@fmf saidMakes a lot more sense than telling some lonely goat-herd the whole deal and then ruthlessly punishing anyone who questions it. (No offence intended to goat-herders, that's a good, honest profession and goats are awesome.)
If the universe was created, then it is science that is expanding our knowledge of its creator, not people claiming to have received some kind of instructions from him-her-it.
Discuss
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 30605
21 Mar 21
@avalanchethecat saidIn or out of a curry?
Makes a lot more sense than telling some lonely goat-herd the whole deal and then ruthlessly punishing anyone who questions it. (No offence intended to goat-herders, that's a good, honest profession and goats are awesome.)
21 Mar 21
@ghost-of-a-duke saidI'm not particular. Admirable animals, and tasty too.
In or out of a curry?
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 30605
21 Mar 21
@avalanchethecat saidIn Japanese, they are called yagi, which seems to suit them better.
I'm not particular. Admirable animals, and tasty too.
21 Mar 21
@fmf saidIf the universe was created, then it is creation that teaches us much about the genius of God.
If the universe was created, then it is science that is expanding our knowledge of its creator, not people claiming to have received some kind of instructions from him-her-it.
Discuss
If God exists, then the knowledge of He Himself is revealed by Him alone, and the medium through which that is accomplished is the written word and His Spirit.
21 Mar 21
@secondson saidAnd then, if the proposition in the OP is correct, it is science that is examining the universe and expanding our knowledge of the intricacies of this genius/creation.
If the universe was created, then it is creation that teaches us much about the genius of God.
21 Mar 21
@secondson saidThis, in terms of the OP, would fall under the category of people claiming to have received some kind of instructions from the creator being, if there is one.
If God exists, then the knowledge of He Himself is revealed by Him alone, and the medium through which that is accomplished is the written word and His Spirit.
22 Mar 21
@fmf saidI find the the answer "God created" to be very unsatisfying, and I would not be surprised if scientifically-minded theists felt the same.
If the universe was created, then it is science that is expanding our knowledge of its creator, not people claiming to have received some kind of instructions from him-her-it.
Discuss
Even if it happens to be true that God created the Universe, we still want to know how he did it.
22 Mar 21
@bigdoggproblem saidBut that is what science is engaged in finding out.
Even if it happens to be true that God created the Universe, we still want to know how he did it.
I suppose religions cater to those who wish or need to "know" why he did it.
But then such religions just conjure up reasons and teach their adherents to internalize those reasons.
Religions create purpose for people. Religions answer their own questions, and, in many respects, the inquiry is then done and dusted.
Meanwhile, science is getting on with exploring the nature of the universe and, therefore, perhaps, the nature of God.
One suspects that the inquiry of science will never be done and dusted.
22 Mar 21
@bigdoggproblem saidIn answer to this, I said "But that is what science is engaged in finding out." On reflection, I am not sure this is so, or at least I am not sure it's straightforward because, if the "how he did it" is, indeed, a supernatural thing, then that would either lie beyond the realm of science OR it would necessitate redefining the scope of what is "natural" and the boundaries of the "nature" that science explores.
Even if it happens to be true that God created the Universe, we still want to know how he did it.
22 Mar 21
@fmf saidTo deduce anything about God from the creation itself is a form of very religious thinking.
If the universe was created, then it is science that is expanding our knowledge of its creator, not people claiming to have received some kind of instructions from him-her-it.
Discuss
Science should only be engaged in the process of describing the universe and nature.
22 Mar 21
@philokalia saidPerhaps "describing the universe and nature" is as close as humans can get to describing what has possibly been created, and - in that way - describing the creator being or entity, a "figure" I do not feel the need to anthropomorphize.
Science should only be engaged in the process of describing the universe and nature.
For this to be "a form of very religious thinking", to my way of thinking, I'd have to worship a being as a superhuman controlling power.
If there is a creator entity and the universe can rightfully be described as "creation", I think science can tell us more [and more and more as times passes] about that "creation" than, say, your Orthodox Catholic narratives and dogma can.
22 Mar 21
@philokalia saida form of very religious thinking
To deduce anything about God from the creation itself is a form of very religious thinking.
I see "religious thinking" as being the belief that there has been communication between human beings and their various God figures; I see "religious thinking" as being the belief that there are instructions, promises, threats, and rewards that have been revealed to human beings.