I thought the current thinking is not the Big Bang but a wave. A expansion and contraction of the universe. I've read a couple of articles about it but it was written for a jr. hi audience. The articles were in a weekly reader called Current Science. What you think of the Big Bang was just the end of the contraction phase.


I thought it fit well. It answers why the universe is presently expanding in the presence of gravity.

Machiavelli Wrote:I thought the current thinking is not the Big Bang but a wave. A expansion and contraction of the universe. I've read a couple of articles about it but it was written for a jr. hi audience. The articles were in a weekly reader called Current Science. What you think of the Big Bang was just the end of the contraction phase.


I thought it fit well. It answers why the universe is presently expanding in the presence of gravity.

I saw something like that recently, but they actually went a little farther. They were suggesting that it would be possible to detect signs of what was here before our present universe. I believe it had something to do with the singularity being smuged a little bit & not quite infentesimal. I'll have to see if I can remember where I saw it.

*** Edited to add link. http://space.newscientist.com/article/mg...e-sky.html

jh Wrote:Libertarians tend to believe more strongly in the separation of church & state than either of the two major parties so I'm not sure there is really a "Christian Libertarian" view on anything. This is not to imply that no Libertarians are Christian or that the Christianity of a Libertarian cannot inform their political views, just that there is not really an identifiable block.

I think I might have mispoken a little bit here. I'm not sure that it's as much the separation of church & state that is in play (though I do believe that remains an important consideration) as much as it is just that the Libertarian party tends to focus on protecting individual rights, often to the exclusion of other concerns. My perception is that religious cohorts, when acting as a group, tend to be focused as much or more on enforcing morality than on protecting rights.

There is one issue where I do think there might be considered a Christian Libertarian position - abortion. The party takes no official stance on abortion, other than believing it's an issue best left to the states to decide. They recognize that there are reasonable cases, consistent with the overall libertarian philosophy of protecting individual rights, to be made on both sides of the argument and that each member must balance these competing claims for themselves. I suspect that most Christians who are Libertarians come down on the anti-abortion side, but I have no data to back that up (and am not claiming that all Christians must oppose abortion or that the only reason to oppose abortion is on religious grounds).

Machiavelli Wrote:I thought it fit well. It answers why the universe is presently expanding in the presence of gravity.

If it was big enough to overcome the initial gravity, it shouldn't have had much problem. Gravity, like magnetic force, decreases exponentially over distance. You don't feel Alpha Centauri tugging at you do you?

georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:

Jugnaut Wrote:As far as world religions though, I was a devout christian for 19 years, but then I thoroughly examined the bible (higher criticism and such) and realized that it was extremely unreliable. The evidence was overwhelming against the authenticity of the bible. Too many contradictions, errors, distortions, exaggerations, etc. Jesus was most likely a radical rabbi who was influenced by Cynicism (referring to greek philosophy, not skeptic). Many of Jesus' saying are copies of Cynic saying and Nazareth was a few miles from a Cynic center Gadara. Example: Jesus: "God is Love"; Cynics before Jesus: "Love is God." Cynics preached a message of rejection of wealth and preached a message of equality/social justice.

I've always said reading The Bible is the best way to become an atheist. You should pick up a copy of "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins. He very clearly lays out his argument for de facto atheism, and addresses all counter arguments, including those you mentioned.

I actually looked at a copy of the God Delusion today at the store. I decided I'll buy and read sometime in the relatively near future. I've got a bunch of other books I'm reading first, but it looked very interesting. I doubt it will change my view as I've heard of a lot of the arguments and counter-arguments before, but I was impressed. It even had st. thomas aquinas' five proofs. I never liked dawkins personally because I thought he was arrogant (saw him on Bill Maher), but the book seems very worthwhile.

Fo Shizzle Wrote:Oh Well....this thead is offically gone to hell.

This strikes me as funny. What is your criteria for this? Of all the threads you've posted in, why this one, and why now? Of all of the forums, I've read, this one is the least likely I'd post something like this, because it's a rarity when they don't.

Jugnaut Wrote:I actually looked at a copy of the God Delusion today at the store. I decided I'll buy and read sometime in the relatively near future. I've got a bunch of other books I'm reading first, but it looked very interesting. I doubt it will change my view as I've heard of a lot of the arguments and counter-arguments before, but I was impressed. It even had st. thomas aquinas' five proofs. I never liked dawkins personally because I thought he was arrogant (saw him on Bill Maher), but the book seems very worthwhile.

He's arrogant as hell, but that doesn't mean he's not compelling.

Some trumpet players have a saying, "It's not arrogance when you're right".

Bourgeois_Rage Wrote:Some trumpet players have a saying, "It's not arrogance when you're right".

The only time I have a real problem with arrogance is when it's not warranted - you earn the right to be arrogant. I don't generally view it as a good quality, but you have to earn it.