Skip to comments.The Dawkins Challenge
Posted on 06/14/2012 6:58:55 AM PDT by C19fan
The noted atheist Richard Dawkins has been very active recently in his campaign to discredit religious belief, in particular Christianity, and Roman Catholicism has been a special target. He had a debate of sorts with Rowan Williams, the Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury, and appeared on an Australian television program, Q and A, with Cardinal George Pell, Archbishop of Sydney. His animus against Catholicism was also evident in a joint appearance with Lawrence Krauss, a theoretical physicist and fellow non-believer (as Krauss likes to be called), at the Australian National University.
Krauss is the author of the much heralded, A Universe From Nothing: Why There is Something Rather Than Nothing, in which he argues that it is highly plausible that we will soon be able to understand how the entire universe, including the fundamental laws of physics, can start from absolutely nothing without any need to appeal to a creator or supernatural agency.
(Excerpt) Read more at thecatholicthing.org ...
thanks, I may have to read something of his one of these days. Any suggestions on something of his that touches on more than just Christianity?
From my perspective, eternity cannot work both ways. God created time, existing outside of its limitations, therefore time has a definite beginning. You could say God was eternal before time existed, but what do words like “eternal” and “before” mean if time does not exist? Our perception is far too limited to conceive these ideas and speak about them in a rational or sensible way.
Oscar Wilde tells us ... Science is out of the reach of morals, for her eyes are fixed upon eternal truths.
In mathematics, in straight line situations, the concept of infinity works both ways; no beginning and no end.
When you think about it, time is a man created concept that makes sense; it's a past and future straight line situation with no plausable beginning or end. So far as math and science is concerned, time is eternal.
Seems to me that eternity can be many things. Just my own limited musings but eternity can be spatial in relation to scale, not just time. I’ve wondered in the past just how final the last second of life and consciousness in human form might be, applying scale to linear time. A second, a half second, a quarter, an eighth, a sixteenth... there’s not really an end there. Finality is an illusion.
“So far as math and science is concerned, time is eternal.”
Exactly, but math and science were both created by God and therefore, He is not bound by either of them, so they are insufficient tools for us to try to draw conclusions when it comes to Him. You might as well try to count the stars in the sky with an abacus.
They definitely are. The universe is the reality in which you live. If folks can't make sense of reality, then there's no justification for banning hard drugs at all. If no god ever shows up to introduce himself, then he's definitely not worthy of any kind of recognition.
Well, that might have been lurking about somewhere in the recesses but I wasn’t consiously aware. Vague memories of Aristotle and the tortoise, so I guess so, but neither mathematics nor philosophy held all that much charm for me during my school years.
What is striking to me is that there is a seeming eternity in every second of every day. Having lost a few loved ones over the years and not always having had a strong religious faith, that comforted me, odd as it sounds.
Double negative correct!
Scientists know that "something" observations might lead to proving something that isn't currently proven or observed.
If you want to really freak out, go look at time-lapse videos of sea stars, urchins, or coral, where it almost appears that they operate on a different relative time scale than we do. To us, they appear very sluggish or even motionless, but speed it up 6-10 times and they are very active creatures.
What you say is true, regarding the universe. However, the very definition of God means something supernatural. Modern science is built on a fundamental premise that they can only consider natural phenomenon. Anything supernatural is outside the bounds of modern science.
“The people that tend to want to debate him are British and American, and likely Christian.”
Correct. The Muslims would rather just decapitate him :)
"Modern science is built on a fundamental premise that they can only consider natural phenomenon. "
No. It is built on the scientific method, which requires observables.
"the very definition of God means something supernatural. ... Anything supernatural is outside the bounds of modern science."Do these gods know they've been defined by the humans? Why do they hide behind some human's definition to avoid introducing themselves? Do they have schizoid, avoidant, or dependent personalities?