Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Tribute Thread For the Recently Raptured Faith
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 1293 of 1677 (846222)
12-31-2018 3:16 PM
Reply to: Message 1288 by ringo
12-31-2018 10:44 AM


ringo writes:
That doesn't answer the question of why He existed before He created anything.
Time is the way we experience change in this life and it is all we know. I understand God to be outside of time as we experience it, and that He is infinite.
I realize that this is belief without evidence, but to my mind it makes a lot more sense than believing in an infinite regression of processes to produce us. There is a good chance you will disagree.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1288 by ringo, posted 12-31-2018 10:44 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1299 by ringo, posted 01-02-2019 2:11 PM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 1311 of 1677 (846655)
01-09-2019 8:33 PM
Reply to: Message 1299 by ringo
01-02-2019 2:11 PM


ringo writes:
hat still doesn't answer the question. Time isn't really relevant. If you can ask why the chemicals exist, it's just as valid to ask why God exists.
I agree.
ringo writes:
But you are the one who's introducing an infinite regression. I'm perfectly willing to stop at chemicals that "just exist". You are the one who wants to put God before the chemicals. I'm just pointing out that that introduces the infinite regression. Where did the God come from? And wherever He came from, where did the "wherever" come from? Etc.
If we're going to stop somewhere, we might as well stop at something that actually exists - i.e. chemicals.
There is no reason to stop at chemicals. The infinite regression argument can be used to refute either position. I don't see it as an argument for either position is my point.
I do however see the anthropic principle as pointing towards intelligent origins.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1299 by ringo, posted 01-02-2019 2:11 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1312 by Percy, posted 01-09-2019 9:10 PM GDR has replied
 Message 1315 by Phat, posted 01-10-2019 3:38 AM GDR has not replied
 Message 1320 by ringo, posted 01-10-2019 11:00 AM GDR has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 1313 of 1677 (846663)
01-10-2019 2:18 AM
Reply to: Message 1312 by Percy
01-09-2019 9:10 PM


Percy writes:
Ringo just gave you a very good reason, one you're just ignoring - chemicals actually exist. You ignore answers a lot and instead respond with some equivalent of "I'm just sticking with what I already said."
Although I suppose one could stop at chemicals, there is a regression from that point. We know where chemicals come from - they form by combining elements. And we know where elements come from - they're cooked in the furnaces of stars and in the explosions of nova and supernova. And we know where stars come from - they condense from interstellar gas clouds. And we know where the interstellar gas clouds come from - they have two sources, either primordial very light elements left over from the Big Bang (hydrogen, helium, lithium and beryllium) or material spewed into space by nova and supernova, the first stars forming from the primordial elements. And we know where the primordial elements came from - they condensed out of a superhot quark-gluon plasma. It gets more speculative before that so I'll just say that the various hypotheses are based upon evidence, unlike any of your ideas.
You make my point. It requires process after process after process. Where did the first process come from? It's turtles all the way down.
We form our own subjective opinions about whether or not there is an intelligent root cause or not.
Percy writes:
As I've told you before, science not only does not see an infinite regression as a necessity, it doesn't even necessarily see it as meaningful since time possibly didn't exist until the Big Bang.
But then the same criteria can be used for God. There is no requirement then to have a creator for God as it isn't meaningful as time possibly didn't exist before the Big Bang.
Percy writes:
You, on the other hand, absolutely have the problem of an infinite regression.
No more than a materialist.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1312 by Percy, posted 01-09-2019 9:10 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1317 by Tangle, posted 01-10-2019 5:05 AM GDR has replied
 Message 1318 by Percy, posted 01-10-2019 9:17 AM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 1325 of 1677 (846735)
01-11-2019 2:28 AM
Reply to: Message 1317 by Tangle
01-10-2019 5:05 AM


Tangle writes:
Sure, it's process all the way down.
Tangle writes:
We'll let you know when we find out for sure, but at the moment it's probable that it popped into existence without the need for one.
Do you think that we will ever find out what caused it to pop?
Tangle writes:
One thing is certain though, if and when we do have the answer, neither you nor I will understand it.
In my case that's a given.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1317 by Tangle, posted 01-10-2019 5:05 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1327 by Tangle, posted 01-11-2019 3:49 AM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 1326 of 1677 (846736)
01-11-2019 2:52 AM
Reply to: Message 1318 by Percy
01-10-2019 9:17 AM


