Why is it such a crime to believe in an intelligent creator?

[So]

The fact they came to a CONCLUSION based on absolutely zero actual physical evidence says to me they aren't quite as smart as you want them to be.

Fact: The chance of a creator existing is the same chance that we are all bacteria on turds in a toilet bowl.

"Many smart men have been wrong about many things for endless reasons."
- So, 2011

 

[Kadarin]

I know belief in God is majorly unpopular on this forum but even still I can't help but to ask the question why is it so hard to believe that it's possible that God could have created life?

It's very easy, and not a crime, to believe that God created life. If that's your belief, then good for you I guess.

However, there is NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER that there is a "God", let alone that such a God created life. Given that, your belief (if in fact you do believe in it) is on a par with EVERY other religious and/or mythical belief system regarding the genesis of life.

Take that as you will.

 

[sandorski]

not a Crime, just not Defensible.

 

[slayer202]

it's ok, you're just uneducated

 

[shocksyde]

It's not a crime.

/Thread

 

[Jeff7]

It just seems to...well, have some things in common with a mental illness.

- Believe in an invisible and utterly undetectable, incredibly complex entity.
- Believe ancient book which includes things like magic, talking animals, and people coming back from the dead.
- Believe that this entity is entirely benevolent and loving, while he is also capable of committing genocide.
- Believe that people in this book have heard voices in their head, and then done what those voices instruct them to do.
- Including trying to kill people.

It's just a little bit alarming.

I know belief in God is majorly unpopular on this forum but even still I can't help but to ask the question why is it so hard to believe that it's possible that God could have created life?

No one ever questions that someone invented computers, the internet, the wheel, power tools, automobiles, etc.. All of those things pale in comparison to the complexity of even the most basic cellular life form. Scientists have known for years that the Earth and the universe are governed by the laws of physics. That suggests planning and deliberate intention. The law of gravity, the water cycle, procreation and the DNA strand are all examples of regulated structure. It's hard to believe that examples such as these could have *all* happened by pure circumstance. If that were the case we would be witnessing such miracles as these on a constant basis, we would see new and radical forms of life evolving around us at an unprecedented rate.

Or, it suggests that these things were able to form naturally because the conditions required for their formation happened to exist simply by virtue of the properties of this universe, and the properties of our particular little planetary arrangement. And there are a lot of places in the Universe where there isn't life. Most of the planets in this solar system are lifeless, or at least there's nothing there that we can detect yet. The overwhelming majority of the Universe is uninhabited - most of it is simply empty.) Even on Earth, if you look at the volume of the planet, life exists only as a very thin film on its exterior.
The usual things for this:
- Fire an arrow at a barn, paint a target around where it hit, and marvel at its impressive accuracy.
- A puddle forms in a hole, and the puddle then marvels at how perfectly the hole in the ground fits its shape.


And evolution takes place all over the place. It's why we have constant research into new antibiotics - pathogens adapt quickly. (And don't go saying that that's not evidence of "macro" evolution. If you say that you believe in inches, but don't believe in miles, you're going to collect some funny looks.)

 

[gophins72]

God is a concept by which we measure our pain. I'll say it again.
God is a concept by which we measure our pain.

 

[sourceninja]

This is exactly my point. Since science accepts that fact that we don't know everything, then why is it so unbelievable that God can not enter into the equation?

What we know now is far more than a few hundred years ago or even a few decades ago. So with that basis it is quite possible in an unspecified period of time science may arrive at the conclusion that there may be a very valid reason to conclude that intelligent design could account for the universe around us. It would be very narrow minded to assume that a factor does not exist when we do not have conclusive or concrete evidence to disprove it.

Because what we know about history, human intelligence, psychology, and science has enough evidence to show us man made up religion to help control the population and explain the things they couldn't explain.

 

[soulcougher73]

Because you lack any sort of proof of your claim. It really is that simple.

If you want to go around believing in fairy tales just because then dont be surprised when people call you out on it.

Ive already made my peace on this subject. I dont believe in a God. But if he someday appeared before the world and took away any doubt he was the creator. I would say "That is nice. I know believe you exist, but you are not worthy of worship" and go about my merry day.

 

[sourceninja]

Obviously the concept of cuddly pink cats vs. God are not evenly remotely the same. There are thousands of years of recorded history of mankind's belief in God. So to try to discredit my argument in such a manner is a weak response to say the least. But I'm not trying to incite an argument, I'm just simply stating that science and God are not incompatible ideals.

Your a Hinduism practitioner then? If belief for a long term = truth, it's called the oldest living religion in the world. Or maybe you worship the Egyptian gods? They predate the jewish ones. Or maybe you worship a snake?

"Archaeologists have discovered what seems to be remains of the world's earliest religious worship site in the remote Ngamiland region of Botswana. Here, our ancestors performed advanced rituals, worshiping the python some 70,000 years ago."

Or maybe Sumerian's who's religion was basically THE religion in the Mesopotamian religion around 2500BCE. It influenced basically all the religions in that region after it (Like judaism).

