time (a rebuttal)

"But, because your lovingkindness is better than life, behold, my life is but a distraction."
-Augustine



Time

beginning of time = starting point

            |------------------------------>

like a point at the beginning of a line in math class, continuing on into the future as represented by an arrow.     *--------->


but an absolute beginning seems to imply two necessities-  one; the thing itself that is beginning and, two; a FORCE that is pushing this thing into motion.  Aka. What good is it for time to have a beginning if it were just standing still?   I can't think of one example in nature that shows a beginning NOT being put into effect by some prior cause or chain of events -  FORCE.

the newborn's life begins.  Why?  the parents did the nasty.  the wind starts to blow?  why?  atmospheric such and such conditions.  a star is born.  why?  a host of scientific explanations.  you start to dance because you will it, you start to work because you need to, you start to play because you want to.  But it seems there's always a force behind it.


So what was before the beginning of time to cause time except eternity or something eternal (something outside of time)?

If eternity exists, time is ultimately finite.   And, again, based on natural observation - time runs out for everything eventually, where's the precedent to indicate that time will not run out in and of itself? 

eternity is something that cannot be measured by time - even if time extended and ran continuously (...) , eternity would be, figuratively, one step to infinite steps ahead of it.  FOR EXAMPLE:  even if an extreme number of years passed, say, the number 1 follow by a jillion zeroes after it (1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,
000,000...)
eternity would still be an INfinite number of times longer than this.  All that is not eternal is eternally out of date.


If time is finite (which is the definition of time , it seems , because an infinite time would in itself no longer be classified as time but eternity) then the start and end of time must imply a force outside of time that put time into motion in the first place and end it at the last.

this force, then, by definition, must exist outside of time .  therefore this force is eternal.

what is eternal cannot die because it always exists.

if it always exists, it is constant.

if it is constant, it is unchangeable.

if it is unchangeable, it is absolute

if it is absolute it is ultimate

if it is ultimate it is truth

if it is truth, all else is lie.

if it is a lie, it is not ultimate.  if it is not ultimate, then not absolute.  if it is not absolute, it is changeable.  if changeable, not constant.

if not constant, not eternal.

if not eternal, then finite.

if its finite, it will die....


This is the cornerstone of the problem with evolutionary theory attempting to explain the complete origins of the universe.    If time is infinite, aside from being an oxymoron, it would imply NO beginning but evolutionary theories ALWAYS assert beginnings or it would not be evolution.  To admit eternity into the discussion is to jump from the naturalist to the supernaturalist camp, as in most atheists dont believe in eternity.  And this of course poses a serious problem to one who's trying to assert a scientific explanation for the beginning of existence , when and if in fact  there was no such thing as the beginning to explain scientifically, because there was technically never such a thing as the beginning.
and if thats the case, all these precious theories are shot to dust.


Therefore, the first event in the evolutionary theory MUST account for the beginning of time AND NOT just the beginning of matter.  I mean, even if the beginning of time and the beginning of matter were two completely separate things - i suspect you'd have backed yourself into a corner when you realize that you're saying that SOMETHING just up and appeared inside of NOTHING.    Matter just "up and appearing" inside of VOID time is about as likely as a cosmos, a cadillac, or a quark suddenly appearing inside of a completely sealed vaccuum that has not even the smallest particle of anything inside it.  It's EMPTY.  things dont appear for no reason inside of empty space.   We're not talking magic tricks, we're talking evolution.  and even evolution needs a base particle to grow.    and this example is beyond empty space, its a VOID.  and beyond a void, for its the FIRST AND ORIGINAL VOID, before all and anything that had fullness of any type could have possibly interefered.


So where did the big bang ball come from?  It just always existed?  Then why did it wait LITERALLY an eternity before spontaneously (without outside force, because there was no outside, because it was the first all-encompassing event, remember?)  exploded?  Are we being scandalous enough to propose that the big bang ball existed from eternity yet no longer exists?  It had no beginning yet definitely had an end?!?!?!?!?!?!?  How could something that had never begun, end?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?   Thats like me saying my cousin Jigglypuff died.  And when somebody asks me "Oh , that's too bad - how old was he?"  I reply "Well, technically he was never born."

GIVE.  ME.  A.   BREAK.

 Is time even constant?  As in, flows at the same rate always?  Is time constant on Neptune?  How bout in the Orion constellation?  Oh, well how about on this same planet 300,000 years ago?  time is a constant because we as men measure it as a constant but time theoretically and technically could shift and speed up dramatically in a one day span and you could wake up 90 years old tomorrow.   and it need not have anything to do with something as relative as the earths revolutionary rate around the sun.

its amazing the things we think we know but really have  no idea about.  We claim "Those idiot creationists!!!"  are stupid because we've evolved to outthink the concept of God, yet we can hardly tie our theoretical shoes because we have no idea  - NO IDEA REALLY - about some of the most basic fundamentals and fabrics of our own existence. 

and we haven't even approached the topic of LIFE generating from NON LIVING CHEMICALS and material.  there is SO much we dont know.  So i think its best we shy away from the poppy extremist super proud know-it-all notion of the left wing society of atheists and move towards a more humble position in the world.  it only takes three words:  "I"  "Don't"  "Know"

and when we're open to not knowing, we're open to hearing all sides of the argument.  And if our ears are open - watch out - we might actually hear something we might not have expected and end up like this dude drossfurnace who once swore up and down there was no God and certainly no Jesus, yet ended up losing friends (yes, and a whole life, too) for refusing to roll over and blind his eyes again to the One that tore the rock away from the tomb of his heart and caused it to beat again with a Life he never knew.   

