Posts: 3620
Threads: 22
Joined: January 19, 2015
Reputation:
30
RE: If there is a creator, so what?
March 13, 2015 at 3:20 pm
(This post was last modified: March 13, 2015 at 3:21 pm by Norman Humann.)
(March 13, 2015 at 1:25 pm)Lek Wrote: What makes a creator seem probable is the fact that we can't explain a cosmos that always existed. Natural science has no means to deal with it. We tend to assume that something that has always existed would possess qualities that are beyond the natural. If there was simply nothing and all of a sudden there was something, then that is also something that natural science can't explain. Either we assume that there is a natural explanation and have to live without knowing, or we open up to the possibility that there may exist something that is not part of our natural world. Using science to prove the existence of the supernatural is like using mathematics to prove evolution. Math doesn't have the capabilities to do that.
There are things science can't explain yet. Can you explain why do you take a leap to the supernatural? Why assume there is something "more" than we could possibly observe? And why is living without knowing so terrifiying or inconvenient that you lean towards supernatural claims?
(March 13, 2015 at 1:25 pm)Lek Wrote: Some people will keep looking for a way that materials came together and began to live, even though we don't know, and say this is reasonable. At the same time, they will refuse to acknowledge the possibility that something outside of nature caused that life to enter into those materials. To me, a creator is no more unbelievable than energy or matter that has always existed and never was created. Which is more believable than the other?
An argument from ignorance, then.
But as I said, why is the creator always existing more probable than the universe always existing, for example?
Look at it this way: if there is a creator, he had to always exist, because he couldn't have created himself, right? So why is the eternal existence of a disembodied mind more probable than the eternal existence of matter? What makes it so much more believable?
Posts: 1073
Threads: 9
Joined: March 8, 2015
Reputation:
4
RE: If there is a creator, so what?
March 13, 2015 at 3:38 pm
(This post was last modified: March 13, 2015 at 3:49 pm by RobertE.)
(March 13, 2015 at 2:53 pm)robvalue Wrote: That's right, the biblical god is ludicrous. He's a bumbling moron, I wouldn't trust him to open a can of beans that was already open.
To me, the only kind of god that in any way gels with reality is the deistic god, it fired everything up and stood back and watched. Or got bored and left. Or died, whatever. But still, it's just a placeholder. Instead of saying "I don't know" you say "This thing did it". It offers no explanatory power, we understand things no better. It's a fairly harmless belief, though.
One thing that creationists cannot answer and I am sure it has been asked before. How did Noah take two of each animal and place them in his ark? If the bible is literally talking about all animals, then it has to be wrong. Saltwater animals cannot live in tropical waters, Marine life cannot live in Tropical waters, and freshwater cannot live in tropical water so, how on earth did Noah get around this little dilemma?
Just seen this statement posted on my facebook page from a family member on my girlfriends side of the family:
Quote:à tous ceux qui détruisent les autres, par méchanceté, par avidité, par égoisme, par vice de perversité, n'ayez crainte, la facture vous sera un jour présentée.
L'univers enregistre tout, rien ne lui échappe, ce n'est qu'une simple question de temps.
Translation:
Quote:to all those who destroy others, wickedness, greed , selfishness by , for vice perversity , fear not, the invoice will be presented one day .
The world record everything , nothing escapes him , it is only a matter of time .
Do you think it wise for me to just keep my mouth shut or just use a famous Dawkins phrase and the way it describes God to a tee?
Posts: 3475
Threads: 29
Joined: December 14, 2013
Reputation:
20
RE: If there is a creator, so what?
March 13, 2015 at 4:58 pm
(This post was last modified: March 13, 2015 at 5:20 pm by Lek.)
(March 13, 2015 at 3:20 pm)Norman Humann Wrote: There are things science can't explain yet. Can you explain why do you take a leap to the supernatural? Why assume there is something "more" than we could possibly observe? And why is living without knowing so terrifiying or inconvenient that you lean towards supernatural claims?
All the other zillion other living creatures on earth only react to stimulus they receive from their natural senses. They behave today just the same as they did 5,000 years ago. We humans are unique in that we possess a spiritual nature that is in the image of the creator. We can venture outside the box we live in and consider other things. We've continued to widen the gap between us and our closest related physical creatures. You're right that there are things that science can't explain.
