|
Post by yeshuapantera on Mar 12, 2019 17:44:25 GMT
Well around 14 billion years ago, you might quickly shoot back. But that's not what this is about.
This is about going further and looking at the big picture, which, is very relevant to former christians in dialogue with christians about science and the bible. There are not a few tricky dick christian apologist's running around making bold claims about the universe's, "beginning." And how that beginning proves the bible correct by pointing that the universe had a beginning. There are a lot of ways of tackling this issue.
Here's where the meat of the matter begins. With a short and concise perspective of some of the claims from christian apologist's:
And here's a follow up which goes into some more detail about the biblical claims of "creation ex nihilo" (creation from nothing):
|
|
|
Post by elisa on Sept 13, 2019 5:43:54 GMT
The very notion of beginning and the need for a one reason beginning is sort of aligned towards a thinking that i born out of opposing theistic studies, belief systems and practices. It is interesting to think that the conversation about origin of the earth used to be had i church while now it is a part of all these Earth Science textbooksEarth Science textbooks. and classrooms and rational thinking
|
|
|
Post by yeshuapantera on Jan 10, 2021 20:03:12 GMT
The very notion of beginning and the need for a one reason beginning is sort of aligned towards a thinking that i born out of opposing theistic studies, belief systems and practices. It is interesting to think that the conversation about origin of the earth used to be had i church while now it is a part of all these Earth Science textbooksEarth Science textbooks. and classrooms and rational thinking I was just thinking about this issue this morning. How and why do people get the idea that there must be some fixed origin of the universe. And further, why do they automatically assume that a supernatural being MUST have created it all. Even when they are stuck with the situation that the supernatural being itself couldn't have had any true beginning? Most people who are out proselytizing religious beliefs like to begin with the assumption that nothing could exist unless a supernatural god created everything. I have seen that on jehovah's witness pamphlets. And discussed it with them at the front door many times. Mormons too. What they are doing is relying on starting from an unproven claims as the foundation: 1) Nothing could exist unless created by a god From there, if you accept without question premise number #1, the effort is to go even further and insist that since you accept premise #1, a second premise: 2) Only a personal god, specifically the personal god of the bible, could have been the creator of the universe. From this point, if you are still willing to accept premise #1 and #2 without question, then a third premise is introduced: 3) Only our denomination or interpretation of the bible correctly aligns with the god of premise #1 and #2. The biggest problem with all three premises is that #1 starts out with an unproven, unverified assumption. Maybe it's true, maybe it isn't. To treat it as true without demonstrating that it is true, means that the foundation of this process is literally being built upon sand foundations of pure assumption. You assume that everything had to be created by a god and not natural processes. But that's just an assumption. It doesn't nor can it ever "prove" anything in an objective way. No matter how confident the theistic arguments present themselves, the above remains the bottom line. They are not possible to prove. And trying to prove such arguments as true is always doomed to an inherent failure. Anyone taking up such arguments has therefore doomed themselves to failure before ever getting started. And that can be very frustrating - trying to prove to people something that it beyond the ability to prove. My advise, never try taking your personal beliefs into debate as if you have any chance of proving them, when you objectively have no chance of proving them. Personal beliefs are best as personal. Frustration averted!
|
|
Wertbag
New Member
Posts: 14
Current Belief System: Atheist
Gender: Male
|
Post by Wertbag on Feb 1, 2021 6:48:15 GMT
I can't remember if it was cosmic skeptic or rationality rules, but one of them pointed out there are two different things being described as "creation". Everything we see and know is the rearrangement of existing matter, whether it is organic growth or inorganic creation. We are all carbon based with our components formed in stars billions of years ago. The other type of Creation being discussed is the creation of that matter itself. Matter creation is something that we only have one known example of. So to say "all creation events need a creator" ignores the fact we have a sample size of zero others to compare to. The very claim that creation needs a creator has to be guesswork as there is nothing to base that claim on. To try and link these two separate types of definitions is a big jump "all events of matter being formed into new shapes needs a creator, therefore the physical matter in those events needs one too", it simply doesn't follow.
|
|
|
Post by yeshuapantera on Feb 24, 2021 4:21:19 GMT
No, it doesn't follow at all.
People just look around and see that human beings "make things." And then assume that the whole universe must have been made or created by a super version of a human being - a god. A complete presupposition that has no valid standing from the outset aside from personal assumption. Without credible evidence to support the assumption.
I remember thinking like that as a child. I would look around at the wonders of the world from my own view on a beautiful island in the Florida Keys. I'd see god written across the skies and the ocean. I assumed that something beyond this world must have created it all. The world is the proof and evidence. Because that's what I was told and because as a child it made sense at the time.
Then I became a middle teen and it stopped making sense. Now, I'm so far removed from it at mid age that it's merely a distant memory, like a dream. From my perspective now, it's unthinkable to assume that anything consciously and purposely created the universe and its contents. It's nonsensical. Or that matter was ever "created" at all. It couldn't have been. And there's zero credible evidence in science or religion of a "fixed" beginning. The natural cosmos appears just as timeless as a god would be.
|
|