You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #20: No, the Bible doesn't say anything about God being undetectable by science... [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Religion/Theology Donate to DU
Dob Bole Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 10:39 AM
Response to Reply #18
20. No, the Bible doesn't say anything about God being undetectable by science...
because the Bible says absolutely nothing about modern science. It was written thousands of years ago. But you already knew that.

The purpose of science is to test and discover what is around us, but "known laws" have their boundaries. There are definitely Newtonian laws operating the mechanisms of our universe (all of which support life, according to the Anthropic principle) on our level of awareness. But on the quantum level, these laws completely break down. For example, if you fire 100 photons into a mirror, 95 will reflect and 5 will pass through. However, if you could examine each one, the structure of each photon is exactly alike, and the predictablity of which 5 will pass through the mirror is absolutely impossible to ascertain. It is indeterminate. We can see the patterns happening, but cannot predict them.

Unpredictability is built into the structure of matter itself. This counters materialism, which sees the entire universe a giant predictable Newtonian machine. The future course of evolution itself is therefore, unpredictable. Theoretically, even Neo from the Matrix could affect the course of our universe undetected...but that is of course, a religious step.

A lack of predictability bothers materialists a little, but not as much as the Anthropic principle, the concept that every constant in the universe appears to support the existence of carbon-based life forms. Stephen Hawkings has said that this has "religious implications," and the only way to counter it is to say that there must be tons of other parallel universes without life: a religious step that likewise cannot be tested.

A belief in God requires religion. Duh. But a mechanism to contain the Western concept of God still exists. On the other hand, if you believe (like Dawkins) that the existence of science counters the existence of God, then you too are religious in a way. (Atheism is an 'ism,' after all.) So you have a stalemate, an even choice. You either choose a philosophy that includes God, or you choose a philosophy that doesn't.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Religion/Theology Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC