03 Nov 16
Ghost, your particular brand of atheism is intriguing to me. You have studied theology at a university level, and are not convinced of God, but you have repeatedly said that you are 'open minded' to God, if the proof were revealed to you.
The issue here though, is that absent of 'god', you seem quite content that earth and humanity just happened, and was not created. Not only do you not believe in God, but you also do not believe in 'creation'.
If God did somehow reveal Himself to you today, you would have no alternative but believe in BOTH scenarios, that God exists....and that He created all.
So, why now, with the absence of proof of God, can you not entertain that all was 'created', but by what.....you don't know?
Meaning.....that your high level of theology studies may not convince you of the 'God of the bible', but to still not believe in some form of 'creation' is entirely different.
03 Nov 16
Originally posted by chaney3I can't speak for Ghost, but I personally can entertain that it was all created, I just don't believe it ie I leave it as an 'I don't know'.
So, why now, with the absence of proof of God, can you not entertain that all was 'created', but by what.....you don't know?
I would like you to watch this:
and think about the first point he makes.
03 Nov 16
Originally posted by twhiteheadVideo aside, you......can entertain 'creation', without necessarily believing in 'who'?
I can't speak for Ghost, but I personally can entertain that it was all created, I just don't believe it ie I leave it as an 'I don't know'.
I would like you to watch this:
[youtube]8fmFYkogtZQ[/youtube]
and think about the first point he makes.
This is very interesting to me, and I would not have guessed that you felt this way.
03 Nov 16
Originally posted by chaney3Yes.
Video aside, you......can entertain 'creation', without necessarily believing in 'who'?
With the understanding that 'entertain creation' means I allow that it is possible the universe was created. I think it highly unlikely, but possible.
This is very interesting to me, and I would not have guessed that you felt this way.
Why?
03 Nov 16
Originally posted by twhiteheadBecause atheists seem 'all or nothing'.
Yes.
With the understanding that 'entertain creation' means I allow that it is possible the universe was created. I think it highly unlikely, but possible.
[b]This is very interesting to me, and I would not have guessed that you felt this way.
Why?[/b]
Not believing in the God of the bible is quite different than not believing in creation.
Quite frankly, your posts, to me, seem as if you try to explain creation, from a scientific point of view. Not allowing room for a 'creator' at all.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 29599
03 Nov 16
Originally posted by twhiteheadThe guy in the video is a smart cookie. Religion does indeed provide convenient and reassuring answers to life's difficult questions. That doesn't mean of course they are the correct answers. (Merely convenient and reassuring).
I can't speak for Ghost, but I personally can entertain that it was all created, I just don't believe it ie I leave it as an 'I don't know'.
I would like you to watch this:
[youtube]8fmFYkogtZQ[/youtube]
and think about the first point he makes.
As an atheist I am not content to be reassured. My questions are not easily pacified and personally I would rather receive no answer than a conveniently incorrect and unproven answer.
I will entertain anything that can be evidenced or proven.
03 Nov 16
Originally posted by chaney3Not according to the vast majority of Christians in America.
Because atheists seem 'all or nothing'.
Not believing in the God of the bible is quite different than not believing in creation.
Quite frankly, your posts, to me, seem as if you try to explain creation, from a scientific point of view. Not allowing room for a 'creator' at all.
And before some grognard tries to tell me that not everyone on this forum or even in the world is Christian or some other non sequitur, that's not my point.
My point is that most Christians DO tend to blow off evolution as some sort of fairy tale, while most atheists blow off creation as some kind of fairy tale.
Evolution is just another kind of creation. I'm convinced people just like to argue.
03 Nov 16
Originally posted by chaney3There are many atheists with many different views. On this site, the majority are somewhat skeptics ie they don't believe anything without evidence.
Because atheists seem 'all or nothing'.
Not believing in the God of the bible is quite different than not believing in creation.
But both are beliefs, and I don't hold beliefs.
Quite frankly, your posts, to me, seem as if you try to explain creation, from a scientific point of view. Not allowing room for a 'creator' at all.
I don't try to explain creation at all. I don't know how the universe started or even if it started as I have said very many times on this forum.
