[QUOTE="Tsimcluckis"]LOL @ people posting on a Saturday night :lol:LZ71

Well?

Just curious :)

I'm going to have to refer you back to the ancient civilizations, who blamed the rising/setting of the sun as well as natural disasters on a greater being. Just give it time.

Edit: And it's obvious you don't fully comprehend the process of a scientific theory.

revoscloud

You either don't understahnd the Big Bang or you don't understand the scientific process. A scientific theory is one in which there is ample evidence and experimentation behind it. The evidence behind the Big Bang actually occurring is ample. It consists of the Microwave Background Radiation as well as the homogeneity of the universe and many many other evidences. The Big Bang states that the universe began expanding from a small particle. Where that particle came from is not part of the Big Bang Theory. All the Big Bang states is that matter is moving away from a single source, which evidence shows it is. The problem with creationist arguments is that they often bring other things into the equation that actually have nothign to do with the theory. That is what is occurring here and that is what occurs when YECs talk abotu abiogenesis and cosmology when arguign against evolution. At one time people thought the Earth was the center pof the universe. And if you visit youtube there are still people who argue for a geocentric universe. However these people are blind and argue from a point of ignorance. Everytime a new scenerio is tested and proven to be plausible there are always those people that hold onto beliefs of the past. Why do you do this. come, it is time to step into the present my friend. I will guide you.

BumFluff122

Using scientific theory to discredit religious beliefs is irrelevant to begin with, no?

What is the foundation of most, if not, all religions? Is it a scientific/logical explanation or a set of beliefs and laws of their own?

You arguing on behalf of science and using science to discredit religion is like myself arguing that the Big Bang Theory is wrong because 'God created the universe.' I'd be trying to illogically prove you wrong using my beliefs that you don't agree with to begin with.

Is scientific knowledge more credible than a system of beliefs? Yes, to an extent.

Have scientists come to a solid, authoritative conclusion as to how, when, or where the universe began? No. Why? It has not been proven, and theories at this point is nothing more than unproven speculation thus far — you cannot deny this. What you can say, is that this 'speculation' is more 'credible' than a system of beliefs, which is not necessarily true considering they're beliefs and not occurrences being proved using 'scientific laws.'

Science + Religion = Conflict.

Religion = set of beliefs on how we've come to exist, why we exist, etc, based on our own beliefs and practices.

Science = speculation on how the world began, using scientific laws and scientific measurements.

See where I'm going? You can't use scientific law and logic to try and discredit something as abstract as religion, since post #1 I've been trying to make the point that science is mostly irrelevant when trying to disprove Christianity, or any religion, seeing as they rarely correspond with each other, so using scientific law to explain why Christianity/belief systems are wrong is not consistent, as there'd be an obvious bias on how things are structured for the reason you're using science to begin with.

Again, theory, theory is a scientific instrument and a scientific term. I don't theorize that God created the universe, I believe God created the universe.

[QUOTE="Tsimcluckis"]It comes down to this; science is yet to stop speculating and actually prove how the universe was created, whether it'd be the Big Bang theory or other theories based on scientific assumption and speculation, which in fact has not been proven. I don't think any Christian, or believer, for that matter, disputes that scientific knowledge and religious beliefs don't go hand-in-hand. Just the fact that it's a system of beliefs should negate your points of trying to flaw the religion via scientific theories, you can't disprove a belief unless you give an authoritative explanation (not theory/speculation) to how everything began, and on the scientific end of things, that just hasn't happened yet. This is where atheists love to state the most repetitive and irrelevant argument in the book; Creationism 'dwells' on things that cannot be proven with scientific logic. ..... Well of course it does, isn't that why it's a BELIEF? Now if I said 'Hey, Atheists, I have a scientific explanation to how the world started, here, read this book, it's called the Bible.' I'd understand the logic behind your argument, but as far as I can tell, you simply cannot disprove one's belief if things are just as irrelevant and inconsistent on the scientific end of things, eg; the numerous theories pertaining to the universe and it's creation, how it all started. etc.revoscloud

You did a lot of talking, but said nothing.