Orderly Universe: Evidence of God?

ABC News ^ | March 2, 2008 | John Allen Paulos

[RightWhale]

The Universe is not 'orderly' by any stretch of the imagination.

Yes, it is, and that is exactly how--stretch of the imagination.

[Lurker]

Saying that something operates by rules which can be understood, ie Newtons Laws, does not equate to 'order'.

The Universe is an extremely disordered, random, and dangerous place.

Implying that things move in stately orbits in a calm, orderly fashion isn't accurate. There's more crap whizzing randomly around the Solar System than anyone could shake a stick at.

Stars explode, solar systems and even galaxies collide and are torn apart, planetary debris is being shot around the galaxy like so many pinballs, and even the 'empty' space between galaxies isn't 'empty'.

It's full of chunks of stuff shooting through space being pulled to and fro by the gravity of whatever objects they pass.

It's literally impossible to find any 'order' in it. People have been trying to do that since the time of Copernicus. All have failed.

L

[null and void]

And you direct me to someone else's post. Why can't you answer my question? You made that statement. Are you making yourself null and void?

Nope. I did it for the same reason you quote the Bible. (Which, by the way, is what Amendment 10 did)

I did it because the definitive answer was well, clearly and concisely stated.

But if you insist on my more awkward wording:

God has authored several Testaments, one written in words on parchment, one written in fossils in rocks, one written in the stars in the sky, one written in molecules in a double helix, one written in the very core of every atom, one written...

Why would anyone limit themselves to seeing only a sliver of His Word?

[RightWhale]

Order is in the mind, that is, subjective, that is, in the imagination.

[null and void]

You’ll all be please to hear of what I just caught the end of the crawl on Fox.

Apparently, The Church has a new list of Sins.

For some of us that means we’re going to Hell after all.

For some that means we have a whole new list of sins to try out.

For some that means we now have new and improved reasons to look down our noses at everyone else...

[Lurker]

in the imagination.

So are Unicorns. That doesn't mean they actually exist.

Sorry to quibble, but this whole 'order in the Universe proves that there is a God' thing is hokum. I don't deny the existence of God, but saying that the Universe is orderly is just not true.

L

[RightWhale]

That unicorns exist in the mind doesn’t say other things can’t.

[CDHart]

I had never heard of them before, but I Googled it and found the subject fascinating.

Carolyn

[CottShop]

[[Earth to CottShop, Science was founded in the west by men of Faith. Anyone who had any education got it from reading the Bible first. Some didn’t publish for decades, as they frantically tried to fit what they were seeing into a Biblical context.]]

Earth to null and void, the early muslims (Before militant islam took over) had great libraries of scientific books, not just religous. Not all scientists were God fearing saved people but simply men who professed to be so, and early scientists didn’t ‘frantically’ attempt to do fit hte eivdnece to the bible- the evidnece already fit on it’s own- there was no need for coercing it to do so- it was those hwo rejected God that frantically tried to fit what they a priori beleived about what their eyes saw ie: everythign ‘looks old’’.

[[What would you do if you saw [naaah, let me use a loaded word:] What would you do if you personally witnessed something that conflicted with your understanding of the Bible?]]

I’ve yet to see anythign that conflicts with hte bible- all I see are assumptions by those who reject anythign but natural explanations, and I’m sure that smarter folks than I in the past were even more convinced that the assumptions of God-rejecting macroevolutionsits/old agers were based on nothign but unsupported guesses. And I’m equally sure that those folks saw the same old age conflicting evidneces that we see today and were just as amused at hte dismissive explanations as we are today.

[[That was the crisis of Faith these men endured. They came to the reluctant conclusion that their understanding of the Bible was incomplete, that verifiable facts are facts,]]

Verifiable FACTS? How were they ‘verified’? When were they determiend to be ‘FACTS’? Crisis of faith? Me thinks you are mind reading long dead folks. Religious scientists, those who were truly saved, I think it is fair to logically conclude, were not put off by thsoe who ‘professed to be God’s children’ who abandoned God based solely on nothing more than peer pressure and assumptions and imaginary scenarios proposed by folks who display a tenacious bent toward NON objective science.

[[I bet you think Darwin said where life came from too]

I bet you’re wrong, but I also bet this won’t stop you from assigning false accusations to me in the future either.

[[I suspect you would deny your own lyin’ eyes.]]

I suspect you severely underestimate the logic abilities of both myself and past investigators of evidences. Who declared their eyes were lying? And with what do they use to declare such? Established FACTS? No- we’ve already discussed that they were NOT idneed facts, but were nothign more than conjectures, guesses and a priori dogmatic devotion to naturalism. While you are perfectly allowed to beleive anythign you like, what you aren’t allowed is generalizing about the past and htose who were alive by attempting ot show that everyone was so ignorant that they should abandon their belief in God’s creation based simply on assumptive imaginary scenarios that lacked ANY empiracle evidences to support. You are however free to suggest whatever you like, but doing so will meet with the truth that refutes your assertions.

[CottShop]

[[You’ll all be please to hear of what I just caught the end of the crawl on Fox.

Apparently, The Church has a new list of Sins.

