Such an intriguing fact....?

Question

Is the science the god of the so called atheists? They keep saying that the universe was formed from the nothing and by the nothing...and that the natural selection system rules all the species. They blindly believe on the science and on the Big Bang theory?

Is the science their god? Is the Big Bang their beloved creator?

Answer 1

Are you suggesting that science is the way that Atheist's commune with their God and their God is the universe?

I believe laws of cause and effect that predict the behavior, fate and destiny of matter and energy in the known universe cause life forms to converge upon conformity to a standard of conduct that is most likely to result in survival. Survival is achieved and maintained when behavior conforms to this natural standard of conduct dictated by laws of cause and effect that predict the behavior, fate and destiny of matter and energy in the known universe. I believe elements of this natural standard of conduct are projected by "messengers" of Yahweh, Christ, and Allah into myth of exclusive divine revelation of spiritual knowledge contained within the sacred scrolls of their respective ideological traditions as a supernatural standard of conduct dictated by the will of a good one in heaven at war with an evil one cast down to and ruling over Earth. If the survival of an ideological tradition is dependent upon the survival of communities of faithful believers that self organize around an ideological tradition, then maybe those ideological traditions that best project elements of a natural standard of conduct into myth as a supernatural standard of conduct are more likely to survive; and in effect, communities of faithful believers self organized around the worship of Yahweh, Christ and Allah worship universe as god. Maybe these are ideological traditions that aggressively motivate communities of faithful believers to out work, out fight and out number competition in the game of survival and sacrifice.

Answer 2

it makes more sense than anything else. not only do religious people believe that something came from nowhere (god), but they also believe that this being created everything that we know today.

the only difference is that athiests actually look for answers, while christians think that they know everything. if you ask an athiest what happens when you die they will tell you they dont know. while if you ask a christian the same question, he will tell you long stories about how you get judged by some all powerful being who decides whether you get eternal happiness or eternal suffering.

athiests dont deny that they dont know how the universe started, or what happens after you die, but they atleast try to find the answers. christians think they know everything even though there is no possible way you could know these things.

duck phup probably has the best answer on this question. he explains both schools of thought extremely well.

Answer 3

Genesis says that God created the earth. It doesn't say he didn't create it with a gravitationally induced explosion. Science and Religion are not as far apart as people would like to make them appear. And yes, I am a Christian. Really though, is it that far fetched to think that (since the Bible does say there are things we won't understand) that God did not create things with science that we just don't get?

Answer 4

There are some subtleties at work here that seem to be escaping the notice of most people. They have to do with the nature of 'belief'.

A rational person might say "I believe in the Big Bang." A religious person might say "I believe in creation, as described in Genesis." But these statements are not even remotely similar, with respect to what is meant by the word 'believe'.

For the rational person, the statement of 'belief' in the Big Bang means that they understand that the concept provides a scientifically and mathematically consistent explanation, congruent with the evidence, which accounts for the evolution of the universe from a fraction of a second after the initiating event, up until the present. When the 'inflationary model' came to the fore, rational people said "Well, good... that clears up a few questions and makes things even more coherent." NOBODY threw up their arms and wailed "Oh, no... oh, no... ain't so... ain't so... the Big Bang is the inerrant truth... not this ridiculous, atheistic 'inflationary' model."

See... when we say "I believe in the Big Bang", we don't really mean the same thing as the religious person means when he says "I believe in creation, as described in Genesis," or "I believe in God." Our 'belief' in the Big Bang (or anything else) isn't really a 'belief'... it is more properly a 'paradigm'... a useful way of looking at something, or thinking about something. If additional information is uncovered that adds to the conceptual model, that is a good thing... not a disaster. If part of the conceptual model is discovered to be incorrect, and must be tossed in the trash and replaced with something completely different... that is also a good thing... not the end of the world as we know it. And often, no matter how highly confident we may be of the accuracy or completeness of a particular paradigm, we may have reason to apply a DIFFERENT paradigm to the same thing, in an effort to tease out new insights; for example, we might want to contemplate the potential implications of a change to a theory from the perspective of the Tao Te Ching, the Gaia hypothesis, or ecological homeostasis. We KNOW that all theories are approximations... and that is OK. We KNOW that we don't have all the answers... and that is OK, too. There is nothing wrong with saying "We don't know... yet; but we're working on it."

But these modes of thinking, perceiving, contemplating and understanding are utterly alien to the 'religious' mind. For the religious mind, a 'belief' is not a paradigm... not a useful way of thinking about something... it is an internalized conviction that one knows the absolute 'truth' pertaining to some aspect of existence and/or fundamental reality. 'Beliefs' are one of the key interpretive component filter of the religious person's 'self-description'... a part of what DEFINES them as a person... the very thing that creates their world-view... an underpinning of their 'subjective reality'. Any attack on one of these internalized 'beliefs' is perceived and interpreted as a vital threat... an attack upon the 'self-description'... and attack on their subjective reality.

And here is the key difference: When there is a change in one of the paradigms dealing with a scientific concept, or a new insight into the workings of the universe, to the 'rational' person, it merely constitutes an interesting new piece of knowledge and understanding. However, if that same new insight, or piece of information (a feature of the universe, for example) seems to threaten a tenet of Christianity, everybody goes to battle stations, goes into 'damage control' mode... for fear that the whole edifice will come crashing down. And, ultimately, it will.

So, when a fundie disparages evolution, for example, it really has nothing to do with a genuine, intellectual dispute regarding scientific details... they are generally scientifically illiterate, anyway. Any 'scientific' arguments that they present are inevitably not even understood... they are just lifted from the pre-packaged lies and misrepresentations that are found on dozens of 'Liars for Jesus' (LFJ) web sites, and parroted. They are in a battle. They are trying to sink science before science sinks them. They are desperate... and science is (mostly, and unfortunately) oblivious to the fact that they are even in a fight, and that somebody is trying to sink them. They are just blithely bopping along, doing what science does... figuring out how nature works.

No... none of this has anything to do with a mere disagreement pertaining to evidence and understanding. It has to do with minds that deal with fundamental issues in an entirely different way. It has to do with a flexible, open-minded, intellectually honest (willing to question and doubt one's own presumptions) curiosity about the universe, contending with a rigid, unyielding world-view that depends from a certainty that certain delusional faith-based (willful ignorance and magical, wishful thinking) 'beliefs' represent the absolute 'truth' of reality.

We might as well be talking to an alien species, from a distant planet.

When the religious enter a forum like this one, they are (generally) NOT seeking new information which might allow them to QUESTION their beliefs more effectively, or might put their beliefs at risk... they are seeking VALIDATION... of their beliefs, and hence, their self-description.

Answer 5

The big bang is a excellent theory. THEORY being the key word.. i would love to hear a scientists theory on how the laws of the universe were created though.. by accident?

Answer 6

"All hail the big bang from nothingness!!!" And they say we're irrational. How logical is a big bang from nothing? Don't you need a "something" to go bang in the first place?

Answer 7

I dont know about science being a god, but I do know science built your computer.

Answer 8

I, as a Christian, cannot judge. I don't approve of the atheist way of looking at things, but God Himself will handle that come judgement day.

Answer 9

Atheist don't believe that a single being created everything. quit trying to see atheist thru religious eyes!

Answer 10

what a good damn question. i think they do believe in the big bang but not into it religously.
just to add. "if the big bang created us... then what created the big bang?" what the ****.... only explenation there is is God. (if the big bang theory is real)
there is the same question of "if God created us, then who created God?" well i say to those that there is only one explenation for all of this which is God. what other explenation is there.