God's purpose

A common argument against evolution, and for that matter quite a bit of science, is that science removes God from the equation. Unfortunately, I don't have any links or whatnot, but it's one that has been known to be used.A corollary, then, is that if God has no purpose, why does he exist? The reason this is a logical corollary concerns God's purposes. Everything that exists, even events, supposedly, have a purpose (especially with the religious worldview). If something has no purpose, why would it exist?My question here, is are creationists (those that make such arguments) afraid of removing all purposes for God, or afraid of believing in something that has no purpose?My take on it is that for those who believe, it only makes sense to believe in an entity that has a purpose. So we need God to have a purpose, which does not necessarily mean that God does have a purpose, only that we ascribe him one to make his existence more palatable.

---

Want to help give back to the world community? Did you know that your computer can help? Join the newest TeamEvC Climate Modelling to help improve climate predictions for a better tomorrow.

Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.Please pay close attention to the question of the OP and respond accordingly.

mis-sentEdited by iano, : No reason given.

This is an argument I would use (not so much here but in my real life dealings with people) The reason I do so is not so much that such argument in any way impacts on God or my belief but that it can be used by other (the people I am talking to about God) as a means to deny Gods existance. Sowing doubt in a persons worldview is a means to point them towards God.I would make the same point regarding the rest of your post. I don't ascribe purpose to God in order to believe God. I know God has purpose because I know him. But there may be other believers who could work in the direction you suggest

ok
number 1..if there is no god , does the universe have any purpose ?number 2 .. if god is all powerful he can have any purpose god wants , reguardless of either evolution or creation being true .number 3.. gods purpose may beyond the understanding of the human mind , but this does not mean god has no purpose.number 4 .. if god has free will and is all powerful god can change gods purpose , either in responce to unfolding events oin the universe or totally independantly .number 5 .. if god does not exsist would humans invent a god to forfill a felt need , and to give such human life a purpose ??ok that should keep us busy for the next 4 or 5 aeons ... Edited by AdminPD, : Off Topic Warning

Doesn't history show us that science has indeed removed God and Gods repeatedly from the equation? As science explains natural phenomenon from volcanic eruptions and eartquakes, the changing seasons and fertility to the development of species and the formation of galaxies have we not left a trail of gods by the wayside?As science has progressed the relevance and power of religion has diminished to the point that the only real questions left which religion can still lay any claim to at all are -1) How did the universe begin
2) How did life begin
3) What happens when we dieAND science is working on those too. This whole forum is testament to the resitance of religion to a scientific understanding of the last remaining questions to which religion can make any claim and the fear it has that science will trump religion on these issues as it has done on so many others.
"Gods purpose" has been a shrinking portfolio ever since scientific investigation was begun and as a consequence religion is, in the longer term, an endangered species.

I think that is a misreading.Science has kept explicit reference to God out of the explicit explanations. But whether God is still present in the background of assumptions on which we build explanations, is up to each person to decide.

---

Compassionate conservatism - bringing you a kinder, gentler torture chamber

I think you are misreading me by automatically assuming I am limiting my argument only to the same God you presumably advocate(?). All natural phenomenon have been attributed to various gods (e.g. the sun god, the god of the sea etc. etc. etc.) in the past and these have indeed been left by the wayside as our understanding has increased. More recently science has again impinged on religion in terms of explaing the motions of the "heavens", the creation of the universe and the origin of the species. There is a definite trend that as our understanding of the natural world (i.e. science) increases supernatural explanations involving god/gods are forced to retreat further and further back.
My argument is basically that there is no reason to think that this trend won't increase as our scientific understanding continues to progress in the last remaining areas of of the physical world that religion makes any claim to "explaining"Edited by Straggler, : Trivail spellings and stuff

I'd say you are misreading what I wrote.Science doesn't say that Thor did not cause thunder. Rather, science says that thunder results from electrical discharges in the atmosphere. If somebody wants to credit Thor with arranging the electrical discharges, that up to the individual person.Sure, science is filling in the gaps, and thus weakening the case for a god of the gaps.

---

Compassionate conservatism - bringing you a kinder, gentler torture chamber

NWR and Straggler,Please move forward. You're saying the same thing.

quote:

---

Science doesn't say that Thor did not cause thunder.

---

Science also doesn't say that he did.Science doesn't mention Gods. Nobody misread anything.Move on.

Is it really possible to believe in Thor and his big hammer whilst at the same time attributing thunder and lightning to the build up of statically charged water droplets in the atmosphere??Possibly, but only by completely neutering Thor of all the qualities that make him recognisable as Thor and claiming that the weathermen of the world can somehow read his moodswings in advance (well sometimes!!). You may have trouble finding any devoted followers of Thor these days. Any Thorists that do exist are going to have a hard time recruiting. Not least because we now do have a verified explanation of the natural phenomenon in question that is a lot more reliable than attributing it to a supernatural being of any kind.My argument is that all gods throughout history have effectively been gods of the gaps and that this trend is likely to continue.
Even the recognition of this gap filling by religious bodies and the problem this poses them I do not think will halt the general downward trend in faith based acceptance of supernatural beings as science progresses. Maybe I'mjust being optimisticTo get back to the OP....If there is no physical role for God (i.e. if we had overwehelmingly verified theories for the creation of life and the existence of the universe - I'm not saying we have yet just what if..) then surely you agree that the draw of God to the masses would at least be reduced. No?

No.As a Christian I look forward to learning how GOD created life and this wondrous universe.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

That's hard to say. It depends on what does influence the masses. I think people are often drawn to religion because it provides them with a social support structure.

---

Compassionate conservatism - bringing you a kinder, gentler torture chamber

hmmm . . .something that I really want to know is if we actually ascribe a purpose to God to remove the craziness of believing in something without purpose (well, what could be percieved as being crazy).

---

Want to help give back to the world community? Did you know that your computer can help? Join the newest TeamEvC Climate Modelling to help improve climate predictions for a better tomorrow.

But that does not really answer the question. So God/gods having no physical role in the universe may not blunt your faith but would it not weaken the case regards religion (Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism) in general? Is not the creator the main role attributed to whatever god by whatever faith?I take NWRs point regards comfort and consolation on board but is that really enough in the long term?Lets just say for example that a verified theory for abiogenesis were to be formulated/discovered/whatever. Likewise a verified physical theory of the absolute beginning of the universe (quantum fluctuations or whatever). In that situation whereby there are verified scientific mechanisms in place to explain these phenomenon...would your faith not be at all shaken??????As a non believer I must admit that the idea of faith in a God for which the universe literally has no physical role completely baffles me.......?