GOD DID NOT CREATE THE UNIVERSE (says my man Steve)

[jd214]

Y'all believing this?

 

[jd214]

Y'all believing this?

 

[mo matik]

Very interesting.  Also interesting how some scholars believe the Bible doesn't actually say God created the Heaven and the Earth, but rather separated them.

God is not the Creator, claims academic

Professor Ellen van Wolde, a respected Old Testament scholar and author, claims the first sentence of Genesis "in the beginning God created the Heaven and the Earth" is not a true translation of the Hebrew.

She claims she has carried out fresh textual analysis that suggests the writers of the great book never intended to suggest that God created the world -- and in fact the Earth was already there when he created humans and animals.

Prof Van Wolde, 54, who will present a thesis on the subject at Radboud University in The Netherlands where she studies, said she had re-analysed the original Hebrew text and placed it in the context of the Bible as a whole, and in the context of other creation stories from ancient Mesopotamia.

She said she eventually concluded the Hebrew verb "bara", which is used in the first sentence of the book of Genesis, does not mean "to create" but to "spatially separate".

Even more interesting is how this is confirmed in the Qur'anic version.

Do not the unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were a closed-up mass (ratqan), then We clove them asunder (fataqna)? And We made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?

Quran 21:31

 

[mo matik]

Very interesting.  Also interesting how some scholars believe the Bible doesn't actually say God created the Heaven and the Earth, but rather separated them.

God is not the Creator, claims academic

Professor Ellen van Wolde, a respected Old Testament scholar and author, claims the first sentence of Genesis "in the beginning God created the Heaven and the Earth" is not a true translation of the Hebrew.

She claims she has carried out fresh textual analysis that suggests the writers of the great book never intended to suggest that God created the world -- and in fact the Earth was already there when he created humans and animals.

Prof Van Wolde, 54, who will present a thesis on the subject at Radboud University in The Netherlands where she studies, said she had re-analysed the original Hebrew text and placed it in the context of the Bible as a whole, and in the context of other creation stories from ancient Mesopotamia.

She said she eventually concluded the Hebrew verb "bara", which is used in the first sentence of the book of Genesis, does not mean "to create" but to "spatially separate".

Even more interesting is how this is confirmed in the Qur'anic version.

Do not the unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were a closed-up mass (ratqan), then We clove them asunder (fataqna)? And We made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?

Quran 21:31

 

[vanillafreak13]

 

[vanillafreak13]

 

[essential1]

well it would be tough for something that doesn't exist to create something so complex as the universe.. don't you think...

 

[essential1]

well it would be tough for something that doesn't exist to create something so complex as the universe.. don't you think...

 

[dathbgboy]

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey

Originally Posted by torgriffith

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey

If we are going to teach creation science as an alternative to evolution, then we should also teach the stork theory as an alternative to biological reproduction.

Enlighten us on stork theory please sir.

  

I been waiting for this mofo to send me a cute white baby for the longest...racist *** stork.

This dude Anton

 

[dathbgboy]

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey

Originally Posted by torgriffith

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey

If we are going to teach creation science as an alternative to evolution, then we should also teach the stork theory as an alternative to biological reproduction.

Enlighten us on stork theory please sir.

  

I been waiting for this mofo to send me a cute white baby for the longest...racist *** stork.

This dude Anton

 

[vsano]

nice one yuku

 

[vsano]

I've read articles on y-origins.com and I do affirm with the discussions. The universe is unimaginably designed perfectly that it's hard to discover and explain every detail of it.

 

[vsano]

nice one yuku

 

[vsano]

I've read articles on y-origins.com and I do affirm with the discussions. The universe is unimaginably designed perfectly that it's hard to discover and explain every detail of it.

 

[wisepharoah]

Theory on top of theory. Science, religion god the universe, laws of physics altered dimesions, quantem mechanics= GOD=consciousness in the form of life and non inanimate energy=GOD. God is not seperate from ANYTHING!

 

[wisepharoah]

Theory on top of theory. Science, religion god the universe, laws of physics altered dimesions, quantem mechanics= GOD=consciousness in the form of life and non inanimate energy=GOD. God is not seperate from ANYTHING!

 

[fade on you]

Im sick of this dude. Dude says some @##+ and everyone acts like a prophet has spoken and @##+ is all over the news and everywhere.

 

[fade on you]

Im sick of this dude. Dude says some @##+ and everyone acts like a prophet has spoken and @##+ is all over the news and everywhere.

 

[tree4twenty]

I have always found it amazing how some of the smartest people in history can say something and people are quick to disregard it, but those same people can read a book with wild stories and a great being that will send you to a firey hell if you do wrong and they will stand behind it like it's all been proven....

 

[tree4twenty]

I have always found it amazing how some of the smartest people in history can say something and people are quick to disregard it, but those same people can read a book with wild stories and a great being that will send you to a firey hell if you do wrong and they will stand behind it like it's all been proven....

