My Boy Brady and The Big Bang | Feedback Friday!

Posted on August 31, 2018 by A Bit Of Orange

Welcome once again to Feedback Friday! This comment is from our friend Brady and is in reply to this post about the Big BANG. He writes:

There are several problems with this post.

The first one being is that the Big Bang is actually not an explosion. It is widely affirmed that the term “Big Bang” is a misnomer. The Big Bang Theory states that the universe started out hot and dense and has expanded and cooled since then.

The second problem is that you claim that the Big Bang Theory is an atheistic theory. This could not be further from the truth. Before the BBT came, most atheists thought that the universe was static and eternal. The BBT actually threatened their atheism, because it implies that the universe had a beginning. So you actually have it backwards: atheists first rejected the BBT and Christians were the first ones to affirm the BBT. In fact, it was a Christians who came up with the BBT.

The third problem is that you say that Edwin Hubble was an atheist. This is blatantly wrong, as he was a Christian.

The fourth problem is that you say that the earth being in the center of the universe is evidence for God, but you never explain why that is the case. How is the earth being in the middle of the universe evidence for God?

Greetings again, Brady, and thank you for your questions.
1. This is semantic nit picking. If something starts out so small that it is considered of no size and it quickly enlarges until it is very VERY large, then perhaps you can explain to me why it is not an explosion. Especially since the model has it being an enormous release of heat and light. How is that NOT an explosion? Riddle me THIS Batman. Until then, I shall maintain that when something suddenly gets much much larger, this can be called an explosion.

IF the words “Expansion” or “Inflation” can really be said to be importantly different, feel free to make the case. Even if you do, I also fail to see how this pettifoggery is of any import. Nothing I say or defend really hinges on this choice of words, and thus this critique is not really necessary.

2. I understand that The Big Bang model proves atheism false and as such was rejected on philosophical grounds by atheists in its infancy, just as it is embraced for philosophical reasons by atheists now merely because it provides an alternative (or they falsely believe it does) to creation by God. I defend my assertion because Big Bang is not based on the observational data, it is not supported by scripture (and in fact contradicts in various ways) and it is now, out of desperation I suppose, the religious creation story of atheism. If one does not start with atheistic assumptions, I do not see any reason why they would embrace it. Christians may have embraced it- I do not know if that is true- but far too many churches erred in accepting evolution as well, and as I have shown several times over, Evolution is as wrong as wrong can be (provided you define it to mean what Darwin meant).

3. From his own words I would not believe Hubble was a Christian, and I have found no evidence to support your claim. Also, he is listed on the internet as a celebrity Atheist/Agnostic, so if you are correct the error is not mine alone. If you have a source to confirm this, please share it. Once again, the point I make is not made on his being an atheist, nor is it broken by his not being one.

4. Forgive me for failing to make the case. I figured this one was obvious. Even Stephen Hawking addresses it in his work- if we are at the center of the universe, the odds are so far against it that it becomes much more likely that we were placed here by an act of will as opposed to random chance dumb luck. This is why Hawking asserts the absurd and (even he admits) unprovable proposition that the universe looks, to any observer in it, anywhere in the universe, as though they are at the center.

See, the large scale map of the universe shows us as the center of a series of concentric bubbles- like being at the middle of a bull’s eye. This certainly would be unlikley. Hawking and others like him admit that this would make our place in the universe far more aligned with the special creation by God than by dumb luck, and that’s why he asserts the absurd and unprovable. In the quote I provide in the context of this article, he says “We believe it only on grounds of modesty…”

Actually, re-reading what I wrote, I do address most of your questions in the original article. Perhaps you ought to just give it a second, and more careful reading. Good advice for most situations I suspect.
Thanks again.

Another friend named Gary wrote in and said:

I’m surprised that you missed something in your humorous story about naming the Big Bang. It was a snide remark by opponent Fred Hoyle that stuck. Also surprised that you didn’t get heat from atheists who object to the explosion reference, but that IS the way it was originally described for many years, then the so-called inflation stuff came along and the explosion thing was no longer accurate. The BB has very little in common with the early days, and even less in common with actual science.

