Door 69

Originally posted by whodey
I am staying focused and I continue to ask why the "gods" would create us if they wanted nothing from us assuming, that is, they seek loving relationships: For example, why would I create a robot that did not meet any of my needs or desires?

I didn't say the gods wanted nothing from us; I said they probably don't need love from us. There are other reasons to create things, ya know.

Originally posted by SwissGambit
The real world could be different from the simulation. Everything we think we know about the big bang and beginning of the universe could be just part of the simulation. Who then knows if the simulation has a creator? Maybe the simulation is just eternal.

And perhaps we are not real at all? Really now, I can only discuss what we "know" to be reality. Otherwise, nothing I say means anything. You are free to believe that you do not exist or that reality does not exist. I have found many that actually fit this criterea and needless to say they are miserable human beings.

As far as matter being eternal, I do not understand this concept. After all, everything had a beginning in the material universe and time is simply a property of the material universe. Once matter came on the scene so did the demensions through which matter can exist which are hieght, length, width, time etc. Time must have had a beginning because by times very definition of measuring point A to point B, time must have had a beginning. If there is no point A then what is time measuring? Come to think of it, there would be no point B as well. I think the absract concept of eternity via the material universe was simply conjured up to make the peices of the puzzle fit, so to speak. There is no scientific evidence to say that matter is eternal. In fact, we can look as far back as the Big Bang and NO further.

So where did God come from? Well, if he is a spirit, he is not from the material universe. This would mean that time may not be a property of such a medium. If this is so, then God could then have created the medium of time, length, width, etc in order for the material universe to exist.

Originally posted by whodey
Genesis 3:17-18 And unto Adam he said, "Because you have hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it; cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow will you eat of it all the days of your life. Thorns also and thistles will it bring forth to thee."

Does this answer your question? Now how about my question?

Go ahead, bring the bible into it. That's when we discover God's true purpose of creation: To afflict living things with various forms of suffering and death. That's when we line up your creator's achievements: infectious disease, natural disasters, a "food chain" of predators forced to maim and kill to survive, etc.

And you'll say this is all the result of sin. This is your 'free will' - love God, or else face all of the above - yep, no coercion there!

Originally posted by SwissGambit
Go ahead, bring the bible into it. That's when we discover God's true purpose of creation: To afflict living things with various forms of suffering and death. That's when we line up your creator's achievements: infectious disease, natural disasters, a "food chain" of predators forced to maim and kill to survive, etc.

And you'll say this is all the res ...[text shortened]... is your 'free will' - love God, or else face all of the above - yep, no coercion there!

Perhaps you prefer a world without accountability for your actions? Perhaps you prefer to have God prevent you from sinning? If nether applies then what do you want?

Originally posted by whodey
Perhaps you prefer a world without accountability for your actions? Perhaps you prefer to have God prevent you from sinning? If nether applies then what do you want?

You don't need a god to be accountable for your actions. I'm accountable to myself and those around me for what I do.

It's absurd to believe both a) God is loving and just and b) God created all those diseases and maladies to afflict mankind, whether they deserved it or not. One of them must go. Your God "disappears in a puff of logic", as rwingett would say.

Originally posted by SwissGambit
Your God "disappears in a puff of logic", as rwingett would say.

He sure does love that turn of phrase, doesn't he?

Nemesio

Originally posted by SwissGambit
You don't need a god to be accountable for your actions. I'm accountable to myself and those around me for what I do.

It's absurd to believe both a) God is loving and just and b) God created all those diseases and maladies to afflict mankind, whether they deserved it or not. One of them must go. Your God "disappears in a puff of logic", as rwingett would say.

So mankind is a just judge? Perhaps sometimes, but what of those who fall through the cracks? It is easy to sit back and be a critic regarding anyone or anything. However, it is another thing altogether to try and walk in someone elses shoes. So tell us, if you were God how would you handle wickedness? Would you even allow wickedness? Would you judge wickedness etc.?

Originally posted by whodey
So mankind is a just judge? Perhaps sometimes, but what of those who fall through the cracks? It is easy to sit back and be a critic regarding anyone or anything. However, it is another thing altogether to try and walk in someone elses shoes. So tell us, if you were God how would you handle wickedness? Would you even allow wickedness? Would you judge wickedness etc.?

For starters, I would not kill anyone who had not committed a capital crime (murder, or intent to murder). I would not kill the entire population of a city over the actions of a few of its residents. I would not kill anyone for not believing in me.

In short, I would act like the human lives I created are actually valuable.

