Who here believes in god?

Well if anyone is expecting me be dogmatic I hope to disappoint them. There are always different ways of veiwing things. Some feel closer to God when they are alone in the woods. Some feel closer in a church full of people. Some feel closer in silence. some feel closer chanting or singing some think of thier body as His temple some think of him in the vastness of the universe. some see him as a savior some see him in passion. some see him as the cause of a crusade others look to him for peace. here is a simple verse i want to share, Gibran wrote about religion from The PROPHET and if you would know God be not therfore a solver of riddles Rather look about you and you shall see Him playing with your children.

Good
orderly
direction

unity in diversity

I was trying to make some sense of the limited views of this discussion. Especially Lisa Marie messages, She did start this discussion. I am like my friend Kevin not easily offended. there is a paradox in the last comment which was a repose to the question I asked; do you think man created God or did God create man. A profound analogy would be when you write a poem do you force the rhyme or does the rhyme force you. You see I used to think I had a scientific mind. But I do not understand the thought of order coming out of disorder. What is the point of measuring the time that it took eternity to accidentally form our orderly solar system. Even if your argument is an infinite universe slowly but constantly changing would lead to infinite possibilities. The planet is predictable and follows the laws of nature how long have laws existed. Anyway have strayed from my topic. The true part of 'man created god' is god is also a thought and everyone thinks they know about what God should BE icluding me. I put some words in order below. If it seems like a poem I am sorry.

LAST WORD

Well I got the last word , in of the year of our Lord 2004.
It seems some don’t believe in the Lord any more
I have learned a lot in this discussion but I think it’s odd
That there are so many that do not believe in God

Am I a dogmatic Christian, or an arrogant ape?
With know where to run. No where to escape
To every thing under the sun, there is a time
And maybe this is not the place for a rhyme

O Lord forgive me if my logic is crude
People forgive me if I seem rude
Right or wrong there is always a border
Don’t we all have a desire for order?

Who is like God,a big question mark?
Order from disorder light from dark
Always was and always will be,
A never ending mystery

You decide if this is a poem or not
Inspiration or random thought
If I broke the rules you must show it
There is no poem there is no poet

i don't think it was a poem either i have read as many opinions on what a poem should be as i have read what God should be i agree with lisa marie man has tried to control God MANY TERRIBLE THINGS HAVE BEEN DONE IN HIS NAME

Imagination

An atheist believes that God is a figment of man’s imagination
I guess they imagine that there is no hope of our eternal salvation
Creationist may conclude, that man is a fragment of God’s imagination
We are created in His image and likeness, yet God is not a creation

We are an image of a Supreme Being, Who always was and always will be
Our imagination extends beyond what we have seen and what we will see
But I cannot imagine creation without a Creator, or time without eternity
A future without destiny, or space without infinity, or love without Divinity

But even if I could imagine a complex universe as a simple coincidence
Brought about by chance without a Creator, in the bliss of my ignorance
And ignore the logic of my mind, imagining there is no Divine providence
I could still conclude the universe just didn’t happen, by objective evidence

If you can imagine creation, more orderly than this rhythm and rhyme,
Without a creator just happen by chance, and there is really nothing sublime
About the simplicity of a poem that was to be written sooner or later in time
Then you want to descend further into illusion, with no desire to climb

Has mankind eaten the fruit of a real or an imaginary tree?
Is the story of creation scientific fact, or biblical poetry?
Man can be creative with his imagination it’s easy to see
Man builds with his imagination that is a factual reality

When he uses his knowledge for good he builds to preserve and heal
When he uses his knowledge for evil he builds things to destroy and kill
We can imagine a world with borders, division, and wars descending to damnation
Or we can imagine ascending and uniting with the Creator with a beautiful imagination

Giordano Bruno

The summary of Bruno’s philosophy would be a fulfillment to a prophecy
To have unity in diversity in a master idea of unity
All reality is one in substance, one in cause, and one when it was begun
And mysteriously, God and this reality are also one
To me this another way of saying creation is God’s alone
And this is something Giordano Bruno must have known

Bruno refused to separate the physical and the psychical
Although many authorities of his day thought he was radical
To him mind and matter were one
Just as the stars were the same as the sun

So the object of his philosophy he taught in a university
Therefore was to perceive unity in diversity
So mind in matter, and matter in mind
These concepts to him were one of a kind

To find the synthesis in which opposites and contradictions meet and merge
Would put a persistent philosopher on the verge
Of rising to the highest knowledge of universal unity
Which is the intellectual equivalent of the love of God’s entity

According to Webster the universe is all created things regarded as a system or whole
Would it be reasonable to assume God’s creation separate from Him, or out of control?
As for the oneness of the physical and the psychical, does not the miracle of creation, make the natural a fragment of the supernatural?

Does not all matter in the universe come from the mind of God?
So if there were no matter in His mind would not you find it odd?
And His matter can be transformed by the mind of man
And can be used for good in accordance with God’s plan

If something totally seems to lack the properties of another
Just as to feed a flame is at the other end of to smother
They are said to be the opposites of each other
Some things are alike but different like a sister is to a brother

But I suppose Bruno knew that mans knowledge of opposites was incomplete
Concluding because of the laws of motion many opposites tend to meet
Just as the substance of creation, which, God did scatter
Are moved by God, and the void becomes filled with matter
And if the soul is void of matter could not time change the latter

Bruno seemed to be a philosopher with mysticism
Some say he was condemned for teaching pantheism
Many scientist credit him with heroism
For supposedly dying for Copernicanism
But was his brutal execution a paradox
By those who thought themselves orthodox
Or did his life end like the summary of his philosophic forethought
I think he was a martyr for the truth that he so diligently sought

I do believe in God...

