Non-intelligent supreme X

[1over137]

This thread is continuation of started talk on non-intelligent supreme X here http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... 78#p165870
Quotes from the thread:

Most atheists I know claim that the universe has blindly created and the thing is...their arguments are, for the most part, pretty logical. So I keep wobbling between theism and atheism...

the atheists I'm talking about are more intelligent than...than that! From their point of view, the universe isn't the supreme force, since it had a beginning. They claim that a supreme force - it has no name, but you can call it X, to make things easier - created both our universe and the laws of physics which operate inside our universe.

And that X was always here with its laws/ways to create universe?

Probably, since it is the supreme force.

And now my question: What logical arguments do they have?

[MBPrata]

What logical arguments do they have?

Before I answer, allow me to say this: some of them wish they had no arguments. Actually, "arguments" aren't actually that important for them, they just wish they had no reasons to think there's no God. Just saying!

Moving on...they have a whole list of logical arguments, most of which are based in the (apparent) lack of logic on God's thought. As in...let's say God wanted to create a universe in which humans could live and use their free will with the objective of accepting or rejecting God. Obviously, since God invent all the rules that operate inside the universe, He could have chosen ANY possible way those rules would apply. In so being, it's hard to understand this like these: Why would God

- Create the whole universe from a ridiculously small point, which could lead humans to think the beginning of the universe implied simplicity, not complexity?
- "Build" humans with the exact same material used to build the whole universe (i.e, atoms, particles and all that stuff), which could lead them to think they had the same value of everything in the universe?
- Allow mental illnesses, which clearly interfere with the whole use-your-free-will-to-choose-God-or-reject-God thing?
- Allow humans to die before a certain age, which interferes with the exact same thing?
- Allow animals to hunt and eat humans as if they were some chicken, which could lead them to think they were as animals as any other animal?
- Allow humans to rot like any regular animal and plant, which could lead them to think hey were as animals as any other animal?
- And why, oh why would He allow extraordinary coincidences to happen, which is WAY likely to make humans think intelligence is not obligatory to create a complex situation/monument/piece of art/whatever

Actually, I myself have talked about some of these lacks of logic in this topic: http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... 33&t=39825. Which is natural, since these lacks of logic are the main thing that keep me away from believing in the God of the Bible. Yes, even more than the spontaneous creation theory.

[jlay]

These are essentially all philosophical questions on why, and not on the how, which indicates they aren't scientific questions at all.

To question the 'logic' of something, then one needs to have a context for logic. Why should anything be logical at all, and why is it that we can ask logical questions about our existence? One must presume logic to ask these questions.

Just because someone can ask 'why' and question the logic of something, doesn't mean there isn't a compatibly logical answer. In fact, one must presuppose that the universe was created for 'thinking humans' to ask such questions.

[MBPrata]

These are essentially all philosophical questions on why, and not on the how, which indicates they aren't scientific questions at all.

Allow me to disagree: not philosophical questions; questions on logic. Besides...so what? Did I say I wanted to question on science?

One must presume logic to ask these questions.

If we don't assume that God has a logical thought, then no Bible will save us; He will choose who goes to Heaven or Hell with no logic whatsoever. We're absolutely helpless.

Just because someone can ask 'why' and question the logic of something, doesn't mean there isn't a compatibly logical answer.

Yes, but if the answers were that logical, it's likely that we would have no problem on guessing these answers, right?

[abelcainsbrother]

Atheists are in Denial of their faith,they look to science and man for validation of their atheistic beliefs,they are fully willing to put their faith in man,not realizing how unwise this is because man has been wrong so many times throughout history whether he believed in God or not.Some atheists think science already has an answer yet other ones realize not yet.Still they look to science and man for answers.It makes it easier to reject God when they mock God and his word and God's people and say God is evil,twisting the bible out of context.Yet they are just as decieved as people in false religions.

[Kenny]

This thread is continuation of started talk on non-intelligent supreme X here http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... 78#p165870
Quotes from the thread:

Most atheists I know claim that the universe has blindly created and the thing is...their arguments are, for the most part, pretty logical. So I keep wobbling between theism and atheism...

the atheists I'm talking about are more intelligent than...than that! From their point of view, the universe isn't the supreme force, since it had a beginning. They claim that a supreme force - it has no name, but you can call it X, to make things easier - created both our universe and the laws of physics which operate inside our universe.

And that X was always here with its laws/ways to create universe?

Probably, since it is the supreme force.

And now my question: What logical arguments do they have?

I think the only practical answer an Atheist could give is to admit he doesn’t know. But if an Atheist wants to believe the Universe was actually created, and was created by something he calls "X", it doesn’t necessarily follow that this "X" is intelligent, powerful, good, forgiving, and all the other adjectives that are attributed to the Christian God.

