-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
SETI-- a "pseudoscience?"
- Thread starter Alcott
- Start date
Umm, no.
It does mean they're kooks though!
Because of the limitations of space and time attempting to discover a transmission from light years away during one's lifetime is rather an exercise in futility.God cannot be discovered through scientific inquiry. The existence of other intelligent life is subject to scientific inquiry, although we might not receive any answers on a useable time scale.
If we find aliens, we will have proven they exist.
We can't find God by looking for him with telescopes.
Creation research isn't scientific because it appeals to miraculous means for creation. The miraculous is supernatural and thus beyond examination by science.
This is one reason I'm opposed to the idea that God made things miraculously (poof!) and that they may appear to have originated by natural means but they really originated by supernatural means (young earth/six day creation contrary to the natural record). If the natural record is undependable because of supernatural meddling, it renders scientific inquiry pointless.
We can't find God by looking for him with telescopes.
Creation research isn't scientific because it appeals to miraculous means for creation. The miraculous is supernatural and thus beyond examination by science.
This is one reason I'm opposed to the idea that God made things miraculously (poof!) and that they may appear to have originated by natural means but they really originated by supernatural means (young earth/six day creation contrary to the natural record). If the natural record is undependable because of supernatural meddling, it renders scientific inquiry pointless.
That's an evasion of the question. You are looking for something or someone not proven scientifically to exist. Some believe these not proven to exist do exist, therefore their research begins with this presumption. If the supposition is that alien beings can be detected by our sense of sight, so could the flesh-&-blood Greek gods; so would searching for old Zeus and Ares not constitute a relgion for that reason? BTW how we know that alien beings, supposing they exist, are detectable by any of our senses?
Is it fair to say that you think God is "there," but he might as well not be? For what has he to do if the scenario is as you said?
If you think that's evading the question, I think you don't understand the question!
If there are any aliens not detectable by natural means, then we are obviously not looking for those aliens. If we are searching for aliens by natural means, then obviously if they exist the aliens we are searching for will be detectable by those means. If they do not exist, the search will still be done scientifically, just without any payout.
No, it's not fair to say that, and he has a lot to do with creating and sustaining. God doesn't have to choose a weird and irrational means of making the universe when a sensible one will do just as well (and in my opinion better).
If there are any aliens not detectable by natural means, then we are obviously not looking for those aliens. If we are searching for aliens by natural means, then obviously if they exist the aliens we are searching for will be detectable by those means. If they do not exist, the search will still be done scientifically, just without any payout.
No, it's not fair to say that, and he has a lot to do with creating and sustaining. God doesn't have to choose a weird and irrational means of making the universe when a sensible one will do just as well (and in my opinion better).
It was my question, bud, I know what I was asking.
Ain't that clever of us?
And if we are searching for anyone or anything that we think can be detectable by natural means, is it open to scientific investigation? The results, as well as the person or thing.
If supernatural intervention is evident in nothing in the universe, why do you believe such a thing?
If He had chosen a "weird and irrational" means of creating, how would we know it? If what He conveyed to us about how it came about is weird and irrational, then the choice is ours as to the evidence of things seen, or the evidence of things unseen; the latter, being the NT definition of faith, upon which all that is important and lasting is based.
Nevertheless, if creation is a billions-of-years automation, what do you mean when you say "he has a lot to do with creating and sustaining?"
Dunno, bud.
You seemed to be equating searching for a physical object that we are not sure is there with searching for a supernatural object (whose status we could never determine by searching). I've had a lot of socks vanish in the wash, but I don't think if I went looking for them that would mean I was worshipping my socks. Depends on if it's a conclusion drawn from evidence or theory that the thing exists. If I just wake up one morning and announce that I had a dream of subterranean Martians with four arms and two tails and I was planning a manned expedition to make contact with those aliens. . . Well, I might be going about the search scientifically, but I think calling it science would be a bit sketchy.
Why is this a problem for me particularly? I don't know many Christians that frequently observe supernatural intervention in their lives. Yet somehow they still believe.
According to YEers, we know it because Genesis says so. I don't think this is a literal account because I think God looks an awful lot like a liar if he makes a universe that appears to be billions of years old when it's really only a few thousand.
Having faith in itself is not particularly virtuous. We have to be sure we're having faith in the right thing.
Once again, do you often see miracles in your life--that is honest-to-goodness supernatural interference, something that cannot be explained without the abrogation of natural law? I'm guessing no. I'm also guessing that you still believe that God is involved in your life in spite of not waking up every morning to find out your tap water has been turned to wine (or grape juice, depending on your preference), your dog has been raised from the dead, or some other bizarre happening has occurred. Once again, this is not something that is particular to me.
So what? Neither are scientifically proven to exist, and we don't know to what extent, if any, either, or the respective results thereof, are detectable. I don't see any significant difference between searching for God and searching for ET. Searching for whatever is there [the site we choose to search] might be different. But using a vast satellite receptor to scan millions of frequencies hoping to find estraterrestrial intelligence... that's choosing a being some want to exist and searching for it despite no evidence that such is in existence. Searching for the "fountain of youth" or the "seven cities of cibola" might be comparable; but should any competent university or research organization, especially government run or funded, be involved in such searches?
Only you can declare that, but I'll take a guess, if you want me to, in saying whether you worship socks.
Now, ain't that an answer?
Again: If supernatural intervention is evident in nothing in the universe, why do you believe such a thing?
Is He a liar for coming in the person of a "mere man," forcing people involuntarily into a decision to believe something that scientifically could not be true? Is He a liar for saying burnt offerings and a day of atonement and a scapegoat carry away sin, then later saying such rituals cannot take away sin? There's a lot more than the appearance of what we see and investigate and conclude that would make Him a liar; that is, if we believed all our investigations and conclusions.
And if that cannot be scientifically proven, it must be impossible to know-- right?
Once, again, you refuse to answer the question. Just what does God have to do with creating and sustaining the universe, if it's all so plain from the "big bang" through dust and gas of the solar system, through evolution from a molecule to us and whales and jackasses?
And no, I don't hold on to belief in God [and I do feel the grip is slipping] because of any "miracles," as I've never seen any, and at times when listening to the radio I've shouted the most vile profanities and curses when some jerk comes on assuring them [miracles; blessings] for a big "gift" of money. If you're really looking for an answer to your questions though [unlike me, and I frankly doubt it], I would prefer my tap water changed to plain grape juice for when I wake up, and to merlot or chardonnay just before I go to sleep
Completely exhausted, so this will be short.
Socks and aliens fall under the category of physical beings. We can search for those through scientific means. God falls under the category of a metaphysical being. Any attempt to search for him through scientific means is silly, like the cosmonauts saying, "We didn't see God up there." Well of course you didn't, you can't see him!
Wait a second, weren't you just telling me something about faith? "The substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen"?
No, I am not refusing to answer the question, thank you for insulting me. I answered quite clearly, it's just that you have blinders on in this regard and are apparently incapable of seeing something from my point of view and aren't willing to accept what I say about my state of mind at face value. So here you go.
God created, God sustains.
And I suppose it will be a great feet indeed if we find them.
That makes searching for any particular god dependent on whether 'he' is believed to be of flesh&blood or of spirit. Would simply changing perception of God from spirit to flesh okay any attempts at researching Him?
Yep. What is your answer to the question?
Oh, a hearty "you're welcome" is in order.
What you said in response was, "do you have miracles in your life......"
Just what does God have to do with creating and sustaing the universe?
Nice scrpiture quote, but according to you all these things happend automatically over about 15 billion years. So-- designing His toy and winding up the key... is that what He has to do with creation and sustenance? If not, what?
Is your trust in scientific research not offended by that? Or is this what evaluating fossils and viewing the stars leads you to?
Then unless we are greater than God, we could not possibly blow ourselves out of existence? The sun will never become a red giant and destroy all life on earth? What are the consequences? And can the consequences be researched by looking for God?
Well, then he wouldn't be God, would he?
You would succeed if you tried looking for God in a physical form in Israel 2000 years ago. Right now you're rather out of luck.
Which is why I'm done talking to you. Too bad I haven't yet met a YE-er who is capable of talking about such things without being a jerk.
As far as I'm aware no YE-er believes God is going to let us sit around here for several more billions of years. Additionally, none of them agree that creation is going to continue in this same mode for forever--it's either going to be destroyed and replaced or repaired. So the question of whether the sun may eventually consume the earth is irrelevant as far as God's sustainment.
As for exactly what jobs does as part of his creating and sustaining, gee, I couldn't specify as I haven't created and sustained a universe lately. You are making the assumption that unless God is violating physical law he is not interacting with the universe. God is perfectly capable of interacting with the universe without breaking physical laws. You cannot demand that I only accept supernatural intervention as long as it's miraculous and then in the same breath agree that someone getting a new job they needed is an answer to prayer.
It's contradictory. If you keep along the tack that you're trying you'll end up being some kind of whacky deist--"God doesn't interact with the world unless he does so via miracles, and he doesn't do miracles so much anymore, so I guess he doesn't interact with the world."
So God created the universe in the Big Bang with all of the properties he wanted. I don't know if we could say he steered outcomes or whether we ought to say outcomes always come out the way he wanted them. . . And God sustains now, meaning if there was no God, we would not be here, and if God decided to randomly give up sustaining, the universe would be cut off like someone hitting Stop on a DVD player.
