Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Can Christians Believe That God Is Immanant In The Natural World?
anastasia
Member (Idle past 5952 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 68 of 88 (413224)
07-29-2007 9:43 PM
Reply to: Message 67 by Straggler
07-29-2007 4:19 PM


Re: Effective Cause
Straggler writes:
Hope you feel better. Stay happy.
Thanks, I am completely well again. It was just a flu or something, but my head was spinning trying to type and all.
I see you are admining a thread on parasites and other such things in nature which covers the other elements touched upon in our discussion. I shall read that thread with interest and hope that the fundies don't hijack it down pointless paths.
Well, yes, I promoted it just for you.
Definitely. It is one of the great unanswered questions. It would be a crime not to be!!!
Is it contradictory to believe the universe is not caused, and also to search for the 'cause' of the universe? I know there are things which I don't understand about the terms scientists use, but I am tempted to quote Rob here. Remember how he uses that quote about science assuming there will be an answer? That scienctists CAN discover how things happened?
Quantum theory is inherently and intrinsically random.
The equations of quantum mechanics are summations of probabilities. They do not describe deterministic linear cause and effect of the type that we (erroneously) take for granted. They effectively decribe uncaused events
I think I am gettng it.
The universe would be the uncaused in itself.
We have no evidence of anything else outside the universe existing. Therefore science has no requirement to explain or look for anything beyond the universe itself.
In short the answer to your question is - No.
You keep saying this. Science has no need to explain anything beyond the universe. Fine. BUT, for the longest time, it was assumed that the universe must have been started by something outside of it. If it can't be shown to have started itself, what do you do?
Cause and effect is a human construct. Not a law of nature.
Did I say it was? Actually, I see what you are thinking. What I mean to say is that there is a possibility that nature itself will NEVER explain how the universe came to be, because it may be that the answer is not in nature. It may be that we can't use natural equations or mathematics to explain things, because we don't know that they have any validity outside of the universe.
I have painstakeningly told you that I am putting aside biases, just to discuss the concept of an uncaused. You don't need to sum up every post with an implication that I am arguing for an agenda.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by Straggler, posted 07-29-2007 4:19 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by Straggler, posted 07-30-2007 12:37 PM anastasia has replied

  
anastasia
Member (Idle past 5952 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 70 of 88 (413560)
07-31-2007 1:27 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by Straggler
07-30-2007 12:37 PM


Re: Effective Cause
Straggler writes:
So then to summarise - Science Vs God so far..........
Only kidding
Sorry if I have been overzealous at times.
Nah, you just seem to assume that I care one way or another about what turns out to be truth. I already acknowledged long ago that my religion is cultural, part of my family traditions, interesting, even fascinating, fun, etc. It is not the be all, end all of who I am, and I don't care at this point if it is true or false. I believe it is true, but I am detached from that belief enough to have normal conversation. I am sure my thought processes nonetheless reveal my upbringing.
I begrudge science nothing. What I do feel is that the 'old man in the sky' concept is not doing justice to the 'real' God.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Straggler, posted 07-30-2007 12:37 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by Straggler, posted 07-31-2007 2:49 PM anastasia has replied

  
anastasia
Member (Idle past 5952 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 72 of 88 (413585)
07-31-2007 3:24 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by Straggler
07-31-2007 2:49 PM


Re: Effective Cause
Straggler writes:
I do care about the truth. At least in the sense that I want it to be true. I fnd it hard to imagine genuinely not wanting to know what the truth is (whether we actually can or not)?
Hm. I care what the truth is, sure, but we don't know yet. We may never know. We can't base our life around lack of knowledge. We must do the best we can with what we know now. I follow my faith because it teaches me just that. It's 'immediate gratification' maybe, but it is absolutely necessary to have some philosophy for living. That is, once you have the basics of survival. Science does not supply my dreams or my ideals, nor a purpose. In that sense, do I care what is ultimately true about the universe? Not as much as I care what is ultimately true about human nature.
I am rambling again, but I suppose I question what mankind would do if we were not happy with what the truth turned out to be, and how relevent truth is within our short lives.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by Straggler, posted 07-31-2007 2:49 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 73 by Straggler, posted 07-31-2007 3:37 PM anastasia has replied

  
anastasia
Member (Idle past 5952 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 74 of 88 (413599)
07-31-2007 4:27 PM
Reply to: Message 73 by Straggler
07-31-2007 3:37 PM


