General statistics
List of Youtube channels
Youtube commenter search
Distinguished comments
About

WaterspoutsOfTheDeep
JRE Clips
comments

Comments by "WaterspoutsOfTheDeep" (@WaterspoutsOfTheDeep) on "JRE Clips" channel.

lol neil is never gonna live down that interview
20
I found it fascinating how Einstein was asked something to the effect are you the smartest person alive or who is and he said Tesla lol.
12
@donaldmack2307 Mankinds most proven knowledge the space time theorems have told us there must be. Borde and Vilenkin took Hawking and Penrose work on classic general relativity and expanded it as far as possible with 5 papers and concluded "all reasonable cosmic models are subject to the relentless grip of the space-time theorems." They gave examples where you wouldn't need an absolute beginning to space and time but in such models you wouldn't have life. So there has to be a causal agent beyond space and time that is both intelligent and caring(fine tuning argument tells us this). Call that a interdimensional space wizard. I call that God.
10
@yuhmadorwah Lots of Asians.
7
If you really want to get technical it's the Word not I AM since that is what the Holy Spirit still calls Jesus in revelation in the future.
5
@Xpistos510 Except that isn't true. Refer to my previous comment.
5
@TristanMac65 Where do you get Jesus never performed miracles? We clearly have documentation he did. Ancient Jewish records of the counsel that wanted him dead even record as such. He never came back from the dead? There were hundreds of witnesses... The whole entirely of the universe is structurally needed just so life can be possible on earth alone, so it's no stretch to think it was created for us given the fine tuning argument. So why bring up earth as one planet being insignificant? It's not. Secondly Jesus came for the work of the cross not to display miracles. If Jesus came as solely God and not also man he would have never been crucified for all would have seen him as God and the work of redemption would have never been accomplished. What are you talking about, the bible makes around 10 times more statements of science than all the other major holy books combined... The bible most certainly makes statements of science and more importantly they are correct like the Big Bang and key components of it. " While most people think of the big bang as an explosion in space, scientists use the term to describe the beginning of space, time, matter and energy. The Bible describes a few key characteristics of the universe that scientists now have the ability to measure. At least five biblical writers describe an expanding universe (e.g. Job 9:8; Psalm 104:2; Isaiah 40:22; 42:5; 44:24; 45:12; 48:13; 51:13; Jeremiah 10:12; 51:15; and Zechariah 12:1). Scripture also talks about the constancy of the laws of physics, most explicitly stated in Jeremiah 33:25. Genesis 1:1 and Hebrews 11:3 declare that the universe began to exist (thus required a Beginner). Romans 8:18-21 speaks of a pervasive law of decay. These four characteristics—a singular beginning, cosmic expansion, and constant laws of physics including the law of decay—define a big bang universe. The Bible leaves many details such as the expansion rate and the strengths of the laws for us to measure. This correspondence between the biblical description of the universe, authored thousands of years ago, and the best scientific understanding of the universe provides strong evidence for supernatural inspiration of the words of the Bible."
4
Sam Armstrong No proof of Jesus. Talk about a disingenuous statement if I've ever heard one. Jesus is literally the most documented figure of his time. It's absurd if you ignore the biblical texts as not being evidence and secular accounts are also extensive. http://www.garyhabermas.com/books/historicaljesus/historicaljesus.htm#ch9
4
Thanos Mighty You have zero concept of creationism in science? You haven't studied any science correct? Freeman Dyson, one of the world’s foremost theoretical physicists, wrote: ‘The more I exam the universe and study the details of its architecture, the more evidence I find that the universe in some sense knew we were coming,’ The fine tuning argument alone is overwhelming for creation...
4
@BJtheMountaineerguy lol the honest and smart ones do, they just call him by their own made up terms =P
3
@onderon4125 Not if Goodenough has anything to say about it, they'll use sodium which is dirt cheap.
3
Ya kinda cringe they have to ask when it's such fundamental Christian doctrine.
3
Especially those like astrophysicists who see direct creation in action unlike biologists. There was a poll that showed 90%+ of astrophysicists believe in God while around the reverse for biologists.
3
Thanos Mighty lmao what kind of ridiculous off tangent reply is that. Evolution and abiogenesis doesn't relate to what I brought up for one. Secondly no biologists don't understand evolution nor abiogenesis. For one, there is no naturalistic origin of life, secondly it's 2020 and speciation or macro scale evolution or whatever you want to call it is still science myth. The fossil record alone not only doesn't support it but flat out contradicts it as does most other scientific knowledge and common sense/logic. Secondly to teach biology or study biology doesn't require God to be involved in the first place hence my previous comment you didn't comprehend.
3
@oldgravy85 I only understood it because I first heard the reverse from Hugh Ross on why God doesn't need to be created haha. And if anyone can condense and explain such hard concepts it's an Astrophycist lol. Here is a two minute clip from a debate he explains it if you are interested. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vkD9BPTXKaM
3
@jasonbeacham2105 Except if you continue with the science the overwhelming fine tuning evidence says if there is a prime mover they are intelligent and caring. Well shocker we know there must be a prime mover now from the Big Bang being solidified. So we have a causal agent beyond space and time that is both intelligent and caring. Does any religion say the same thing? Well indeed one does and it just so happens to be the only one that spoke of the big bang and got all the fundamental scientific details surrounding it correct 12/12 Christianity. The only other religion in history that got close was an ancient babylonian religion that got 3/12 correct. So as science has advance so has the case for not only God but a personal God and which? Jesus. Fascinating how the evidence continues to point towards Christianity and away from naturalism. Must mean something right? An honest person would say so.
3
@harrydavis6117 Newton is still regarded as the smartest man quite frequently by scientists... He was right the bible apparently did have scientific secrets... Big Bang(a singular beginning, cosmic expansion, and constant laws of physics including the law of decay—define a big bang universe). I also believe Newton attributed the bible for giving him the reasoning to even bring about all of his work. That's kinda a big thing...
3
@harrydavis6117 No that isn't true it does in fact. The claim of the bible is it is the inspired word of God, the writers and their understanding of what was written is thus irrelevant. And that claim holds quite true in many regards like the continuity of the text and 100% accuracy of prophecy and so on. An astrophysicist is in fact the one who made these claims. This isn't even obscure knowledge. Everyone knew this and the huge implications the Big Bang had for Christianity which is why Atheists for decades have attacked the Big Bang model at every angle to disprove it all the way till around 2009 when Borde and Vilenkin solidified the Big Bang and thus the Christian implications. "While most people think of the big bang as an explosion in space, scientists use the term to describe the beginning of space, time, matter and energy. The Bible describes a few key characteristics of the universe that scientists now have the ability to measure. At least five biblical writers describe an expanding universe (e.g. Job 9:8; Psalm 104:2; Isaiah 40:22; 42:5; 44:24; 45:12; 48:13; 51:13; Jeremiah 10:12; 51:15; and Zechariah 12:1). Scripture also talks about the constancy of the laws of physics, most explicitly stated in Jeremiah 33:25. Genesis 1:1 and Hebrews 11:3 declare that the universe began to exist (thus required a Beginner). Romans 8:18-21 speaks of a pervasive law of decay. These four characteristics—a singular beginning, cosmic expansion, and constant laws of physics including the law of decay—define a big bang universe. The Bible leaves many details such as the expansion rate and the strengths of the laws for us to measure. This correspondence between the biblical description of the universe, authored thousands of years ago, and the best scientific understanding of the universe provides strong evidence for supernatural inspiration of the words of the Bible."
3
@harrydavis6117 What's your claim to Newton should have known about alchemy during his time?
3
@christopherknox So Newton was insane for believing in God? That's absurd. That's literally what science tells us now, causal agent beyond space and time(Big Bang), that is both intelligent and caring(fine tuning argument tells us this). That is as good a description as any of a personal God. That was the whole argument I just brought up. Newton attributed his work to God because the belief in a logical God that created everything means there must be logic to find in everything thus his reason to set out and find it which he did. Which is exactly the argument of why Christianity is attributed to bringing about modern science, scientific method, universities, which came about in the Christian West not the East and led to the rise of the West and ultimately brought humanity into the modern age. That is what Joseph Needham of Cambridge concluded from his life's work studying this.
3
We know there was. Borde and Vilenkin took Hawking and Penrose work on classic general relativity and expanded it as far as possible with 5 papers and concluded "all reasonable cosmic models are subject to the relentless grip of the space-time theorems." They gave examples where you wouldn't need an absolute beginning to space and time but in such models you wouldn't have life.
3
@cosmic_love_5 That has been answered by Hugh Ross quite well. He says God created this universe including space and time so that tells us he is outside it operating in two or more dimensions of time. Which means he doesn't need a creator and can be uncreated.
3
@Netero770 How is Jesus a fairy tale? He is literally the most documented person of his time. With multitudes more historical documentation than many historical figures. You would have to be extremely historically ignorant to make such a moronic statement lol.
3
Jesus is also referred to the morning star fyi. Jesus and Lucifer both have held the same position of bringing God's word to the inhabitants of the earth. But only Jesus is called the bright morning star.
2
What do you mean? God literally is the scientific explanation for the Big Bang. That's why it was so heavily opposed lol. I never watched the video was this idiot actually trying to say there was no causal agent beyond space and time(God) for the Big Bang?
2
@zeuxconors2185 The Big Bang was opposed by Atheist academics for literally decades because of it's Christian implications all the way till like 2009. That's when Borde and Vilenkin took Hawking and Penrose work on classic general relativity and expanded it as far as possible with 5 papers and concluded "all reasonable cosmic models are subject to the relentless grip of the space-time theorems." They gave examples where you wouldn't need an absolute beginning to space and time but in such models you wouldn't have life. That only gives us the causal agent. But the fine tuning argument is so overwhelming now and it tells us that causal agent basically "God" must be personal. Freeman Dyson, one of the world’s foremost theoretical physicists, wrote: ‘The more I exam the universe and study the details of its architecture, the more evidence I find that the universe in some sense knew we were coming,’ That's basically where I'm coming from.
2
@CleanArtSoulja Logic and reason already answers that question. That question is redefining god to make it relevant. It is true for some religions but at least like I said for the Christian God which claims to have created the universe outside of our space time that is an irrelevant argument. So I guess in a sense I'm wrong if you are referring to some other religion like Hinduism. Was that the case? I'm sorry if so. Also no God is not a theory science has come to a point where it flat out shows us there logically must be a God and that they are a personal God. We know there has to be a casual agent(Big Bang), that is both intelligent and caring(fine tuning argument tells us this). So we are at the point where science provides us with overwhelming evidence of a personal God. The next logical question to ask is which God. Pretty easy to answer. Which one gave us the Big Bang theory? Christianity. So the answer is Jesus.
2
@c.m.lollar7501 lmao what evolution? It's 2020 and the science we have today practically destroys the notion of evolution. The fossil record evidence alone annihilates the concept of speciation. Here are some examples The Cambrian explosion refers to the sudden, simultaneous appearance of most of the animal phyla (body plans) that occurred 542–543 million years ago. Ten of the many challenges the Cambrian explosion poses to evolutionary explanations for life are as follows: While evolutionary scenarios, as opposed to worked-out theories, exist for hypothesizing how new genera, new orders, and new families of animal life might appear, there is no rational evolutionary scenario for explaining how a new animal phylum might appear. From 50 to 80 percent of the animal phyla known to have existed at any time in Earth’s history appeared within no more than a few million years of one another, as the Cambrian geological era began. Of the 182 animal skeletal designs theoretically permitted by the laws of physics, 146 appear in the Cambrian explosion fossils. The Cambrian explosion marks the first appearance of animals with skeletons, bilateral symmetry, appendages, brains, eyes, and digestive tracts that include mouths and anuses. Virtually every eye design that has ever existed appears simultaneously in the Cambrian explosion. The moment oxygen levels in Earth’s atmosphere and oceans permit the existence of Cambrian animals, they suddenly appear. The Cambrian explosion occurs simultaneously with the drastic change in sea chemistry known as the Great Unconformity. The Cambrian explosion includes the most advanced of the animal phyla, chordates, including vertebrate chordates. Both bottom-dwellers and open ocean swimmers appear simultaneously in the Cambrian explosion. Optimization of the ecological relationships among the Cambrian animals, including predator-prey relationships, occurred without any measurable delay. Jeffrey S. Levinton, “The Cambrian Explosion: How Do We Use the Evidence?,” BioScience 58 (October 2008): 855, doi:10.1641/B580912. Gregory A. Wray, “Rates of Evolution in Developmental Processes,” American Zoologist 32 (February 1992): 131, doi:10.1093/icb/32.1.123. Kevin J. Peterson, Michael R. Dietrich, and Mark A. McPeek, “MicroRNAs and Metazoan Macroevolution: Insights into Canalization, Complexity, and the Cambrian Explosion,” BioEssays 31 (July 2009): 737, doi:10.1002/bies.200900033.
2
Galva Tron I AM is the Word aka Jesus. I AM is the name of God given at the burning bush, it's half of the root of the name Jesus, Jeh/Yeh that gives us Je sus, the sus comes from sous which is from the name of Moses which fulfills biblical prophecy.. Here is a thorough explanation. http://whyapostolic.com/html/jesus.html
2
@xShadow_God Burden of proof lies on those who refute the paradigm to support their case. Atheism is making a claim.
2
@theangrymanc9643 "How fing dare I"? You are an idiot, Borde and Vilenkin are atheists not Christians, Atheists who set out to challenge the big bang in order to disprove it because of it's Christian implications. Their research conclusions solidified the big bang and thus Christian implications. No the bible does not say the earth is flat, looks like the common theme is you have reading comprehension issues.
2
@xShadow_God You say that while science has not supported those claims but contradicted them while at the same time validating the biblical claims. Even those presented right infront of you here, already refuting your claims before you made them. You say intelligent design is a weak argument yet it's the actual paradigm with almost everything pointing the direction towards it, not naturalism. Now that science has advanced, all of Atheists speculations are based on non-empirical arguments and that shows just how weak their case is. So your assertions are quite disingenuous when the evidence clearly points in the opposite direction and at the very least what you've read right here even. Even Freeman Dyson, one of the world’s foremost theoretical physicists, wrote: ‘The more I exam the universe and study the details of its architecture, the more evidence I find that the universe in some sense knew we were coming,
2
@theangrymanc9643 You act like any of that is even relevant argument lmao
2
@theangrymanc9643 No it isn't. You are making moronic arguments and a fool of yourself, clearly ignorant of the topic.
2
Lucifer really doesn't mean devil, it's just the previous name of Satan before his fall which is now defunct so really shouldn't be used technically.
2
The scientific term is causal agent beyond space and time that is both intelligent and caring.
2
@garygrant6340 Good catch. Correct Gary at the time of creation Jesus was known as the Word.
2
Something? Someone. The causal agent beyond space and time aka God.
2
Thanos Mighty yes all of it. there is no naturalistic origin of life, the most up to date origin of life conference has outright said this for several years now. I said macro scale evolution/speciation making a distinction given evolution has many meanings, it's not my fault you can't grasp such a simple obvious effort. Yes the fossil record does contradict such types of evolution, obviously in regards to lack of evidence of speciation and almost all biological mechanisms of various organisms appearing instantly in the fossil record. Those are called scientific facts Thanos. The only red flag here is you are ignorant on current science.
2
We do know what happened though in one respect. The "causal agent beyond space and time" started the big bang.
2
Gen 1:1 says it better. The Hebrew translates to "In the dateless past Elohim(plural for God, trinity introduced) brought out of nothing the heavens and the earth(heavens and earth denotes totality of reality)." It's one of the best scientific statements in the whole biblical text.
2
@muttenmong5509 Jesus is literally the most documented person of that time period. A person would have to be a complete moron to say he is fiction lol.
2
Consider you are talking about a guy that takes DMT and talks to demons.
2
No he didn't just go to paradise, he went to the other worlds below the earth like Tartarus since the text shows him informing fallen angels they failed and aren't getting freed by Satan anytime soon.
