Agnostic.com

1 0

How many times, when trying to discuss the Origins of the Universe with the Religious of this world, have you heard them say that " Something can't be created/made from Nothing therefore God created everything?
What responses, etc, have gotten in return when you merely quote back to them the very first lines of Genesis which " In the beginning God created the Heaven and the Earth," BUT where did God come from to create things, where did God find the materials to create things with since the states( well the ORIGINAL version at least states it) clearly that " In the beginning there was nothing except the word of God, etc, etc."
But we all know that words are just a succession of vibrations passing through the air and they cannot create matter from themselves.
So what is so different, in the eyes of the Religious, between the story of Genesis and the scientific Understanding of the Beginning of the Universe?

Triphid 9 Oct 7
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

1 comment

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

2

I feel that as agnostics, it's okay to not know the answer, but to seek it, and in the meantime just be in awe of how we could have this wonderful life, yet not know exactly how everything started.

Theists would rather just take the easy answer, true or not, because it's simpler - God made it. And they feel it would be blasphemous to ask then "who made God, etc." They are happy with "God just is." Well then why can't they be happy to say "I don't know, let's find out!?"

Yes, BUT in truth curiosity didn't really kill the cat, as the saying goes, it just made it far too complacent.
In prefer to discover and learn for myself rather than to merely sit back and enjoy taking the ' free ride' that it appears so many seem to content themselves with.
After all, "knowledge is no real burden but ignorance or complacency is." Can't remember who the Author of that quote was atm, but it makes sense to me.

I meant the "I don't know, so let's find out" part to be in the "agnostic" paragraph. I don't mean to just be complacent, but at least we don't need to substitute an answer that can't be proven at this time, but leave the question open to discovery.

You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:195884
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.