Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 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:   God's purpose
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 16 of 101 (355717)
10-10-2006 6:08 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by Straggler
10-10-2006 6:03 PM


Re: Historically Speaking
In that situation whereby there are verified scientific mechanisms in place to explain these phenomenon...would your faith not be at all shaken??????
Nope. Not even a little. All that would tell us is "HOW" GOD did it.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Straggler, posted 10-10-2006 6:03 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by Straggler, posted 10-10-2006 6:23 PM jar has replied

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 17 of 101 (355719)
10-10-2006 6:11 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by nwr
10-10-2006 5:44 PM


Re: Historically Speaking
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
I agree in general. However is it not true that in the face of science even the strength of that support structure has weakened in general over time? True there are communities to whom faith in a particualr religion is a vital component but compared to say a few hundred years ago where whole nations were effectively ruled by the rule of faith (or at least those bodies that claimed to speak on Gods behalf) this is a relatively minor facet of modern culture in all but the most fundamentalist of nation states.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by nwr, posted 10-10-2006 5:44 PM nwr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by nwr, posted 10-10-2006 6:17 PM Straggler has replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 18 of 101 (355722)
10-10-2006 6:17 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by Straggler
10-10-2006 6:11 PM


Re: Historically Speaking
However is it not true that in the face of science even the strength of that support structure has weakened in general over time?
I don't think so. If anything, I see the reverse. That is, religion has brought the benefits from science to the masses, and in doing so it has spread the influence of religion.

Compassionate conservatism - bringing you a kinder, gentler torture chamber

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Straggler, posted 10-10-2006 6:11 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Straggler, posted 10-10-2006 6:34 PM nwr has replied

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 19 of 101 (355724)
10-10-2006 6:23 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by jar
10-10-2006 6:08 PM


Re: Historically Speaking
Nope. Not even a little. All that would tell us is "HOW" GOD did it
On what, if anything, do you base this absolute conviction?
Hmmmmm getting very hypothetical now but.....
Following on from my last hypothetical question...Lets say that in the far flung future of science we get to the point whereby we can actually instigate abiogensis (i.e. life from non life). Lets also say we theoretically and practically understand the creation of space and time to the point that we can actually create "baby universes" in the lab..Hypothetical but not impossible!
Would we not be in danger of becoming "God" to whatever we create? Or is the physical role completely unimportant in deciding what constitutes a god?
BTW This is not some sort of debating tactic I am genuinely interested in the thinking of a believer as to me the whole point of God seems to be creator and without bthat I just don't get the point of any of it?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by jar, posted 10-10-2006 6:08 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by jar, posted 10-10-2006 6:53 PM Straggler has replied
 Message 24 by GDR, posted 10-10-2006 7:12 PM Straggler has replied

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 20 of 101 (355727)
10-10-2006 6:34 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by nwr
10-10-2006 6:17 PM


Re: Historically Speaking
I don't think so. If anything, I see the reverse. That is, religion has brought the benefits from science to the masses, and in doing so it has spread the influence of religion
Then we do disagree. Surely the role of religion is weaker now than it has ever been? The proportion of people who would call themselves agnostics or atheists is higher than at any time in history. Even proclaiming such ideas would have been blasphemously unacceptable until relatively recently. Even amongst those who would claim to be believers active worship of any sort is relatively rare and the official and actual power of the various religious bodies has diminished to levels inconceivable at the time of Galileo for example.
In what way do you think the influence of religion has increased since say the time of the crusades, the inquisition or any other point in history you care to mention?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by nwr, posted 10-10-2006 6:17 PM nwr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by nwr, posted 10-10-2006 7:16 PM Straggler has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 21 of 101 (355730)
10-10-2006 6:53 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by Straggler
10-10-2006 6:23 PM


Re: Historically Speaking
On what, if anything, do you base this absolute conviction?
I base the conviction on my belief that GOD exists. If we were to discover exactly how (or more realistically one possible way) life was created, and how our universe came into being, it is just adding details to the creation story.
If I look at a Seurat picture,
I can learn lots about HOW he created it. I can dissect it, examine it, look at the origin of the pigments, examine each and every dot of paint, how points of paint were laid on top of other points of paint, partially hiding the one below.
I can study our eyes, and our brains and learn all the processing we do. I can study the lighting and the surroundings and what I ate that day and who I was with and what I hear while looking at it and all the other factors we can imagine.
Is that basket of data, that pile of information the painting?
Is that basket of data, that pile of information what I experience?
Is that basket of data, that pile of information what you experience?
If GOD exists, the She exists regardless of any evidence It does not exist.
If GOD does not exist, He does not exist regardless of any evidence She does exist.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by Straggler, posted 10-10-2006 6:23 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by Straggler, posted 10-10-2006 7:03 PM jar has replied

