Comments for The Acts 17 Accord http://www.acts17accord.com Encourage, Educate and Evangelize Sat, 13 Nov 2010 14:15:44 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 Comment on The Inescapable Logic For God – by Paul Myrant by Himangsu Sekhar Pal http://www.acts17accord.com/2010/10/06/the-inescapable-logic-for-god-by-paul-myrant/comment-page-1/#comment-18 Himangsu Sekhar Pal Sat, 13 Nov 2010 14:15:44 +0000 http://www.acts17accord.com/?p=377#comment-18 IF GOD CREATED THE UNIVERSE, THEN WHO CREATED GOD? Earlier it was impossible for us to give any satisfactory answer to this question. But modern science, rather we should say that Einstein, has made it an easy task for us. And Stephen Hawking has provided us with the clue necessary for solving this riddle. Actually scientists in their infinite wisdom have already kept the ground well-prepared for us believers so that one day we can give a most plausible and logically consistent answer to this age-old question. Let me first quote from the book “A Brief History of Time” by Stephen Hawking: “The idea of inflation could also explain why there is so much matter in the universe. There is something like ten million million million million million million million million million million million million million million (1 with eighty zeroes after it) particles in the region of the universe that we can observe. Where did they all come from? The answer is that, in quantum theory, particles can be created out of energy in the form of particle/antiparticle pairs. But that just raises the question of where the energy came from. The answer is that the total energy of the universe is exactly zero.” Here the question stops. So the clue is this: if we can ultimately arrive at zero, then no further question will be raised, and there will be no infinite regression. What I intend to do here is something similar to that. I want to show that our God is a bunch of several zeroes, and that therefore no further question need be raised about His origin. And here comes Einstein with his special theory of relativity for giving us the necessary empirical support for our project. God is a Being. Therefore God will have existence as well as essence. So I will have to show that both from the point of view of existence as well as from the point of view of essence God is zero. It is almost a common parlance that God is spaceless, timeless, changeless, immortal, and all-pervading. Here we are getting three zeroes; space is zero, time is zero, change is zero. But how to prove that if there is a God, then that God will be spaceless, timeless, and changeless? From special theory of relativity we come to know that for light both distance and time become unreal. For light even an infinite distance is infinitely contracted to zero. The volume of an infinite universe full of light only will be simply zero due to this property of light. A universe with zero volume is a spaceless universe. Again at the speed of light time totally stops. So a universe full of light only is a spaceless, timeless universe. But these are the properties of light only! How do we come to know that God is also having the same properties of light so that God can also be spaceless, timeless? Scientists have shown that if there is a God, then that God can only be light, and nothing else, and that therefore He will have all the properties of light. Here is the proof. Scientists have shown that total energy of the universe is always zero. If total energy is zero, then total mass will also be zero due to energy-mass equivalence. Now if there is a God, then scientists have calculated the total energy and mass of the universe by taking into consideration that there is also a God. In other words, if God is there, then this total energy-mass calculation by the scientists is God-inclusive, not God-exclusive. This is due to two reasons. First of all, even if there is a God, they do not know that there is a God. Secondly, they do not admit that there is a God. So, if there is a God, then they have not been able to keep that God aside before making the calculation, because they do not know that there is a God. They cannot say that they have kept Him aside and then made the calculation, because by saying that they will admit that there is a God. At most they can say that there is no God. But we are not going to accept that statement as the final verdict on God-issue, because we are disputing that statement. So the matter of the fact is this: if God is really there, then scientists have shown that both the total mass and energy of the universe including God are zero. Therefore mass and energy of God will also be zero. God is without any mass, without any energy. And Einstein has already shown that anything having zero rest-mass will have the speed of light. In other words, it will be light. So, if God is there, then God is also light, and therefore He is spaceless, timeless. So from the point of view of existence God is zero, because he is spaceless, timeless, without any mass, without any energy. Now we will have to show that from the point of view of essence also God is zero. If there is only one being in the universe, and if there is no second being other than that being, then that being cannot have any such property as love, hate, cruelty, compassion, benevolence, etc. Let us say that God is cruel. Now to whom can He be cruel if there is no other being other than God Himself? So, if God is cruel, then is He cruel to Himself? Therefore if we say that God is all-loving, merciful, benevolent, etc., then we are also admitting that God is not alone, that there is another being co-eternal with God to whom He can show His love, benevolence, goodness, mercy, compassion, etc. If we say that God is all-loving, then we are also saying that this “all” is co-eternal with God. Thus we are admitting that God has not created the universe at all, and that therefore we need not have to revere Him, for the simple reason that He is not our creator! It is usually said that God is good. But Bertrand Russell has shown that God cannot be good for the simple reason that if God is good, then there is a standard of goodness which is independent of God’s will. Therefore, if God is the ultimate Being, then that God cannot be good. But neither can He be evil. God is beyond good and evil. Like Hindu’s Brahma, a real God can only be nirguna, nirupadhik; without any name, without any quality. From the point of view of essence also, a real God is a zero. So, why should there be any need for creation here, if God is existentially, as well as essentially, zero? But if there is someone who is intelligent and clever enough, then he will not stop arguing here. He will point out to another infinite regression. If God is light, then He will no doubt be spaceless, timeless, etc. Therefore one infinite regression is thus arrested. But what about the second regression? How, and from whom, does light get its own peculiar properties by means of which we have successfully arrested the first regression? So, here is another infinite regression. But we need not have to worry much about this regression, because this problem has already been solved. A whole thing, by virtue of its being the whole thing, will have all the properties of spacelessness, timelessness, changelessness, deathlessness. It need not have to depend on any other external source for getting these properties. Thus no further infinite regression will be there. H. S. Pal IF GOD CREATED THE UNIVERSE, THEN WHO CREATED GOD?
