Why do people use science to refute God?

Discussion in 'IntroSpectrum' started by Ignorant, May 11, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Ignorant

    Ignorant Village Idiot

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Messages:
    17,758
    Science has not been able to explain how and WHY the universe was created.

    The Big Bang is a THEORY... you can even say religious dogma is theory.

    People who use science to dispute the existence of God take the Bible too literally... like the world really was created in 6 days?? C'mon.

    It's figurative language.
    • Hot Thread Hot Thread x 1
    test
  2. reggie_jax

    reggie_jax rapper noyd

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Messages:
    2,437
    that depends on your interpretation really. some believe that its not figurative at all but the literal word of god, and will even reject science on those grounds.

    obviously science can't disprove the abstract notion of god.
    test
  3. TheBigPayback

    TheBigPayback God Particle

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    11,469
    Ur such a level headed dude reg. I respect ur thinking.

    Do we mean days on earth or days in heaven. Cus if it were being created there wasnt earth time yet. And a day in heaven is as 1000 years on the earth.
    test
  4. Your Idol

    Your Idol ♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠

    Joined:
    May 5, 2001
    Messages:
    12,045
    The Gregorian Calendar wasn't even used until 1582.
    test
  5. Sir Bustalot

    Sir Bustalot I am Jesus

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2002
    Messages:
    55,618
    I think the need for a why is mans creation

    i think sometimes things just are and there is no why

    and i think that applies to the universe and life
    test
  6. Noncentz

    Noncentz Sieg Heil, M'fer!

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    6,043
    What do you mean created? The Universe is still expanding... In fact, that in itself goes against the biblical version of creation.

    By the way, why do you believe the Christian God and bible are all powerful? Why can't it be Vishnu and Shiva? That's what they believe over thar in that there India.

    There are simply too many contradictions for me to take the Christian bible (or any other religious text for that matter.) as the word of an actual God.

    And there probably isn't a God any ways.
    test
  7. babygal

    babygal New Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2011
    Messages:
    31
    The main goal of science is not proving if there is a God or not, but having a better understanding of the environment and the universe we live in.

    God, at this point, is a belief. If you believe there is a God, an afterlife and so on, it's fine, really. But don't impose that on others. There is people that lead perfectly happy lives not believing in God or simply following religions other than Christianity.

    Don't get me wrong, i consider myself a Christian, but I don't feel science challenges my faith in any way and definitely I don't feel religion itself is threatened by science. Then again, I don't believe I have to make others believe what I believe or reject science.
    test
  8. TheBigPayback

    TheBigPayback God Particle

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    11,469
    I dont see it threatening christianity either.
    test
  9. reggie_jax

    reggie_jax rapper noyd

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Messages:
    2,437
    that's cause you ignore it

    i'm fine with people who want to say they can co-mingle faith with science, but not when your faith causes you to deny evolution or any other widely accepted scientific consensus. the only objections to the theory come from the religiously devout.
    test
  10. TheBigPayback

    TheBigPayback God Particle

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    11,469
    Bro many times u make a lot of sense. But it really doesnt matter if we were forced to accept evolution which pretty much we are, it still isnt the fool proof theory yall believe to be.
    test
  11. TheBigPayback

    TheBigPayback God Particle

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    11,469
    I mean i know its easier for you to accept but at the end of the day its still just something ur betting ur life on. An im not convinced enough of it to do that.
    test
  12. reggie_jax

    reggie_jax rapper noyd

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Messages:
    2,437
    i'm not betting my life on evolution, though i would probably do so if the alternative were christian theology.

    its simply that in my opinion there isn't much room for debate on whether or not evolution is a part of life and whether it has occurred and does occur in nature, the only real scientific debate left is exactly how it has occurred. i have yet to hear a single plausible alternative to the theory in regard to how speciation has taken place on this planet. the fossil record directly debunks the myth that we were all created at once by a benevolent overlord.

    but despite any of that, evolution could have been started by a god or whatever and i'd have no argument against that based on my belief in evolution alone. the reasons i dont believe in the bible are based more on what the bible says than they are based on evolution.
    test
  13. Radium

    Radium f k

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,535
    its really really hard to abstract evolution because the process of life starting from point A (nothingness) to point B (technology, civilization, cognitive existence) is so grand that it really does seem impossible. i can't really blame theists for feeling wishy washy about it. the best way that i ever abstracted the process of evolution as being feasible and actually even necessary happened when i was playing super mario bros 3 on my psp go w save states. trying to get from point A (LvL start) to point B (LvL end) perfectly, requires precise maneuvering over a variety of unpredictable hazards.

