Prove me wrong. Big Bang happened somewhere in the distant past

File: PB25May07_002.jpg (93KB, 580x427px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 580x427px

How is a simulation created? We have bits of code here, some assets there, and the other crap over there. We are one of the experiments that has successfully started making simulations of our own. Although primitive compared to whichever developer created our world, it may take quite some time before we can harness the full power of our solar system. Right now we are a small program, black holes being viruses/corruptions, gamma ray bursts being trojans, and suns being additional ram if you will. When ram gets old, it tends to not perform well, so it goes into a state of slowing itself until it can no longer handle it. Once we reach the levels of whomever the creators were (politics persisting towards it), we can start this process all over again and watch the results with some minor changes.

>>138942636
Everything is created. A simulation would have to have been created. No matter the theory, the eventual line of wha created what ends with an uncaused first cause

>or matter
it was a super dense concentration of matter accumulated via a massive black hole. once that black hole died out, its' condenced matter exploded into what is on known as the big bang.

>>138943274
Where did the black hole come from?

>>138943274
See no matter how you counter it, there will always be a necessary need and an unavoidable uncaused first cause

Humans can only perceive things as a piece of something else. Something has to come from something else. We are incapable of thinking beyond this limitation.

>>138940854
I don't think the big bang EVER happened for OP

>>138944363
So your saying from nothing came everything and the fact that we can't comprehend it counteracts an argument for God? I'd say that takes a little more faith than I can spare

>>138943556

if a creator can be eternal, why can't the universe be cyclically eternal? there's nothing in physics saying that's impossible.

>>138943497
put your hands together like a ball, then "explode" them out a ways. stop, reverse back to the ball and do it again. repeat. each time you do this, think to yourself "tens of billions of years ago"

>>138943556
agreed, there must have been a beginning at some point. however, with the.exercise I gave the anon above, so.much time has passed that to think you know the answer to it all let alone that we're some special fleck of dust on a cog in the machine that is the universe is to be lieing to yourself.

>>138940854
E8 lattice

>>138944546
We exist in the present. Today is the end of eternity. If it were truly eternal today would never arise. The fact that we are witnessing the end of the timeline shows we are in a finite not eternal universe

>>138940854
Read the Isha Upanishad
http://www.swamij.com/upanishad-isha-purna.htm

File: Gun_jesus_Ian.jpg (74KB, 630x720px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 630x720px

Oh shit is that gun jesus

>>138944894
Being removed by time does not discount the fact that there was a beginning and therefore a beginner. I get the idea hat we can't fathom that. But I implore you to read into the arguments, judge for yourself but I know my life was given to me by this being and the least I can do is defend his existence

>>138945125
this

>>138945125

let me try to break this down.

>we exist in the present
ok. sounds good.

>today is the end of eternity.
what, why?

>If it were truly eternal today would never arise.
again, what, why? where are you getting this from. what about eternity would prevent today from happening?

>The fact that we are witnessing the end of the timeline shows we are in a finite not eternal universe

witnessing the end of what timeline? i haven't seen time end. pretty sure no one has.

File: serveimage(3).jpg (974KB, 2222x2212px) Image search: [Google]

974KB, 2222x2212px

>prove me wrong
Pic related

>trusted the word of some disabled faggot in a wheelchair over God

>>138945819
what hasnt happened yet hadent happened yet, can you prove otherwise?

The sad thing is that this is literally how 70% of the US thinks

>>138946165

why would i try to disprove a tautological statement?

>>138946165
You have to think of eternity as this never ending timeline. Infinite in both directions. We look back and we see eternity, we look forward and we see the end of the line which is where you are currently. To be eternal there can be no stop it could never have happened by definition.

>>138940854

Ok, sure. But that gives you literal zero understanding of God, ultimately is is the same as not believing in God.

Because the God that created the big bang could have decide to just observer and not interfere in what he just created.

File: ianpepe.png (89KB, 632x492px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 632x492px

Gun jesus

>>138945406
I have, and decided to be honest and call myself an agnostic athiest, someone who doesn't believe in a god as described by man nor claims to know whether or not what can be construed as a god exists.

>>138946538
Exactly! Yet this being CHOSE to create. Acted on freewill to give us life. I know I can't prove it to you but I implore you to read up on Christian apologetics, this is the biggest gamble you'll ever make. I'll pray for you and I hope you find him.