2
@oldgravy85 Good thing we can point out the universe had to have a beginning. Borde and Vilenkin took Hawking and Penrose work on classic general relativity and expanded it as far as possible with 5 papers and concluded "all reasonable cosmic models are subject to the relentless grip of the space-time theorems." They gave examples where you wouldn't need an absolute beginning to space and time but in such models you wouldn't have life. God is an unavoidable conclusion in science now, and the fine tuning argument tells us that God must be intelligent and caring.
2
@oldgravy85 I mean more so to condense the argument.
2
Omiros 99 Go back to ESL, I said astrophysicist not physicist.
2
Omiros 99 lmao you are a moron, you don't even know the difference. Neither is it something I made up it's a quote from Astrophysicist Hugh Ross. You are telling me you know better than him about his own professional field? When did you get your degree in astrophysics? lol Even beyond that he is active in the community for decades traveling around the world speaking at universities meeting his peers and doing research. Also I'm not religious, I'm Christian, Christianity condemns religion.
2
DNA the most complex language known just created itself too! Some muddy water made a code long enough to go to the moon and back like four times on it's own and the magical ingredient called time.
2
Jesus is one of the most documented historical figures. You clearly don't know much history lol.
2
@DaddyOfTheSugarVariety Easy. http://www.garyhabermas.com/books/historicaljesus/historicaljesus.htm#ch9
2
@jjm2948 Who says a person is their body? Poor argument. We are a mind that HAS a body. The biblical text goes one step further and says we are a spirit that has a mind and body.
2
@brandonhanserd7832 Big bang theory means it wasn't random though is my take away.
2
@protectork9831 I think it's more the issue of Tesla's inventions working. But the context in which it works is the issue and overlooked. It might only work on very small scale, or very large, or under small load or very large load. Or there simply isn't the materials invented yet that can be used to even make such a thing. There was one video about hydro generators that talked about this. His generator was more efficient but could only work small scale because we literally don't have the materials capable of building the device at scale.
2
@rayp7632 Well he is busy trying to think of how he can interview a person for 2 hours so is probably constantly thinking of what can be talked about.
2
Theoretical unfortunately doesn't equate to being reality lol. A good example would be a wormhole between two black holes it's theoretically possible but realistically impossible.
2
@48sharksOfficial Same thing =P
2
@harrydavis6117 Wouldn't the correct statement be we can't validate that claim then? Where do you get he could not have said it?
2
@christopherknox I've stated almost entirely only facts not beliefs... Also ironically I believe I already have given quite good evidence to contradict your last statements. So it's a bit alarming you still made them.
2
Eternal time or cyclical universe has already been proven false too. Borde and Vilenkin took Hawking and Penrose work on classic general relativity and expanded it as far as possible with 5 papers and concluded "all reasonable cosmic models are subject to the relentless grip of the space-time theorems." They gave examples where you wouldn't need an absolute beginning to space and time but in such models you wouldn't have life.
2
@5pointwarrior320 It wouldn't be illogical, there can be two or more dimensions of time(length and width) which is why God doesn't need a creator is eternal and uncreated. God already has to exist beyond our space in time since he created it in the first place. Hugh Ross explains this quite well.
2
Science literally says that. Big Bang is a Christian concept, it states there must be a causal agent beyond space and time(God). The scientists on the show was being disingenuous refusing to tell the full truth. The overwhelming evidence of the fine tuning argument is the second half it shows that if there is a causal agent beyond space and time which we proved with the big bang theory, that they must be intelligent and caring. It;s game over, we know with overwhelming evidence there must be a personal God. Which God is the next logical question. Which gave us the big bang theory and is a personal God? Christianity. No other religion gets it right. So Jesus is the answer as to which God.
2
We know the universe had an absolute beginning now though... Even the ridiculous multiverse concept is bound by this.
2
You might want to research how intensely the Big Bang was disputed for years because of it's Christian implications. It practically went on till I believe around as late as 2009.
2
Causal agent beyond space and time, aka God.
2
@ariancitaku2964 You sound moronic. The evidence is right infront of you lol. "No human being have ever used the bible as a scientific source and had any success"? Ya only who many academics regard as the smartest man and the father of modern science Newton. Holy shit you have to be American right? lmao and you have the nerve and audacity to tell me to stop talking. Go crawl back in your cave Felicia never to be heard from again. Your shame is tangible at this point.
2
Actually the opposite. Science has proven that had to be a start to time. It's based on the most proven knowledge human has lol... Borde and Vilenkin took Hawking and Penrose work on classic general relativity and expanded it as far as possible with 5 papers and concluded "all reasonable cosmic models are subject to the relentless grip of the space-time theorems." They gave examples where you wouldn't need an absolute beginning to space and time but in such models you wouldn't have life.
2
It's the same reality where all the atoms that make up your computer randomly came together and wrote your comment but with a shit emoji at the end.
2
@towerofpower7462 Sure. Borde and Vilenkin took Hawking and Penrose work on classic general relativity and expanded it as far as possible with 5 papers and concluded "all reasonable cosmic models are subject to the relentless grip of the space-time theorems." They gave examples where you wouldn't need an absolute beginning to space and time but in such models you wouldn't have life.
2
@Netero770 I don't need to do my research the best archeologists, and scholars of the world both present and past already have for me. That's how I can make such statements of fact and certianty unlike you. You should probably attempt to educate yourself first before speaking. Clearly you made little attempt. The evidence for Jesus is overwhelming. Here I'll even help you out, here is a proffesor of archeology disputing all the retarded concepts of why Jesus never existed so even someone as stupid as you doesn't get the wrong idea. Also some additional reading material for you. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XAN3kQHTKWI http://www.garyhabermas.com/books/historicaljesus/historicaljesus.htm#ch9
2
God. Logically that's the answer since the Big Bang tells us God outside of our space time started everything.
1
@RealityBoat Boundaries are not a construct. We know the universe had a full start and can't go infinitely in the past. That's is a boundary. We know we are limited to one linear dimension of time, that is a boundary.
1
@seandunn2062 Thank you for your reply but to tell you the truth I don't quite follow lol. It sounds like you are saying Lucifer and Jesus are two sides of the same coin to some extent and symbolic in nature of some sort. Which isn't what I'm talking about, I was talking quite literally. The bible states Lucifer was King and Priest over the earth for the preAdamic race before his fall. The preAdamic race we only know of now by the name demons which lost their bodies during Lucifers fall when God judged the earth which is described as God destroying the earth and flooding it and sealing up the sky so a frozen ball of ice. Thats the picture we see in Gen 1:2 a flooded frozen eath(no light no heat) and destroyed earth(formless and void). It's kinda a huge topic. There is actually unfortunatly a spelling error in that scripture it should read the earth "became" formless and void not "was" formless and void, which is why most people usually don't give it much thought unless they remember passages where the text says God created the earth to be inhabited and everything God creates is good which is clearly not the picture in Gen 1:2. Also not to be technical but just to put it out there, the bible describes man as a spirit not a soul. We are a spirit that has a soul and a body. Christs redemption saved our spirit which became one with his, our soul we save daily through the cleansing of the blood, and washing of the word, and our body is corrupt and unable to be saved we get a new holy one in heaven.
1
@spotlizard0374 lmao are you for real the proof is the Big Bang. It shows there must be a causal agent beyond space and time.
1
@adm1s905 lmao are you for real the proof is the Big Bang. It shows there must be a causal agent beyond space and time.
1
@CleanArtSoulja You are redefining God as a god bound to our space time. The Christian God at least is stated to have created the universe thus already existed beyond our space time he created. Thus already exists in two or more dimensions of time. With time having a length and a width with two dimensions that means God is uncreated. There is no reason to assume God needed to be created. This is a old poor argument.
