Posted by MEYER on August 05, 1998 at 22:48:48:
In Reply to: Beginning vs Creation posted by cm on August 05, 1998 at 22:17:15:
I can't speak for Carlos, but I believe he is saying that the BEGINNING implies that no being or intelligence
planned for and implemented the creation of the universe.
And it's not necessary to define a creator. But if you'll notice you even used the term "creation" in your explanation.
The BEGINNING was the result of natural laws of
physics (that we obviously know little about).
Again, I am willing to call it BEGINNING, but it still implies the same thing. An event that was un-explanable and "Bang" to natural laws.
The CREATION, on the other hand, implies that the universe was
consciously created by some kind of intelligence.
Only if that's what you believe. But it's not necessary to believe in an intentional thinking creator to observe the natural universe and it's Beginning, or creation.
I don't think Carlos is playing with words -- he just doesn't
believe in creation as I've described it.
We are all free to believe what we want. The webmaster has stated he wants facts and science and NO wishful thinking and dreams. I ask you, where is the scientific bases for the belief that the universe has a beginning, but no creation? Both ideas are equally unscientific because both are outside of science, and both implie nothing about the creator. For all you know I could believe the creator is a munchkin.