The Creator

[galaxy]

Freethinker, I came here with an open mind, and posted the topic of "The creator" expecting to have an intellectual discussion about scientists and their opinion regarding the existence of God. A simple "No, I don't believe there is a creator because..." would have been enough, I would respect your opinion and move on. On the other hand, all you seem to do is try to change others opinion and try to belittle people who's opinion is different than yours. You have done this with Irish eyes and myself, and I find this very disrespectful.

It's ironic how you mentioned the theory of gravity in your argument...and yet Isaac Newton discovered the law of gravity and he firmly believed in Jesus Christ and the Bible as God's word, and wrote many books on these topics. In fact, many of the major fields of science were founded by Christians.I am including a list of some. This information was taken from the book Men of Science, Men of God by Henry M. Morris, Ph.D.

 

 

1. Johann Kepler (1571-1630) was the founder of physical astronomy. Kepler wrote "Since we astronomers are priests of the highest God in regard to the book of nature, it befits us to be thoughtful, not of the glory of our minds, but rather, above all else, of the glory of God.

 

2. Robert Boyle (1627-1691) is credited with being the father of modern chemistry. He also was active in financially supporting the spread of Christianity through missions and Bible translations.

 

3. Blaise Pascal (1623-1662) was one of the greatest early mathematicians, laid the foundations for hydrostatics, hydrodynamics, differential calculus, and the theory of probability. To him is attributed the famous Wager of Pascal, paraphrased as follows: "How can anyone lose who chooses to be a Christian? If, when he dies, there turns out to be no God and his faith was in vain, he has lost nothing--in fact, has been happier in life than his nonbelieving friends. If, however, there is a God and a heaven and hell, then he has gained heaven and his skeptical friends will have lost everything in hell!"

 

4. John Ray (1627-1705) was the father of English natural history, considered the greatest zoologist and botanist of his day. He also wrote a book, "The wisdom of God Manifested In The Works of Creation."

 

5. Nicolaus Steno (1631-1686) was the father of Stratigraphy. He believed that fossils were laid down in the strata as a result of the flood of Noah. He also wrote many theological works and late in his life took up religious orders.

 

6. William Petty (1623-1687) helped found the science of statistics and the modern study of economics. He was an active defender of the Christian faith and wrote many papers sharing evidence of God's design in nature.

 

7. Isaac Newton (1642-1727) invented calculus, discovered the law of gravity and the three laws of motion, anticipated the law of energy conservation, developed the particle theory of light propagation, and invented the reflecting telescope. He firmly believed in Jesus Christ as his Savior and the Bible as God's word, and wrote many books on these topics.

 

8. Carolus Linnaeus (1707-1778) was the father of biological taxonomy. His system of classification is still in use today. One of his main goals in systematizing the varieties of living creatures was an attempt to delineate the original Genesis "kinds." He firmly believed in the Genesis account as literal history.

 

9. Michael Faraday (1791-1867) was one of the greatest physicists of all time, developed foundational concepts in electricity and magnetism, invented the electrical generator, and made many contributions to the field of chemistry. He was active in the various ministries of his church, both private and public, and had an abiding faith in the Bible and in prayer.

 

10. Georges Cuvier (1769-1832) was the founder of the science of comparative anatomy and one of the chief architects of paleontology as a separate scientific discipline. He was a firm creationist, participating in some of the important creation/evolution debates of his time.

 

11. Charles Babbage (1792-1871) wa

[Uncle Martin]

Well,...that's enough for me. I believe. Heck, that many christians can't all be wrong. What do I need to do next,... where do I sign up? Glory be, galaxy as shown me the light. Hallalulah and all that stuff.