Quote:But as I said, why is the creator always existing more probable than the universe always existing, for example?
Scientifically speaking, I'm not sure. Must anything physical have been created according to scientific principles? Do think something the physical universe always existed?
Quote:Look at it this way: if there is a creator, he had to always exist, because he couldn't have created himself, right? So why is the eternal existence of a disembodied mind more probable than the eternal existence of matter? What makes it so much more believable?
Because I believe the witness of the biblical writers written over the centuries predicting the coming of a messiah. I also believe the new testament writers who claim to have walked with Jesus and testify to his works and that he is the messiah. And every time I try convince myself that there is no God, I walk outside and become more convinced that there is. Obviously, we look at the same evidence and come up with different interpretations.
(March 13, 2015 at 3:38 pm)RobertE Wrote: One thing that creationists cannot answer and I am sure it has been asked before. How did Noah take two of each animal and place them in his ark? If the bible is literally talking about all animals, then it has to be wrong. Saltwater animals cannot live in tropical waters, Marine life cannot live in Tropical waters, and freshwater cannot live in tropical water so, how on earth did Noah get around this little dilemma?
Pretty simple - either it wasn't a literal story or else God worked a miracle. I believe it wasn't literal, but at the same time, the God who created the universe and caused the flood could have managed an easy thing like that.
(March 13, 2015 at 2:49 pm)RobertE Wrote: We have to go back to basics to actually understand how the universe came about, how human beings and other organisms came about and how we share certain features. This is only hypothetical of course, but if God created man in his own image and he created the animals, how could he have got it so wrong? It is said that he created animals such as snakes, whales, hippos, lions, tigers, bears, sharks etc etc ad nauseum. However, how can someone so give what could be described as legs to an animal that slithers along the ground? What is the point of whales still having vestigial organs i.e. legs again when they live in water and have done for some time. Are we really to believe that God created perfect beings in the hope that they might change their habitats over a certain period of time?
Another difference is the way of thinking between creationists and those who believe in natural selection. Religious people i.e. Catholics, Muslims are very closed-minded people. On the otherhand, the way Dawkins and Krauss dealt with one person by clearly stating that they are welcome to be challenged by any of their students and given a better solution. If it is a better solution, then scientists will test it and see if it rings true, what you might call the next step in the learning process of how earth came about. It is only a matter of time before Scientists will get the break they need and religion will die off.
These are some of the many points that led me to become an evolutionist. Proving evolution won't cause religion to die off.
Posts: 1114
Threads: 28
Joined: June 13, 2011
Reputation:
18
RE: If there is a creator, so what?
March 13, 2015 at 7:42 pm
(This post was last modified: March 13, 2015 at 7:59 pm by Pizza.)
(March 11, 2015 at 8:40 am)robvalue Wrote: Oh sure, yeah. You make good points. But I'm talking about making changes in my behaviour to actually allow for this creator. Even if I believed there was one, I have no way to communicate with it, or any reason to think it cares what I am doing. If I also believed it was actually doing anything to interact, that would be cause for concern. But just the existence of a creator doesn't lead to this without further justification and evidence.
Arguments like the Kalam at best take you to a deistic God, and I'm saying even if I allow these arguments, it doesn't get to the point of anything I can actually interact with. So just trying to convince me there is "something up there" is really pointless, unless you can demonstrate you have some way of actually knowing something about it. Of course christians would try and just switch in their god and hope I don't notice. That needs its own justification, for which I see none. There's the rub: to prove they know what a god would or wouldn't do.
Why assume a god would communicate with humans through scriptures?
Why assume a god would communicate with humans at all?
I've never heard a non-question begging reply from apologists.
@ Lek, vague verses don't count as predictions.
It is very important not to mistake hemlock for parsley, but to believe or not believe in God is not important at all. - Denis Diderot
We are the United States of Amnesia, we learn nothing because we remember nothing. - Gore Vidal
Posts: 69248
Threads: 3759
Joined: August 2, 2009
Reputation:
259
RE: If there is a creator, so what?
March 13, 2015 at 8:47 pm
Quote: We humans are unique in that we possess a spiritual nature that is in the image of the creator.