Yes, the cost is high.  But if its the TRUTH, isnt it worth it?




absolutely.

Brand New Obama Posters

its kindof sick when parents push politics on children with no understanding and then rejoice as they regurgitate it back at them.  I read one page with this mother who was so proudly explaining how her 2 or 3 year old just walked around the house saying "O-Bah-Ma, O-Bah-Ma."     Whats next for Barack, a guest spot on Barney and friends?  Anyway, I figured since we're deeming the political opinions of 5 year olds as credible , i might as well help out the Obama campaign by coming up with some new posters and strategies.  hope you enjoy them, my nonreaders.

Idiocracy

Really.  that picture should say enough. 

Last night i was flipping thru the tv and caught the "news" and the program basically bombarded me with some of the dumbest crap ive seen to date.

First was a picture of a live Obama rally.  The crowd was waiting for the appearance of the legendary Barack, and a chant of "O-BAM-A"  went through the crowd with fist pumps and finger points towards the stage to accent each syllabel.    In the front row were these 3 little white girls, probably like 14 or 15 years old, and i watched as they grinned at eachother like they were at a Souljah boy show while pumping rock concert devil horns instead of the fist pumping to go along with the chanting.  It REALLY just looked incredibly stupid and I realized two things - 1) that was probably the first time in these girls' lives that they'd ever rocked the devil horns, and 2)  Barack Obama is the candidate for 15 year olds who have no idea about anything.  They're so young and clueless , I wouldn't be surprised if Thursdays still get them excited because its french bread pizza day for lunch after their 9th grade studyhall.

If I was a Republican strategist or a McCain advisor- thank goodness I'm not -  I would try and BURY this dude under his middle school constituency and make a vote for Barack Obama synonymous with a vote for an MTV The Hills marathon -  as trivial as an MTV newsbreak.

Secondly, I saw a clip of Hillary Clinton and Obama pandering to the World Wrestling Federation viewing audience , of all freaking things.    Hillary goes "and for one night only, you can call me [as a wrestling name]  HILLROD"  and Obama goes "Can you smell what BARACK is cookin'?"   Are you kidding me?  All 3 of your credibilities waver somewhere between negative numbers and zero , and you go to the home of Stone Cold Steve Austin, the Undertaker, and Golddust to try and state your case?    Oh yeah, and then they had a mock hillary wrestle a mock Obama.    Wow.

Im moving to Paraguay.

the end.

on the backs of crystals (Expelled)

hilarious. thats all ive got to say. i'd love to see how one can argue that was taken out of context.

Question: "then how did life suddenly come from mud?"

Reputable Scientist Answer: "geez, i already told you. It mutated on the backs of crystals."

maybe you'd be thankful if Stein did take it out of context, when he probably spared the guy from the rest of his comment which probably went something to the effect of ..."which is why Im advocating we all get unisex haircuts, cut off our penises, and buy a bunch of nike swish pants in anxious anticipation for the return of our alien crystal mothership."

please. Just take Bill Maher with you.

Every once in awhile I like to thumb through magazines from the left to see what's going on in the pop culture world according to their idealogy.  Rolling Stone, Adbusters, and Wired are on my reading list.  I genuinely like 2 of the 3 (excluding Rolling Stone for obvious lameness).  I even went and bought the founder of Adbusters' book , which I read and found very interesting.  I agree with a lot of the points this mag makes about consumerism, capitalism, advertising, etc...  but to me they overromanticize a suburban buddhism (Sub-buddhism?)  and cross the border of pretentiousness one time too many for my taste.  Yet, being one who believes ultimately in the authority of the Bible - it's interesting to me to see events unfolding in mainstream liberal media and consciousness that unwittingly (to them) confirms the Bible's authority as the prophetic Word of God for end time things to come.

a quote from the latest issue of Adbusters:

"In 2008, look for a more muscular U.N. and more buzz around the idea of global democracy.  Adbusters will launch a competition to design the flag that this United States of Planet Earth can proudly fly."

This idea, a global govt, has been floating around Bible believers for arguably millennia. This string of thought goes hand in hand with the concepts of the Antichrist and the mark of the beast, as well as a bunch of other stuff...  false christs, wars and rumors of wars, rebuilding of the temple in jerusalem, etc etc etc... 

About two years ago I saw a report on the news about this couple in Canada who were so in love w. eachother that they implanted microchips on their hands to swipe across eachother's apartment door and car locks ... 

It will look to come so innocently, but like most innocent things they will be twisted in the hands of the wrong people (like the undercurrent of datamining and privacy invasion that came after the popularity of the seemingly innocent Facebooks and Myspaces).  It's going to hit the fan like the Bible says - and I think within my generation we'll see the antichrist for real.  Hitler was an antichrist of his generation, but he was limited in scope due to limits in resource and technology. 

My personal semi-theories on the mark are that it will be something like an instantaneous linkage to the internet...  ie - access to google maps , dictionary.com or the like based on thought access...  Like, you're lost somewhere and need directions so you somehow access the internet through this chip implanted in you.  Or maybe a globally enforced GPS chip (w/ bonus features) to combat "terrorism."   Or maybe a credit-card chip w/ all your personal information on it to stop "identity theft" once and for all and curb the need to carry a wallet, credit card, identification, membership cards, etc etc etc........ a technological "convenience factor" upgrade that will be so immensely popular it'll take over so suddenly and seem so necessary that you cant live without it (a la the cell phone). 

who knows.