Jump to content

Why do people so frequently tie a creator to religion?


Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Strange said:

The arrogance of this statement is stunning. Why do you assume that people who don’t agree with you are somehow ignorant and “need to do research”? Maybe they are already very familiar with the subject .

If you are unable to provide any evidence supporting your beliefs then there is no reason for anyone to take them seriously. 

 Its one of those topics that gets no where, ive been there before on this forum. If people want they can search my post history for the specific reasons i have came to these conclusions, but i will not post them in this thread.

Why do you care anyways? Ive decided that i feel there are flaws in the copernican principle, are you not ok with someone having a different opinion on the matter? How i got to this point isnt really important, its that im here. Id rather have conversations about the question posed in the OP, and how i feel it is important that people are able to seperate the idea of a creator to religion, its still baffling to me that so many people even if they disagree with what a religion says will base a creator around that same framework. 

Edited by Scotty99
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 114
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I already explained why i am not going to post all the specifics in this thread, its too big for that. It took me 2+ years to come to the conclusion i have.

Then there is no conversation is there...  you can't just state "Marsians did it" or "I can fly with the power of my mind" without presenting some kind of evidence - especially here on a science site.

That is simply a failure of the education system,  as you have not been taught the true history cosmology far enough to understand what i am talking about. You took everything that was told to you for

4 hours ago, Scotty99 said:

Never understood why people cannot have a conversation about a creator without bringing up religion. 

Doesn't "creator" point to a personal god?  I would say: "creative force".

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Itoero said:

Doesn't "creator" point to a personal god?  I would say: "creative force".

To some maybe? I dunno. I just think its important to separate the idea of a creator with religion, i feel this is going to have to be the way forward for not only the advancement of the human race, but also scientific endeavors.

Just imagine this for a second, lets say science finds something that makes it so that its undeniable we were created. It would be such a crazy and unifying event, if there was universal knowledge of a creator (like i believe we had in the past) it would refocus the entire planet, for the better.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to flip this on its head and offer another perspective: not all religions have creation stories and many that do don't have a creator - more a creative force as Itoero put it. So the association between creator and religion isn't so strong as appears from the Western perspective.

The reason that people associate a creator and religion is that the Abrahamic faiths are ubiquitous in the West and they assert (often aggressively) the existence of a creator. Nothing controversial and you're free to hold a belief in a creator without religion. But this will naturally lead to questions about how and why your belief is different to mainstream teachings. So it's strange you would bring this up then refuse to take questions on it.

7 minutes ago, Scotty99 said:

Just imagine this for a second, lets say science finds something that makes it so that its undeniable we were created. It would be such a crazy and unifying event, if there was universal knowledge of a creator (like i believe we had in the past) it would refocus the entire planet, for the better.

Like in the middle-east where all those people fervently believe in a creator? It being scientifically proven would mean nothing to the truly faithful.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Prometheus said:

Just to flip this on its head and offer another perspective: not all religions have creation stories and many that do don't have a creator - more a creative force as Itoero put it. So the association between creator and religion isn't so strong as appears from the Western perspective.

The reason that people associate a creator and religion is that the Abrahamic faiths are ubiquitous in the West and they assert (often aggressively) the existence of a creator. Nothing controversial and you're free to hold a belief in a creator without religion. But this will naturally lead to questions about how and why your belief is different to mainstream teachings. So it's strange you would bring this up then refuse to take questions on it.

Like in the middle-east where all those people fervently believe in a creator? It being scientifically proven would mean nothing to the truly faithful.

So sure i dont doubt there would be some sections of the planet that would be unwilling to waiver from their beliefs, but i truly do think it would be a unifying event that would change the world for the better. Thats part of where im getting all this, i feel we had that in the past as some point. Ancient cultures were clearly far far more advanced than what meets the eye, if you can try and imagine a society where you actually KNOW something like that, would internet and phones and jobs and stuff really be that high on your priority list? Heck no it would probably look something like ancient cultures did. If science was actually able to confirm without a shadow of a doubt that a creator exists it would change everything, i think that is the next scientific revolution.

