Moved Another step towards answering the question of life's origins - religion

[GenesisNemesis]

Sure. It was the asteroid that created it.
So the question is, was the asteroid created deliberately or unintentionally.

And you answer is … God created the asteroid?

No. My question is... "was the asteroid created deliberately or unintentionally."

Cool, so I'm going to take that as further confirmation you don't understand logic, because first you have to fucking know how to determine an asteroid was purposefully designed to answer that question.

 

[Elixir]

Sure. It was the asteroid that created it.
So the question is, was the asteroid created deliberately or unintentionally.

And you answer is … God created the asteroid?

No. My question is... "was the asteroid created deliberately or unintentionally."

Cool, so I'm going to take that as further confirmation you don't understand logic, because first you have to fucking know how to determine an asteroid was purposefully designed to answer that question.

Aw c’mon! There’s a test for that:

Q: Does the asteroid exist? Y/N

A: If N, you need not worry about it.
If Y, Goddidit.

Problem solved, QED!

/ Kreation Science

 

[Lion IRC]

Sure. It was the asteroid that created it.
So the question is, was the asteroid created deliberately or unintentionally.

And you answer is … God created the asteroid?

No. My question is... "was the asteroid created deliberately or unintentionally."

Asteroids are remnants of the formation of the solar system.

Sure.

So, was the solar system created intentionally?

Yes. Created.

If you believe that your god who is omniscient without bound created the universe down to the finest detail, then god created asteroids.

He sure did.

Everything that happens is part of creation and plan, which I take as fundamental Christian belief.

Yep.

For someone like me who aligns with naturalism, there is no intent to the universe.

But do you admit there is intention/agency within the universe? Deliberate causation?

It just is. No meaning and no creator. An endless chain of events with no end and no beginning.

"Just is."
Can I use that same phrase as an argument for God did it?

 

[abaddon]

... god created asteroids.

He sure did.

Everything that happens is part of creation and plan...

Yep.

Are brain tumors in children 1) part of "everything that happens" or 2) not part of "everything that happens"?

It's one or the other.

But do you admit there is intention/agency within the universe? Deliberate causation?

What would Christians model their God on if they didn't have examples of intention/agency within the universe?

And you answer is … God created the asteroid?

No. My question is... "was the asteroid created deliberately or unintentionally."

No, your answer was and is God created the asteroid.

 

[steve_bank]

Learner

So god intentionally crated the solar system, so asteroids are intentional. Does it not follow logically that asteroid strikes on Earth are then intentional?

 

[Lion IRC]

... god created asteroids.

He sure did.

Everything that happens is part of creation and plan...

Yep.

Are brain tumors in children 1) part of "everything that happens" or 2) not part of "everything that happens"?

It's 1.
The answer is 1.
God as already taken account of everything and has a plan in mind for everything that happens - including stuff He didn't cause.

But do you admit there is intention/agency within the universe? Deliberate causation?

What would Christians model their God on if they didn't have examples of intention/agency within the universe?

I cant think of any other way to describe agency, intention, volition, design, creation, deliberate causation.

Am I supposed to differentiate models just because there are lots of examples of intent/agency? Why is there a ring-fence around human (terrestrial) examples such that we have to use a different 'model' to describe the same thing happening elsewhere?

And you answer is … God created the asteroid?

No. My question is... "was the asteroid created deliberately or unintentionally."

No, your answer was and is God created the asteroid.

That's two different answers to two different questions. Go back and re-read the thread.

1. Was it deliberate? Yes or no.
2. If it was deliberate was it God?

 

[steve_bank]

There you have it folks, the loving god who will wipe out life with a flood or a killer asteroid.

If your house is destroyed and your family killed by a tornado it is all part of the plan.

The ultimate fantasy escape from reality.

 

[Lion IRC]

There you have it folks, the loving god who will wipe out life with a flood...

We're still here.

or a killer asteroid.

We're still here.

If your house is destroyed and your family killed by a tornado it is all part of the plan.

Tornadoes and forest fires have been known about for a lot longer than we have been building houses made of wooden sticks.

The ultimate fantasy escape from reality.

Fantasy escapism would be pretending that nothing can harm us.

I would think someone was deluded if they thought you could go swimming where sharks eat and blame God if they get bitten.

 

[steve_bank]

Weak response, I believe you get the point Lion even if you will not acknowledge it.

There is no human choice for tornadoes, earthquakes, asteroid strikes, and infant birth defects.

 

[pood]

I would think someone was deluded if they thought you could go swimming where sharks eat and blame God if they get bitten.

This is really pathetic.

Weak response, I believe you get the point Lion even if you will not acknowledge it.

There is no human choice for tornadoes, earthquakes, asteroid strikes, and infant birth defects.

Um … Lion?

 

[bilby]

I would think someone was deluded if they thought you could go swimming where sharks eat and blame God if they get bitten.

Well, it is an inescapable logical consequence of an omnipotent and omnicognisant God that He is responsible for literally everything that happens.

I suspect that you are not actually groping for the obvious conclusion that, as it would be delusional for such a swimmer to expect not to be bitten, it is therefore delusional to believe in an omnipotent and omnicognisant God.

But that is where your logic leads.

And the logic works both ways.

What if (for example) somebody were to be placed in a lion's den, and credited God when they didn't get bitten? Would that too be delusional?

