NOMA and Deism vs. the Material World

[Michael Schubert]

Since we know that the creation story of Genesis is objectively false and human beings did in fact evolve from Homo Erectus, Australopithecines, and Homo Hominids to today's Hominoidea, the only half-plausible religious view is that of Deism. This says God created the universe but left it to run on natural causes. Well, we see some major problems with deistic beliefs, too. From the essay, Religion is Bullshit:

The very concept of creation depends on time. Something that did not exist before a given point in time comes to existence through the act of creation and exists from that time on. The universe clearly cannot have been created in this sense, because the universe is spacetime and thus there is no time outside of the universe itself.

In other words, once someone creates something, the creation only exists from that point on in time, and it did not exist prior to its creation. The universe is time, and time is infinite, so it is impossible for (a) God to have created the universe because time does not exist outside of the universe.

Then there is the theory of Non-Overlapping Magisterial (NOMA). This says religions and science are different categories: the former is philosophical materialism, and the latter is methodological materialism. So religions only deal with non-material substance that cannot be proven by science. So if (a) God(s) exist(s) in objective reality, then science could measure it. During the past few hundred years, no one has ever proven (a) God(s) exist. One's faith also cannot be tested by the Scientific Method.

Do a Google search on "Religion is Bullshit" and you will see all of this enlightening information and much more. Kudos to Lemonvariable72 for the great website, Evil Bible.

[Nine]

Then there is the theory of Non-Overlapping Magisterial (NOMA).

They should have just called it NOM. It would have been much funnier.

[Simon Moon]

Since we know that the creation story of Genesis is objectively false and human beings did in fact evolve from Homo Erectus, Australopithecines, and Homo Hominids to today's Hominoidea, the only half-plausible religious view is that of Deism. This says God created the universe but left it to run on natural causes. Well, we see some major problems with deistic beliefs, too. From the essay, Religion is Bullshit:

The very concept of creation depends on time. Something that did not exist before a given point in time comes to existence through the act of creation and exists from that time on. The universe clearly cannot have been created in this sense, because the universe is spacetime and thus there is no time outside of the universe itself.

In other words, once someone creates something, the creation only exists from that point on in time, and it did not exist prior to its creation. The universe is time, and time is infinite, so it is impossible for (a) God to have created the universe because time does not exist outside of the universe.

Then there is the theory of Non-Overlapping Magisterial (NOMA). This says religions and science are different categories: the former is philosophical materialism, and the latter is methodological materialism. So religions only deal with non-material substance that cannot be proven by science. So if (a) God(s) exist(s) in objective reality, then science could measure it. During the past few hundred years, no one has ever proven (a) God(s) exist. One's faith also cannot be tested by the Scientific Method.

Do a Google search on "Religion is Bullshit" and you will see all of this enlightening information and much more. Kudos to Lemonvariable72 for the great website, Evil Bible.

I have no problem with Deism.

They seem to apply almost all of the same critical and rational thinking that atheists apply, up until the point that they assert a 'deity of first cause' where one is not necessary.

Is it because they can't quite let go of that final belief?

It doesn't seem to matter though, since Desists are not going to: fly planes into buildings, blow themselves up in public places, try to pass laws to get pseudoscience taught in public school science classes or to prevent homosexuals from getting married, etc.

I disagree with NOMA.

As soon as a theist claims that their god alters the physical universe, that is theoretically a scientifically testable claim. When a theist claims that their god communicates with them, they are claiming they are a 'god detector' and that is theoretically a testable claim.

[Michael Schubert]

I disagree with NOMA.

Then how can faith be tested by the Scientific Method?

[MindForgedManacle]

Since we know that the creation story of Genesis is objectively false and human beings did in fact evolve from Homo Erectus, Australopithecines, and Homo Hominids to today's Hominoidea, the only half-plausible religious view is that of Deism. This says God created the universe but left it to run on natural causes. Well, we see some major problems with deistic beliefs, too. From the essay, Religion is Bullshit:

Few of issues I have here.

Firstly, at best you could say that "We know 'objectively' that a literal reading of te Genesis account of creation is false given our understanding of cosmology and biology." The reason I say this is because there is a significant number of Christians who don't read Genesis literally in every detail. I myself did not when I was a Christian.

Secondly, Deism can't really be called a religious position. Unless you're saying that belief in ANY god equals having a religious position. But that's not what religion really is. I mean, point out some common ritual system of practice Deists have; I doubt you can.
And deists don't think the deity they believe in is "God"/Yahweh, just a god/'Divine Architect'.

[quoted passage]
In other words, once someone creates something, the creation only exists from that point on in time, and it did not exist prior to its creation. The universe is time, and time is infinite, so it is impossible for (a) God to have created the universe because time does not exist outside of the universe.

If time "began", how could it be infinite? Further, even the whole time having begun isn't some set-in-stone knowledge.

For all we know, a deistic God could have created our universe, while residing in its own universe. Remember, deists don't equate the deity they believe in with that of the Abrahamic god.

Then there is the theory of Non-Overlapping Magisterial (NOMA). This says religions and science are different categories: the former is philosophical materialism, and the latter is methodological materialism. So religions only deal with non-material substance that cannot be proven by science. So if (a) God(s) exist(s) in objective reality, then science could measure it. During the past few hundred years, no one has ever proven (a) God(s) exist. One's faith also cannot be tested by the Scientific Method.

Really, NOMA is just something stupid Gould whipped up, seemingly to placate the religious.

Er, religion isn't 'philosophical materialism'. Most of the religious are emphatically not materialists of any sort. Nor does that commit any or all religious folk to 'non-material substance', or making claijs not verifiable by science. Ever hear of natural theology? That's exactly the kind of arguments that come out of natural theology, ex: Fine-tuning argument, cosmological argument, design argument, etc., each of which are - so far as I can tell - science-accessible at least in potential.

Also, not all truths are accessible by science. In fact, to even claim that (if you are) is self-defeating. Basically, if you say "all truths are only those accessible by science;, you clearly believe that statement to be true, but it wasn't a true statement reached by science/the scientific method(s).

Do a Google search on "Religion is Bullshit" and you will see all of this enlightening information and much more. Kudos to Lemonvariable72 for the great website, Evil Bible.

Boo. And before you ask, yes I'm an atheist. :p

[Michael Schubert]

If time "began", how could it be infinite? Further, even the whole time having begun isn't some set-in-stone knowledge.

Time and the universe are probably infinite. No one has any evidence that the universe had a beginning.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EXMKPvWqg...7&index=17

[Ryantology]

Then there is the theory of Non-Overlapping Magisterial (NOMA). This says religions and science are different categories:

Yes. The former is delusional fiction and the latter is a time-tested method for discovering the way the universe works.

[Faith No More]

Time and the universe are probably infinite. No one has any evidence that the universe had a beginning.

Where are you getting this from?

[Michael Schubert]

Time and the universe are probably infinite. No one has any evidence that the universe had a beginning.

Where are you getting this from?

Towards the end of the video that I posted. Scientists do not know yet whether the universe had a beginning. We do know that numbers are infinite, and time does not exist outside the universe. If anything does in fact exist outside the universe, then please tell me what.

http://www.hawking.org.uk/the-origin-of-...verse.html

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Deism strikes me as a tremendous cop-out. People WANT there to be a Creator, but they simply and ad hoc define said Creator out of any rational discussion.

Boru