1
@CleanArtSoulja I believe I just corrected you, it would be honest of you to acknowledge that. Also you say you take issue with my claims and assertions that doesn't hold true to modern science, yet I obviously just showed otherwise, how about you be specific. Also no, there are no other claims or theories by any other of your so called tribes that gets the conditions of the creation of the universe correct except Christianity with the Big Bang. Which let me remind you the big bang is a Christian concept which gets all the major conditions correct and conditions stated correct. Stop being disingenuous and ignoring science and it's obvious implications for Christianity. Christianity stands alone among all other faiths in this regard. While most people think of the big bang as an explosion in space, scientists use the term to describe the beginning of space, time, matter and energy. The Bible describes a few key characteristics of the universe that scientists now have the ability to measure. At least five biblical writers describe an expanding universe (e.g. Job 9:8; Psalm 104:2; Isaiah 40:22; 42:5; 44:24; 45:12; 48:13; 51:13; Jeremiah 10:12; 51:15; and Zechariah 12:1). Scripture also talks about the constancy of the laws of physics, most explicitly stated in Jeremiah 33:25. Genesis 1:1 and Hebrews 11:3 declare that the universe began to exist (thus required a Beginner). Romans 8:18-21 speaks of a pervasive law of decay. These four characteristics—a singular beginning, cosmic expansion, and constant laws of physics including the law of decay—define a big bang universe. The Bible leaves many details such as the expansion rate and the strengths of the laws for us to measure. This correspondence between the biblical description of the universe, authored thousands of years ago, and the best scientific understanding of the universe provides strong evidence for supernatural inspiration of the words of the Bible.
1
@adm1s905 God
1
@adm1s905 No circular reasoning. Vague question, vague response. Learn to communicate.
1
@adm1s905 That's a conversation you had only in your own head. Not here. Learn to communicate.
1
@adm1s905 No you gave a one word question with zero context. Then pretend you gave it all along while still stating circular reasoning to a conversation that never happened...
1
I believe those were fallen angels not demons. Jesus was telling them they failed and aren't getting out anytime soon lol.
1
@SamuralSabatoge That's literally what the Big Bang theory tells us lol. You know it's a Christian concept right?
1
Who is talking to me then?
1
@kenkauble175 Talking about you fool. You claim to be microbial, yet are you telling me you aren't now?
1
@kenkauble175 I don't believe that opinion is the current consensus in your microbe nation state. We are going to have to take a vote.
1
@xShadow_God Silence...
1
Jesus is the bright morning star another trivia.
1
"alt left sounds made up" because the whole left IS alt left lol and that isn't an exaggeration whatsoever.
1
Actually even the ridiculous multiverse concept is bound by the space time theorems. There had to be a full start beginning from the so called causal agent beyond space and time, that has to be both intelligent and caring(fine tuning argument shows this). So who else could that be than God, and the multiverse has to have that God. That God fits the Christian biblical text more than anything else.
1
Hell is the broad term that is used to encompass all 5 worlds stated in the text that exist below the earth. Paradise the abode of the righteous dead, sheol the abode of unrigheous dead, tartarus abode of fallen angels, pit/abyss abode of demons, lake of fire.
1
@BOOGIECali Yup gold star and lolly pop for you neto.
1
@getsugaallen6612 Clearly the text shows he did. So why would you say Jesus never went to hell? Are you talking about some mormon or jehovah witness passage or something?
1
Who is the "we." Islam doesn't believe in the trinity. Angels don't have creation power only God.
1
@hxyzazolchak We is plural...
1
Fitting yet in poor taste.
1
Actually we do know. The causal agent beyond space and time aka God, started the big bang. Beyond that no one knows.
1
The Big Bang isn't random though it's so fine tuned it's beyond our understanding... The Big Bang isn't illogical.
1
Casual agent beyond space and time, aka God.
1
Lucifer means light bringer not morning star, morning star is another name for the same person they aren't the same name.
1
@Drimirin Sorry, I'm trying to say they aren't the same. I'm talking about the person not Latin word. One is the definition of the name Lucifer(light bringer) for the biblical Lucifer, the other morning star is a descriptor of the person. If that makes more sense. Jesus is also called the morning star yet he isn't "light bringer."
1
You just realized the Big Bang is a Christian concept? lol fyi almost all astrophysicists believe in a God, the poll showed in the 90%'s.
1
No you have to accept Jesus as Lord and Savior and receive salvation before death. You can't go to hell say you don't like it then choose Jesus and go to heaven lol.
1
We know the universe had to have a full start, no cyclical universe theory. The ridiculous multiverse theory also is bound by this. Borde and Vilenkin took Hawking and Penrose work on classic general relativity and expanded it as far as possible with 5 papers and concluded "all reasonable cosmic models are subject to the relentless grip of the space-time theorems." They gave examples where you wouldn't need an absolute beginning to space and time but in such models you wouldn't have life.
1
Science proves that isn't true. Borde and Vilenkin took Hawking and Penrose work on classic general relativity and expanded it as far as possible with 5 papers and concluded "all reasonable cosmic models are subject to the relentless grip of the space-time theorems." They gave examples where you wouldn't need an absolute beginning to space and time but in such models you wouldn't have life. No avoiding the Christian implications of the Big Bang =)
1
The Big Bang is unavoidable. The Atheists went through all possibilities to disprove it because of it's Christian implications. Borde and Vilenkin took Hawking and Penrose work on classic general relativity and expanded it as far as possible with 5 papers and concluded "all reasonable cosmic models are subject to the relentless grip of the space-time theorems." They gave examples where you wouldn't need an absolute beginning to space and time but in such models you wouldn't have life.
1
@northstar1060 Mankinds most proven knowledge the space time theorems have told us there must be a God. Borde and Vilenkin took Hawking and Penrose work on classic general relativity and expanded it as far as possible with 5 papers in an attempt to disprove the Big Bang and it's Christian implications and concluded "all reasonable cosmic models are subject to the relentless grip of the space-time theorems." They gave examples where you wouldn't need an absolute beginning to space and time but in such models you wouldn't have life. So there has to be a causal agent beyond space and time(God, but are they a personal God?) that is both intelligent and caring(fine tuning argument tells us the causal agent is).
1
@northstar1060 no comment?
1
lmao the irony is that is exactly what the science we have now boils down to, Borde and Vilenkin solidified it.
1
Doubt it. We know the universe isn't cyclical it had to have had a full start.
1
@patrickphelan3676 No Big Bounce. Borde and Vilenkin took Hawking and Penrose work on classic general relativity and expanded it as far as possible with 5 papers and concluded "all reasonable cosmic models are subject to the relentless grip of the space-time theorems." They gave examples where you wouldn't need an absolute beginning to space and time but in such models you wouldn't have life.
1
I would think logic would dictate better being the one that wasn't defeated twice and soon a third, who wasn't created and had to be given his limited power which is completely nullified by the mere name of the other lol.
1
Science tells us there was a causal agent beyond space and time(Big Bang/space time theorems), also that it is intelligent and caring(fine tuning argument). So...
1
Actually the scientific and biblical text that connects to it is overwhelming lol. That's why it was decades of atheist astrophysicists challenging the big bang theory to disprove it up until around 2009 when the evidence was overwhelming. Borde and Vilenkin took Hawking and Penrose work on classic general relativity and expanded it as far as possible with 5 papers and concluded "all reasonable cosmic models are subject to the relentless grip of the space-time theorems." They gave examples where you wouldn't need an absolute beginning to space and time but in such models you wouldn't have life.
1
@Akira3kgt I wasn't making such logical leaps, so why would I be missing such conclusions? I don't think I even implied such things. I clearly was responding specifically to a whole host of questions someone dumped on me. Should have been apparent it says at the top of my comment that it's a reply to said individual who frankly is more along the lines of a troll than someone trying to have a conversation.
