Chance and evolution

Michali · #**101** 5th November 2003, 02:20 PM

If the perfect is a being, we see a good reason for why we're here. God wanted to make other beings. Beings that are able to make choices and decisions. Probably for companionship.

We know God wants companionship because he has given us that same spirit. He has chosen to want companionship. He has chosen us to want love, as He wants love.

lucaspa · #**102** 5th November 2003, 02:25 PM

Originally Posted by Michali

"Existence" is an undefinable term. If something "exists" it exists because it is present within something.

Does not follow. Yes, the universe says "I exist because I am". After all, that is how God is supposed to have answered when Moses asked it: "I am that I am".

If you can use the logic that God can exist in its own system, then that logic holds to say some other entity can -- such as the universe -- exists in its own system.

Sagan in Cosmos declared this very thing: "The Cosmos is all there is all there was, and all there ever will be.

What ever this system is, is infinite in all attributes.

But if the system is the universe, you have just shown it is not infinite in time; it had a beginning. So the data contradicts this assertion.

Anything that is infinite is also omnipotent.

This does not follow. If this were true, pi would be omnipotent because it is an infinite number.

An example: If spacetime were infinite, everything (and I mean everything) would be possible somewhere in space or time.

This does not follow either. Why? For instance, complete violation of the Second Law of Thermodynamics is not possible. Within that spacetime it would not be possible for earth to be the center of the solar system. The aether is not possible. The list goes on and on.

lucaspa · #**103** 5th November 2003, 02:29 PM

Originally Posted by Michali

If the perfect is a being, we see a good reason for why we're here.

But that does not make the being exist. There are other good reasons why we're here, including chemistry and evolution working on their own.

God wanted to make other beings. Beings that are able to make choices and decisions. Probably for companionship.

We know God wants companionship because he has given us that same spirit. He has chosen to want companionship. He has chosen us to want love, as He wants love.

Is God required to give us characteristics it has itself? Why? Your argument is based on a false premise. By your logic of God being omnipotent, God is not limited to giving us characteristics that it has.

Also, there is nothing in Genesis 1 or 2-3 to indicate that God wants love or companionship. If God is infinite, as you assert, then God existed infinitely without companionship. For an entity that wants companionship and is omnipotent, why the wait?

Far better to simply give up trying to project human emotions onto God. This, I believe, is called making God in man's image.

lucaspa · #**104** 5th November 2003, 02:32 PM

Originally Posted by Michali

It is infinite, because anything that exists in it has the ability to remain in it's existence even though it is expanding. If it expands in all values forever, it's father system must be limitless.

But this argument depends on that "if" being true. You don't know so. Also you know that the universe can't extend infinitely far back in the past. There is a limit there imposed by the Big Bang.

Also, you keep asserting the premise that the universe must exist within something else. Yet that is the very proposition you are trying to prove. You can't assume the conclusion. That's circular logic.

lucaspa · #**105** 5th November 2003, 02:38 PM

Originally Posted by Michali

Stating that the universe is in God, is also stating that God is "outside" of the universe. I am not saying that the universe is God.

I know that. But you didn't read what I said. I said that orthodox Christian theology states that God is separate from the universe. If the universe is in God as you assert, that means that God and the universe are not separate. Rather, the universe is part of God.

God is completely undefinable by what exists. He is seperate by this fact, that he is greater than existence itself.

Then your asssertion that the universe is in God contradicts this, because part of God can indeed be defined by what exists -- the universe.

However, your statement "God is completely undefinable by what exists" also contradicts Christianity on another point: God made flesh in Jesus. We do indeed define God by the existence of Jesus. God is also defined to some extent by the Exodus and the creation of Israel.

I'm not sure where you are trying to go, Micheli. You seem to be trying a new route to "prove" the existence of God. You aren't doing that. Instead, you are destroying Christianity. I suggest giving up the route and simply acknowledging that God cannot be "proved" by logic.

Michali · #**106** 5th November 2003, 02:40 PM

Originally Posted by lucaspa

I'm not sure where you are trying to go, Micheli. You seem to be trying a new route to "prove" the existence of God. You aren't doing that. Instead, you are destroying Christianity. I suggest giving up the route and simply acknowledging that God cannot be "proved" by logic.

I don't believe that is true, and I will now go back through all your posts, though it may take some time.

Michali · #**107** 5th November 2003, 02:51 PM

Originally Posted by lucaspa

Does not follow. Yes, the universe says "I exist because I am". After all, that is how God is supposed to have answered when Moses asked it: "I am that I am".

If you can use the logic that God can exist in its own system, then that logic holds to say some other entity can -- such as the universe -- exists in its own system.

I am saying that because the universe is not infinite (a fact held by many) it is not the "just exist" that we are looking for. And it must "exist" in what it is expanding in. -edit- God is the infinite system.

But if the system is the universe, you have just shown it is not infinite in time; it had a beginning. So the data contradicts this assertion.

This does not follow. If this were true, pi would be omnipotent because it is an infinite number.

You are misunderstanding me completely. The "just exist" system is not the universe because of that reason. And "pi" is a mathematical term and is infact omnipotent in the fact that it "explores" every combination of numbers. An omnipotency in math. Not to mention that the infinity is in the small. And some believe that there is an indivisible unit.

This does not follow either. Why? For instance, complete violation of the Second Law of Thermodynamics is not possible. Within that spacetime it would not be possible for earth to be the center of the solar system. The aether is not possible. The list goes on and on.

The theory of multiple universes is a good example. If space time is infinite (note that I don't believe it is) everything is possible for it.

Michali · #**108** 5th November 2003, 03:06 PM

Originally Posted by lucaspa

But that does not make the being exist. There are other good reasons why we're here, including chemistry and evolution working on their own. Is God required to give us characteristics it has itself? Why? Your argument is based on a false premise. By your logic of God being omnipotent, God is not limited to giving us characteristics that it has.... Far better to simply give up trying to project human emotions onto God. This, I believe, is called making God in man's image.

Because the perfect is perfect, by my logic, God is potent enough to limit His own actions. He has "chosen" His will. He has "chosen" His nature. Because we also are beings, I can see that God has imprinted His image onto us.

Also, there is nothing in Genesis 1 or 2-3 to indicate that God wants love or companionship. If God is infinite, as you assert, then God existed infinitely without companionship. For an entity that wants companionship and is omnipotent, why the wait?

I am attempting to seperating myself from my beliefs at the moment, so therefore I am not staying within the confines of Christian theology. Though I think I am.

And the wait? How about the fact that there wasn't a wait? If He wanted us, He had to make us at some point, and we are that point. Also, there was no time before the creation of the universe.

Michali · #**109** 5th November 2003, 03:10 PM

Originally Posted by lucaspa

But this argument depends on that "if" being true. You don't know so. Also you know that the universe can't extend infinitely far back in the past. There is a limit there imposed by the Big Bang.

Also, you keep asserting the premise that the universe must exist within something else. Yet that is the very proposition you are trying to prove. You can't assume the conclusion. That's circular logic.

I am not sure you understand me, and I'm afraid you only caught my meaning in this post. Therefore it looks like I'm contradicting myself. But the whole time I am asserting that because the universe is not infinite it exists in another system. Now I believe that system is necessary to be infinite, and as I have been discussing, perfect.

Jet Black · #**110** 5th November 2003, 03:13 PM

perfect?