[galaxy]

No uncle Martin. I am not trying to change your views, nor do I think your sarcasm is necessary. The reason I provided the list is because that was what this topic was intended to be about, scientists and their believes in a higher power. You guys want "facts," well I don't have any scientific proof that God exists... All I have to do is look at nature, at the stars, at the universe ... at human life.... Do you know how much information there is in a person's DNA? Do you think this....just happened? Maybe you do, and that is your opinion and I respect it. You replied to one of my statements in the topic "what happens after life."You mentioned that you did not understand why any intelligent person would consider themselves Christian, and it appears that they do. In fact they did exist, and they still do. I am sure there are many scientist that share your believes, and that is perfectly fine with me. I repeat I am not here to change anybody's point of view, I am here to share opinions, without the necessity of getting defensive.

[rls]

Ok, I will try this again, I spent 4 hours getting my research together to answer this question and to present some evidence and my server knocked me off and I lost all my information!

 

First, I also am new to this forum and I thank you guys and gals for the opportunity to voice my opinion.

 

To rebut the issue of proof of scripture in secular records, one such instance is in reference to the biblical name of Nimrod in Genesis 11:1 thru 6. If you recall the story of Nimrod, they built the Tower of Babel. Secular tradition cites Nimrod as the first to attempt to establish world government. This is verified by Vellius Paterculus citing from Aemilius Sura, in his <U>Roman History,</U> Book 1 section 6, the following, " Between this time (when Rome conquered Philip,king of Macedonia) and the beginning of the reign of Ninus (Nimrod) king of the Assyrians, who was the first to hold world power, lies and interval of 1995 years." Rome conquered Philip in 197 BC, that would put the reign of Nimrod or Ninus at 2192BC. Julius Africanus states that Nimrod reigned jointly with his father Cush for a period of 62 years. That places the overthrow of Babel at 2254BC.

 

The most spectacular confirmation of this date, if you consider the confusion of tongues and the seperation of the nations during this time, is the fact that the Chinese begin their authentic history at 2254 years before the present era.

 

Enjoy

[galaxy]

Wow, that's really great information rls, I was not aware of that. Thank you for sharing and welcome. I am also new here... and I am glad that you joined

[rls]

I understand from reading another post that you claimed to be a Humanist!

 

Have you ever read the Humanist Manifesto 1 or 2? They are rather informative about the positions of secularist's and humanists.

 

FYI humanism is considered by the courts as a religion, you can research the issue from these cases:

1. Torcaso v Watkins, case number 367us488

2. Washington Ethical Society v District of Columbia, case number 101 Appelate DC 371, 249 F 2d 127

3. Fellowship of Humanity v County of Alameda, case number 153 Cal. App. 2d 673, 315 P. 2d 394

 

If you want to see thehumanist opinion of what is important in our schools and how they despise persons of faith check out "Three Cheers for our Secular State", The Humanist, March/April edition page 16.

 

Enjoy

[Uncle Martin]

Originally posted by: galaxy

No uncle Martin. I am not trying to change your views, nor do I think your sarcasm is necessary.

It was intended as sarcastic humor, sorry if it was less than I had hoped. I have the utmost respect for all members of this forum. Our opinions do vary,.... however, I do respect your right to your opinions. The ultimate conclusion of any debate IS to change your opponents thinking,...don't you agree. There is no sense in discussing something without any plan for enlightening someone with the knowledge we have. Or,...conversely, accepting the facts presented and changing ones own worldview.

 

You must admit that you do wish to not only share with me your opinions, but hope that I will see your point of view and adopt it as my own. I am willing to tell you that is my intention. Seems the real purpose of discussion. In the end we will likely agree that we disagree, but I look forward to the experience.

 

OK,...that said,....lists of spiritual scientists does not prove the existence of a creator. I can provide a list of theologians that have changed their view and become atheistic, that also proves nothing other than human nature and our ability to change. There is no need to extrapolate a "creator" from what we do know. Your creator only comforts those that are uncomfortable with acknowledging the very real fact that there is much we do not know and may never know. Now,... admitting we may never know something is what rubs you believers the wrong way. YES,... it goes against our intuitive reasoning, but try to think logically, not intuitively. This is how a scientific mind sees thing, this is the knowledge you seek,...so really try. You may see things differently.

[galaxy]

rls, who are you replying to? I hope is not me, since I never claimed to be a humanist.

[galaxy]

Uncle Martin, I agree with you on one thing, that is that we still disagree in this subject . rls wrote some interesting information regarding historical records that match up with scriptures, what is your opinion on that?

[Uncle Martin]

Originally posted by: galaxy

Uncle Martin, I agree with you on one thing, that is that we still disagree in this subject . rls wrote some interesting information regarding historical records that match up with scriptures, what is your opinion on that?

I don't have the time now to research and verify these assertions, as I am not an historian. If his post is accurate,...it is an interesting coincidence. I have never asserted that the bible is totally inaccurate regarding SOME historical events.

[rls]

Galaxy I recall a thread from one of freethinkers statements where he mentioned he saw one of your posts, if I am mistaken I apolygize. No offense meant.

I just think that it is interesting that all the peoplewho claim to have no belief in a god claim to or appear to believe in some form of humanism, I know that is a broad statement because there are as many interpretations of humanism as there are christian denominations. There is one central theme to modern humanism and that is their belief in nothing supernatural.

Here is a quote that you often hear," Moreover there are some kinds of statements which are rejected even without being subjected to the usual tests..... Such treatment is due statements reporting happenings which do not conform to the laws of nature as established by scientific methods.

...It requires no justification where myths are involved. Their summary rejection is implied in the rule that no statement can be accepted unless it can be shown to rest upon trustworthy observation....

If anyone asserts them he must be regarded as ignorant, superstitious, the victim of hallucination, or some othber form of mental abberation.", <U>The Critical Method of Historical Research and Writing.</U>,author

Carey Hockett, page 61.

I believe this would be an accurate summation of the how uncle martin, freethinker, and others would respond to those who claim to believe in a Creator.

This is considered by some to be the responses of humanists.

 

Enjoy.

[Uncle Martin]

rls,

Contrary to my often misunderstood tone,(my apologies) I have given much consideration to the possibilities proposed by the creationist camp. We are subjected to repetitive arguments and I sometimes grow weary of the redundancy of the whole thing. My philosophy is that no VALID evidence has been presented to support the concept of a "creator". I do not disallow for the possibilty that evidence may at some future time become available. Perhaps you have some new evidence, if so, present it for debate. Please read some of the posts in similar threads first, as virtually every point and counter point exists somewhere in this forum already.

[wisdumn]

most people have very little knowledge of the Bible or what it's message really is,instead they need to disect and explain everything by using big words or complex theories. to truly understand what something says we have to read it for ourselves, but before we read we must throw away everything we have heard of other people and come openminded and curious as to what this or that really is. we cannot concern ourselves with mother's and father's theories except to respect the parent, we cannot be taught Truth-Fully by any person,we cannot be concerned with how many holy wars or old nagging lady's at the local first baptist church skew our views of God, it says in the Bible that many will profess the name of God but will not actually be of God, why? because until a person subjects themselves first to the moment that they take that book into their hands and actually read with an open (young) mind that is searching for truth rather than knowledge,they will consistenly search outside for reasurrance from others that only God can give in the heart, not the head. I suggest reading the four major Gospels

Matthew,Mark,Luke,John. try starting them in the reverse order, but before you do this commit to yourself first to study,not just read, a doctor could never perform surgery just by reading a medical journal one time. one theme i think you may notice and might want to meditate quitely upon is the simple statements made in these books, these teachingsmay sound simple, as if talking to a child, but think about the teachings and see how they speak to you personally, again i emphasize to understand you must study and read more than once as to learn what it is saying, and here is a question to ask yourself while reading, what is the point of reading an instruction manuel if not for following the instructions to gain the knowlege we seek

[Uncle Martin]

Originally posted by: wisdumn

....and actually read with an open (young) mind that is searching for truth rather than knowledge,.....

Welcome wisdumn, How can you imply that there is a difference in knowledge and truth? To me they are one and the same, in this context.

[Uncle Martin]

Double post, how did that happen?

[Freethinker]

Originally posted by: galaxy

Freethinker, I came here with an open mind, and posted the topic of "The creator" expecting to have an intellectual discussion about scientists and their opinion regarding the existence of God. A simple "No, I don't believe there is a creator because..." would have been enough, I would respect your opinion and move on. On the other hand, all you seem to do is try to change others opinion and try to belittle people who's opinion is different than yours. You have done this with Irish eyes and myself, and I find this very disrespectful.

Galaxy, this is a SCIENCE SITE. As such we DEMAND facts and data. What one person "believes" is irrelevant to TRUTH. In fact persoanl beliefs are one of the worst ways to find an understanding of reality. If this was not FACT, magicians would be out of business and there would not be anything like "optical illusions. Science, realizing how easy it is to fool personal perception, has developed a process to remove personal bias and sensory error from it's pursuit of knowledge.

 

If you find my agressive response to psuedo-science and outright fallacies as "disrespectful" perhaps it is becuase you do not adopt a scientific approach to your personal philosophy. I can not help that. Again this IS a SCIENCE site and that is the rigor we expect for posters.

 

IF it is my identifying LIES as LIES, well a rose by anything other name... e.g. the Christians' attempts to claim Eisntien in the camp of a personal god believer IS a LIE and he stated it as such. My calling it the same thing is FACT. I fail to see a problem there.

It's ironic how you mentioned the theory of gravity in your argument...and yet Isaac Newton discovered the law of gravity and he firmly believed in Jesus Christ and the Bible as God's word, and wrote many books on these topics. In fact, many of the major fields of science were founded by Christians.I am including a list of some. This information was taken from the book Men of Science, Men of God by Henry M. Morris, Ph.D.

Ah yes, a rambling list of those that were not OUTRIGHT KILLED by Christian authorities for taking SCIENTIFIC stances that strongly opposed Christian theology. Coperincus was also a "beleiver". Yet he was so afraid to publish the TRUTHS of his research on planetary motion that he had to smuggle his work out of the country. He KNEW that he did not have enough standing in his Christian country to stop being added to the list of martyrs for reason and knowledge if he dared to publish his works himself in his own country. He was presented with a copy of his published works on his death bed so he could see the fruits of his labor in a setting in which his death by the hands of Christian Authorities would not be an issue.

 

So what your list represents is those that hedged their scientific knowledge with enough politically correct god rambling to not be killed outright by those religious authorities.

 

And that must be something to be very proud of, that your Christian forebares did not just outright kill EVERY scientist along the way.

28. Albert Einstein (1879-1955), formulator of the theory of relativity, which is one of the single greatest intellectual accomplishments in the history of man. Einstein was Jewish and thus did not follow in the Christian tradition of Newton or Faraday. He did not believe in a personal God, such as is revealed even in the Jewish Bible. Yet, he was overwhelmed by the order and organization of the universe and believed this demonstrated that there was a Creator.

 

Yet you continue to spew this particular lie.

 

It IS a LIE. You could claim ignorance the first time around. I provided valid VERIFYABLE proof to the contrary. He even called himself an ATHEIST. Yet you want to claim he believed in a creator. You decided to ignore these FACTS and once more promote the LIE. This 2nd time

[Freethinker]

Originally posted by: galaxy

You guys want "facts," well I don't have any scientific proof that God exists...

Yet some how you decide to come to a SCIENCE site and are upset when you want a claim that you yourself admit completely lacks ANY scientific value, lacks ANY facts to support it, is attacked? What were you expecting? If what you wanted was empty headed blind faith acceptance of god myths, why come to a Science site?

All I have to do is look at nature, at the stars, at the universe ... at human life....

OK, you look at NATURE and invent a god for it. What does that have to do with SCIENCE?

Do you know how much information there is in a person's DNA? Do you think this....just happened?

Yes and Obviously.

 

And my stance does not REQUIRE me to say "well I don't have any scientific proof that...".