Percy writes:
To be more declarative and painfully clear this time, our universe began with the Big Bang. The most widely accepted view is that time began with the Big Bang. We cannot talk about what came before the Big Bang because time did not exist before the Big Bang. Time related words like "before" have no meaning when there is no time. Whatever caused the Big Bang did not happen before the Big Bang because there was no before.
Absolutely but that is the case whether you are talking about an infinite regression of processes or of gods.
Percy writes:
Why does there need to be a Big Bang in your God scenario? You're already picking and choosing what you believe without evidence. Why, suddenly, are you letting your ideas about God be guided by Big Bang evidence? Does your God exist within time, or is he outside time, and what is your evidence?
There is absolutely evidence for what we are saying about the Big Bang, while there is no evidence for this God you keep speaking of. Tell you what. Let's trade objective evidence for the root cause of the universe one for one. I'll go first with evidence for the Big Bang: the cosmic background radiation at a temperature of 4.2K discovered by Penzias and Wilson in 1964, for which they received the Nobel Prize. This is my first item of objective evidence that the Big Bang is real.
Your turn. What's your first piece of objective evidence that God is real.
OK Your evidence for the root cause of the universe is evidence for the Big Bang using cosmic background radiation. Well firstly the CBR was a result of the Big Bang. I accept the scientific fact of the BB. However the BB is not a root cause. It just happens at t=0 to be the first instance of physicality as we perceive it.
'
It tells us nothing about why the BB happened.
My evidence is that the world that we perceive requires a conscious observer, either directly or by measurement. Consciousness then seems to be a foundational property of the universe. With that knowledge it is then reasonable to believe that the universe resulted initially from a consciousness outside of our experience of time.
Percy writes:
Now materialist is a term of disparagement?
Not at all. I'm using it in this sense from Webster's.
quote:
: a theory that physical matter is the only or fundamental reality and that all being and processes and phenomena can be explained as manifestations or results of matter

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1318 by Percy, posted 01-10-2019 9:17 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1332 by Percy, posted 01-12-2019 9:41 AM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 1328 of 1677 (846766)
01-11-2019 1:39 PM
Reply to: Message 1327 by Tangle
01-11-2019 3:49 AM


Tangle writes:
Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist.
Spontaneous creation sounds almost fundamentalist.
Tangle quoting Hawking writes:
"It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going."
I don't see it as a matter of needing to invoke God, I'm simply saying that the world as we perceive it leads IMHO, to believing that an intelligent consciousness is a more likely reason for our existence than a long stream of endless processes back to a a mindless spontaneous creation.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1327 by Tangle, posted 01-11-2019 3:49 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1329 by Tangle, posted 01-11-2019 2:07 PM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 1330 of 1677 (846776)
01-11-2019 2:35 PM
Reply to: Message 1329 by Tangle
01-11-2019 2:07 PM


Tangle writes:
Just sounds like more hard and impossible physics to me. You either accept the experts ideas or forget all about it. For example, it seems proven that universe is expanding. But the universe is all there is, so what is it expanding into? I'm not looking for an answer; there is an answer but it's incomprehensile.
Can I hear an AMEN.
I did say that we don't need to invoke God but that the choice is between an intelligent consciousness or mindlessness. I simply said that IMHO the intelligent consciousness is the most reasonable answer. In either case it is our subjective belief.
Tangle writes:
What are you going to do if/when it's shown that it did actually spontaneously pop up? Or in the other hypothesis, that it has always existed?
It will be another Darwin moment.
It may be a Darwin moment but it still wouldn't negate theism. For that matter the BB was rejected by non-theistic scientists initially as it had theistic overtones.
I have no problem with the idea of an infinite universe in both time and space. Personally I very speculatively believe that we are an emergent property of an infinite reality.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1329 by Tangle, posted 01-11-2019 2:07 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1331 by Tangle, posted 01-11-2019 2:58 PM GDR has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 1341 of 1677 (846902)
01-13-2019 11:01 AM
Reply to: Message 1332 by Percy
01-12-2019 9:41 AM