 

[classy freshman]

bookmarked to read when I get time

 

[classy freshman]

bookmarked to read when I get time

 

[torgriffith]

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey

Originally Posted by Philosoraptor

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey

Originally Posted by Philosoraptor

It's kind of hard to discredit a higher power if you take into account how great this ever expanding universe is. Science alone can probably prove the physics within our own realm and dimension but what about further out?

http://nerdnirvana.org/wp...ed-by-a-single-pixel.jpg

If you take into account this picture which im just posting the link to (too big of a jpg to post), It is just mind boggling how the "we" as humans can claim science is correct and quickly discredit a higher being.

Not saying that science is wrong, but theories applied here on earth can falter down the line in this universe. There is still so much to learn.

But why is the said higher being exempt from the laws of science and creation? You are amazed at the grandeur of the universe and this leads you to conclude that a higher being beyond the scope of the universe had something to do with it. I am looking beyong this said higher being. How did it come into existence? Why stop at the questioning the universe's mysteries?


Religious folks and scientists are essentially saying the same thing.....that IT has always existed (the universe or God). If you think about it, both theories are not so different. The difference is science does a much better job or atleast makes an attempt to back up their claims with experiments and logic. 

I kind of actually agreed with you up to some extent. The second paragraph was on point until the last sentence. Which is where your belief comes into play. But I dare not cross the line any further since religion is only bent to continue based on faith, where as science with "experiments and logic". It's a side everyone has to chose. Different approaches do not always merit the same conclusions and this is a great example when it comes to religion and science.

Evolution has been proven, science has done more for its cause as far as offering explanations than religion has that is why I side with it. Science doesn't have all the answers, but it certainly has more "answers" than blind faith. I also side with science because it asks more questions than religion.


-Religion says "thing in the sky did it" as a response.
-Science says creationism is false and here is the evidence (bones on dinosaurs, carbon dating, quantum physics, recreating the big bang or whatever else it is these guys do that my brain can't even begin to fathom.

Didn't that article from the other post about 2012 solar flares talk about how scientist were wrong about their theory of carbon dating since there really is no accurate constant to measure it against. ( Decay rate not consistently the same across the universe). 
My thing with modern science is that it's not complete. They are making it up as they go. Much like Hawkings is. Too bad for  mental domes of the people that hang on to this guys every word.

 Both modern religion and modern science are constantly evolving. Would you take that as evolution of science and religion, or creationism because like Mo Matik pointed out, God separated rather than create, so that when it comes back together, a witness would say that's evolution rather while the ( putter togetherer 

) would claim he simply recreated what once simply always existed. This brings it down to subjectivity of the viewer IMO on the universe and it's origins. 

 

[torgriffith]

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey

Originally Posted by Philosoraptor

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey

Originally Posted by Philosoraptor

It's kind of hard to discredit a higher power if you take into account how great this ever expanding universe is. Science alone can probably prove the physics within our own realm and dimension but what about further out?

http://nerdnirvana.org/wp...ed-by-a-single-pixel.jpg

If you take into account this picture which im just posting the link to (too big of a jpg to post), It is just mind boggling how the "we" as humans can claim science is correct and quickly discredit a higher being.

Not saying that science is wrong, but theories applied here on earth can falter down the line in this universe. There is still so much to learn.

But why is the said higher being exempt from the laws of science and creation? You are amazed at the grandeur of the universe and this leads you to conclude that a higher being beyond the scope of the universe had something to do with it. I am looking beyong this said higher being. How did it come into existence? Why stop at the questioning the universe's mysteries?


Religious folks and scientists are essentially saying the same thing.....that IT has always existed (the universe or God). If you think about it, both theories are not so different. The difference is science does a much better job or atleast makes an attempt to back up their claims with experiments and logic. 

I kind of actually agreed with you up to some extent. The second paragraph was on point until the last sentence. Which is where your belief comes into play. But I dare not cross the line any further since religion is only bent to continue based on faith, where as science with "experiments and logic". It's a side everyone has to chose. Different approaches do not always merit the same conclusions and this is a great example when it comes to religion and science.

Evolution has been proven, science has done more for its cause as far as offering explanations than religion has that is why I side with it. Science doesn't have all the answers, but it certainly has more "answers" than blind faith. I also side with science because it asks more questions than religion.


-Religion says "thing in the sky did it" as a response.
-Science says creationism is false and here is the evidence (bones on dinosaurs, carbon dating, quantum physics, recreating the big bang or whatever else it is these guys do that my brain can't even begin to fathom.

Didn't that article from the other post about 2012 solar flares talk about how scientist were wrong about their theory of carbon dating since there really is no accurate constant to measure it against. ( Decay rate not consistently the same across the universe). 
My thing with modern science is that it's not complete. They are making it up as they go. Much like Hawkings is. Too bad for  mental domes of the people that hang on to this guys every word.

 Both modern religion and modern science are constantly evolving. Would you take that as evolution of science and religion, or creationism because like Mo Matik pointed out, God separated rather than create, so that when it comes back together, a witness would say that's evolution rather while the ( putter togetherer 

) would claim he simply recreated what once simply always existed. This brings it down to subjectivity of the viewer IMO on the universe and it's origins. 

 

[nat turner]

This is the stuff that the naysayers of Hawking would rather hear. Many of you don't realize how ridiculous you sound, but perhaps, maybe you do, and then love being like this guy above!