Posted on 10/15/2001 7:18:15 PM PDT by Heartlander
What exactly is going on here? Schools suddenly want to make a point that God has no place in our children’s lives during a time our country is crying out for Him. If education is their claim than let’s deal with some facts:
1. Had the rate of expansion of the big bang been different, no life would have been possible. A reduction by one part in a million million would have led to collapse before the temperatures could fall below ten thousand degrees. An early increase by one part in a million would have prevented the growth of galaxies, stars, and planets.
2. The material of the observable universe is isotropic (evenly distributed) to an accuracy of 0. 1 percent. Such an accuracy is antecedently improbable and slight variations would rule out life.
3. Had the values of the gravitational constant, the strong force constant (the force binding protons and neutrons in the nucleus), the weak force (the force responsible for many nuclear processes [e.g., the transmutation of neutrons into protons]), and the electromagnetic force been slightly greater or smaller, no life would have been possible.
4. In the formation of the universe, the balance of matter to antimatter had to be accurate to one part in ten billion for the universe to arise.
5. The random coalescing of several unrelated factors necessary for life someplace in the universe is highly improbable. This can be seen by examining the factors on earth necessary for life. The point is not, however, that it is amazing that these factors came together on earth instead of somewhere else. Rather, it is amazing that they came together anywhere, and earth is used to illustrate the factors necessary. Had the ratio of carbon to oxygen been slightly different, no life could have formed. If the mass of a proton were increased by 0.2 percent, hydrogen would be unstable and life would not have formed. For life to form, the temperature range is only 1-2 percent of the total temperature range, and earth obtains this range by being the correct distance from the sun, just the right size, with the right rotational speed, with a special atmosphere which protects earth and evens out temperature extremes. In addition, the planet which had these factors just happened to contain the proper amount of metals (especially iron), radioactive elements to provide the right heat source, and water-forming compounds. Perhaps the proper temperature range could be obtained in another way. But earth shows how delicate and multifaceted are the independent factors involved in maintaining the correct temperature for life. 3
6. The chance formation of life from nonlife (abiogenesis) has been estimated at around 1 x 1040,000 Thus, the probability of life forming anywhere in the cosmos is miniscule. 4 Furthermore, in the process of reacting in some prebiotic chemical soup, the reactants often need to be isolated from their environment at just the right time and reintroduced at just the right time for the reaction to continue. This is achieved in the lab by investigator interference, but it is difficult to conceive of a mechanism to do this in nature and to do it at just the right time.
1. Davies, God and the New Physics, P. 189. 2. See Davies, God and the New Physics, pp. 177-89; The Accidental Universe (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982); John Wiester, The Genesis Connection (Nashville: Nelson, 1983), pp. 27-36, 47-50; hn Leslie, "Anthropic Principle, World Ensemble, Design," American Philosophical Quarterly 19 (Aprfl ):141-50. 3. Wiester, The Genesis Connection, pp. 42-43, 47-50. 4. For examples of these estimates, see Thaxton, Bradley, and Olsen, The Mystery of Life's Origin, pp. 113-66, 218-19; Pierre Lecomte du Noiiy, Human Destiny (New York: The New American Library of World Literature, 1949), pp. 30-39; Robert Shapiro, Origins (New York: Summit, 1986), pp. 117-31; Henry M. Morris, ed., Scientific Creationism (El Cajon, Calif.: Master, 1974), pp. 59 69
I don't think the problem is with scriptures, just our ability to understand them.
I tend to get in trouble with the Powers That Be when I get involved in these kind of arguments, so my answer
to the headline is, "No he doesn't, but knock yourself out if you disagree, just don't go asking for
state-sponsorship or funding."
No, I won't respond to any other arguments, because I value my posting privileges. ;^)
I'm trying to save them a little embarassment.
I think that's quite civil myself.
Years ago, I heard a wonderful story. A Baptist preacher had a close friend who was a Biologist. One day at lunch, the Biologist told the Preacher, "After 25 years of study, I have finally discovered there are 5 major elements which make up the universe; time, force, motion, space and matter. The Baptist preacher started laughing and said, "You could have saved yourself 25 years by just reading the first line of the Bible:
In the beginning - Time
GOD - Force
created - motion
the heavens - space
and the earth - matter
I personally heard the Baptist preacher tell this story.
Too late.