Percy writes:
It would have been far more appropriate for you to repeat your reply to Tangle in your previous message, that it's a given you don't understand this. A regression involves time and is a series of "befores" - if there is no time there can be no regression.
I get that Percy, but my point is that it is the same argument whether you talk about a regression of gods or processes. It's still turtles all the way down.
Percy writes:
"Why" is not a science question unless you mean it in the sense of, "What caused this to happen?" If you do mean it in this latter sense then observational evidence has spawned several promising theories. But if you do actually mean "why" then that places you on exceptionally weak ground, since you can't answer any of the "why" questions for religion, such as why a loving and compassionate God allows innocent babies to suffer and die.
I have dealt with that numerous times and yes, suffering is a difficult question for a Christian to answer. I'll repeat what I've said before. Firstly a loving compassionate god is a far better explanation for why there are creatures who are able to love altruistically and minimize suffering than are blind processes. I think that we have agreed that deep down people realize that the golden rule should be foundational to humanity whether they actually live it out or not.
Concerning the suffering caused by humans is concerned, and you've heard a thousand times. you can't have the ability to choose to love sacrificially if you can't choose to love the self even to the detriment of others. Entropy seems to be a necessity for a world with onlty one direction of time which results in natural disasters.
Also from from a Christian stand point, this isn't the end and that with new creation there will a world where the wolf lies down with the lamb and there is no suffering.
Percy writes:
You haven't actually described any evidence. My evidence that the Big Bang is real is that antenna and satellite probes detect electromagnetic radiation of just the right temperature required by theory. You can read all about the evidence for the cosmic microwave background radiation at Wikipedia or at a huge number of other sources on the Internet. Please provide some equivalently hard evidence that your God is real. Or answer any of a number of other questions you've avoided, such as does your God exist within time or outside time, and what is your evidence?
I believe with only subjective evidence that we are an emergent property within a much greater reality. For us time flows in only one direction but in the greater reality of which we are only 4.5% time and space are infinite.
I have no evidence for that but it forms a way of understanding things which fits with both my Christian understanding as well as with my ultra minimal understanding of relativity and QM.
Percy writes:
Let us not play games. You used the word "materialist" in a pejorative manner, as if materialists and spiritualists were at odds with spiritualists having the superior viewpoint. I replied that you are as much a materialist as everyone else, in other words, that we are all, by necessity, materialists because we live in the real world.
No I didn't. I meant it is the same sense as I would use the term Christian, atheist, secular humanist etc.
Percy writes:
But the more fundamental question, and another one that you've avoided thus far, is why you're trying to tie your immaterial spiritual beliefs to evidence from the material world.
Even Paul wrote that we can see God in the physical world. IMHO it only makes sense it learn from all the sources that we have, whether it be holy books, philosophy or science. Ultimately the absolute truth has to have all of this in harmony.
I haven't had a lot of time to deal with EvC lately and the next couple of weeks is going to be the same. Sorry if I don't get back to everyone.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1332 by Percy, posted 01-12-2019 9:41 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1361 by Percy, posted 01-14-2019 5:36 PM GDR has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


(1)
Message 1354 of 1677 (846941)
01-13-2019 7:52 PM
Reply to: Message 1332 by Percy
01-12-2019 9:41 AM


