FIXTURESNo upcoming fixtures — check back soon.
FORUM / MIKES GRIPES /  Professor John Lennox | God DOES exist

Professor John Lennox | God DOES exist

Started by Beeno125 REPLIES1,745 VIEWS· 25 Dec 2018, 12:07
SHAREXFACEBOOKWHATSAPPTELEGRAMREDDITLINKEDIN
BE
Beeno1Captain40,032 posts
25 Dec 2018, 12:07
#1
25 Dec 2018, 12:07#1

The brilliant professor enllghtens the atheists at the Oxford Union.

This speech has a lot in it and the points made need to be thought about deeply.


Prof John Lennox




CR
CrusadersfanPro3,099 posts
27 Dec 2018, 17:42
#2
27 Dec 2018, 17:42#2

This should be good for a laugh. Once i get out of the bars of bkk i will have a good look but it will have to be alot better than the made up bullshit this morons usually spout.

For a more informed view based on fact check out the superior minds of Hitch and Dawkins if you want the true facts on the insanity of religion

SH
sharkbokCaptain20,097 posts
27 Dec 2018, 20:49
#3
27 Dec 2018, 20:49#3

A school teacher that has achieved nothing in the scientific world. Science cannot prove or disprove the existence of God, or at least not yet. If he is accepting God as a fact without factual proof, he is not a scientist. He is confusing beliefs with facts.

Anyone can get a doctrine nowadays. 

I did a 4-year undergraduate degree in three years via correspondence. I just bought the books, read them, and passed the exams at the end of the year. This was when I was between 19- 22 years old. If I continued, I could have had a doctrine by the time I was 27 or thereabouts. 

That does not make me an Einstein, it makes me someone that has read a few books.


DB
DbDraadCaptain26,388 posts
28 Dec 2018, 09:06
#4
28 Dec 2018, 09:06#4

Lol Shark...you don't get to be a mathematics professor at Oxford after doing some correspondence degree.

SH
sharkbokCaptain20,097 posts
29 Dec 2018, 02:56
#5
29 Dec 2018, 02:56#5

It is well respected amongst people that have degrees when people are self-taught. Correspondence is better than being spoonfed at a University. It is the same content and the same certification as people that go to University each day- like being in school. 


It was UNISA, which at the time was internationally recognised. It is also the best correspondence university in SA. Part of the degree was a year of law- which was taken from American university books, media law. 

I would not overrate people that get doctrines and teach at a university. If they were so good they would be millionaires, not regurgitating textbooks. Difference between theory and practical skill.  

Still a school teacher, more knowledge than skill and ability. Scientists with half his education, are achieving real results.


DB
DbDraadCaptain26,388 posts
29 Dec 2018, 09:08
#6
29 Dec 2018, 09:08#6

Not all results are measured in money...and how many UNISA graduates lecture at Oxford? Do you really want to belittle an Oxford Mathematics Professor's achievements just because he is a Christian?

BE
Beeno1Captain40,032 posts
29 Dec 2018, 12:58
#7
29 Dec 2018, 12:58#7

Draad note how these brain dead oafs make no comment when Prof Lennox talks about how absurd is the notion that the Universe created itself out of nothing - which is the official atheist position as articulated by Stephen Hawkins.

Science today has been almost darwinian in reverse making a right monkey of these halfwits. Hahahahahahahahahaha. Cracks me up every time. Guess when you get as bigoted as a half baked atheist no light penetrates.

CR
CrusadersfanPro3,099 posts
29 Dec 2018, 13:06
#8
29 Dec 2018, 13:06#8

The only people saying the universe came from "nothing" is relgious  retards who like to dumb things down for the simple minded followers.

And where exactly did this god that you claim created everything come from if nothing can come from nothing?