>>138946600
The biggest gamble you'll ever make. He believes in you. Research the gospels find him I promise he will find you. I love you brother

>>138940854
You didn't say anything
>>138944546
>>138944894
Oscillating universe
>>138944363
Humans have imagination
>>138944510
>>138945406
>>138945819
Nothingness is impossible
Time is a subjective abstract concept
>>138946009
>spidermancomic.jpg

>>138946743

I hope you are not bringing up pascal's wager here. It will only end with you sending me fifty dollars because I could be God and will damn you to hell for eternity if you don't.

>>138940854
The Big Bang doesn't actually happen until the end. That is, "the end" and "the big bang" happen simultaneously, each causing the other.

>>138946937
Pascals is a offensive disgusting form of preaching and believe me that's not what I do. I am simply trying to tel you there is evidence that point to a creator and a personal creator. I just believe everyone should be told atleast once about the evidence and have the ability to choose to find him. Everyone deserves a chance.

>>138940854
conjecture, your honor

>>138946600
> i'm agnostic
That's Latin for "Ignoramus"

>>138947084
That is just another infinite circle of causes, never explained why or how it was put into motion

>>138946399

you can't look back and see eternity any more than you can see the future. you can only gauge that things have happened as a consequence of prior things happening, because that is literally how everything ever has worked. this is also how we can gauge that things will happen as a result of things currently happening.

also, you're confusing the concept of eternity for something static when there's no reason for it to be static. a thing not need exist yet for it to exist in the future.

>>138946399
Im agreeing with you, theres nothing suggesting everything ahead of us is preplanned or whatnot and if events went backwards in time eternally we would never have gotten to this point in time its a paradox by definition therefore there must have been a beginning caused by a force above the laws of physics.

>>138946862
Says you and every single other thiest of every single other religion out there.

and you'll claim your God is all knowing, which would mean he knows exactly what it would take for me to believe.

well here I am, 31 years old in a universe 13.7 billion years old. still waiting.

>>138947125

I believe there is evidence for the possibility of an intelligent creator to reality. I Have never heard or seen any evidence of the bible accurately portraying this creator though. Even the bible itself says, to make a logical argument for christian faith is impossible.

>>138947370
Time is not an object which can exist. Time is simply time. All things degrade, all stars are running out of fuel, all life ends, everything in our world shows the decline of everything we know of. If an eternal universe were true which is against the evidence, these things could not be, every star would have died out, every life gone. To have something degrade in eternity is not eternity

File: 1396347815152.jpg (152KB, 625x538px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 625x538px

>>138940854
i think of it as our 'verse' is one of many bubbles in the cosmic soda pop of ((reality))

>>138947401

no, it's not a paradox at all.

also, physics is suggesting everything is predetermined. a lot of hippies think quantum physics tells us that nothing is predetermined, but that's wrong. quantum physics tells us that we -cannot observe- what has been predetermined, that's all. if you kick the same ball in the same way in the same conditions, you're going to get the same exact result every single time. because of that principle, we know that every unique input has a unique output.

everything is linear. we just can't observe it.

File: IMG_0513.jpg (62KB, 726x590px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 726x590px

>>138947469

>>138947604
You're working under the assumption new matter isn't created. This is not something we know any certainty.

>>138940854

don't sacrilege our Gun Jesus you lion food faggot

>>138947604

as another anon already said, cyclical universe. still eternal.

>>138947757
We exist in this reasoning on the basis of probability, it is in fact true that all the molecules in your phone right now decide to destroy themselves and the phone would disappear. Theoretically possible, however infinitely implausible. However the fact that it is possible shows the probability factor in all our equations. I simply am asking you to look at the evidence. From an unbiased. Fair. Perspective. What seems more logical, complete randomness creating design, a never ending series of universe giving birth to a world perfect for us to inhabit, or a creator. A single entity that created all. Love you God bless

>>138947767

I'm an agnostic deist to begin with. I've read the bible, but i'm not gonna waste my life reading the 2000 years of literature written on the bible. I could literally live my entire life doing nothing else.

>>138940854
>This cause cannot be space, time or matter because they weren't created yet.

Wrong. So utterly wrong its painful. Space and Time were never created. They can exist completely separate from the rest of reality. They are, in fact, the closest thing to God we can actually point to.

