Let's just assume that the Big Bang Theory is correct, and we have a perfect understanding of how the world works. Well, Genesis obviousely didn't happen, the Universe was made by the Big Bang not God. But there are still unanswerable questions:

1) How was the matter created?

2) Why do these natural laws exist?

and so on and so on. Understand that science has disproven the 7 days creationism theory of Genesis, but God still (and can't) be proven to not exist, or exist either.

You've never obviously heard of bertrand russell.

The fact that he can't be disproved is of no concern, why, for the same instance you can't disprove the:

tooth fairy, easter rabbit, a teapot revolving around jupiter, etc...

Yet, all of these things would be ludicrous to believe in now wouldn't they?

the fact that i can't disprove something doesn't make it a 50/50 chance. Easy misconception. So we turn to the fact that it CANNOT be proven, this makes it false.

I think there will always be a limit to human understanding. Even as we gain supreme knowledge of how I doubt we will ever be able to comprehend why the framework for those instances inherantly exists.

We need to drastically rethink the connection and definition of god and science as there is the room not to mention nessecity for them to coexist.

quote:Originally posted by CatharticWeek:



I think there will always be a limit to human understanding. Even as we gain supreme knowledge of how I doubt we will ever be able to comprehend why the framework for those instances inherantly exists.

We need to drastically rethink the connection and definition of god and science as there is the room not to mention nessecity for them to coexist.

False.

quote:Originally posted by Kazz:

False.

Occupation: Making a real ass of myself.

Carthatic, i don't follow your logic.

"there is the room not to mention nessecity for them to coexist".

Are you trying to say that we need to change our definition of science and God to MAKE them coexist? Or, are you saying they are unable to.

And i think its clear "why" things happen, its the course of the universe, there is no real "why" to explain evolution except constant need for survival.

First of all we don't have anywhere near a perfect understanding of how the world works. There is a fuck-ton of stuff we don't know. And if we did we why how matter was created and why do these natural laws exist. Your logic confuses me.

"God can never be proved, not disproved"...YET!

I still refuse to fill the gaps in our knowledge with an imaginary god though.

To say God cannot ever be proven either way is silly, because we don't know what will happen in the future. Currently, however, there is no way to prove the existence of a God either way. Bertrand Russell, as another poster has mentioned, summed it up nicely with his teapot argument.

If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time.

quote:Originally posted by CatharticWeek:



I think there will always be a limit to human understanding. Even as we gain supreme knowledge of how I doubt we will ever be able to comprehend why the framework for those instances inherantly exists.

We need to drastically rethink the connection and definition of god and science as there is the room not to mention nessecity for them to coexist.

HOW is what causal events produced what effects. HOW is a reality that exists independent of human conceptions.

WHY is a construct of the human mind, and does not have a factual representation beyond our imagination.

In short, there is no reason to think there is any WHY, but just a HOW.

quote:Originally posted by CatharticWeek:



I think there will always be a limit to human understanding. Even as we gain supreme knowledge of how I doubt we will ever be able to comprehend why the framework for those instances inherantly exists.

We need to drastically rethink the connection and definition of god and science as there is the room not to mention nessecity for them to coexist.

HOW is what causal events produced what effects. HOW is a reality that exists independent of human conceptions.

WHY is a construct of the human mind, and does not have a factual representation beyond our imagination.

In short, there is no reason to think there is any WHY, but just a HOW.

Here's the most amusing hypothesis on the subject of religion I've come up with so far...

All of the religions that survive today and are popular have a paradox along these lines. From this, we can see that religions that state that they CAN be valid or invalid died out at the dawn of science. Now, this is survival of the fittest: religions with paradoxes are more fit for survival against attacks by science, hence, they suvive better. From this we can see that not only does evolution happen, it applies to religions themselves and thus the very proliferation of christianity demonstrates the invalidity of creationism.

But I could attack the fools who think the bible is literally true all day, and it wouldn't do any good. (BTW, the simple fact of the matter is that evolution isn't some wacked-out theory with some evidence behind it; it is a way of classifying behaviours that are FACTUALLY known to exist in certain chaotic systems and can be demonstrated in a vast variety of ways. The question isn't "does evolution happen?" because this is known to be true; the real question is "is this how humanity, and life on Earth, came about?".)

As for me? I believe two things are relevant. One is the fact that the existence of god won't help you survive the next drought, while the other is that attempting to prove the existence of god demonstrates a lack of faith on the part of the "prover" which demonstrates them as being the real atheist here.

quote:Understand that science has disproven the 7 days creationism theory of Genesis, but God still (and can't) be proven to not exist, or exist either.

My, that's funny, science just keeps disproving more and more of the bible. I wonder why...

To anyone that still believes that the bible is "literally true": Have you actually read some of the bullshit that's in it? (http://tinyurl.com/2caa2w)

i love you pianospleen. i gotta show that list to my journalism teacher.

All hail the Teapot!

Shrimp are an abomination! Repent sinners!

Fear the sinful burn of...THE BUNNIES

provvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvveee it