I don’t find that sort of argument tempting or convincing. It assumes we have all the facts and can safely rule out every other alternative. But of course that only begs the question, it doesn’t settle anything. I can’t decide whether I suck at rhetoric or if rhetoric simply does suck but I lean toward the latter on the strength of my own biases.
2 Likes
Well I said I feel like there is something more to our existence, but a more accurate statement would be I don’t know, I mean faith and feeling doesn’t count as evidence that I agree with tbh it was more of a hapless rant so gor that I Apologize especially because it did not contribute to the conversation at all.
Oh you cant say that, what becomes of my wonderfully erudite and relevant response?
Nothing becomes of it, your response is still erudite and relevant I assure you.
Only if he is all knowing, which we don’t know for sure and probably never will
We have sufficient facts. And we cannot safely rule in any alternative. We all suck at rhetoric 'cos rhetoric simply does suck. And it’s all we got, along with biases.
Why does someone create something and then looking at what He created say “it is good.” Doesn’t that imply that it might not have been. Doesn’t it imply that the creator is NOT in absolute control of how things turn out? Sure an artist or carpenter often does exactly this. And the reason is that sometimes what they make doesn’t turn out so good. But what of an all-powerful creator? Many think this would mean that things will always turn out exactly as He intends. This doesn’t agree with the Bible. Genesis 6 tells the opposite story.
So yeah, evolution produced all kinds of nastiness from cancer to parasitoid wasps. So I have suggested that if you want to be technical about it, evil didn’t completely begin with Adam and Eve. But on the other hand, we also see in evolution a rather wonderful demonstration that cooperation is the most powerful and successful survival strategy and seeing this I can well believe that God said, “it is good.”
2 Likes
Look, Kevin, no one has foolproof evidence that God exists or does not exist. Fools can always find reasons not to believe. Looking for definitive evidence is a fool’s errand, in which Dawkins, Harris, and Hichens have failed.
What do you think is the reason for your existence? That is your faith. Then you need to test and explore it to see if you are right or not. But make sure it is your reason for existence and not someone else’s.
Then what are you saying?
Sude Note: Order and something, nothing and chaos are not strictly speaking synonyms, but they are analogs. so they are comparable.
I am not saying something from nothing.
I dont think anyone is except those who want to misrepresent non literalistic christian ideas.
Order and chaos were my words, not something else with a different meaning.
I think i asked if you recognize that order
does arise spontaneously from chaos.
If you dont care to say we can drop it,
Right.
And plenty of others find foolish reasons to believe.
Of course you are correct about that. The only thing there is nothing of in chaos is order. Where there is nothing, there is neither chaos nor order.
2 Likes
Nonsense. They are each full of the other.
And order spontaneously arises from disorder.
1 Like
That’s true. Nothing, as Astrid noted, is something of a red herring here. The attempt to include it where it doesn’t belong leads to nonsense, nonsense such as de novo creation.
Perhaps it would be better to say order and chaos are entangled the way life and non life are. As one predominates, the other recedes. But there is always potential to move from one state to the other in time.
1 Like
Under the right conditions, to some degree yes.
Mostly not, but neither is it uncommon.
In the far-from equilibrium conditions, at the right distance from some stars with a flow of energy but not too much energy you can see order spontaneously arising from disorder to various degrees depending on the conditions.
Or sugar crystals forming in your syrup bottle.
Seems to me a flow of energy orders a systrm.
Scattered raindrops to form a river in all its complexity.
Howabout cloud formations.
1 Like
These are not order flowing from chaos, but order flowing from order.
Evidently you use a unique definition of chaos.
Possibly also not wanting to see my point?
Lets try, order spontaneously increasing.
You agree that happens?
1 Like
Which is the order, and which is the “chaos?” The syrup or the crystals? For those who prefer the syrup then it is going from order to disorder instead of the other way around, however itis best today that the sugar goes from one kind of order to another. This is not by magic, but by the natural law of Kinetic Theory.
Rain drops, rivers, and clouds are all parts of the water cycle which are also governed by Kinetic Theory. None of which are chaotic, but all different forms of the same orderly process.
Death is disorder, and it is not spontaneously reversed. “Entropy” is form of disorder, which is found only in an isolated static state.
In the physics sense, they are extremely chaotic. In the “unguided” sense, that is a philosophical question, not a scientific one.