Greetings GJM! I did actually know that the name “Big Bang” was coined as a snide remark, but I’m still disappointed that no one came up with anything better. And I did get pushback from atheists on youtube about calling the big bang an explosion.

While I am familiar with the language of “inflation” I must ask, as I did to them,

what’s the difference between an explosion and a rapid inflation?

It seems rather nit picky to say nothing suddenly became a giant and rapidly expanding ball of intense heat and light but it WASN’T an explosion. If your car suddenly becomes a rapidly expanding ball of light and heat, you will tell the insurance company that your car exploded. I don’t think they would be justified to say “We would cover an explosion, but your car simply underwent a rapid inflationary period.”

Although I have had insurance companies try similar things with me in the past, but I digress. thanks for your comment.

Posted in Feedback Fridays | Tagged , | 2 Comments

Proof of God 6: Proving God with Science (AKA: Indiana CSI: Tomb Raider)

Posted on August 29, 2018 by A Bit Of Orange

Roach Clowns all the time be saying, “I don’t understand God, Science, or the concept of proof!” but because their spelling is so bad it frequently comes across as “I demand scientific proof for the existence of God!”

Now because they so often want scientific observations of God Himself, they prove only what they don’t know. They are demanding physical observations of a immaterial being.

This is like asking how much water love would displace when submerged or how tall Jazz is in centimeters. On the other hand, there is a second way to take this demand. We could alter it to demand that science be used to show the existence of God (Sometimes you need to help the Roach Clowns make sense before you can answer them. This is one of those times). It is in this second way that science is of great help to the Christian Apologist. But before I explain that, I need to tell you something truly amazing about this article.

BagawatChurch copy Continue reading →

Posted in atheism, Philosophy | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Objective Morals and the Fish Slapping Dance

Posted on August 27, 2018 by A Bit Of Orange

I was setting fire to old tires full of orphan kittens this morning when I realized that the only thing that has kept me from making arson (Burning down hospitals, specifically) a full time career is all the time I spend selling drugs to grade school kids as a way to fund the local chapter of the Illinois Nazis.

Racism isn’t cheep you know. Not the real, fascist, genocidal kind.

So, I thought I could start splitting my time between drugs and theft more efficiently by forcing other people to rob for me by threatening their wives and children with high explosives and anthrax. Every successful person has a team under them. Look at Jim Henson, Oprah, or Attila the Hun just to name a few examples. And I want my career as a Fascist polluting racist thieving drug czar to be more than just a hobby. I want it to be really big, because I want the world to be a better place.

It’s a lot of work, but I really feel it’s the right thing to do.


 Continue reading →

Posted in Philosophy | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

In Defense of the 10 (non) Atheist Commandments

Posted on August 24, 2018 by A Bit Of Orange

Greetings friends! Today we’re looking at a reply to my recent series on the 10 atheist (non) commandments, which shows that, no matter how simple I try to make things, people will tell me I’m wrong without actually reading what I’ve said.

Seriously, can anyone argue that I write at too high a level to be understood? Because I don’t think it takes a PhD to read my stuff. I don’t think it takes much more than a 5th grade education to understand me EVER, but still somehow I remain a mystery to some. Go fig.

For a great example of someone missing the point, read this reply by Makagutu, and then some of his readers. He fails almost immediately by claiming “atheism makes no claims.” How people can make this error over and over amazes me. This is a MAJOR concern of his. “HOW DARE you define Atheism to mean “Atheism”? It’s MEANINGLESS!”Which is almost true, but I digress. Continue reading →

Posted in atheism, Philosophy | Tagged | Leave a comment

Proof of God 5: Universe from the new i-God (Not coming to any store near you)

Posted on August 22, 2018 by A Bit Of Orange

During this series I’ve been focusing on how Roach Clowns all the time be demanding evidence for the existence of God, but they are not the only people who ask for evidence for the existence of God. Lots of people do and ought to ask for evidence for every part of the Christian worldview. What makes Roach Clowns unique is that they have absolutely no desire to hear the answer, and will do anything in their power to ignore, misunderstand, or make fun of any evidence you provide.

