/ Register

  • Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.
  2. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  3. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.
  4. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Scientific Proof For The Existence of God/ Heaven

Discussion in 'Physical & Life Sciences' started by white gardenia, Feb 27, 2017.

  1. Kylie

    Kylie Atheist and Proud

    +2,504
    Australia
    Atheist
    Married
    There are many who don't love God who have done amazing things. Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Alan Turing, there are countless people who do not worship a God and who have made important contributions to society, which you use every day.

    And there are many devout Christians who have done horrible things.

    When you say that those who don't love God are responsible for causing evil, your claims do not hold up to scrutiny.


    Fine. Then show me that it is accurate to say that God is required for physics.
     
  2. Tanj

    Tanj Redefined comfortable middle class

    +2,401
    Australia
    Atheist
    Married

    Please stop mis representing us. The opinions of a bunch of talking head atheists is not representative of "most". The "computer" human consciousness runs on is unique to each individual. It will never be downloadable to a generic synthetic device regardless of what Ray or Allegedly Respected Sam think.
     
  3. Chriliman

    Chriliman Well-Known Member

    +491
    Christian
    Married
    Ok, but none of that can mean God didn't come before and make all that is good. Just because you don't believe it doesn't mean it doesn't hold up to logical scrutiny.

    It's accurate to say something supernatural is required for the laws of physics to exist. People can believe all sorts of things about that supernatural state of realty, but what matters to me is the truth.

    Anyhow, you clearly see no reason to believe in God and, logically, only God Himself can give you a convincing reason, I'll leave it to Him.
     
  4. Tanj

    Tanj Redefined comfortable middle class

    +2,401
    Australia
    Atheist
    Married
    Would that other Christians follow your lead.
     
  5. Kylie

    Kylie Atheist and Proud

    +2,504
    Australia
    Atheist
    Married
    But it does invalidate your point that "those who don't love God are responsible for causing evil."

    After all, I gave example of people who don't love God and have not caused evil, and I can certainly give examples of those who DO love God and caused a great deal of evil.

    Why?

    And how do you determine if something is the truth?

    I won't hold my breath...
     
  6. white gardenia

    white gardenia Member

    112
    +41
    Christian
    Single
    Yes I've read that book...a lot of it went over my head but I'm pretty sure that krauss is actually explaining how "something" came from a quantum vacuum state...which, if I'm not mistaken, is different from "nothing" For example, I believe that a quantum vacuum is still inside of spacetime. ..in other words there was some small scale activity preceding the big bang......just as Roger Penrose believes that wmap seems to indicate pre- big bang activity on a much larger scale
    But in the case of Lawrence krauss he is still not explaining what caused that pre- big bang activity to be set in motion... where did spacetime itself come from?
    If anyone feels that I am misunderstanding krauss' book I would appreciate clarification..I am not a Christian who insists that my preconceived view of the universe has to be right... I always want to know what is actually physically true even if it seems at odds with what modern Christianity teaches

    Oh BTW if you are a fan of Lawrence krauss you might be interested in this...
     
  7. JonFromMinnesota

    JonFromMinnesota Well-Known Member

    +1,600
    Atheist
    Single
    You're not misrepresenting his book. "Nothing" is a hard word to define when it comes to the beginning of the universe. We've never experienced what "nothing" actually is in that context. So it's difficult to say whether something can or cannot come from nothing.

    To answer you question about where space time itself came from or what was before the big bang....I don't know. Maybe that question is unknowable. Every mystery about the natural world that has been solved had a natural explanation to it. I don't see why the beginning of the universe would be any different.
     
  8. Kylie

    Kylie Atheist and Proud

    +2,504
    Australia
    Atheist
    Married
    Of course, since time is a property of our universe, not something separate from it, it makes no sense to speak of a time before the universe.
     
  9. white gardenia

    white gardenia Member

    112
    +41
    Christian
    Single
    I agree... And i also think that if scientists do find empirical evidence for a natural first cause...then Christians need to accept it....we need to look at what is actually , physically real and then deal with it from that vantage point...
     
