Try the URL below to understand the problem.
The problem is that if you rely on a creator for the existence of the universe, this reliance will reveal God's existence. But, that is placing God in the gaps. God in the gaps is the best way to push God further away from our minds. Understanding God in this way makes belief too easy. Faith is not easy; no test for the obvious. God is not or ever will be obvious. So, science reaches into the unknown for the universe before the Big Bang.
Is this a physics problem, a cosmology problem, or a theology problem? I say separate the science from theology then both God and man will be better off in the end. To stand up to the test is not an act of defiance.
reaches into the unknown for the universe before the Big Bang ... Is this
a physics problem, a cosmology problem, or a theology problem? I say separate
the science from theology then both God and man will be better off in the end."<
Since I agree with the acclaimed cosmologist, Lawrence Krauss, that God and Science don't mix ("A scientist can be a believer. But professionally, at least,
he can't act like one."), I also agree with you that science and
theology should be separated. [my #3 post with the Krauss reference was deleted]
However, I include "theology" in the realm of philosophy & social
science, but relegate it to pop philosophy, pop psychology, and pop soft
drinks, i.e., it is not only sugar coated, but infused with lots of mentally
unhealthy sweetness that one can get addicted to.
The only rational position for the creation problem is "we don't
know". That is HONEST, and I don't consider that to be a "real
problem". Although scientific methods are the ONLY way we can
objectively discover and test our common reality, to try and unveil mysteries,
they are limited with their observations & mathematical equations,
especially when the concept of "infinity" is involved. Even a
theory in this area would be ridiculous to take seriously; we depend on logic.
WHO CREATED THE CREATOR?
Let's be practical. Why should we care? (outside of our natural
Why should that creation question matter in our short life on this one out of
>"..to be exploited,
as those African slaves and Native Americans were...not to mention the other
Wow, were you referring to certain human cultural
groups as "non-human animals" ?
Was that a mistake, or a Freudian slip? :-)
Therefore, outside our trustworthy friends & their common sense experiences (one degree of separation from "data"), and outside trusted general media, modern science is the only way to obtain "knowledge" about reality that is not directly observable or related to common sense.Science can give us knowledge about physical reality. It cannot be the sole determinator of all reality b/c it has its limitations.
Unfortunately, many/most historical accounts from over a thousand years ago may not be reliable. As you know, in those days, writers of "history" were supported by biased agendas and unscientific dogma. If you choose to believe in any of those claims, I just hope that you "test" them with current reality.
I think more people today have biased agendas that reject ancient historical records. I'm not saying all recorded ancient history is legit, but people talk of agendas and what not and those people usually have no basis whatsoever for saying such...they just show their own bias. The discussion really has to be about specific historical records or claims to really "test" them.
For example, using your common sense, why do ANY religious beliefs matter nowadays without having a threat of an inquisition on heresy?Not sure what you mean here.
The 'who created the creator' question really does not refute anything. Or at least, it does not refute the position that there is a creator of the universe. [Post #19]
True. But when there are literally millions of possible explanations for the universe and millions of possible creators – Zeus, Jehovah, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, the Last Thursday Creator, the Great Green Arkleseizure, plus zillions of others – why, in the absence of any distinguishing evidence, pick any particular one?
Except maybe wishful thinking and prior indoctrination which seem rather weak reeds to be leaning on ….