Which Takes More Faith?

[heartstrings]

Which takes more faith; to believe that the Universe spontaneously generated itself or that it always existed?

 

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2947967/Did-Big-Bang-happen-Quantum-model-predicts-universe-NO-beginning-explain-dark-energy.html

[MountainChristian]

I need to check his math. 

[Ukulelemike]

Some of you might have heard this before:

 

Some scientists wanted to do a study of a frog's jumping ability, so they caught a nice big frog, put it on a table, and said "Jump, Frog, Jump!"

 

The frog jumped 60 inches!

 

Impressed, they cut off one leg, then said, "Jump, Frog, Jump!"

 

The frog jumped 48 inches!

 

Again, impressed, they cut off another leg and shouted "Jump, Frog, Jump!"

 

This time, the frog jumped only 36 inches.

 

Still, they were impressed at his ability, so they cut off a third leg and shouted "Jump, Frog, Jump!"

 

The frog jumped, but only about 24 inches.

 

Still encouraged, they cut off the final leg and shouted "Jump, Frog, Jump!"

 

The frog just sat on the table, unmoving. So they shouted louder, "JUMP, FROG, JUMP!" but the frog just sat. They shouted one more time, even louder, "JUMP FROG JUMP!!!" but still he sat.

 

So the scientists sat and discussed the experient, and in full agreement, they gave their findings: "With each leg lost, the frog's jumping distance lessened by 20%. However, after cutting off the final leg, we were shocked to find that he did not jump 12" when told to jump, no matter how loudly we commanded, as OBservations would have expected.

 

Therefore, our conclusion is, a frog with no legs goes deaf. 

 

Good OBservations, bad conclusion.

 

That being said, this study is the same thing. Time and again, the Big bang has been proven to be a big dud. The coveted Higgs Bosin particle they sought to find to prove the big bang, through the Large hedron Collider, instead proved the very particle would have caused the galaxy to immediately implode upon itself and prevent any big expansion.

  Then, recently, scientists who thought they had discovered proof of the original expansion that took place at the moment of the big bang, turned out to be just some space dust.

 

So, faced with the reality that the BB is extremely flawed and impossible, they look at all the evidence against them and declare, "Well, since there can't be a big bang, then the universe must just have, well, always been."

 

Good OBservation   Bad Conclusion.

 

Jump, Frog, Jump!

 

 

edited to add: thanks to Kent Hovind for the frog story

[heartstrings]

Actually, their conclusion is already decided: "there can't be a God" so they continually search.

[Ukulelemike]

Actually, their conclusion is already decided: "there can't be a God" so they continually search.

I suspect that the Hubble telescope could find a patch of space where the words, "Created by Jehovah God 6,000 Years Ago", and they would still reject God.

 

Of course, in the milennial reign of Christ, many will still reject Christ, though He sits on a throne in Jerusalem in the flesh-they will see HIm and hear His wisdom, see His power, yet still rebel, and when Satan is loosed again, they will willingly join with him, to their own destruction.

 

So its no wonder that, though their theories fall apart before their eyes, they go further into impossibility to try to maintain their unbelief. They will ignore and sweep aside even established scientific laws. I recall Steven Hawking saying something to the effect that the universe HAD to exist, so it HAD to create itself. because it had to be done, it is proof enough that it did it.  Pray for Steven Hawking-he truly needs to be saved, and would be a great ally. Someone who stares at the stars for so long MUST  eventually see God there, for the heavens declare His glory.

 

Let me wander for a moment:  I recently saw a Monty Python skit, (yes, not the best people to watch, but it was clean), a, updated rendition of the song The Universe Song". In it, it goes on to describe, not very accurately, even according to science, the dimensions of the universe and the speed of light and such. A very cathcy song, but not very accurate.

 

At the end of the song, some scientist commences to extoll on the prOBlems with the song, the bad science, etc. Meanwhile, while he complains, you see in the background a small vehicle of some sort driving up behind him. In a moment you see it is Steven Hawking zipping up behind him, until he reaches the scientist and runs him down, saying in his rOBot voice, "You are too pendantic!" And the n he zips off, and in a second, he is flying off into the sky and through space, singing the song in his rOBot voice.

 

My point being, the man seems to have a great sense of humor, having also voiced on the Simpsons as himself, punching Homer in the face with a boxing glove that comes out of his chair.  He seems like a really nice guy. It would be great to see him get saved. For more reasons than that, of course-these things just humanize him, a man who is hard to see as human in his condition--I know that sounds bad, but that's just truth.

 

Okay, I will cease my bunny trail--let's return now to our regularly scheduled thread!

[Alan]

I read the article on, 'Quantum."

 

I've heard, and read, most of the theories discussed in the article and came to the conclusion, as with Ukulelemike, evolutionary scientists do not want the truth and will reject any truth that does not fit their own beliefs; not facts. They are not after scientific facts, they are only after any theory that will not support creation.

 

There are a lot of scientific facts to support creation but insincere and unblievers reject them as they do not fit their theories. It is not a head prOBlem it is a heart prOBlem.