That didn't really make sense (the first part of what you said)--if you're going to join the disscusion, why not give us your valid answer for not believing in God. I think it would be interesting to hear it. And just so you know, we're not critizing what you believe...so you don't have to justify. I think we are just expanding our horizons and finding out what other people believe.

To tell you the truth, I think it is extremely interesting that you believe in Heaven, but not God. Knowing that, what do you think Heaven is like...do you think it is ruled by someone, or that it is like Earth?

I agree with It Itty But I think I have got an idea about what you think are good reasons not to believe in God, and you thought the case had been made. The story of the forbidden fruit is losing its meaning. When science has failed to end all suffering we do not say I don’t believe in science. When politics fail at peace we lose hope sometimes but still try. When natural disasters are unleashed we don’t stop studying ways to deal with it. Every one must come to their own understanding of God. In the last weeks that my mother was living she wanted to talk about dying I admit that I did not want to believe the time was near. My experience was trying to prepare for what I knew was going to happen. Even though I knew she would be better off in another place I did not want her to leave me.
I remember her saying’ Mike if something was to happen to me I will still be with you.
It is never easy separating from one you love and I cannot think of any words that she could have said that would have been more comforting. There are times I still feel her presence. Watching her suffer was the most pain I ever with through. Although it is a very human thing to convert pain into anger I somehow got through the pain by praying. There are many good poems that attempt to show the value that pain has on the soul if taken the right way. As I watched my mother suffer I was really struggling with the question of, why do good people suffer. My mother was very religious. Her favorite station was EWTN she had many tapes of those programs. During the week my mother was on life support I was really thinking about that a lot. I went through her tapes and selected one at random. A priest was talking about why good people suffer I still remember two points he made. The greatest evil ever committed was when man crucified God. God took the greatest evil and turned it to the greatest good. FAITH HOPE AND CHARITY HOW CAN YOU HAVE ANY WITHOUT THE OTHER? THIS IS A PRAYER I WANT TO SHARE

Prayer for the Mission

O Lord, we pray for the strength to carry out these holy missions
That You may look with favor upon our humble petitions
We pray, that Your most holy living word, that proclaims salvation
Can be understood by all of us, in our own personal situation
We pray for more faith, with the most holy symbol of
The crucifix, that is the greatest proof of Your love
We pray, the light of Christ can be seen by all, so that the darkness of sin will cease
That the Easter candle shines, like the light of Christ to create harmony, and peace
Give us this day our daily bread, the bread that is Jesus, we pray
That nourishes our life, and makes us the bread of life, for today
We are called to Your altar, with Jesus our brother
Sent forth on a mission to serve You, and one another
Lord accept our prayer, as love from all of us to You
So that all of these symbols can be understood before we are through 2/13/03

PLEASE GO TO www.poetrymd.com to read the uneditted two chapters of my book thank you and God bless you all

Tessa I do not see any resaon why you should apologize to me for your faith or lack of faith. But if you would be so kind to read my reasons for faith you could benifit. You see I have read your poems and I see pain, anger,and disappiotment I am not picking on you You are not alone. There are many poets that express thier disapoint that love does not just fall from the sky. There are as many ways the percieve love as there is to percieve heaven.. I am very heart broken to read about your brothers I would offer them good luck but I don't put any faith in luck as it has not been my reallity in other words I find it more difficult to measure than you find the fruits of the Holy Spirit ; love, joy,peace, patiece,kindness, goodness,faithfulness humility and self control, plus the Gifts of the Holy Spirit
I recieved a very harsh criticism from a poet who considered the Holy Spirit an irrational preceiption. and said he wished to plant the seeds of doubt, as if doubt were a virtue. critisizes me for offering hope all in the name of love, which he implies has forsaken him, how do you spell daaaa............???
He did however in support of rational logic offer me best wishes and good luck. I want to end by offering my explianation for what you and some of your friends are offering yourselves those illussions that it is foolish to believe in God because good people suffer. god is ethier to weak or to mighty i know you will have to look deeper to understand that it is not friutful to judge GODS PLAN and MAY GOD BLESS YOU AND TAKE CARE In my opinion it is or would be unfair be strick about the forum rules being the vast freedom of thought given to this discussion a want to share a prayer written that gives another insight into what difference does it makes on earth what someone believes
Dirty, tired and embarrassed, I let him lead the way
It took all I had, but I decided to pray
No one would believe me, I knew anymore
What I had done surely shut freedoms door
The next few weeks I stayed alone on my knees
Asking Jesus to let me know him please
Read my word, I heard Him say
So I meditated night and day
Now what Lord, I ask in belief
I knew I had begin to experience sweet relief
Follow My way don’t slide from My path
Give up all the bad habits that you have
Lord forgive me I repented each day
You’re not far from victory I heard Him say
Going to prison, I soon went to school
I found friends in church were the ones that where cool
The Holy Spirit became my best friend
We laugh, and talk, and our love never ends
Mom comes to see me, she says that she’s proud
I am a knew creature in Jesus I will shout it out loud
If you’re lost, lonely, or in trouble like I was
Don’t get involved no deeper, just look above
Heaven is in your reach, when you believe
Is what helps you understand, God is relief
Love the Lord Jesus Christ by Carolina
To as many as have received Him
He gave the power to become sons of God

the author of the prayer has been dead 12 years
. i want you to keep the christian belief in heaven even though you may think it is irrational to believe in God. or that mans understanding of the almighty leaves to much to be disired, I have expeirience the pride which is causeing you misery I respect other understandings of afterlife i just wanted to share thank you again.

