(September 4, 2013 at 7:12 pm)Michael Schubert Wrote: 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.
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
