Subject:
|
Re: Why not Both?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 24 Jan 2001 13:57:19 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
476 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Tim Culberson writes:
> We also in our thinking pattern deduce that
> everything - absolutely everything has to have a beginning and an end.
> While this is essentially true,
I'm rather not of that mind. And actually, to be perfectly frank, in my mind
there is no such thing as a beginning and an end-- those concepts are more
just human interpretations based on our experience of causality.
> we accept this much by faith. That's right, no matter
> what your position you have to accept some things by faith.
I completely agree :)
> What you say? You are an atheistic evolutionist who does not believe in
> any "Higher-Order being" and therefore you do not have to have faith in
> anything?
I'd dispute that, but on a lower level-- as for a reference... uh... there's
SO many recent posts I've made on the issue... check out the other big
recent thread, starting around... oh.... how about:
http://news.lugnet.com/off-topic/debate/?n=8750
> Where then, did you come from. Modern evolution goes
> something like: ...[snip]... before that = the big bang that formed the
> earth, before that = the energy and matter that the big bang came from,
> before that ---oh, wait a minute, there IS no exlplanation as to where
> the matter and energy came from.
>
> Therefore no matter who you are if you logically think about it you MUST
> believe in SOMETHING as having always existed.
The problem is that there's no such thing as 'before' and 'after'. They're
just perceptions of 'time' that seems to be Newtonian. Y'know all those
theories about space being curved? How about time being curved? Basically,
my own theory on the issue is that the universe is a multi-dimentional
(infinitely dimentional) fractal, only a part of which we have experience
of. And it's full of circular things. Planets, orbits, bubbles, etc. Perfect
circles? No way. But circular. I'd be happy to explain in more depth...
> For me the explanation that there is a Supreme Being-creator in the form
> of the Biblical God that can in fact create something out of nothing is
> very acceptable - much more so than millions and millions of perfect
> randomnesses(is that a word?) that had to occur for Evolution to occur.
And for me, it's the reverse. Except I'd qualify that 'randomness' to
'structured', with the exception being that it's structured so far beyond
our ability to comprehend that we'll never be capable of FULLY understanding
it, because our comprehension deals with the finite. See Chaos theory.
DaveE
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Why not Both?
|
| (...) Here we come to what is seemingly an impossible thing to answer: HOWEVER: If you are already in a position where you say you believe the Bible the answer is simple - the Bible clearly states that God always was, is, and always will be (sorry, (...) (24 years ago, 24-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
88 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