When Roach Clowns ask you to give evidence for God, they are like Midwesterners who say, “How are you doing?” We don’t really want to know how you are doing. It’s a greeting. It simply means, “I acknowledge your presence in my vicinity.” You’re supposed to reply, “Fine,” or “Good,” and then quickly change the subject. When a Roach Clown says, “What evidence do you have for the existence of God?” what he means is “I don’t understand your position, but you’re wrong and I hate you.”

Naturally, the meaning does get lost in translation.

universe box Continue reading →

Posted in atheism, Philosophy | Tagged , | Leave a comment

10 (non)Commandments of Atheism #9 and 10- Prohibited and Yet Mandatory

Posted on August 20, 2018 by A Bit Of Orange

Today we conclude a look at the 10 (non) commandments offered as an alternative to the ten (actual) commandments. This list is compiled from nearly 3,000 submissions from atheists from more than a dozen countries.

In keeping with the mindless emotional drivel which has come before, the remaining two (non) commands are not only entirely baseless and indefensible on atheism, but are actually contradictory:

#9. There is no one right way to live.

#10. Leave the world a better place than you found it.

Number 9 almost works on their world view, as long as you acknowledge that there isn’t even ONE right way to live, let alone more than one. There is no right or wrong of any kind on atheism, so this becomes a meaningless statement. It’s like saying, “In a world where light does not exist, you can wear any color you want after labor day.”

Or, “In a world with no liquids, there is no one drink of choice.”

Whoo hoo. Can you feel that exhilarating feeling of freedom? Me neither.

Oh, and by “There is no one right way to live,” we meant, “The only right way to live is where you leave the world a better place than you found it.” I think we’ve passed hypocrisy and have plowed, full speed, into stupid. While it is hard to remember this while watching the Indiana Jones movies, The Nazis REALLY BELIEVED that they were going to make the world a better place. (Read more about that HERE)

Number ten is an actual COMMAND, or would be if they could qualify “Better.” Ironically this failure is their escape hatch. On Atheism, there is no good, and so there can be no better. For an atheist to ask if the world is a better place is like two bus station drunks having the following conversation:

Drunk 1: “Are we closer, or further away?”

Drunk 2: “From what?”

Drunk 1: “It doesn’t matter.”

Drunk2: “Oh. In that case, no.”

This sums up the entire exercise. Without God, there is no meaning and purpose to our existence. Without meaning and purpose, we can’t fail to reach out goal, and we can’t fulfill our purpose, because none exists. No one is of adequate authority to give commands. So why did these guys all make their own top ten list? Because they all KNOW the truth they refuse to acknowledge.

Romans 1:20 (ESV) tells us this: “For [God’s] invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world,  in the things that have been made. So they [unbelievers] are without excuse.”

Everyone KNOWS that God is there. Some just don’t like it. Everyone KNOWS there is a moral law, given to us by God. Many just don’t like being held accountable. But even these atheist give the game away when they try to replace the word of God with their own wills. They still insist we be selfless, and not selfish. They still insist we take responsibility for our actions, and even consider how our actions will effect future generations whom we may never meet.

They are like a group of children arguing about which color of flower is the best, all the while pretending that there is no light, because they do not like the sun. But without the sun, there would be no light, and thus, no colors. You can claim it’s possible to have a favorite color without the sun, but when you admit to color, you are admitting to the sun as well.

Even on the ten (non) commandments of Atheism, we have all sinned. None of us ALWAYS works to make the world a better place, or considers others first when we choose to act. All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. (Romans 3:23) But where atheism leaves you stained forever by you own sins, and all of the world’s religions demand you raise yourself from the dead, the Bible tells us that God did for us what we could not do.

“…God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.“ (Romans 5:8).

