But we do see here a glimpse of how the mindset of the creationist works.
1.Modern knowledge conflicts with stories and explanations from the bible.
2.So, either modern knowledge is wrong or the bible is wrong.
3.The bible cannot be wrong, so we must find where modern knowledge is wrong.
Damn this is hard.
Disinformation is called for, otherwise people would stop believing the bible.
Really, It’s for their own good.
By mentioning that the scientific community has no idea how life begun I was merely trying to state that guesswork is guesswork whether it is done by science or religion.
Now religion and the bible in particular doesn’t really care how the world works or what the value of π is… Religion is trying to establish how people should behave towards God.
You either accept or reject it and that’s the end of it.
What strikes me as odd is that agnostics/atheists tend to consider believers as naive people not capable of recognising plain facts, and forgetting that science has uncovered much more mysteries than provided solutions.
As we advance in science, the words of Socrates ‘εν οιδα οτι ουδεν οιδα’ (I know one thing that I don’t know anything) appears in more and more fields.[Or as Pratchett puts it (unfortunately I dont remember which discworld book was that) as science progresses we become more ignorant about the really important stuff and do not posses the mundane ignorance of common people!]
Which id the tinniest particle? We don’t know.
Is there such a thing as the tinniest paricle? We don’t know
How did the universe came to being? We don’t know
Is the universe expanding or not? If yes, where is it expanding, is there a place outside the universe and what we call that space?
Are there multiple universes? We don’t know
Now I am not suggesting that ignorance = God created everything
All I am saying is some people choose to believe they all magically appear and some believe God created them…
As neither can provide any actual proof then it all boils down to what every individual chooses to BELIEVE and not what they actually KNOW.
There you go again…
First, You set it up as if there are two (and just two) competing sets of explanations.
Science vs Religion.
Then, you bait and turn and spin and switch, by saying that because the one hasn’t all the answers to everything, and the other hasn’t either,then kind of follows, that both have equal value.
You happily skip over the fact that current knowledge has explanations for a multitude of phenomenae, from how certain diseases start, why it rains, how deep the ocean is to how mountains form and how to build a computer.
While the bible is just plain wrong about things.It has the explanatory power you would expect from someone who lived 2500 years ago (and didn’t want to read any greek).
On top of that it’s not just “science” vs “Religion”, now is it?
You forget that there is not just one religion. Do all have equal value on the explanatory front?
And lastly
You made an error in your juxtaposition. Let me correct it for you
Some people don’t know exactly how certain things came to be, others believe a God magically created them.
Latro,
let me start by saying I stand corrected about my last sentence. If it makes you feel any better yes some people don’t know exactly how things came to be, others believe a God magically created them.
Now, my previous comments were referring ONLY at creation and NOT at every aspect of science and in that sense you have to either accept divine intervention or chance. There’s no middle way about it.
Of course science explains how rain is made and the bible doesn’t because, to be honest bible doesn’t give a damn of how rain is made, or if apples tend to fall in the head of people sleeping under apple trees.
I do not know about others thus I will speak for myself in saying that neither me nor any other person I know has ever tried to explain natural phenomena using the bible!
It’s like using Newton’s book in trying to make an omelette. If you want to cook get a cooking book. If you want to learn about physics you get a physics book and if you want to learn about religion you get a religion book.
If you are suggesting I am trying to explain the natural world using the bible then you are mistaken. As I have previously stated Bible is a religious book and should be treated like one.
Having said that (I hope I am clear on the subject now!) returning to the Creation part neither scince nor religion offer a stout proof, so people BELIEVE what they like.
If you believe in God creating the world (Any God you choose) does not make you an imbecile any more in believing that stuff just happened.
And please let me clarify once more I am staying strictly on the subject of creation for now and I am not trying to oversimplify matters to prove God exists because honestly, there can be no logical proof that God exists.
You either except it or not, as simple as that!
No,He didn’t come back during the first Century with His angels like he told the people. And all you state is by man, as a matter of fact by you, who are just a man. That is why people are still waiting for Him to return. One cannot have a personal relationship with someone who is not a proven person any more than one can have a personal relationship with King Arthur of the round table. You want to believe you have a personal relationship, but in truth it is just that, you believe you do. As I stated before you like to believe it, and that is your right. No one can in truth say they are following God’s instruction because the instruction comes from the mind of humans, who they accept as the instructions of God so the belief is in a Human’s word, not God!
Well, there are those who would hold that, yes science is right about evolution and such, but it was god that gave the spark to set it in motion.
While a middle road, it does leave you with an imperfect bible.
But is was not always thus. People * did* think that what the bible said on such issues was the truth. People have STOPPED doing it, in the face of the accumulated knowledge since the bible was written.
Then don’t pretend creationism is science.
Sorry, but you’re just doing the same yet again.
Repeating the false equivalence doesn’t make it truer.
But all right, let’s go with that a second.
When you believe God created the universe, what does that mean you believe exactly?
It was done in 6 days, as genesis says?
And then the Allmighty, Omnipotent one really needed a rest (??)
