“The unfolding of absolutely nothing into something is a problem of the profoundest difficulty and currently far beyond the reach of science.” – Peter Atkins
Another crazy, religious nutjob spouts his anti-science mythology.
Except Peter is an atheist.
Look him up if you don’t believe me.
…told ya!
Good ole’ Pete understands that science is like a paintbrush.
Smearing varnish on a deck?
Paintbrush!
Making walls another color
Paintbrush!
Dabbing barbeque sauce on grilled chicken
Paintbrush! (…really!)
Changing a tire on your truck?
…you’re gonna need a different tool.
Chopping firewood?
…paintbrush won’t help you here either.
Remember this next time you’re tempted to say, “I’m not a religious person.”
Everybody is religious sometimes.
When the science paintbrush won’t work, you reach for religion.
Need to measure distances?
Science!
Describing physics and chemistry?
Science!
Want smartphones and televisions?
Science!
Want to speak out against genocide?
Scie…wait. No. That’s wrong…
Want to know why you should be kind to others?
Sci…nope! Wrong again.
Science paints nothing with altruism.
A paintbrush only works in nature.
You can’t paint metaphysics.
Can’t paint a prayer.
Can’t paint a thought.
Paintbrushes don’t do compassion.
Useful toolboxes contain more than paintbrushes.
Useful worldviews contain more than mere science.
OH! One more thing!
The Bible is also a paintbrush!
Some of you religious folks need to learn some science.
87 Responses
I was interested by the genocide comment. Many people do not understand the philosophical core of science: that objective information must be interpreted subjectively to have any real significance. Science is not the be-all and end-all in human existence. But I’m not anti-science. I hold a doctorate in molecular biology. I’m against bad philosophy which sometimes corrupts science. This was a good post.
Hey RLJ3,
Molecular biology is fascinating. I don’t know as much as you do about it but the little bit I understand fills me with awe.
I find the logic behind the design of living things very interesting.
I’ve tried explaining the philosophical and logical problems with Naturalism to Tildeb numerous times, but he doesn’t think it’s problematic that he’s completely without a foundation. Tildeb won’t answer which came first: the brain or logic?
Yet he continues to take advantage of logic in general (and the Scientific Method in particular).
He has no patience for conversations about logic and scientific philosophy…. That’s just rambling nonsense!
All Atkins is saying in a nutshell is ” We don’t know.” Nothing wrong with this. It is forthright and honest.
That’s why I quoted him.
I sense a deeper point you are trying to make here, John. Want to elaborate?
That’s probably the Holy Spirit giving you that sense.
Ark, just in case you haven’t crossed swords with JB before, he really tries to play the comedian at all times. It’s a deflection.
Nice of you to let Ark know what’s up in case he’s not sharp enough to figure it out for himself.
So there is no point then?
You’re the one who sensed some deeper meaning. How am I supposed to know what you’re sensing?
Fair enough. So do you agree with my comment that ” We don’t know?”
I’ve always agreed with that comment.
So you are open to the possibility that your god is simply a man-made construct?
Yep.
Are you open to the possibility that man-made constructs usually exist as explanations for truth?
Sure. But so far no evidence has been presented that would induce me to believe in a deity. What was the evidence that convinced you?
…ugh. I’ve answered that question half a dozen times. Every time JZ pastes billions of words about protozoa and Paley’s Watchmaker…
Here goes:
So far, no evidence has been presented for any machinery coming to exist apart from the deliberate activity of an intelligent, transcendent agent.
I don’t believe in God so much as I am doubtful that consciousness sprang from nothing.
Machinery is different.
And this has been refuted.
But I’m interested in what convinced you. Are you a Christian? I know you have commented on JohnZ’s blog but I can’t remember if you said?
What has been refuted?
Sorry, I misread your comment. I got distracted. Are you alluding to an intelligent agent being responsible for the universe, suggesting this is comparison to you machine analogy?
Yes.
I’m alluding to an intelligent agent being responsible for the universe.
So, you are a deist?
No.
Jesus was God walking around among us. That’s not deism.
While there well may have been someone called Yeshua the biblical character, Jesus of Nazareth was simply a narrative construct. And even in the biblical stories he never claimed to be a god either.
Oh!
Oh?
Just acknowledging that I received your message.
Usually, “evidence” isn’t the problem. Most unbelievers struggle because of a bad mental picture of God–and mistakenly viewing Him as a “thing,” instead of the perfect standard of absolute truth that He is.
We’re talking about a fairly abstract concept here. But everybody believes in truth. Therefore, everybody believes in God.
Most Atheists like to describe God as “an angry old man” or “a fairy in the sky” or “a cosmic dictator” or a whole bunch of other lame caricatures of what God is. Of course, there’s no bearded strong-man with a staff sitting in the clouds. If you want evidence for that, you won’t find any.
But, if you want evidence that this Universe is logical and predictable and knowable, I can give you plenty. Our reality obeys the laws that have been coded into it. So the only logical question is, “Who is the code-writer?”
Fine, so was it that convinced you to become a Christian? If indeed you are one of course and not a deist.
There’s no silver bullet for me. And I don’t think it’s possible to give you a point in time when I “became” a Christian. I’ve just discovered as I’ve searched for the truth that the God of Christianity most completely explains reality.
A perfect and personal being outside of time and space, whose main objective is to have a relationship with the necessarily imperfect beings that aren’t Him–but who share some traits with Him.
I haven’t found a worldview which explains the natural and supernatural realities better.
So, no evidence then, merely a ”feeling”. Okay.
Little different to the Hindus, Muslims, Jainists etc…
Were you also convinced you are a sinner and need some sort of salvation?
The god of Christianity is the Judaic god, Yahweh, a man made Canaanite deity adopted by the Israelites who first made an appearance in the Pentateuch.
You know this is now regarded by biblical scholars as nothing but historical fiction? ( not the likes of Geisler etc of course! 🙂 )
You are aware of the Ugaritic texts, I presume?
Unless you are referring to a different god, one that Marcion was convinced was the god of christianity?
Can you be specific?
The fact that Atheists are always the first to bring up the Bible is one of the things that fascinates me about it.
I said the Christian God corresponds most closely to reality. I don’t really care too much who described Him first.
The fact that many cultures also wrote about a perfect being which exists outside of space and time only reinforces my believe that they’re on to something…
The “Wisdom of the Crowds,” as it were…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wisdom_of_Crowds
Anyway, I like what C.S. Lewis wrote:
“I have therefore no difficulty in accepting, say, the view of those scholars who tell us that the account of Creation in Genesis is derived from earlier Semitic stories which were Pagan and mythical. We must of course be quite clear what ‘derived from’ means. Stories do not reproduce their species like mice. They are told by men. Each re-teller either repeats exactly what his predecessor had told him or else changes it. He may change it unknowingly or deliberately….
“Thus at every step in what is called—a little misleadingly—the ‘evolution’ of a story, a man, all he is and all his attitudes, are involved. And no good work is done anywhere without aid from the Father of Lights. When a series of such retellings turns a creation story which at first had almost no religious or metaphysical significance into a story which achieves the idea of true Creation and of a transcendent Creator (as Genesis does), then nothing will make me believe that some of the re-tellers, or some one of them, has not been guided by God.”
The fact that Atheists are always the first to bring up the Bible is one of the things that fascinates me about it.
I imagine every non-Christian will reference the bible for where else will one encounter the god you worship?
I reiterate, your god is Yahweh, a man-made Canaanite deity found in the Pentateuch which is now regarded as historical fiction.
If you have another name for your god, please feel free to share it.
You seem to have missed my question regarding whether you consider yourself a sinner and in need of salvation?
Yes, I DID miss your salvation question. Apologies.
I worship the God described in the Bible. Not the Bible itself. It doesn’t matter whether the stories are literal history or morality tales.
The understanding of God’s works and character, which come from the Bible, answer my biggest questions about reality.
Regarding sin: yes, I do wrong things regularly. I’m not God, but I often want to behave like I am. I’m egotistical/prideful and short-tempered. So, if the Creator is an impersonal God who doesn’t care about my daily life, then I have no hope. I’m a tiny speck of insignificance in a giant Universe. And I’m lost.
