I don't know how it happens, but sometimes I type things trying to speak the truth in a loving way, and then I read it afterwards and it comes out really agressive. Sorry if it seems that way, it's not my intention.

Lucky G said :

Doesn't it also make sense that the proper environmental conditions happened to arise, and life leapfrogged itself to accommodate to these conditions, adapting when said conditions changed, leaving us (all life on this planet) where we are today?

No. Only life begets life.

For every piece of information pointing to this or that theory, there is something indicating against it.
I've heard statements like this before, and I really think people don't think about this very much. Sometimes the information is inconclusive, and this can be misleading. But what we know for certain, those thing we can scientifically anylize here today, we can compare to theories available and use to build upon those premises. There are many verifable evidences of creation. The problem is, we don't know everything, and for many until they see with thier eyes God creating the universe when he takes them back in time to see it, they won't believe. And maybe they wouldn't believe even then. But if a person discredits creationism because of it's lack of evidence ("were you there???"), then it would indeed prove to be overwhelming hypocricy on the part of the evolutionist.


cannabis4for20 said:

That articles answers a question with facts that can't be proven. They state that god created the universe, without any facts to back up that statement. But they do not explain who created God, they just say that god always was, without having a beginning. But everything has to have a beginning. Even if it didn't though, you could just use that same argument to say that the matter which separated after the big bang just always was.
It does indeed answer with facts. The question you asked was about who created God or where did God comes from. The article directly answers that from a biblical perspective. If God exists, how would you expect someone to show you eternity??? Should I just send it to you in a box or something?

The article pointed out that everything that has a beginning has a cause. The universe had a beginning and therefore must have had a first cause. God does not need a cause because he never had a beginning. He's been forever and ever.

The article also uses other scientific facts to show that the universe cannot expand forever, that according to the laws of thermodynamics the universe cannot continue forever it will slow down to a dead stop, even in an oscillating universe "Each one of the hypothetical cycles would exhaust more and more usable energy. This means every cycle would be larger and longer than the previous one, so looking back in time there would be smaller and smaller cycles. So the multicycle model could have an infinite future, but can only have a finite past."

It points out that "there are many lines of evidence showing that there is far too little mass for gravity to stop expansion and allow cycling in the first place" and that "the universe still has only about half the mass needed for re-contraction"


Also, very importantly it points out "that Finally, no known mechanism would allow a bounce back after a hypothetical â??big crunchâ??.7 As the late Professor Beatrice Tinsley of Yale explained, even though the mathematics says that the universe oscillates, â??There is no known physical mechanism to reverse a catastrophic big crunch.â?? Off the paper and into the real world of physics, those models start from the Big Bang, expand, collapse, and thatâ??s the end.8"


It points out several other things as well. I guess it's easy for you to blow off the evidence I've provided when the material is off site.

Listen, according to the laws of the universe, according to every scientific experiment ever conducted by a human being, every effect has a cause. But that only applies in the physical universe. God is outside of time. He created time. He's beyond our full comprehension. People are saying how it's all too much for us to grasp. Well there it is. God is too much for us too grasp. But at the same time in his wisdom and his all mighty power he gave us a comprehension of God.

Even if it didn't though, you could just use that same argument to say that the matter which separated after the big bang just always was.
no. because ultimately the cause of the big bang would have a previous cause and it would in the end have to have an original cause. That's just the natural laws that exist. If we had no understanding of natural laws then that might be a consideration. But according to all of the scientific evidence ever recorded, every cause has an effect.

And I would really like someone to answer the quote about the universe not being a banana. Particularly this statement:

This universe canâ??t have any properties to explain its preferential coming into existence, because it wouldnâ??t have any properties until it actually came into existence."

Think of the order in the universe. All the natural laws that hold things together and keep everything from being absolutel chaos. I think we take that for granted. If there is no God keeping order in the heavens and the universe just happened, then there is no reason to believe that the coming to be of the universe is any more to be expected than the big bang producing a gallon of ice cream.


vej33 said:

God was really bad at physics...

if he really did mean to create us all in his image, and make sure that His word was spread far and beyond, why would he create a place where only 1 planet out of an infinite number could sustain the life that would spread "the gospel"?
Because he only wanted the gospel spread upon that one planet!

All those aliens you see in star wars can't be made in God's image. Only we are made in God's image. There's no reason to spread us all over the universe. God put us here, and it started with two people in the middle of the universe. that sounds right to me.

Billionfold said:

Does the bible say anything about the sun engulfing us in the distant future?
No. And even if that were really to happen, it wouldn't be for another 5 billion years if I remember correctly.

sombrero said:

And of course time is something without substance, so doesn't really exist.

I'll ignore the other things you said, but I will mention that time is in fact finite, and I suggest you study up on some physics.

snowblind said:

there are two major theories, that firstly the universe will expand indefinately, this is somewhat beyond the human's minds conception but it is probable.

the other maybe more believable is that the universe will expand till it reaches a criticle mass, then it will implode back upon itself.
I don't know about the first one, but I know as far as the second, this is not possible. Take a look at the page I liked to earlier which points our that there is too little mass for gravity to stop expansion.
natureisawesome Reviewed by natureisawesome on . wtf happened before the big bang? i was high one day and was thinking about the big bang and stuff. and thought what happened before the big bang? scientist always talk about the big bang and everything that happened after that, but none talk about before the big bang? Rating: 5