 

Furhermore, it takes more faith to believe any of their theories than to believe the scriptures. Most of them, including, 'The Gap Theory,' is pure fantasy invented by folks who are embrassed by the literal account of creation and are looking for a compromise with the world for vaious reasons. 

 

God made this uiverse in six days and rested the seventh. Very simple and truthful. All you need is a child like faith.

Edited February 13, 2015 by AlanTaiwan

[heartstrings]

I agree with you. But one little thing: The "Gap Theory" may have been invented by such as you describe; I don't know. But some people wholeheartedly believe it, while others merely THEORIZE* with it because of the question of what happened to the dinosaurs; nothing more and nothing less.. But let's stay on topic shall we? I will if you will.   

[Alan]

fine with me.

[Ukulelemike]

Well,and while it will light a fire, I think the Gap theory is an acceptable side subject, since, being a way to figure out what happened to the dinosaurs, and inventing something extrabiblical to explain it, it falls clearly into the same category: they reject God's simple word that says cleqarly that God created everything in six days. But because they take stock in what evolutionists said, (particularly at a time that they couldn't even pretend to be able to date anything, just pure speculation on ages), the ignored clear scripture to invent something new by pulling a very few verses out of context and declaring that there was a non-existent millions/billions of years between two verses in the Bible,and that created things, which the Bible says were created in six days, including the heaven and the earth, the sea and ALL that in them is, (thus angels, and Lucifer).

So, just like evolutionists, they ignore clear evidence to the contrary and invent something to fit where they believe they need it to. The gap theory is not even a theory, it is a hypothesis, which should be rejected by every Bible believer because there is no evidence, no scripture and no historical precedent for it.

[OLD fashioned preacher]

Well,and while it will light a fire, I think the Gap theory is an acceptable side subject, since, being a way to figure out what happened to the dinosaurs, and inventing something extrabiblical to explain it, it falls clearly into the same category: they reject God's simple word that says cleqarly that God created everything in six days. But because they take stock in what evolutionists said, (particularly at a time that they couldn't even pretend to be able to date anything, just pure speculation on ages), the ignored clear scripture to invent something new by pulling a very few verses out of context and declaring that there was a non-existent millions/billions of years between two verses in the Bible,and that created things, which the Bible says were created in six days, including the heaven and the earth, the sea and ALL that in them is, (thus angels, and Lucifer).

So, just like evolutionists, they ignore clear evidence to the contrary and invent something to fit where they believe they need it to. The gap theory is not even a theory, it is a hypothesis, which should be rejected by every Bible believer because there is no evidence, no scripture and no historical precedent for it.

Just for clarity, not all pro-gap Baptist believe or cater to evolution nor use the gap as a place to put dinosaurs.

[Steve Schwenke]

I believe the Gap, but it has absolutely nothing to do with Evolution or the dinosaurs.  

People like Clarence Larkin were still trying to reconcile modern "science" and the Bible, because up until the 1800's real "scientists" operated from the principle that God was the Creator and their findings supported the Bible.  Strange how Bible correctors like Westcott and Hort popped up at the same time Darwin did.  

[Ukulelemike]

The Gap still goes against stated doctrine of the Bible. It has Lucifcer created and falling much earlier than he could have, if at day six God declared everything he had created to be very Good. How could this be so if Lucifer had fallen, taken angels with him, and the earth was already filled with death, which the Bible says Adam caused? That's not very good, that's already terribly flawed. That's an earth already tainted by sin. The flood of Noah destroyed civilization, but the earth was still tainted by sin-an earlier flood could not have washed it away any better, especially if Lucifer, who apparently had fallen, was still around. being part of God's creation HE was clearly not very good.

 

Unlkess your version of the Gap is diffeent than the classic one where Lucifer ruled the earth. There seem to be many, which is impressive when one consideres there really isn't room for it or scripture to back it.

 

Sorry if I sound snarky-my break is just ending and trying to get it out fast.

[Steve Schwenke]

Let me clarify something about the Gap.

I believe it, but I don't make it a point of division.  Everything works out the same in the end with or without it.  

I believe it for very sound reasons, and I understand both sides of the issue.  All of my reasons have solid standing in Scripture, without twisting or wresting Scripture.

 

I have absolutely no quarrel with those who do not hold to the Gap.

 

That being said, I decline to argue the point.

 

In Christ,

[ThePilgrim]

Let me clarify something about the Gap.

I believe it, but I don't make it a point of division.  Everything works out the same in the end with or without it.  

I believe it for very sound reasons, and I understand both sides of the issue.  All of my reasons have solid standing in Scripture, without twisting or wresting Scripture.

 

I have absolutely no quarrel with those who do not hold to the Gap.

 

That being said, I decline to argue the point.

 

In Christ,

I don't believe in the gap but on your last two lines I totally agree.  We Christians often let small disagreements get in the way of the big truths on which we do agree.  It is the Truth we should be shouting from the housetops, not making a huge hullabaloo about the things that just get in the way of soul winning.  The hullabaloos sometimes get so loud the lost can't hear the big Truth. 

Edited February 18, 2015 by ThePilgrim