SH
sharkbokCaptain20,097 posts
29 Dec 2018, 14:04
#9
29 Dec 2018, 14:04#9
I have met people that have studied at Oxford- and they are no different from other internationally recognised universities. I know someone with a masters degree in engineering from Oxford- and he was working in marketing. I have met lots of people from South Africa that were smarter than he was.
The content in the books is the same as other universities. It is similar to the best schools and the average schools- same textbooks.
Anyone can study and become a teacher. As the saying goes, teachers teach because they cant do. There are people with Oxford Doctrines in economics who are not rich. 
I am not knocking teachers as they do make a valuable contribution- but for the most part, they are book smart. 
Robert Mugabe has honorary doctrines from universities around the whole world- and look how that panned out. https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20101029224442993

I am just saying that a degree is not as good as it was hyped up to be, especially nowadays with so much knowledge and training on the internet. 
DB
DbDraadCaptain26,388 posts
29 Dec 2018, 16:11
#10
29 Dec 2018, 16:11#10
He does not have an Oxford degree. He got his degree from Cambridge. He is a Professor in mathematics at Oxford...and mathematics is the languages of science . It might be easy to get some doctorate in some lazy assed book knowledge field. Math and physics is something else though. For that you need the ability for critical thinking. No amount of reading and hard work can substitute for that.
RO
RooinekCaptain18,117 posts
29 Dec 2018, 20:02
#11
29 Dec 2018, 20:02#11
The simple answer is that you can have any degree from any top university but if you still believe in 2000 year old fairytales then you must be pretty stupid.
I see the blithering idiot Baboon-ou is still banging on about the universe creating itself out of nothing. This brainwashed fool really is starting to sound like a stuck record and he's never once attempted to debate the point that no creation was ever necessary . . . there was no beginning and there will be no end.
DB
DbDraadCaptain26,388 posts
29 Dec 2018, 21:02
#12
29 Dec 2018, 21:02#12

Well, that's just it Rooi. The best and most credible theory for the existence of the universe is that it started ex nihi lo about 15 billion years ago.

CR
CrusadersfanPro3,099 posts
29 Dec 2018, 21:23
#13
29 Dec 2018, 21:23#13

Never ceases to amaze me in this day of enlightenment that people can still cling to dead sea pedestrian ignorance and belive BS that has no shread of factual truth and every single scientific evidence proves its completed made up bullshit 

No matter how much facts shows their beliefs to be complete crap they still just go on believing purely because they cant stand the fact that death is final  no matter how much you lot want it to be true doesn't  make it so. 

Face it, there is no after life and you not going to spend eternity licking the arse of some  mythical being as if anyone would consider this a good thing.

Do any of you believe your departed family are looking down on you? Have you thought of that when you rub one out or give your misses one. If you truely thought your mum or grandmother was watching you pork your misses you would never do it. Seriously could any of you manage to do that if your parents are watching, i know i couldn't 

RO
RooinekCaptain18,117 posts
29 Dec 2018, 21:26
#14
29 Dec 2018, 21:26#14
"The best and most credible theory for the existence of the universe is that it started ex nihilo about 15 billion years ago."
No, nothing ever came from nothing and I don't know of any credible theory that claims it ever did.
The universe as we know it is still expanding but not as quickly as it once was which leads scientists to believe that at some point it will stop expanding and start to contract. It will carry on contracting until all the matter in the universe, the planets, the stars the galaxies will all contract into the tiniest singularity again before the next big bang occurs and the expansion starts again. 
The oscillating universe theory requires no creation, it's just expansions and contractions. No beginning and no end.
DB
DbDraadCaptain26,388 posts
29 Dec 2018, 23:32
#15
29 Dec 2018, 23:32#15
From Wiki:
"In the 1920s, theoretical physicists, most notably Albert Einstein, considered the possibility of a cyclic model for the universe as an (everlasting) alternative to the model of an expanding universe. However, work by Richard C. Tolman in 1934 showed that these early attempts failed because of the cyclic problem: according to the Second Law of Thermodynamics, entropy can only increase.[1] This implies that successive cycles grow longer and larger. Extrapolating back in time, cycles before the present one become shorter and smaller culminating again in a Big Bang and thus not replacing it. This puzzling situation remained for many decades until the early 21st century when the recently discovered dark energy component provided new hope for a consistent cyclic cosmology.[2] In 2011, a five-year survey of 200,000 galaxies and spanning 7 billion years of cosmic time confirmed that "dark energy is driving our universe apart at accelerating speeds."


