0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
So, if we pick the bits we like and reinterpret the other bits in our favour then that constitutes proof, does it?And who were these guys "with no education"? That's an incredibly arrogant way of describing highly intelligent and well educated philosophers.
...The example I gave from Isaiah is not just a 'bit' of information. That is high level physics. Einstein receives so much praise for saying it but when I show you from the bible you conclude it's not so amazing.
Be honest. If I showed you that the bible may also be talking of an expanding universe would that be more amazing?Or that it told of a round earth thousands of years before Gagarin went into space or Magellan around the globe. Would that impress you more.Somehow I doubt it would impress you because you believe in science, and you wrongly think it contradicts the bible.
I wish you could say exactly what makes you not believe in a creator
Errr... what ever happened to getting an intelligent head? []http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=19945.msg223835#msg223835
It could just as easily be interpreted as me getting my washing back from the laundry and finding that I haven't lost a sock.
The bible doesn't talk about science, it sticks to allusion, which is so open to interpretation as to make it meaningless in any absolute sense. Incidentally, both the ancient Greeks and Asian Indians thought that the Earth was spherical.
The difference between religion and science is that religion is all about belief, and furthermore, it requires a lack of proof; when you have proof you have knowledge and belief becomes redundant. Science, on the other hand is all about knowledge, and it seeks proof. Be careful not to confuse knowledge and belief; they are mutually exclusive.
The lack of evidence for one.
QuoteIt could just as easily be interpreted as me getting my washing back from the laundry and finding that I haven't lost a sock.It says in clear terms that matter resulted from energy. No 2 ways about it.
QuoteThe difference between religion and science is that religion is all about belief, and furthermore, it requires a lack of proof; when you have proof you have knowledge and belief becomes redundant. Science, on the other hand is all about knowledge, and it seeks proof. Be careful not to confuse knowledge and belief; they are mutually exclusive.Not true
QuoteThe lack of evidence for one.You exist as proof. Singularity if it existed must have come from somewhere. Isaiah explains where.
QuoteThe difference between religion and science is that religion is all about belief, and furthermore, it requires a lack of proof; when you have proof you have knowledge and belief becomes redundant. Science, on the other hand is all about knowledge, and it seeks proof. Be careful not to confuse knowledge and belief; they are mutually exclusive.So if you believed in God and then 1 day he provided absolute proof of his existence, would you necessarily cease to be religious?Consider this. Little peasant in his cottage in the Middle Ages. He has been told all his life that his country is ruled by a king and believes that to be true even though he has never seen him. Like many other serfs, he is a royalist. Then, one day, the king (uh huh huh) comes a-calling. Maybe he fancies a scoop of ale. But whatever the reason for his visit, there he is in front of little peasant person. Little cottage-dwelling paean now knows the king exists because there he is in little man's favourite chair.Erm... I've forgotten where I was going with this. I'll come back to it in a while unless someone else can determine the point I was trying to make. Blame the medication! [xx(]
Doc - I think I know what you are getting at - it's a definitions thing though - technically, once I can confirm that the cat is at home, or my tea is refreshing and good, I no longer believe it, I just know.
Here's the nub of it though - there doesn't need to be a why. We don't know what came before the big bang, and perhaps we never will. But that gap doesn't need to be filled with a deity.
I think there are semantics at issue here - for example, I believe my cat will be at home to greet me, based on my experience and evidence of the past, but it may not come to be true - likewise, I can have faith that my cup of tea will taste nice, based on my previous knowledge of tea.
Here's another interpretation from the same words - he had lots of energy (which almost certainly had a different meaning in biblical times)
If the Universe had expanded one million millionth part faster, then all the material in the Universe would have dispersed by now. And if it had been a million millionth part slower, then gravitational forces would have caused the Universe to collapse within the first thousand million years or so of its existence. Again, there would have been no long-lived stars and no life
The example I gave from Isaiah is not just a 'bit' of information. That is high level physics.
QuoteHere's the nub of it though - there doesn't need to be a why. We don't know what came before the big bang, and perhaps we never will. But that gap doesn't need to be filled with a deity.There has to be a why. As scientists, we always ask why. There is a design to everything that we study. That's the only way we can know them. Take the electron, in a normal atom it orbits the nucleus without falling into it. Automatically we ask what question...?So how come when we know the closest answer to a question may be God. We stop asking 'why?'.
QuoteI think there are semantics at issue here - for example, I believe my cat will be at home to greet me, based on my experience and evidence of the past, but it may not come to be true - likewise, I can have faith that my cup of tea will taste nice, based on my previous knowledge of tea.You probably have faith that this is the year 2009. But you have no knowledge that this is about the number of years since Christ's being born on earth.
But then again, God created humans not for him to be an object of scrutiny. We are too insignificant. So it remains a question of faith. If the bible was a science book then we would discuss in those terms. But it is not. The best evidence of his existence is all around us. In the precision, foresight, intelligence that went into creation which on earth only man can understand because he was created to have those characteristics to a smaller degree.Evidence is also in the very fact that something so obvious can escape people who spend years studying it. It's like physical matter has a hidden code that you need only wisdom to understand.The universe is so perfectly fine tuned that it's precision seems impossible considering that it may have started in a super massive bang. (I'm not arguing the big bang). Actually, even the rate of expansion of the early universe was very highly fine tuned.QuoteIf the Universe had expanded one million millionth part faster, then all the material in the Universe would have dispersed by now. And if it had been a million millionth part slower, then gravitational forces would have caused the Universe to collapse within the first thousand million years or so of its existence. Again, there would have been no long-lived stars and no life That's a quotation from Sir Alfred Charles Bernard Lovell.There is even more intricate fine tuning in the four fundamental forces but I won't go into that.
However we can disprove the bible !The earth was not created in 7 days. Either that or carbon dating doesent work at all. Humm who do i believe !Moses well parting the red sea is disputable ! God killed the first born children sent wave after wave of plagues, personally Adolf seems quite mild in comparison !One of my favorites Adam and Eve, two sons, I mean INSEST!Quote Pen and Teller " The best way to dismiss the bible as fiction is to read it ! "
Quote from: Gabe2k2 on 12/09/2008 20:52:51However we can disprove the bible !The earth was not created in 7 days. Either that or carbon dating doesent work at all. Humm who do i believe !One day represents 1000 years
However we can disprove the bible !The earth was not created in 7 days. Either that or carbon dating doesent work at all. Humm who do i believe !