Posted this on Facebook with the text "No one can read that and not think that science is friggin' awesome," and got the following as a response. I don't know how to respond to this respectfully but informatively (I'm new at this) but I feel like I absolutely have to because this person frequently takes advantage of the "I'm a Christian so I can tell you EXACTLY how I feel but since you're an atheist, stfu!" crap.

"Very interesting, and beautiful! The complexity and awesomeness of science is so thorouhly amazing, that it always brings me back to the Creator of it all......God!! It couldnt just happen, No! It is immensely fantastic, and terrific, so it couldnt just be here...No! I love the beauty and how interesting it is, which always makes me want to be thankful, and I can only thank one Person...God! It all points us to Him! Thanks for hearing me share my piece! I appreciate science deeply! ♥"

I do find it ironic that the very short article even said that this is how life originated in our own system as well and yet she says that it couldn't happen without God. Anyone who believes the Bible cannot possibly "appreciate science." Argh.

Tags: bang, big, creationism, the

Views: 1286

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I thought about it for a long time but I guess it just got to me that she seems to be under the impression that it's okay for her to spread her beliefs around but not vise versa. In the future I may just have to do this. She did say "I love God, I can't just stop talking about him! You talk about people you love!" :/

Very beautiful image. The universe and its mechanics are truly amazing! Science is frickin' awesome!!

As for the comment, if I were in your position, I might leave it, if it didn't bother me too much, and sometimes it doesn't. I try to be respectful of my friends' choices as long as they respect mine. But if it's somebody who seems to be trying to push their ideas on me all the time, I'd delete it.

I think what I'm trying to get at is that it really depends on how YOU feel about this person. I've recently purged my Facebook page of most Christians, actually, because I didn't feel like they really respected my point of view. So, if this is the case for you, then you may want to consider if you really want to keep this person on your list. Does he or she only comment with religious things, or are there comments being made that aren't associated with religion? If the person only ever seems to comment to talk about their religion, and they know that isn't something you care to hear, then that isn't being very respectful of you or what you believe in, and you may want to consider if they're worth keeping around. Those decisions can be really hard, though. Took me years to finally get the gumption to take the ax to my friends list!

Woohoo! I sure thought so! :D

I almost left it, but I've started to resent this person a bit since I told her of my leaving Christianity and she seemed very judgmental and ignorant and just started proselytizing away of course. Unfortunately (or fortunately, however you want to look at it) she doesn't only post religious comments (although plenty of shares/posts of her own, which I have unfollowed) and she's a family member I care deeply about. I'm sure I'll come to delete certain people as they make themselves known though. And yes, it's very difficult to express the "Either we have civil debates where we can both voice a "side" or neither of us does. But don't shove it on me and expect not to be shoved back." thing.

When it's a family member, it makes it worlds harder. :(

Rachel, please believe me, there's no offense intended, but did you know that your name, in Hebrew, means, "female sheep"? But in a good way, I mean, we're talking, cute, fluffy, all good stuff --

pax vobiscum,
archaeopteryx
www.in-His-own-image.com

You have to learn that even Richard Dawkins has given up trying to talk to these people. If they are allowed to turn to the bible and don't even try to have factual discussion you are in a hopeless situation.

Then, you can just be polite and go away or use Hitch arguments and use absurdity of their own beliefs to show how ridiculous their nonsense.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nIRJVmZ4K8&feature=autoplay&...

I'm starting to get that impression. Unfortunately for me I'm one of those "But you have to see what I'm talking about! How can you not see it?!" people. :/

Yes and no, Kevin -

Once you bring up the BB, the next question is, "What caused/created the BB?" To this, we regularly respond with, "Well, who created god?" And they come back with, "No one created god, god just always was." And so an impasse is reached they can't prove he was, we can't prove he wasn't.

I'd like to throw in a little something that could break that impasse, at least until they develop a stock response to it. Einstein established that space and time are inseparable, kinda like bacon and eggs (sorry, Vegans), and proponents of the BB theory, which now even the Vatican accepts (but says GodDidIt), that both space and time - space/time - were compressed into that infinitesimally tiny singularity. Therefore, the Universe "just always was," as well!

"How do you figure?" you may well ask (but I beat you to it) - if space/time sprang out of the singularity, then there was no "time" before the singularity - space and time began together, simultaneously, at the instant of the BB, and since "always was" implies the use of time, and since time and the universe began simultaneously, then for as long as there has been time, the universe has always existed. Which also implies that creating something takes time, if only an instant, so god couldn't have created the universe, because he wouldn't have had time to do it!

Yeah, I know - it takes a second to wrap your head around it - just think how long it will take THEM!

pax vobiscum,
archaeopteryx
www.in-His-own-image.com

This also depends on the curvature of spacetime.  From my understanding, a big bang type singularity is a mathematical certainty given certain assumptions about the universe which may or may not be correct.  One of those assumptions relates to the curvature of spacetime.

If spacetime is open and flat, like a piece of paper, then there definitely was a singularity.

If spacetime is closed and curved, like the surface of a sphere, then there was no singularity because spacetime curves in on itself long "beforeafter" any singularity would have happened. By that I mean that if you keep going back in time far enough, spacetime curves and you end up going forward in time, never reaching the singularity because it never actually happened.  By analogy, imaging getting in a hovercraft, pointing north and going in a straight line. Eventually, you'll end up at the south pole but you'll never, ever reach Polaris.

It is ironic then when creationists argue against the big bang theory as they are arguing against the model that has anything that could even be considered a 'creation' event. The alternative is a persistent universe with no possibility of having been created, thus no possibility of a creator.

And yes, I find myself saying things like "there was never a time when there was nothing" in these kinds of discussions.

Of course, in the BB model, there IS no space/time until the BB, curved or otherwise.

Hence the 'creation' event.  While if spacetime is curved there was always time and no big bang.  By extension, if there was a big bang, spacetime is not curved and closed.

In either case, there was never a time when there was nothing.

I'm not sure how to reply to all of this but I grasp your concept and even if for nothing else it might get people to shut up for a little while while they try to figure it out. lol Thank you, guys! I appreciate it.

RSS

Services we love!

We are in love with our Amazon

Book Store!

Gadget Nerd? Check out Giz Gad!

Advertise with ThinkAtheist.com

In need a of a professional web site? Check out the good folks at Clear Space Media

© 2014   Created by umar.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service