Tessa, I do believe in God but I totally agree with you that no one here should be made to feel obligated to substantiate their stated beliefs about God. And no one should be derided for what they believe or don't believe. This is an individual choice and people have the right to hold their beliefs and express them without any further burden.

As for me, I accept the world as it is and try to live my life in the best way possible, not that I am always successful. I understand that our world is not perfect. There are diseases, disasters and a myriad of injustices created by some of the world's inhabitants. But I never believed that I was entitled to God's ultimate perfection here on earth.

I agree with blue water - well spoken :O)

Personally I believe in God and thank him for my every blessing In'shallah

Thanks so much for your kind words.

Whether you agree with its premise or not, there is a very good poem dealing with this subject by Mark Spenser. It is titled 'God Must Not Exist." The poem is on this site.

I stand for GOd and the finished work on the CROSS no more no less. I salute the defenders of the CROSS.

I believe God will not judge the world of sin, bcs that was paid painfully by the Savior. I believe the world and its system will be judged bcs it rejected, disbelieved the Savior. It is no wonder that every argument and pretention can come up to disuade, taint the cross, enthrone reason and confuse the in between folks from taking a stand that matters. I wrote something on that in my poem TROPHY OF FAITH!!
I doff my cap to Mike, lipton and others, you doing a grreat job here!

barring the specific jewish/christian/muslim god, what scientific reason/evidence rules out the possibility of a divine entity, one that possibly played a major role in the creation of the universe? I'm looking for some atheist opinions here, I'm curious.

I just want to comment on the one who would take his cap to me I would like to salute him. The spirit of GOD is in him. I also off my cap to my other bothers and sisters in Christ who aslo stand for God An excellent point has been made by the poet from Nigeria It is very dangerous to to rely on your human nature to to avoid darkness I am a sinner therefore I have been in darkness. there is a myth that Christians cause suffering by avoiding sin. Jesus tells us to take up our cross an follow him he knows we are going to fall even if we are not pushed. the ones that run from their cross suffer the most. the only way to the KINDOM IS THE WAY. If you choose to reject the truth as 'I have been taught' by the word you cannot enter into eternal life.SALVATION CANNOT BE EARNED. but you can reject it. I have been taght that the spirit of GOD IS IN MANY FAITHS. The relationship between God and an indiviidual is very personal. Far be it from me to judge but I do not understand why it is so difficult for so many to see religion is a path and not the distination. I won't apologize for not being a athiest I cannnot respond to the last question because the only thing I know about the big bang theory is that Johnny Carson thinks that after the big bang there might have been a really big cigarette

(C)hrist our savior and lord
(H)oly baby Jesus is adored
(R)ighteous and pure is he
(I)ncarnation of God and man
(S)in forgiven for all mankind
(T)hrough the blood of Christ
(M)ary holy mother of god
(A)s pure as virgin white snow
(S)avior Christ our Lord aglow

Happy Birthday Jesus

Replying to Sean...no evidence rules it out. Science can't prove something does not exist. However, it uses Occam's razor, which means that we take the explanation that uses the least unexplained phenomona.
There is currently no evidence for God's existence. Therefore, from a purely scientific point of view, we assume that he does not exist until evidence shows up proving he exists.
Think of it this way. There is no way to prove that invisible pink unicorns do not exist. However, we assume that they do not exist until evidence to the contrary shows up.
Hope this clears things up!

I'm sorry Lipton, but you made a hell of a lot of mistakes in your post about the age of the earth. First of all, you provide no sources for your assertions other than capitalizing SCIENTISTS.

I'll break my posts up for easy reading. First, examples 1-3.

"GEO-CLOCK EXAMPLE 1:
Erosion. SCIENTISTS have assumed that erosion was very great in the past, due to the way the world was. However, SCIENTISTS also know that even at the present rate of erosion, there should be 30x more sediment in the ocean then there is. Even more, at this constant rate, all of the continents would have been eroded around 14 million years.
"
This argument, advanced by creationist Stuart E. Nevins [Pseudonym for Steve Austin -- editor] in the ICR Impact series (No.8) in 1973, simply ignores the impact of modern geology! Nevins overlooks the fact that the continents are dynamic and have grown appreciably over time, both by accretion of material at the margins and by addition of material from the mantle below (Dalrymple, 1984, p.114). Volcanic activity, the emplacement of gigantic masses of rising, molten rock, and the stupendous compressional forces of the earth's colliding plates have been building mountains off and on for billions of years. Mountain building is going on even now in many parts of the world.

"GEO CLOCK EXAMPLE 2:
SCIENTISTS have studied Niagra falls for quite some time, and have determined it's rate of erosion per year. SCIENTISTS admit that it has only taken 5,000 years to erode from its original precipice.
"

So it only takes five thousand years. What does this say about the age of the earth? Nothing. The current thinking is that Niagra falls were formed in the Wisconsin glaciation 10,000 years ago anyway.
" N. H. Winchell estimated that it took 8000 years to account for the erosion of the gorge and falls of St. Anthony. E. Andrews arrived at 7,500 years from a study of wave erosion on the shores of Lake Michigan. B. K. Emmerson calculated from his study of the glacial valleys in Massachusetts that 10,000 years had been at work. D. Mackintosh deduced that the erosion of limestone beneath glacial boulders required 6000 years. Taken together, these early estimates indicated that the ice sheets had disappeared 6,000-10,000 years ago (Dalrymple, 1991, pp.66-67)."