And now I'm done because it's my prerogative to decide whether or not I want to put up with being insulted, and the answer today is No.
You believe in luck. Okay.
We haven't done any talking, but I'm sure the probability is in favor of your reading this sentence.
No, I'm sure he has a low threshold for boredom.
"For forever"? Ain't that a redundancy?
I haven't sucked on a nipple since I was about a year old, or at least far enough back that I have no conscious memory thereof. But some things we just never forget. Come on now, tell us about when you did create and sustain a universe.
Otherwise, he controls the roll of dice, he makes babies have birth defects, he knocked a tidal wave into Indonesia...
Well if not, he's probably clever at hiding from the physical law police.
Okay, how many breaths does it take? I have been in need of a different job for a long time. Years. I tried prayer for that, and... oh yeah, it really works, don't it? If I ever do get the kind of job I need, it won't be any answered prayer, and He won't be thanked for it.
Maybe we could have saved all our slackjaw here-- and this whole forum-- by just saying that.
Where'd you get that from? Thomas Jefferson? or Archie Bunker's son-in-law, "Meathead"?
Yeah, he holds the deeds to all those properties.
Oh, we could SAY either one, bud.
If there was no God, he wouldn't be there? Well, I was sure you could figure something out. But I guess he's not gonna hit that button on his Don't Violate Destiny player.
If you've read this far, you did put up with it.
I am still awaiting a reasonable answewr to the question: If supernatural intervention is evident in nothing in the universe, why do you believe such a thing? Petrel may have wimped out, but there are plenty of others here who are made in the same mold.. or by the improbability of coincidental non-directed natural forces happen to think as this individual does.
Yes, you are charmingly polite. Some day I would like to meet an intelligent, inquisitive, polite Young Earther. The majority of the YEers I know are lacking in the last two attributes, many are lacking in the first. I don't know that I can say I've ever met any that matched all criteria. Sometimes it makes me sad. Of course, if I ever really did meet an intelligent, inquisitive YEer (polite or rude would not matter) they would probably not be YEer very long because they would go through the same process of examination that many of us have.
I answered your question repeatedly. I really am not sure how your inability to comprehend this can be explained. I guess it just comes down to an inability to temporarily discard your prejudices and look at something from someone else's point of view. This is a useful skill to have, even if you are always right. After all, you can't expect to convince someone else of your infallible correctness if you can't cogently explain what's wrong with their position because you fundamentally do not understand it.
I'll point out that your venemous responses are not justified by anything I have said to you in this thread. I remember you badly from other threads but was heartened to find you were apparently willing to have a civil discussion here, but I guess I was mistaken!
I answered your question repeatedly. I really am not sure how your inability to comprehend this can be explained. I guess it just comes down to an inability to temporarily discard your prejudices and look at something from someone else's point of view. This is a useful skill to have, even if you are always right. After all, you can't expect to convince someone else of your infallible correctness if you can't cogently explain what's wrong with their position because you fundamentally do not understand it.
I'll point out that your venemous responses are not justified by anything I have said to you in this thread. I remember you badly from other threads but was heartened to find you were apparently willing to have a civil discussion here, but I guess I was mistaken!
Your "answers" have been: "God created; God susteains"... "If I lose a pair of socks in the washing machine, does that mean I'm worshipping them?"... "Do you have miracles in your life"... "I haven't created a universe lately"... and quoting from John 1.
None of those answer the question of: if there is no evidence of supernatural beings or actions in the universe, why do you believe such a thing?
Can we do it multiple choice then?...
A) Because I'm brainwashed to believe it.
B) Because the "big bang" couldn't have happened without someone to pull the trigger.
C) Because I just feel like a god has to be there.
D) Becasue I've had an 'experience' with this god which cannot be explained naturally
E) Because of another reason [and nothing about socks, or just repeating the question, or quoting scritpture, for it you believe it it must come from brainwashing, experience, or reasoning].
F) I don't believe it; I was lying.
Which is the best answer?
None of those answer the question of: if there is no evidence of supernatural beings or actions in the universe, why do you believe such a thing?
Can we do it multiple choice then?...
A) Because I'm brainwashed to believe it.
B) Because the "big bang" couldn't have happened without someone to pull the trigger.
C) Because I just feel like a god has to be there.
D) Becasue I've had an 'experience' with this god which cannot be explained naturally
E) Because of another reason [and nothing about socks, or just repeating the question, or quoting scritpture, for it you believe it it must come from brainwashing, experience, or reasoning].
F) I don't believe it; I was lying.
Which is the best answer?