Suffering with a loving God
Percy writes:
But if you do actually mean "why" then that places you on exceptionally weak ground, since you can't answer any of the "why" questions for religion, such as why a loving and compassionate God allows innocent babies to suffer and die.
Hi Percy
I got thinking about this and because it is such an important issue I wanted to give you a fuller reply from another perspective.
I agree, as I said, that suffering is the issue that we have to face up to as Christians. After answering your post I was sitting in church this morning and thinking about this. I don’t pretend to have good answers but I do find comfort in my Christian faith that gives me hope. I would add though that even though it is hope and faith, it does not mean that my beliefs are in error. We all have hopes and or faith that something we want to happen, actually does happen.
I lost my birth father shortly before my 1st birthday as he was an RCAF navigator during the war and died in service. Mom married again when I was 3 to a man who became Dad and was a loving father and a wonderful example of ethical living. I never felt less loved than my 2 brothers who were his natural children.
I grew up in what IMHO was the best time and location, (Alberta Canada), that there has ever been. I had the opportunity of education and a wide open future and at a time when being a teenager was far easier that it is today. I truly feel like I am one of the most privileged people that has ever lived.
Today I volunteer with refugee families that have come here with virtually nothing having lived in countries where their lives were in constant danger, where they weren’t sure where their next meal was coming from, and where there was little or no freedom. I have a music program where I work with seniors, in many cases suffering from debilitating dementia. (Music seems to trigger a response in their brains.) I use this same music program with a group, all younger than myself, who suffer from various mental illnesses such as schizophrenia. There is a guy who started coming to our church a couple of years ago after coming out of prison for offenses that were the result of alcoholism, and I and others have been doing what we can to help him get his life in order. He grew up in various foster homes and then when he finally found a home where he was loved his foster mother died at the hands of an British mass murderer while she was visiting in Thailand. I have, as we all have, friends who have had their children die well before their time. I did the eulogy for a wonderful woman who was my cousin just one year after she had having given birth to my god-daughter.
My point in all of that is that I get the argument about rationalizing the suffering. Yes, it bothers me that in addition to all that I have and have had, I can look at my kids and grand-kids and they are all healthy and doing well, while others have little or nothing and watch their children going hungry. How do I deal with that as a Christian who has led a life of exceptional privilege? Why have I had the life that I have had, while others have suffered so much through no fault of their own.
I am not saying that I have evidence for how I rationalize this incongruity, but it does flow from my other Christian beliefs. In a nutshell I believe and live in the hope that ultimately there will be perfect justice for all. I don’t know what that looks like, but I believe that this justice will come from a loving, forgiving and merciful God, that will somehow balance the suffering endured in this world in the world to come. As part of that I see the vocation for those like myself to not just wring our hands and decry the injustice, but to do what we can to alleviate it. None of us, and me more than most, will do all that we should do, but at least we can get a start on it. In the Anglican church we have a prayer of general confession where we pray to be forgiven for all that we have done AND left undone. That always gives me pause.
I also find it helpful to think that God reaches out to everyone with His still small voice, but in particular He used a small nomadic tribe that were almost continuously beaten down and often enslaved by their more powerful neighbours to reveal Himself. When it came to choosing His messiah, His anointed one, the one who embodied His full nature and spiritual wisdom, He used a bastard child of the peasant class within this beaten down society. The disciples of Jesus were simple fisherman and even an outcast who collected taxes for the Romans. He spent time with and loved the lepers, the prostitutes and the pretty much despised Samaritans. Jesus said things like from whom much is given much is expected, and the first shall be last and the last first.
I believe and trust that God fully understands and suffers with the sufferers, and that ultimately we will see and understand perfect justice.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1332 by Percy, posted 01-12-2019 9:41 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1355 by Tangle, posted 01-14-2019 4:08 AM GDR has replied
 Message 1363 by Percy, posted 01-14-2019 6:25 PM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 1357 of 1677 (846959)
01-14-2019 6:18 AM
Reply to: Message 1355 by Tangle
01-14-2019 4:08 AM


Re: Suffering with a loving God
Tangle writes:
The problem of suffering has been worried over by religious folk for thousands of years and like you, they haven't got an answer. It's impossible to to reconcile the way life and death works on earth and a loving god that cares for us. You know that. Your only answer is that you believe it's all be ok in the end. That is no answer to the child dying slowly in pain of some hideous disease or the mother forced to watch the process.
That is a devastating quote from Hitchens and it is hard to imagine that kind of evil. All I can again say if we can't choose evil we can't choose that which is good.
A Canadian named Jean Vanier gave up a life wealth and privilege to work with people who were developmentally challenged. There are millions of people who give of themselves, including some their whole lives to work to help others less fortunate.
Frankly I have no problem with people like yourself and Hitchens who reject any deity based on the the suffering of others. The hope is that people like yourself who are so repulsed by the suffering also feel that it is their call to do something about it. As a Christian I see it as God's call for all of us. As an atheist I would hope that you see it as humanities call to give of yourself to alleviate suffering.
I would also add that yes we should feel deeply about the suffering in the world, but at the same time we should rejoice in the joy of others in the very same world. There is a great deal of that as well.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1355 by Tangle, posted 01-14-2019 4:08 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1358 by Phat, posted 01-14-2019 7:51 AM GDR has not replied
 Message 1359 by Tangle, posted 01-14-2019 10:26 AM GDR has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 1376 of 1677 (847027)
01-15-2019 8:50 PM
Reply to: Message 1332 by Percy
01-12-2019 9:41 AM


