@Maars:
I also enjoy your comparison between a creature and its creator and a painting and its painter. I find it quite an illustrating comparison and you did in fact get me thinking about it. There is indeed a certain logic to it.
I also have to give you credit for your statement that one can not be 100% open minded if he doesn't take the theory of one single creator into account. There are however a couple of difficulties with this theory if you want to include it into the balance, which are probably often the reasons for it not to be included.
1)
The theory of one creator that/who is almighty and above everything, is used too often and too easily for my taste to explain questions for which no answers can be found elsewhere. "It is the work of the creator" and terms like that are terms I heard a few times too often and can be used - and in my experience
are used - on any given moment by those who have no explanation for a certain question.
I do understand that this is exactly why it is called a religion or belief - you have to belief it in order to accept it as plausible. But this brings us to point 2.
2)
Blindly (as in without proof) 'believing' does not sit well with those people - including yours truly - who try to think from a scientific point of view. These people look for hard evidence, proof, or at least enough arguments to arrive at a 'beyond reasonable doubt' situation to accept a certain situation as plausible. Simply 'believing' or 'having faith' holds no evidence, proof or arguments what so ever, and therefor goes directly against the way these people think.
Apart from that, there might be more arguments to prove/disprove the theory of one single creator. Some people might point to events shown on the daily news as proof against the theory. In my experience, this is often responded to by the believers of the single-creator theory (ie religious people) with: "Do not question God's ways", or "The Lord works in mysterious ways". These are arguments that hold no factual proof and are void of any form of objectivity, and often cause the discussion to turn ugly or end.
That said, I do agree that it is the duty of every scientist, every self-proclaimed open-minded person and even a simple objective theorist to take into account each and every possible theory, whether or not he finds them plausible. Not doing so would indicate the presence of a certain level of prejudice, which would directly contradict the open-minded and objective nature of these people.
So the theory of one single creator must be taken into account. It must also be said that said people must for the sake of open-mindedness accept the possibility that there are forces at work in the universe which modern day science - or our present intellectual level for that matter - cannot explain (yet). And that these forces might be proven some time in the future not be of religious nature, but possibly of a higher level of nature or dimension than we now cannot comprehend.
I must also point out, however, that this kind of real open-mindedness is quite often lacking in the religious people,
at least talking from my own experience with discussions like these. I don't mean to generalize.
In fact, I have never spoken to a religious person who also sincerely took other possible theories into consideration. They seemed so convinced of their theory of one god, that they dismissed any and all other theories before they even gave it any serious thought. Which often made me wonder why they even took part in the discussion in the first place. Obviously these people don't join such a discussion to take part in it in a constructive manner and observe if from all angles, but to convince the others that their theory (ie religion) is the one and only explanation.
In this perspective, it is interesting to note that there are theories right now that state that what some of us now call 'God' is actually a yet unexplained force of nature that operates at higher dimensions (some talk about 'vibrations') than humans do now. If this would in time turn out to be true, than that would be extremely interesting. It would not only reveal a sentient presence that is older than anything in the universe, but it would also unite science and religion, just like you said.
Whatever may be true, I feel no man should ever think they definitely know how it works. We will never know exactly how the wheels turn, or have any proof one way or another, until that day when we do receive that indisputable proof that nobody can possibly deny.
Until such a time, I must admit that religious people are better off, for they have a certain peace of mind believing that the story of the single creator is the explanation of how everything came to be, whereas scientific minded people will always be looking for a better explanation.
Edit:
Balls! I just couldn't do it without editing!
[Edited on 12-5-2012 by Viper]
The Bible etc
