Posted by Ryan on November 23, 1999 at 12:50:15:
In Reply to: a too brief reply posted by rpcman on November 22, 1999 at 12:05:38:
: I don't have much time so my reply will be briefer than it should...
: First of all, you have some good (and some not so good) questions. The not so good ones could be eliminated or improved through a better understanding of physics/cosmology and perhaps biology. A bigger dose of what the scientific method is and what it seeks to accomplish would be helpful too.
: The major problem with your logic is it is basically an argument for the "god-of-the-gaps theory"--a theory with a horrible track record. Not only does it have a bad history (i.e. god(s) keep shrinking under this theory) but it raises a bigger question than it answers.
Do you admit, then, that you have no answer to my question about
the big bang, but can only defer to the other option,
namely, God, and say that it has the same problem?
That's like saying that if you find a watch on the beach (I know,
this is an oldie--but bear with me) it is more logical to
assume it got there by randomly formed, unguided sequential
processes than by an intelligent creator. Why? Because
to say that the watch had an intelligent creator is to
create an even bigger problem--who made the man who
made the watch? Therefore, teh watch had no intelligent
creator.
Sorry, that does not fly with me.
You might say that the analogy doesn't apply--but reality
is that according to the big bang/evolution, it is
no analogy at all, but rather the watch was formed by beings who
were formed through those exact means, and was thus formed by
those means, itself.
Just because we can't figure out from our universe
how it got here, doesn't mean that methods don't exist,
outside of our present physical laws by which we abide,
by which our universe was created, and in which the seemingly paradoxical questions
of this reality in which we live(ie-"the universe")
are answered.
If time does not even exist where God dwells,
that settles your answer right there. We can not
understand it, and that is the meaning of faith.
While admittedly it does not prove there is a
God, it does require at the very least that principles/laws, etc.
exist in our universe which contradict some basic scientific assumptions
up to this point--even things which we thought were
absolute. Such as, "nothing can travel faster than
the speed of light" However, if the big bang happened
as is supposed, the initial energy traveled billions
of light years in the first second, reaching not too
far from where it is now!!!
And, if the scientific view of reality, which
we are supposed to base our lives on, turns out to
be totally ( false? insufficient? contradictory? all of
the above?) Then, why not trust in what God has to
tell you, instead?