1) Niagra falls has nothing to do with the age of the earth.
2) It's about 10,000 years old anyway.

"GEO CLOCK EXAMPLE 3:
SCIENTISTS have also studied oil pressure beneath sedimentary rock. When an oil driller hits a pocket of oil, it shoots up into a geysur (sp?). All sedimentary rock is somewhat porous. With time, the pressure of the oil would dissipate. SCIENTISTS say that if the oil was there for more than 5,000 years, then there would be no pressure."

The incredible pressure found in oil and gas wells indicates that the oil and gas have been effectively trapped. The initial, slow accumulation of oil and gas from the source area (primary migration) would hardly have had a chance to build up great pressure if the trapping rock were leaking like a sieve! (Wszolek and Burlingame, 1978, p. 573).

References:
Wszolek, P. C., and A. L. Burlingame. 1978. "Petroleum--origin and evolution" In Fairbridge and Bourgeois. 1978. pp.565-574

Dalrymple, G. Brent. 1984. "How Old is the Earth? A Reply to Scientific Creationism" Proceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Pacific Division, American Association for the Advancement of Science, Volume 1, Part 3, edited by Frank Awbrey and William Thwaites, April 30, 1984, pages 66-131

Examples 4-6
"GEO CLOCK EXAMPLE 4
Everything in space is collecting dust (called interplanetary dust). That means, so is the moon.
NASA experts were expecting to see tremendous amounts of dust on the moon, seeing as the earth is "4.5 billion years old". In fact, they expected we would encounter 54 inches of it! However, when the first men landed on the moon, the most we found in a given area was 3 inches... and some places were as low as 1/8 of an inch. SCIENTISTS have admitted that it would only take about 8000 years to accumulate this amount."

I burst out laughing when I read this! Do you know that you're using a measurement from the 1960's!!! This is based on Hans Pettersson in the February 1960 issue of Scientific American. Pettersson's upper estimate for the influx of cosmic dust, a figure he considered risky, was based on particles he collected from two filtration units in the Hawaiian Islands. One was located near the summit of Mauna Loa, Hawaii, and the other near the observatory on Haleakala, Maui. He came up with 39,150 tons/day. Pettersson actually favored a figure about two-thirds less, and he warned his readers that the true figure could be much lower still.
Since the late 1960s, much better and more direct measurements of the meteoritic influx to the Earth have been available from satellite penetration data. In a comprehensive review article, Dohnanyi [1972, Icarus 17: 1-48] showed that the mass of meteoritic material impinging on the Earth is only about 22,000 tons per year [60 tons/day]... Other recent estimates of the mass of interplanetary matter reaching the Earth from space, based on satellite-borne detectors, range from about 11,000 to 18,000 tons per year (67) [30-49 tons/day]; estimates based on the cosmic-dust content of deep-sea sediment are comparable (e.g., 11, 103).

Dohnanyi's figure for the moon (2 x 10-9 grams/square centimeter per year) yields 2.3 tons/day. In 4.5 billion years a layer of about one and a half inches of cosmic dust would accumulate on the moon. (On the moon, of course, a ton would weigh much less. We're actually talking about a mass that would weigh 2.3 tons on Earth.)

You're using an argument that has been around for 25 years...and has been refuted many times since then.

"GEO CLOCK EXAMPLE 5:
SCIENTISTS have made a public announcement that the sun is shrinking five feet every hour (but, seeing as the sun is millions of miles in diameter, then this isn't much). SCIENTISTS said that this is has been going on since the sun was in existance. Well, working backwards (adding five feet for every hour going backwards in time) we end up with the sun twice its diameter in 100,000 years, and in 200,000 years, the sun would be touching the earth!"

The shrinking-sun argument contains two errors. The worst, by far, is the assumption that if the sun is shrinking today, then it has always been shrinking!

That's a little like watching the tide go out and concluding that the water level must have fallen at that rate since the earth began. Therefore, working backwards, much of the land must have been under water a few weeks ago! Since careful inspection shows no signs of such a flood, the earth can't be older than a few weeks!

Blunder number two is the unwarranted assumption that the rate of shrinkage reported by Eddy and Boornazian is an established fact. Far from it! The rate of shrinkage was published as an abstract to further scientific discussion, not as a polished paper.
Before long, serious flaws in its methodology turned up and the data has since been discredited; the full text of their study was never published.

"GEO CLOCK EXAMPLE 6:
Supposing each family has had an average of 2.5 kids, then it would take only 4,000 years to have this present population.
With "millions" of years behind us, tho, there would be a total of 25,000 generations (each dying at about 40 years of age), and each family averaging at 2.5 children. These statistics show that the earth's pop. would grow about .5% each year. With "millions" of years behind us, and these statistics, today's population would be 10, with 2,100 zeros after it! "Well, more people died back then then they do now, because they didn't have the medical advancements and such!" Well, having that, 3,000 billion people would have died to have today's population. That's incredible, because ancient bones are rare... "

Jesus-tapdancing-Christ...HOW STUPID CAN YOU GET???
That's not how population dynamics work! Populations don't expand beyond their means of support! By the same reasoning 8 germs could populate every cubic inch of available living space on Earth to the tune of 1 million strong in less than a week! guess, by creationist reckoning, the earth must be a week old! If it were a few thousand years old, the germ population would have gone through the roof!

