Intelligent Design of the universe!

[questor]

if creationism is a man made philosophy, what is the opposite ? what does the fact or absense of a creator have to do with theology ?

[coldcreation]

if creationism is a man made philosophy, what is the opposite ? what does the fact or absense of a creator have to do with theology ?

 

Only the heterodox liberation from such a body can transform man from a slave to creator, from dependent to autonomous, subservient to courageous, from a machine to an organism capable of hyperbolic expression (naïve as it still seems at present).

 

This is not science...it is an observation.

 

Coldcreation

[questor]

CC, interesting comment. what does it mean? are you saying some outside force changes or alters the state of man?

[Tormod]

if creationism is a man made philosophy, what is the opposite ?

 

There is no opposite. All philosophy is man (or woman) made. Unless we find aliens who can think.

 

what does the fact or absense of a creator have to do with theology ?

 

From Wikipedia:

Theology is literally rational discourse concerning God (Greek θεος, theos, "God", + λογος, logos, "rational discourse"). By extension, it also refers to the study of other religious topics.

[questor]

Tormod. is it possible there was a creator that wasn't named God? that created gravity,

matter, energy, the universe, and the cosmos, but it wasn't God?

[infamous]

Tormod. is it possible there was a creator that wasn't named God? that created gravity,

matter, energy, the universe, and the cosmos, but it wasn't God?

A creator by any other name still equals God.

[questor]

What is your definition of God? is he a creation or idea of man, or is he something else?

[C1ay]

some people seem to be absolutely certain there is no God (creator). this is ridiculous on its face because there is no absolute proof of that and the scientific method relies upon facts, not supposition. i would ask that those who are certain of the absence of a creator offer proof of the absence or admit there is a case for the presence of a creational force. for someone to take a positive stance on a subject with no proof violates scientific principle.

You have some misconceptions questor. Scientific method does not presume someone's theory is correct. Just because you want to believe in a creator does not make it everyone else's burden to prove you are wrong. It is your burden to prove you are right. If you want to prove you are right using the scientific method you need to:

 

Characterize the issue by making observations and taking measurements.

Posit a hypothesis that explains your observations and measurements.

Make some predictions based on your hypothesis.

Test your predictions to see if they match your expected observations and measurements.

Repeat.

 

These are the steps you need to take to support your theory that there is a creator understanding that there is no presumtion that your theory is correct and that it is not someone else's burden to prove your theory is wrong. That's science.

[Csongor]

Not true, right now I'm thinking about if I create a system do I, or do I not want to make a GOD itself for the system.... And so I'll have many creative members probably thousend of humans, to work on the project later on.....We are not called as God... But we probably able to create one, ......

[Csongor]

Sorry with quote!

 

 

Not true, right now I'm thinking about if I create a system do I, or do I not want to make a GOD itself for the system.... And so I'll have many creative members probably thousend of humans, to work on the project later on.....We are not called as God... But we probably able to create one, ......

[Csongor]

And here is the quote by Infamous!

 

 

A creator by any other name still equals God.

 

--------------------

Tolstoy wrote; "men only learn when they're suffering". The question is; [how much do you want to learn?]

[Csongor]

A creator by any other name still equals God.

 

 

By the way the quote haven't went true at the first time....So I copied it here....

[Tormod]

Tormod. is it possible there was a creator that wasn't named God? that created gravity,

matter, energy, the universe, and the cosmos, but it wasn't God?

 

I don't understand this question. Is it about my faith or do I need to say once again that I think anything is possible?

 

Oh, and if there is a creator and it has a name...who named it?

[Qfwfq]

It chose its own name. Perhaps something along the lines of "I AM THAT I AM".

 

God isn't a proper name Csongor, god is a noun but often used as a name, in place of The Name, which nobody remembers how to pronounce.

[questor]

the sticking point here is the insistence upon calling the creator God and trying to relate him to man. God is a creation by man to explain how things happened on earth and around him. lets say for some reason the earth and all life on it disappeared. would the universe stop operating? would gravity disappear? would light stop traveling at C? would not the same order that exists in the universe now continue after man and his concept of God was gone? if this order does exist and persist ,what induces the order? if there was a big bang why do spins and orbits of planets exist. who/what made gravity? how did all the things that make the universe work occur? happenstance? unbelievable coincidence?

[Csongor]

The question is really this one: "lets say for some reason the earth and all life on it disappeared. would the universe stop operating?"

 

 

Maybe yes. I'm just try to working on, but seems to be yes, or really likely yes.......... My opinion, now as I writen many times, but noone was really talk about this, to try to create an independent, system somwhere, so we try to modell the existing one. And so if we belive, or any chanche, we've been created by one higher, or older civilisation, deffenitelly, this will be the time to contact Us, from an unknown outside space.....

 

 

 

Csongor

[Southtown]

lets say for some reason the earth and all life on it disappeared. would the universe stop operating? would gravity disappear? would light stop traveling at C? would not the same order that exists in the universe now continue after man and his concept of God was gone? if this order does exist and persist ,what induces the order? if there was a big bang why do spins and orbits of planets exist. who/what made gravity? how did all the things that make the universe work occur? happenstance? unbelievable coincidence?

If something can be explained philosophically to spring from physical phenomena, science will adhere faithfully, and if not science will adhere to the hope that someday it will be. In any circumstances, science gives itself the benefit of the doubt.

 

I have never met Ockham nor do I wish to use his razor. Methodical reductionism is fine for playing the odds in blind desperation. But mathematical probabilities only speak of likelyhood, which is usually noteworthy information but is not inherently an absolute truth indicator.

 

As for me, I still have my intuition, my nose, and my imagination. Where knowledge stops, one can journey wherever he pleases. And I have found profound personal fulfillment in refusing to accept the authority of both universities and churches, preferring to take my own road.

 

If people consider science (or preachers) the be-all-end-all of truth, then they reduce themselves to fit within predefined boundaries, bowing down to a god lesser than themselves and effectively "worshipping" a creation of man. Such restraint is needlessly antiproductive. Life is a journey, knowledge is the aftermath.

“

So it was, while they conversed and reasoned, that Jesus Himself drew near and went with them. But their eyes were restrained, so that they did not know Him. ”

—

Luke 24:15-16