Why MT doesn't believe in this.

[11_Panama_]

Amen Hobo. As I stated before, all this technologies and sciences has not disproven God. The Bible states..and this is in my own words....."somethings are not meant for us to know".

[Yanoda]

Good to have your feedback Hobo.
There are some things you left out though...
The Babylonian Enuma Elish account on creation and the Bible's account on creation are very alike (if not identical).
Both books explain the creation of the world we know happened in 6 parts.
1. Both states the world was void. Tiamat and Apsu represent that in the Enuma Elish.
2. Bible states God separated the waters to sky and ocean. Enuma Elish states Marduk slices Timata (Water) into two.
3. Bible states God created land to be separated by water. Enuma Elish states the creation of Kishar (God of Earth).
4. Bible states God created the Sky (stars etc. includes light). Enuma Elish states the creation of Anu (God of the sky).
5. Bible states God created all the living creatures. Enuma Elish states the creation of Ea (God of all things in the Earth).
6. Bible states God created humans. Enuma Elish states that Marduk became king of the Gods and created man.
7. Bible states God rested on the 7th day. Enuma Elish states that man was created so that the Gods may rest.

http://meta-religion.com/World_Religion ... eation.htm
http://faculty.gvsu.edu/websterm/Enuma_Elish.html
http://www.reformationmedia.org/schades ... nStory.pdf

So technically with your argument, the Enuma Elish is the story that described the creation of the world (similar to scientific research on the creation of the Universe) since it predates the Bible.

The scientific explanation (from what we were able to observe/collect) say that er existed in a singular point with extreme density, mass and temperature. The singularity expanded rapidly (which was space as well). We still observe the effects due to Galaxies moving away from each other.
As the expansion persists, er/particles (quarks, photons etc.) cool and start to bond (electrons, protons etc.) to create atoms and in turn elements (mostly hydrogen).
Matter started to clump (gravitational forces) to form early stars, black holes, quasars, galaxies etc.
Formation and destruction of stars create the other elements we know (~120).

From what I gather, the creation story does not accurately explain the scientific version. Again, the Bible (or other religious books) is vague and can be easily interpreted into different ways.

Panama, one cannot say something exists because there is no evidence disproving it. This an argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy (appeal to ignorance). Using your same logic would imply that unicorns, leprechauns, centaurs etc. exist, which I doubt you believe in. Think of a better argument and stop repeating yourself without any valid premises. It is the religious' and theists' burden to provide proof of the existence of a God with valid evidence. Your form of argument would not be considered serious/valid in a proper discussion/argument.

Cheers

Yanoda

[11_Panama_]

@ Yanoda....I can't see air...yet I know it exists...I can feel air...just like I can feel God. And why is NOT being able to prove something invalid? As time goes by, even proven things change with new studies...sciences..methods..etc. Remember, the world was flat once upon a time...and that was "factual" at the time.

[Yanoda]

@ Yanoda....I can't see air...yet I know it exists...I can feel air...just like I can feel God.

Is that the best you can do?
Air (gaseous state of particles) can be observed, tested and manipulated. We feel air due to the particles colliding on our skin (sensory cells). If you change the pressure/temperature of a gas, one can manipulate its state to a solid, liquid, plasma or Bose-Einstein condensate.
God cannot be observed or tested, thus God cannot be considered a truth until evidence of God arises.

Do some research and re-evaluate/revise your argument.

Cheers

Yanoda

[11_Panama_]

@ Yanoda....I can't see air...yet I know it exists...I can feel air...just like I can feel God.

Is that the best you can do?
Air (gaseous state of particles) can be observed, tested and manipulated. We feel air due to the particles colliding on our skin (sensory cells). If you change the pressure/temperature of a gas, one can manipulate its state to a solid, liquid, plasma or Bose-Einstein condensate.
God cannot be observed or tested, thus God cannot be considered a truth until evidence of God arises.

Do some research and re-evaluate/revise your argument.

Cheers

Yanoda

These are not arguments..these are my BELIEVES. I'm not here to argue my believes, I'm here to say that science has not proven or will prove everything in our world. Some things are not meant to be.

[Yanoda]

These are not arguments..these are my BELIEVES. I'm not here to argue my believes, I'm here to say that science has not proven or will prove everything in our world. Some things are not meant to be.