>>138948116
That book is more attested to than any other book in human history. 5,600 copies exist the first of which is <100 years away from the originals. Compare 2nd place, the Iliad 1,800 copies with a 1000 year gap between the first copies and original. It is a eyewitness account of the things they saw. Why would they for something they knew a life, why make it up? They gained death. Christ died. He rose. How else do you explain the rise of Christianity amid constant persecution for 300 years. Religions like Islam conquered and spread like fire. Christianity was trampled on and yet it persisted. I promise you on my life it is true and I hope you give it a chance. There is reason, there is logic, I guarantee you will find it if you look

>>138946902
>Time is a subjective abstract concept
Wrong. And you have to be monumentally stupid to think so. Time passes regardless of its perception

>>138947240
here in America it means not being able to know

like its' antonym gnostic, meaning to know

there's a lot of old outdated things in Latin that since served their purpose and aren't needed, like the Bible for example

>>138940854
Who the fuck knows man. I just think that if there is a god we have literally no idea what it actually is. Any man thats claims he does is trying to sell you something.

>Big bang/explosion forming into an orderly universe
>2nd law of thermodynamics

You can't have both. When has an explosion ever resulted in a structure of any kind forming? Big bang is completely nonsensical on it's face.

Also, in order for something to even be there to explode then that something has to come from somewhere.

>>138940854
You can't create something that existed before
Time is conceptual to observation. Observing time causes it to change.

Therefore no observation that is based on the past can be used to understand the future.

Thanks guys I'm out, may God bless you and may you come to find Christ. Pray for me as I will pray for you. There is one God and he loves you, he is a God of logic and reason. I promise for what it's worth, that if you read, if you look you will find. Christian apologetics and reason are backed so ardently in facts it hurts to see such smart minds be lead astray. It hurts to know the world has portrayed the gospels as ananumois fairty tales. May the collective people responsible know their damage. If anything else, be open to the idea and maybe one day, you'll let him change your life, he changed mine. And All I did was research. goodnight

>>138948441

If I believed in eye witness accounts from 2000 years ago I'd also believe in vampires, unicorns, skinchangers, gnomes, goblins and all sorts of other things.

The plausibility of it all being made up is a hell of alot higher then it being real. There are tens of thousands of stories all made up and all believed my millions of people.

>>138948107

probability doesn't remove determinism, that's the thing. probability is only a tool we use when we can' see what is determined.

complete randomness is the worst thing you could argue against. it's funny you bring this up, because we actually use probability to determine that, given enough time, random assortments can and eventually will create every conceivable possibility.

so yes, randomness is literally likely to create every and all possible scenarios, including this one where i'm typing to you right now.

File: b (58).jpg (25KB, 600x514px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 600x514px

>>138940854

Blind, unquestioning faith is what the church demands. Rambling pop science lectures won't save anybody.

Science is the opposite of faith. Don't mix them together.

>>138948893

>he is a God of logic and reason.


is he now?

1 Corinthians 1:21
God, in his wisdom, saw to it that the world would not know him through worldly knowledge.

1 Corinthians 1:27
But God chose what the world thinks foolish in order to shame the intelligent.

>>138949133
Your shaking 1:27 right now. In your knowledge and intelligence you deny him. The unbelievable brain that not even the most intelligent human could dream of creating, is being used by you, right now to argue against him. I really do care for you and if you don't believe me, atleas you have heard it. That Christ is lord he died for you and he created you. He loves you.

>>138946399
Well they say time is half a dimension, so only goes in one direction. A line goes in both. So imagine instead of just a line time was made into a plane like 2 dimensions. That's how I imagine eternity.

>>138946743
>OP is a Christian
What a disappointment. This could have been a more interesting discussion.

>>138948865
Is this the fascist version of "real communism has never been tried before"?

>>138949419

oh I'm not arguing against him, I'm just pointing out how the bible itself admits that you cannot draw a logical conclusion to christian faith.

I don't tell christian not to be christian, but the point is, you can only be christian if you have faith in it. Sense I do not have faith, and I can only believe in things through logic, I can never be a christian.

>>138948865
Perhaps the past hasn't existed yet and we have already lived a future. Did you ever think of that?

>>138940854
>infinite
it does not exist in nature

>>138948614

big bang was never an explosion. that's a dumb name that stuck, but also it's great for exposing idiots who make shit up based on what the name sounds like.

First post ever in /pol/. It takes a lot of faith to believe in something you can't inherently prove to be true. Yes, you can prove that an abstract math equation is valid, but you cannot prove with absolute certainty that you're looking at the correct numbers given the fact that we have such a very limited perspective. Science is a methodology, but many people have attempted to turn it into blind faith. In science everything that is considered to be a fact is also considered to be falsifiable in the case of contradictory evidence.