I notice that you provide NO references and appear to have put NO thought into your assertions. Back up some sources, please.

"GEO CLOCK EXAMPLE 7:
SCIENTISTS have observed the moon, and have declared that it is moving away from the earth at about two inches per year. Working backwards, the moon would have been on the earth's surface 2 billion years ago, and by now, the moon would be completely out of sight!"

The tides, chiefly caused by the Moon's gravitational attraction and the orbiting of Earth and Moon about a common point, act as a brake to slow down the earth's rotation. The nearer tidal bulge, which carries the greater effect, runs slightly out of alignment of the Moon overhead; the gravitational interaction between it and the Moon serves to speed up the Moon in its orbit even as it slows down the earth's rotation. As it speeds up, the Moon moves to a higher orbit.
"The present rate of tidal dissipation is anomalously high because the tidal force is close to a resonance in the response function of the oceans; a more realistic calculation shows that dissipation must have been much smaller in the past and that 4.5 billion years ago the moon was well outside the Roche limit, at a distance of at least thirty-eight earth radii (Hansen 1982; see also Finch 1982).

(Brush, 1983, p.78)"

"Also, when C-14 dating was used on these things, this was the result:
-LIVING mollusks. C-14 revealed: Dead for 2,300 years
-FRESH sealskins. C-14 says: decaying for 1,300 years"
The reason for this anomaly is that the limestone, which is weathered and dissolved into bicarbonate, has no radioactive carbon. Thus, it dilutes the activity of the lake meaning that the radioactivity is depleted in comparison to 14C activity elsewhere. The lake, in this case, has a different radiocarbon reservoir than that of the majority of the radiocarbon in the biosphere and therefore an accurate radiocarbon age requires that a correction be made to account for it.

-Mortar from a castle known to be only 800 years. C-14 says: decayed for 7,370 years"

The gravel and sand that the mortar was made from is 7,370 years old.

-Saber-tooth tiger. By looking at the geological chart, SCIENTIST estimate this thing to be 100,000-1,000,000 years old. Radioactive testing shows 2,800."

We use radioactive dating to date the "geological chart" (It's called the geological column), so how can they disagree, exactly? Do your research.

-Natural Gas. Supposed to be 50,000,000 years old by chart, revealed by C-14 dating to be 34,000."
You can't use c-14 dating on natural gas, it only works on organic
-Coal supposed to be 100,000,000 years old. C-14 says 1,680 years old."
C-14 doesn't work beyond 50,000 years, as it's half life is only 5,000 years. This is like using a single ruler to measure the Empire State Building!

You are mixing up C-14 dating with isochron dating anyway. Want me to explain that to you? Apples and oranges, you're comparing here.

I can tell that you haven't done much research on these topics, and give no sources for your assertions.

References:

http://www.c14dating.com/corr.html

Brush, Stephen G. 1982. "Finding the age of the earth: By physics or by faith?" Journal of Geological Education, vol.30, pp.34-58

Does the universe anywhere ever stand completely still?
Absolute zero is what Science say’s it could and will.
At the tiniest quantum levels there’s never any change.
Zero point energy is only part of this big bang game.
Electromagnetic fields around their own zero baselines,
Continuously fluctuate activity in never-ending time.

Does time really come to it’s own end? Like the big chill.
When energy in stars burn themselves to completely out.
No more light from anywhere, I hope that’s not for real.
Big rip might be it; stars, planets and atoms fly inside out.
Gravity repels instead of pulls so everything comes apart until.
The big crunch when all the universe stops expanding out.
Falls back in on it’s self to one point for another again thrill.
Big bang the universe expanding in this never-ending bout.

Has the cosmos become intelligent to make and become us?
To look back at it’s self to smell, hear, see and feel joyous.
Will it like what man has done with this earth and ourselves?
Big chill, big rip or big crunch end it all to start a new birth?
Or will “God” all creation keep us full of life, love and precious?

I'm not religious at all. Though I have nooooo problem with anyone who is..(unless they push it in my face....that REALLY ticks me off!)...I dont belittle them or insult them because of their beliefs. I admit I don't believe in god....nor satan or anyother "holy figure" and I don't turn to science for an explination on why things are the way they are. If that makes ANY sense to any of you.
Cryptic

Hi Bogie,
No, gravity pulls everything together again to make the big crunch. This will happen if the total mass of the observable horizon is high enough. The fact that the universe is expanding is due to the big bang, not from gravity repelling.

i do..

replying to alasdair
Why is it so difficult for me to find it as reasonable that most accept that organic matter came to be by accident and that your accidentally evolved brain was the product of an accident of circumstances you compare God to a pink unicorn, would you not agree that more people believing on the basis that creation needs a creator and that science is objective rather than subjective. Would this at least make a hi tech ape look at that as evidence? Can you see how many who worship God could find that offensive Could I not purely from a scientific point view compare the evolution of the portion of the brain used to create that analogy to a jackass’s brain? I have not studied quantum physics but the tower of Babel was an early attempt to reach God objectively. All I know is that many will be mislead by that statement that there is no evidence for God. Maybe there is a part of me that thinks it can be simplified to people just believe what they want to believe. Some want heaven without God Creation without a creator order without laws and so forth just a summary of my feelings thank you. Maybe it was not your intention to mock God by that analogy. You may not be one of them, but I have seen many atheist that are actually offended by the thought they evolved from an ape one of them explained that he thought we came from another planet. When I heard him, he agreed to listen to a view point I had written on the subject I thought he was joking when he tried to explain simply by saying we came from another planet without thinking where did the life from that planet come from? He ask me to leave just for saying the word God I was attacked. I will post the poem last chance saloon
.

hi Alasdair,
gravity repelling is the "big rip"
Gravity repels instead of pulls so everything comes apart

The "big crunch" when all the universe stops expanding out.
Falls back in on it’s self to one point for another again thrill

"Big bang" the universe expanding in this never-ending bout.

