Quote:
Originally posted by Bibliotheque
I know my summary of science was wrong, but what I'm trying to say is that no matter how far back science in the future will explain, I simply don't believe that something (whether it be particles, a "dense state" or anything else), can come from nothing, and that is a line that will always have to be crossed to explain our existence without God.
|
This, I think, is where we differ. Philosophically. Currently, Physics many theories pertaining to how the universe (or universes) came to being, whether it be by causes beyond our current comprehension or if there's some unending loop or some such other explanation. In any case, though, there are some good hypotheses out there. And that's my problem with those who believe we came into being by the will of an intelligent creator: their explanation relies on dubious philosophy rather than solid science.
As for myself, like everyone else, I cannot
know whether or not the universe was created by an intelligent being, but I see no reason to consider it for very long unless presented with evidence presented with scientific theories that have been hypothesized, tested, reviewed and theorized rather than just the twisting nature of philosophical arguments which themselves may be debunked by those other than myself.
But I don't want to be too hard on philosophy, so I suppose I'll say this: you have your basic assumptions, I have mine, and this is a debate I love dearly in spite of vitriol that is wont to rear its head because I enjoy talking about such phenomenal things as the creation of our world.