1
@sarnxero2628 Vague much? Here is one. Fossil record doesn't show evolution. The Cambrian explosion refers to the sudden, simultaneous appearance of most of the animal phyla (body plans) that occurred 542–543 million years ago. Ten of the many challenges the Cambrian explosion poses to evolutionary explanations for life are as follows: While evolutionary scenarios, as opposed to worked-out theories, exist for hypothesizing how new genera, new orders, and new families of animal life might appear, there is no rational evolutionary scenario for explaining how a new animal phylum might appear. From 50 to 80 percent of the animal phyla known to have existed at any time in Earth’s history appeared within no more than a few million years of one another, as the Cambrian geological era began. Of the 182 animal skeletal designs theoretically permitted by the laws of physics, 146 appear in the Cambrian explosion fossils. The Cambrian explosion marks the first appearance of animals with skeletons, bilateral symmetry, appendages, brains, eyes, and digestive tracts that include mouths and anuses. Virtually every eye design that has ever existed appears simultaneously in the Cambrian explosion. The moment oxygen levels in Earth’s atmosphere and oceans permit the existence of Cambrian animals, they suddenly appear. The Cambrian explosion occurs simultaneously with the drastic change in sea chemistry known as the Great Unconformity. The Cambrian explosion includes the most advanced of the animal phyla, chordates, including vertebrate chordates. Both bottom-dwellers and open ocean swimmers appear simultaneously in the Cambrian explosion. Optimization of the ecological relationships among the Cambrian animals, including predator-prey relationships, occurred without any measurable delay. Jeffrey S. Levinton, “The Cambrian Explosion: How Do We Use the Evidence?,” BioScience 58 (October 2008): 855, doi:10.1641/B580912. Gregory A. Wray, “Rates of Evolution in Developmental Processes,” American Zoologist 32 (February 1992): 131, doi:10.1093/icb/32.1.123. Kevin J. Peterson, Michael R. Dietrich, and Mark A. McPeek, “MicroRNAs and Metazoan Macroevolution: Insights into Canalization, Complexity, and the Cambrian Explosion,” BioEssays 31 (July 2009): 737, doi:10.1002/bies.200900033.
1
@cassandraingraham8690 It doesn't need to be explicitly stated. Are you saying it has to be to be true? That's extremely poor and weak stance to take. Fyi we have text of Jesus talking to fallen angels in hell letting them know they failed even. It's pretty clear Jesus went to hell to say the least it's called establishing context. So how you can state it's an interpretation of scripture is beyond me.
1
@andreshernandez3107 1 Peter 3:18-19, I believe most mistake them for demons but it's fallen angels that slept with women in the time of noah that are chained in tartarus there was something to do with that which helps denote they are fallen angels and not demons. Whether it's the hebrew using the term tartarus or chains since demons aren't chained something to that effect.
1
@andreshernandez3107 No. Demons are earth bound spirits without a body that seek one. Angels are heaven bound spirits with a body. Scripture states fallen angels reside in Tartarus, demons reside in the abyss/pit two different distinct locations. So technically they are completely different.
1
It's not absurd because the most proven scientific knowledge of humanity the space time theorems have solidified the Big Bang theory. Borde and Vilenkin took Hawking and Penrose work on classic general relativity and expanded it as far as possible with 5 papers and concluded "all reasonable cosmic models are subject to the relentless grip of the space-time theorems." They gave examples where you wouldn't need an absolute beginning to space and time but in such models you wouldn't have life. So science and logic and reason tells us there was a Big Bang. And frankly by extension the evidence for the God of the bible is getting quite overwhelming.
1
I mean the big bang literally says that which is why the speaker in the video danced around the implications the science says.
1
We know there are 9 in our universe. There can be more though...
1
@GOilers97 I mean an Astrophysicist said that and explained each of the minor ones. I made a mistake it was ten not nine. Here if you want to read more. https://reasons.org/explore/publications/facts-for-faith/read/facts-for-faith/2000/07/01/a-beginner's-and-expert's-guide-to-the-big-bang-sifting-facts-from-fictions
1
Not true science tells us time had a full start. Borde and Vilenkin took Hawking and Penrose work on classic general relativity and expanded it as far as possible with 5 papers and concluded "all reasonable cosmic models are subject to the relentless grip of the space-time theorems." They gave examples where you wouldn't need an absolute beginning to space and time but in such models you wouldn't have life.
1
@TimeTraveler0036 The Big Bang and it's Christian implications after decades of being challenged because of those implications, got solidified at that point fyi. No crazy new theory there, in fact it's thousands of years old.
1
The Lake of Fire is a distinctly different location than Sheol. According to the biblical text there are 5 "worlds" below the earth. Sheol the abode of the unrighteous dead, Paradise the abode of the righteous dead which is now part of Sheol,Tartarus the abode of fallen angels, the Pit/Abyss the abode of demons, the Lake of fire which is empty but will one day be what the rest are combined into. So "hell" isn't everlasting fire but it will be.
1
@Chip4835 I mean I assume forever, the spirit which is what we are is eternal, that's what's going in the lake of fire. The scripture states once a year we will be required to look down from heaven at the lake of fire and people in it in remembrance of what Jesus saved us from. I forget during what day it is held at but it's stated. Maybe it will change in the new creation. But I think the default stance that makes more sense is just to assume forever. I assume it's torture too given that's judgment on sin, just separation from God isn't judgment on the sin which God must do given he is a just God. Not receiving Jesus's gift of salvation isn't benign separation from God which is kinda what you are saying sounds like.
1
@danielamaya2551 You don't have to act like I'm crazy because you yourself are ignorant of the scripture. Luke 16:19-28, Matthew 8:12 shows there is clearly torment in hell. Revelation 20:10,Revelation 14:11, the torment in the lake of fire is forever. You made it sound like sin is not punished there is just separation from God and death where the person ceases to exist. Also I'm not going to waste hours on end looking up a passage for you. It was connected to a yearly observance of a feast in heaven where the saints go to the tabernacle, it wasn't said in direct terms either something to the effect of looking over across or down to the souls not saved something along those lines.
1
That's why athiests contested the big bang theory till like 2009 till it became unavoidable. It has massive implications for Christianity.
1
makes sense but is still in poor taste given it's connotation.
1
@Ddub1083 I know I'm saying it was in poor taste. It's basically a insult done on purpose choosing that name.
1
@Ddub1083 Of course it is, it's a insult to the vatican and Christianity as a whole. For some obscure reason you think somehow I was referring to the vatican purposing the name which doesn't even make sense...
1
@Ddub1083 Morning star is used, which isn't the same word as Lucifer. It's used in reference to both Jesus and Lucifer in reference to their position they both held which was the same. So Lucifer the name has no relation to Christ even though the same descriptor was used in relation to the two people. So Lucifer does hold negative connotations given it's relation to Satan, despite it's use prior to his fall(how can it not...) and name change as far as I know. . I never knew about the use of "Lucifer" for those two instances in the Catholic church that's interesting they or someone at the time viewed it as fine to use in such a way, or perhaps the connotation has drastically changed with the times. But we live in the time we live so... It's like arguing gay means happy lol.
1
@Ddub1083 It's all a bit convoluted lol. I'm obviously Protestant so the Latin wouldn't be what would commonly come to mind. In the modern age does the average Catholic have a benign view on lucifer associating it more with the Latin than the angel? So are you saying it was a mistake by the early church to use Lucifer as a name to call the angel Satan prior to his fall and name change to Satan? That Lucifer is more a general descriptor like morning star than a proper noun for his actual name? Morning star is a established term for angel in the bible though so it's not really a leap to associate Lucifer to the name for an angel and Satan. Job 38:7 talks about morning stars plural the angels being around during creation. Ezekiel 28:12-19 clearly shows Satan is a angel Are you talking about Isaiah 14? King of Babylon is referring to Satan just like King of Tyrus. There was not even any men alive in the context of Isaiah 14, it's all in context of the preAdamic race which had nations and cities on the earth that we only know of as demons now after their fall Lucifer caused corrupting them the scripture states.
1
@Ddub1083 Except I've already shown that isn't the case. There was a name change and we see the connection between the two through the context. That's like saying Jesus wasn't the burning bush because the name Jesus wasn't used...
1
@Ddub1083 Copy pasting a link to a lucifer search result is quite irrelevant to the conversation. Is there something specifically you are referring to for why you made your previous statements? I addressed your previous points, nor did you make any attempt to answer anything I asked either...
1
@Ddub1083 I think you gave the wrong link then. You linked wikipedia. Lucifer in the occult and so on has nothing to do with this. That's exactly what I was asking about where do you get Lucifer is a modern invention? Before you weren't saying that you were saying there was only one verse linking Lucifer to Satan, now you are saying something completely different. We know the text you brought up is mentioning Lucifer along with the "King of Babylon," is referencing Lucifer because of the context. Also morning star is used for angels in general not just Lucifer and Jesus, it's more a descriptor than proper noun. Was there something else I missed?
1
@Ddub1083 So then the question arises, where did Satan and demons come from then since everything God creates is good and demons are not fallen angels. And if you deny the connection of Satan to Lucifer then I assume you are saying Satan is also not a fallen angel since he isn't Lucifer. What's the deal with Lucifer even being mentioned in the bible then? Is Lucifer stilled called Lucifer after his fall? Where did he go after his fall?
1
Think how even more intelligent Issac Newton must have been the father of modern science.
1
 @eue4127 I disagree because Newton's wide scope of discoveries I think demonstrates him on another level...
1
@eue4127 Sure, the coherent inherentness of the universe mindset Newton brought to mainstream science which aloud for such work to be done which he attributed to God. Extremely important, it's why the Christian West took humanity into the modern age and not the East where science basically stagnated for centuries. That is what Joseph Needham of Cambridge concluded from his life's work studying this.
1
To be technical the Word is the name of Jesus before the creation of the unvierse, it's the name the Holy Spirit still calls Jesus in the future as we see in Revelation. Also there is no Jeshua in the bible the name is Jesus, it always has been and will be, Jesus is the name nailed to the cross not Jeshua. English Iesus then Jesus when the letter J came about. Greek it's Iesous. Hebrew it's Jesha(s) the s is added for syntax and to denote masculinity. There was never a Jeshua just Jesus.
1
@oldgravy85 What would that be cause and effect?
1
@oldgravy85 I get it but it would be easier to put it that we only live in ONE dimension of time thus and so on... Because if we lived in two or more dimensions of time with a length and width then we'd have access to this current moment in infinity. But since we only exist in one dimension of time we cannot.
1
@n1al1ya13 Lol John Lennox even owned Dawkins a few times when debating him at Oxford. Quite a bright man.
1
@tommy9303 Hugh Ross would be great honestly because he addresses the naturalistic objections to Christianity like the unfounded notion the biblical text and message goes against science and nature.
1
Those are quite the assertions he is making with zero evidence or support. "Life is insignificant and with basic common conditions it just happens." The arrogance of man is disturbing.
1
@AmitSinghco That's quite an ignorant assumption when in fact their science likely led them to God. Which is extremely common in the astrophysics community for example, over 90% of them believe in God.
1
@__ Facinating given the paradigm in science is currently intelligent design and the foremost evidence we currently have not only tells us there must be a God(Big Bang) but that they are intelligent and caring(fine tuning).
1
Omiros 99 What fairytales? The biblical text has been falsified time and time again. Modern science and archeology has accelerated this several fold. If the biblical text was fairtales there would logically be a huge discrepancy between it and reality wouldn't it? Yes, any honest person would answer yes. Sorry but you are showing your ignorance once again on another topic.
1
Omiros 99 Einstein was a hypocrite. The coherent inherentness of the universe mindset which comes from knowing a logical God created the universe changed the course of humanity forever. You can thank Issac Newton for publishing that and attributing it to work and making it mainstream. That was what allowed start of modern science. Einstein wouldn't have done any work without that.
1
Omiros 99 If I took your brain and put it into a blender then put it back in your head would you make a coherent thought? Not a complicated concept to grasp... for most. But then again maybe you would make a more coherent comment than you have so far which wouldn't be hard lmao.
1
Omiros 99 That's what you choose to respond with after making a complete fool of yourself? lmao unreal
1
Omiros 99 Get some self-awareness and have some shame. You don't even know what plagiarism is, you've made a fool of yourself over and over.
1
The Word.
1
A God that created space and time, exists outside of it meaning said God has to already exist in at least two dimensions of time making them uncreated. God does not need a creator. This is what a astrophysicist gave for an answer to that question.
1
Correct, a decade ago. Not anymore. Borde and Vilenkin took Hawking and Penrose work on classic general relativity and expanded it as far as possible with 5 papers and concluded "all reasonable cosmic models are subject to the relentless grip of the space-time theorems." They gave examples where you wouldn't need an absolute beginning to space and time but in such models you wouldn't have life. The Christian implications of the Big Bang are now unavoidable =) The fine tuning argument is the nail in the coffin for Atheism since we know have the Big Bang theory solidified. Only one God can logically be linked to both of these which tell us there must be a personal God, Christianity and Jesus.
1
Impossible. There is literally only one dimension of time in this universe, you need at least two for what you say to happen.
1
The Big Bang literally tells us there was a creator though... and the fine tuning argument tells us that creator must be intelligent and caring lol. He was just flat out making some shit up. The Big Bang is literally a Christian concept lol.
1
We know the universe had an absolute beginning and isn't cyclical though...
1
Scientists have done the calculations for life to be possible in the universe. We are the only intelligent life in the universe, any other would have to come after us. We are as early as intelligent life could happen.
1
@DaddyOfTheSugarVariety You are telling me you are either being disingenuous or too low iq to investigate the topic after getting what you asked for from me. Quite pathetic on your part after making such authoritative claims earlier. I hope you realize that.
1
@DaddyOfTheSugarVariety Except I did back up my claims extensively. Like I said you are either being disingenuous or have the iq of the turnip. Which is it? Either way you have made a fool of yourself here which I clearly have to point out because you lack any self-awareness.
1
@DaddyOfTheSugarVariety Turnip it is.
1
@DaddyOfTheSugarVariety That's your takeaway and what you choose to respond with...
1
@jjm2948 We don't know how to completely quantify what the mind is, so it's hard to respond to that.
1
Ya pretty fundamental Christian doctrine. But not a shock they don't know.
1
@pookz3067 Untrue. We know there must be time outside of our space time because the causal agent beyond space and time aka God started the Big Bang. There was an action there, thus time. We know since God created this space time God isn't bound by our linear space time thus exists in two or more dimensions of time which with a length and a width means God is uncreated.
1
It all was... that's literally what the Big Bang theory tells us, causal agent beyond space and time. You know the Big Bang theory is a Christian concept right? lol
1
Nothing was an accident, the universe is beyond extremely fine tuned to orders of magnitude the human mind can't even comprehend...
1
It sounds like jibberish because he is dancing around all the points where the science directs us towards creationism like how the big bang tells us there must be a God(causal agent beyond space and time), fine tuning argument(if there is a causal agent beyond space and time they are intelligent and caring, game over we know there is).
1
Exactly that's the whole point haha. Freeman Dyson, one of the world’s foremost theoretical physicists, wrote: ‘The more I exam the universe and study the details of its architecture, the more evidence I find that the universe in some sense knew we were coming,’ The fine tuning argument is unavoidable at this point and it tells us the causal agent beyond space and time we know there is because of the Big Bang must be both intelligent and caring. So science is at a point where it is for all intents and purposes literally telling us God created the universe just for us lol.
1
To think there was actually a functional vaccine for lyme that worked. But it was only good for so long and people had to pay the 200-500 USD out of pocket something like that and the drug company never made enough money on it so they stopped making it. This was around early 2000's it was taken off the market. They really need to start making it again.
1
The Big Bang is a Christian concept you know that right? lol
1
@christopherbueno1580 Should be evident...
1
@christopherbueno1580 lmao no.
1
Jesus and the Holy Spirit are uncreated. Father, Word, Holy Spirit made the first covenant before the creation of the universe for the plan of redemption as stated in Romans 8, Ephesians 1. Then went on to create it. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all equal in power and position but not in relationship.
1
@sonofaangel1 lmao stop that's ridiculous you want me to believe what you are saying. That's some Jehovah witness or Moron cult ideology. Come on, it's 2020 you have no excuse, you already are using the internet. There is no way you can go from knowing sound fundamental doctrine to completely changing to cult ideology based on some scriptures like that you don't understand without even bothering to google a biblical scholar explaining such texts first for you. Also I literally just disproved that cult ideology with two very in depth passages talking about the trinity before the creation of the universe, ACTIVE in nature creating the first covenant between themselves and agreeing to it. That is why God said by myself in regards to the covenant he made it with himself(with in the trinity) so it would be eternal and unbroken because man cannot keep such a covenant for eternity. Also Colossians 1:15 there are several interpretations. One should use scripture to interpret scripture aka cross referencing and establish context at the same time. It goes a long way to avoid... heresy. Here is a good reference for many tough theological questions and another for many hard science and faith questions. https://alwaysbeready.com/evidence-for-jesus/ reasons.org
1
@sonofaangel1 Just keeping it real. You should know better. These cult ideologies are easily disproven.