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 22 of 101 (355733)
10-10-2006 7:03 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by jar
10-10-2006 6:53 PM


Re: Historically Speaking
Hmmm I was hoping for something a bit more specific regards the actual role of God as per my later questions (and the OP for that matter). This sort of thing is all very well but something simlar if not identical could be said by anyone of faith regards their particular brand of belief. Frankly none of this is any reason to have absolute conviction in your god above any other and none of this is directly relevant to the topic under discussion.
Belief in the face of all evidence could be called delusion by someone less polite than myself......

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by jar, posted 10-10-2006 6:53 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by jar, posted 10-10-2006 7:30 PM Straggler has replied

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


Message 23 of 101 (355734)
10-10-2006 7:04 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by kuresu
10-10-2006 9:55 AM


kuresu writes:
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.
Evolution does not remove God from the equation. Evolution is a scientific theory with considerable scientific support behind it. There are those who would say that evolution make a creator unnecessary, whereas I would be among the group that believes that a complex process such as evolution requires a creator. Neither of these two positions fall within the bounds of science.
Francis Collins writes:
Evolution as a mechanism, can and must be true. But that says nothing about the nature of its author. For those who believe in God, there are reasons now to be more in awe, not less.
kuresu writes:
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?
I can see no reason to think that God has no purpose. I think that in context the Bible is correct when it says that we are made in God's image. I'd like to try applying that thought to this question.
As humans we seem to have a built in desire to explore, to design, to build and to expand our horizons. Why did the explorers risk death and endure incredible hardship? Why do people like Einstein spend a life time trying to solve scientific riddles? Science is showing us more and more that our world, and our universe, is incredible in its complexity. Certainly the creation of a universe this complex would serve similar desires in God giving him purpose.
Humans have a need to give and receive love and affection. If we are made in the image of God then I believe that we can assume that God has similar desires. Why do we marry, have friendships, have children etc. This need for love and affection is hard-wired into us. You can argue that all of those things are relationships between equals, whereas we would hardly be equal to an intelligence capable of creating the universe.
Let's consider why we have pets. This is an example of an unequal relationship, and maybe a good parallel for God's relationship with us. I suggest that we largely have pets not so much as to receive love, but more so that we have a recipient on which we pour out our love and affection. I'm suggesting that we are the object of God's love and that provides purpose.
That ultimately doesn't provide a full answer either though. As a Christian I believe this life is merely a precursor to a fuller reality after this one. (Reading about quantum mechanics gives something of an indication of how little reality there is in our current universe. ) I suggest that we won't find out our greater purpose until we leave the womb of this existence for whatever lies next.
kurseu writes:
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?
I dislike the term creationist because I am one, (as are all Theists), and yet I don't fit the definition that is generally used, at least on this forum. I do agree however, that I would have trouble accepting a purposeless deity.
kurseu writes:
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.
I agree that faith requires God to have a purpose, which does not necessarily mean that He doesn't have one. I basically believe that God has given us three scriptures; the Bible, the creation and human reason. I contend that all of these three scriptures support the contention, as I outlined above, that God does indeed have purpose and that there is no need for us to invent one. (None of this is scientific of course. I see science as the exercise of our gift of reason to study the gift of His creation.)
Greg

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by kuresu, posted 10-10-2006 9:55 AM kuresu has not replied

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


Message 24 of 101 (355736)
10-10-2006 7:12 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by Straggler
10-10-2006 6:23 PM


Re: Historically Speaking
straggler writes:
Following on from my last hypothetical question...Lets say that in the far flung future of science we get to the point whereby we can actually instigate abiogensis (i.e. life from non life). Lets also say we theoretically and practically understand the creation of space and time to the point that we can actually create "baby universes" in the lab..Hypothetical but not impossible!
If we could do that wouldn't it be something of an indication that we required a creator in the first place? Say we could instigate abiogenesis. Where did the basic material come from in order for us to be able to do that? Why was there something in the first place?