Earlier it was impossible for us to give any satisfactory answer to this question. But modern science, rather we should say that Einstein, has made it an easy task for us. And Stephen Hawking has provided us with the clue necessary for solving this riddle. Actually scientists in their infinite wisdom have already kept the ground well-prepared for us believers so that one day we can give a most plausible and logically consistent answer to this age-old question. Let me first quote from the book “A Brief History of Time” by Stephen Hawking:
“The idea of inflation could also explain why there is so much matter in the universe. There is something like ten million million million million million million million million million million million million million million (1 with eighty zeroes after it) particles in the region of the universe that we can observe. Where did they all come from? The answer is that, in quantum theory, particles can be created out of energy in the form of particle/antiparticle pairs. But that just raises the question of where the energy came from. The answer is that the total energy of the universe is exactly zero.”
Here the question stops. So the clue is this: if we can ultimately arrive at zero, then no further question will be raised, and there will be no infinite regression. What I intend to do here is something similar to that. I want to show that our God is a bunch of several zeroes, and that therefore no further question need be raised about His origin. And here comes Einstein with his special theory of relativity for giving us the necessary empirical support for our project.
God is a Being. Therefore God will have existence as well as essence. So I will have to show that both from the point of view of existence as well as from the point of view of essence God is zero. It is almost a common parlance that God is spaceless, timeless, changeless, immortal, and all-pervading. Here we are getting three zeroes; space is zero, time is zero, change is zero. But how to prove that if there is a God, then that God will be spaceless, timeless, and changeless? From special theory of relativity we come to know that for light both distance and time become unreal. For light even an infinite distance is infinitely contracted to zero. The volume of an infinite universe full of light only will be simply zero due to this property of light. A universe with zero volume is a spaceless universe. Again at the speed of light time totally stops. So a universe full of light only is a spaceless, timeless universe. But these are the properties of light only! How do we come to know that God is also having the same properties of light so that God can also be spaceless, timeless? Scientists have shown that if there is a God, then that God can only be light, and nothing else, and that therefore He will have all the properties of light. Here is the proof.
Scientists have shown that total energy of the universe is always zero. If total energy is zero, then total mass will also be zero due to energy-mass equivalence. Now if there is a God, then scientists have calculated the total energy and mass of the universe by taking into consideration that there is also a God. In other words, if God is there, then this total energy-mass calculation by the scientists is God-inclusive, not God-exclusive. This is due to two reasons. First of all, even if there is a God, they do not know that there is a God. Secondly, they do not admit that there is a God. So, if there is a God, then they have not been able to keep that God aside before making the calculation, because they do not know that there is a God. They cannot say that they have kept Him aside and then made the calculation, because by saying that they will admit that there is a God. At most they can say that there is no God. But we are not going to accept that statement as the final verdict on God-issue, because we are disputing that statement. So the matter of the fact is this: if God is really there, then scientists have shown that both the total mass and energy of the universe including God are zero. Therefore mass and energy of God will also be zero. God is without any mass, without any energy. And Einstein has already shown that anything having zero rest-mass will have the speed of light. In other words, it will be light. So, if God is there, then God is also light, and therefore He is spaceless, timeless. So from the point of view of existence God is zero, because he is spaceless, timeless, without any mass, without any energy.
Now we will have to show that from the point of view of essence also God is zero. If there is only one being in the universe, and if there is no second being other than that being, then that being cannot have any such property as love, hate, cruelty, compassion, benevolence, etc. Let us say that God is cruel. Now to whom can He be cruel if there is no other being other than God Himself? So, if God is cruel, then is He cruel to Himself? Therefore if we say that God is all-loving, merciful, benevolent, etc., then we are also admitting that God is not alone, that there is another being co-eternal with God to whom He can show His love, benevolence, goodness, mercy, compassion, etc. If we say that God is all-loving, then we are also saying that this “all” is co-eternal with God. Thus we are admitting that God has not created the universe at all, and that therefore we need not have to revere Him, for the simple reason that He is not our creator!
It is usually said that God is good. But Bertrand Russell has shown that God cannot be good for the simple reason that if God is good, then there is a standard of goodness which is independent of God’s will. Therefore, if God is the ultimate Being, then that God cannot be good. But neither can He be evil. God is beyond good and evil. Like Hindu’s Brahma, a real God can only be nirguna, nirupadhik; without any name, without any quality. From the point of view of essence also, a real God is a zero.
So, why should there be any need for creation here, if God is existentially, as well as essentially, zero?
But if there is someone who is intelligent and clever enough, then he will not stop arguing here. He will point out to another infinite regression. If God is light, then He will no doubt be spaceless, timeless, etc. Therefore one infinite regression is thus arrested. But what about the second regression? How, and from whom, does light get its own peculiar properties by means of which we have successfully arrested the first regression? So, here is another infinite regression. But we need not have to worry much about this regression, because this problem has already been solved. A whole thing, by virtue of its being the whole thing, will have all the properties of spacelessness, timelessness, changelessness, deathlessness. It need not have to depend on any other external source for getting these properties. Thus no further infinite regression will be there.
H. S. Pal

