Timeline for Religion After the Discovery of a Multiverse
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
15 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 21, 2015 at 15:35 | comment | added | wedstrom | The bible doesn't claim the Earth is flat. The claims made by this man (answering-christianity.com/earth_flat.htm) for instance are ABSURD, and I would like to point out come from his desire to prove his own religious views. I have never seen a "flat-earth" verse that wasn't a desperate grasp at a straw. Any time someone has tried to use the bible to prove a scientific fact, they have been spectacularly wrong not only scientifically but theologically as well. | |
| Aug 21, 2015 at 10:45 | comment | added | Luaan | @Frostfyre Well, there used to be such a time - if you read the old testament, it's full of actual scientific experiments that unambiguously prove the existence of God (of course, they were most likely faked, but it was expected to be possible to directly observe God's actions) - for example, Elijah's confrontation of Baal's prophets. It's just that as our scientific knowledge has grown, religion had to retreat from the areas lost to science - when everyone knows the world is round, they can no longer accept the Bible as a source of cosmological knowledge, with its flat world claims. | |
| Aug 20, 2015 at 14:33 | comment | added | Vakus Drake | @Frostfyre Yeah I only expect a small number a religious people to actually let any of this change their minds. | |
| Aug 20, 2015 at 14:31 | comment | added | Frostfyre | @VakusDrake Since when was religion predicated on logic? | |
| Aug 20, 2015 at 14:18 | comment | added | Vakus Drake | @Frostfyre I just mean there's a logical impossibility in the idea that something that always existed was created. | |
| Aug 20, 2015 at 14:07 | comment | added | Frostfyre | @VakusDrake Not really, to be honest. For example, every time science proved man's environment was larger, the Judeo-Christian deity was moved farther away so it could be attributed to the environment's creation. The existence of a deity must be taken on faith; science can't disprove a deity's existence. | |
| Aug 20, 2015 at 13:29 | comment | added | Vakus Drake | @Frostfyre yes of course but i'm sure you see the problem in trying to claim your god created something that had always existed. | |
| Aug 20, 2015 at 13:04 | comment | added | Frostfyre | "Who else could create something infinite?" That's easy. Me. Or you. Samuel, Tim B, and bowlturner would probably be pretty good at it too. It's kind of what we do as worldbuilders. :) | |
| Aug 19, 2015 at 21:46 | comment | added | wedstrom | "Behold, and take heed the parable of Cygnus 47-B, a multiverse without God. Accept him or suffer the same fate." Deuteronomy 56:4 | |
| Aug 19, 2015 at 21:39 | comment | added | Vakus Drake | Well it would be hard to call that the end times, if that was the inevitable fate of many universes and this had always been true, after all if all the other universes have been going this way forever then arguing ours will be different would be difficult. | |
| Aug 19, 2015 at 21:35 | comment | added | wedstrom | The similar universes could be a problem. If you see many lifeforms evolving randomly, that could be a problem. Worst could be watching thousands of civilizations dying in the frigid void and the heat death of their uncaring "godless" universe. That would be difficult to deal with. However, that sounds very much like hell/damnation/end times as told in the bible and many other religious works... | |
| Aug 19, 2015 at 21:20 | comment | added | Vakus Drake | Yes humans are already cosmically insignificant but at least our universe is small enough you don't expect identical copies of our planet, at the very least, with a multiverse there are infinite copies of any given universe. Plus the fact our particular universe allows life wouldn't be in any way indicative of design since that's just a inevitability. It wouldn't disprove design (can't prove a negative) but it would eliminate any perceived need for design. As for design, well it is kind of difficult to even argue something could be designed if we know it was always around basically the same. | |
| Aug 19, 2015 at 21:13 | comment | added | wedstrom | No, it would not make it impossible to use the design argument (there is always room for a higher dimension than we are aware of, creation is a lose term anyway, see my organized comment), and no, it would not make us less cosmically significant. If the sheer scope and scale of this universe is not enough to humble someone, learning about infinite multiverse won't either. | |
| Aug 19, 2015 at 20:55 | comment | added | Vakus Drake | Well I suppose the main difference is how much apologetics would have to change, currently most apologists usually deny the possibility of a multiverse. The main reason they deny this of course is that a multiverse makes it impossible to use the design argument, as well as the fact it makes humans cosmically insignificant. | |
| Aug 19, 2015 at 20:46 | history | answered | wedstrom | CC BY-SA 3.0 |