There is literally tons of proof that the earth didn’t just come to be in 6 days.
Logically it is impossible to still believe genesis as true.
We all have different rolls in God’s work. We will all obtain those aspects of the Lord He wants to give us:
From 1 Cor 12
We are being formed into a single individual body - that of Jesus, not individual members of humanity. Much like when a child in the womb’s cells start to differentiate and work together as part of a single body. We as the cells start to take on specialized rolls.
Science does not involve guesswork. Science is the discovery of truth via observation, experimentation, precise measurements, and peer-reviewed analysis of data. That’s what makes it science – there is no dogma involved.
What’s so wrong about that? It’s true, science often creates more questions than answers – but that’s what makes science so exciting, there are always more mysteries to explore. Simply stating that “God Created Everything” is downright boring by comparison!
So far, neutrinos.
Which brings us back to the topic, the fact that Creationism is total bunk. It’s no more than a devious ploy by dogmatic Christians to brainwash people.
It is simple. If you believe a book that was written by many people at different times in history is truth , you have to find ways to come to the conclusion you need. If they need to have the world 6000 years old to fit the message, they will find a way to make it fit.
It is not easy. You have to toss out science and logic. It helps if you can pretend scientists are enemies of religion and alter their findings to discredit it. Eliminate astrophysics, biology, palientology, geology and other earth sciences and there you have it…proof.
Starting from your last remark, when someone believes God created life it is not necessary to take the 6 day creation literary. Once more Bible was not written to act as a scientific manual and yes, you are absolutely right in saying that Creation is not science.
Science requires observation, calculation and experiment not necessarily in that order! It is interesting you brought up evolution (as I was only talking about creation) because I am really kin to learn how exactly evolution is compatible with the above definition of science and furthermore has any fossil of a ‘missing link’ (fish to reptile, reptile to bird etc) being discovered?
Surely you must be aware of the number of times evolutionists ‘modified’ the theory to apply to their understanding of how the world works.
Coming back to your reply you mention that in the past people believed the bible to be a physics manual. Are you refering to the dark ages in Europe? Because I do not really know any other era of Christianity that this notion prevailed (of Course I cannot say much about other denominations than my own) but if it has then those people were wrong.
Since science cannot explain how life begun then why not assume it appeared suddendly, or that God created life?
Is it metaphysics? Sure it is. Unless someone creates life in a laboratory from nothing, then any guess is right and any guess is wrong!
I totally agree with your definition of science. So how does this apply to how was life created in the first place?
As for science creating more questions than answers you have missed my point which is : Science does not have all the answers!
Cretionism is bunk you say, sure why not ? But so is the accidental appearance of life isn’t it?
Now about the brainwash part, I am not so sure about who is brainwashed and who is not. People who believe in God or people who refuse to…
Actually God pries these out for most. He shows the errors of science and the foolishness of logic. One of the hardest thing is to acknowledge that man is just so unable to figure these things out.
Actually both are mutual enemies of the personal relationship with God. It is deliberately set for both sides to slug it out. The truth comes from God.
Not all guesses are wrong - and not all guesses are equally unlikely.
I declare that I created life! Yesterday! In my blender. And everthing living is descended from that life.
If you ignore enough science, then my claim cannot be shown to be wrong. Why not assume it is true?
Best Freudian slip of the day…
What about the accidental appearance of God? Who created the Place for God to be? If God is a being a God would require a place to be, If God exists than there has to be existence!
They are all “missing links”; life is always changing.
That’s what science is like, it changes itself to conform to new facts as they come to light; as opposed to religion, which refuses to adapt and clings to lies and delusions regardless of evidence. But evolution itself is not a theory; it’s a fact. The theory is just about how it works.
Because the precursors of life are common;. Because there’s no way that life could “just appear.” Because there’s no evidence that a God exists to create life in the first place, or that a God is possible. Because “God created life” is a religious claim and religious claims are consistently wrong. Because science has the beginnings of an explanation, it has defined laws of physics that explain how it could have happened.
No, not all claims are equal. Especially not religious claims which are at the very bottom of plausibility. They are consistently wrong; you’d be better off writing random ideas on a wall and tossing a dart than you are in trusting religion. Science has quite a bit of evidence, quite a few principles that define various ways life likely came about. Religion has nothing but empty assertions that always turn out to be wrong. Why should anyone assume that this one time religion will actually be right?
I may have missed it earlier in the thread, but can someone on the Creationist side explain to me why specifically, Jesus appeared when he did and not say 10,000 years earlier?
Oops, sorry, it couldn’t have been that much earlier if the planet has only been around for 5,000 years…let’s say 200 years!
Why wouldn’t Jesus have been introduced now, when we have the technology to transmit his wonderful message of peace and love to everyone and we could have even filmed his crucifixion and resurrection and REALLY convinced his followers?
IOW:
“If you’d come today you would have reached a whole nation,
Israel in 4 BC had no mass communication.”
No shit, Sherlock?
Or are you reciting some song lyrics for me?
Andrew Lloyd Webber and Tim Rice got there before you did.