Ok, maybe. It's just that...if our "only" way to be His ambassateurs is through faith, then that makes it kind of needless/pointless for modern scientists to try to rationalize the idea of God through science instead of just betting on faith.
The underlined to me is an oxymoron. God is what everything comes from. And at some level we are both right. You believe something has always existed and so do I (at least I believe you do, if not we have bigger fishies to fry first). Hebrews 11:1 "Faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen". He's not asking you to have blind faith (another oxymoron IMO). To have conviction you have to have enough intellectual drive for your will to believe and therefore hope that your convictions are right. Yes it can be done blindly, but it's not helpful for that person, or anyone else. And IMO, detrimental to everyone involved, including that individuals relationship with Him. And, yes, we can only be ambassadors through faith. How could we be and ambassador to something/someone we don't even believe exists?
Huh...sure. So, before creating humans, God created human-like creatres like Neanderthals and Erectus. Which we, humans, would eventually find out when digging. Also, He created a process through which new animals/beings/whatever can be created, like DNA mutations. And He mixed both these things in the same planet. As if some of us wouldn't, naturally, reach the conclusion that macroevolution could perfectly be a thing...like a fake clue or a mixed signal.
Then again, you did underline the importance of faith. It sure takes some faith to believe God put us here while we have, in our very planet, a mechanism to create new beings...but, oh well, maybe faith answer that.
Haha, Erectus. A couple of things here.. First I reject random (even in quantum mechanics) and macroevolution as existent 'things' (we don't need to agree here, it doesn't get in the way of anything). Although, if you are interested, I would like you to demonstrate/show me macroevolution. I have done my due diligence of thorough studies and found no evidence of it (especially at the DNA/molecular level. If this is something you can enlighten me to, I would greatly appreciate it).
Second, assuming macroevoltion is true.. What does that have to do with anything? Who cares if humanity evolved step by step to what resembles humans today? It still didn't happen randomly. Mutations are not random; they happen for a reason. And even if it was random (I'll assume randomness exists); again, so what? That just adds a random element to existence. I'm still calling existence itself God. And surely to a creature he can seem random; but I disagree He/Reality is.
So, how can we get to the crux of this?
I also disagree with what is underlined. What is this mechanism? At the quantum level, lots of things look the same...
Aren't those situations a little too rough for we to learn something? Would a loving allow thousands of people to die or live miserable lives just to allow a percentage of people to learn from their disgrace?.....
There are assumptions here. First, define love (and by whose standards?). Then, death can be a very loving action. So can ending a life. And it's more than 'suffering of the many for the sake of the few'. We are all in this reality together. This reality has consequences from our actions. And our reality is that we, collectively as a human race, trash ourselves and the reality we are in. Some people don't deserve to live. Some groups of people don't deserve it either. And an entire civilization that destroys itself, each other, surrounding peoples, it's youth, does not either (Sodom as an example).
There are also assumptions that God jumps to judgement, and He doesn't. But how could someone know either if they won't even get past the emotional blocks of accepting He is real based off of presumptions about His character (when He doesn't even exist... See the issue here?)? The problem, is people in general are relative humanists. If we are going to try and grasp the functioning of God, we really to do it on realities terms, not ours. And trauma, BTW, is very effective in permanently changing personalities/hearts. Trauma isn't always a bad thing, either.
And I don't know that article of Deems, but unless he had a special revelation, or knows Haiti is going against something in a covenant that applies between them and God, I don't know how he could jump to that specific conclusion. I do accept, however, that 'natural' disasters are a form of warning/punishment from Him.
Ah, the old dilemma. In my opinion, it came from rules. Now, since rules are not a physical thing, then may perfectly exist and apply without the need of being created; they just are. Now, it is possible that God created these rules. Then again, they may also exist on their own, since they're not physical; just something that applies
You kinda just described God... In order to get your answer, we would have to figure out 2 things. 1) Is our reality the only reality (all encompassing, nothing 'outside the box' as there is no such thing)? 2) Is there something outside this reality and is that an oxymoron itself? <-creates a regression.
Regardless, we'll have to figure out if infinite regression is even possible. And the reality we live in, says no.
Think of our senses. We can't see many, many things. Due to acuity of vision, or lack of physical ability to sense (such as seeing much more of the light spectrum than we can).
It is hard for us to 'see' these rules, the laws that govern our reality. But we believe in them. Because the are apparent through their effects. So, too, can we say the same thing about God. He is apparent, through Him actualizing our reality/existence. The fact existence exists, speaks of Gods existence. The Principle everything comes from. Whether such things as laws are of Him and therefore un-created, or His tool to govern our reality; doesn't really matter. We are still dealing with the same issues. What is this underlying Principle? <--explored by the Principles effects on our reality. And it's great you see non-physical exists.
I like to thing intelligence came from somwhere (or someone), but then I think maybe intelligence is something that only exists in our universe, so the outside can't be explained by intelligence...maybe! Sometimes I wish I had strong beliefs so I could get rid of these soul-crushing doubts. I'm doubtful by nature... XP
Having doubt is healthy. Living your doubt is retarding yourself. Questing to always test yourself and what you know to refine your beliefs, shows a productive intelligence and will.
I think God is intelligence as He is existence as He is love as He is the purest form of everything expressed in this reality. And everything is just an expression of Him. We have all these things because the 'come from' Him. We have intelligence. We can see intelligence because we have intelligence. We can see order is real because we see all these intricate rules working together to hold existence together, and their consequences on us/our planet. We can see the non-physical exists such as abstract objects (redness for example). All the things we can see (and can't) tell us about reality. If there is something where everything comes from (simple secular science); then we know God exists. Who/what this God is, is the real question. Which is why atheists are so self-defeating. It's obvious there is a God, we just need to identify it/Him (and I believe I have).
