Did He have to speak for the infinity of them from eternity?
There is no background. There is nothing at all anywhere in any way, shape or form, at all, ever.
That’s the point. How does the universe explode from that? Science would say it is impossible, I believe. Science has offered us a huge clue.
Yes, in that case, fluctuations can’t really happen, as they require space and time to exist.
Legitimate science would say that it is untestable, and so beyond the realm of science. That does not require supernatural agency, as that would be a “god of the gaps argument”. It means that we don’t know, and, at present, cannot know.
2 Likes
Science says no such thing. Whatever emerges from nothingness is not what happens in virtual particles. They do not break the conservation laws within the universe.
Absolute nothingness is unstable, in pseudocode null > ! null, in propositional logic, ! p therefore p
God, science, philosophy, logic do not explain the ultimate fact, existence.
It requires something, science would have to say, I think. Don’t you or no? Based on everything that science has to offer, everything that science knows, if you will, it would say it is impossible for our universe to exist unless something non-material produced the material, I would think. Anyway, that’s what I believe. I don’t know if He hangs out at Gaps or Macys, but He sure is.
What is strange is that it just isn’t that big of a stretch to draw such a conclusion that God exists, to me anyway. It is almost like there is a resistance to the idea that God is that borders on religious fanaticism/hysteria, you know? It’s like it is irrational.
No it’s not. It’s perfectly rational. God explains nothing for infinitely more inexplicable complexity.
But, this is where He was born
and first opened his eyes
and cried
and nursed
and took his first breath
and was held by a human being
and loved
and adored
and fell asleep
1 Like
Aye. I want it to be true too. Irrational as that is.
1 Like
You could have held him in your own arms
and sung him a lullaby
as He rests his head on your shoulder
1 Like
But beyond the scope of physical science, that same theory explains so much more, including where mind and morality and our yearning for meaning come from. Those were the clinchers for me.
1 Like
I completely agree. That’s why I hate to see the sacred debased by expressing it in literally empirical terms.
For many that is like saying this is where the number 3 came from. It is far from clear that you need such an explanation. It seems enough to explain that 3 is what you get when you add one more to 2, and likewise explain the conditions under which the human mind comes into being or when communities create standards of morality. They frankly don’t look like products of intelligent design but rather things which arise or organize themselves by necessity of the circumstances. Using God in this way is what makes atheists think this is nothing more than a failed primitive science. Compared to science, God is a complete failure as an explanation. But that doesn’t mean God doesn’t fill other more valuable roles in human existence.
It’s important to emphasize that the thread title is incorrect. The Bible affirms that God makes use of natural processes. Intelligent design and natural processes are not opposites. Natural processes are options for intelligent design to use. The scientific evidence points firmly to evolution by natural selection as a good description of the natural processes used by God in intelligently designing organisms.
Arguments for or against design must correctly assess what the design is for in order to tell if something is a good design.
4 Likes
You are right, but when intelligent design is used in a certain sense (especially when capitalized) it usually refers to a god-of-the-gaps argument:
“Wow! This is too complicated to have come about by natural processes, so goddidit.”
5 Likes
Is it? What even is mind? How can matter have a mind? How can less than a gigabyte of DNA information code for a wet machine with a mind that is capable of coming up with the theory of general relativity, when the device you’re reading this on is incapable of having a mind of any kind, despite many gigabytes of code?
And meaning, what is that? How can things like meaning and understanding exist in matter? Why do we feel the urge to seek meaning if there is none to be had? We don’t tend to have any other desires that are inherently unable to be satiated.
A bona fide materialist (e.g. Dawkins) would wave those things off as mere emergent phenomena but I think most people don’t find that a satisfactory position.
1 Like
Jesus invited a little child to stand among them. 3“Truly I tell you,” He said, “unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. 4Therefore, whoever humbles himself like this little child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.…
Truly I tell you, anyone who does not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it."