  10. white gardenia

    white gardenia Member

    112
    +41
    Christian
    Single
    Well there had to be a starting point for space and time just as most scientists believe there will be an ending point....unless of course guys like Roger Penrose are right, and we live in a cyclical universe...
     
  11. Kylie

    Kylie Atheist and Proud

    +2,504
    Australia
    Atheist
    Married
    It doesn't follow that this starting point must be God.
     
  12. morse86

    morse86 Junior Member

    +484
    United States
    Baptist
    Single
    US-Others
    $cientists don't want to answer origin.

    Real scientists do, the ones not "tax payer" funded. Real scientists do not work for universities and tax payer funded grants, they are independent, verifiable, testable, observable experiments.

    Evolution and big bang theory are tied in. They must both answer origin.

    In the end you have 2 theories, which do you believe?
    1) God's creation
    2) Everything coming from nothing

    That's what it all boils down to. Don't let anyone deceive you. Both theories are by faith. Look around the world, observe nature, what is observable and testable...there is more evidence for God than evolution and big bang theory.
     
  13. sjastro

    sjastro Newbie

    756
    +468
    Christian
    Single
    Try checking your grammar before posting.......
     
  14. Kylie

    Kylie Atheist and Proud

    +2,504
    Australia
    Atheist
    Married
    What's with the $? Are you trying to imply that science is done only out of greed? That's not very nice, is it?

    And who pays them?

    No they aren't and no they don't. Evolution deals with changes to life forms that already exist.

    The one with supporting evidence from the real world.

    You don't understand what "theory" means, do you?
     
  15. James Redford

    James Redford Lux et veritas et libertas

    164
    +5
    Christian
    Private
    Hi, White Gardenia. Thank you for your present post pertaining to physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology.

    For those unfamiliar with it:

    God's existence is a mathematical theorem within standard physics. Standard physics is the known laws of physics, viz., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics. This theorem has been given in the form of Prof. Tipler's said Omega Point cosmology. These aforestated known physical laws have been confirmed by every experiment conducted to date. Hence, the only way to avoid Tipler's Omega Point Theorem is to reject empirical science. As Prof. Stephen Hawking wrote, "one cannot really argue with a mathematical theorem." (From p. 67 of Stephen Hawking, The Illustrated A Brief History of Time [New York, NY: Bantam Books, 1996; 1st ed., 1988].)

    Prof. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology has been extensively peer-reviewed and published in a number of the world's leading physics and science journals, such as Reports on Progress in Physics (the leading journal of the Institute of Physics, Britain's main professional organization for physicists), Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (one of the world's leading astrophysics journals), the International Journal of Theoretical Physics (a journal that Nobel Prize in Physics winner Richard Feynman also published in), and Physics Letters, among other journals.

    Prof. Tipler's Ph.D. is in the field of Global General Relativity, which is the field created by Profs. Stephen Hawking and Roger Penrose during the formulation of their Singularity Theorems in the 1960s. Global General Relativity is General Relativity applied on the scale of the entire universe as a whole, and is the most elite and rarefied field of physics. Tipler is also an expert in quantum field theory (i.e., Quantum Mechanics combined with special-relativistic particle physics) and computer theory.

    For much more on Prof. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology and the details on how it uniquely conforms to, and precisely matches, the cosmology described in the New Testament, see my following article, which also addresses the societal implications of the Omega Point cosmology:

    * James Redford, "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Sept. 10, 2012 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2011), 186 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708, https://archive.org/download/ThePhy...TheoryOfEverything/Redford-Physics-of-God.pdf , https://purl.org/redford/physics-of-god , WebCite query result .

    Additionally, in the below resource are different sections which contain some helpful notes and commentary by me pertaining to multimedia wherein Prof. Tipler explains the Omega Point cosmology and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model TOE.

    * James Redford, "Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech: Can Physics Prove God and Christianity?", alt.sci.astro, Message-ID: jghev8tcbv02b6vn3uiq8jmelp7jijluqk[at sign]4ax[period]com , July 30, 2013, Google Groups , Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech:… , WebCite query result .
     
Loading...
An Elite CafeMedia Publisher