And i already answered the questions as to how i got here, its a combination of things i touched on, really not important to the gist of the thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Scotty99 said:

So sure i dont doubt there would be some sections of the planet that would be unwilling to waiver from their beliefs, but i truly do think it would be a unifying event that would change the world for the better. Thats part of where im getting all this, i feel we had that in the past as some point. Ancient cultures were clearly far far more advanced than what meets the eye, if you can try and imagine a society where you actually KNOW something like that, would internet and phones and jobs and stuff really be that high on your priority list? Heck no it would probably look something like ancient cultures did. If science was actually able to confirm without a shadow of a doubt that a creator exists it would change everything, i think that is the next scientific revolution.

And i already answered the questions as to how i got here, its a combination of things i touched on, really not important to the gist of the thread.

Well first it would have to be true before science would be able to provide evidence for it.  Currently the balance of evidence is going the other way though.

You may well imagine a world where some event unifies mankind. But that would be ignoring human nature. If you want to live in that unified world, rather than relying on an external event to bring us all together we should actually work toward it by engaging in dialogue and such.

By the way, it's interesting that you think there could be evidence for a creator god, it's says you believe that god (or 'creator bob' or whatever you want to call it - can you see why people just end up using religious lingo?) still intervenes in the universe - if not there can be no evidence.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Scotty99 said:

To some maybe? I dunno. I just think its important to separate the idea of a creator with religion, i feel this is going to have to be the way forward for not only the advancement of the human race, but also scientific endeavors.

Just imagine this for a second, lets say science finds something that makes it so that its undeniable we were created. It would be such a crazy and unifying event, if there was universal knowledge of a creator (like i believe we had in the past) it would refocus the entire planet, for the better.

But what does it mean if you say' we were created'?

If we find scientific evidence that our 3D reality is formed at the Big Bang. Is then the Big Bang the creator of the universe?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Scotty99 said:

Its one of those topics that gets no where, ive been there before on this forum.

Because all you have on your side is your belief/faith. 

2 hours ago, Scotty99 said:

ts still baffling to me that so many people even if they disagree with what a religion says will base a creator around that same framework. 

The only difference is that you have invented your own religion instead of copying another (although, of course, you have copied a lot, such as your ideas on geocentrism).

2 hours ago, Scotty99 said:

I just think its important to separate the idea of a creator with religion

But it is, by definition, a religious belief. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Scotty99 said:

Creationism is the religious belief that the universe and life originated "from specific acts of divine creation"

The problem with creationists is that they claim Earth is not >= 4.5 bln years old, and just 6k y +- couple thousands years old, or so..

If they would learn quantum physics at primary school, and understood and accept radio-dating of rocks like Rubidium-87... it would be much easier..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rubidium–strontium_dating

 

Creationists are making dinosaur's park showing how they lived together with humans.. I see there nothing but plain rubbish.. made by people who have no bloody idea what they are talking about.. So why such nonsense being continued.. ? To more stupefying people?

 

 

Edited by Sensei
Link to post
Share on other sites

Your religious beliefs are not unique. I'm guessing you might be a deist. Perhaps you are confusing "religion" with "organised religion"?

I agree that it is pretty naive to think any proof could be unifying humanity. Look at evolution theory: you can't prove anything with more certainty, but so far its unifying succes is rather limited... 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/10/2018 at 11:56 AM, Sensei said:

The problem with creationists is that they claim Earth is not >= 4.5 bln years old, and just 6k y +- couple thousands years old, or so..

If they would learn quantum physics at primary school, and understood and accept radio-dating of rocks like Rubidium-87... it would be much easier..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rubidium–strontium_dating

 

Creationists are making dinosaur's park showing how they lived together with humans.. I see there nothing but plain rubbish.. made by people who have no bloody idea what they are talking about.. So why such nonsense being continued.. ? To more stupefying people?

 

 

I don't really know what i am in regards to classifications, for example i see no problem with evolution and us having a creator. I dont understand why many think these things are incompatible.

