Orange Room Supporter
i think this is where we differ in perspectives. i think the idea of a creator of the universe is very scientific. i am quite certain that our existence is not a random chance. the probability that the moment we are living exists by chance is zero. well let's say epsilon. the amount of events that need to correctly line up since the beginning of the universe till now is utterly and ridiculously tremendous. that's not to tackle the idea of a causal universe springing out of nothingness, that simply defies science.
from a scientific perspective, it is more likely that this universe has been created. that by itself poses a series of questions, the answer to which may not necessarily be religion. but the bottom line is that it is curiosity, not fear, that motivates this line of thinking. why do we exist? where did we come from? where are we heading to? these are all scientific questions, motivated by scientific curiosity, it is simply applied on a very abstract domain, but the time will come when part of the answers might become available.
with that in mind, i am not a big fan of organized religion. but i am an avid supporter of some theories that contribute to the ascension and the progress of the human race in an everlasting quest towards perfection.
Let's suppose the formation of the universe was a series of mutually-exclusive events E1, E2, E3, ...Ei (where i is a natural number and i > 3).
The probability of all these events to happen by chance is P = E1 x E2 x E3 x ... x Ei ≈ 0 (where ≈ means approx equal).
Lets suppose P = ε, where ε ≈ 0, acording to the laws of probability, E, which is the series of the events mentioned above, is considered to be so low probable that it is considered impossible.
This is how I see it.