"theism" here means "belief in a god" or "the worldview that an intelligent designer created the universe and life.
" ("god" here means a being with a mind who initiated and/or wound-up the universe, and designed life on earth)the most common claim that i see atheists making on twitter, is that "no evidence" exists in support of belief in a god.this post will remove any excuse atheists have for claiming "no evidence exists" in support of an initiator.
atheists can still reject this evidence as "weak," but they cannot truthfully say it does not exist.now, it is true that we do not have "observable, repeatable, falsifiable, empirical, scientific" evidence conclusively proving that an initiator exists, but we do have many lines of philisophical, experiential, and logical evidence.and... here... we... go:1:) many leading scientists, including stephen hawking, say that the space-time-matter universe had a beginning at the singularity/big bang.
Viviane, Yes, Stephen Hawking does say those things. They are found here on his own webpage:http://www.hawking.org.uk/the-beginning-of-time.html
No, he didn't. Read the paper and know what the words in it mean when you read it.
Your first premise is wrong, therefore any conclusion you make based on it is wrong.
"theism" here means "belief in a god" or "the worldview that an intelligent designer created the universe and life.
" ("god" here means a being with a mind who initiated and/or wound-up the universe, and designed life on earth)the most common claim that i see atheists making on twitter, is that "no evidence" exists in support of belief in a god.this post will remove any excuse atheists have for claiming "no evidence exists" in support of an initiator.
atheists can still reject this evidence as "weak," but they cannot truthfully say it does not exist.now, it is true that we do not have "observable, repeatable, falsifiable, empirical, scientific" evidence conclusively proving that an initiator exists, but we do have many lines of philisophical, experiential, and logical evidence.and... here... we... go:1:) many leading scientists, including stephen hawking, say that the space-time-matter universe had a beginning at the singularity/big bang.
The existence of a "Cosmic Mathematician" (Mind beyond our universe) would explain how a universal working system of mathematics just happened to be built into the universe.
Interesting premise. Explain please, how a "Cosmic Mathematician" came into existence to develop these mathematics.
"theism" here means "belief in a god" or "the worldview that an intelligent designer created the universe and life.
" ("god" here means a being with a mind who initiated and/or wound-up the universe, and designed life on earth)the most common claim that i see atheists making on twitter, is that "no evidence" exists in support of belief in a god.this post will remove any excuse atheists have for claiming "no evidence exists" in support of an initiator.
atheists can still reject this evidence as "weak," but they cannot truthfully say it does not exist.now, it is true that we do not have "observable, repeatable, falsifiable, empirical, scientific" evidence conclusively proving that an initiator exists, but we do have many lines of philisophical, experiential, and logical evidence.and... here... we... go:1:) many leading scientists, including stephen hawking, say that the space-time-matter universe had a beginning at the singularity/big bang.
Science has never observed life naturally developing from non-life on its own, therefore, the scientific position would be to assume that it did not naturally happen on its own (This points to either an Initiator/God or to extraterrestrials seeding and engineering life on earth and beginning evolution).
Science is a process and method for obtaining information about the natural word. It cannot observe anything. Since you don't know what science is or how it works, any claims you make about it are drawn from a lack of knowledge and therefore useless.
"theism" here means "belief in a god" or "the worldview that an intelligent designer created the universe and life.
" ("god" here means a being with a mind who initiated and/or wound-up the universe, and designed life on earth)the most common claim that i see atheists making on twitter, is that "no evidence" exists in support of belief in a god.this post will remove any excuse atheists have for claiming "no evidence exists" in support of an initiator.
atheists can still reject this evidence as "weak," but they cannot truthfully say it does not exist.now, it is true that we do not have "observable, repeatable, falsifiable, empirical, scientific" evidence conclusively proving that an initiator exists, but we do have many lines of philisophical, experiential, and logical evidence.and... here... we... go:1:) many leading scientists, including stephen hawking, say that the space-time-matter universe had a beginning at the singularity/big bang.
The universe and earth appear to be very unlikely and improbably fine-tuned to support life. Even Stephen Hawking and other leading scientists admit this.
No they don't.
Second point is wrong, any conclusion based on this is therefore also wrong.
"theism" here means "belief in a god" or "the worldview that an intelligent designer created the universe and life.
" ("god" here means a being with a mind who initiated and/or wound-up the universe, and designed life on earth)the most common claim that i see atheists making on twitter, is that "no evidence" exists in support of belief in a god.this post will remove any excuse atheists have for claiming "no evidence exists" in support of an initiator.
atheists can still reject this evidence as "weak," but they cannot truthfully say it does not exist.now, it is true that we do not have "observable, repeatable, falsifiable, empirical, scientific" evidence conclusively proving that an initiator exists, but we do have many lines of philisophical, experiential, and logical evidence.and... here... we... go:1:) many leading scientists, including stephen hawking, say that the space-time-matter universe had a beginning at the singularity/big bang.
Many leading scientists, including Stephen Hawking, say that the space-time-matter universe had a beginning at the Singularity/Big Bang. Time itself did not exist, and then it came into existence.
No they don't.
First premise is wrong, therefore anything based on this is wrong. I don't even need to read the rest of your post.
over the years, i have seen a change in heart with the country i grew up in and the general view of what they perceive as how everyone should view things in relation to morality.
a strictly religious country for centuries now forever changed within a short number of years.
i have also seen the viewpoint on this site gradually change in many ways.
For me, Gods standards NEVER change. I fully believe that Gods word was inspired and that his moral standards are for our (mankind's) benefit....absolutely. Wake up people The world is upside down in their thinking.
So you're advocating for slavery, genocide, ethnic cleansing, women having to marry their rapist, women being property, eating shrimp and bacon being a crime, etc.?
Goodbye everyone. This is my very last post.
Hey, maybe miracles do happen.
in 1897, j.j. thomson discovered the electron.
this was the first constituent part of the atom which, for 2,000 years, was thought to be indivisible.
today, we know of 18 elemental particles following the recent discovery of the higgs boson, the so-called god particle.. back in 1897, most people believed in god because there weren't even any theories as to how the universe came into being.
There is no end to the physical universe it goes on forever. It must go on forever because if it had an end there would be something beyond that end and mankind would do all he could to get beyond that something.
So, you're very first sentence uses, at best, specious and speculative reasoning that relies upon conjecture and opinion. Any reasoning based that is equally useless.
in 1897, j.j. thomson discovered the electron.
this was the first constituent part of the atom which, for 2,000 years, was thought to be indivisible.
today, we know of 18 elemental particles following the recent discovery of the higgs boson, the so-called god particle.. back in 1897, most people believed in god because there weren't even any theories as to how the universe came into being.
august 2015 awake .
quote in title taken from article footnote.. anyone have information on who gene hwang and yan-der hsuuw in the article are?.
why do they repeatedly state that apes turned to humans when that's not what evolutionists teach at all?.
There are many, many ways that the Bible can harmonize with and complement modern science.
Name three, please.
what is god's spirit?
.
i ask this of those who believe in god.
you are always asking questions of believers and here I ask you (and other interlopers on this thread - myself included I guess) a simple question and you tell me to look it up.
I asked what was meant in the context the word was used because,in the context of the discussion, what is meant by "significant deviation" isn't clear. Deviations can vary by order of magnitude depending on context. Hence the request for clarification.
I don't ask people to define words from a dictionary, I ask for the contextual nuance critical to understanding what they are saying.
So I repeat what do you (and anyone who does not believe in god) think process means?
You're still free to look it up. There is no contextual nuance.