I just want to add i feel this entire thing is who can guess best. I dont think there is a reward or anything but i do wish science took intution into account more than just data and observations.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Scotty99 said:

I don't really know what i am in regards to classifications, for example i see no problem with evolution and us having a creator.

A lot of other religious people don't see these as incompatible, either. It just depends what sort of creator you have invented. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Strange said:

A lot of other religious people don't see these as incompatible, either. It just depends what sort of creator you have invented. 

I dont have like an idea of what my "ideal" creator would be, its not like that for me. I just think when you take everything into account a creator makes more sense than not.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Scotty99 said:

I just think when you take everything into account a creator makes more sense than not.

I'm not sure why you think anyone cares about your beliefs. Or why you are discussing them on a science forum. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Could be Sid Meier. We could be one of a billion saved games played out by who knows who.

4 minutes ago, Scotty99 said:

Then why do you respond to every single thread i make?

He's got a point.... it's a science site yea?  So why try to discuss a non scientific subject and make non scientific claims with no evidences to back them up in any way here at this science site?  Surely you expect to be challenged, no?

Twilight zone! Freaky quotes jumping through time!  PROOF of the supernatural right there!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Scotty99 said:

I don't really know what i am in regards to classifications, for example i see no problem with evolution and us having a creator. I dont understand why many think these things are incompatible.

I just want to add i feel this entire thing is who can guess best. I dont think there is a reward or anything but i do wish science took intution into account more than just data and observations.

Science takes intuition into account but on a very different level from what you are presenting. Talented physisists and mathematicians for example,  have better results dealing with extremely difficult problems when using intuition but that needs a lot of knowledge and rigour - you need to be very smart, experienced and knowledgeable to be able to use intuition effectively. When not having basic knowledge (like yourself), intuition is a dead end. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, koti said:

Science takes intuition into account but on a very different level from what you are presenting. Talented physisists and mathematicians for example,  have better results dealing with extremely difficult problems when using intuition but that needs a lot of knowledge and rigour - you need to be very smart, experienced and knowledgeable to be able to use intuition effectively. When not having basic knowledge (like yourself), intuition is a dead end. 

What basic knowledge do you presume i lack? The only thing you know about me is that i disagree that the earth is in a random position in the universe. Actually disagree is probably the wrong wording, its not exactly at odds with our current understanding of the universe.

Edited by Scotty99
Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Scotty99 said:

I just want to add i feel this entire thing is who can guess best. I dont think there is a reward or anything but i do wish science took intution into account more than just data and observations.

Then it wouldn't be science. You might as well join a golf club and then ask why you can't ignore the ball and just run round the course much quicker on a motorbike.

Guessing and making up stories is not science. It is fiction. Write a blog or a book. Then you can find out if anyone cares about your beliefs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Scotty99 said:

What basic knowledge do you presume i lack? The only thing you know about me is that i disagree that the earth is in a random position in the universe.

You are convinced that there is some secret debate behind closed doors amongst the scientific community about the validity of the copernican principle. You are not backing up this ridiculous nonsense with evidence. Start doing so please.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, koti said:

You are convinced that there is some secret debate behind closed doors amongst the scientific community about the validity of the copernican principle. You are not backing up this ridiculous nonsense with evidence. Start doing so please.

I think the debate would look something like this:

"well crap space is definitely not as homogenous as first expected"

"what do we do bob"

"well we cant go back on the copernican principle thats for sure"

"why not bob"

"that would mean geocentrism could make a return to popularity"

"why is that bad bob?"

"because fred, if we arent random its possible were in a special place, and you know what that means"

"oh i see, well cant we just get rid of the big bang bob"?

"thats what were working on now fred"

 

These are discussions that are happening today, bob and fred arent real people btw :)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Scotty99 said:

These are discussions that are happening today, bob and fred arent real people btw

Quite. Like everything else you say, it is a figment of your imagination. So it isn’t the evidence you were asked for. 

Edited by Strange
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.