RE: Evidence that God exists
March 6, 2009 at 8:49 pm
(This post was last modified: March 6, 2009 at 8:54 pm by fr0d0.)
I don't think any science proves (or supports) the supernatural notion of God. Do you? Let me throw that back at you: Does science explain absolutely everything?
Isn't this Dawkin's position? The interest in theology that sells Dawkin's book/s and breaths life into the many forums such as this.
To me science is fantastic and I'm constantly in awe at the ideas in the same way I'm at awe at nature. I really look forward to seeing advancements and want to live as long as possible to witness them.
I have reasoning to support the idea that God exists. None of that reasoning I think fits in with science at all. If there were an ulterior point to thunder angels, like there was something to be learned from the simile... let's imagine there was a point, then 'belief' in the angels would be foolish, as we all know the point of the story is the lesson. That actual physical happenings are used to describe the lesson in beside the point.
Like there actually was a "tree of knowledge of good and evil" (catchy name, dunno how that could've become extinct), and this miraculously formed dust bloke and his spare rib missus actually ate it's fruit after being given instruction to do so from a talking snake.... Are you people OFF YOUR HEADS!?!? Do you really think this is a serious claim of FACT!?!
See, I don't. I think genesis is an incredible book. The stories mind blowing and full of truth. Truth that stands up to scrutiny now, which is pretty mindblowingly amazing. Big up to the bloke/ blokes who wrote it. Top job
@ EvF: Lack of empirical evidence seems to be a signature of God. But not the only signature. Christians use the bible as a record of the signature of God so that they can distinguish him.
Isn't this Dawkin's position? The interest in theology that sells Dawkin's book/s and breaths life into the many forums such as this.
To me science is fantastic and I'm constantly in awe at the ideas in the same way I'm at awe at nature. I really look forward to seeing advancements and want to live as long as possible to witness them.
I have reasoning to support the idea that God exists. None of that reasoning I think fits in with science at all. If there were an ulterior point to thunder angels, like there was something to be learned from the simile... let's imagine there was a point, then 'belief' in the angels would be foolish, as we all know the point of the story is the lesson. That actual physical happenings are used to describe the lesson in beside the point.
Like there actually was a "tree of knowledge of good and evil" (catchy name, dunno how that could've become extinct), and this miraculously formed dust bloke and his spare rib missus actually ate it's fruit after being given instruction to do so from a talking snake.... Are you people OFF YOUR HEADS!?!? Do you really think this is a serious claim of FACT!?!
See, I don't. I think genesis is an incredible book. The stories mind blowing and full of truth. Truth that stands up to scrutiny now, which is pretty mindblowingly amazing. Big up to the bloke/ blokes who wrote it. Top job
@ EvF: Lack of empirical evidence seems to be a signature of God. But not the only signature. Christians use the bible as a record of the signature of God so that they can distinguish him.
