The following is a reply to Ohypothesis on reddit. I got tired of answer all his questions previously and told him there was no reason to continue the conversation unless he made a truth claim, a positive statement. You can find the link HERE . Notice how difficult it is for him/her to make a positive statement or any statement of fact. When he does make one positive assertion it is this "The intelligence that made science is provably human beings." But how can human beings have made something we are still discovering?
Below is my response to him:
You said: At the beginning of this of this let me say that in your blogs and in your writings here, you seem to assume that anything that we do not have an answer for, you can immediately assert that a supernatural force (or higher power as you keep saying) can be inserted inside it to answer the question. This is not the case.
My Response: If I were like you I would say you are making assumptions about me. But I will be more gracious and actually answer this. I do not assume that we just move to a God for every answer because we do not know the answer. I believe God is the answer who gave us science so we can understand the world we live in. I believe he gave us metaphysics, logic, math, reason, faith etc… I believe we owe are entire existence to Him. But this is supposed to be you answering my questions I thought? The rest of what you said up until you said “As far as gaps in our…” was useless and only an explanation of why you do not like the idea of the supernatural, again not explaining anything to answer the question of “Okay... tell me about your beliefs concerning the origins of the universe/multiverse. What ever it is that is the beginning... please tell me these things.” The entire explanation was why you do not believe in a logical reason for the supernatural.
But even after you say "As far as gaps in our…” you only said “We don’t know yet” and went back to the supernatural being wrong. Still not an answer to the question. Then you talk about Holy Books for whatever reason. Nobody in this conversation said a Holy book could answer questions about science.
Then you finally said you believe in the Big Bang. WE AGREE!!! We probably disagree on who started it. For me it is logical to consider an outside the universe God who started it as easily as believing that humans started programs and are not inside the binary code universe. Again, I am being much more gracious here when sharing what I believe then you have been with me. Typically you tell me why you think my argument is foolish based off of assumption; and because you appear to be totally opposed to any idea of the supernatural. Again, assuming there is no supernatural. And you think that science must prove the supernatural because I guess science can prove things not physical in your book. Then you go into much science, some of which is utterly getting to the truth, others like abiogenesis being more difficult. Everything that man has attempted to prove life through physical means alone has run into road blocks. If you care to read here is a link that can give you a ton of information http://www.reasons.org/Search?q=abiogenesis.
You then continue on with science, which I must agree is amazing, but cannot agree that it holds the answer to everything. Your entire world view is based off of science holding all answers, or having the ability to hold all answers. So you do not open yourself up to the possibility for something other than science, like religion, or a God. But this is not true just because you do not believe. Nor have you given any reason to just believe in Ohy instead of God.
But again through this entire dialogue you do not make a positive claim until you get near the end of your whole work.
But finally you say “The intelligence that made science is provably human beings.”
FINALLY!!!!!!! So you assert that humans made the laws of physics, they made gravity, dark matter, the sun, stars and all the planets, plus the moons. Humans made the Big Bang. So humans would be what I call God.
Humans made science, the one thing you believe in. Humans did not discover science as I suggest, discover all the laws that were already in place. So humans are your Ohy. Humans are the higher intelligence because they made everything!!
But if you are not saying that, my questions again are. Who made science? Who or what caused all the laws we discover in science? What agent other than intelligence makes laws? To assume that anything other than intelligence makes laws is unsubstantiated. So can you answer these questions differently, or am I to truly assume that you believe science was made by man?
Below is my response to him:
You said: At the beginning of this of this let me say that in your blogs and in your writings here, you seem to assume that anything that we do not have an answer for, you can immediately assert that a supernatural force (or higher power as you keep saying) can be inserted inside it to answer the question. This is not the case.
My Response: If I were like you I would say you are making assumptions about me. But I will be more gracious and actually answer this. I do not assume that we just move to a God for every answer because we do not know the answer. I believe God is the answer who gave us science so we can understand the world we live in. I believe he gave us metaphysics, logic, math, reason, faith etc… I believe we owe are entire existence to Him. But this is supposed to be you answering my questions I thought? The rest of what you said up until you said “As far as gaps in our…” was useless and only an explanation of why you do not like the idea of the supernatural, again not explaining anything to answer the question of “Okay... tell me about your beliefs concerning the origins of the universe/multiverse. What ever it is that is the beginning... please tell me these things.” The entire explanation was why you do not believe in a logical reason for the supernatural.
But even after you say "As far as gaps in our…” you only said “We don’t know yet” and went back to the supernatural being wrong. Still not an answer to the question. Then you talk about Holy Books for whatever reason. Nobody in this conversation said a Holy book could answer questions about science.
Then you finally said you believe in the Big Bang. WE AGREE!!! We probably disagree on who started it. For me it is logical to consider an outside the universe God who started it as easily as believing that humans started programs and are not inside the binary code universe. Again, I am being much more gracious here when sharing what I believe then you have been with me. Typically you tell me why you think my argument is foolish based off of assumption; and because you appear to be totally opposed to any idea of the supernatural. Again, assuming there is no supernatural. And you think that science must prove the supernatural because I guess science can prove things not physical in your book. Then you go into much science, some of which is utterly getting to the truth, others like abiogenesis being more difficult. Everything that man has attempted to prove life through physical means alone has run into road blocks. If you care to read here is a link that can give you a ton of information http://www.reasons.org/Search?q=abiogenesis.
You then continue on with science, which I must agree is amazing, but cannot agree that it holds the answer to everything. Your entire world view is based off of science holding all answers, or having the ability to hold all answers. So you do not open yourself up to the possibility for something other than science, like religion, or a God. But this is not true just because you do not believe. Nor have you given any reason to just believe in Ohy instead of God.
But again through this entire dialogue you do not make a positive claim until you get near the end of your whole work.
But finally you say “The intelligence that made science is provably human beings.”
FINALLY!!!!!!! So you assert that humans made the laws of physics, they made gravity, dark matter, the sun, stars and all the planets, plus the moons. Humans made the Big Bang. So humans would be what I call God.
Humans made science, the one thing you believe in. Humans did not discover science as I suggest, discover all the laws that were already in place. So humans are your Ohy. Humans are the higher intelligence because they made everything!!
But if you are not saying that, my questions again are. Who made science? Who or what caused all the laws we discover in science? What agent other than intelligence makes laws? To assume that anything other than intelligence makes laws is unsubstantiated. So can you answer these questions differently, or am I to truly assume that you believe science was made by man?
No comments:
Post a Comment