Erasmus00 Posted August 8, 2005 Report Share Posted August 8, 2005 I've been reading some of the intelligent design arguments of late, and one that comes up over and over again is that evolutionary science is biased by what ID proponents call "methodological naturalism." They claim that science, which searches for only natural causes is missing the obvious "evidence" of design. My question is for ID/creationist proponents. How else can science proceed other then by looking for natural causes? When is it ok to say "I don't know how this happens, it must have been God?" What methodology would ID replace this methodological naturalism with? -Will Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Little Bang Posted August 9, 2005 Report Share Posted August 9, 2005 "I don't know how this happens, it must have been God?" -Will Anyone who looks at an unkown and says this, does not have the ability to ask why.It's ok to believe that some entity created the universe, but it is also ok for me to ask what created that entity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infamous Posted August 9, 2005 Report Share Posted August 9, 2005 Anyone who looks at an unkown and says this, does not have the ability to ask why.It's ok to believe that some entity created the universe, but it is also ok for me to ask what created that entity.All questions a man can ask are fair inquiries, it is the answers we recieve form others, that need sorted out by reasonable logic and empirical evidence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qfwfq Posted August 10, 2005 Report Share Posted August 10, 2005 It's ok to believe that some entity created the universe, but it is also ok for me to ask what created that entity.The Catholic answer is in the Profession of Faith (the Credo), which says generated and not created. This is understood as meaning that nothing created God. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boerseun Posted August 10, 2005 Report Share Posted August 10, 2005 Premise:Nothing created 'God'.'God' is omnipotent, and the creator of all things.Any 'omnipotent' entity, must have infinite resources at its disposal, and be infinitely powerful to qualify as being 'omnipotent'The only thing we know of with such vast resources at its disposal is the universe itself. Conclusion:Isn't it possible that the concept of 'God' is just an unsiphisticated reference to the Universe, and that God is the universe? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.