Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Bookworm88
Administrator
Registered: 03-2006
Posts: 978
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Origins, of matter and of life
quoting
pepperspaw ...
Genesis IS the origin of man.... good grief... hahahah science
is all we can turn to? LOL
What a crock 
HAHAHAHAHHAHAH
I can understand that you would rather laugh at and ridicule BA's beliefs rather than engage him in converstion, but what purpose does that really serve?
I was thinking of starting a new thread for this question, but since it relates to your response here, I'll put it in this thread.
At what point should we stop a conversation with an unbeliever, and how should we stop it?
There certainly can be a time when an unbeliever is so set in their ways, that no amount of Biblical reasoning can possibly sway them. It may be best, in that situation, to just move on and interact with someone else who is more willing to listen. But I don't think the moving on has to be accompanied by ridicule, no matter how much we may disagree.
And also, if we move on, we may be moving on right before they actually start to be swayed.
|
|
8/7/2010, 8:32 pm
|
Link to this post
Send Email to Bookworm88
Send PM to Bookworm88
|
BornAgain9
Registered user
Registered: 07-2009
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 691
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Origins, of matter and of life
Interesting post Bookworm. I'll have to respond to the rest later, but I wanted to touch on this one part now.
quoting
Bookworm88 ...
quoting
BA ...
That is the kind of narrative I might expect from someone living thousands of years ago who was trying to write an account of how they thought God might have created the world.
Sorry, but I just can't buy that explanation. After all, who in their right mind would "make up" an account where the sun is created three days after the light? They would be laughed out of town.
First, no one had explicitly to make anything up. The same assertion is made in the Enuma Elish which is dated centuries earlier than the Genesis account. The Babylonians believed that the gods created light separately from the Sun, hence on heavy overcast days when the Sun is not visible there is still light. This is a rational, but misconstrued belief. So too in Genesis we have,
"And there was evening, and there was morning -- the third day."
The third day: even though the Sun does not yet exist. It was a cultural, or theological, view shared with the Babylonians. You might say it was a cultural belief held by Abraham and passed down through the generations. No one had to make it up and no one felt laughed at. This idea that the Sun is not the source of daylight was a commonly held belief at one time in the Fertile Crescent.
It might be worth mentioning that the other acts of creation occur in the same order in the Enuma Elish as in Genesis. In essence Genesis looks like the Enuma Elish written from a Jewish perspective. Certainly our copies of the Babylonian creation account are many centuries older than the oldest Hebrew accounts. Certainly Moses lived centuries after the Babylonia accounts were written and could easily have acquired the proper order of events from the older sources. In fact to be credible, the order of events might have had to be the same as in earlier sources that people were already familiar with.
quoting
Bookworm88 ...
The reason people didn't laugh Moses out of town was because he had PROVABLE contact with God.
This belief about light existing separately predates Moses by centuries. Anyone who could read the old creation accounts would be familiar with this view. And yes, it was probably a cultural belief spread over a large area. Moses did not have to get his account from God, he could have gotten it from any number of ancient sources and as people would likely already be familiar with the order of events in the older creation accounts, this might have necessitated the same ordering of events in Genesis.
quoting
Bookworm88 ...
He performed miracles that no one outside of God could haved accomplished. He DID have insider information and had the miracles to prove it.
To start with I don't believe the Egyptian priests could turn their staffs into snakes. If they could do it then so too could those today who held arcane knowledge. If this story was not in the Bible, but found in the Koran, my guess is you wouldn't believe it. If the story of Mohamed riding a flying horse was not in the Koran, but instead we had in the Bible an account of Moses on a flying steed, you probably would believe it.
That's the situation as I see it. I certainly am not going to convince you that the miracle accounts of Moses are only legends, but I imagine you can understand why I might see it that way.
|
|
8/7/2010, 10:14 pm
|
Link to this post
Send Email to BornAgain9
Send PM to BornAgain9
ICQ
Blog
|
BornAgain9
Registered user
Registered: 07-2009
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 691
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Origins, of matter and of life
quoting
Bookworm88 ...
And also, if we move on, we may be moving on right before they actually start to be swayed.
I don't think I will be swayed, but then Peter Hitchens, brother of Christopher, would probably have said the same thing at one time. His book, The Rage Against God, talks about his slide from atheism back to God. It seems the main motivator was his fear of Hell. Unfortunately, when it came to the details he proclaimed he would not discuss such personal matters with total strangers. I was disappointed. I wanted the nitty gritty. It's a subject that greatly interests me.
|
|
8/7/2010, 10:24 pm
|
Link to this post
Send Email to BornAgain9
Send PM to BornAgain9
ICQ
Blog
|
Bookworm88
Administrator
Registered: 03-2006
Posts: 978
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Origins, of matter and of life
quoting
BornAgain9 ...
quoting
Bookworm88 ...