Or maybe you think religions books are factual history books, in which case islam claims Adam as it's first prophet.....

The point is that old and widely believed doesn't make it true. Evidence makes it true. In fact people have long standing beliefs of non-religious nature that are false. I'll list a few.

1) Spacecraft heat up on re-entry because of the friction of the atmosphere.
2) Men have one less rib than women. (ok, this one is kinda religious)
3) The The “Rule of Thumb” refers to beating your wife
4) Adolf Hitler was a vegetarian and didn’t drink alcohol.
5) Alexander Graham Bell invented the telephone.
6) People in Columbus's day thought the world was flat.
7) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_misconceptions
etc.

If anything we have more evidence that newer ideas are more likely to be correct.

 

[CallMeJoe]

I don't really pray, but I am also not so simple minded to think that there may not be something greater than myself.

For once we agree. I find it easy to believe in things greater than you

 

[CallMeJoe]

Is a fart wind? If so is it based on barometric pressure?

Let me stick a barometric pressure probe up your bum and I can demonstrate the pressure differential of a fart.

 

[soulcougher73]

Also when referring back to "the old days" as some sort of proof man has believed in God for an extended period of time is pretty lame. Compare the average intelligence of a person today to 0BC. Compare what we do know via science to a person from 0BC. 99.9% of the people from back then couldnt read of write. They had no concept of the universe other that what they could see with the naked eye. Any little event that happened back then was unexplainable which lead people to make shit up to explain it (aka God). They couldnt explain natural disasters, so God must have done it because you pissed him off was a normal answer then.

Remember when people thought the earth was flat as well?

They lacked any understanding of well,anything really, which is why the resorted to fairy tales to attempt to make sense of it.

 

[BeauJangles]

Like I mentioned before there is much evidence to support mankind's belief in the existence of a God or a higher intelligent life form. Magical key rings, pink cats or any other spur of the moment invention is just talk for the sake of an argument. There is a reason that *every* racial, national or demographic group has expressed a belief in some form of a deity.

And we've spent most of our existence believing that the earth is flat and at the center of the universe. Does that make it true?

 

[JulesMaximus]

Nobody intelligent could have created man. No, the mess on this planet was just an accident.

 

[Beev]

I subscribe to the theory of the multiverse. It makes the most logical sense, and if it turns out to be true, god isn't real (at least "as we know him").

 

[SlitheryDee]

It isn't a crime, it just isn't logical. I find no evidence in the complexity of the universe to suggest a creator. I believe that the theory of evolution explains the complexity and apparent purpose that we see in life much better than anything in the bible or theological ruminations.

The "laws of physics" aren't the same things as traffic laws, but things that are interdependent on each other in ways that may make it impossible for them to have ever been any other way. It may not be that some deity came along and turned the dials of physics to the right settings, but rather that the dials could not be turned to start with. The universe simply does what it can do within the immutable constraints that it must obey. It just so happens that we are one of the things that it can do. It may seem incredible that all the right things should come together to result in us, but the vastness and age of the universe takes care of that quite easily. We are the needle in the haystack. We are the tiny place where, amongst a billion billion places where things didn't go right, it finally did. The problem is that people can't see that, given enough attempts, the improbable becomes nearly inevitable.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

It's hard to believe because there's no evidence for it, just like there's no evidence for unicorns. If your excuse is that there's some things that science still can't explain and you try to explain them with a god you're a moron. Simply because we don't know something now doesn't mean a god did it.

 

[lokiju]

<iframe id="dit-video-embed" width="640" height="360" src="http://static.discoverymedia.com/videos/components/dsc/184f0faeed68c663fbc226ddd2718443d7b11c32/snag-it-player.html?auto=no" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" allowtransparency="true"></iframe>

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

Also when referring back to "the old days" as some sort of proof man has believed in God for an extended period of time is pretty lame. Compare the average intelligence of a person today to 0BC. Compare what we do know via science to a person from 0BC. 99.9% of the people from back then couldnt read of write. They had no concept of the universe other that what they could see with the naked eye. Any little event that happened back then was unexplainable which lead people to make shit up to explain it (aka God). They couldnt explain natural disasters, so God must have done it because you pissed him off was a normal answer then.

Remember when people thought the earth was flat as well?

They lacked any understanding of well,anything really, which is why the resorted to fairy tales to attempt to make sense of it.

Heads up. The Greeks knew the Earth was round during the Greek empire. In other words: 2,000+ years ago.

While we are on the subject, the ancient Greeks also proposed a heliocentric model of the solar system. Both of these were discussed around 300 BC (+/- 100 years) in the time of Aristotle.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_Earth
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heliocentrism#Greek_and_Hellenistic_world

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

It isn't a crime, it just isn't logical. I find no evidence in the complexity of the universe to suggest a creator. I believe that the theory of evolution explains the complexity and apparent purpose that we see in life much better than anything in the bible or theological ruminations.

