Evidence for God from Science

I think you are just picking a stereotype here. I am fine with eternity. Just not sure, if earth is eternal is a biblical idea. Heaven is, but if God stays here forever and so do we, then it makes no sense that heaven is empty, hell is nowhere to be found and our planet stays alive even when the very thing it exists in, falls away. You need consistently, gravity, an active core, the sun, the moon to have this planet stay here for eternity. Particles decay SH, everything decays, to be otherwise is just contradictory to the nature of God and creation, if this is how God modeled it.

In other words if we are to stay here, then why did God create a lasting universe, and not an everlasting one? If the earth is an exception then all of that, the rest of the universe, seems a waste to be honest.

Pardon me, I thought you were struggling with eternity...so as far as living here goes, in my view, the Bible indicates that heaven is a real physical place, which settles on earth after the millennium. Then the earth is recreated or restored.
Some see heaven as another dimension, which does not seem to agree with our physical world.

Personally, I read that earth is everlasting, and I guess that means having to improve or change the way our physical laws work.
Psalms 78:69 for eg.

Personally, I read that earth is everlasting, and I guess that means having to improve or change the way our physical laws work.

A reference? is always nice.

Starhunter wrote:Pardon me, I thought you were struggling with eternity...so as far as living here goes, in my view, the Bible indicates that heaven is a real physical place, which settles on earth after the millennium. Then the earth is recreated or restored.
Some see heaven as another dimension, which does not seem to agree with our physical world.

Personally, I read that earth is everlasting, and I guess that means having to improve or change the way our physical laws work.
Psalms 78:69 for eg.

thanks...by the way if heaven exists physically then it exists in another dimension, for the lack of a better wording. If the inflated universe model is true than heaven can't exist here.

I Corinthians 15:54

neo-x wrote:[
Personally, I read that earth is everlasting, and I guess that means having to improve or change the way our physical laws work.
Psalms 78:69 for eg.

thanks...by the way if heaven exists physically then it exists in another dimension, for the lack of a better wording. If the inflated universe model is true than heaven can't exist here.[/quote]

So what's your view of the teaching of heaven, what and where is it?

And He built His sanctuary like the heights,
Like the earth which He has founded forever.

A poetic gesture, nothing concrete to say it is everlasting. You should read two verses above:

65 Then the Lord awoke as from sleep, as a man wakes from the stupor of wine. 66 He beat back his enemies; he put them to everlasting shame.

As you can see everlasting here is as meaningful as God drinking wine like a man and falling asleep, getting up and punching his enemies...no pun intended.

Starhunter wrote:

neo-x wrote:[
Personally, I read that earth is everlasting, and I guess that means having to improve or change the way our physical laws work.
Psalms 78:69 for eg.

thanks...by the way if heaven exists physically then it exists in another dimension, for the lack of a better wording. If the inflated universe model is true than heaven can't exist here.

So what's your view of the teaching of heaven, what and where is it?[/quote]

I don't think heaven is a physical place, like a place made up of matter. It is a spiritual existence and that makes its coordinates irrelevant.

Revelation chapters 21 and 22, is a popular reference. What do you recon about it?

Job 19:25-27 Job trusts in a bodily resurrection. Seems to be connected to previous existence, rather than on another plane?

but the one thing we should not do, is philosophize science. That is not the aim of meta physics at all

I see metaphysics as explaining the fundamental nature of being and the reality (space/time/matter) that encompasses. What else is it? (An actual question, not begging the question)
Science is based off of, and cannot exist without metaphysics and philosophy. You can't have science without philosophizing or having metaphysical principles.

Yes, some things would be easier and better to comprehend in a different field, such as astrophysics. But there is a metaphysical to everything, so thats where I try to get my understanding. And sometimes, only empirical science can lead you there.

supernova happened just 500 lights years...that is something meta physics can neither tell you nor help you with

The observation of the supernova, yes. But as to the why, the foundation to what was observed, is totally metaphysical. But you still need science to get the wholistic knowledge. And again, sometimes you need scientific discovery to lead to the metaphysical principles.

central position in the universe. Now this is an assumption with a meta physical connotation with it.

And if it's being asserted metaphysically, then it needs to be tested on the grounds of reason.
Just because something comes from a metaphysical level, doesn't mean it's true. Take the roots of modern philosophy for example.

Starhunter wrote:Revelation chapters 21 and 22, is a popular reference. What do you recon about it?

Its not a reference of heaven, only of earth. How a pure earth without corruption would look like.

Quick question to anyone, do you think the spiritual is stronger and more powered than created matter or do you think it is weaker, ghostly and etherical, but somehow special so we don't completely write it off?

Mallz wrote:

but the one thing we should not do, is philosophize science. That is not the aim of meta physics at all

I see metaphysics as explaining the fundamental nature of being and the reality (space/time/matter) that encompasses. What else is it? (An actual question, not begging the question)
Science is based off of, and cannot exist without metaphysics and philosophy. You can't have science without philosophizing or having metaphysical principles.

Yes, some things would be easier and better to comprehend in a different field, such as astrophysics. But there is a metaphysical to everything, so thats where I try to get my understanding. And sometimes, only empirical science can lead you there.

supernova happened just 500 lights years...that is something meta physics can neither tell you nor help you with

The observation of the supernova, yes. But as to the why, the foundation to what was observed, is totally metaphysical. But you still need science to get the wholistic knowledge. And again, sometimes you need scientific discovery to lead to the metaphysical principles.

central position in the universe. Now this is an assumption with a meta physical connotation with it.

And if it's being asserted metaphysically, then it needs to be tested on the grounds of reason.
Just because something comes from a metaphysical level, doesn't mean it's true. Take the roots of modern philosophy for example.

And I am not denying any of it. I am only saying that when we have a better answer then resorting to metaphysical mystery is unnecessary. You are right that there is such a thing as philosophy of science but that is different than philosophizing science. Philosophy of science and actual science, these two entities are not interchangeable.

My only objection to it, even in the first place, is when the philosophy is held and the reality isn't. For example, we are at the center of the universe, this is philosophizing science. Reality is, we do not know. There is a difference. That is all I am trying to say here.

neo-x wrote:

Starhunter wrote:Revelation chapters 21 and 22, is a popular reference. What do you recon about it?

Its not a reference of heaven, only of earth. How a pure earth without corruption would look like.

Where is the New Jerusalem before it comes to earth? Is it not in heaven now?

John 14:1-3, is this it?

Starhunter wrote:Quick question to anyone, do you think the spiritual is stronger and more powered than created matter or do you think it is weaker, ghostly and etherical, but somehow special so we don't completely write it off?

The spiritual is eternal, the physical is not. It is not a matter of being strong or weak. It is a matter of which laws govern what. The physical is governed by physics, chemistry and we can guess where they might lead. The spiritual is up with God, no one knows about it, except its eternal.