The Walking Rocks

[Mr.Bride]

That is precisely the problem, Martin. If people say, "God did it" and it later turns out that a meteor hit the area, those people have made God look rather dumb.

If any evil been done in the land, who did it?

 

[Forsakenone]

.Anyone want to guess who put the rocks there ?
God? Devil? UFO? Magic? Bigfoot? Nephilim?

So are you saying all of them put the rocks there???????????????????

Of course not.

These are some questions I would have, you might be seeing something that I am not seeing. Anyways, I am not going to say anyone's opinion is wrong when I don't even know for a fact these stones are not a hoax, seems certain information is missing; it would help if they had a documented account of the movement so one could tell what the weather was, how much the stoned moved over how much time etc.

then it must be by the motion [life] from the finger [energy] of God [truth]

So isn't motion from energy a truth?

 

[Tex]

So do tell, how did the primordial atom condense to create that Big Bang as all space, matter, time and energy rapidly to form the expanse and matter of the universe in the beginning?

I don't know. I wasn't there. The point of science isn't to answer everything. It is to answer materially. If you would like metaphysics, that is a different discussion.

But if I say in the beginning the finger of God created the expanse and the earth, then they give you some rights to hurl insults? But the common evolutionist response is that the two are totally different.

The finger of God did create the expanse. I don't deny it. God is the cause of everything. However, don't assume that it's magic. If you were to say "Existence is contingent upon a God" you would have a much better answer.

Since you like quoting Neil deGrasse Tyson.-- There is no shame in not knowing. The problem is when you claim nobody else does either to fill the vacuum of your own ignorance.

I had to google the name to be reminded who this was. And that statement is garbage. There are plenty of things no one knows. But I will say that we have the potential to figure everything out. If you would like to include God in the equation, there are plenty of things only 3 people know. If this was supposed to be a display of arrogance saying, "I know how the universe began and you are simply trying to fill the vacuum of your own ignorance", then shame on you.

14.5 billion years ago, yet energy can not be created nor destroyed so then the primordial atom must have been around a lot longer than 14.5 billion years. But science says that the know for a fact. But what was the medium in which this primordial atom existed in before the Big Bang? So the universe, which is basically what the primordial atom was, just merely in a condensed state. Not a clue how it got there but it just magically got there and just magically made the expanse and matter. Let's see expanse couldn't be substituted for the heaven nor and the earth and all the celestial bodies which formed from matter huh. Yeah, no similarities whatsoever. :lol:

Since the primordial atom contained all the space, matter, time and energy- then what pray tell caused the external force to act upon the primordial atom in order for it to condense to cause it to explode rapidly -- since the first law of motion states that a body at rest stays at rest while a body in motion stays in motion unless an external force acts upon it.

Here's why that's a bad explanation. You're talking about a primordial atom. First, you need to specify that you don't mean hydrogen, because that didn't exist until well after the big bang. What you mean is "indivisible zero-deminsional object". This is the starting point I assume you're trying to make, reading a bit into your writing. Second, due to Einstein, it is entirely reasonable that the "indivisible 0-D object" did not exist in a medium. It would be equivalent to asking "what does the universe exist in?" It doesn't exist in anything; it is a self-contained system. Finally, Newton is not the physicist you need to be using. You need Einstein. Newton's equations do not work for large bodies of matter like, say, an entire galaxy or black holes. Therefore, "external forces" does not apply. For example, black holes constantly spray gamma rays into the universe without any external cause. That's simply how a black hole works internally.

Alright, so the solution, easier said than done, is to break from physics and move to metaphysics. Instead of asking, "what caused the big bang?", the question changes to "Why is there something to go *BANG*?" This leads the question away from material causation, which could theoretically regress infinitely, to existential causation, where infinite regression is logically absurd. Think about a human being: "Where do you come from?". Materially, you can trace those atoms back forever and a day. However, if you ask "when did you begin to exist?", it's ridiculous to say, "before my conception, I existed as an egg and a sperm". That's where you need to go with this.

 

[Forsakenone]

The point of science isn't to answer everything.
The finger of God did create the expanse. I don't deny it. God is the cause of everything. However, don't assume that it's magic.

Your previous quote: What you just proposed is called "God of the gaps". Do not ever believe that junk. Science cannot explain something, so therefore God? That is how every pagan religion began. I can't explain lightning, so Zues. I can't explain volcaneos, so Mars must be mad. One day, scientists will find out how the rocks move, and God will have less gaps for you to fit Him into.
So who is going to fill in the gaps? God.... {come on now, you got to see the humor in that response}


If God is the cause of everything then if there is one thing that God didn't cause, then that statement would be incorrect, is that correct?

I don't, it's magical!

I had to google the name to be reminded who this was. And that statement is garbage. There are plenty of things no one knows. But I will say that we have the potential to figure everything out. If you would like to include God in the equation, there are plenty of things only 3 people know.

If possible to exclude God that causes all things then are you one or three?

If this was supposed to be a display of arrogance saying, "I know how the universe began and you are simply trying to fill the vacuum of your own ignorance", then shame on you.

God is the cause of everything.

you mean is "indivisible zero-deminsional object".

This thread wasn't about you, or rather your off topic comments, but you are more than welcome to offer you opinion about the topic, look forward to it....

 

[Tex]

@ForsakenOne

I'm sorry, but I don't understand the large majority of that post. I'll address what I think some things mean.

"So who is going to fill in the gaps? God.... {come on now, you got to see the humor in that response}"

Haha, I read this in Napolean Dynamite's voice.


"If God is the cause of everything then if there is one thing that God didn't cause, then that statement would be incorrect, is that correct?"

If God is the cause of everything and if we find something that God is not the cause of, then yes, it refutes "God is the cause of everything". But God is cause the atoms in the computer you're looking at to exist, and therefore is the cause of you being able to reply. God is the "primary cause" of everything. There are also "secondary causes", such as you are a secondary cause by pressing the send button to reply.

"I don't, it's magical!"

I don't get this in the least bit.

"If possible to exclude God that causes all things then are you one or three?"

I have no idea what this means. I am one person? God is three persons? I don't really know what you're asking. Is this an anti-trinitarian comment?

"This thread wasn't about you, or rather your off topic comments, but you are more than welcome to offer you opinion about the topic, look forward to it...."

I wasn't under the impression that my comments were the least bit off topic. We're not talking about rocks, yes, but we are talking about the "finger of God". I'm pretty sure that is 100% on topic. But I may have misunderstood this statement too.

 

[Forsakenone]

It was more hyperbole, so any theories?

 

[Tex]

Sands shift all the time. I would think that the sands shifting moves the rocks to a fro. But I really am not interested so much in the rocks or their movement.