To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 8399
8398  |  8400
Subject: 
Re: What Would It Take? (was:Re: Problems with Christianity)
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Sun, 24 Dec 2000 20:12:53 GMT
Viewed: 
1373 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Tom Stangl writes:
John Neal wrote:

I would simply define God as a single Entity which created the universe.  We
all instinctively long to be united with that Entity.

Do we?  What makes you think this?

I think science/society seeks to understand "creation". I don't think being
united with creation is really a global aim. That said, could it not be
argued that we are part of creation?

There's merit in that argument. Certainly we are "part of the universe"
since we reside in it, observe it, are affected by it, and effect things
within it.

The problem is that "creation" carries a connotation of it being an act of
volition. That may not be a good word to use because it then presupposes the
thing some are trying to prove. I'd prefer a different word but I don't have
one to proffer other than "universe".

Cosmological physics seeks to understand the events very near the beginning
of time. This much we know, the evidence points to a singularity of some
sort. But cosmological physics doesn't seek to explain what went "before the
beginning". And it doesn't need to. It can provide many practical and useful
results nonetheless.

I grant that many religions provide a more aesthetically pleasing
explanation of events "before the beginning" but they are unverifiable, and
they do not help predict or explain things in this realm, so they're pretty
and pleasant to read, but purely decorative, explanations.

But I agree it is human nature to seek to understand and to feel like one is
"part of the universe". I don't see that as being "one with the Creator"
though, as John alleges.

++Lar



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: What Would It Take? (was:Re: Problems with Christianity)
 
(...) I think science/society seeks to understand "creation". I don't think being united with creation is really a global aim. That said, could it not be argued that we are part of creation? Scott A (24 years ago, 24-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

298 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR