Which do you trust, God or science?

Except that the mass was not infinite and it was not an explosion.

According to Linde and chaotic inflation, the mass of the universe before the start of the inflationary epoch was only 0.00001 grams!

Second, it was an expansion of space itself. An explosion implies that the matter forcefully expanded into an existing space. This is not an accurate description of inflationary theory.

So, whether you accept inflation or not, your source did not tell you an accurate version of inflation if they said it was an "infinite mass" that "exploded." How can you possibly hope to know which side is right if you only listen to a side that cannot get the facts correct?

 

We six day creationists do believe in the "Big-Bang" idea. We just have a slightly different chronology, it is at the end, not the beginning!

2Pet 3:10

 

When I read advertisements for 1611 printings of the King James Bible, I see that they are divided into two categories—the “He Bibles” (“he” rather than “she” in Ruth 3:15) and the “She Bibles.” There are only about one third as many “He Bibles” known to exist as there are “She Bibles,” and the “He Bibles” are believed by many to be an earlier printing than the “She Bibles,” and for these two reasons the “He Bibles” cost more than twice as much as the “She Bibles” even though both of them were printed in 1611.

A “She Bible” is bad enough, but a “She God” crosses the line from my point of view. That is even worse than the "Wicked Bible" of 1631 (“Thou shall commit adultery”).

 

Amen, Brother Rjprince -- Preach it!

 

Why don't you tell Jesus that, He apparently disagreed when He said God is a FATHER(male).

 

Space expands. Hmmmmm not much of a space physicist, but sounds a lot like the old aether theory to me. I thought that was dead several years ago.

 

Aether was something different.

When we speak of speed, we ususally refer to the speed as being relative to something. When Maxwell was developing his equations to describe electromagnetism, it turned out that the equations simply described a speed for light without reference to anything. THis was combined with the idea that electromagnetic waves must travel through something just as sound waves do.

So the luminiferous aether was proposed. This was the medium through which light was to have travelled and the speed of light was to be relative to it. Alas searching never found the aether.

But there was a clue in Maxwell's equations. Eventually you get Einstein's theory of special relativity. From relativity we learn that there is a poit of reference for the universe. And it is not just space. It is space-time. Space-time gives us the reference point to determine motion and speed.

Space-time, more precisely, is also what began expanding at the start of inflation and continues to expand to this day. That is the Bang, the expansion of space itself.

 

According to Hawking I should have used the term "infinite density" rather than "infinite mass". However, who made Linde the ultimate authority on the "Big Bang"? And the mass of the universe is only 0.00001 grams? Amazing?

 

Heh Ed

I think I found it!

Hebrews 11:3
Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

 

"Throughout Scripture the masculine gender is used when referring to the Triune God. Anyone who disputes this either has not read the Bible or doesn't believe it."

What physical form do you think God takes?

 

Nitpick all you want but macroevolution does a very poor job on both the origin and complexity of life. Intelligence which is a rational scientifically valid source for information provides a far superior explanation... regardless of how you ultimately think that Intelligence applied Himself.

 

Male- Jesus Christ.

Further, He refers to Himself as masculine. The NT uses the analogy of the bride and the bridegroom... with Christ being the groom.

Masculine is not simply a physical characteristic. God certainly transcends our understanding but He has chosen to refer to Himself as masculine.

I suggest you use the Bible rather than the internet to support any conflicting contention.

 

Maybe you should concern yourself more with yourself. I believe you probably underestimate how thoughtful I and others like me have approached these various issues.

Try your Bible that you claim to know well. Do you consider it "evidence"?

BTW, the Bible declares that God is in control of the course of history even to the point of ordaining human leaders and governments. That is fundamental.

If you need a study to prove the value of prayer then your list of problems simply continues to grow.

I know a walking talking miracle. Our pastor was given 6 weeks to live... about 3 1/2 years ago. He has untreatable leukemia. The doctors have no explanation. He just stopped getting worse... after people far and wide began to pray for him.

First, I just gave you a set.

Second, revelatory supernatural periods are intermittant even in the biblical record. In fact, 2 Peter 3 addresses your point of view and that of naturalistic thinkers in general:

I don't think that the fear of the Lord is very well represented by doubting His supernatural power and the supernatural acts He claimed to have performed.

 

Debating whether God is male or female is a great deal like debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. It is an exercise in futility.

 

"If you need a study to prove the value of prayer then your list of problems simply continues to grow."
..................................................
If the effectiveness of prayer cannot be shown by a carefully controlled study, then it does not help and all your wishing will not make it so.

 

Nope. God calls Himself a He... and He qualifies as a much greater authority on masculinity than you.

 

Prayer has helped in my own experience and in the experiences of other genuinely born again Christians I have known. Your line of argument is specifically anti-Christian and makes Phillip's question concerning your religious beliefs very relevant.

Prayer has repaired lives beyond the capabilities of the people involved. Specific prayer has preceded healings that defy a medical explanation. Prayer is the only means provided by God for man to approach Him for salvation and forgiveness. The greatest miracle is not physical. It is the resurrection of the spiritually dead.

If you have no faith in prayer then you are by definition not a Christian (much less a Baptist) in any biblical sense. You and the moderators will have to judge your testimony. However, you should not be posting in this section unless you meet certain qualifiers.

 

Hogwash! Hogwash! Hogwash! I have personally witnessed several genuinely miraculous answers to prayer. They did not happen to be a part of a controlled study, but had they been, there would have been an abundance of proof that God does hear and answer prayer. God is NOT an Orphan Annie rag doll.

 

Actually the debate tells
us a lot about the subject of this topic.
The majority insists that God is, God was,
and God will always be: as a human male.
Thus what you must believe God is saying
is "I am male". Science is quite on the
subject. Which do you trust, God or science?

My eight year old (well it was nigh unto
28-years ago, but she was eight then) asked
me: "Is God everybody?" The answer then
as now is "no, God is not everybody nor
even the majority. God is God not the
collective.

Which do you trust, God or science?
I still trust God over science.
I still trust science over the collective
opinions of Baptists. I still trust God
over the collective opinions of Baptists.