And also, if we move on, we may be moving on right before they actually start to be swayed.
I don't think I will be swayed, but then Peter Hitchens, brother of Christopher, would probably have said the same thing at one time. His book, The Rage Against God, talks about his slide from atheism back to God. It seems the main motivator was his fear of Hell. Unfortunately, when it came to the details he proclaimed he would not discuss such personal matters with total strangers. I was disappointed. I wanted the nitty gritty. It's a subject that greatly interests me.
I don't think you'll be swayed either, but then again, maybe you will be. If you ever are, it won't be by my presentation skills, but because God brings something into your life that really challenges your thinking. Who knows, maybe He will show you a miracle.
I'll have to read that book to see what you mean about a man who writes a book to describe his path from atheism back to God and then feels that the details are too personal to share.
|
|
8/7/2010, 11:00 pm
|
Link to this post
Send Email to Bookworm88
Send PM to Bookworm88
|
Free04
Registered user
Registered: 04-2006
Posts: 400
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Origins, of matter and of life
quoting
BornAgain9 ...
My wife and I experienced two miscarriages before our two successful births. The specialists couldn't determine the cause of those miscarriages but put them down to possible genetic causes. You wouldn't say that just because doctors had no answers for the miscarriages that God was therefore responsible. Would you? I see the origin of the universe and life the same way. Just because scientists don't have full explanations for these events doesn't prove God is behind any of them.
Job did not understand what produced hail. He thought God had to be the cause. Job was wrong. We can't assume God is the answer just because we lack a detailed explanation of our own. That makes the Deity a god of the gaps.
Those secrets of God's really don't tell you anything. The Bible really doesn't offer any explanation for the cause of the universe, especially when the account in Genesis is full of contradictions. Further, by what means did God produce the universe? Saying, "And God said, 'Let there be...' " tells you nothing, Free. That is the kind of narrative I might expect from someone living thousands of years ago who was trying to write an account of how they thought God might have created the world.
You see, the Genesis story to me looks for all the world like a poetic account of creation produced by someone with no understanding of the universe or of the true nature of the world. There is nothing in it that looks like insider knowledge. So many things in this account strike me as so completely wrong that it can only have been written by someone from maybe 2000 BC.
Genesis cannot be considered a legitimate source of knowledge for the origins of the world or of life. That leaves science as the only credible explanation. Science, though its information is incomplete remains the best explanation we have.
You can't know how the universe was created until you know what it is. Astronomers and cosmologists have made great strides in that department. In comparison Genesis tells us nothing, and if you had only scripture to go on what could you tell me about the nature of the Sun, Moon, Mars, comets, asteroids, Kuiper Belt, Oort Cloud, etc.? Until all these things, and more, are understood in detail it is not possible to formalize an hypothesis on the origin of those objects, or on the origin of the world and universe. Relying on the Genesis account alone the existence or nature of most of these things could not ever be known or guessed at, and yet you see scripture as the best source for our knowledge on the origin of the universe?
It seems to me that until we have a detailed understanding of the universe we cannot speculate on its origins. The Genesis writers did that, and it shows. Today we have far more knowledge and are now reaching a point where, based on facts known, we can speculate. We can form hypotheses and test them; and yes, that is being done.
What do I believe? I see the Big Bang as an hypothesis that may or may not survive further investigations. At this point I wouldn't even rule out Hoyle's Steady State hypothesis. I don't agree that there is a lack of evidence; I think there is a tremendous amount of information. I would say, however, that scripture contains virtually no worthwhile information on the origin of the universe or of life. Biologist can't tell us yet how life began, but this is not evidence that God is responsible. The Biblical account of life's origin makes no sense in my mind except in terms of mythology.
Everything concrete that we have learned on these issues has been derived from science. The Bible has, unfortunately, provides us with nothing of substance. It remains valuable, however, as a window into history. It shows us what those without science once thought.
A tremendous amount of ranting that really doesn't answer my question. Lets try again and notice that the question is not about the Bible or anything in it. So let's not discuss the scripture.
I was curious as to how you support your belief of the origins considering the lack of evidence offered by science and your lack of belief in a supreme being. Could you explain your view of our origins?
---
John 8:36 So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed. |
|
8/8/2010, 4:59 am
|
Link to this post
Send Email to Free04
Send PM to Free04
|
BornAgain9
Registered user
Registered: 07-2009
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 691
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Origins, of matter and of life
quoting
Free04 ...
quoting
BornAgain9 ...