Originally posted by SwissGambit
For starters, I would not kill anyone who had not committed a capital crime (murder, or intent to murder). I would not kill the entire population of a city over the actions of a few of its residents. I would not kill anyone for not believing in me.

In short, I would act like the human lives I created are actually valuable.

Well the charges concerning those God "judged" were very severe indeed. God does not just kill off any murderer he sees nor does he do so with those who do not believe. I think wickedness has to reach a certain level before he intervenes. So are you saying that there is no level upon which you would not intervene?

Originally posted by whodey
Well the charges concerning those God "judged" were very severe indeed. God does not just kill off any murderer he sees nor does he do so with those who do not believe. I think wickedness has to reach a certain level before he intervenes. So are you saying that there is no level upon which you would not intervene?

As a god, I would be highly non-interventionist. For the most part, I would allow people the freedom to live as they choose.

Originally posted by whodey
Just kidding so get your minds out of the gutter. No this post is about proving God. Since one cannot prove God, one must choose between either accepting him by faith or rejecting him. Simply put, either God demands faith, as the Bible states, or he does not exist. The question then becomes, if God exists, which I am all sure you will agree with me that he does exist, why does he demand faith instead of proving himself? Speculations?

That's not logical. That God "demands faith" is not the opposite of "or he does not exist." If God does exist, it is possible that He/She would prefer or would like people to have faith, but it isn't automatic that God is demanding this. It is quite possible that God is perfectly accepting of those who don't have faith. Is your mere human ability to love based on the beliefs of your loved ones? Do you only love your children when they like you and treat you respectfully (ages 0-1.5, a few weeks at age 3, ages 5-7, maybe age 24 or so...) or do you love them all the time?

Originally posted by SwissGambit
As a god, I would be highly non-interventionist. For the most part, I would allow people the freedom to live as they choose.

So if you gave such people the freedom to choose and then saw that the same people were taking away other peoples freedom to choose would you intervene? I mean, your whole goal is freedom to choose so if this were your goal then you must either make a decision to intervene or let your creation go in a whole different direction than what you had originally planned.

I think God WANTS us to hold ourselves accountable and our fellow man. In fact, when we do so I thnk he does not intervene. However, when we shirk our responsibilities in terms of holding ourselves and others accountible God is more likely to intervene directly. For example, had man not intervened during the holocaust at some point I think eventually God would have felt compelled to intervene. I think God gives us every oppurtunity, however, to change coarse in order to preserve our free will as much as possible.

Originally posted by pawnhandler
That's not logical. That God "demands faith" is not the opposite of "or he does not exist." If God does exist, it is possible that He/She would prefer or would like people to have faith, but it isn't automatic that God is demanding this. It is quite possible that God is perfectly accepting of those who don't have faith. Is your m ...[text shortened]... a few weeks at age 3, ages 5-7, maybe age 24 or so...) or do you love them all the time?

But God does not "prove" himself to mankind. So the question remains, why? Either he does not exist, or we require faith to believe in him. That is all I am saying. The next question then becomes, does he care if we believe in him? I say yes. After all, if he does not care, what significants does he have in relation to his creation? Is not God then as good as dead to his creaton if he has no desire in relating to them in any way?

Originally posted by whodey
But God does not "prove" himself to mankind. So the question remains, why? Either he does not exist, or we require faith to believe in him. That is all I am saying. The next question then becomes, does he care if we believe in him? I say yes. After all, if he does not care, what significants does he have in relation to his creation? Is not God then as good as dead to his creaton if he has no desire in relating to them in any way?

Creationists believe that God has indeed proven himself -- that creation itself is that proof. If Biblical accounts are true or even partially true, then God proved himself over and over in the past and it's just in the most recent hundred years or so that belief has fizzled out. You want fresh proof for each generation it would seem. Interesting thought. I know it's been asked in whole threads before, but what would you consider proof? I'm thinking most doubters would consider proof something more like literary wizards doing magic. Humans can desire a relationship with someone without forcing it. Why not God? People have their whole lifetimes to come to believe.

Originally posted by whodey
But God does not "prove" himself to mankind. So the question remains, why? Either he does not exist, or we require faith to believe in him. That is all I am saying. The next question then becomes, does he care if we believe in him? I say yes. After all, if he does not care, what significants does he have in relation to his creation? Is not God then as good as dead to his creaton if he has no desire in relating to them in any way?

If God exists he is necessarily eternal, so must exist outside of time because time had a beginning. A being outside of time would have difficulty interacting with things inside of time (as there is no time for him to interact), and to an eternal being the life of all the universe is just a blink of an eye.

So I highly doubt such a being would care whether something infinitely smaller than itself believed in it. After all, do you care about the behaviour of microbes?