]]> Comment on Rock Mountain Creation Fellowship by vineyard christian fellowship church http://www.acts17accord.com/2009/10/05/rock-mountain-creation-fellowship/comment-page-1/#comment-13 vineyard christian fellowship church Wed, 31 Mar 2010 06:47:43 +0000 http://www.acts17accord.com/?p=287#comment-13 [...] she ... years he worked for Inter-Varsity Christian Fellowship, from 1989 till 1997 as National ...Rock Mountain Creation Fellowship | The Acts 17 AccordRock Mountain Creation Fellowship. Posted by TimJones on October 5, 2009. Paul will be ... time to [...] [...] she … years he worked for Inter-Varsity Christian Fellowship, from 1989 till 1997 as National …Rock Mountain Creation Fellowship | The Acts 17 AccordRock Mountain Creation Fellowship. Posted by TimJones on October 5, 2009. Paul will be … time to [...]

]]> Comment on Paul to lead ORIGINS discussion at Littleton Vineyard by vineyard christian fellowship http://www.acts17accord.com/2009/11/19/paul-to-lead-origins-discussion-at-littleton-vineyard/comment-page-1/#comment-12 vineyard christian fellowship Thu, 11 Mar 2010 04:17:30 +0000 http://www.acts17accord.com/?p=322#comment-12 [...] ... Changing the Christian Image (2 Corinthians 10:3-5; Matthew 22:23-32) Stream | Download ...Paul to lead ORIGINS discussion at Littleton Vineyard | The ...Name (required) Mail (will not be published) (required) Website. Is Fire hot or cold? ( required) [...] [...] … Changing the Christian Image (2 Corinthians 10:3-5; Matthew 22:23-32) Stream | Download …Paul to lead ORIGINS discussion at Littleton Vineyard | The …Name (required) Mail (will not be published) (required) Website. Is Fire hot or cold? ( required) [...]