Your previous statement was an argument trying to validate your view that God exists comparing it to air. I took it apart and invalidated your argument.
If you do not want to discuss/argue, then why are you in this discussion? If you have nothing productive to say, then don't post. A 'belief' is a proposition without knowledge or proof; it has no place in science. Science is ever changing and we learn more every day. I have never stated science/we know everything either. Next time just state what you wanted to say instead of just repeating "there is no proof disproving God".
What "things are not meant to be"? That we gain sufficient knowledge that we can conclude that there is no God? That we advance so far that we understand how the universe we know occurred? If God is all mighty, then it should not be afraid or hinder us in achieving greater knowledge (it Punished humans based on Genesis).

Cheers

Yanoda

[Hobo]

Good to have your feedback Hobo.
Both books explain the creation of the world we know happened in 6 parts.
Six? The Enuma Elish shows it in more than six. I found 9 leading up to the creation of the world and universe.
1. Only Apsu, god of fresh water, and Tiamat, goddess of saltwater, exist.
2. They make the iggigi warriors, including Ea, the strongest and smartest.
3. Apsu plots to kill the warriors.
4. Ea kills Apsu.
5. New generation. among them Marduk, patron of storms and city of Babylon.
6. Tiamat revolts against Ea for killing Apsu.
7. Marduk offers to be the divine warrior for the blah blah blah divine assembly. Ea agrees.
8. Marduk fights Tiamat and kills her with lightening.
9. Marduk makes a new world, cutting Tiamat into the heaven and the Earth. He scatters her blood to the wind.
1. Both states the world was void. Tiamat and Apsu represent that in the Enuma Elish.
Almost every creation story will have some sort of empty void in the beginning. I wouldn't consider this as strong evidence that the bible and Enuma Elish are similar.
2. Bible states God separated the waters to sky and ocean. Enuma Elish states Marduk slices Tiamat (Water) into two.
In the Enuma Elish, Marduk slices Tiamat into two, Heaven and Earth, NOT sky(also could be Heaven) and ocean.
3. Bible states God created land to be separated by water. Enuma Elish states the creation of Kishar (God of Earth).
Yes, but in the Enuma Elish, it doesn't say Kishar was separated from water,(Tiamat and/or Apsu).
4. Bible states God created the Sky (stars etc. includes light). Enuma Elish states the creation of Anu (God of the sky).
5. Bible states God created all the living creatures. Enuma Elish states the creation of Ea (God of all things in the Earth).
Ea was the god of wisdom, the tablets only show that he made the human race. The first man that was made in the story was Lullu.
6. Bible states God created humans. Enuma Elish states that Marduk became king of the Gods and created man.
Ea made men. Well, then I suppose you could switch No.5 with No.6 around. But in every single creation story, men are created eventually, so this instance can't count, also because they are in different order.
7. Bible states God rested on the 7th day. Enuma Elish states that man was created so that the Gods may rest.

These are fragments, that do not correlate in the same order and certainly do not mean that they are the same. There are a few validated statements above, but its not enough for the two books(The book and the Tablets) to be considered the same. An example of what I mean(a little exaggerated) is that if you had a book, which has words in it, then you had another book, you can't take several sentences from one and correlate them with the other, and then claim copyright claims on the other for infringement claiming one derived from the other.

So technically with your argument, the Enuma Elish is the story that described the creation of the world (similar to scientific research on the creation of the Universe) since it predates the Bible. The Enuma Elish is a story that describes the creation of the world, but just because it predates the bible doesn't necessarily mean its true.

The scientific explanation (from what we were able to observe/collect) say that er existed in a singular point with extreme density, mass and temperature. The singularity expanded rapidly (which was space as well). We still observe the effects due to Galaxies moving away from each other.
As the expansion persists, er/particles (quarks, photons etc.) cool and start to bond (electrons, protons etc.) to create atoms and in turn elements (mostly hydrogen).
Matter started to clump (gravitational forces) to form early stars, black holes, quasars, galaxies etc.
Formation and destruction of stars create the other elements we know (~120).

From what I gather, the creation story does not accurately explain the scientific version. Again, the Bible (or other religious books) is vague and can be easily interpreted into different ways.