THE NATURE OF THE EXPANSION An inability to see that the expansion is locally just kinematical also lies at the root of perhaps the worst misconception about the big bang. Many semi-popular accounts of cosmology contain statements to the effect that ``space itself is swelling up'' in causing the galaxies to separate. This seems to imply that all objects are being stretched by some mysterious force: are we to infer that humans who survived for a Hubble time would find themselves to be roughly four metres tall? Certainly not. Apart from anything else, this would be a profoundly anti-relativistic notion, since relativity teaches us that properties of objects in local inertial frames are independent of the global properties of spacetime. If we understand that objects separate now only because they have done so in the past, there need be no confusion. A pair of massless objects set up at rest with respect to each other in a uniform model will show no tendency to separate (in fact, the gravitational force of the mass lying between them will cause an inward relative acceleration). In the common elementary demonstration of the expansion by means of inflating a balloon, galaxies should be represented by glued-on coins, not ink drawings (which will spuriously expand with the universe).

THE INITIAL SINGULARITY Beginning at the beginning, a common question asked by laymen and some physicists is what the universe expands into. The very terminology of the ``big bang'' suggests an explosion, which flings debris out into some void. Such a picture is strongly suggested by many semi-popular descriptions, which commonly include a description of the initial instant as one ``where all the matter in the universe is gathered at a single point'', or something to that effect. This phrase can probably be traced back to Lemaître's unfortunate term ``the primaeval atom''. Describing the origin of the expansion as an explosion is probably not a good idea in any case; it suggests some input of energy that moves matter from an initial state of rest. Classically, this is false: the expansion merely appears as an initial condition. This might reasonably seem to be evading the point, and it is one of the advantages of inflationary cosmology that it supplies an explicit mechanism for starting the expansion: the repulsive effect of vacuum energy. However, if the big bang is to be thought of explosively, then it is really many explosions that happen everywhere at once; it is not possible to be outside the explosion, since it fills all of space. Because the density rises without limit as t -> 0, the mass within any sphere today (even the size of our present horizon) was once packed into an arbitrarily small volume. Nevertheless, this does not justify the ``primaeval atom'' terminology unless the universe is closed. The mass of an open universe is infinite; however far back we run the clock, there is infinitely more mass outside a given volume than inside it.

The Friedmann equation shows that a universe that is spatially closed (with k = +1) has negative total ``energy'': the expansion will eventually be halted by gravity, and the universe will recollapse. Conversely, an unbound model is spatially open (k = -1) and will expand forever. This is marvelously simple: the dynamics of the entire universe are the same as those of a cannonball fired vertically against the Earth's gravity. Just as the Earth's gravity defines an escape velocity for projectiles, so a universe that expands sufficiently fast will continue to expand forever. Conversely, for a given rate of expansion there is a critical density that will bring the expansion asymptotically to a halt:

A particle horizon is not at all the same thing as an event horizon: for the latter, we ask whether r diverges as t -> . If it does, then seeing a given event is just a question of waiting long enough. Clearly, an event horizon requires R (t) to increase more quickly than t, so that distant parts of the universe recede ``faster than light''. This does not occur unless the universe is dominated by vacuum energy at late times, as discussed above. Despite this distinction, cosmologists usually say the horizon when they mean the particle horizon.

Hi Snowbird,
The Apocalypse, yes you are right.
If I take forever out that should fix it.

And back to the ?
Who here believes in god?

I do, and I love you JESUS

I was watching PBS and discovered many theories on the expanding universe. One was named by its creator the soda pop theory another was named the noodle theory. After carefully weighing the merit of each theory. I thought it would be fun to develop a theory of my own. One could call it the more room out than there is in theory. For short cosmic flatulence but I kept it in, because I believed it would raise a big stink in the scientific community. Go ahead and laugh at me I find humility to be fruitful. I have made my own study of the battle between church and science which some still want to ignore.
I remember when I was younger I found all the rules of my religion to be suffocating I was never encouraged to read the bible. What I knew about the bible I learned at mass .My original intent to read the bible was to convince my mother not to be so dogmatic. I believe it is human nature to be passionate about ideas. Each individual seems to want his thoughts to have dignity I was not there but from the accounts I have read Giordono Bruno sacrificed his life for his ideas and the authorities sacrificed their dignity when they burned him in the name of God, they thought they knew the whole truth. I see everything evolving I suppose I am as stubborn as Tessa who says I am not going to change to please someone else. Before I lose your interest I would like to propose a question how many think that we know everything? And that if the non-existing entity that our country is united under was to reveal a more detailed account of our origin. How many think they could understand?. And at what point did my ancestors become Americans. At what point could we call them a one and not a thing?

i also wanted to mention to bogie that is a great piece
a good spiritual analogy like the song lirics like the created drawn to its creator

hey tess its me again that annoying christian the one who believes that truth is constant. and it is only understanding that changes I gess even the dogmatic Christiains would understand rebelion as Jesus had to rebel against the authority of his day who professed an unchangeing God. are you looking for a used pagan god or a new one? there must be millions do any of them cliam to have created a perfect world in 7 days there is always some disire above good would any one be interested in showing me in my bible where it says the world was perfect. I would also like to know more about fantasy gods you might be interested that you inspired a poem Kingdom Come I posted on this site. I could only think of the wise men whenI Thought of a synthisis o understanding I read the profile of the pagan that posted in this discussion I agree that there is no pill that cures depression there are some that cliam to control it

Profile :

In my heart darkness has taken over. You may label me insane, but the only one who knows whats inside my mind, is me. "We may die from all the medication, but it sure did kill the pain" Depression, is not curable.

