Gravity and the Expanding Universe

[gnostic]

I think Earth will support people for eternity because 'Earth abides forever' according to Ecclesiastes 1:4 B.
Adam was only offered everlasting life on Earth. Earth was Not a stepping stone to another place.
Earth is Not at fault for what Satan and Adam did.
Jesus was sent Not to do away with Earth, but to undo the damage Satan and Adam brought upon humanity on Earth.
Known science ( and many churches ) teach an end to Earth, but we don't yet know all that God has in store for us.
What we do know is that God does Not have an end to Earth in His mind for us.

Really, “undo the damage” on Earth?

Seriously?

The Earth continued on just the same AFTER Jesus’ death/resurrection as they did BEFORE, URAVIP2ME...nothing have changed on Earth.

The politics, wars, slavery and corruption didn’t stop with Jesus.

According to messianic prophecies, the Messiah was supposed to bring peace on Earth, and that clearly never happened.

And the Messiah was supposed to rule Earth for a thousand years...and that also didn’t happen.

Either the prophecy is wrong, or Jesus isn’t the Messiah promised.

 

[ChristineM]

Seems to me Hitler set himself as being his own 'god'.
Yes, he did a lot of things to aid his cause but in the end it was not good.

He set himself up as ruler of his country and actually did good pulling Germany out of the recession caused by ww1. But then it went bad

 

[shunyadragon]

He set himself up as ruler of his country and actually did good pulling Germany out of the recession caused by ww1. But then it went bad

I believe Hitler's true evil nature was apparent much earlier.

 

[ChristineM]

I believe Hitler's true evil nature was apparent much earlier.

Right from the beginning, in hindsight. That does not change what he did, both good and bad, for Germany

 

[paarsurrey]

YOU made the comment that there were fallacies in logic. Don't ask me to try to support YOUR silly comment. If you can defend it, let's hear it.

If you can't, well, that's just another notch in the tree

Friend, don't be angry, please!:
List of fallacies
List of fallacies - Wikipedia
Right, please?

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

Agree with what?

There that there are limitations as to what science uses “Scientific Method”?

Of course, there are limitations. You think scientists don’t know that there are limitations?

There are limitations in every studies/subjects and in every disciplines, whether it have to do with science or not.

Scientific Method is merely methodology for how ones would proceed to explain the phenomena and how one would test and analyze observations/evidence in particular fields with physical sciences or natural sciences.

It is the evidence, not personal belief or personal preferences, that would determine science or not science.

Social sciences study people, their behaviors, their custom, their cultures, their social activities, and so on. They are simply different studies to natural sciences, using alternative techniques in investigations and researches. But each one, have their limitations.

Unlike natural science, social science allowed for personal opinions and personal experiences that are subjective, but still can be considered “evidence” in social sciences, for instances, in psychology and psychiatry. Opinions, beliefs, personal experiences matter in therapy, psychology and psychiatry, and they can vary widely from one to another.

Natural sciences, on the other hand, evidence have to be physical, that can be observed, measured and tested. Personal opinions are not useful in natural sciences.

This is why Physical Sciences and Natural Sciences are considered “hard science”, where as Social Sciences are labelled as “soft science”.

But there are also limitations to non-scientific studies, like arts, crafts, literature, musics, etc.

Religions also have limitations. There are also limitations to every scriptures. The Quran and bible are completely inaccurate when it comes to natural science, because it never explain anything about astronomy, physics or biology.

Scriptures are also unreliable as historian sources, because often they make up something that never happened, or events didn’t happen the way they are recorded in scriptures.

Even many of moral codes and religious laws that appeared to be universal today, other codes and laws appeared very outdated, immoral, and unjust.

Don’t get me wrong, the legal systems and practices are hardly perfect, but compared to laws and morality in religious books, the Bible and the Quran aren’t perfect too, more so in some areas than others.

If you want to learn about stars, planets and galaxies, or the universe as a whole, then I would recommend learning from modern astronomy, astrophysics and cosmology, and learn these not from Bible or the Quran.

If I want to study human body or that of animals or plants, then I would learn from biology classrooms or textbooks, not from the Bible or Quran, or other scriptures.

If I want to construct a car, house, bridge, cabinet or furniture, then I would seek experts in those areas, not from any holy books.

There are lot more limitations in religions, and only fools would think there are none.

gnostic wrote," The Quran and bible are completely inaccurate when it comes to natural science."

I will restrict myself for Quran.
Why should one read Quran for the issues of Science, Quran does not claim to be a text book of Science, please? Right, please?

Quran is a book of guidance for the life of humans in the ethical, moral and spiritual matters. Quran addresses them, please? Right, please?

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

Why do you keep asking a a methodology of atheism?

There is always a method for doing things, if the correct method is not employed one would achieve nothing. I ,therefore, enquire the methodology of "Atheism".
Are "Atheism" non-methodical, working under whims and superstition, please? Right, please?

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

Correct, it is a tool of limited use. But it is highly successful in its area of application.

Thanks for one's comments. Scientific Method, therefore, fails in Religion and religious matters. Right, please?

Regards

 

[Subduction Zone]

Thanks for one's comments. Scientific Method, therefore, fails in Religion and religious matters. Right, please?

Regards

It does not fail, it is simply not applied. Though some make the error of thinking that they can use it to find evidence for God, none of them use it properly. To properly use the scientific method one must first come up with a falsifiable hypothesis and believers are loathe to do that and it is called a strawman when non-believers do it. Though many theists get a bit frustrated when one points out correctly that there is no reliable evidence for their beliefs.

 

[ppp]

There is always a method for doing things, if the correct method is not employed one would achieve nothing. I ,therefore, enquire the methodology of "Atheism".

Since atheism is not a thing to be done, your underlying assumption of "doing things" does not apply. If you wish to ignore this fundamental fact, and insist otherwise, that is up to you. But you are engaging in flawed thinking.

You say that there your god exists. I don't believe you. That alone makes me an atheist. No one needs a methodology to simply not believe something that you say.

 

[gnostic]

Why should one read Quran for the issues of Science, Quran does not claim to be a text book of Science, please? Right, please?

No, the Quran isn’t a science textbook, but Muslims do...through their interpretations of the Quran.

The same is true with the Bible. It isn’t a book of science or book of history, and yet some Christians claim it so (particularly literalists or creationists), through their interpretations of the scriptures.

Much of debates in forums like here, are between science and with some modern interpretations of scriptures (eg interpretations of Bible or that of the Quran).

It more to do with modern interpreters of scriptures that I often have problems with.

HOWEVER, these (“these” as in “some”) modern Christians and Muslims put their respective scriptures under the spotlight.

Their interpretations put every passages they quoted under scrutiny, where non-believers can find inconsistencies, flaws and errors in the scriptures.

That how I often find problems with scriptures that they tried to interpret verses to be scientific or historical, when they are really not.

 

[paarsurrey]

Actually, that was just a test to see if you understand even basic things about the Bible.

Jesus did not write any parts of the Bible.
Jesus did not dictate any parts of the Bible.

Why are you discussing the Bible if you don't know this?

It is one's misunderstanding, please. The contents of NT, as I understand and as I have read the whole of it, I know that it is third person narrative and I have mentioned it in many of my posts in this forum. NT, as I understand, has nothing to do with Jesus and Mary and as to what they believed and did . They were Jews.
As a Muslim, therefore, I only accept of NT which is not against Quran, the truthful and secure Word of G-d. Right, please?
Please stand corrected, if one likes to. Right, please?

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

No, the Quran isn’t a science textbook, but Muslims do...through their interpretations of the Quran.

The same is true with the Bible. It isn’t a book of science or book of history, and yet some Christians claim it so (particularly literalists or creationists), through their interpretations of the scriptures.

Much of debates in forums like here, are between science and with some modern interpretations of scriptures (eg interpretations of Bible or that of the Quran).

It more to do with modern interpreters of scriptures that I often have problems with.

HOWEVER, these (“these” as in “some”) modern Christians and Muslims put their respective scriptures under the spotlight.

Their interpretations put every passages they quoted under scrutiny, where non-believers can find inconsistencies, flaws and errors in the scriptures.

That how I often find problems with scriptures that they tried to interpret verses to be scientific or historical, when they are really not.

gnostic wrote, "No, the Quran isn’t a science textbook, but Muslims do...through their interpretations of the Quran."

The discussion is between me and one, other Muslim may interpret Quran incorrectly, please. Right, please?
Please quote from Quran directly for a meaningful discussion. Right, please?

Regards

 

[ecco]

YOU made the comment that there were fallacies in logic. Don't ask me to try to support YOUR silly comment. If you can defend it, let's hear it.

If you can't, well, that's just another notch in the tree

Friend, don't be angry, please!:
List of fallacies
List of fallacies - Wikipedia
Right, please?

A. I am not your friend.
B. You are not my friend.
C. I am not angry.

All I asked YOU to do was to support YOUR comment about logic and fallacies.