]]> Comment on Reviews of The Challenge of Evolution by elsen http://www.acts17accord.com/2009/09/04/reviews-of-the-challenge-of-evolution/comment-page-1/#comment-11 elsen Thu, 04 Mar 2010 19:47:40 +0000 http://www.acts17accord.com/?p=242#comment-11 [...] ... Renee Elsen. Shea Fanning. Zachary Fisher. Jimmy Gray. Christine Gronneberg. Audrey Harper ...Reviews of The Challenge of Evolution | The Acts 17 AccordChadd Elsen, Lay-leader. The Challenge of Evolution is the perfect book to wake up and inspire [...] [...] … Renee Elsen. Shea Fanning. Zachary Fisher. Jimmy Gray. Christine Gronneberg. Audrey Harper …Reviews of The Challenge of Evolution | The Acts 17 AccordChadd Elsen, Lay-leader. The Challenge of Evolution is the perfect book to wake up and inspire [...]

]]> Comment on The Challenge of Evolution by Wendy Wendover http://www.acts17accord.com/2008/12/12/the-challenge-of-evolution/comment-page-1/#comment-10 Wendy Wendover Mon, 08 Feb 2010 19:04:49 +0000 http://www.acts17accord.com/?p=122#comment-10 Good morning Paul, I am following up on our conversation last week regarding your contact with Karen Fitzpatrick at the ACSI Conference. Karen Fitzpatrick indicated that she made a contact with Sid Buzzell, Dean of the School of Theology at CCU, and then put your book (The Challenge of Evolution) in the campus mail for Sid, She also left him a follow up voice mail after sending it to him. You will want to contact Dean Buzzell directly at sbuzzell@ccu.edu or his direct line at 303.963.3421. I am glad that I could assist you in finding the next step to take. Blessings. Wendy Good morning Paul,
I am following up on our conversation last week regarding your contact with Karen Fitzpatrick at the ACSI Conference. Karen Fitzpatrick indicated that she made a contact with Sid Buzzell, Dean of the School of Theology at CCU, and then put your book (The Challenge of Evolution) in the campus mail for Sid, She also left him a follow up voice mail after sending it to him. You will want to contact Dean Buzzell directly at sbuzzell@ccu.edu or his direct line at 303.963.3421. I am glad that I could assist you in finding the next step to take.
Blessings.
Wendy

]]> Comment on Exerpts from The Challenge of Evolution by Bob Puharic http://www.acts17accord.com/2009/09/04/exerpts-from-the-challenge-of-evolution/comment-page-1/#comment-9 Bob Puharic Thu, 17 Sep 2009 01:16:03 +0000 http://www.acts17accord.com/?p=236#comment-9 This creationism is a tragedy for Christianity. The fact is that creationism is wrong. Adhering to it only damages the Christian religion. The reason evolution is taught is because it's true. Hundreds of millions of Christians see no conflict between evolution and religion. It is creationism that's wrong. Learn to think. September 19, 2009 Thanks for you opinion Bob, I appreciate you taking the time to write it. If you had actually read my book it might make a difference in your opinion. The book is the result of 37 years of intense study and research into both creationism and evolution. My belief in a Creator is not based on blind faith, religion. It is based squarely on logic and the evidence of the universe and human interaction. Personally it does not matter to me if most Christians believe in evolution, which they don't, what matters is what the Bible teaches and what science can prove as fact. My best understanding of the Bible is that God made the unverse out of nothing in six days. The beliefs of science are as follows: we live in a universe that had a beginning (i.e the big bang) the logical assertion of this is that the big bang had to be caused by something greater that itself, and something that was pre-existent to the event (i.e. and eternal creator). Secondly, all living things appear to have the capacity to adapt to given environments making small changes within a given specie. White foxes and brown foxes adapt to their environments for survival. Is this evolution? Not at all,it is adaptation, or maybe better stated, gene selection based on the survivability of white or brown foxes due to their protection and visiblity to predators. Third, what science can prove is that everything reproduces after its own kind. That is a scientific fact, not that everything came from one original life form and changed into succesive species over millions of years. The belief in cross species mutation is based on assumptions and subjective interpretation of skulls and bone fragments of unknown beings from the past. Since, the goal of each of these scientists who interpret these artifacts is to prove their personal belief system is true, "evolution", their opinions are not trustworthy, they are not objective. A final issue is the age of the universe and the earth. This is really what science has placed their beliefs in. The facts of this are non-existent. If a Creator exists, (which logic tells us must) then how did this being create the universe, what was the process He used? It is impossible to prove, scientifically or philosophically how this took place, all we can possiblly do is try to discover how the universe is operating today. If the Creator created the universe, He did so by a supernatural activity, which cannot be duplicated and which makes all natural laws the result of a supernatural act. Which also means that everything created was created with apparent age, functional and complete. If naturalism were true then it might take millions of years for life to move from simple to complex forms, but it cannot take place without something causing it to happen. If you can create anything why not create it complete and functional. What is most critical is whether the universe is cause or uncaused. an uncaused universe is irrational to the highest degree, the existence of an eternal Creator is the only logical explanation for the universe. I do not believe that Chrisitianity harms itself in any way because of our understanding and belief that God created the universe. Christianity is based entirely on the fact that God exists and created the universe out of nothing. That the Creator is the owner and judge of all human activity. That our actions are a result of our own choices. That God is good and loves mankind. The message that God created and loves mankind is a message of hope and peace. It has been received by countless millions of people throughout the ages. Christianity continues to be the largest religion in the world, and no belief system other than Christianity provides real answers to the questions that people have. Why do I exist? What is the meaning of life? What happens after I die? This creationism is a tragedy for Christianity. The fact is that creationism is wrong. Adhering to it only damages the Christian religion. The reason evolution is taught is because it’s true. Hundreds of millions of Christians see no conflict between evolution and religion.

It is creationism that’s wrong. Learn to think.

September 19, 2009

Thanks for you opinion Bob, I appreciate you taking the time to write it.

If you had actually read my book it might make a difference in your opinion. The book is the result of 37 years of intense study and research into both creationism and evolution. My belief in a Creator is not based on blind faith, religion. It is based squarely on logic and the evidence of the universe and human interaction.

Personally it does not matter to me if most Christians believe in evolution, which they don’t, what matters is what the Bible teaches and what science can prove as fact. My best understanding of the Bible is that God made the unverse out of nothing in six days.

The beliefs of science are as follows: we live in a universe that had a beginning (i.e the big bang) the logical assertion of this is that the big bang had to be caused by something greater that itself, and something that was pre-existent to the event (i.e. and eternal creator).

