No, I have faith in my chair, I see it.

Also it's not necessarily true. I have faith in Christianity, others have faith in Hinduism, they cannot both be true

Poor you. You'd might want to take some coffee.



What I meant to say was that there is much disagreement what faith actually means (which is very obvious ); it is possible to create varies definitions of faith and to argue in favour of one over the other, but there is not enough evidence in the Bible to exactly determine what faith actually is.

It can be defined as broad as "a vague belief in some sort of deity or life-force" to as narrow as "a conscious and strict adherance to a very concise set of beliefs".

A definition of faith is very important regarding the issue of predestination: who is saved and who isn't? Since I'm more of a classical or even an ultra-orthodox Calvinist on this particular issue, which means I strictly maintain that it is far too speculative to assign to anyone whether that person is saved or not, I'm also not very likely to accept one particular definition of faith. I personally favour more liberal interpretations of the number of the elect, but I nevertheless am open to any number ranging from one to all.



It is a mathematical method of writing chances, 1 corresponds to 100%. If I toss a coin, the probability of the cross side ending up facing upwards is .5. If I toss a die, the probability of the one-eyed side ending up facing upwards is 1/6 or approximately 0.1667. So it is just an arbitrarily difficult way of saying that if a Creator exists, that is an entity with sufficient power to create (an omnipotent God would obviously have sufficient power) and that entity wants to create a universe and puts the necessary effort (if any, whatever it may be) to it, the universe is bound to be created.



Some people are then quick to abandon causality; while abandoning four-dimensional causality is okay in metaphysics, it is not when it still regards the physical universe.

What I also find ironic, but also a bit disappointing, is that the Big Bang is often rejected by orthodox Protestants. The Big Bang is actually valuable in discarding several materialist notions of the universe (the universe is infinite, it has no end and no beginning).



Actually, I meant to assign the quantity of spacetime in a different dimension as to be free from space and time, I think it is basically the same idea but with different terms.

In that case, it would be like the correlation of the following views:
[*]Hell does not exist, people who would be assigned to Hell would cease existing.
[*]Hell does exist, but Hell is cessation of existence (annihilationism).

Both convey a very similar notion of Hell, but they have fundamentally different views on the question "does Hell exist?".



I actually meant that part as an invisible opponent, in order to be ahead of any people criticising me for ignoring that important question, often championed by the like of Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens (or "Ditchkins" as referred to by Terry Eagleton).

So I would agree with your views there.



Paul certainly was a thinker who preferred sound criticism indeed.

Just throwing this into the mix: predestination or preordination is being called to do something before coming to earth, if you don't do what you are supposed to then it goes to someone else.



I actually think that the Big Bang is a product of god, because of one of the aspects...organization.

Oh god what

Have you ever looked through a telescope? There's no organization at all.

There would need to be if the big bang actually happened though.

Big Bang Fails.

There is.

Stars can be classified.
Stars are parts of galaxies or satellite groups which can be classified in several groups according to the Hubble classification.
Then galaxies can be classified into clusters.
Clusters can be classified into larger groups, like the Local Group.

The notion that what you see at the night sky with a peek gives you a good insight on the organisation of the universe is very geocentric.

Those groups tend to be random: That's not God's organization, that's humanity's obsessive need to classify things.

I love how topics can be so dearly personal, and yet, people still post "HEY GUYS HOW LONG IS YOUR PENOR MINE IS 9 MILES LONG LOL!" Seriously, why should people know each others' religion?

WOAH, GET THE f*** OUT OF THE FORUMS. YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE HERE.

Ok, sir, calm down, no need to be frustrated over such a sudden return.

Couldn't you have made your return a little more grander, Zero?

Meh, I had a feeling people wouldn't give 2 poops if I made my epic return here, and made a topic about it. Sure, I'll do it, if you want me to.

Only if you plan to stay.

Okay. Until I regain my hacked Xbox account back, I'm staying.

Back on topic, religion is just too personal for one to speak freely of.