1
Soon is quite relative lol.
1
@heythere6983 God never judges the wicked with the righteous. Those who accept Jesus as Lord and savior won't be around for the apocalypse unless you are late to the party.
1
@MsHojat We can see in the fossil record eyes never evolved. Virtually every type of eye all came into existence in a geological instant in the Cambrian explosion. Along with many other biological structures.
1
@thecatvirusgotme889 this is the same for many major features (mouth, anus, skeleton structure...) that appeared in the Cambrian explosion. massive issue for evolutionary theory.
1
Hell is a generalized term encompassing all of the 5 stated worlds below the earth in scripture which is where the confusion comes from.
1
That isn't true. Protestants are also told Catholics are our brothers and sisters in Christ. There are also messianic Jews. There are ignorant Protestants just like Catholics anyone can cherry pick what the idiots say. It's just the fact Catholics get a more unified message so it's easy to paint a picture such as you did.
1
No the righteous dead had to go to paradise which was a world below the earth since the work of the cross had not yet been done. Paradise now empty then got consumed by sheol the abode of the unrighteous dead.
1
The big bang is a Christian concept which tells us there must be a God, the scientist conveniently left that part of the big bang out when talking about it. Talk about being biased.
1
@ELDeViL71 Article written by astrophysicist Hugh Ross. "While most people think of the big bang as an explosion in space, scientists use the term to describe the beginning of space, time, matter and energy. The Bible describes a few key characteristics of the universe that scientists now have the ability to measure. At least five biblical writers describe an expanding universe (e.g. Job 9:8; Psalm 104:2; Isaiah 40:22; 42:5; 44:24; 45:12; 48:13; 51:13; Jeremiah 10:12; 51:15; and Zechariah 12:1). Scripture also talks about the constancy of the laws of physics, most explicitly stated in Jeremiah 33:25. Genesis 1:1 and Hebrews 11:3 declare that the universe began to exist (thus required a Beginner). Romans 8:18-21 speaks of a pervasive law of decay. These four characteristics—a singular beginning, cosmic expansion, and constant laws of physics including the law of decay—define a big bang universe. The Bible leaves many details such as the expansion rate and the strengths of the laws for us to measure. This correspondence between the biblical description of the universe, authored thousands of years ago, and the best scientific understanding of the universe provides strong evidence for supernatural inspiration of the words of the Bible."
1
Where do you get that one from? lol Lucifer held three positions, King and Priest over the earth in preAdamic times before his fall and was head of worship in heaven. He was second only to Jesus in positions held. I don't remember "angel of knowledge" anywhere.
1
It's almost like the bible spoke of the Big Bang long before lol.
1
@Shatamx I mean science has come to a point where we know there has to be a casual agent that is both intelligent and caring(fine tuning argument tells us this). So it's silly to say that isn't God. So it would be lying to say there isn't a God in 2020 with the science we have.
1
Sorry but you are an idiot. You flat out made that shit up. Lucifer was called morning star, Jesus was called bright morning star. Quite the distinction. Jesus isn't the light bearer he is the light. Lucifer and Jesus held the same position bringing revelation/truth to the inhabitants of the earth. The difference being Jesus is the truth, the light.
1
That's basic fundamental Christian doctrine almost everyone knows. Jesus died on the cross and went to hell for 3 days and rose on the third day fyi. You realize you kinda are making a fool out of yourself showing how out of touch you are with something so widely known lol.
1
@davidc8683 No just pointing out how you are trying to make Eddie Bravo sound like an idiot while ironically being one yourself.
1
What do you mean he is literally bringing up science that proves creationism and God. Just conveniently leaves out those details of the science he mentions because of his bias.
1
We are at the point where we only have God created it though. The universe was created by a causal agent beyond space and time(big bang) that is both intelligent and caring(fine tuning argument). That's "God" if there ever was one and all science is telling us right now. So...
1
@richarddunleavy3011 Casual agent beyond space and time, that has to be both intelligent and caring(fine tuning evidence shows this has to be the case). I mean call that whatever you want. God seems to be as good as any description lol. This is why they Big Bang was being researched to be refuted all the way till around 2009 where Borde and Vilenkin took Hawking and Penrose work on classic general relativity and expanded it as far as possible with 5 papers and concluded "all reasonable cosmic models are subject to the relentless grip of the space-time theorems." They gave examples where you wouldn't need an absolute beginning to space and time but in such models you wouldn't have life. So the Big Bang and Christian implications have been solidified since their work.
1
Yes indeed watch a video with Lawrence Krause but one with him debating Astrophysicist Hugh Ross or Oxford mathematician John Lennox who know these arguments and call out Krause when he oversteps in assertions. And point out the real blaringly obvious implications the research gives, hint hint the evidence when tallied on both sides is getting quite extensive on the intelligent design side specifically even Christian, while the naturalistic/Athiest side the evidence is so few and far between Athiests are stuck with speculations based on non-empirical arguments and that shows just how weak their case is.
1
That's why the multiverse has always been seen as a joke concept.
1
The Big Bang has huge Christian implications and is basically a solidified theory at this point, you realize that right? The science means it does make sense lol. Also the biblical text does not say God was in the sky, nor does "let there be light" mean that's when God created light fyi. Let is not a word of creation but permission.
1
@PAGoldenglovechamp06 Yahshua isn't his name, it's not biblical, it's not found in the bible. Jesus is his name and we can trace the two roots of the name all the way back to Moses and the name of God given at the burning bush I AM which was Jesus. Also Jesus was the name nailed to the cross with Jesus not Yahshua or any other name.
1
@PAGoldenglovechamp06 J wasn't a letter because the letter i was used for both the letter j and i. J was invented and used to take away the dual use of the letter i. I'm sorry but you don;t know what you are talking about. Here is a good article to explain everything in great detail. http://whyapostolic.com/html/jesus.html
1
@PierzStyx No they really aren't. They are all completely different names. Here is an in depth article going over extensively pretty much all the details on the subject if you are interested. http://whyapostolic.com/html/jesus.html
1
@PAGoldenglovechamp06 But they clearly did, . Hebrew it's Jesha(s) the s is added for syntax and to denote masculinity. Greek it's Iesous. English Iesus then Jesus when the letter J came about.
1
@richarddunleavy3011 lmao what in the world are you talking about with Nick? Also no God does not need a creator. You are arguing from a point of view where you have redefined god into something else. God at least the God of the bible that exists beyond space and time. He doesn't need a creator because he created our space time thus already exists in more than one dimension of time, and if those two or more dimensions of time have a length and a width that means God is uncreated. Astrophycist Hugh Ross explained it well in a debate. Here is a 2 minute clip. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vkD9BPTXKaM
1
We know that isn't true. Time had an absolute start point. Borde and Vilenkin took Hawking and Penrose work on classic general relativity and expanded it as far as possible with 5 papers and concluded "all reasonable cosmic models are subject to the relentless grip of the space-time theorems." They gave examples where you wouldn't need an absolute beginning to space and time but in such models you wouldn't have life.
1
Lucifer/Satan isn't in hell yet. After Armageddon he will be in the lake of fire forever. That hasn't happened yet.
1
It's one of the most validated. That's why Atheists hate it, the Christian implications are unavoidable.
1
@sagesarrazine6270 The point is no holy text gets the 12 major distinctions of the creation of the universe correct aside from the biblical text. The only one that got close was some babylonian religion that got 3 out of 12 correct is what one astrophysicist said in a talk. So sure some got something right here and there but nothing close.
1
@tylereby8309 Nah earth is earth, the heavens plural speaks of the rest of the universe and the third heaven which most think of as heaven the place of the righteous dead.