    using save states this becomes extremely clear over time: you repeatedly send many different versions of mario out over nd over, and every version that attempts to get frm point A to point B, has a unique maneuvering strategy to get there. maybe you were sort of clumsy w your hands so you failed to make him jump right when he really should have. so he dies. therefore you understand that any clumsy mario you send out next won't make it from point A to point B. maybe you were rushing because you felt frustrated by that so you failed to make him ready to prepare in time for some kind of enemy appropriately. so he dies. so no more frustrated/rushing marios the next time you send him out.

    depending on the difficulty of the stage you may have sent out 50-100 versions of mario out just to ultimately get the 1 version of mario who could effectively get through the stage.

    expand this same process out into the physical world and consider that every generation of humans only (imagine this for ants, for example) yields millions+ of new/different versions of human beings repeatedly being sent out over and over again, like super mario. consider how many different kinds of humans are sent out in just every single generation. consider that this process has been happening for billions+ years way way before humanity ever really started. many of the things we consider as belonging to us physically as humans are actually v ery ancient: for example things like eyes, the mouth, the brain, the skeleton. imagine how many creatures had to be sent out just to do something like create a mouth. then imagine how effective that creature must have been at getting from point A to point B; for nearly every living creature on earth today to now have a mouth.

    just looking at our anatomy is like looking at a highlight reel of our ancestors trying to get frm point A to point B

    this link pretty much proves it

    The longest cell in the history of life Why Evolution Is True

    but um seriously next time anybody plays super mario bros 3 pay attention to this though honestly. its really the best way to understand evolution i think.

    i was listening to this



    its unrealted but whatever
    test
  14. snowy

    snowy 39k Rap Song Music Folder

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2004
    Messages:
    4,590
    I think there is a difference between the normal use of theory by you and me and theory as it pertains to scientific study. Really what most people call theories are hypothesis. Theories have been tested but still remain theories until they can be 100% proven i think. Evolution is not JUST a theory, its a Scientific Theory. Which means scientists have thrown experiments at it to try and prove or disprove and have really only moved in the direction of proven over time.

    The Big Bang Theory is pretty much impossible to prove, or even really 100% test as its model includes things like Dark Matter which we assume exists but haven't really encountered it first hand. But being able to measure that the Universe is still expanding outwards supports it. So scientists use what we do know to prove it little by little.

    Religious Dogma is a Hypothesis. In that its a question posed with no discernible way of testing it.
    test
  15. Your Idol

    Your Idol ♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠

    Joined:
    May 5, 2001
    Messages:
    12,045
    At one point in time the consensus was that the world was flat. Our scientific knowledge is constantly evolving and along the way many theories are proven wrong. Science can't explain everything right now and it's possible that it never will but you can't refute faith.
    test
  16. reggie_jax

    reggie_jax rapper noyd

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Messages:
    2,437
    the important question to ask is why can't i refute faith? because there is essentially nothing to refute. it's a baseless claim with no evidence to support it, so of course i can't refute it.
    test
  17. Your Idol

    Your Idol ♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠

    Joined:
    May 5, 2001
    Messages:
    12,045
    You can but it doesn't change anything. You're still entitled to your opinions as much as the next person. You're basically spot on though.
    test
  18. reggie_jax

    reggie_jax rapper noyd

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Messages:
    2,437
    hey i'm not trying to say people dont have the right to choose religion over science, i just think there are plenty of good reasons to criticize that when they are the main people who are trying to disprove a theory. its like, their cards are already out there for everyone to see yet they're still somehow trying to bluff.
    test
  19. babygal

    babygal New Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2011
    Messages:
    31
    i don't take the Genesis literally. The Genesis itself actually intermingles two stories of the creation of the world and it's heavily based on Ancient Mesopotamian mythology.

    I personally feel Creationism/Intelligent design is a pretty story for people who find the truth scary, and actually this debate is mainly an American one rather than a Christian one. Nevertheless, it has found muslims willing to support such a theory such as Harun Yahya.

    Stil, believing in God is a personal choice. It shouldn't be imposed on others or be in schoolbooks. Secularism is a good thing and its positive for people to listen to new ideas and for people of different cultural/ethnic/religious backgrounds to meet each other on a principle of equality :).
    test
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Users Viewing Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 0)