I believe in...
- Thread starter qazplm
- Start date
Are we to assume that "God" refers to the Christian concept of the term, or is it more generic... i.e. A god (or gods), as opposed to The God?
Generic. Whatever version of God/Deity you ascribe to. I figured if I broke it down by religion there'd be like 50 choices.
Cool. That's what I figured, although I would also clarify that one doesn't necessarily need to ascribe to any one particular deity.
I myself am blissfully undecided, but I get a sense that there's a higher order out there somewhere, but part of the mystery of life is that none of us really know what's going on behind the curtain.
I myself am blissfully undecided, but I get a sense that there's a higher order out there somewhere, but part of the mystery of life is that none of us really know what's going on behind the curtain.
Well, I could have expanded the options. I believe in the big bang more or less, but there is some evidence that it's not necessarily "out of nothing" but could be like in Brane theory where big bangs happen on a regular basis as two branes collide. Thus, the first big bang may not have been "our" big bang, and "our" big bang may not be the last one.
So thus far, we have 15/19 who believe in evolution, which is pretty heartening to me given in the general public most polls show less than half of Americans believe in it.
And we have 14/16 who believe in some version of a Big Bang or some other scientific theory as to the origin of the universe.
For those who clicked "some other theory" it would be interesting to see what you believe in.
And we have 14/16 who believe in some version of a Big Bang or some other scientific theory as to the origin of the universe.
For those who clicked "some other theory" it would be interesting to see what you believe in.
All those theories are way over my head. All I think I know is, something doesn't ever come from nothing (a la Pasteur disproving spontaneous generation), and yet at some point it seems likely that that indeed happened. I doubt we will ever come to understand fully what did happen, and even if we did, a good portion of the world wouldn't believe it. Half the fun is in not knowing, IMO. Knowing for certain would stifle the debate.
Virtual particles. They come from nothing (and go back to nothing after an extremely short period of time). We have real science based on their real existence (see Casimir Effect). Something absolutely can, and does, come from nothing. The vacuum is "frothing" with virtual particles popping in and out of existence.
It's also quite possible that the Big Bang didn't come from "nothing." Various theories on it allow for prior universes that expanded, crunched, and then expanded again ad infinitum...or Brane theory...or other theories.
You may be right, but to my limited brain power, if something comes from nothing, then it probably wasn't nothing to begin with. But if I'm wrong, so be it.
There's a lot of stuff at the quantum level that makes no common sense.
Check out the double slit experiment. Take a particle of any size smaller than an atom (possibly a molecule). Through the double slit experiment we see that particle can be in two places at once, and interact with itself as if it is in two places at once. Freakier still we can see that the mere act of observing can change reality.
A lot more freakier stuff out there than just something from nothing...that's on the tame end.
I tried a double slit experiment once during a bachelor party. My main observation was $40 being removed from my wallet. 
It's been a long time since I took chemistry or physics, and this stuff is fascinating. But I think the uncertainty principal in general is reason enough to cast doubt on everything we think we know. Not to dismiss it entirely, just cast doubt.
It's been a long time since I took chemistry or physics, and this stuff is fascinating. But I think the uncertainty principal in general is reason enough to cast doubt on everything we think we know. Not to dismiss it entirely, just cast doubt.
Evolution is pretty well-documented, IMO, and the recent evidence points to a singular creation event such as a big bang. That said, what caused all that to happen? Well, I ascribe to the same thought process as CS Lewis when it comes to my belief in the existence of a supreme being.
Are we talking micro- or macro-evolution?
And when did evolution go from a theory to fact?
First of all, I didn't say it was a fact, but it is what I believe. I said it was "well-documented". In the way that I think you're using the terms, I believe in macroevolution. In case I wasn't clear (or you're not familiar with the works of CS Lewis), I believe God exists and created the universe, and I believe that life has since evolved/adapted.
Theories never turn into facts. They aren't the same thing in science. Facts are discrete points, theories are take those facts and make predictions with them, they try to put them together. The fact that masses attract each other positively at a certain rate is a fact. How that works, the theory of gravity, is a theory, and we so far have multiple possibilities for how gravity works. Relativity is still "a theory."
This is a great discussion, let's all try to keep level heads and emotion out of it, no matter how you feel about it. Let's not turn this into a Fire God or whatever thread. I will enjoy reading it until it turns into that. So far, so good.
Personally, I think there is a higher power, too many scientific complexities that are perfectly fit together to think there wasn't some master programmer behind a curtain putting things together. I'm not a theologian, not a scientist, this is only from my general observations. I am probably thinking too "simply", but my simple mind says a good cake doesn't just happen. A baker puts together all the ingredients. I am applying the same theory to creation. Leave it up my fat ass to use a food analogy
Personally, I think there is a higher power, too many scientific complexities that are perfectly fit together to think there wasn't some master programmer behind a curtain putting things together. I'm not a theologian, not a scientist, this is only from my general observations. I am probably thinking too "simply", but my simple mind says a good cake doesn't just happen. A baker puts together all the ingredients. I am applying the same theory to creation. Leave it up my fat ass to use a food analogy
This is a great discussion, let's all try to keep level heads and emotion out of it, no matter how you feel about it. Let's not turn this into a Fire God or whatever thread. I will enjoy reading it until it turns into that. So far, so good.
Personally, I think there is a higher power, too many scientific complexities that are perfectly fit together to think there wasn't some master programmer behind a curtain putting things together. I'm not a theologian, not a scientist, this is only from my general observations. I am probably thinking too "simply", but my simple mind says a good cake doesn't just happen. A baker puts together all the ingredients. I am applying the same theory to creation. Leave it up my fat ass to use a food analogy
Or, it's simply the only way they could have fit together to create this particular universe. There's some evidence out there of the idea of a multiverse. If that's true, then there is a universe where life doesn't exist. And another where it exists in a different way. And another where it could exist but just doesn't. We just happen to live in one that works for us.
Chaos theory shows that randomness can very quickly lead to high complexity.
CS Lewis is largely regarded as an apologetic child - even among the apology crowd. His arguments are easily defeated. I wouldn't hang my hat on any of his incomplete syllogisms.
To all, what we have here is a deism/theism debate.
Does the creator of the universe not want you masturbate?
That is theism.
This is a great discussion, let's all try to keep level heads and emotion out of it, no matter how you feel about it. Let's not turn this into a Fire God or whatever thread. I will enjoy reading it until it turns into that. So far, so good.
Personally, I think there is a higher power, too many scientific complexities that are perfectly fit together to think there wasn't some master programmer behind a curtain putting things together. I'm not a theologian, not a scientist, this is only from my general observations. I am probably thinking too "simply", but my simple mind says a good cake doesn't just happen. A baker puts together all the ingredients. I am applying the same theory to creation. Leave it up my fat ass to use a food analogy
This is a self defeating argument.
Your god is a receding pocket of scientific ignorance. I don't know, is this your god?
Who said anything about hanging my hat on his thoughts? Nope. I said I agreed with them.
I guess I don't understand your position. You agree with Lewis but don't agree with Lewis? Is there confusion about the phrase "hang your hat"?
It is a rather simple idiom.
ETA: I reread the thread. Are you sure you understand Lewis' position? You seem to be more of a deist.
Last edited:
I'm pretty sure I understand his position.
"Hang my hat" implies that I use CS Lewis as the basis for my belief in God. That is not true.
Well, I ascribe to the same thought process as CS Lewis when it comes to my belief in the existence of a supreme being. - Gr8
I am more confused.
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
How are we getting to 13 Scholarships- Latest: GoldandBlackintheSaddleAgain
-