What do I believe? I see the Big Bang as an hypothesis that may or may not survive further investigations. At this point I wouldn't even rule out Hoyle's Steady State hypothesis. I don't agree that there is a lack of evidence; I think there is a tremendous amount of information.
Everything concrete that we have learned on these issues has been derived from science. The Bible has, unfortunately, provides us with nothing of substance. It remains valuable, however, as a window into history. It shows us what those without science once thought.
A tremendous amount of ranting that really doesn't answer my question. Lets try again and notice that the question is not about the Bible or anything in it. So let's not discuss the scripture.
I was curious as to how you support your belief of the origins considering the lack of evidence offered by science and your lack of belief in a supreme being. Could you explain your view of our origins?
All right we will try this again. In my beliefs what's not in the Bible is important. The Bible is the whole reason I stopped believing. In my youth I did hold to an inerrant belief in scripture. In order to explain to you why I believe what I do today I have to talk about the shortcomings of scripture, because that is what led me to science and away from belief in God; but you want me to leave out that central part of my understanding so I shall try to do so -- for the moment. 
Origins: What do I believe about the origins of i) the universe, ii) the origins of the world, iii) the origins of life, and iv) the origins of mankind? That's four questions, and they all require different explanations. If you have additional questions please let me know.
i) The Origin of the Universe
It all starts with the origin of the universe and my view is a totally naturalistic one. As stated above I am not completely sold on the idea of the Big Bang, but even if I were then how did the quantum fluctuation that produced it come about? Those who make their life's work the study of such things perhaps can give you an answer. I can't. I suspect that the universe we observe and that we know as our own, is probably better thought of as a soap bubble. Possibly there are many other bubble universes like our own, existing all around us. I think Stephen Hawking, among others have proposed this, so I jump on their coat tails for the ride. This, of course, is arm chair speculation on my part, but not on theirs. Their complex mathematical formulas have led them to these hypotheses precisely because such things are predicted within the framework of the mathematical formulas. I shall take their word for it with the full understanding that a different and better understanding may be coming down the pipe.
This is where it is important to highlight the difference between a scientific hypothesis and a religious belief. You don't want me to discuss this, I know, but it is absolutely essential to your understanding of what I believe.
[Hypotheses are formed based on the evidence at hand. Sometimes evidence may be sketchy, but based on what is known a conjecture is made. As additional evidence comes available it either takes us in a new direction of understanding or generally confirms what already is suspected. Questions are then asked regarding what further information is needed to shore up the hypothesis or to knock it down. This is important because in science every hypothesis must be falsifiable. If something cannot be falsified then it cannot be tested and there is no value in a position that cannot be tested.
Religious belief is not falsifiable. There is no way to test for God, the Holy Ghost, the divinity of Jesus, the soul, transubstantiation, or a whole host of other religious assumptions. My beliefs all exist in the testable realm of the physical world. So my beliefs are not like your beliefs. Mine are testable. They can be falsified and I do not hold to them as inerrant. My beliefs regarding the details of origins will shift as better data is obtained. Yours will remain constant because altering them is not permitted.]
The two bracketed paragraphs should not have to be repeated so long as the truth of the statements contained with in are always born in mind.
In summing up I suspect bubble universes may exist, but not necessarily. More research is needed to confirm or reject the hypothesis, but it's an interesting one and not improbable as far as I can tell – that's if there are big bangs that are the source of baby universes.
If Fred Hoyles thoughts are considered then big bangs are not required. He conjectured the spontaneous formation of matter between the galaxies that over time led to new galactic formation, the so-called Steady State Hypothesis. Interestingly, the existence of tenuous matter between the galaxies has recently been discovered (Sky & Telescope, Aug. 2010, p. 14). There was something else I read some time back that caused a few astronomers to take notice and wonder if the much criticized Hoyle was actually on to something.
No astronomer or cosmologist, as far as I know, would hold to the view that the Big Bang is an inerrant belief, and neither do I. As far as God's part in it goes, I see not a scintilla of evidence. Christian scientists, such as Francis Collins, fully accept the scientific explanations but as a matter of faith choose to see the Hand of God in the works. Most would probably acknowledge, as does Collins, that faith, not evidence, causes them to see God in the universe. Personally I don't see any reason to conjecture the existence of a deity to explain the physical universe. It is easier to explain an unknowing universe coming from a quantum fluctuation than it is to explain an all knowing, all powerful deity coming from nothing, or even worse, always existing. How does anyone attempt to explain that? Problem is no one does, they just take it as a given, without explanation, without reason, and without questioning it. At least cosmologists, such as Hawking, have mathematical formulas, background radiation, and all sorts of things to measure and test. I'll go with that group as they are trying to find explanations and are not locked into inerrant positions requiring beliefs that are too sacred to seriously question.