You could not. That tells me and the peanut gallery that you made an unsupportable comment.

Worse yet, you clearly do not understand the contents of the link you posted.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Really, “undo the damage” on Earth?
Seriously?
The Earth continued on just the same AFTER Jesus’ death/resurrection as they did BEFORE, URAVIP2ME...nothing have changed on Earth.
The politics, wars, slavery and corruption didn’t stop with Jesus.
According to messianic prophecies, the Messiah was supposed to bring peace on Earth, and that clearly never happened.
And the Messiah was supposed to rule Earth for a thousand years...and that also didn’t happen.
Either the prophecy is wrong, or Jesus isn’t the Messiah promised.

You are right, right because what you write about is about the still coming future.
Men 'will be' saying, " Peace and Security...." as the precursor to the coming great tribulation - 1 Thessalonians 5:2-3
And, we are ALL still invited to pray the invitation of Rev. 22:20 for Jesus to come ! ( Not Jesus came )
The setting of Revelation is for our day or our time frame for us alive today - Revelation 1:10.
Right, nothing happened just as Jesus taught at Luke 19:11-15 that the kingdom (Daniel 2:44) would Not immediately nor instantly appear.
First, the good news message of Matthew 24:14; Acts 1:8 would have to be declared on a grand international scale as it is now being done.
Wars, corruption, etc. is what falls into the description as found at 2 Timothy 3:1-5,13 with men going from bad to worse.
Before peace would come, the world would see the fulfillment of Luke 21:11 and we see that today on a large scale.
Before the thousand years, first there will be a separating as found at Matthew 25:31-33,37.
Before the thousand years, there will also be the great tribulation as mentioned above and as found at Revelation 7:14,9.
Then, at this coming time Jesus will take the action of Isaiah 11:3-4; Revelation 19:14-16.
The passing of time has also allowed for all of us to be born and think who we would like as Sovereign over us.
So, I hope you will keep an open mind and stay ALERT ! or Stay WATCHFUL as Jesus instructed at Mark 13:33-37

 

[paarsurrey]

A. I am not your friend.
B. You are not my friend.
C. I am not angry.

All I asked YOU to do was to support YOUR comment about logic and fallacies.

You could not. That tells me and the peanut gallery that you made an unsupportable comment.

Worse yet, you clearly do not understand the contents of the link you posted.

Sorry, I might have misunderstood one, please.
Regards

 

[ecco]

Sorry, I might have misunderstood one, please.

Nah. I don't think you misunderstood anything. I think you know quite well that you made a nonsensical assertion that you could not back up.

When called on it, you tapdanced and then pleaded "misunderstanding".

If you are serious about there being a misunderstanding, go back over our comments and either produce support for your allegation or admit your post was just your incorrect opinion.

 

[halbhh]

I consider unnaturalness an odd oxymoron. I have no reason concerning the present state of our knowledge that would indicate the universe is in any way unnatural.

I do not believe these references provided a 'fuller understanding of the subject.

Ah, that's another part of why I offered those links -- to help whomever is interested to learn more about the current situation of physicists realizing this Universe is "unnatural". But if it is too technical for instance, I could find a less technical article, if you just ask. Or perhaps it's a question of getting clarification about some term or sentence or paragraph?

 

[paarsurrey]

paarsurrey said: ↑
There is always a method for doing things, if the correct method is not employed one would achieve nothing. I ,therefore, enquire the methodology of "Atheism".

Since atheism is not a thing to be done, your underlying assumption of "doing things" does not apply. If you wish to ignore this fundamental fact, and insist otherwise, that is up to you. But you are engaging in flawed thinking.

You say that there your god exists. I don't believe you. That alone makes me an atheist. No one needs a methodology to simply not believe something that you say.

I said " method for doing things" that also meant and included doing research , acquiring knowledge and discerning right from wrong , good from evil and forming a sound thinking. Please don't tell me "Atheism" is lifeless and or idle, I won't buy that, please? Right, please?

Regards

 

[ppp]

paarsurrey said: ↑
There is always a method for doing things, if the correct method is not employed one would achieve nothing. I ,therefore, enquire the methodology of "Atheism".

I said " method for doing things" that also meant and included doing research , acquiring knowledge and discerning right from wrong , good from evil and forming a sound thinking. Please don't tell me "Atheism" is lifeless and or idle, I won't buy that, please? Right, please?

Regards

You say that there your god exists. I don't believe you. That alone makes me an atheist. No one needs a methodology to simply not believe something that you say.