Dawkin's Universe (evolution, creation, attending, Abraham, God)

[Storm]

Originally Posted by misanthropic_clown

I recently had the pleasure of attending a public lecture by Professor Richard Dawkins at my university. He was, overall, very good, but there was one point that I still feel a little confused about.

In order to bring God into the realm of being a scientific hypothesis, Dawkins claims that the universe would be a much different thing with a God than without one. This point seemed to be skimmed over somewhat, which is why I want to open a discussion on it now.

Do you think that the universe should/would be different if there is a God [note that Dawkins places emphasis on the God of the Abrahamic religions when he says God]?

What do you think a Godly universe should look like, and adversely what should a naturalistic universe look like? What qualities would you be looking for in order to judge one way or another?

I don't think it would look any differently. If an Abrahamic type God exists, this is the universe He created.

As for why He would need evolution and such arguments, I can easily see such a being Creating this universe for the sheer pleasure of doing so. I would.

[camanintx]

Originally Posted by Storm

I don't think it would look any differently. If an Abrahamic type God exists, this is the universe He created.

If we were created in our current form as Abrahamic religions teach, then why do we appear to be the result of biological trial and error?

[Kungfuzed]

Originally Posted by misanthropic_clown

I recently had the pleasure of attending a public lecture by Professor Richard Dawkins at my university. He was, overall, very good, but there was one point that I still feel a little confused about.

In order to bring God into the realm of being a scientific hypothesis, Dawkins claims that the universe would be a much different thing with a God than without one. This point seemed to be skimmed over somewhat, which is why I want to open a discussion on it now.

Do you think that the universe should/would be different if there is a God [note that Dawkins places emphasis on the God of the Abrahamic religions when he says God]?

What do you think a Godly universe should look like, and adversely what should a naturalistic universe look like? What qualities would you be looking for in order to judge one way or another?

Well, I have to assume that Dawkins was referring to ID or young earth creation theory. I haven't read any of his stuff so I'm just guessing at this.

All the stars and galaxies of the universe should be less than 6,000 light years away, or else we wouldn't be able to see them at all. There would be no mountains or platetechtonics because there would be no time for it do develop, not without destroying the earth in the process. There would be no dinosaur bones.

Of course, one could make the argument that God created everything just as it is in order to make it appear as though the universe were billions of years old, but if God were deceving us, why would we need Satan?

[Storm]

Originally Posted by camanintx

If we were created in our current form as Abrahamic religions teach, then why do we appear to be the result of biological trial and error?

The existence of an Abrahamic-type God does not validate the relatively new theology of Biblical Literalism. IOW, even if He IS the Creator, that doesn't make the YECists any less foolish.

[Storm]

Originally Posted by Kungfuzed

Well, I have to assume that Dawkins was referring to ID or young earth creation theory. I haven't read any of his stuff so I'm just guessing at this.

I haven't made it through any of his stuff, but my impression is that he's referring to theism in general.

[camanintx]

Originally Posted by Storm

The existence of an Abrahamic-type God does not validate the relatively new theology of Biblical Literalism. IOW, even if He IS the Creator, that doesn't make the YECists any less foolish.

But even if an Abrahamic God used evolution over millions of years, wouldn't it have been a guided evolution and not the kludge of biological trial and error we see today?

[Storm]

Originally Posted by camanintx

But even if an Abrahamic God used evolution over millions of years, wouldn't it have been a guided evolution and not the kludge of biological trial and error we see today?

This is just a variation on the original question: how would guided evolution look different? My answer is the same: I don't think it would.

[camanintx]

Originally Posted by Storm

This is just a variation on the original question: how would guided evolution look different? My answer is the same: I don't think it would.

If someone intended for us to walk upright, why would they give us a pelvis suited for knuckle dragging?

[Storm]

Originally Posted by camanintx

If someone intended for us to walk upright, why would they give us a pelvis suited for knuckle dragging?