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by Straggler, posted 10-10-2006 6:23 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by Straggler, posted 10-10-2006 7:43 PM GDR has replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 25 of 101 (355739)
10-10-2006 7:16 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Straggler
10-10-2006 6:34 PM


Re: Historically Speaking
Surely the role of religion is weaker now than it has ever been?
Perhaps - I haven't followed the statistice. However we were discussing science, and I'm not seeing that science has had much affect. Sure, scientists are more likely to be atheist or agnostic than the general population. But most people are not scientists, so this is a minor effect.
Even amongst those who would claim to be believers active worship of any sort is relatively rare and the official and actual power of the various religious bodies has diminished to levels inconceivable at the time of Galileo for example.
That might well be so. But it has more to do with mass culture than with science. At one time you either attended church, or you were bored staying at home. Today you can play golf, watch football, take in a TV show, listen to the latest music on your ipod, or get involved in an internet forum.
In what way do you think the influence of religion has increased since say the time of the crusades, the inquisition or any other point in history you care to mention?
I am not saying that it has increased. I am simply disagreeing with your point about science.

Compassionate conservatism - bringing you a kinder, gentler torture chamber

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Straggler, posted 10-10-2006 6:34 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by Straggler, posted 10-10-2006 7:34 PM nwr has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 26 of 101 (355743)
10-10-2006 7:30 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by Straggler
10-10-2006 7:03 PM


Re: Historically Speaking
This sort of thing is all very well but something simlar if not identical could be said by anyone of faith regards their particular brand of belief.
Of course.
Frankly none of this is any reason to have absolute conviction in your god above any other...
LOL. Of course.
...and none of this is directly relevant to the topic under discussion.
Oh, I agree.
I think we are pretty much wasting our time trying to figure out what GODs purpose is. Perhaps someday we can ask. But the folk that say we are GODs purpose make God into a pretty small critter.
Belief in the face of all evidence could be called delusion by someone less polite than myself......
Oh, that is okay. Feel free to speak your mind. But so far I have seen no evidence that GOD does not exist.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Straggler, posted 10-10-2006 7:03 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by Straggler, posted 10-10-2006 7:37 PM jar has replied
 Message 32 by Straggler, posted 10-10-2006 7:49 PM jar has replied

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 27 of 101 (355745)
10-10-2006 7:34 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by nwr
10-10-2006 7:16 PM


Re: Historically Speaking
I am not saying that it has increased. I am simply disagreeing with your point about science.
Whether you accept that they are related or incidental do you not agree that at the same time scientific understanding has increased the power of religion has decreased?
Is this just coincidence in your opinion?
The point you make about mass culture - Is not mass culture the product of science (TV, internet, downloadable music etc.) and does this level of information provided by science not free us from the grip of localised faith based teachers/priests/shamen/whatever and substitute in it's place a "belief" in technology and therefore (indirectly) science?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by nwr, posted 10-10-2006 7:16 PM nwr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by kuresu, posted 10-10-2006 7:42 PM Straggler has not replied
 Message 34 by nwr, posted 10-10-2006 8:07 PM Straggler has replied

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 28 of 101 (355746)
10-10-2006 7:37 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by jar
10-10-2006 7:30 PM


Re: Historically Speaking
I would still be interetsed in your thoughts on the hypothetical science and whether or not this would potentially make us "gods" in the eys of our "creations"
Or if god is more than and even seperate to the role of creator.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by jar, posted 10-10-2006 7:30 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by jar, posted 10-10-2006 7:49 PM Straggler has not replied

  
kuresu
Member (Idle past 2513 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 29 of 101 (355749)
10-10-2006 7:42 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by Straggler
10-10-2006 7:34 PM


Re: Historically Speaking
mass culture
the product of science (TV, internet, downloadable music etc.)
removing the power of the localised pastor? hah! ever hear of pat robertson? he's in the media a lot, getting his views out there, even influencing some people. so much for for diminishing the effect of religion, mass media increased it in some areas.

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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Straggler, posted 10-10-2006 7:34 PM Straggler has not replied

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 30 of 101 (355751)
10-10-2006 7:43 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by GDR
10-10-2006 7:12 PM


Re: Historically Speaking
If we could do that wouldn't it be something of an indication that we required a creator in the first place? Say we could instigate abiogenesis. Where did the basic material come from in order for us to be able to do that? Why was there something in the first place?
Not really. If in my hypothetical scenario we understand the nature of space and time enough that we can create it via controlled quantume fluctuations or whatever then we literally can create space, time matter and all the rest of it. we are in effect God in any physical creation sense. that is kinda the point of my hypothetical question - To establish if God needs a physical role or not (and conversely to establish if that physical role defines what ba god is)
Actually the very nature of your question implies that whatever created us also needs a creator otherwise where did they get their stuff from? Your logic presumably applies equally to our creator no? If not why not? (This is in danger of going badly off topic)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by GDR, posted 10-10-2006 7:12 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by GDR, posted 10-10-2006 7:57 PM Straggler has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024