Thank God for reaching out to me.
Now, I’ll ask a question: Why is it so important for you to assign a name to an Infinite Being? (Or, to put it a different way, do you have a problem with calling God “Truth?”)
May I ask why you worship a man- made Canaanite deity?
My apologies, but I do not actually understand what you mean by this? Could you be specific, or use more straightforward language? Thanks.
I consider I would feel rather silly to worship a man-made deity from a ”book” regarded as historical fiction.
If there is a creator deity responsible for ”all this” then if and when he/she/it makes an appearance I will decide what to do at that time.
Try to keep up, Ark.
I don’t worship a man-made Deity. Even if the text is fiction, that doesn’t mean that GOD is. (I’ve learned many profound truths from fiction books.)
Furthermore, as I’ve already explained, a bearded guy isn’t going to show up on your porch and shake hands with you. So I’m not sure what you mean by “if and when [God] makes an appearance.” In fact, that’s why I asked the question about why it’s so important for you to give a name to God. I can’t shake the feeling that you think he has eyes and arms and feet–just like other things we like to name.
God just means “Supreme.” It means “Utmost” or “Absolute.” THE biggest, most true, most real thing you can point to is your god. So–if you need a different question–what is the truest thing you KNOW?
Forgive me for any misunderstanding.
1.You said you worship the Christian god.The god of the bible.
2.I have already explained , the Christian god in the bible is Yahweh.
3.Yahweh is a former man-made ( make believe) Canaanite deity and there is textual evidence to support this.
As I asked before, if you have another god you worship ( maybe something like Marcion and the Doceists believed) then please tell me its name.
I’m not going to continue allowing you to ask all the questions, Ark. This is not that complicated.
I believe there is a God who is personal and who exists outside of space and time, regardless of what the Bible says. Did you even bother reading the quote from CS Lewis?
Your question (which is the same as JZs, when he asks “which god?”) is just as nonsensical as someone who asks “which winner?”
I stand in awe of The Truth. What’s yours?
You believe in a personal god. I accept this and so far have no issue with your right as an adult to believe what ever you so wish.
All I ask is : what is the name of your personal god?
That also is not complicated.
I stand in awe of The Truth. What’s yours?
Once again, you’ll have to excuse me, I’m sorry, but I don’t follow your question? What do you mean by my Truth and why do you use a capital T?
Do you have an authority, outside of yourself, that you trust? Some standard for truth?
What do mean by truth? Facts/evidence/ not lying?
And are you going to divulge the name of your personal god?
Ark,
You can peruse her blog to verify but she’s a Conservative Fundamentalist – take a wild guess as to which one she submits to (and she’s been raised to submit).
I lose count of the number of cults out the, Carmen. Southern Baptist?
I would guess something even more ‘fringe’ but unspecified on her blog. I did a lot of head-shaking as I was reading through, I’ll tell you that though. 🙁
I can help you guys out a bit.
McMommy (and me) are part of a very ultra-right-wing fringe group that believes they are the ONLY true Christians. Everyone but us is despised by God and on the path to hell.
We’ve never read any book other than the Bible. We close our eyes at grocery store checkouts so we won’t accidentally glimpse at magazine covers and thus damn our souls to hell.
We only use wooden spoons because plastic is an abomination of the devil.
We believe television is witchcraft.
We cover our ears whenever we hear science of any kind being spoken.
Twice a year, we literally bury our heads in sand to remind us of God’s mission for us.
Hope this helps remove some of your guesswork.
You forgot the part about firm belief in homeschooling to keep kids indoctrinated, endorsing patriarchal systems, marriage and motherhood as the only future for women and the danger of gay marriage leading to sex with animals.
We don’t believe any of that stuff because it’s too mainstream.
Obviously you aren’t as devoted a follower of your daughter’s blog as she is of yours.
Unfollowing my blog carries a severe punishment that I can’t divulge to anyone outside our cloistered cult.
I understand there are many people interested in sects. . . 😉
My God doesn’t have one name. Pick one that best conveys the ideas of Be-All and End-All.
It’s only concrete THINGS that need names, so that concrete thinkers can feel like they’ve got a grasp on those ideas. So why don’t YOU propose a name for God, and we can call him that, for the sake of future conversation?
And–with that–I’m officially done entertaining your questions on this thread. I’m not convinced you don’t understand what I’ve been asking, because I already hinted where I was going: If you believe in truth, you believe in God.
But, since your primary goal is to make sure you can’t be considered a Theist, you are going to do the Atheist Word Game Dance, to hang on to your godless status, regardless. And I just don’t have time for it today.
So many people have found their identity in the community of Godless People, and so they’re afraid of losing that if it turns out that they (like everyone) actually DOES believe in God.
The question has never been about his existence. The question is: what is God like? Are human brains the Be-All, End-All? Should we worship ourselves and our own accomplishments, the way Humanists do? Or is Nature a wise and omnipotent force which deserves to be called God? Or is nature just a magnificent reflection of God–who is wholly outside of nature itself?
Those are the questions you should be asking yourself.
If Atheists spent half as much time scrutinizing their own beliefs as they do obsessing over whether Moses literally walked the earth, then there wouldn’t be any Atheists left.
http://godevidence.com/2016/02/everyone-religious-rather-nobody/
Your god?
Hmm, how does John sound?
Or is that just a bit too creepy?
Unfortunately for you and yours you are a rapidly fading point of inconsequential nonsense that one day relatively soon will be viewed as nothing more than a rather unpleasant anachronism.
Let’s say humans have been here for around 100,000 years in our present form.
The Judea/ Christian religion as you now embrace it been here how long?
RFLMFAO.
How arrogant of you, my dear to believe it will survive much longer.
However, you enjoy it while it lasts.
I hope your kids forgive you.
Feel free to re-post this comment on the new thread, Ark.
As you know, we try not to avoid engaging on old ones, so that others can follow along better.
You go ahead if you feel you want some of your dad’s 14,000 subscribers to read it.
What was it….sorry,typo
I’m certainly glad to hear that your daughter made an excellent recovery, John. That’s great news. Thankfully, we have well-trained medical staff who spend years training, observing, and treating people for a variety of problems. We also have scientists who are desperately searching for more answers, and finding them every day.
It’s unfortunate that neither you nor your daughter read through the whole story (as I suspected you wouldn’t). Matt’s story illustrates what happens to ‘person who believes’ when they are faced with the FACT that science – and science alone – is/was responsible for the remarkable recovery of a child from the brink of death. His story is one of human tragedy but has a happy ending. His ‘awakening’ to this fact, after years of believing in superstition and ‘woo’ is the theme of the story.
Hopefully you’ll have your own awakening one of these days, John.
Why does it matter whether I ‘awaken’ one day? 100 years from now, what difference will it make?
It makes a difference NOW, John. That’s what we get, not forever. Face it.
What difference does it make now?
You are living in a delusion, that’s why. Face facts, John. Read the story; it’s illuminating, I assure you.
I read all of it.
So what if I’m in a delusion? What’s so great about your ‘truth’?
The truth is based on facts, not conjecture, speculation, and imagination; that’s why.
Why is the truth better than delusion?
Truth is honesty and honesty is the first chapter in the book of wisdom. 🙂 You don’t want to be as a fool, do you John?
I certainly don’t want to be a fool!
So I should read the Bible? Is that what you’re saying?
If reading ancient myths inspire you, so be it!
So back to my question.
Why is truth preferable to myth?
I answered that one.
Sure you did.
Here’s an article that you might find interesting: http://whyimcatholic.com/index.php/conversion-stories/atheist-converts/103-atheist-convert-jennifer-fulwiler
I started reading it but when I got to the part where she went through the severe mental breakdown, I stopped. John, you realize that many people who ‘convert’ do so because of some trauma in their lives, don’t you? This is another one of those stories. . . she imagined a saviour as a coping mechanism; plus she loves her husband and he’s Christian – rewards!
But, let me guess – you gave all praise and glory to the invisible spirit . . .