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.” (John 3: 16-17)

Where ever you get your ten commandments, you still need to be forgiven. You still need a savior. God gave us a top ten list to show us that we needed to be forgiven, and then he made the way for us to be saved from our sin. Believe in Jesus, let him take yours sins away, and then, when you can see the sun, acknowledge the true standards of God’s moral law, then you can selflessly love others by really trying to make the world a better place.

“If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” 1 John 1:9

Do that today. And remember #JesusLovesYou

Posted in atheism, Philosophy | Tagged | Leave a comment

Was Genesis 1 Written for a Poetry Slam? | Feedback Friday!

Posted on August 17, 2018 by A Bit Of Orange

Welcome again to Feedback Friday! Today’s comment is about the Creation account in Genesis 1, and is a response to THIS POST .

If I may make an aside for a moment, this comment is an example of one of my pet peeves. You will note that he essentially says, “You are wrong, and other people agree with me.” But he NEVER makes the case from the text of Genesis itself to show WHY I am wrong. I get SO MANY comments which essentially say, “You’re wrong. TRUST ME. You are.” For all my readers, do me a favor- if I am wrong- EXPLAIN TO ME WHY I AM WRONG. Make a case for it so I can learn something. I’m not saying I don’t trust you, but… I don’t trust you THAT MUCH. 

That said, here is Brady’s comment about Genesis 1:

You seem to conflate what Genesis 1 says with what Genesis 1 means. There are many passages in the Bible where a literal reading of the text is actually not what the author of said text means. And many scholars argue that Genesis 1 is one of said passages.

Greetings Brady! Thanks for your comment.

I agree that the Bible contains a variety of literary genres, not all of which ought to have a literal interpretation, but this is not the case in Genesis 1. The text, while not wholly free of poetic flavor (what text outside of tax codes truly are?) is not poetic in the same sense that the Psalms are, nor is it told with the style and structure of a contemporary ancient mythology.

Furthermore, it is linked directly into the history which follows and there is no separation between the creation account and the histories of Abraham or Joseph as there are between, for example, the parable of the Prodigal Son and the healing of the lepers. Where the Bible is intended to be NOT literal, the separation between literal account of historical narrative and allegory or poem is made clear.

It’s true that many scholars do agree that Genesis 1 ought not be taken literally, but NOT because of the text itself. Rather, those scholars have an a priori dedication to deep time, evolutionism, or some other extra or even anti-biblical stance which forces them to betray the clear intent of the text itself.

Hebrew scholars have made clear for decades and through the centuries that the text itself makes clear a literal creation of the heavens and the earth and all living things in six literal days around 6,000 years ago. As for me, I shall not change the meaning of a text to suit my own preconceptions. Let it say what it says and then do what you must with its actual meaning.

Thanks for your comment.

To see what else I have to say on the subject, check out:

Looking NOT in Genesis- Confessions of a YEC part 5

Odds are Six to One That a Day is a Day- Confessions of a YEC part 7

Was it like a DAY day? Or just a day?- Confessions of a YEC part 9

 

Posted in Feedback Fridays, The Creation SoapBox | Tagged , | 1 Comment

Proof of God 4: Proving God with science- or, What does the Number Five Smell Like?

Posted on August 15, 2018 by A Bit Of Orange

If you’ve admitted in the public space of social media that you are a Christian, you no doubt have been attacked by the filthy pests of social media which I call Roach Clowns in an exchange that sounds something like this (once you remove the profanities and name calling):

Roach Clown: You believe fairy tales! I’m a man of science! I only believe things which can be proven scientifically with 100% mathematical certainty!

You: You can prove atheism to be true then?

Roach Clown: Uh…I don’t have to prove anything! Don’t try to push the burden of proof on me! You’re the person believing in fairy tales! I only believe things which can be proven scientifically with 100% mathematical certainty!

You: You mean, for example, evolution?

Roach Clown: Evolution is a scientific fact! We don’t need to prove it, we KNOW It’s true!*

You: With 100 % mathematical certainty?

