Mockingbird

Please, please, for the love of God, stop getting your science from creationist websites. Haven't been to any creationist websites; sorry to disappoint. I know what entropy means and implies for the universe. Read me No thanks. Too technical for a non-scientist like me. How about a dictionary (American Heritage)? ENTROPY NOUN: Inflected forms: pl. en·tro·pies 1. Symbol S For a closed thermodynamic system, a quantitative measure of the amount of thermal energy not available to do work. 2. A measure of the disorder or randomness in a closed system. 3. A measure of the loss of information in a transmitted message. 4. The tendency for all matter and energy in the universe to evolve toward a state of inert uniformity. 5. Inevitable and steady deterioration of a system or society. Are you saying that matter, as a rule, doesn't deteriorate or "wind down" (as Robt. Jastrow put it in God and the Astronomers), implying that all matter has a beginning? Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird "Why is there something rather than nothing?"

Please present said logic. I've given it; you rejected it. Why do you insist on arguing about it? I rejected it because you did not reach a logical conclusion. It was logical. You didn't like what the conclusion implied (a First Cause), so you decided to find fault with the premise, "The universe had a beginning." Funny how so many great scientific minds agree that the universe had a beginning... Einstein, Eddington, Hubble, Penzias, Wilson, Jastrow... It was Eddington who wrote: "Philosophically, the notion of a beginning of the present order of nature is repugnant to me.... I should like to find a genuine loophole." By the way, where's all your observable, repeatable evidence for your faith in an eternal universe? Gee I wonder if it would pass muster in a courtroom.

"Prove it." Eternal means to exist independently of time. Time exists within the universe, not the other way around. The universe is eternal. Oh wonderful; let's not use the term eternal to mean "no beginning and no end" as it is usually thought to mean. Let's use a nuance of the word that is convenient for your atheistic worldview. Sheesh. Nah, let's not. Instead let's talk about whether there was ever NO universe at all. Can you grasp that? Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird "Why is there something rather than nothing?"

Please present said logic. I've given it; you rejected it. Why do you insist on arguing about it? Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird "Why is there something rather than nothing?"

"Prove it." Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird "Why is there something rather than nothing?"

Please, please, for the love of God, stop getting your science from creationist websites. Haven't been to any creationist websites; sorry to disappoint. I know what entropy means and implies for the universe. Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird "Why is there something rather than nothing?"

In what specific way do you think Christians are claiming that God wants all of us to behave? All the evidence you need for his existence is in logic. People in denial can't see the logic. All the evidence you need to understand that Christ is the son of God is his resurrection. People who have made the choice not to follow him have talked themselves out of believing the evidence. So please stop with the questions as though you don't know the answers. May God bless you with an unbiased mind as you think about these things. Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird "Why is there something rather than nothing?"

So you believe Herodotus when he talks about gold digging ants the size of dogs, and tribesmen living in the desert with their faces in their chests? After all, he says that all his information comes from eyewitnessess. sounds pretty far-fetched; wonder who he was trying to scare. Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird "Why is there something rather than nothing?"

So you're just flinging unsubstantiated claims around, then? Uh... no. And I don't have time to find it... as though it would make any difference to you! Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird "Why is there something rather than nothing?"

Where is your evidence of an "eternal cycle"? Matter cannot be eternal because of entropy. Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird "Why is there something rather than nothing?"

Common sense. Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird "Why is there something rather than nothing?"

I don't believe in the supernatural. That is what atheism is, disbelief in the supernatural. As man's knowledge has increased over the years more and more of what people attributed to supernatural causes has been explained to not be of supernatural cause. Deitys make no logical sense. There is no evidence of anything supernatural and by definition there never will be any. I think the supernatural is logical! There's no other way to explain how the universe came into existence. We know it hasn't always existed; it had a beginning. Something caused it to come into existence. So, I'd say that the universe itself is evidence of something supernatural--- i.e., its cause. Actually, some do. Sure there is. You just reject it as evidence. It's called eye-witness testimony. We have NO reason not to believe what those witnesses wrote down for us or told others to write down for us as testimony. And they back up what they said with their lives. Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird "Why is there something rather than nothing?"

Sorry, don't have the source for the other list. Maybe you can find it. The sources who mentioned Tiberius Caesar and what was said about him are irrelevant to me. Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird "Why is there something rather than nothing?"

Greanleaf is not without his critics. NO one is without critics. That means nothing. I'll stick by Greenleaf's opinion; after all, he was a converted atheist... No wonder he's "not without his critics." Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird "Why is there something rather than nothing?"

Interesting argument, but, unfortunately, it is faulty logic. It makes the assumption that the universe had a beginning. The universe as we know it emerged from a singularity. The beginning of time occurred at the Big Bang. That doesn't mean that the universe came into existence at that point, only that any information of how the singularity came to be is lost and unknowable by man, at least with our current level of understanding. There are more plausible ideas than a supernatural being creating the universe at that point. One possibility is that the universe is cyclical, and the Big Bang, modeled mathematically, is an instant represented numerically with division by zero. Note that the Greek word logos (sorry, the greek letters didn't render) is translates to both word and, perhaps more importantly, ratio. "Division by zero"??? Yeah right. There was no time before the Big Bang, there was no space before the Big Bang, and there was no matter before the Big Bang; there was no "before" before the Big Bang. The universe is expanding, so it had to have a beginning-- the Big Bang. This isn't an assumption. What you wrote above is speculation only. Everything started with one event. Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird "Why is there something rather than nothing?"

