Regiomontanus
Eastern Orthodox
Rare to nonexistant? Aristotle? I was wrong about the majority of the ancient Egyptians.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Scientists say...
- Thread starter YoursTrue
- Start date
The Bible was written a long time before Aristotle. Greek philosophers were one that first groups to posit an infinitely lasting universe in the Mediterranean and Near Eastern region.
Regiomontanus
Eastern Orthodox
Only considering some of the OT, yes.
PureX
Veteran Member
It's not a question that scientific processes or instruments can answer. It's a philosophical question. "Moses" is a fictional character, but humans even in that time still had access to the philosophical process. They could observe the world around them and speculate about the logic or illogic to be found within what they observed, and then try to follow that reasoning to various conclusions. And one of those conclusions was that everything that is, seems to follow from everything that was. Driving our minds to wonder where or how this event chain we call reality began? We had no idea then just as we have no idea now. But this procession of change would belie the idea that it's perpetual. Why would perpetuity change? That makes no sense.
So we assumed there must be a beginning and an end. Though we couldn't know how or why.
Pretty much every culture viewed the cosmos as having a beginning. Many also had a cyclical view of the cosmos going through cycles of formation and dissolution, as you find from Mesoamerican indigenous belief to Hinduism.
That in mind, I'm not seeing what's special about Genesis saying the universe had a begining.
But there was no Moses. The character could not write anything.
So I suggest you refer to the actual writers and what they wrote.
The beginning is just an arbitrary point in time. It the point at which you decide to start your narrative from. Doesn't mean there was nothing before it, only that whatever came before the start of your narrative ain't going to be covered.
Altfish
Veteran Member
I think one of the big differences between religious explanations and scientific explanations is that scientists are happy to say, "We don't know"
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Well allegedly , we don't even know if Moses ever existed.
But surely the Creation story is in the OT itself. That was written within a cultural sphere where creation by Gods were the dominant paradigm.
Even a broken clock can be right twice a day.
People will ignorantly leap to a multitude &
variety of beliefs or predictions that might
eventually become factual.
In 2000, The Simpsons predicted President Trump.
In 2010, Milhouse predicted Bengt Holstrom would
win the economics Nobel Prize. He did in 2016.
In 1998, Homer correctly calculated the mass of
the Higgs boson. In 2012, scientists verified
Homer's work. The list goes on.
What does it mean if The Simpsons
is more accurate than the Bible?
Last edited:
Of course science does not know, but first according to the present understanding of science "nothing blasted anywhere." The universe expanded form a singularity,Of course you in reality do not accept science so this discussion is fruitless. I believe you are actually intentionally ignorant and clueless as to what science says . . .
YoursTrue
Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Don't scientists agree on a "Big Bang"? I mean they posit that something (a real small concentrated something) exploded. So --put more succinctly, those scientists that believe in the "Big Bang" seem to believe that there was something there before it exploded. Or caused the so-called Big Bang.
YoursTrue
Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
A beginning, like from a "Big Bang" type thing?
YoursTrue
Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Many think he did not. I've been thinking about that lately. For instance, I was reading about Charles Dickens, the English author. There are some things about him that many do not really know but were discussed in a more recent book about his life and relationship with his wife. It's kind of a sad story. But if that had not been revealed people would believe only one side of it, namely, Dickens' side. And why am I saying this? Because many things that happened against the earthly rulers do not come to light. Printing presses and newspapers weren't around thousands of years ago and even if they were, nothing might have been written explaining the real stuff that happened if it looked bad for the ruler. Or the writings simply did not survive.
The Big Bang may be a singularity or not. It is debated.
Rational Agnostic
Well-Known Member
Not sure Moses was a real person. But if he was, his opinion that the universe had a beginning was definitely not unique. There are lots of other creation myths from other cultures. It isn't very difficult or impressive to make a guess that the universe might have had a beginning and invent a god who created it.
That is inaccurate at best.
He did not. It does not make sense to think of the early prophets of Judaism as quite that arrogant.
Yes, it is based on fact and data. There's no other plausible alternative. The Big Bang is not a creation event, but an event that was a change in the state of existing material. So to say a beginning only means a change in the state of existing material, not the beginning of material, or the laws, or the four forces.