For some of us that means we’re going to Hell after all.]]

You’ll all be pleased to hear that the Church doesn’t determine who goes to hell or not- God does, and God has clearly stated that the ONLY thing that will cause eternal damnation is rejection of His Son’s Salvation work on the cross. you’ll also all be pleased to know that there are no ‘lists’, and that it isn’t by our own works that we are saved, but by Christ’s sacrifice on the cross. Once salvation is completed through the asking, it is done for eternity. you’ll all also be pleased to know that we’re ALL sinners but God is open to ANYONE who simply asks honestly.

[[For some that means we now have new and improved reasons to look down our noses at everyone else...]]

If that’s what you wish to do- then whatever-

[roaddog727]

Pretty amazing stuff, no?

[presently no screen name]

I suspect that if science is faithful to its methods, it and religion will converge on a better understanding of our place in the universe.

3rd try....What does religion have to do with the universe? You still haven't answered that.

[CottShop]

[[Yet the foulest mass murdering, baby killing, child rapist would go straight to Heaven, if they managed to accept Christ as their personal Savior in the last milliseconds of life. How deep is that root?]]

As Deep As God demands- God is no respector of persons. His offer is open to everyone. The simple white lie or bad thought is equally evil as any other sin, and is enough to prevent a person from goign to heaven. We are ALL born into sin and ALL are at enmity with God, whehter we are ‘good people’ or not- God sees the heart and judges on that- Is the heart an enemy of God? Or will it humbly bow before God and ask forgiveness? EVERY person born is responsible for murdering Christ in a horrific manner, hanging Him on a cross until his lungs collapsed in excruciating pain fro mthe weight of His body. Our enmity with God caused Christ to becoem a willing sacrifice for hte remission of our sins. Whiel we can point ot evil people and say God should never forgive them, we do so ignoring our own reprehensible culpability for the death of Christ.

Christ came ot save sinners- ANY sinner that falls before Him in true repentance. The Apostle Paul before He was saved, was cheif amoung hte murderers, being responsible for haivng peopel stoned to death for hteir faith in Christ, Yet God’s mercy, being freely open to sinners, was accepted by Paul- a mass murderer.

Suppose htere are two as yet unsaved people- one a wicked evil person, murderer, rapist, and all around wicked person- the other is a highly respected person- giving ot charities, helping peopel whenever they can, always looking out ofr others best interests above his own. Which is closer to God? The naswer is neither one! They both just as lost, just as unsaved! Christ came to save sinners! Salvation is NOT based on our works, it is Based on God’s merciful grace to ALL people! It is based NOT on what we do, but on unmerritted grace! We don’t ‘earn’ God’s grace- Grace is a FREE gift open to everyone.

[Captain Beyond]

bump

[CottShop]

[[As opposed to, oh, say, Religion which relies on the assumption that the Bible is true,]]

it’s not an assumption- it is a certainty based on eyewitness accounts, on the fact that 100’s of prophesies prove that it was God’s word that was spoke, and it’s based on certainties that are justified through the science.

[[Who where the witnesses for the first 5 days?]]

Those to whom God gave the revelations.

[[Ummmmmmmmm, is this a bad time to point out the BY DEFINITION every Biblical miracle violates nature?]]

What does a violation of nature have to do with the fact that people witnessed the events and recorded them? Naturalists who beleive in the imaginary scenario of Macroevoltuion have no such eyewitness accounts- ALL they have are someone’s assumptions about past unsupported events.

[Leroy S. Mort]

If the universe was chaotic, would that be proof of no God?

[CottShop]

[[‘Predict’ is the scientifically loaded word, and ‘Prophesy’ is the religiously loaded word, for the same phenomena: saying what will happen before it happens]]

predict isn’t the same as prophesy- with predictions- you take known variables and make a logical guess- prophesies are revelations about complete unknowns 1000’s of years down the road

Pedict isn’t ‘scientifically loaded’, it’s a guess- Prophesy is a revelation (often accompanied by visions) about future events. Those who lived after the prophesies, and durign hte time the prophesies came true, had confirmation that God’s word was absolutely true.

[CottShop]

[[If the universe was chaotic, would that be proof of no God?]]

Why woudl you think that? There is no mandate that I know of that declares everythign shall be in order for their to be a God. God is omnipotent, and is hte God of everythign. He is bigger than both order and disorder- Both order and disorder are subject to Him.

[Diamond]

...a properly functioning “thinking pipe”.

The notion of "proper" noetic functioning also implies the corollary notion of improper noetic function. You are implying that there is something wrong with a theist's thinking, in the same sort of way that there is something wrong with the thinking of a person who believes in the existence of imaginary, mythical leprechauns. But how do you account the your notion of something functioning, or not functioning, as it ought to in the first place, resting as it does on the supposition that byproducts of brain chemistry are themselves nothing but the accidental byproduct of chance/necessity, and natural selection? How could evolution not function as it ought to? What sense does it make to attribute properness to something that chemistry can't help doing in the first place?

Cordially,

[CDHart]

Very amazing. What an awesome universe. I should have paid more attention in science and math classes - I could probably understand it better.

Carolyn