Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 80 (8908 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 05-27-2019 4:58 AM
20 online now:
caffeine, PaulK (2 members, 18 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WeloTemo
Post Volume:
Total: 852,106 Year: 7,142/19,786 Month: 1,683/1,581 Week: 62/443 Day: 2/60 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Why'd you do it that way, God?
Peepul
Member (Idle past 3160 days)
Posts: 206
Joined: 03-13-2009


Message 101 of 137 (541681)
01-05-2010 9:16 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by kbertsche
10-05-2009 12:38 AM


quote:
Here aret two reasons/advantages for God to use natural processes in creation:
1) Using "naturalistic processes" helps to establish them as "normal," and to underscore God's consistency and reliability as He runs His universe.
2) The vast time periods used for "gradual naturalistic processes" convey a similar message to vast size of the universe. As David said in Psalm 8, this reveals to us our insignificance. We are insignificant in the vast size of the cosmos, and likewise we are insignificant in the vast history of the cosmos. Our significance comes from God, not from our spatial or temporal place in the universe

I don't think that makes sense. Our knowledge of how the naturalistic processes work is very recent - no more than 200 years or so, much of it in the last 100. That knowledge has not generally led people to the conclusions you reach. In fact it has led to the widespread secularization of Western society. So the message it conveys has effectively been 'there is no need for God to explain the Universe'.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by kbertsche, posted 10-05-2009 12:38 AM kbertsche has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 103 by Sky-Writing, posted 01-06-2010 10:32 AM Peepul has not yet responded
 Message 124 by kbertsche, posted 01-07-2010 2:15 PM Peepul has not yet responded

    
Peepul
Member (Idle past 3160 days)
Posts: 206
Joined: 03-13-2009


Message 107 of 137 (541810)
01-06-2010 12:46 PM
Reply to: Message 104 by Sky-Writing
01-06-2010 11:02 AM


Re: Falling came after the fall.
quote:
#1 Creation of matter and energy is impossible.
(So a "God" is needed to explain why we see matter.)

but then a "God" needs explanation - oops, problem not solved.

Don't come back and say God is eternal, outside time and therefore does not need an explanation. I could claim the same for a non-supernatural precursor of the universe. Neither of us would be justified. What happened before the big bang, if anything, is currently unknown. That's all we can say about it.

quote:
#2 Everything degrades down. Nothing evolves up to more a more complex system. (Evolution "up" is impossible)

Reality shows us otherwise. You're right within a closed system such as the universe as a whole, but thermodynamics does not prevent parts of that system from getting more 'complex' at the expense of others.

We see evolution of complex life from simple life in the fossil record.

quote:
#3 The Cosmos is headed to death, not life.
(Again, Evolution as a source of life is contrary to Science. Evolution as a way to cope with decay and death is valid. Life DOES change to cope with a decay in the environment. But no NEW information is created or added.)

Eventually you may be right that the cosmos is heading towards death, depending on the ultimate fate of the Universe. But there are billions of years ahead of us before that becomes the case - far longer than the universe has already been in existence. The sun is likely to keep shining pretty much as it is for another 4 billion years or so. So, the eventual fate of the universe is irrelevant for what we see now and will see in the conceivable future.

'Devolution but No NEW information' is the latest mantra of creationists. It has nothing to do with science. It can only survive while creationists define information in an unmeasurable way or by diktat as something that needs intellect to create. It will go the way of all previous creationist mantras when even creationists are forced to admit that their theories make no sense.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by Sky-Writing, posted 01-06-2010 11:02 AM Sky-Writing has not yet responded

    
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019