I'm no scientist, but I think what the science creation story in your point of view says is this:(I like lists)
1. There was nothing except a single point of extreme energy.
2. It blew up, causing the big bang.
3. As things settle down, particles bond with each other, creating atoms and in turn hydrogen and other elements.
4. Matter clumps together due to gravity and forms stars, black holes, quasars, galaxies.
5. Formation and blowing up of stars creates more elements.

Heres the first few main points in the first chapter of Genesis:(I parenthesized how I think it could correlate to the scientific version)
1. Formless void of nothingness, only God exists. (perhaps God is the "single point of energy")
2. God creates light. (Big Bang, I would assume makes a LOT of light)
3. God separates light from dark. (I thought about this, how could you separate light from dark if light automatically gives a shadow? I think it comes from the theory of luminous fog, eventually turning into clear space.)
4. God creates celestial bodies. (Stars, planets, etc..)
5. God imparts movements to celestial bodies. (Moves celestial bodies around, forming new ones and destroying others)

Anyway, these are my thoughts.



A Hobo
http://www.ancient.eu.com/article/225/
http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Genesis-Chapter-1/
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/celestial+body

[FaiL.?]

@ a Hobo

[ProfessorDreadNaught]

These are not arguments..these are my BELIEVES. I'm not here to argue my believes, I'm here to say that science has not proven or will prove everything in our world. Some things are not meant to be.

Your previous statement was an argument trying to validate your view that God exists comparing it to air. I took it apart and invalidated your argument.
If you do not want to discuss/argue, then why are you in this discussion? If you have nothing productive to say, then don't post. A 'belief' is a proposition without knowledge or proof; it has no place in science. Science is ever changing and we learn more every day. I have never stated science/we know everything either. Next time just state what you wanted to say instead of just repeating "there is no proof disproving God".
What "things are not meant to be"? That we gain sufficient knowledge that we can conclude that there is no God? That we advance so far that we understand how the universe we know occurred? If God is all mighty, then it should not be afraid or hinder us in achieving greater knowledge (it Punished humans based on Genesis).

Cheers

Yanoda

EVERYTHING is based on beliefs. There is NO "scientific method" of proving that reality exists beyond my senses ability to experience it and my minds ability to comprehend it. I could be in a dream right now and none of this is real or true.

DOOLITTLE But how do you know you exist?

BOMB #20 It is intuitively obvious.

DOOLITTLE Intuition is no proof. What concrete evidence do you have of your own existence?

BOMB #20 Hmm... Well, I think, therefore I am.

DOOLITTLE That's good. Very good. Now then, how do you know that anything else exists?

BOMB #20 My sensory apparatus reveals it to me.

DOOLITTLE Right!

BOMB #20 This is fun.

DOOLITTLE All right now, here's the big question: how do you know that the evidence your sensory apparatus reveals to you is correct? [...] What I'm getting at is this: the only experience that is directly available to you is your sensory data. And this data is merely a stream of electrical impulses which stimulate your computing center.

BOMB #20 In other words, all I really know about the outside universe relayed to me through my electrical connections.

DOOLITTLE Exactly.

BOMB #20 Why, that would mean... I really don't know what the outside universe is like at all, for certain.

DOOLITTLE That's it.

BOMB #20 Intriguing. I wish I had more time to discuss this er.

DOOLITTLE Why don't you have more time?

BOMB #20 Because I must detonate in seventy- five seconds.

Don't get uppity with science. It is a tool, nothing more. (its uncertain if its worthy of the worship its given!)

[Darth Crater]

What more proof that things exist do you want than "I can observe it, interact with it, and predict how it will act in the future"?

A belief is simply something that you think is true. All beliefs are based on the evidence you've gathered about the world. The problem is that humans are typically bad at sorting out which things constitute useful evidence, so we form wrong beliefs easily. Science helps us form beliefs that conform to reality (or, if you're still not sure it exists, form beliefs that let you predict what your hallucinations will do), and discard those which contradict it. I agree that, say, the Scientific Method is a tool, and shouldn't be worshiped. That doesn't stop it from being far more useful and beneficial to our lives than any deity I've heard of.

I don't see any useful comparisons between the various creation stories and reality, beyond "there was either nothing or something different, then it stopped being nothing", which is pretty much the definition of the creation story. In Genesis, in particular, apparently the Sun, other stars, and moon didn't exist until after Earth was populated by plants.