People believe in god for many different reasons. Once I began to understand these reasons it truly solidified my atheism- even more so than a scientific education.
Fear of hell is one of them, but there are many others.
Fear of death.
Psychological conditioning (brain washing)
security (someone is watching over me)
Hope (prayer)
Explain the unknown
Social reasons (going to group events like Church..)
2007-11-21 06:23:07
·
answer #1
·
answered by Morey000 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
There is a very clear consensus in the scientific community that Intelligent Design is not a valid scientific alternative to evolutionary theory. The Nova episode a few weeks back did a good job of showing why it's no good. I don't think you can say it's much of a "religious view" either. It is a deliberate dishonest attempt at trickery which abuses some language and arguments characteristic of good science to make it look like Intelligent Design is being illegitimately suppressed as a theory. It's an insidiously clever tactic and one those of us who stand for reason must be constantly on guard against.
2016-05-24 22:05:00
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I recently learned that the Big Band Theory was discovered by a Catholic priest, and was later endorsed by Albert Einstein. So from a scientific prospective, these men have concluded that the universe had a definite beginning and was not “always there”.
So, where did the universe come from?
Yes, my answer is it was created by God. How did He did do it? I have no idea, but neither does anyone else.
Where did God come from?
He didn’t. He always was, meaning He has no beginning. He IS the definition of eternity.
2007-11-22 00:26:34
·
answer #3
·
answered by Danny H 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
The phrase 'Intelligent Design' was coined by bible literalists as a way to try to redefine the creation story (to counter the theory of evolution) and make it acceptable as a scientific theory. However, it is not a theory as no proven facts have been presented to support the story. In fact 'Intelligent Design' does not even qualify as an hypothesis. It is simply a made up story that has no foundation in reality.
Similarly, there is no evidence for the existence of any gods.
2007-11-21 06:28:25
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
0⤋
In all sincerity I don't think you understand the Intelligent design argument. Before trying to critique it it would be adviseble to actually read some of their material in their own words. They don't simply throw there arms up in air and say Gawd done it. And I don't think they go into the origin of God. What they do is look for signs of intelligence in creation and have even developed a filter to help sort out what may be cause by physical laws. What can be atttributed to chance and what can be better explained with a third possibility specification. An example of the first is a ball falling to the earth a hundred times repeatedly can be best explained by the natural law of gravity. The second filter grasps low probablity such as flipping a coin which has a 50/50 chance of being either. Now imagine a card game where the dealer wins with a Royal flush os spades which probability is 1 in 2,598,960 which is a low probability accept when you consider that 2,600,000 poker hands may be dealt in a year in the U.S. This number is relatively low expressed by 2.5 X 10 to the 6th power. Now imagine this scenario in a poker marathon the dealer deals a second then a third and so on through the night of Royal flushes. Now the probability of this event is becoming vanishingly low. 1 in 10 to the 150th power. At some point a person has to begin to question if their isn't some crafty person meddling in the affairs. Now the probability of a bacteria flagellum tight specification for function in it's nearly 40 constituent proteins is calculated extremely low at 1 out of 10 to the 1170 power. In other words the probability of a flagellum to have assembled itself is the equivelant of being dealt 190 consecutive royal flushes. I should add that there are a number of ID scientists who are peer reviewed. I doubt they would be peer reviewed is they simply said Gawd done it.
2007-11-21 06:45:16
·
answer #5
·
answered by Edward J 6
·
0⤊
4⤋
Or, maybe it's just a question of semantics, and God and the universe are just different words for the same thing. After all, God is everywhere and in all things, right? God has always existed? God is the universe.
2007-11-21 06:23:01
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Physcists don't believe that the universe always existed. They believe that prior to the big bang, there was no time or space. There was nothing but a singularity that lacked any distinguishable properties. And yet, despite the lack of time, time progressed and the universe was created (as an event requires a moment in time).
It would be incorrect to say that the universe has always existed and the theory of the "big crunch" has been discredited.
2007-11-21 06:22:22
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋
We ask, "If all things have a creator, then who created God?" Actually, only created things have a creator, so it's improper to lump God with his creation. God has revealed himself to us in the Bible as having always existed. The Bible says of the Creator of all things: "From everlasting to everlasting, You are God" (Psalm 90:2). In other words, with God alone there was no beginning and no ending. Even Jesus, who was born of Mary in Bethlehem, existed in spirit form before he came in the flesh as a baby in the manger.
Can you give reasonable proofs of your theory as to how a specific part of creation created another specific part of creation?
2007-11-21 07:02:46
·
answer #8
·
answered by Steve Husting 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
Fear hell ? Are you kidding ? With winter right around the corner , and the cost of fuel going up like a rocket , all that free heat is really appealing .
2007-11-21 06:26:13
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Try this one:
C: The world is perfect.
A: Three quarters of the world is covered with water, if we were perfect, wouldn't we have gills. Plus, since we need potable water to survive, does it make sense that in a perfect world the water in the oceans is undrinkable?
2007-11-21 06:24:29
·
answer #10
·
answered by battleship potemkin AM 6
·
2⤊
0⤋