Just as the creation of a Coral Reef doesn’t require an intelligent creator with all of those adjectives; maybe the creation of the Universe doesn’t either.

Ken

[MBPrata]

Atheists are in Denial of their faith,they look to science and man for validation of their atheistic beliefs,they are fully willing to put their faith in man,not realizing how unwise this is because man has been wrong so many times throughout history whether he believed in God or not.

Most atheists I know put their faith in man not because they fully believe in man, but because they say that's the only way to be happy in the "real world". They do realize man is not perfect, but he's everything they have.

Some atheists think science already has an answer yet other ones realize not yet.

What answer are you talking about? Just for the record, spontaneous creation is an answer. Whether it is right or not, that's another story, but it is totally an answer.

[1over137]

What logical arguments do they have?

Before I answer, allow me to say this: some of them wish they had no arguments. Actually, "arguments" aren't actually that important for them, they just wish they had no reasons to think there's no God. Just saying!

Moving on...they have a whole list of logical arguments, most of which are based in the (apparent) lack of logic on God's thought. As in...let's say God wanted to create a universe in which humans could live and use their free will with the objective of accepting or rejecting God. Obviously, since God invent all the rules that operate inside the universe, He could have chosen ANY possible way those rules would apply. In so being, it's hard to understand this like these: Why would God

- Create the whole universe from a ridiculously small point, which could lead humans to think the beginning of the universe implied simplicity, not complexity?
- "Build" humans with the exact same material used to build the whole universe (i.e, atoms, particles and all that stuff), which could lead them to think they had the same value of everything in the universe?
- Allow mental illnesses, which clearly interfere with the whole use-your-free-will-to-choose-God-or-reject-God thing?
- Allow humans to die before a certain age, which interferes with the exact same thing?
- Allow animals to hunt and eat humans as if they were some chicken, which could lead them to think they were as animals as any other animal?
- Allow humans to rot like any regular animal and plant, which could lead them to think hey were as animals as any other animal?
- And why, oh why would He allow extraordinary coincidences to happen, which is WAY likely to make humans think intelligence is not obligatory to create a complex situation/monument/piece of art/whatever

Actually, I myself have talked about some of these lacks of logic in this topic: http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... 33&t=39825. Which is natural, since these lacks of logic are the main thing that keep me away from believing in the God of the Bible. Yes, even more than the spontaneous creation theory.

It seems to me that since they do not find logic for this world they go on to say that the world was blindly created by some unintelligent X. They do not see any meaning for this world.

Now to your points:
1. I do not understand where the problem is in your simplicity/complexity point.
I would like to also add that it is amazing how relatively small set of physics laws is responsible for the working of the universe. For me it points to a Law-giver. Law-giver that likes symmetries and mathematical beauty.
2. To your next four points. It all shows me that we do live in a fallen world. Good that you do not like this fallen world.
And to say more: God is merciful, loving, just, righteous. And you do not really know what happened to those ill and dead people. Sorry for being very brief now.
3. To your last point: can you give an example of such coincidence?

[Audie]

This thread is continuation of started talk on non-intelligent supreme X here http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... 78#p165870
Quotes from the thread:

Most atheists I know claim that the universe has blindly created and the thing is...their arguments are, for the most part, pretty logical. So I keep wobbling between theism and atheism...

the atheists I'm talking about are more intelligent than...than that! From their point of view, the universe isn't the supreme force, since it had a beginning. They claim that a supreme force - it has no name, but you can call it X, to make things easier - created both our universe and the laws of physics which operate inside our universe.

And that X was always here with its laws/ways to create universe?

Probably, since it is the supreme force.

And now my question: What logical arguments do they have?

I dont personally recall ever making such statements or arguments, which seem dim witted to me.

[Audie]

Atheists are in Denial of their faith,they look to science and man for validation of their atheistic beliefs,they are fully willing to put their faith in man,not realizing how unwise this is because man has been wrong so many times throughout history whether he believed in God or not.

Most atheists I know put their faith in man not because they fully believe in man, but because they say that's the only way to be happy in the "real world". They do realize man is not perfect, but he's everything they have.

Some atheists think science already has an answer yet other ones realize not yet.

What answer are you talking about? Just for the record, spontaneous creation is an answer. Whether it is right or not, that's another story, but it is totally an answer.

What do you mean, "put their faith in man"?

[Audie]

What logical arguments do they have?

Before I answer, allow me to say this: some of them wish they had no arguments. Actually, "arguments" aren't actually that important for them, they just wish they had no reasons to think there's no God. Just saying!

