I’m breaking out this reply from the other thread as there is too much association with Creationism and attacking it.
SingleDad: Whether you are a believer or not, if you’re interested in understanding a phenomenon in a rational manner, the God answer doesn’t help any.
trouts1: as I see it, God the term, as about equal to current theory of events behind the big bang.
Bored2001: Can you please elaborate? I still don’t see why it is a valid answer.
In the other thread I said God had no attributes. Obviously he has one skill that he’s pretty good at and that’s creation of
I’ve setup the basis of the term God in the other thread so won’t do that again here. Within that definition belief in a creator God does not preclude perusing scientific explanations in any way. God comes into play where science fails. For example prior to the Big Bang I would have said that God created the universe in some fuzzy way I don’t understand so its non specific. Then science comes up with the Big Bang. Cool and seems reasonable. God gets shifted behind the Big Bang. The designer of Big Crunch Singularities. For me that’s where he sits at the moment.
If I believed in Hawkings closed concept of the universe (1) then I would still question, “what agency created the universe and what created that agency”?(2) Just say I believed the closed concept. God would shift from a designer of Big Crunch Singularities to a creator of closed universes. If string theory then unifies things to explain with 13 dimensions and vibrating strings the Closed universes then God will again shift to be the creator of dimensions and strings.
I’m not an astrophysicist and can only understand things as well as the currently available layman’s explanations. From
what I understand of the closed universe theory its not so hot. I reject it as it seems so implausible. Note - I don’t reject
it because God is there so I need no other explanations. (? I don’t see how some of you arrived at the conclusion that a belief in God would preclude investigation. ?) I reject string theorys as so far I can’t really make sense out of them. They might have possibilities though and if I accept them then God will get shifted as I explained above. God will be viable for a while as unified theories that bring about their own existence are fairly repulsive.
So there is a very mild pantheism here.
Bucky So then, you consider yourself to be a religious man:
Eistein: I believe in mystery and, frankly, I sometimes face this mystery with great fear. In other words, I think that there are many things in the universe that we cannot perceive or penetrate and that also we experience some of the most beautiful things in life in only a very primitive form. Only in relation to these mysteries do I consider myself to be a religious man…
Bucky: You don’t believe in God, then?
Einstein: Ah, this is what I mean about religion and science going hand-in-hand! Each has a place, but each must be relegated to its sphere. Let’s assume that we are dealing with a theoretical physicist or scientist who is very well-acquainted with the different laws of the universe, such as how the planets orbit the sun and how the satellites in turn orbit around their respective planets. Now, this man who has studied and understands these different laws–how could he possibly believe in one God who would be capable of disturbing the paths of these great orbiting masses?
No, the natural laws of science have not only been worked out theoretically but have been proven also in practice. I cannot then believe in this concept of an anthropomorphic God who has the powers of interfering with these natural laws. As I said before, the most beautiful and most profound religious emotion that we can experience is the sensation of the mystical. And this mystically is the power of all true science. If there is any such concept as a God, it is a subtle spirit, not an image of a man that so many have fixed in their minds. In essence, my religion consists of a humble
admiration for this illimitable superior spirit that reveals itself in the slight details that we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble minds.(3)
- Hawkings: A Brief History of Time,143-146
- Hawkings: Black Holes and Baby Universes, 85
- P. Bucky: The Private Albert Einstein 80-87