Then why would an atheist ask for such evidence? a. The nature of a deity is supernatural. b. Scientific evidence concerns itself strictly with the natural. c. The supernatural doesn't subject itself to science because it is "SUPER" (=above or beyond)-"NATURAL" (=nature) According to the Cambridge Dictionary, supernatural means: "supernatural (adjective): caused by forces that cannot be explained by science the supernatural (noun): things that cannot be explained by science" Science certainly has limitations. It can't explain that which is beyond the natural, even when that which is beyond the natural has interacted with the natural and left "it's" fingerprints on the natural. In Jesus, the natural and supernatural coalesced. Do you want evidence for Jesus? Fine. He came into the natural world to be felt, seen, heard... all scientific observations, and he was. Proving beyond a reasonable doubt that he existed on this earth 2000 years ago is not difficult. Eyewitnesses have left their testimony about Jesus for posterity, tho' some, who by nature object to the whole idea of Jesus (especially his claims and his miracles which validated his claims), will only refer to that testimony as "hearsay evidence," even tho' one of the greatest legal minds ever known, Simon Greenleaf, considered that testimony to be valid, and "would have been received in evidence in any court of justice, without the slightest hesitation." (p. 9, 10 in his 1874 book, The Testimony of the Evangelists-- referring, that is, to the authors of the gospels, NOT televangelists!!

Have you tried the dictionary to find definitions appropriate for the context of making a logically valid argument? I'm aware of the definitions of those words. You didn't like my usage of the words; tell me either how I misused them, or tell me how to use them properly. Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird "Why is there something rather than nothing?"

This is a great example of imprecise usage of the term evidence. Here is an example of imprecise usage of reason and logic. OK, I'll bite. Tell me how to use the terms "evidence", "reason" and "logic" correctly. I will be receptive to anything taught to me having to do with using the English language correctly so that I'm able to communicate effectively. Seriously. I've only been speaking the language 53 years; you'd think I would know how to use it properly, but I will certainly not take that for granted!! Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird "Why is there something rather than nothing?"

I'm sorry, I should've worded that better; I think you misunderstood me. What I meant was, if you (jcd11235) believe in absolute truth (that it exists and that not all things are relative), then you will most likely agree that the law of non-contradiction would dictate that of two contradictory theories (such as atheism and theism), only one can be true. Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird "Why is there something rather than nothing?"

Good point. Atheists have shown that they don't like their religion misrepresented, and they will speak up if you do. Christians certainly don't like Christianity misrepresented either; they want to set the record straight. That's what both sides are doing. That's intelligent conversation--- until insults start getting thrown around. And ridicule. And then the whole thing just degenerates. Entropy. Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird "Why is there something rather than nothing?"

Sounds like you know something of the sovereignty of God. You're right, the Father always makes the first move in awakening a heart in need, and leading it to where living water can be found. And sometimes that happens as a Christian is sharing his faith with that person. If you don't want to hear it, tell the person talking to (or at) you to stop. But don't blame him for sharing his viewpoint openly in the first place-- that's what these Speaker's Corner forums are for. And that's what Christians are internally compelled to do by the love of Christ. If you ask me not to reply to your posts any more, trust me, I'll stop. That goes for anyone else who doesn't want to hear what I have to say anymore. But as long as I keep getting feedback or questions on what I am saying, I'll continue until the thread dies. Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird "Why is there something rather than nothing?"

He wouldn't be the first to imply (to put it mildly!) "that those who disagreed with him were wrong, yet with no credible evidence" offered. See, one thing we've all got to understand is that people on all sides of the debate feel very certain that their evidence has merit and is credible. I find your reasons for believing only in the natural unreasonable and illogical. And obviously you see the Christian's reasons for affirming a supernatural First Cause (with all the implications) unreasonable and without merit. We can't take it personally or be offended when someone implies that those who disagree with him are wrong; he's just certain of his own position and that's the nature of debate. After all, if you believe in Absolute Truth, then someone in the argument/discussion has to be wrong, because of the law of non-contradiction! My last reply (to you) was meant to be a lighthearted attempt at offering adding some balance to the mix. Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird "Why is there something rather than nothing?"

I like this idea (and not just because you had it, Bill

Pretend you're brave, and smile! Ask the person sitting by the door when you exit to smile and wave at you. Then keep eyes on that person as you leave, keep smiling at him until he's out of sight. Works for me!!!!

No you won't, Chubba! Because you'll do some practice exits at altitude to establish confidence that you CAN do it on your hop & pop. It's hard to relax when you're not confident. While breathing deeply, visualize yourself over and over exiting perfectly and then practice it. You're gonna' do GREAT! Let us know how great it turned out afterward, OK? Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird "Why is there something rather than nothing?"