If you read up on the more recent models to fit this theory with the facts, you start seeing the word "assumption" quite a bit. I have read a few of Hawkings' lectures on the subject too and he could not come to a satisfactory model either, so I'm glad that you can be so sure about things.
DB
DbDraadCaptain26,388 posts
29 Dec 2018, 23:41
#16
29 Dec 2018, 23:41#16

"No, nothing ever came from nothing and I don't know of any credible theory that claims it ever did."


OK, you got me. N ot nothing but rather "the tiniest singularity"

SH
sharkbokCaptain20,097 posts
30 Dec 2018, 04:56
#17
30 Dec 2018, 04:56#17
Einstein theorizes that time is space, and space is time. (aka time-space). If there is no space there is no time, or singular time space is when existence is so minimal- as Stephen Hawkin theorizes . 
RO
RooinekCaptain18,117 posts
30 Dec 2018, 07:59
#18
30 Dec 2018, 07:59#18
"Not nothing but rather "the tiniest singularity".
Yes, the tiniest singularity that is so incredibly dense that it contains every atom in the entire universe . . . so probably the furthest thing from "nothing" that one could possibly imagine.
There are several YouTube videos that show some perspective of the size of the universe . . . here is an example . . . so watch one of them, understand the scale and then try to picture every single one of those celestial bodies plus every other object in the universe all compressed into a singularity smaller than a pinhead and you'll have some idea of how stupid your "ex nihilo" sounds.
DB
DbDraadCaptain26,388 posts
30 Dec 2018, 11:17
#19
30 Dec 2018, 11:17#19

I'm well aware of the cocepts and theory,  my mind is not closed like you seem to think...and I don't care how stupid I sound to someone who has closed his mind a long time ago...and I'm not only talking about religion here. 

RO
RooinekCaptain18,117 posts
30 Dec 2018, 13:22
#20
30 Dec 2018, 13:22#20

Your understanding of the theory sounds a little dodgy if you're confusing concepts that are completely opposite like "nothing" and "everything".

DB
DbDraadCaptain26,388 posts
30 Dec 2018, 15:29
#21
30 Dec 2018, 15:29#21

Says the man who thinks an Oxford Mathematics professor is stupid...whoosh!

You better go read up on the redefinition of "theory"...I think I'd rather go with Einstein's conclusion than yours. 

RO
RooinekCaptain18,117 posts
30 Dec 2018, 15:40
#22
30 Dec 2018, 15:40#22
No, says the guy explaining to you . . . without a lot of gratitude it must be said . . . that ex nihilo means the exact opposite of what you think it means.
SH
sharkbokCaptain20,097 posts
30 Dec 2018, 20:20
#23
30 Dec 2018, 20:20#23

What is heavier,  nothing or a whole universe compressed into a singular spec of dust? 

 Is 1kg of metal lead or 1kg of feathers heavier? 

Which one has the higher density?. 

RO
RooinekCaptain18,117 posts
30 Dec 2018, 22:07
#24
30 Dec 2018, 22:07#24
Here's an interesting question . . . which is more dense?
a) All the atoms of the known universe condensed into a tiny particle of dust as they were prior to the last big bang . . . or . . .
b) The bone matter surrounding Baboon-ou's pitifully small and primitive little brain?
Like I said, it's an interesting one.
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
01 Jan 2019, 21:51
#25
01 Jan 2019, 21:51#25
So how did the first singularity come to exist?
SH
sharkbokCaptain20,097 posts
02 Jan 2019, 01:30
#26
02 Jan 2019, 01:30#26
The first singularity origin is beyond our comprehension, but it is similar to saying how did God come to exist. If God has always existed, then it would be no different to say that the first singularity always existed. If time is space, the first singularity would be so small there would be no such thing as time. 
The big bang theory seems like a flawed argument -, just as using creationism because there has to be a before (Big Bang or God). Our understanding of time is there is always a beginning.
There is proof that the universe is expanding and the area where the big bang originally happened is believed to have been found. So there is more evidence of the big bang that God.
It is also theorized that a black hole can go back in time, and a white hole can go forward in time- and the cycle of the universe seems to be linked to black holes and white holes, which could be forever trapped in going forward and backward in time- in addition to no time at all.
— END OF THREAD —

More from Mikes Gripes