The "laws of physics" aren't the same things as traffic laws, but things that are interdependent on each other in ways that may make it impossible for them to have ever been any other way. It may not be that some deity came along and turned the dials of physics to the right settings, but rather that the dials could not be turned to start with. The universe simply does what it can do within the immutable constraints that it must obey. It just so happens that we are one of the things that it can do. It may seem incredible that all the right things should come together to result in us, but the vastness and age of the universe takes care of that quite easily. We are the needle in the haystack. We are the tiny place where, amongst a billion billion places where things didn't go right, it finally did. The problem is that people can't see that, given enough attempts, the improbable becomes nearly inevitable.

Basically this.

So the OP wants to know why everything was "fine tuned" for this universe, well one of the current theories (that seems to be gaining evidence supporting it every day) is that of the multiverse and that there are an infinite number of different universes where each one could have different laws and properties involved. It's like having an infinite number of 10,000 sided dice and in order for life to form the specific number 1337 has to come up. It will come up it's just a matter of on which die.

Once you have the universe in which life as we know it can exist, and life as we know it does not mean life cannot form in other ways under different conditions, then how does life happen? Well in our universe there are countless galaxies (Hubble Deep Field and Ultra Deep Field images show a ton of galaxies in a microscopic part of the sky), each with countless stars each of which could have planets. On this near infinite number of planets orbiting stars, there just needs to be one where it's the right distance from the star, has an atmosphere, has liquid water, and all the other things that life on Earth needed to form. Give it ~12 billion years for all the variables to go through other values, and it's really not that surprising that life formed at some point WITHOUT the need for a "creator".

 

[KeithTalent]

It isn't a crime. It only becomes a crime when you try to pass your beliefs on others through legislation, or corrupt the beliefs of foreign cultures under the guise of "help". Keep the shit to yourself, and I don't care what you believe in.

This.

KT

 

[Gigantopithecus]

OP might want to read that.

Believing in an intelligent creator isn't a crime. Believing that intelligent design is science is just flat-out incorrect.

/thread

 

[DrPizza]

This is exactly my point. Since science accepts that fact that we don't know everything, then why is it so unbelievable that God can not enter into the equation?

What we know now is far more than a few hundred years ago or even a few decades ago. So with that basis it is quite possible in an unspecified period of time science may arrive at the conclusion that there may be a very valid reason to conclude that intelligent design could account for the universe around us. It would be very narrow minded to assume that a factor does not exist when we do not have conclusive or concrete evidence to disprove it.

Okay, where do you want God to enter into that equation? What you're talking about is a God of the gaps. "We don't know how this particular part happened, so it must be that God did it!" That's a very weak foundation, because as we develop new tools to study reality, as we are able to probe deeper, with more precision, more accuracy, we discover new things. And, every step along the way, we would be rejecting your God of the gaps.

The process of evolution is quite well understood. That evolution happens is abundantly clear - there is evidence all around us. One particular (of 1000's) example that's pretty easy to discuss is the evolution of various bacteria which have "developed" resistances to antibiotics. If you go to the hospital for an infection, next time tell them you don't want the treatment based on 40 years of evolution. You want the good old penicillin that worked 40 years ago.

Also, we have a LOT of evidence - billions of pieces of evidence that point to what happened on Earth long, long ago. Do you think that continental drift, the existence of one supercontinent (pangea), etc., are all just fantasies of some scientist? There is abundant evidence in the Earth's crust to back track for eons to discover what happened. There is a ton of evidence of what type of life existed on Earth a 2 or 3 billion years ago. And, from those simple life forms that existed back then, there is zero need for an intelligent creator to get from point A back then to point B now. None. It's akin to rolling 5 rocks down a hill; and they take slightly different paths, then declaring that the 4th rock's path was guided by some intelligence. Sure, maybe it was, but there is no evidence for this to have happened, and zero laws of physics were violated in following that path. Have you ever thrown a rock and had a really weird bounce, and said, "wow, that was cool!" - Don't be surprised if you claim that "it was clearly guided by intelligence on that bounce, otherwise it wouldn't have done that" and you're mocked to some degree.

Obviously the concept of cuddly pink cats vs. God are not evenly remotely the same. There are thousands of years of recorded history of mankind's belief in God. So to try to discredit my argument in such a manner is a weak response to say the least. But I'm not trying to incite an argument, I'm just simply stating that science and God are not incompatible ideals.

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

And to answer the OP's question:

It is not a crime to believe in an intelligent creator.

It is wrong to use those beliefs to form any kind of policy, rules, laws, decisions, orders, etc for others to follow. It is wrong to use fear to try to intimidate somebody else to follow the belief. It is wrong to try to indoctrinate children in the public education system to that belief as it lacks proof/evidence. It shows either ignorance at best or a deliberate rejection of the scientific method which is what has actually enabled humanity to get to society today. It makes me question the sanity, rationality, and validity of just about anything the person states as fact. So, if you choose to believe that there was an intelligent creator then I fully support that decision. However, keep in mind those other things that go along with that choice. If you are ok with that, then feel free to indulge yourself by snorting some god off the back of a toilet. Just please don't do it off an alter boy.