Moving on...they have a whole list of logical arguments, most of which are based in the (apparent) lack of logic on God's thought. As in...let's say God wanted to create a universe in which humans could live and use their free will with the objective of accepting or rejecting God. Obviously, since God invent all the rules that operate inside the universe, He could have chosen ANY possible way those rules would apply. In so being, it's hard to understand this like these: Why would God

- Create the whole universe from a ridiculously small point, which could lead humans to think the beginning of the universe implied simplicity, not complexity?
- "Build" humans with the exact same material used to build the whole universe (i.e, atoms, particles and all that stuff), which could lead them to think they had the same value of everything in the universe?
- Allow mental illnesses, which clearly interfere with the whole use-your-free-will-to-choose-God-or-reject-God thing?
- Allow humans to die before a certain age, which interferes with the exact same thing?
- Allow animals to hunt and eat humans as if they were some chicken, which could lead them to think they were as animals as any other animal?
- Allow humans to rot like any regular animal and plant, which could lead them to think hey were as animals as any other animal?
- And why, oh why would He allow extraordinary coincidences to happen, which is WAY likely to make humans think intelligence is not obligatory to create a complex situation/monument/piece of art/whatever

Actually, I myself have talked about some of these lacks of logic in this topic: http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... 33&t=39825. Which is natural, since these lacks of logic are the main thing that keep me away from believing in the God of the Bible. Yes, even more than the spontaneous creation theory.

It seems to me that since they do not find logic for this world they go on to say that the world was blindly created by some unintelligent X. They do not see any meaning for this world.

Now to your points:
1. I do not understand where the problem is in your simplicity/complexity point.
I would like to also add that it is amazing how relatively small set of physics laws is responsible for the working of the universe. For me it points to a Law-giver. Law-giver that likes symmetries and mathematical beauty.
2. To your next four points. It all shows me that we do live in a fallen world. Good that you do not like this fallen world.
And to say more: God is merciful, loving, just, righteous. And you do not really know what happened to those ill and dead people. Sorry for being very brief now.
3. To your last point: can you give an example of such coincidence?

I wonder what you mean "logic for this world"?

i dont guess I know what you mean by "meaning for this world" either.

Like.. I can look at a waterfall, and pretty much know what is going on, but I dont seek
"meaning" in it..what "meaning" could it have?

I dont seem to understand this usage of words, regarding logic and meaning.

[jlay]

These are essentially all philosophical questions on why, and not on the how, which indicates they aren't scientific questions at all.

Allow me to disagree: not philosophical questions; questions on logic. Besides...so what? Did I say I wanted to question on science?

One must presume logic to ask these questions.

If we don't assume that God has a logical thought, then no Bible will save us; He will choose who goes to Heaven or Hell with no logic whatsoever. We're absolutely helpless.

Just because someone can ask 'why' and question the logic of something, doesn't mean there isn't a compatibly logical answer.

Yes, but if the answers were that logical, it's likely that we would have no problem on guessing these answers, right?

Fine. Then provide an objective context for logic.

[1over137]

Audie, I meant basically the 'why' questions. Why universe is? Why we are here?
Some people do not see any purpose for people to exist, universe to exist. They imagine that if some intelligent X created the universe, the universe would be 'intelligent'. I imagine they imagine that the intelligent world would be without suffering, killing, death. I do not know what else they require for an intelligent creator but MBPrata gave some more insight into it.

[1over137]

- "Build" humans with the exact same material used to build the whole universe (i.e, atoms, particles and all that stuff), which could lead them to think they had the same value of everything in the universe?

I missed this one before.

Well, I do not know what other "material" would be better to use. We need to eat, we need to touch things. We need to interact with particles and atoms from this world.
We are part of the creation. We were to take care of the creation, take care of the garden.

[PaulSacramento]

Why would God

- Create the whole universe from a ridiculously small point, which could lead humans to think the beginning of the universe implied simplicity, not complexity?
- "Build" humans with the exact same material used to build the whole universe (i.e, atoms, particles and all that stuff), which could lead them to think they had the same value of everything in the universe?
- Allow mental illnesses, which clearly interfere with the whole use-your-free-will-to-choose-God-or-reject-God thing?
- Allow humans to die before a certain age, which interferes with the exact same thing?
- Allow animals to hunt and eat humans as if they were some chicken, which could lead them to think they were as animals as any other animal?
- Allow humans to rot like any regular animal and plant, which could lead them to think hey were as animals as any other animal?
- And why, oh why would He allow extraordinary coincidences to happen, which is WAY likely to make humans think intelligence is not obligatory to create a complex situation/monument/piece of art/whatever

Why wouldn't He ??