Hi Michael,
Evolutionary theory doesn't say that life came about by accident. It says that the variations that come about in life is random, but the mechanism that sifts through it(natural selection) is anything but random. Here's an example...if you take a jar full of sand and shake it up, the sand will "by accident" be mixed up by the water. However, if you leave this jar by itself for a few minutes, all the sand will have sunk to the bottom..."by accident" ! Point being, a non random filter(gravity in this case) will produce order from randomness.

I didn't mean to offend you with the pink unicorn comment, but the point there was that scientifically, we can't accept something unless there is empirical evidence FOR it. I can think of none such evidence for God, but if you have any, I'd like to hear it (I mean this not in a challenging or sarcastic way, but because I am seriously interested). Note that this doesn't make God any more or less real, it just means that as far as science is concerned, he doesn't exist until further evidence has been found.

To Bogie - Thank you, that post was enlightening, a jolly good read. Sorry about misunderstanding you, I thought you were saying that gravity repelling was causing the universe to expand. Can you provide a source for that information?

Michael...I find it hypocritical when you take offense at my comparing God to a pink unicorn, but then you attack the existence of other people's gods...but correct me if I'm misinterpreting it.

"I have seen many atheist that are actually offended by the thought they evolved from an ape"

I have seen many Christians who are actually offended by Young Earth Creationists (Henceforth YEC), because it implies that God is decieving humans by making all the evidence contrary to YEC, and it opens up the Bible to ridicule.

"the tower of Babel was an early attempt to reach God objectively"
Do you seriously think that different languages originated from the tower of Babel? And if it isn't possible to reach God through building a giant tower, why was he so worried?

alasdair
Well excuse me for the harsh paraphasing. Am I correct in assuming that what you were saying is that Science could be difined as the observation of the laws of nature and it has never been the intent of science to explian these laws ?

What? Science is all about explaining things, especially laws. Science is the systematic and self correcting process of gaining knowledge about the natural world.
By the way, you've mispelt my name two times out of two times you've attempted it. My name is Alasdair, not alusdair. Just pointing it out.
Cheers!

Hey Alasdair, my last post on this topic was a while ago, so I applogize if this seems slightly random... I am awake of Occam's Razor, "one should not increase, beyond what is necessary, the number of entities required to explain anything." However, we do not have an adequate explanation of the creation of the universe. The "singularity" that is currently being posed as the "entity" (to use the parlance of Occam's Razor) could easily be replaced or caused by another entity, God. God's existence does not increase, beyond what is necessary, the number of entities required to explain the beginning of the universe.

Alasdair
I am not really offended by your mocking or showing your ignorance of the Jewish culture or tap dancing as far as I am concerned It would not demean the dignity of my Savior if he did tap dance You know what I am talking about this is from your post .Jesus-tapdancing-Christ...HOW STUPID CAN YOU GET. You see sarcasm is really not that hard to detect as far as the comment on me being a hypocrite I have been called a lot worse by people I love dearly my own sister thinks I am a pompous ass with to much time on my hands that opinion came right after I had quoted a bishop. This was the quote; Every human person is created in the image and likeness of God and has an inviolable dignity, value, and worth nothing can take this away-not race gender class or human characteristics. therefore both the most wounded victim and the most callous criminal retain their humanity .My sister took this as an attack on her belief which is as far as I can tell is that God only requires that we show compassion to people that we declare as worthy. I believe that faith hope and charity are the basis for healthy spirituality I believe that I respect any religion that is based on these virtues in my opinion you are correct many dogmatic Christian authorities have brought ridicule on their selves by being overly concerned with the finding of scietific truths one example is the condemnation of the heliocentric theory But am still skeptical about scientific explanation of intelligence of organic matter which came from non organic matter because of the laws of nature and that you or any other ape that evolved from these laws understand them fully. Surely you would understand that your simple illustration of adding one variable would not satisfy a serious student of quantum physics in other words many people who do not understand everything about quantum physics will accept that intelligence came from the laws of physics. In other words the same evolved apes that say it is not logical to believe in God when told nothing more than it was because of a cosmic explosion that happened a long time ago say ok so that explains it

Michael,
For starters, if you divided up your text into paragraphs, it would be easier to read.

"I am not really offended by your mocking or showing your ignorance of the Jewish culture or tap dancing as far as I am concerned It would not demean the dignity of my Savior if he did tap dance You know what I am talking about this is from your post .Jesus-tapdancing-Christ...HOW STUPID CAN YOU GET. "

I wasn't talking to you, nor did I mean to offend you or Jesus when I made that comment. The only person I meant to offend was Lipton. I was asking Lipton "how stupid can you get", not Jesus. His "proof" that the world couldn't be past a million year old by overpopulation was incredibly stupid, you've got to hand me that.
However, I concede that it was bad word choice, taking into account the topic of this discussion.