Even if there were a supernatural being behind our every move, who's to say that it is a christian god? Why are the Native American myths of creation any less truthful? The christian concept of god is no less mythical than the Greek and Roman gods of ancient mythology.
Even though the term "Christian" is properly capitalized, you fail (refuse) to do so on each occasion that you use the term. Likewise for the term "God" as reference for the specific deity, as opposed to the general term "gods," to which you applied the proper case when referring to those of Greek and Roman mythology. Yet, you invariably (carefully) capitalize the terms "Native American" and "Greek" and "Roman" in your diatribe. What this all reveals, aside from an a priori bias against Christianity's truth claims, is a form of reply which attempts to impugne or belittle by use of childish and immature debate mechanisms.
As to your question, "Well then, who created god?", that's a question which an apparently finer mind than yours has already posed. Bertrand Russell's Why I Am Not A Christian, perhaps the most articulate statement of unbelief in print, attempts to address this question, but nevertheless fails to come to closure on it. And, as to your follow-on question, "Why are the Native American myths of creation any less truthful?", even though you pose the question you appear unwilling to have the rigor to attempt to answer your own question by examining the truth claims of each belief system. To pose such a question, and be unwilling to address it, is evidence of a lax, ham-handed effort to refute someone else's position without providing a substantive response.
Translation: You need to do far better than that if you are to refute Physicist's statements and position. (Advantage: Physicist.)
I am a Deist. I believe in God, but I believe that He never interacts with the universe. He is so great that He was able to create the universe in a way that was perfect for His unknowable purpose. Everything in the universe is perfectly natural; there are no true miracles in the universe. If something were unnatural, if it violated the laws of nature, it would represent a deviation from the path of Truth that God's purpose requires. Not only is no interference necessary, but no interference is possible.
God cannot be apprehended by looking for his fingerprints on creation, or by reading a book. The only handle we have on Him is our reason.
You're hinting at Martin Heidegger's fundamental question of metaphysics: "Why does anything exist? Why not just nothing?"
Ayn Rand got it right when she chose as an axiom: "Existence exists". Start with that, and there's no more question-begging.
I will not debate as to whether or not there was a "Big Bang" per se, but I will note that according to scripture, God spoke creation into being, if you want to call that instance of creation the "Big Bang", you are at liberty to do so. I would expect that you would grant me the same courtesy when I call it Genesis 1:1.
You are looking at the universe for ways in which it looks unnatural to you, and presenting what you find as evidence of God. If the universe looks unnatural to you, it suggests to me that you aren't looking at it in the right way. But beyond that, if you do find any conscious interference with the structure of the universe, I myself would put it in the category of evidence against the existence of an omnipotent God.
Depends how she defines "existence" in her assertion. Does she mean "all things"? If so, then her assertion cannot be a first principle, because things come into and go out of existence. That is, the fact that a thing exists is not a part of a thing's essence or nature.
If she meant that being exists eternally, then she was correct. However, that is not the same thing as saying that creation or the universe is eternal. The universe' being is contingent. The universe cannot logically be eternal. Why? Because the universe would have to be infinitely old. While an infinite series, such as an infinite period of time, can exist ideally, it cannot exist in actuality, because in becoming actual the series becomes finite.
Another way to look at it is the following. If the universe is infinitely old, then the past must recede infinitely. For us to be here now, an infinite amount of time would have to have been realized, which is a contradiction.
Don't read the Bible literally. What God did when he/she/it created the universe is beyond our understanding. The whole notion of God is beyond our understanding. So we try to make sense out of it by describing creation and God in terms we can understand. 6 out of 7 days he worked, ect ect...
7 is considered a "perfect" number in the Bible. So the writers of Genesis use this number to describe the time period of creation. God's creation of the world was perfect, therefore it happened in 7 days.
Then we need to make sense of time. We draw on the Bible and come up with 7 days in the week. 24 hours in a day, well I think that depends on the earth's rotation, but I'm not sure. :)
I would be much more impressed by a deity that could, working within the constraints you laid out above, set the whole ball of wax rolling, and come up with this specific result.
Well, that's what this deity did, so feel free to be impressed. Once you get past the "7 days" and literal reading of the Bible, you can realize what God did for us.
"Oh God, you are so VERY huge. Gee, we're all REALLY impressed down here." - MP and The Meaning of Life
I just knew you would want to hear me declaim on all of this . . . ;-}
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.