The "god of the gaps" argument for atheism says that religion always uses God to explain the unknowns still remaining in scientific discovery.
For example, when people didn't know what caused the planets to move, religious people would say that God caused it. However, we now understand the role of gravity and general relativity, so science has closed that gap. Now it's not unusual to point to God causing the big bang because science has yet to discover any other cause.
Does religion always insert God into an area where science may eventually crowd God out? How can you have a faith that does not substitute God for science?
2006-11-10 09:51:14 · 14 answers · asked by NHBaritone 7 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
NBASUPERDUPE: An excellent example of "God of the gaps." Thanks for demonstrating the point.
2006-11-10 10:59:32 · update #1
exactly. thats exactly what thegod of the gaps is.
any gap in our knowledge is evidence that god exist. ask Kent Hovind. its idiotic i know.
the only way to vaidate their theory is to claim any hole in science is evidence for god.
i usually respond to these god of the gaps comments with "well you claim god did it....well i say the magical tooktook did it." if youre willing to beleive god is in the gaps then its safe to assume that anything is in the gaps. that any god is in the gaps. what people (christians) fail to realise is that when you do a god of the gaps claim youre simply adding your prsonal god in that gap. anyone with a different god can simply change the name and it would be equally as valid
example:
we dont know what started the big bang......so god did it
and lets change it
we dont know what started the big bang......so Vishnu did it
we dont know what started the big bang......so ALlah did it
we dont know what started the big bang......so the magical TookTook did it
we dont know what started the big bang......so the FSM did it
all equally as valid as the christian claim (god did it)
god of the gaps is laughable. that why no one takes intelligent design, creationism or Kent Hovind seriously.
2006-11-10 09:52:13 · answer #1 · answered by johnny_zondo 6 · 4⤊ 5⤋
There are no "gaps" between faith and scientific "discovery". For example, you cited gravity causing the planets to move. How is that removed from God? Who created the Law of Gravity? Or any other laws of Physics? Laws are intelligently designed and must have a Lawgiver. Scientists (who are intellectually honest) point out that the Big Bang Theory is a physical impossibility, based on the Laws of Probability and the Law of Angular Momentum. Scientists don't know what happened prior to the first nanosecond after the Bang. I personally don't believe there was a "Bang" at all - the universe was Created instantaneously about 6,000 years ago. To believe that all the mass in the Universe could fit into a period on this page is complete nonsense, requiring a great deal of FAITH, adding fuel to the argument that evolution in all its forms (cosmic, stellar, planetary, and biological) is a RELIGION.
2006-11-10 10:09:46 · answer #2 · answered by FUNdie 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
God isn't about science or explaining things that haven't been scientifically worked through yet. Believing in God is about having faith, about believing that there is something bigger than yourself. And when science finds a new discovery, it is only putting a name on a tool of God.
2006-11-10 09:59:14 · answer #3 · answered by heather d 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the more we learn, the more perplexing future questions become. We fill in the gaps with science, not God. God, by definition, is beyond our understanding
2006-11-10 09:58:30 · answer #4 · answered by rav42u 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Actually, PURE science proves the existence of God. PURE science without the naturalist bias.
As a naturalist you have to believe:
1) Something arose from nothing
2) Order arose from chaos
3) Life arose from non-life
4) Intelligence arose from non-intelligence
Naturalists also have to believe:
In the beginning were the particles, and the particles became complex living stuff, and the stuff imagined God, but then discovered evolution. (Darwin 1:1)
Naturalist philosophy explains away science that leads to God. Science makes atheism the most illogical philosophy on earth!
Atheists like to tell Christians their "crazy", "mad", "weird", but they have yet to explain how - Nothing produces everything - Non-life produces life - Randomness produces fine-tuning - Chaos produces information - Unconsciousness produces consciousness - and Non-reason produces reason.
They will keep name calling because THEY HAVE NO ANSWERS!
**Checkmate, God**
----- Part 2 -----
Dear NH Baritone (in response to your additional details),
The difference between you and I is that you have faith that naturalism will provide the answers to what you believe to be "unknown". I believe God IS the answer to what we already know. You have to turn your back from the proof of God, and I embrace it.
Your logic has to turn non-life into life and unconsciousness into consciousness. I think that logic is grossly ignorant, for which you substitute faith in naturalism. I just don't have enough faith to be an atheist (or Buddhist monk, or whatever you are).
Your leaps of faith are much greater than mine. That is the difference.
2006-11-10 09:54:57 · answer #5 · answered by nbasuperdupe 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋
religion ideally helps bring people together in community to share in the spiritual healing that results from love and brotherhood.
you're talking about myth, which has unfortunately been mixed with religion to an extent that the differences are now barely noticeable.
2006-11-10 09:55:25 · answer #6 · answered by jerrytherobot 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
THANK YOU VERY MUCH!!
That pretty much sums up the questions I have asked all throughout today.
Have a good one dood!
2006-11-10 09:53:52 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
You know, my Girlfriend is really pissed at me and I don't know why, so I said God did it.
2006-11-10 10:54:30 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
God = magic.
2006-11-10 09:53:26 · answer #9 · answered by boukenger 4 · 0⤊ 3⤋
I could go on till the end of time with this answer!!!!!!!!! You are right,,,, that is all i want to say ,,,, thank you.
2006-11-10 09:53:52 · answer #10 · answered by scouser 2 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