"In other words the same evolved apes that say it is not logical to believe in good when told noting more than it was because of a cosmic explosion that happened a long time ago say ok so that explains it "

Big Bang theory says nothing about God's existence, and has nothing to do with the Evolutionary theory. By the way, all apes, not just us humans, are evolved. It's just that modern apes (And all life!) and ourselves have evolved in difference directions.
If you want a discussion on Evolutionary theory, then I'd be willing to start a seperate thread, if you show me that you understand it enough to have an intelligent conversation. I don't want the unresearched and uneducated junk that Lipton brought up.

Sean,
"However, we do not have an adequate explanation of the creation of the universe. The "singularity" that is currently being posed as the "entity" (to use the parlance of Occam's Razor) could easily be replaced or caused by another entity, God. God's existence does not increase, beyond what is necessary, the number of entities required to explain the beginning of the universe."

You're right, so far we do not know what caused the singularity. We may never know. However, you can't say "I don't know how it happened, therefore God did it". What we should be saying is "I don't know...but I'm going to find out!". Steven Hawking notes in his book The Universe in a Nutshell in reference to that the singularity might not be able to be explained scientifically, but it's critical that we make the attempt.

The reason that Occam's Razor is envoked here is because if we say that God made the singularity, then we have an unexplained phenomona there - God Himself.

All in all, we may never find out what made the singularity...but we must at least attempt to discover it.

Cheers!

Michael

I'm curious about something...is English your first language? Because it's occurred to me that it could be why you misinterpreted my "Jesus Tapdancing Christ how stupid can you get" comment.

Yes English is my first language was it your first? The connection between your rude comment to Lipton and the Jesus tap dancing Christ phase was not made by me. It was made by you I pasted the whole comments so that made so there would be no dispute as to the accuracy of the quote. I thought that you would believe that I personally was not offended. In other words I am not mad at you. I was just worried that someone else would think that in order to exalt your imagined intelligence that your were trying to intimidate freethinking you agreed it was a poor choice. I have been guilty of harsh paraphrasing I just wanted to see if you were able to separate your intellect from your emotions. I am impressed with your scientific mind and I am happy that you took this challenge

Personally I did not think that the data was infallible. I am among the Catholics that believe the age of the earth has nothing to do with faith if you can understand that. Just as you do not think that the big bang has anything to do with evolution. I hope that I have not led any to believe that I have credentials as a scientist. And I don’t believe it is your Intention to lead us to believe that you have given a lot of thought to spirituality.

Maybe I am not good at making myself clear. I have spent the last two years writing a book of poetry. The books title is ‘The balance of the Heart Soul and Mind Chemical Balance through Spirituality.’ Many people on this site are suffering from emotional problems witch they express as poems as the pagan pointed out there is a darkness in their heart that I don’t think can be explained by science there emotional pain is not easily treated or at least it is not being treated by physicians. Of course I don’t expect you to understand them. Or care about them. If I did not believe in spiritual healing power I would not be trying to share it

alasdair
I would like to explain why my simple mind had to make a connection between the big bang and life.
Is there a possibility as far as you know that life as we know it could exist without our sun?.The sun witch I assumed did not exist before the big bang occurred. Is there a correlation in the veriables in iorganic matter over a large period becoming organic matter.and is not gravity and other veribles necessary for both ?. Besides warmth organic matter requires substance. and in fact the whole, order from caos, system requires laws, and these laws are eternal? Please correct me if I am wrong . Do not naturaral laws govern the universe. Is not the universe all created things regarded as system or a whole?

Are you looking for a used pagan god or a new one? There must be millions. Do any of them claim to have created a perfect world in 7 days? There is always some desire above good would any one be interested in showing me in my bible where it says the world was perfect. I would also like to know more about fantasy gods you might be interested that you inspired a poem Kingdom Come I posted on this site. I could only think of the wise men when I Thought of a synthesis of understanding I read the profile of the pagan that posted in this discussion I agree that there is no pill that cures depression there are some that claim to control it

Tess I believe this comment left you very confused as to the point I was trying to make. You are very honest about your feelings I believe you have not shared all of your feelings in order to comply the rules of this forum. I think you have been respectful at least in this forum, but anyway you voluntarily entered this discussion for what reason I don’t know but you have made some proclamations other than I am an atheist I have been accused by another member as attacking other beliefs I was curious to follow your logic. The idea that I could be attacking a religion that in your mind does not exist at the present presents a problem to me. But to clear the mystery about are you looking for a new [pagan god ] or an old [pagan god] was I suppose a bit absurd. But I was thinking of a previous comment that was not made by you . that is that God was created by man. Any unknown religion that recognizes a power greater than their self could consider this an attack there belief. If we face the facts god has in many cases become a multimillion dollar business but now I am getting away from my point. Even though it is none of my business I know the feelings you have toward God as a non existing entity and feel that you have made it clear to God and man that you would reject any divine intervention. I have no other choice than to accept that.

As far as the tower of Babel analogy, I am only required to accept the bible as the inspired word of God. Even if I were to use the standard of science that you accepted on some ones authority, I would honestly say I have not committed to the historical accuracy although if you are asking me to speculate. On the exact nature of God I find it difficult to think of Him as being worried that they posed any threat to him. I suppose the all knowing God was not even in wonder of what the idiots were doing. Many historians agree that Babylon is the site of that tower which latter became Iraq Just to amaze everyone I am going to confess that I have always been intrigued with astrology. Just for fun what if I was to state that the probability of a major earthquake is very hi around the tenth of this month would you believe in astrology if it happened or would you say lucky guess