Science and Religion: Creationism/Evolution Thread

#426
#426
so is the infinite universe

how can you fully study something that has no beginning, nor has an ending?
 
#427
#427
GASOUTHERNVOL said:
so is the infinite universe

how can you fully study something that has no beginning, nor has an ending?
Click to expand...

I said if we are assuming something can be infinite, I am saying the infinite universe makes more sense than the infinite creator.
 
#428
#428
rjd970 said:
Evidence, reasons, whatever you want to call it...but at a philosophical level it makes more sense that a creator doesn't exist, for reasons I have outlined inumerable times on this site. Chief of which is the problems I see with the philosphical reasons cited by some for its existence.
.
Click to expand...

Wait, because someone's philosophical reasons for existence are inadequate in your view you take that as meaning it makes more sense there isn't a creator? Quite a leap.

How does that work?
 
#429
#429
IPorange said:
This is assuming a linear time line like we are used to. We know that time is relative. I'm not so sure that there necessarily HAS to be a "beginning" and "end" as we know them.
Click to expand...

This subject has always interested me for many reasons even though I struggle to grasp it. Time being relative as it is if there was no beginning then what was "The Big Bang"? I know that at one point we though/think that the universe is expanding, some say just the opposite. Is it static, expanding or contracting and what would that mean for our theories about the universe.

Even though I believe in God these questions are important to answer, after all if we believe we were created by God then he is responsible for the inquisitive nature of human beings. Why give us such a desire to know answers if we weren't meant to use it?
 
#431
#431
volinbham said:
Wait, because someone's philosophical reasons for existence are inadequate in your view you take that as meaning it makes more sense there isn't a creator? Quite a leap.

How does that work?
Click to expand...

Trying to determine why we are here takes leaps upon leaps. There is no other way around it. Scientists may try to claim the intellectual high ground, but their beliefs are no more made up than our own.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#432
#432
rjd970 said:
Well, since it is non-falsifiable, and supernatural by definition, it deosn't fit into the realm of science, convienently. I thought that was well established at this point in the discussion?
Same answer as I stated, science is not capable of proving or disproving at this point.
Evidence, reasons, whatever you want to call it...but at a philosophical level it makes more sense that a creator doesn't exist, for reasons I have outlined inumerable times on this site. Chief of which is the problems I see with the philosphical reasons cited by some for its existence.
To you it might, partly because those are the philosophies you adhere to and believe in, this isn't the case for everyone. That doesn't make one philosophy right, wrong or better than another, they just happen to be yours.
This doesn't preclude a creator existence by any means, but I find it highly unlikely. You see the line as 50/50. I see it more as 95/5....with the 5 there just to keep an open mind.
Click to expand...

No offense but it seems to me that my mind is open but yours is made up, one is willing to entertain the other position but one has made up it's mind and will not change unless they are confronted with what they do not believe in first hand.
 
#433
#433
KB5252 said:
No offense but it seems to me that my mind is open but yours is made up, one is willing to entertain the other position but one has made up it's mind and will not change unless they are confronted with what they do not believe in first hand.
Click to expand...

+1

:hi:
 
#436
#436
#437
#437
I never had the liberty of evolution and such going to a private school all of my life so I soaked as much as I could when I got to college.

I would say that my lack of interest in science stems from my private school days.
 
#438
#438
OrangeEmpire said:
I never had the liberty of evolution and such going to a private school all of my life so I soaked as much as I could when I got to college.

I would say that my lack of interest in science stems from my private school days.
Click to expand...

I went to a private school as well, at least for the first 6 years. I hated it and learned most everything I know on my own. Public schools are terrible as well, most of the people that were teaching knew very little and just winged it from the teachers guides and text books.
 
#439
#439
I'm not gonna lie, I went to a hardcore legalistic church, then I got bible class all week, it got fairly old hearing about doctrine all the time.
 
#440
#440
volinbham said:
Wait, because someone's philosophical reasons for existence are inadequate in your view you take that as meaning it makes more sense there isn't a creator? Quite a leap.

How does that work?
Click to expand...

No it's not a leap. At least no more than you saying science and reason can never be able to prove a creator, so one must exist.

And it isn't just me. I still see no reason why the Flying Spaghetti monster can't be the creator given your purview of justifying one's existence.
 
#446
#446
rjd970 said:
No it's not a leap. At least no more than you saying science and reason can never be able to prove a creator, so one must exist.

And it isn't just me. I still see no reason why the Flying Spaghetti monster can't be the creator given your purview of justifying one's existence.
Click to expand...

How about this:

Life exists
Man is the highest form of life


Spaghetti is not life

It's absurd to suggest that the likelihood of an FSM is equal to that of a creator that is a higher form of life than man.

There is no record anywhere of those feeling they've been touched by a creator describing anything approach an FSM

It's a pure device to argue against a creator rather than to attempt to understand what one might be.

You may find science based arguments explaining why people believe the creator is a particular form (e.g. shared culture, common hallucinations, etc) but they still point to a greater likelihood one would be different than an FSM.

Honestly - using your "best available explanation" rule, if there is a creator do you believe an FSM is as likely as anything else? If so how would you support that (again assuming there is a creator)?
 
Last edited:
#450
#450
turambar85 said:
The same as my thoughts on any other work of fiction.
Click to expand...

Considering the Bible as fiction is the equivalent of considering Horton Hears a Who as non-fiction... neither could be further from the truth whether you believe in God or not. As previously posted in this thread, numerous archaeology finds and other studies have proven the Bible to be a valid historical document... again, whether you believe in God or not.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top