Secondly, all living things appear to have the capacity to adapt to given environments making small changes within a given specie. White foxes and brown foxes adapt to their environments for survival. Is this evolution? Not at all,it is adaptation, or maybe better stated, gene selection based on the survivability of white or brown foxes due to their protection and visiblity to predators.

Third, what science can prove is that everything reproduces after its own kind. That is a scientific fact, not that everything came from one original life form and changed into succesive species over millions of years.

The belief in cross species mutation is based on assumptions and subjective interpretation of skulls and bone fragments of unknown beings from the past. Since, the goal of each of these scientists who interpret these artifacts is to prove their personal belief system is true, “evolution”, their opinions are not trustworthy, they are not objective.

A final issue is the age of the universe and the earth. This is really what science has placed their beliefs in. The facts of this are non-existent. If a Creator exists, (which logic tells us must) then how did this being create the universe, what was the process He used? It is impossible to prove, scientifically or philosophically how this took place, all we can possiblly do is try to discover how the universe is operating today. If the Creator created the universe, He did so by a supernatural activity, which cannot be duplicated and which makes all natural laws the result of a supernatural act. Which also means that everything created was created with apparent age, functional and complete.

If naturalism were true then it might take millions of years for life to move from simple to complex forms, but it cannot take place without something causing it to happen. If you can create anything why not create it complete and functional.

What is most critical is whether the universe is cause or uncaused. an uncaused universe is irrational to the highest degree, the existence of an eternal Creator is the only logical explanation for the universe.

I do not believe that Chrisitianity harms itself in any way because of our understanding and belief that God created the universe. Christianity is based entirely on the fact that God exists and created the universe out of nothing. That the Creator is the owner and judge of all human activity. That our actions are a result of our own choices. That God is good and loves mankind.

The message that God created and loves mankind is a message of hope and peace. It has been received by countless millions of people throughout the ages. Christianity continues to be the largest religion in the world, and no belief system other than Christianity provides real answers to the questions that people have. Why do I exist? What is the meaning of life? What happens after I die?

]]> Comment on Reviews of The Challenge of Evolution by The Challenge of Evolution | The Acts 17 Accord http://www.acts17accord.com/2009/09/04/reviews-of-the-challenge-of-evolution/comment-page-1/#comment-8 The Challenge of Evolution | The Acts 17 Accord Sat, 05 Sep 2009 07:25:42 +0000 http://www.acts17accord.com/?p=242#comment-8 [...] WHAT PEOPLE ARE SAYING ABOUT THE [...] [...] WHAT PEOPLE ARE SAYING ABOUT THE [...]

]]> Comment on Highlights from The Challenge of Evolution by The Challenge of Evolution | The Acts 17 Accord http://www.acts17accord.com/2009/09/04/highlights-from-the-challenge-of-evolution/comment-page-1/#comment-7 The Challenge of Evolution | The Acts 17 Accord Sat, 05 Sep 2009 07:24:27 +0000 http://www.acts17accord.com/?p=234#comment-7 [...] HIGHLIGHTS FROM THE [...] [...] HIGHLIGHTS FROM THE [...]

]]> Comment on Exerpts from The Challenge of Evolution by The Challenge of Evolution | The Acts 17 Accord http://www.acts17accord.com/2009/09/04/exerpts-from-the-challenge-of-evolution/comment-page-1/#comment-6 The Challenge of Evolution | The Acts 17 Accord Sat, 05 Sep 2009 06:50:09 +0000 http://www.acts17accord.com/?p=236#comment-6 [...] EXCERPTS FROM THE [...] [...] EXCERPTS FROM THE [...]

]]> Comment on Gay Marriage – What Does the Bible Say? by pmyrant http://www.acts17accord.com/2008/12/13/gay-marriage-what-does-the-bible-say/comment-page-1/#comment-5 pmyrant Sat, 13 Dec 2008 21:15:27 +0000 http://www.acts17accord.com/?p=126#comment-5