Oh, Lek. Aren't you special.
An argument from personal incredulity only means you lack any sort of imagination. Give it up and give science some time. The earliest radio telescopes date from the 1930's and they have discovered a great deal since then.
Whilst you...are stuck with your silly god and "In the beginning." The future is not looking good for your ilk.
Posts: 3475
Threads: 29
Joined: December 14, 2013
Reputation:
20
RE: If there is a creator, so what?
March 13, 2015 at 9:28 pm
(March 13, 2015 at 8:47 pm)Minimalist Wrote: An argument from personal incredulity only means you lack any sort of imagination. Give it up and give science some time. The earliest radio telescopes date from the 1930's and they have discovered a great deal since then.
Whilst you...are stuck with your silly god and "In the beginning." The future is not looking good for your ilk.
It's interesting that you say that I'm the one lacking an imagination. The future is looking real good for me. Once you atheists take over, the world will be a utopia and I'll get to live there in peace and harmony. Maybe we'll all get to stand arm in arm and sing "Imagine" together. But I'll be the only christian left, and after living in the perfect atheist world, I'll still get to go to heaven. How can the future be any better than that?
Posts: 29107
Threads: 218
Joined: August 9, 2014
Reputation:
155
RE: If there is a creator, so what?
March 14, 2015 at 3:26 am
(This post was last modified: March 14, 2015 at 3:27 am by robvalue.)
Erm... OK!
Well Lek, you keep saying we are "spiritual", but what does that mean? There has never been any evidence of any spirit or soul. It's flowery language which simply acknowledges the amazing capability we have for deep thought and self awareness that does indeed distance us from quite possibly every other animal we are aware of.
But the explanation is simple; evolution. After a long enough time, amazing creatures can evolve. To just randomly say humans have a spirit because they can conceive of their own self in very abstract terms is just a metaphor.
What does spiritual actually means and how do I know what you say is true?
Also, do you have any answer as to why I should care if there is a creator? Or do you respect my stance of carrying on regardless?
Posts: 1114
Threads: 28
Joined: June 13, 2011
Reputation:
18
RE: If there is a creator, so what?
March 14, 2015 at 4:45 am
(This post was last modified: March 14, 2015 at 4:46 am by Pizza.)
@ Rob,
You should be asking for reasons to believe Yahweh exists and not some other god. I don't see what souls existing or not existing has to do with anything. Mind-body dualism is a red herring. Try sticking to deism vs Christian theism.
Like I said earlier Christians have never given an answer that doesn't beg the question against other deistic, theistic, and supernatural views.
It is very important not to mistake hemlock for parsley, but to believe or not believe in God is not important at all. - Denis Diderot
We are the United States of Amnesia, we learn nothing because we remember nothing. - Gore Vidal
Posts: 29107
Threads: 218
Joined: August 9, 2014
Reputation:
155
RE: If there is a creator, so what?
March 14, 2015 at 4:51 am
Sure, yeah. I'm not assuming any particular god, so if they think I should act differently because god is "their god" then I need some justification for that 
Posts: 1073
Threads: 9
Joined: March 8, 2015
Reputation:
4
RE: If there is a creator, so what?
March 14, 2015 at 5:05 am
(March 13, 2015 at 9:28 pm)Lek Wrote: (March 13, 2015 at 8:47 pm)Minimalist Wrote: An argument from personal incredulity only means you lack any sort of imagination. Give it up and give science some time. The earliest radio telescopes date from the 1930's and they have discovered a great deal since then.
Whilst you...are stuck with your silly god and "In the beginning." The future is not looking good for your ilk.
It's interesting that you say that I'm the one lacking an imagination. The future is looking real good for me. Once you atheists take over, the world will be a utopia and I'll get to live there in peace and harmony. Maybe we'll all get to stand arm in arm and sing "Imagine" together. But I'll be the only christian left, and after living in the perfect atheist world, I'll still get to go to heaven. How can the future be any better than that?
Reading your bolded part does hold water to be fair. Let us just say that I am in some agreement in that even if there were no religions to speak of in the future, the future will still be bleak simply because of what humans are programmed to do. We are naturally programmed to survive by any means necessary and crime will still be the same in a "Utopian", world.
|