 

[Lion IRC]

Weak response, I believe you get the point Lion even if you will not acknowledge it.

No. I get the point you're trying to make.
I "acknowledge" the point you are trying to make.

You mustn't confuse a persons disagreement with you as their...refusing to "get the point".

There is no human choice for tornadoes, earthquakes, asteroid strikes, and infant birth defects.

Well, ackshually....

There are many elements of choice in these areas. I gave the example of the person who chooses to swim with sharks. The person who knows that tornado beats house made of sticks. And yes, we can choose to continue living notwithstanding the slim chance that sometime in the next million years an asteroid might hit the earth.

There's also choices made with respect to infant birth defects. It's literally referred to as a pro-choice position.

 

[steve_bank]

Lion, If your reasoning helps you sleep peacefully at night then good for you.

 

[Swammerdami]

Hi Lion.

I'm curious about your viewpoint. First let me summarize what I've gleaned.

God created the universe down to the tiniest detail. In that universe are creatures with agency (volition) of their own.
Q: Does the Omnimax God know in advance what decision those creatures will make?
("In advance" is a bad phrase here, since the Omnimax God exists OUTSIDE time and space, no?)

Q. Or is it a "game"? God could know how the creatures will behave, but chooses to remain ignorant and savor the pleasure or pain of witnessing human decisions?

Q. What are the "creatures with agency" anyway? Humans surely. Other animals? Plants?

I think Leibniz's view is interesting (and it segues into Tegmark's view). God created "the best possible universe." A universe with much beauty but WITHOUT cancer or evil would have been incompatible with some mathematical constraints.

 

[pood]

I think Leibniz's view is interesting (and it segues into Tegmark's view). God created "the best possible universe." A universe with much beauty but WITHOUT cancer or evil would have been incompatible with some mathematical constraints.

I’d love to see the maths on that.

Also how it is that God also created a perfect place with no cancer or evil called heaven that apparently was not incompatible with some mathematical constraints.

 

[Elixir]

how it is that God also created a perfect place with no cancer or evil called heaven that apparently was not incompatible with some mathematical constraints

That's a QUESTION, right? And a damn good one at that.
Presumably it (heaven) is in a different universe. At least different enough that the same mathematical constraints that exist in this one, do not apply. Remember the omnipotent part? It means that God can create universes willy nilly, right? If every person's heaven requires its own set of physical attributes and mathematical constraints (or lack thereof), no problem. That's omnipotence for you!

 

[Elixir]

we can choose to continue living notwithstanding the slim chance that sometime in the next million years an asteroid might hit the earth

Slim chance? Your own link says "An object about 100m across should arrive every 1,000 years", which means that over the next million years, it is PROBABLE that 1000 (a thousand) of them are likely to hit earth. Not a slim chance, a virtual certainty,
(For reference, the Tunguska object is estimated at 130 feet - less than half that diameter, way less than a quarter of the mass)

ETA: Oooops! Forgot to check... this is the "religion forum" part of the OOL discussion. My apologies... falsity is okay here. Never mind my nitpick.

 

[Elixir]

I LOVE that cartoon. The expression on #87's face, the body language of #50 in the background, the reporter's reaction...
What a great talent to be able to convey all that at once...

 

[Lion IRC]

Hi Lion.

I'm curious about your viewpoint. First let me summarize what I've gleaned.

God created the universe down to the tiniest detail. In that universe are creatures with agency (volition) of their own.
Q: Does the Omnimax God know in advance what decision those creatures will make?

He has the ability to know.

("In advance" is a bad phrase here, since the Omnimax God exists OUTSIDE time and space, no?)

I dont think God is confined to being inside or outside (what we call) time.

Q. Or is it a "game"? God could know how the creatures will behave, but chooses to remain ignorant and savor the pleasure or pain of witnessing human decisions?

I don't think God needs to choose one way or the other. He already knows, in a universal way, the causes and implications of pain/pleasure. And since He knows that everything in the long run will 'turn out well' He may decide not to micro manage every minute detail in the short term.

Q. What are the "creatures with agency" anyway? Humans surely. Other animals? Plants?

Humans yes. Other animals, yes, to some degree. Plants? Maybe. Hard to measure. And scripture doesn't seem to answer the question.

I think Leibniz's view is interesting (and it segues into Tegmark's view). God created "the best possible universe." A universe with much beauty but WITHOUT cancer or evil would have been incompatible with some mathematical constraints.

I think we are on a journey towards the best of all possible worlds. And that's a better possible world than one where no journey ever took place.

Could God make a better possible world without us in it? Sure. But why?

 

[Lion IRC]

we can choose to continue living notwithstanding the slim chance that sometime in the next million years an asteroid might hit the earth

Slim chance? Your own link says "An object about 100m across should arrive every 1,000 years", which means that over the next million years, it is PROBABLE that 1000 (a thousand) of them are likely to hit earth. Not a slim chance, a virtual certainty,

Do you want to stop living because sometime in the next million years there MIGHT be an asteroid which MIGHT be big enough to MAYBE wipe out an unknown percentage of life on Earth?

(For reference, the Tunguska object is estimated at 130 feet - less than half that diameter, way less than a quarter of the mass)

The Tunguska object/asteroid impact event happened in 1908. We're still here.