Amplified Bible
and said, “I assure you and most solemnly say to you, unless you repent [that is, change your inner self—your old way of thinking, live changed lives] and become like children [trusting, humble, and forgiving], you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.
Change! How difficult it is. My inner self, the real me, not what I hope others will see or what I hope to be even to myself, but me, the real me, unless I change deep inside and look at Christ through the eyes of an innocent little kid, I really can’t begin to get this Guy. That’s what He seems to be saying to me.
Don’t be a hardened, know-it-all skeptic/adult, but understand that I really am your God, your shepherd, the One you have longed for all your life! That is me, the crazy, missing part.
He is the most fascinating, mysterious, profound and deep person/God in the universe. Too mind-boggling.
1 Like
Excellent. Longing for meaning. Exactly. Where does that desire come from ultimately? It is a God given urging, more intense for some, but present in most of us and often we have no idea that God satisfies that longing. He Himself is in fact who and what we are seeking.
I never appreciated Dylan when I was younger. Yea, he sang a few good songs. That’s as far as it went.
I started listening to his various works and now I love this guy. “I was born very far from where I’m supposed to be, and so I’m on my way home.” Bob
You ain’t kiddin Bob
1 Like
It’s got a range of meanings from faithfulness to trust in someone to a body of doctrine that is to be believevd.
3 Likes
I think “the mind” is part of what lives on forever. It is part of our souls, our spirits, that cannot die.
That is the part of me I feared would go to hell and dwell in utter misery for a long time, even though I didn’t believe there was a hell and didn’t believe in God or an afterlife; at least that’s what I thought I thought. That’s what I would have said I believed. But, when it came down to it, when I was flat on my back w/o a reason to go on, I was terrified, absolutely terrified of dying for fear that I didn’t know what would happen, but it didn’t look good.
The fiery tongues of hell were lapping at my shoes.
If your right eye makes you stumble, tear it out and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. If your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to go into hell.
Source: 35 Bible verses about Hell
Hell is so real. It is so awful. It is the worst place by far. And people decide to go there like they are defying authority or getting the last laugh. “I’ll show you!”
That is indeed the question! Precisely what I was asking myself when I responded to your post above. Shall we consider the two most popular notions, one which has even been suggested by Ralphie.
- The mind is a function of the brain. This is a notion particularly popular among some atheists.
- The mind is a nonphysical thing in the realm of universals or something like that. This is a notion of the dualistic Neoplatonists which has adopted the mental “soul” of Greek philosophy as the non-physical puppeteer driving the body as if it were an automobile.
My response to these are …
- Although much of what has been attributed to the mind has indeed not only been shown to be a function of the brain but has also been demonstrated to be things which other animals like the chimpanzee also have as function of their brain, the mind contains far more than what is simply contained in our DNA.
- The nonphysical puppeteer notion of the mind simply doesn’t agree with the scientific evidence. So while there may be something nonphysical, it is clear that what operates the body or even the majority of what we call the mind even when the demonstrable brain functions are subtracted from this, is not something which can be attributed to something apart from the laws of nature and our physical existence.
Thus I would suggest a third alternative that the mind is self-organizing dynamic construct of human language, a physical living organism much like the body but in the medium of linguistic information, concepts and ideas rather than organic chemistry like the body. And for those who believe in a non-physical existence as I do, there is no need to borrow the rational “soul” of the Greek philosophers. For the understanding of Paul in 1 Corinthians 15 which has a spiritual body growing from the physical body like a plant from a seed can easily be extended to include a spiritual mind growing from the physical mind in the same way.
The advantage of this is not only a much better agreement with both science and the Bible, but also a better agreement with what we experience, where the mind is a living entity with its own desires, needs, and health, as well as an inheritance passed to the next generation via human communication quite apart from the biological inheritance in our DNA. It also makes sense of the areas of psychology which have not become so enamored and preoccupied with chemistry and brain function.
1 Like