>>138940854
>big bang

This is literally the same fucking thing as "In the beginning god said let there be light"

Stop accepting their bullshit. Look up Wal Thornhill and the Electric Universe

the last universe was swallowed by a blackhole, atleast all the matter....hole collasped upon itself resulting in a cosmic implosion large enough to repopulate the universe with said matter....theres your big bang

>>138940854
The big bang cannot and does not explain what was before.

Maybe big bang is just a small spark from a large bang that happen outside of our (((observable))) universe.

Maybe it is s property of strings thst sometimes thr bangs occur between them

Maybe the god said ALLAHU ACKBAR and blew up so hard it created the universe.

It could be anithing ever.
BUT it certainly is nothing like the bible or Quaran explain it to be - therefore both are a lie.
If tgere is a god, he is nothing you omagine him to be.

>>138953347

math isn't science, nor is it reliant on perspective: that's the beauty of it. it doesn't matter how you look at it, whether you're still cramming for calc class or you're motherfucking dormammu playing 5d chess: in math, true is still true.

>>138940854
>The Big Bang had a cause. This cause cannot be space, time or matter because they weren't created yet.
Just because we can't understand something doesn't mean some ancient book written by some guy has the answer. Does the bible describe creation as the big bang and evolution of life?

The things we understand about everything does not measure up with the bible. The things we understand are provable, the bible requires faith.

One day someone will work out the origin of the universe and you will move on to the next unknown and claims that's where god is.

>So This cause therefore must be beyond space, time and matter. It must be infinite, omnipresent and more powerful that we could possibly imagine....
Why must it?
For all we know creation of the universe was a simple process. We literally do not know how things started so how can you judge it's requirements?

>....while knowing that whatever this is CHOSE to create it, showing a personal element as well.
This implies theirs a purpose to everything, other wise why bother creating anything?
To create a flawed being and then punish it for being flawed? Why would God be psychopathic?!

This raises more questions than it answers.

>There are TONS Of more arguments for the existence of God. If one of you researches it and is saved I've done my part. Love y'all. MAGA
So you're not sticking around to defend your position? OK.

File: Mattdoggy+used+roll+picture+mattdoggy+rolled+image+_51c7a7f46aa24cb6bd8958490fab8628.jpg (11KB, 326x184px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 326x184px

>>138949044
>Science is the opposite of faith. Don't mix them together.

All logical thought process starts at the point where you chose what to believe.
Theres an Axiom - an unquestionable fact ypu accept as such without proof to base all your further logic upon.
To take your first logical step you first chose a point of faith.

Let me give you a bunch of examples.
Solipsism - they simply chose to believe that everyone around them arent real people but imitations, or that they live in a simulation/dream/illusion.
You cant logically disprove a solipsist, they would think you and your argument are only their dream.

Religion
>this makes no sense its wrong
>such is god's will to make it so it wouldnt make sense because theres a great plan for everything.

Nihilism
>nothing matters, neither does your argument, the discussion, its topic or anything ever.

And yoy siimply chose to believe that things do matter and tge world is not an illision.
Why do you think so? It also is faith.

>>138953935
i saw that episode of futurama too, one of my favorites.

Although the big bang is a good explanation for the expanding nature of our universe, do keep in mind that it is still a theory anon

>>138943556
its the "which came first, the chicken or the egg?"

>>138940854
>Big Bang
>proven
pick one faggot

Interesting that the communists and niggers avoid the science/metaphysics threads. REALLY ACTIVATES THE ALMONDS BOYS.

>>138955443
The first chicken egg was laid by a chicken's evolutional ancestor that in fact wasnt a chicken.

Prove me wrong, the thing that was the big bang, (infitite mass at 1 point) can only explode in the same way, no matter what. This is it.

>>138955822
Is it an argument for determunism or what are you getting at?

https://youtu.be/6bOy3RNyWME

>>138940854
The logical conclusion is actually that the big bang was an explosion of some previously existing matter/force which would make finding the origin impossible whilst we are still inside of that exploding cloud called the universe.
That in no way disproves the divine, however it may suggest that any true divine influence would be much further back in time

>>138955565
If the universe has always existed there is no inconsistency. All we have to explain is why we can only see 42 billion lighr years away.

>>138940854
In the highest dimension things are static because "causation" requires a higher dimension.