1
@ariancitaku2964 "There isn't a single similarity between the book of Gensis and the Big Bang." You can't actually be serious lol you clearly haven't even bothered to look. Authored by Astrophysicist Hugh Ross "While most people think of the big bang as an explosion in space, scientists use the term to describe the beginning of space, time, matter and energy. The Bible describes a few key characteristics of the universe that scientists now have the ability to measure. At least five biblical writers describe an expanding universe (e.g. Job 9:8; Psalm 104:2; Isaiah 40:22; 42:5; 44:24; 45:12; 48:13; 51:13; Jeremiah 10:12; 51:15; and Zechariah 12:1). Scripture also talks about the constancy of the laws of physics, most explicitly stated in Jeremiah 33:25. Genesis 1:1 and Hebrews 11:3 declare that the universe began to exist (thus required a Beginner). Romans 8:18-21 speaks of a pervasive law of decay. These four characteristics—a singular beginning, cosmic expansion, and constant laws of physics including the law of decay—define a big bang universe. The Bible leaves many details such as the expansion rate and the strengths of the laws for us to measure. This correspondence between the biblical description of the universe, authored thousands of years ago, and the best scientific understanding of the universe provides strong evidence for supernatural inspiration of the words of the Bible." https://reasons.org/explore/publications/rtb-101/big-bang
1
Still a baby. If the evil evolutionists had their way it would be trillions/quadrillions of years.
1
Creation theory is literally the only current valid scientific theory, you realize that right? Now that science has advanced, all of Atheists speculations are based on non-empirical arguments and that shows just how weak their case is. The Big Bang is unavoidable, we know there must be a causal agent beyond space and time that is both intelligent and caring(fine tuning argument tells us this). That's as much God as there could ever be lol.
1
Actually yes there had to be an absolute start. This holds true even for the ridiculous multiverse concept. So there is no escaping the reality of the causal agent beyond space and time that must both be intelligent and caring(fine tuning argument tells us this). Borde and Vilenkin took Hawking and Penrose work on classic general relativity and expanded it as far as possible with 5 papers and concluded "all reasonable cosmic models are subject to the relentless grip of the space-time theorems." They gave examples where you wouldn't need an absolute beginning to space and time but in such models you wouldn't have life.
1
Seems pretty ridiculous, it's about as relevant as a statue of Jesus being teleported from a star trek spaceship.
1
If they buried the whole site then obviously they never left it in a hurry and time had passed and they were that meticulous to bury it so it isnt a far stretch they would have cleaned out the place or packed up at least.
1
Lucifer doesn't mean morning star, morning star was another name given for Lucifer. Lucifer means light bearer. Two different names for same person, the names however aren't the same. Jesus is the morning star yet not light bearer he is the light. There is distinction between the two terms.
1
We have the science, the big bang is unavoidable now. Borde and Vilenkin took Hawking and Penrose work on classic general relativity and expanded it as far as possible with 5 papers and concluded "all reasonable cosmic models are subject to the relentless grip of the space-time theorems." They gave examples where you wouldn't need an absolute beginning to space and time but in such models you wouldn't have life.
1
The big bang literally tells us God always existed lol.
1
The way she talks makes her sound like a cult recruiter which is kinda creepy.
1
I think the point is using the word is in poor taste given it's connotation.
1
Correct the name Lucifer was defunct when Lucifer fucked up and thought he could take on his creator.
1
God knows.
1
Except it's also in poor taste given the context of the history following.
1
@Netero770 That's quite the way to say you are an absolute moron and made a fool of yourself and are ignorant of the subject you blowhardedly spoke with authority on.
1
Because he also was the first to sin, corrupted a third of the angels, introduced sin to the earth and corrupted the whole earth and it's inhabitants and the fall of a race(demons) which caused God to have to judge the whole earth, introduced sin and corrupted God's new creation man and thus caused the death of billions more. Maybe that's reason why.
1
Billions of years is a baby universe fyi. The evil evolutionists wanted it to be trillions/quadrillions of years since that's what's needed theoretically for even the possibility for evolution to give us all the life we have today on earth. Now you know.
1
The Big Bang is a Christian concept. It literally shows there must be a God... It's ridiculous how this is such a well kept fact. Clearly in part because of what we see here a disingenuous scientist that refuses to tell the whole truth because of it's implications.
1
@horsepower523 No because that's not what the biblical text says not even close. Anyone would think that's ridiculous. There is no beard, no man, no heaven during creation, no snap your fingers instant creation aside from the initiation of the big bang. The bible says the seven days are long periods of time, we are still in day seven lol... The cosmic creation, fossil record, and evidence all around us we've learned from the advance of science all point towards a God. You clearly don't understand the current paradigm is intelligent design not naturalism. It's ironic because Atheists used to always talk about the God of the gaps and how science was doing away with God, but the fact is it never did but it's becoming the opposite Atheism is barely hanging on. Now that science has advanced, all of Athiests speculations are based on non-empirical arguments and that shows just how weak their case is. The real travesty is for over a decade all this evidence and it's implications doesn't get discussed as much as it should so the general public is oblivious to just how much the tables have turned.
1
@horsepower523 Nope, no wonder you take such strong issue if you think that's what it says. Might want to read it yourself if you want to argue the topic. Here is what the bible says about the big bang for example a Christian concept fyi. Fyi nothing comes close to Christianity, it stands alone. The only other faith that comes close to getting the major events of the big bang correct is an ancient babylonian religion that got 3/12 correct, Christianity gets 12/12. While most people think of the big bang as an explosion in space, scientists use the term to describe the beginning of space, time, matter and energy. The Bible describes a few key characteristics of the universe that scientists now have the ability to measure. At least five biblical writers describe an expanding universe (e.g. Job 9:8; Psalm 104:2; Isaiah 40:22; 42:5; 44:24; 45:12; 48:13; 51:13; Jeremiah 10:12; 51:15; and Zechariah 12:1). Scripture also talks about the constancy of the laws of physics, most explicitly stated in Jeremiah 33:25. Genesis 1:1 and Hebrews 11:3 declare that the universe began to exist (thus required a Beginner). Romans 8:18-21 speaks of a pervasive law of decay. These four characteristics—a singular beginning, cosmic expansion, and constant laws of physics including the law of decay—define a big bang universe. The Bible leaves many details such as the expansion rate and the strengths of the laws for us to measure. This correspondence between the biblical description of the universe, authored thousands of years ago, and the best scientific understanding of the universe provides strong evidence for supernatural inspiration of the words of the Bible.
1
@horsepower523 No everything I've said is in line with the thought test it and see where the evidence leads. Christianity isn't about blind faith, in fact Paul says test everything and hold fast to that which is true. What's new age about proper reading comprehension? This is all in the KJV bible nothing new there. It only seems "new" to you because you are ignorant of what the text says. The big bang cosmic creation concept can be traced to biblical scholars hundreds of years ago, this isn't new. You realize the big bang was heavily contested for decades something like 40-50 years by largely Atheist academics because of it's Christian implications. It was only around 2009 when Borde and Vilenkin(both I believe atheists looking to refute the big bang and find a loophole where we don't need it, seeing where the evidence leads like I said earlier) took Hawking and Penrose work on classic general relativity and expanded it as far as possible with 5 papers and concluded "all reasonable cosmic models are subject to the relentless grip of the space-time theorems." They gave examples where you wouldn't need an absolute beginning to space and time but in such models you wouldn't have life. Which solidified the big bang theory and of course it's Christian implications. I didn't notice that question. It's an old question it's actually irrelevant. It's redifining god to be bound by our space time. So perhaps that argument is true for Hinduism or some other religions but the Christian claim like we see with the big bag is God or the causal agent is beyond our space time. Not in our linear time. That God since they created our singular linear one dimension of time must exist already in two or more dimensions of time. If one of those has a length and the other width that God or whatever is uncreated. Hugh Ross an astrophysicist explains this well in a debate, here is a 2 minute clip. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vkD9BPTXKaM So in conclusion yes test the claims, and in regards to statements of science we can test Chrsitianity comes out on top(among alot else) and it's not even close. Which faith gives us the big bang, and fine tuning implications of an intelligent caring God. Well which has a personal caring God, and gets the claims of the start of the universe and big bang correct, Christianity nothing else comes close.
1