I have a couple of minutes and I would like to go off on a bit of a tangent.
I am not at home and I can not get the usual brackets etc on to work on this foreign language computer. I can not get anything but the basic letters.
AdminPhat writes:
I'll help.
percy writes:
A regression involves time and is a series of "befores" - if there is no time there can be no regression.
I actually did get that the first time and I agree. My point was that if you are going to invoke that rule nor a non-theistic position then a theist should be able to invoke the same. If it is not turtles all the way down for the non-theistic position then it is the same for the theistic position.
Also, I would like to bring up Paleys argument about the evolution of the eye. I accept the evolutionary answer that the eye could evolve with a series of mutations rather than requiring the whole eye to be complete from day one.
It seems to me however that we should look at that more deeply. If evolution is a mindless process that has resulted in the creatures we have today, and that it all started without any cellular life, how would a blind process know that the sense of vision was something that existed at all in order to begin the evolutionary process that resulted in vision being a reality? The same is true for the evolutionary processes for any of our senses.
Also, you said in another post when I mentioned the observer effect that even though there was no one there to measure or observe anything that the rocks etc of our world would still exist. How do you know that or is it simply something you believe. If you know it then how do you know it?
There is the age-old question that if a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it does it still make a sound. Assuming that there is no conscious life around I would say no it does not. It is not a sound until it is perceived as sound. It is only an increased movement of airwaves. Possibly it is the same for observing rocks.
Edited by AdminPhat, : fixed quotes
Edited by AdminPhat, : No reason given.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1332 by Percy, posted 01-12-2019 9:41 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1378 by AZPaul3, posted 01-15-2019 10:09 PM GDR has replied
 Message 1381 by Percy, posted 01-16-2019 7:47 AM GDR has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 1377 of 1677 (847028)
01-15-2019 9:09 PM
Reply to: Message 1363 by Percy
01-14-2019 6:25 PM


Re: Suffering with a loving God
Again it is primarily only the letters that correspond with what is on the keyboard on this computer, so I am limited to pretty much that.
Percy writes:
My mother grew up on a farm not too distant from Calgary.
Mine did too except it was a ranch in the Irricana area just NE of Calgary.
Percy writes:
But you can't really believe this since it makes no sense to alleviate any suffering in this world if all will be made right in the next.
Why not? If I am right that there is a next world where there will be perfect justice it makes perfect sense to do our best to make that a reality in the present. Jesus told us to pray thy kingdom come on Earth as in Heaven.
Percy writes:
Are you maybe thinking more of your own reward?
That is not my motive. It is my belief, which is also scriptural, is that it is not about what we do but about how our hearts desire that we live our lives. Do we truly believe that sacrificial love is what we desire or we all about the self? We have all lived in different circumstances and some are able to respond to their hearts belief in sacrificial love more than others. As Jesus said. to whom much is given much is expected.
Percy writes:
Or are you maybe just filling in a religious explanation for the normal human impulse to relieve suffering?
That is a bit of a chicken and egg question. As a Christian, I go with the impulse coming from God whereas an atheist would go with your statement. It is a philosophical question and our answers are all subjective.
Edited by AdminPhat, : fixed quotes

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1363 by Percy, posted 01-14-2019 6:25 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1382 by Percy, posted 01-16-2019 9:47 AM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 1379 of 1677 (847030)
01-15-2019 11:14 PM
Reply to: Message 1378 by AZPaul3
01-15-2019 10:09 PM


AZPaul3 writes:
GDR, really. I think you actually already know.
Light from our star is energy. Powerful energy. Photons do strange and wonderful things to chemistry. Early microbes were not confined to the dark. Any strange and wonderful things that happened to even a small portion of a microbe's chemistry that could be used as a tripwire for when whatever kind of light was present or not, is just sitting there asking, sorta, to be stumbled and bumbled into something useful ... like a light detector. Modification and reproduction do the rest. Octopus eyes. The best on the planet.
And the vast majority of the various convergent evolutionary paths of Earth eyes respond most effectively to the same rather narrow range of light frequencies. Just so happens that narrow range corresponds directly to the frequencies of our star's most prolific electromagnetic outputs.
No majik necessary. Just chemistry.
Well I wish that I had the knowledge to already know that. It offers an explanation but it does strike me that we had to have exactly right chemistry available and the light had to trigger something that caused light to evolve in a way that produced vision without any knowledge of what vision is. Maybe you are right but it does seem to me that allowing for a pre-existing intelligence is actually a simpler answer.
BTW, I am not arguing for an intelligence that necessarily intervenes in the process as I would accept the idea of an intelligence that set the tripwire, in the beginning, and evolution evolved naturally.
AZPaul3 writes:
If I understand you right the observer effect, as you call it, is part of the Copenhagen interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. An observer collapses the wave function of a superposition. The part most folks miss, thank you pop-culture science news, is that ANY macro object (a dust mote) interacting with any particle is an "observer" thus collapsing the function.
I know that with my very limited knowledge I am on shaky ground here but you have to assume that the dust mote exists if it is not observed. In reality, we have no way of knowing any of this as we are not observing or measuring it.
how do we know?
AZPaul3 writes:
Sorry. Yes there is a sound, whether it is perceived or not. The vibrating waves of air molecules still vibrate at the same frequencies, travel the same paths and echo off the same hills whether any equipment is there to observe them or not. The physical operations are the same. For a falling tree in a forest, it is physically impossible for the vibrations to not be produced and propagate. Saying this is not "sound" because it is not "heard" is a semantical absurdity.
I guess it is semantics but are vibrating waves of air molecules a sound prior to impacting an eardrum or measuring device. For that matter, if there is no conscious observer does the tree even exist in the first place?
Edited by AdminPhat, : No reason given.
Edited by AdminPhat, : No reason given.
Edited by AdminPhat, : No reason given.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1378 by AZPaul3, posted 01-15-2019 10:09 PM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1380 by Tangle, posted 01-16-2019 3:32 AM GDR has not replied
 Message 1383 by Stile, posted 01-16-2019 9:49 AM GDR has not replied
 Message 1385 by AZPaul3, posted 01-16-2019 10:13 AM GDR has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


(1)
Message 1387 of 1677 (847056)
01-16-2019 6:28 PM
Reply to: Message 1382 by Percy
01-16-2019 9:47 AM


Re: Suffering with a loving God
With my problems with this keyboard I think I will go with a generic response.
Incidentally Percy our backgrounds seem to cross each other again as my wife is a New Englander from Melrose a suburb of Boston.
The first thing is that when I make any scientific claims I am as much looking for information as I am to proposing actual belief. I very quickly am out of my depth.
Christianity is essentially the belief that is based in the accounts of the redemptive aspects of God in the Israel story climaxing in Jesus, and also in personal experiences of forgiveness, renewal and love.
From all of that I have faith that God is a god of love, forgiveness and mercy. I also believe from that He is a god that wants His human creatures to reflect those qualities into creation. In addition that ultimately this world will be fully redeemed and renewed.
I think that this summarizes basic Christianity and it is by faith that we accept this.
There is no absolute answer as to why there is suffering in this world. I have to accept that it exists and that it is contrary to His hope for the world but that it was necessary and beyond what He could do to bypass this intermediate stage of life as we know it.
I suggest that as humans we want to find concrete reasons to support our faith. I do not suggest that any of the arguments that I have put forward are hard evidence but I would call them suggestive.I will quote John Polkinghorne as he can put things far better than I can and actually has the credentials. He says that the key to understanding the physical world is mathematics, an invention of the human mind. The fit between rationality in our minds and rationality in the world is to be expected if the world is a creation of the mind. Again it is not hard evidence but it is suggestive that we are the result of intelligence.
The anthropic principle does not provide a conclusive argument for the existence of God but again I suggest that it is suggestive. The ultra high degree of fine tuning required is what we might expect if life and consciousness were goals of a rational creator with a purpose.
Also science has shown, although you guys have shown that I went too far with it, that a conscious observer does play a very large role in the functioning of our world.
Why I have come to the conclusion, and have faith in that conclusion, that we exist as a direct result of a loving god that wants us to reflect that love into the world, and you guys have not, is a mystery to me. It goes back to having free will I guess which also gives us freedom to believe what we will believe.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1382 by Percy, posted 01-16-2019 9:47 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1388 by Stile, posted 01-17-2019 9:11 AM GDR has replied
 Message 1389 by Stile, posted 01-17-2019 9:27 AM GDR has replied
 Message 1390 by Percy, posted 01-17-2019 9:44 AM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 1392 of 1677 (847081)
01-17-2019 6:58 PM
Reply to: Message 1388 by Stile
01-17-2019 9:11 AM


Re: Suffering with a loving God
GDR wrote
I suggest that as humans we want to find concrete reasons to support our faith.
Stile wrote I don't understand how any reasonable person can make such suggestions.
I'm assuming you have no problems understanding that different people may have different levels of attraction to different flavors of ice-cream, yes?
Wouldn't you think that "ice-cream" is a lot simpler and less-important than "finding concrete reasons to support our faith?"
So, on one hand, we have an incredibly simple and low-importance issue for humans to deal with (ice cream flavor comfort.)
I am only saying that we look for concrete reasons however I agree that we have to settle for reasons that are not concrete, but would you settle for the term I used which is suggestive.
Maybe we do settle for what we are comfortable with, but personally I have tried to find a path that I believe represents the truth knowing that I can not know whether or not I have things right. I was not always a Christian.
I have no doubt that some of things I believe are wrong, with the trouble being that I do not know which things they are. I have been forced to modify or even change my beliefs over the years by listening to the reasoning of others, including others on this forum.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1388 by Stile, posted 01-17-2019 9:11 AM Stile has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024