Listen man, I know all this stuff, same as you, but you kinda come across as a shill here. No reason to pick a fight with creationists until they pick it with you. And if they don't, then whatever.

I totally agree. The point I'm getting at is we can prove an equation is valid, but we cannot prove that we have the correct equation given our limited perspective on what the outcome actually is.

>>138940854
>The Big Bang had a cause.
Yes, we don't know what it was. For all we know, this isn't even true:
>creating all space, time, and matter and indeed everything
TBB may have simply been a phenomenon that wiped out evidence of anything before it. It might not even be unique, but perhaps very infrequent (tens or hundreds of trillions of years).
>This cause cannot be space, time or matter
As explained above, that isn't true.

>So This cause therefore must be beyond space, time and matter. It must be infinite, omnipresent and more powerful that we could possibly imagine, while knowing that whatever this is CHOSE to create it, showing a personal element as well.
>I don't know, therefore GOD.

>>138945125
The present is eternal. 'Present' means 'before-being' in Latin. The present never truly arises.

The present is constant

File: acid.jpg (74KB, 850x400px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 850x400px

>>138940854
>must be beyond space, time and matter
It's Consciousness

>>138948559
The Bible is in Greek, retard-o

And no, Latin is linguistically on a whole 'nother level than English.

File: TfwGodRipsTheFloorOutFromUnderYou.gif (2MB, 288x192px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 288x192px

>>138940854
I already believe in God, but your argument honestly isn't very solid. Yes, I know William Lane Craig uses it. It's still not very solid.

>>138940854
>Big Bang happened somewhere in the distant past creating all space, time, and matter and indeed everything.

Full fucking retard.

The energy in the Big Bang dispersed. That doesn't mean its an exception to the law. Calling it the "creation" of energy or matter is stupid.

>This cause cannot be space, time or matter because they weren't created yet.

That's just your opinion.

>It must be infinite, omnipresent and more powerful that we could possibly imagine

A giant leap of retarded logic.

All the Big Bang means -- if its true -- is that the observable energy and matter in the universe originates from a single point. That doesn't mean that it "created" jack shit.

>>138957128
>All the Big Bang means -- if its true -- is that the observable energy and matter in the universe originates from a single point.
Great way to summarize it. This is literally all we know, and everything else is conjecture, painting a picture between "dot of shit" and "all this shit".

>the dig dang ebin xD

File: 44.jpg (358KB, 1742x1080px) Image search: [Google]

358KB, 1742x1080px

>>138956966

What we call The Multiverse is just another stage of the Original Singularity. The Big Bang is the process through which it changed.

There is no evidence for the big bang though.

Religious faggot.

Fuck religious fags like you

>>138940854
Okay sure, now explain why that means I need to worship a dead jew on stick?

File: 1502798498119.jpg (60KB, 480x720px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 480x720px

>>138940854
Why are evangelicals so dedicated to this idea that "God" has to be a physical thing. God might just aswell be truth, since it is eternally present and never changing. I'm sure you know why Jesus is the son of God, it's because he is supremely truthful. God even says that himself multiple times, and truth is like the biggest deal in the new testament. Why do evangelical fags have to give christianity a bad name with insisting that God is some sort of being. fuck off already

>>138958249
Protestantism was a jewish plot to divide and conquer christianity. They pretend to be retarded by design.

>>138940854
Prove to me that God exists, and isn't a fabrication created by man.

>>138948340

You can't go around claiming the universe was able to appear from nothing because the rules of reality didn't exist yet, then deny a higher power couldn't do the same.

>>138958105
Engage in the conversation and articulate your points or go back to /r/atheism

>>138944894
Big crunch has been disproven sir. Space is expanding faster than the speed of light

>>138940854
>It must be infinite, omnipresent and more powerful that we could possibly imagine, while knowing that whatever this is CHOSE to create it, showing a personal element as well.

literally 0 proof for this.

It's the reasoning of old age men when they cannot comprehend.

File: 1430035911488.jpg (12KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 250x250px

>>138940854
>big bang created all space, time

Well then what happened before the big bang....
>muh science is settled goy

>>138940854

>everything came from nothing

(((Science)))

>>138940854
who's this semen demon?

>>138962649
oh shit it's forgotten weapons

>>138948441
Did he die ? He was on that cross, what, 7-8 hours. Crucifixion takes up to 24 hour and even more to kill a person. Clinical death seem a fairly likely proposal. It's not like he was decapitated.