Isn’t it obvious? You will eventually see the error of your youthful ways and, once you are a wise man of Zeb’s esteemed age, will realize just how right he was all along.
2 Likes
My great uncle (d-day veteran, part of the group that liberated Belsen) told me about Sundays in the army as an atheist.
The Catholics and Protestants would line up and go to their respective services. He would go wash the dishes.
Derail over.
1 Like
Love the Bonhoeffer quote. For those not familiar with the man:
"Dietrich Bonhoeffer (German: [ˈdiːtʁɪç ˈboːnhœfɐ]; 4 February 1906 – 9 April 1945) was a German pastor, theologian, spy, anti-Nazi dissident, and key founding member of the Confessing Church. His writings on Christianity’s role in the secular world have become widely influential, and his book The Cost of Discipleship has become a modern classic.
Apart from his theological writings, Bonhoeffer was known for his staunch resistance to Nazi dictatorship, including vocal opposition to Hitler’s euthanasia program and genocidal persecution of the Jews. He was arrested in April 1943 by the Gestapo and imprisoned at Tegel prison for one and a half years. Later he was transferred to a Nazi concentration camp. After being associated with the plot to assassinate Adolf Hitler, he was quickly tried, along with other accused plotters, including former members of the Abwehr (the German Military Intelligence Office), and then executed by hanging on 9 April 1945 as the Nazi regime was collapsing."
1 Like
@antiquity
You might feel @zeb1 is displaying a ‘child-like’ faith in his responses to Why God?.
That is exactly what is perscribed in the Bible as the necessary act, to humbly submit to his authority.
Having spent many thousands of hours reading the Bible, commentaries, language translations, antropological and archaeological studies, listening to sermons / lessons, and diving into more advanced areas like eschatology, apologetics, hermeneutics, and exegesis - l originally came to and find my most comfort, from that simple and child-like faith. The same one that my grandmother with 6 years of education and the several surgeons, attorneys, and assorted PhDs in my church used to seek and find God.
Genuinely curious why the scientific community can acknowledge the interconnectedness of the dozen systems in the mammal world, the orderliness being uncovered in all of the scientific fields, or the tiny range that the multiplicity of fields (physics, biology, astronomy, bio-chemical) must operate in, to facilitate life.
But that there an intellegent designer rather than the 1 in 10 to the 43rd chance of life just happening, are simply too large of a leap of faith.
1 Like
Hi Treco - Reading something like a wide-eyed child means you are taking everything at face value without questioning it. As a scientist (and even before I could call myself one), that never was something I was able to do. I was drawn to Buddhism , among other reasons, but because the Buddha gives instructions on how to live an enlightened existence in harmony with everything, but then says “but don’t take my words for it, try it yourself.” That’s great Christianity is something that is unriching your life. It doesn’t make it more true or better than what others believe (or don’t believe).
You should read “Our Mathematical Universe” by Max Tegmark of MIT. He’s a cutting edge astrophysicist who talks about the implications of what quantum mechanics and our recent progress suggests about the reality we perceive.
First, the seemingly too-remarkable-to-be-coincidental fact that the physics of the universe are fine-tuned to support life is an example of the anthropic principle. Basically, this is the idea that only a finely-tuned universe could result in life intelligent enough to reflect on the fact that the universe seems finely-tuned. That is, there is a deep, inescapable selection bias at work. The truth is, we have no idea how many iterations of the universe there have been, nor how many of those possessed parameters that were not compatible with life.
Second, the 1 in 10^43 probability of life is not as improbable as it sounds:
http://evolutionfaq.com/articles/probability-life
Third, scientists don’t reject the possibility of an Intelligent Designer because ‘it requires too large a leap of faith’; rather, they do so because supranatural causes are not ‘allowed’ in science. In other words, a scientific explanation can never appeal to factors posited to exist outside the constraints of materialism and natural law. Note that this does not mean ‘science says there’s no God’; all it means is science cannot use God as an explanation.
Finally, I would point out that it is all too easy to mistake the limits of one’s imagination for the limits of the universe. That is, just because someone can’t imagine something happening (eg, the spontaneous emergence of life) doesn’t mean it couldn’t have done so.
1 Like
Because one is manifested through repeated experiment and observation, giving evidence and truth-- and the other is simply an idea without evidence. It is really that simple. To not understand this simple concept is to be scientifically ignorant. I have no qualms with religion, and those whom follow it, however, it needs to be kept out of science. They are entirely two different things and I blame this on people not being properly educated in science.
@Evolv already gave you a good answer as to why this claim is rejected in science, and @EyeDentist wrote up some more good info about the anthropic principle (akin to a puddle marveling at how the hole it finds itself in just so happens to be its exact size and shape).
However I will add:
Doesn’t that give you a moments pause to think that “Wow, the scientific community really does seem to have so much stuff figured out… Why don’t they accept this claim?” Genuinely curious as to why you accept the findings of science in all the areas you mentioned, but reject the (non)conclusion on this matter.
Asserting that an unproven God did something answers exactly nothing, an in fact raises even more questions. Where did IT come from? How did it create life? It is the quintessential “Godditit” proposal, generally answered by saying “Well of course it can do that… It’s God after all!” - It is a non-answer, and as I said is worse than nothing because it raises further questions.
2 Likes
I tend to avoid threads on religion, but I was sifting through and reading, and I think this is something, as a believer, that always strikes a chord with me. The wild-eyed child concept you mention has always baffled me - God endows us with the greatest gift that sets us apart from all other life - Reason - and expects us to immediately forfeit utilization of the gift in understanding Him and the awe-inspiring universe around us?
Unthinkable, to me.
1 Like
To be clear, the revelations of science are not frightful to me nor other Christians l know.
They are, after all, merely man’s discovery of the world around him. A world that heretofore, was unable to be seen, heard, measured, perhaps unimagined without previous revelations.
And while religion seeks to answer two important questions - “Why am I here?” & “What is my purpose?”; there naturally are musings regarding How any of this began, by whom, & why? I suppose man has always wondered these thoughts.
But my faith in God gives me several things - a peace in my current situation, a peace for my eternal future, and a starting point for creation. Since science does not answer where the energy, molecules, math systems, or whatever latest hypothesis originally sprung from either, I am at peace with God.
1 Like
I respect that approach. That is why religion was established in the first place: to explain what we couldn’t and to give people a sense of purpose. If it makes you a better person and happier, that’s great.
Thanks for the response Puff.
I should have clarified the question into two categories of people who have never heard or had the opportunity, and people who have had the opportunity but don’t view Jesus as their way to salvation. If you think they will all eventually believe as you so they can receive salvation, that is fair.
I think the missionaries of the LDS are particularly interesting, as the founder created more than one way in the religion to expand and create staying power for his creation. I assumed the purpose is as you mention, but I appreciate the clarification regardless.
I fall along the lines of what antiquity said right above my post:
1 Like
I think religion is a wonderful thing for people whom can gain strength in their everyday lives from it. I would never challenge that in anyone and would never want to debate someone that their God does not exist. Not my intention, and that would be a wasted breath on so many levels. I just want people to understand that religion is not science, and they are not universally interchangeable. Too many religious folk want to use science to support their religion, or debate science itself. I think a lot of people truly do not know what science is and how it works.
Some people will even use religion to solve a real problem! Our own President and Vice President have done this, and that is very unsettling.
Eh… science does know where a lot of these come from. We know exactly where the elements of the periodic table come from, the sub atomic particles that make up those elements, and the energy that creates… well everything. The big question is where did everything come from before somewhere around 1x10^-36 seconds after the big bang. I think that is pretty amazing we have done that thus far!
1 Like
Sometimes this happens:
Interesting… “God did it” wasn’t the answer to a single one of those. We used the scientific method to advance our knowledge on every single one.
The idea that science knows everything or doesn’t make mistakes is a fiction, constructed by people who wish to undermine it or dont understand it. Any time a hypothesis/theory is overturned its because even better science came along to correct it… Not because God revealed the truth in unfalsifiable revelation
Science is a human endeavor, and thus it is bound to include errors, mistakes, and motivated reasoning just like all human endeavors do.
1 Like
I agree with every word that you wrote. Man is quite fallible and eventually figures that out…over and over and over again…
Goodness… I guess this is why these conversations are really pointless…
I don’t think you have read and comprehended anything, anyone has written…
I’m sorry, please explain all of the finer points that I have missed.
Thank you
I agree. The struggle and doubt are very much part of faith whether it be based on reason or emotion. To think that we all can accept God in an instant as a child isn’t the story of Christianity. Just look at Paul, Thomas Aquinas, or Mother Theresa.
2 Likes
Just reading your responses on Christ and reminded me of this.
1 Like