Perhaps you can see why I didn't answer you question directly, but tried to give you an synopsis of my position in my first post. This may take a while. I am only one fourth the way through the explanation. To be continued...
Last edited by BornAgain9, 8/8/2010, 8:39 am
|
|
8/8/2010, 8:32 am
|
Link to this post
Send Email to BornAgain9
Send PM to BornAgain9
ICQ
Blog
|
Bookworm88
Administrator
Registered: 03-2006
Posts: 978
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Origins, of matter and of life
quoting
BornAgain9 ...
Perhaps you can see why I didn't answer you question directly, but tried to give you an synopsis of my position in my first post. This may take a while. I am only one fourth the way through the explanation. To be continued...
I say, you're giving quite the lengthy explanation. I was going to present your viewpoint as something much more simple, like "I don't know and I don't care."
Well, maybe not quite that simple.
More like, "We simply do not have the information at the present time to make absolute statements about our origins, and it doesn't bother me that we cannot currently make those absolute statements. It seems to matter more to Christians that we have absolute statements than it matters to non-Christians."
Of course, from my perspective, it is not the "absolute statement" that is mattering, as much as the philosophy behind the existence of what exists. Why is there order and organization in the world that exists? If there is organization, there must be an Organizer.
|
|
8/8/2010, 11:00 am
|
Link to this post
Send Email to Bookworm88
Send PM to Bookworm88
|
Free04
Registered user
Registered: 04-2006
Posts: 400
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Origins, of matter and of life
quoting
Bookworm88 ...
I was going to present your viewpoint as something much more simple, like "I don't know and I don't care."
This should have been the answer with emphasis on I don't know. Otherwise BA has a belief.
quoting
Bookworm88
More like, "We simply do not have the information at the present time to make absolute statements about our origins,
From the scientific prospective this is the correct answer. Good job Bookworm.
---
John 8:36 So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed. |
|
8/8/2010, 2:52 pm
|
Link to this post
Send Email to Free04
Send PM to Free04
|
Bookworm88
Administrator
Registered: 03-2006
Posts: 978
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Origins, of matter and of life
quoting
BornAgain9 ...
It might be worth mentioning that the other acts of creation occur in the same order in the Enuma Elish as in Genesis. In essence Genesis looks like the Enuma Elish written from a Jewish perspective. Certainly our copies of the Babylonian creation account are many centuries older than the oldest Hebrew accounts. Certainly Moses lived centuries after the Babylonia accounts were written and could easily have acquired the proper order of events from the older sources.
I don't dispute that there were older sources than the writings of Moses. It doesn't surprise me at all that other cultures had the account of creation among the stories that they passed down. After all, creation happened, so some cultures were going to retain that information even while other cultures lost it or completely corrupted it. The contact that Moses had with God allowed Moses to know which parts of which accounts were accurate and which weren't.
|
|
8/8/2010, 7:59 pm
|
Link to this post
Send Email to Bookworm88
Send PM to Bookworm88
|
BornAgain9
Registered user
Registered: 07-2009
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 691
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: Origins, of matter and of life
quoting
Bookworm88 ...
quoting
BornAgain9 ...
Perhaps you can see why I didn't answer you question directly, but tried to give you an synopsis of my position in my first post. This may take a while. I am only one fourth the way through the explanation. To be continued...
I say, you're giving quite the lengthy explanation. I was going to present your viewpoint as something much more simple, like "I don't know and I don't care."
Well, maybe not quite that simple.
More like, "We simply do not have the information at the present time to make absolute statements about our origins, and it doesn't bother me that we cannot currently make those absolute statements. It seems to matter more to Christians that we have absolute statements than it matters to non-Christians."
Yes, what you said.
I thought Free might want a more detailed explanation, but you may be right.
We don't know the origin of the universe with anything near certainty and we don't know the cause of life's origin, and I am not concerned about that. Cosmologists and biologists are seeking answers. So we will just have to wait.
quoting
Bookworm88 ...
Of course, from my perspective, it is not the "absolute statement" that is mattering, as much as the philosophy behind the existence of what exists. Why is there order and organization in the world that exists? If there is organization, there must be an Organizer.
You see, I don't think that's evidence of an organizer. I think if we examined a stream bed we'd find the gravel and silt was layered in a particular way. That doesn't mean someone had to sort the grains and lay them down. The water's own action is the organizer, but its not intelligent.
You'd have to point out what order in the world you are talking about, but I have a strong suspicion that no matter what you came up with I'd find a natural cause. Perhaps you can suggest something?
|
|
8/8/2010, 10:00 pm
|
Link to this post
Send Email to BornAgain9
Send PM to BornAgain9
ICQ
Blog
|
Add a reply
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
You are not logged in ( login)
|