And yes, I take the scientific view on anything because I believe science is the best method to learn about the world - and in fact the only reliable method.
But science does not rule out a creator.
03 Nov 16
Originally posted by twhiteheadYour last sentence is false.
There are many atheists with many different views. On this site, the majority are somewhat skeptics ie they don't believe anything without evidence.
[b]Not believing in the God of the bible is quite different than not believing in creation.
But both are beliefs, and I don't hold beliefs.
Quite frankly, your posts, to me, seem as if you try ...[text shortened]... bout the world - and in fact the only reliable method.
But science does not rule out a creator.
Science most certainly tries to 'explain' origin without a creator.
03 Nov 16
Originally posted by SuziannePeople do like to argue, myself included, but that doesn't change the fact that I do, genuinely believe that creation as believed in by most Christians, is 'some kind of fairy tale'.
while most atheists blow off creation as some kind of fairy tale.
Evolution is just another kind of creation. I'm convinced people just like to argue.
Fairy tales may on occasion be factual or in part based on truth. But that doesn't change the fact that you have not convinced me that that particular claim is factual.
03 Nov 16
Originally posted by chaney3No, it most definitely is not false.
Your last sentence is false.
Science most certainly tries to 'explain' origin without a creator.
Science just tries to discover and understand. It does not start with beliefs. If it finds evidence for a creator, then so be it.
What it has not done, is rule out the possibility of a creator.
03 Nov 16
Originally posted by twhiteheadAre you publicly stating that the origin of life 'could' be due to a creator?
No, it most definitely is not false.
[b]Science most certainly tries to 'explain' origin without a creator.
Science just tries to discover and understand. It does not start with beliefs. If it finds evidence for a creator, then so be it.
What it has not done, is rule out the possibility of a creator.[/b]
03 Nov 16
Originally posted by SuzianneWhy do Christians INSIST evolution is some other creation tale? It is DECIDEDLY NOT about creation.
Not according to the vast majority of Christians in America.
And before some grognard tries to tell me that not everyone on this forum or even in the world is Christian or some other non sequitur, that's not my point.
My point is that most Christians DO tend to blow off evolution as some sort of fairy tale, while most atheists blow off creation as som ...[text shortened]... y tale.
Evolution is just another kind of creation. I'm convinced people just like to argue.
Christians, creationsist INSIST on clumping evolution with creation and the creation of the universe. You should know full well the scientific discipline of evolution is NOT about creation, it is about the changes that happen to life AFTER life has already started by whatever means it got here.
Life origins is another discipline altogether, they could basically care less what happens to life forms after it starts, they want to know if life could start from mud and lightning or some such variation and you know good and well the Miller experiments showing the generation of complex molecules from a contained spark in a bottle with basic components.
And of course that is not the complete picture but you have to know science in general is still in kindergarten so you are like chiding an 8 year old child for not knowing astrophysics on a phd level.
And the origin of the entire universe is yet another science discipline.
They could give a rats ass about life forms and evolution and all that, they want to know how it all happened, the entire universe. Like I said, we are in kindergarten in many sciences so cut them some slack when you dis all those sciences. Just believe what you will without casting aspersions on men of science because they can't answer the big questions just yet. Come back in a few hundred years and things will be a lot more mature in science, especially the big questions science. Right now you are bitching at 7 year olds for not knowing.
You may find it comforting there is a biblical answer to just about everything and hey, go with it if it makes you feel more secure.
I don't need that particular security blanket myself but whatever floats your boat.
Just don't put down whole sciences for not knowing the big questions just yet.
We haven't even been able so far to connect relativity and quantum mechanics and untill we do we will be in the dark as to what goes in, say in the bottom of a black hole. Some theorize our whole universe is what a white hole is, that a black hole in a parent universe pokes a hole in OUR dimension and spills its guts to form what we see as the big bang. And of course that is just another of many hypothesis and you can poo poo it all you want and many scientists do but till we master combining relativity with quantum mechanics those questions will remain in the hypothesis closet. And we know it.
So cut them some slack. They are, after all, only human.