Roach Clown: Evolution denier! Heretic! OFF WITH HIS HEAD!!!

measuring the five Continue reading →

Posted in atheism, Philosophy | Tagged , | Leave a comment

I don’t have to prove ANYTHING! | Feedback Friday!

Posted on August 14, 2018 by A Bit Of Orange

Welcome my friends to Feedback Friday*! Today’s comment is one of those which is intended to remind me that, when I write articles about how ridiculous and indefensible atheism is, I don’t have to make stuff up. I didn’t link to the article this was in response to, because, as you will see, it doesn’t matter:

By the way. I don’t have to prove anything. You do however have the burden of proof. I say their is nothing. You say their is something. Show me something tangeble to prove your myth and I will believe it. You have nothing but philosophical wordsmithing and hairsplitting elastic justification for your religions poor track record

I frequently say that Atheists all the time be claiming that they don’t have to prove anything. I don’t make this stuff up you know, and when you don’t believe me, it hurts my feelings. Anyhoo, I responded:

Nope, if you reject the obvious truth of the Bible, then you are making the ridiculous claims and must offer extraordinary evidence.
I have all of science, history, and philosophy on my side. Atheism has… well, literally nothing.

And he replied again:

Lol. You are funny. You claim there is a god. The burden is yours to prove it. I don’t have to prove there is nothing that I, you, they, we, or anybody can’t see. You can reason your way into the argument, but in the end you have nothing to show. You don’t know one thing. You have chosen to believe. Nothing more

To which I said:

Thanks. I’m glad I can make you laugh, but, hey- looks aren’t everything.

And actually, you DO have the burden of proof.

You are the one making the ridiculous claims.

YOU are claiming the universe made itself, life made itself, information can write itself with no author, and that the laws of physics and chemistry which cause an increase in ENTROPY actually cause an increase in COMPLEXITY and INFORMATION. That’s beyond absurd, so you have the burden of proof. You have to argue against ALL of established scientific laws.

That’s a big burden of proof.

You are claiming to be a self, one unified, self aware mind, capable of logic and reason and discerning between good and evil- yet none of those things CAN be true if atheism were true, so you are making a ridiculous claim and you have the burden of proof. You have to argue against ALL know laws of logic.

That’s a big burden of proof.

And I am asserting that you already know that God exists. You have already acknowledged much of a Biblical worldview and rejected much of an atheistic worldview. Which means, you have to argue against your own religious professions of faith.

That’s a big burden of proof.

Or you can stop trying to defend the impossible, stop trying to avoid thinking about your own worldview, and just ask more good questions. I sincerely believe that you are not stupid enough to be an atheist. You need to believe that too.

Thanks for writing in. Let me know if you have questions. I’m here to help.

#JesusLovesYou

*Yes, technically I posted this on a Tuesday, but Feedback Tuesday doesn’t have the same ring to it. Besides, like they say, “Its Friday somewhere!”
Posted in atheism, Feedback Fridays | Tagged , | Leave a comment

10 (non)Commandments of Atheism #5 – 8: No Foundation for Fish Tacos

Posted on August 13, 2018 by A Bit Of Orange

We’re continuing our tour through the epic failure which occurred when nearly 3,000 atheists from more than a dozen countries tried to replace the ten commandments with their own very helpful suggestions. In a lot of ways, it’s what I imagine would happen if a group of alcoholics tried to write up a list of reasons they believe that words do not exist. But not as funny.

Today we start with (non)Commandments of Atheism #5:
God is not necessary to be a good person or to live a full and meaningful life.

I’ve heard a thousand variations on this argument, and they always fail for the same reason. The argument fails to understand the moral argument (Read about it HERE and more about it HERE). In short, Christians do not argue that a person who does not believe in God cannot do good things. We are saying that, in a universe where God does not exist, there is no GOOD or BAD just as in a universe with no light there is no red or blue, or in a universe with no food there is no fish taco with guacamole and a side of Spanish rice and re-fried beans. Continue reading →

Posted in atheism, Philosophy | Tagged | 6 Comments