forum |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ok, so if you don't pray to it, you don't acknowledge some kind of consciousness, it didn't create us in any kind of directed way. "Bushidobillyclub" ..you are equating knowledge with consciousness ...it doesn't take consciousness for a rock to one day fall off a cliff ..so why would the big bang need consciousness to take place also of course believers in the big bang have to believe that is what created them thank you, you made my point funch. it is ridiculous to believe that something without conciousness that makes no decisions made you and that you could replace god with that thing . . . silly, ridiculous, a great comedy, that is this thread. "Bushidobillyclub" ..if according to the theory that the big bang supposely created the universe then wouldn't it be responsible for resulting in the creation of the people and all life that exist within the universe ....isn't this simple logic?...er...I'm curious...did you pass that math test you took the other day? 100% on the test. You however are failing horribly in this thread to understand even the simplest of my arguments as to why this is a silly topic. Saying the Big bang created us is like saying a bomb that kills everyone creates peace. Saying the big bang is god is like saying gravity is god, that light is god, that electrons are god, that heat transfer is god, that . . . . on and on and on .. . . its meaningless, if everything is god then you are god, I am god, and that would be meaningless, perhaps those people should instead take some Buddhism classes. A force is not a god, something without a decision making process cannot be a god. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&hs=tiu&defl=en&q=define:god&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title "# the supernatural being conceived as the perfect and omnipotent and omniscient originator and ruler of the universe; the object of worship in ... # deity: any supernatural being worshipped as controlling some part of the world or some aspect of life or who is the personification of a force # a man of such superior qualities that he seems like a deity to other people; "he was a god among men" # idol: a material effigy that is worshipped; "thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image"; "money was his god" Only someone that does not understand both the definition of God, and the natural processes would confuse the two . . . so if that is the person you are referring to in this thread . . great so we are talking about people who leave god and use the big bang as there god in the most ridiculous and most ignorant of ways who don't understand what people mean when they say god, and don't understand natural processes. Ok . . . so this thread is soo specific as to be meaningless . . Gotcha. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ok, so if you don't pray to it, you don't acknowledge some kind of consciousness, it didn't create us in any kind of directed way. "Bushidobillyclub" ..you are equating knowledge with consciousness ...it doesn't take consciousness for a rock to one day fall off a cliff ..so why would the big bang need consciousness to take place also of course believers in the big bang have to believe that is what created them thank you, you made my point funch. it is ridiculous to believe that something without conciousness that makes no decisions made you and that you could replace god with that thing . . . silly, ridiculous, a great comedy, that is this thread. "Bushidobillyclub" ..if according to the theory that the big bang supposely created the universe then wouldn't it be responsible for resulting in the creation of the people and all life that exist within the universe ....isn't this simple logic?...er...I'm curious...did you pass that math test you took the other day? 100% on the test. You however are failing horribly in this thread to understand even the simplest of my arguments as to why this is a silly topic. Saying the Big bang created us is like saying a bomb that kills everyone creates peace. Saying the big bang is god is like saying gravity is god, that light is god, that electrons are god, that heat transfer is god, that . . . . on and on and on .. . . its meaningless, if everything is god then you are god, I am god, and that would be meaningless, perhaps those people should instead take some Buddhism classes. A force is not a god, something without a decision making process cannot be a god. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&hs=tiu&defl=en&q=define:god&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title "# the supernatural being conceived as the perfect and omnipotent and omniscient originator and ruler of the universe; the object of worship in ... # deity: any supernatural being worshipped as controlling some part of the world or some aspect of life or who is the personification of a force # a man of such superior qualities that he seems like a deity to other people; "he was a god among men" # idol: a material effigy that is worshipped; "thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image"; "money was his god" Only someone that does not understand both the definition of God, and the natural processes would confuse the two . . . so if that is the person you are referring to in this thread . . great so we are talking about people who leave god and use the big bang as there god in the most ridiculous and most ignorant of ways who don't understand what people mean when they say god, and don't understand natural processes. Ok . . . so this thread is soo specific as to be meaningless . . Gotcha. "Bushidobillyclub" I didn't say that I believe that the big bang theory created people I said those that are believers of the theory that treat it like a religion and fact can only estimate that is how life was created...dude you have to try and stay focus ....so ..er..you say that you got a 100 percent on the math test ...I'm just curious but you didn't have access to the answers before the test did you |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I bet someone is going to report this ridiculous thread funches.
 Its getting pretty borderline now.
|
|
|
|
|