Here’s what I would say to someone who revealed that a loved one of theirs nearly died:
“I hope everything turned out okay.” (Or, “I’m glad your story had a happy ending.”)
God put the rules and the ingredients into motion. And then amazing doctors (like this one) played their roles. I’m grateful to both that I still have a little sister on this side of Heaven.
http://www.humansofnewyork.com/tagged/pediatric-cancer#13
As I’ve said before, John. Science explains most things. ‘God’ explains NOTHING.
Dave’s little treatise might make you smile benignly but does little else but give all you believers the ‘warm fuzzies’.
God forbid !
Warm fuzzies !!
John,
Here’s something I think you would like to read. This guy is such a good writer that I assumed he was an English major. 🙂
I even think you’ll learn something. At any rate, it might give you pause for thought.
https://jerichobrisance.com/2014/06/08/paisley/
In light of your earlier comment, I’m not sure what this article is communicating.
Is this article about ‘Science’ which explains most things or is this about ‘God’ which explains NOTHING?
Give it a go, John. Like I say, you might even enjoy the read. (It’s in a series, but he has the reader hooked ‘in the beginning’) 😉
Okay.
I read it.
He certainly has a gift for prose!
Have you actually THOUGHT about the story of Paisley though, John?
Yes indeed!
I’ve actually lived through a similar story with my youngest daughter!
John,
That is kind of the thinking I was using when I commented in yesterday’s blog.
Science is great at many things, but can’t deal with the intangible. What can science explain about “art”? It can speak of the tools and medium, but still falls short. Heck, colleges break science away from arts and humanities, after all.
I think from time to time that it is odd that in the past, there were scientists keen to discover how God put this universe together, yet now many scientists are keen to spend their time seeking to banish Him from talk of His creation.
We can use the tools of history, logic, theology, and more to discuss how and why an infinite God created a finite universe. But science seems to be a tool of another priesthood, one that seeks to elevate it, and only it, to the sole tool to explain things it is ill equipped to do. (Yum… run-on sentences for popular consumption).
Who owns science? Do I have a right to it, even if I do not possess a PhD? To what level can I employ it and avoid the pish-poshing of the illuminati of the sacred halls of science, where eye-rolling and sighing greet those of faith?
Who even decided that science is now supreme and decides so many things? Will we one day be ruled by a technocracy that would howl and cry at the thought of a theocracy? California tried, but failed, to pass a bill allowing for legal action against so-called “climate deniers”. Is it too far-fetched to think of a day when the technocracy prosecutes parents and takes children from them for the “abuse” of teaching them Scripture, that God created all that is, and that Christ died on the Cross and rose again for our salvation?
Science can be such an amazing tool in the hands of the curious man who wants to understand the whole of creation. I study science for that reason. I want to know how things work; how God ordered this universe and how gravity works and why birds can fly or how plants use the sun for energy and produce oxygen.
When science seeks to be a tool to explain everything with the presupposition that there is no God is where it falls apart. There are gaps, holes, question marks, things that don’t quite fit together.
My *public* high school chemistry teacher once said in class that the more he studies science, the more his faith grows in what God created. That was the 80s. He would be burned as a heretic by the secular priesthood today… or at least lose his job or be made to recant.
I use the tool of the image of God (that we were created in) to understand the universe around me. I look at the world with amazement and wonder at the things I see that He created as much as I do when I see a man’s heart changed by faith in Christ. The same Hand wrought both.
Dave
Genesis 1:26-27 (ESV)
Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”
So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.
“Why” is one of the most fundamentally important questions in the world. Even Christians can hate you for asking it. This post perfectly explains why science may be able to answer “how”, but not “why”.
“It seems to me that when confronted with the marvels of life and the universe, one must ask ‘why’ and not just ‘how.’ The only possible answers are religious. . . . I find a need for God in the universe and in my own life.” –Arthur L. Schawlow (Professor of Physics at Stanford University, 1981 Nobel Prize)
John, boy – I’m worried about you. Cheese slid off the cracker?
Don’t worry. I’m fine.
I can explain this post to you if you need me to.