Re: Dreamers
Straggler writes:
I think it is human nature to seek the truth regardless of the consequences.
That's kind of the problem. Truth matters to us somehow even if we know we can't grasp it yet. When it comes to religion, we have to believe that we have enough knowledge of what is 'true', to be good people, and to be accountable for our actions when we are not.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by Straggler, posted 07-31-2007 3:37 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by Straggler, posted 07-31-2007 5:43 PM anastasia has replied

  
anastasia
Member (Idle past 5952 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 76 of 88 (413646)
07-31-2007 7:05 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by Straggler
07-31-2007 5:43 PM


Re: Dreamers
Straggler writes:
I don't really see seeking truth as a problem. It is a necessity.
Is it, though? If we are all here as animals who will live, possibly breed, and die, what does the origins of the earth matter?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Straggler, posted 07-31-2007 5:43 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by Straggler, posted 08-01-2007 3:25 AM anastasia has replied

  
anastasia
Member (Idle past 5952 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 78 of 88 (413772)
08-01-2007 10:29 AM
Reply to: Message 77 by Straggler
08-01-2007 3:25 AM


Re: Dreamers
Straggler, I guess we have meandered into chit chat.
I wanted to discuss in this topic the way Christians see God and His role in nature. Or, what type of being they would be expecting to find in the after-life.
Many hymns to the Holy Spirit, within Orthodox Catholicism, speak of the spirit as 'everywhere present and filling all things'. Sounds rather like 'immanance'. I don't know that it is popular to pray to the spirit within other denominations. It/He is, perhaps, not even viewed as sentient in the way that God or Jesus is, and many do not pray to God either. Jesus, as human, is intermediary.
All in all, I was wondering how much our conceptions {or misconceptions} of God influence the God/Science antagonism.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by Straggler, posted 08-01-2007 3:25 AM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by Straggler, posted 08-01-2007 5:07 PM anastasia has replied
 Message 84 by macaroniandcheese, posted 08-02-2007 3:15 PM anastasia has replied

  
anastasia
Member (Idle past 5952 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 80 of 88 (413923)
08-01-2007 9:15 PM
Reply to: Message 79 by Straggler
08-01-2007 5:07 PM


Re: Farewell (on this thread anyway)
Ah, I knew you were going to take that like a request to shut up.
It was more of a reflection upon myself. I know I have been distracted for a few days. I don't know how far I can continue the initial discussion without knowing more about what quantum physicists are trying to explain. I also did a poor job of the 'truth' conversation, and basically, I don't want to post without something to say. It is a bit of a trap when you have a round with someone who is nice for a change. In the future, feel free to type cast me all you want!
Edited by anastasia, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by Straggler, posted 08-01-2007 5:07 PM Straggler has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by sidelined, posted 08-01-2007 9:41 PM anastasia has replied

  
anastasia
Member (Idle past 5952 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 82 of 88 (413951)
08-02-2007 12:07 AM
Reply to: Message 81 by sidelined
08-01-2007 9:41 PM


Re: Farewell (on this thread anyway)
Thanks sidelined.
I did read some of the books my husband has, probably about 4 years back now, but I understand a little of the 'strange' you mention. I don't recall covering possible origins of the universe, but at that point in my life I wouldn't have paid much attention anyway. My creationist glassy eyes were partially to blame, along with my irreligious, non-philosophizing alter-ego. Oh, and I wasn't on EvC.
Anyway, time to dust off the brain.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by sidelined, posted 08-01-2007 9:41 PM sidelined has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by Straggler, posted 08-02-2007 6:16 AM anastasia has not replied

  
anastasia
Member (Idle past 5952 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 85 of 88 (414085)
08-02-2007 4:37 PM
Reply to: Message 84 by macaroniandcheese
08-02-2007 3:15 PM


brennakimi writes:
the point is, i guess that a discussion of immanence really shouldn't be part of the discussion of the foundations of the universe and life. it's a separate issue.
Sure, I agree. I hope it didn't seem like I was trying to make this a science.
I will answer more later, but for now I want to see the Genesis thread. It is August already, yikes.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by macaroniandcheese, posted 08-02-2007 3:15 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by macaroniandcheese, posted 08-02-2007 4:43 PM anastasia has replied

  
anastasia
Member (Idle past 5952 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 87 of 88 (414089)
08-02-2007 4:55 PM
Reply to: Message 86 by macaroniandcheese
08-02-2007 4:43 PM


brenna writes:
the problem is that the argument shouldn't be made, but it is every day, right here. it's not you. your concept of the expression of god within nature, whether theologically flawed or not, is the heart of the issue. if nature happened through mechanism, that takes the magic out of it for so many. for me, it adds to the magic.
I can't say any of that is 'my concept'. It was random half-formed thoughts, something like wondering how much of God actually IS mechanism or non-personal.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by macaroniandcheese, posted 08-02-2007 4:43 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 88 by macaroniandcheese, posted 08-02-2007 4:57 PM anastasia has 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