Why are we here?

[Keith&Co.]

First, you are presupposing that God is supernatural.

Uh, no. Not 'presuppose.' That's my understanding of the term. it's what makes 'gods' different from 'really influential men' or 'powerful natural forces.' And i see absolutely no reason not to do so.

That may be an incorrect assumption.

The word you want is 'definition.' You need to supply a 'definition' of gods that may exclude supernatural powers and traits, yet remain recognizable as describing a god.

God may simply be the end of all natural development and, thus, where evolution is leading.

No. NOW you're redefining god AND evolution to suit your agenda. It's hard to convince people of your theory if you cannot use human words in a manner to express ideas except by saying these words don't really mean what they mean.

Second, given that, there is no need to look for a process that moves something from natural to supernatural.

Well, since i haven't 'given' you that, that's meaningless.
But further, as i understand your thesis, the purpose of the universe is to create God, then God will have the power to travel back in time, and create the universe, or at least create us, so that we can create him. Or Him. This is not a natural being. Your thesis defeats itself.

Third, to make this conclusion, there is no need for me to say exactly how a god would evolve.

So, argument by ignorance. I really wish i still had my creationist bingo cards.

Assuming this reality survives to that point and the evolutionary process is not interrupted.

Absolutely wrong.
Stop misusing words like that.
The evolutionary process does not work like that.
It doesn't have a goal.
And it only produces traits that are just good enough to get by. Your deity recursion scenario, even if it's true, will not be the result of evolutionary processes. Make up a new term because evolution ain't up to what you need.

If you believe the first answer to "how we came to be?" (random noise), then this assumption should make sense as part of the natural process.

You're jumping back and forth between assumption and conclusion, neither of which you're using correctly.
Just say 'fantasy.'

On the other hand, if you believe the second answer (God creation), then you can feel comfortable that this reality will get to that point as it has already happened (recursion).

So....WE somehow create God (not evolve, because i have a vocabulary). That omnipotent but still natural God then has the brilliant idea to recreate the universe that just created Him.
Why didn't the created Creator just create Himself at the start of all time?

As you've said, logic fails in the face of omnipotence, but this is just stupid. Having been created once, God then must shoulder the burden of His own creation, which has already been accomplished? Why? Is He hoping that on the second time through He comes out with a bigger dick?

 

[C_Mucius_Scaevola]

Sung to the tune of "Auld Lang Syne"...

We're here because
We're here because
We're here because we're here


We're here because
We're here because
We're here because we're here

Any other answer involving a creator god is subject to infinite regress, i.e. "We're here because god created us ... ok, then why is god here? Because he/she/it was created ... ok, so why is his/her/its creator here?" etc.
Any other answer involving an ultimate purpose for humanity is a misapplication of teleology.


We're here because
We're here because
We're here because we're here

We're here because
We're here because
We're here because we're here ...

 

[KeepTalking]

Let's examine your quote in the surrounding context then:

Whether you believe that some "random noise" caused something to be created from nothing (I believe Stephen Hawking has the math on this) or that there was some "divine" influence (ie. God or gods), this fundamental question begs for an answer as not only does it talk about where we came from, but also where we might be going. I see a possible answer to the fundamental question that is both religious and scientific, but I'm not going to reveal it yet (that sounds like I'm making myself out to be special, but its not my intent). I'd rather see if others have a useful answer to the fundamental question that maybe I didn't think of or if others come to the same conclusion I have.

In that post you are actually stating that they are the same question, so the two possible answers you supplied would apply to both interpretations. You seem to be winging it at this point, but maybe you can put the problem to rest by revealing your super secret answer to the two questions that are one, but somehow have different sets of answers.

Okay, you caught me. The answer that I'm heading towards for "why are we here?" is "to create God".

Well then, we've already created a few thousand gods, so can we go home now?

In the case of "random noise" (ie. something from nothing and evolution takes over), this would be the natural end of evolution.

No, the natural end of evolution would be the end of life. Once there is nothing left to evolve, there will be no more evolution.

In the case of an all-powerful, all-seeing God, this would be the answer to how God came to be (he created himself *OR* he's creating a companion). It provides a much more satisfying answer than "divine plan".

Why does the answer need to be satisfying? The preferred answers are those that are true, not those that one finds satisfying.

 

[Keith&Co.]

To paraphrase Arthur C. Clarke -- any sufficiently advanced natural capability is indistinguishable from the supernatural.

That sounds like a good 'gotcha' but it's only a soundbite. It doesn't help your cause, any at all.

Clarke compared technology to magic, where 'magic' means an action with no linear connection to the reaction. You pour water on the ground and for some reason rain falls from the sky. If you can demonstrate that the action does have a series of linear effects that produce rain, it's no longer magic.
For technology to be 'advanced' enough to be like magic, you only need to not understand the connection.

Most people don't really understand what happens when you throw a light switch. That ignorance makes the light coming on in the overhead pretty much magic.

But if you're going to claim that natural processes can produce the qualities we associate with gods, or that you associate with your God, you can't just appeal to ignorance. Hell, in this paraphrase you're depending on ignorance, as a placeholder for an explanation about just what you mean by 'advanced natural abilities.'

You're trying to blur the distinction, but not because you have any evidence that it's a false distinction. You just need it blurred or removed in order to make your story look credible.

A time-traveling omnipotent deity, who created dinosaurs in order to make a world that'd make people who make him, but all, you know, natural.

 

[DBT]

Indistinguishable in a relative sense....indistinguishable for those who do not know how it works, like modern appliances would appear magical to a Paleolithic hunter gatherer, but nonetheless working on the basis of physical principles of matter/energy.

Yes. Scale this up to the creation of this reality. The process may be natural, but not yet known.

''Natural'' implies no external agency as the Creator.