• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Universe: fine-tuned or not?

Bob Crowley

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Dec 27, 2015
4,414
2,758
72
Logan City
✟1,112,458.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Yeah, why not install in men an almost undeniable urge to inseminate women? Or, as you so quaintly put it, 'fool around in bed'. For almost the whole of history, men have used women to satisfy this urge. There were no flowers, a nice meal, some romantic music, a bottle of red and a few tentative gropes on the lounge before hopefully 'a certain amount of pleasure' in a comfy bed to follow. Men would generally take what they wanted when they wanted it.

This sexual urge has caused more misery in the world than anything else I can think of. And it didn't have to be like that whatsoever. You don't need pleasure to procreate any more than you need it to commit to another person or to agree to have children. It's needed in the wild because animals need that urge to maintain the species. Would you decide not to have children if there was no 'certain amount of pleasure' involved? Of course you would. It's not required. But...as we are ourselves animals, it's inbuilt by the evolutionary process. It's madness to design it that way.
One of the toiughest sayings of Christ relates to the this very issue, which is due to that hackneyed expression "sin".

(Mark 10:1–12)

1When Jesus had finished saying these things, He left Galilee and went into the region of Judea beyond the Jordan. 2Large crowds followed Him, and He healed them there.

3Then some Pharisees came and tested Him by asking, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any reason?”

4Jesus answered, “Have you not read that from the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’a 5and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’b? 6So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate.”

7“Why then,” they asked, “did Moses order a man to give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?c”

8Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because of your hardness of heart. But it was not this way from the beginning. 9Now I tell you that whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.d”
Men might abuse women, but they will pay for it if they don't repent.
 
Upvote 0

Hans Blaster

Returning from Wilusa
Mar 11, 2017
26,595
19,029
56
USA
✟497,143.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Democrat
Rubbish


They form crystals which do nothing more than exist, yet even then they are often beautiful to look at as though there is an artist at work, like the glories of mud, air, water and sunlight in flowers.

View attachment 381372
They are merely crystals with the angles between them set by the chemical properties of the bonds of the molecules (in this case water). Nothing more. This is not fine tuning.

The results above and below are due to blind chance with not an ounce of intelligent design I take it, other than human intelligence taking a hand in organising the flower arrangement?

View attachment 381371
"Design" in biology is not the fine tuning of the physical constants. Please take that discussion to a different thread or start a new one. We are trying to examine the physics parameter "fine tuning" question. Cheers.
 
Upvote 0

Bradskii

Under the Southern Cross I stand...
Aug 19, 2018
26,010
18,112
73
Bondi
✟445,663.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
One of the toiughest sayings of Christ relates to the this very issue, which is due to that hackneyed expression "sin".
So it's your opinion that God designed the sexual urge, not to aid procreation, but simply to test us. And by 'us' I mean almost overwhelmingly men. And that countless numbers of women over eons have suffered horrendously because men failed the test. And God, being omnipotent, would have known that that was going to happen. Why design something if you know it's going to fail so badly?

You can test someone for sin without the test having such an horrific effect on millions of people. Doing otherwise seems...cruel.
 
Upvote 0

Larniavc

Perfect in every way.
Jul 14, 2015
16,931
10,220
53
✟446,054.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
Men might abuse women, but they will pay for it if they don't repent.
Rather than simply punishing men decades after the act why not stop them before the act of rape. If you could stop someone being raped wouldn’t you?
 
Upvote 0

Larniavc

Perfect in every way.
Jul 14, 2015
16,931
10,220
53
✟446,054.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
You can test someone for sin without the test having such an horrific effect on millions of people. Doing otherwise seems...cruel.
You wouldn’t even need to create them to rest them because you would already know if they would pass or fail before hand.

Knowing all that why create the rapist?
 
Upvote 0

Bradskii

Under the Southern Cross I stand...
Aug 19, 2018
26,010
18,112
73
Bondi
✟445,663.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
You wouldn’t even need to create them to rest them because you would already know if they would pass or fail before hand.

Knowing all that why create the rapist?
I'm kinda bending over backward and allowing for the concept of free will where God allows us to make bad decisions to see if we're good or not. Yeah, I know...He'll already know, so the situation is ridiculous to start with. But it's like putting a fillet steak in your dog's kennel and then punishing the dog if eats it. Hey, what did you expect!
 
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Sure, I like Circular Reasoning!
Site Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
27,353
12,617
Space Mountain!
✟1,545,131.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Sure.

1Ch 26:18 At Parbar westward, four at the causeway, and two at Parbar.

That was the out of context one.

Here's the in-context one ...

Ge 1:31 ¶ And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

Do you know the difference between a verse of the Bible that is 1) taken out of context, VS. one that 2) is stated without context ?

These are not the same concepts.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,858,119
52,925
Guam
✟5,249,614.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Do you know the difference between a verse of the Bible that is 1) taken out of context, VS. one that 2) is stated without context ?

These are not the same concepts.

You want scripture that supports God creating the universe perfectly tuned? *

Here you go:

Ge 1:31 ¶ And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

* Not just fine tuned ... perfectly tuned.

If the universe shows that it is fine tuned, then it's because it has gotten worse.

Which, of course, is because of the Fall.

Ro 8:22 For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.
 
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Sure, I like Circular Reasoning!
Site Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
27,353
12,617
Space Mountain!
✟1,545,131.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
You want scripture that supports God creating the universe perfectly tuned? *
Nope. I don't want that. What I asked above doesn't have anything to do with that. I was asking a separate question.

I already believe God created the Universe. I'm not asking for "proof."
Here you go:

Ge 1:31 ¶ And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

* Not just fine tuned ... perfectly tuned.

If the universe shows that it is fine tuned, then it's because it has gotten worse.

Which, of course, is because of the Fall.

Ro 8:22 For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.

This is a perfect example of the Willy Nilly application of scripture and concepts you attempt to put forward. Why not try to learn something academic about Biblical Exegesis and Epistemology so you sound more knowledgeable and make more solid statements about the Bible?

You'd be more effective in getting your points about faith and the cogency of the Bible across to all who read.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,858,119
52,925
Guam
✟5,249,614.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Fine tuning the universe assumes it was out of tune at one time.

It came into existence fine tuned.

Ok. It's time for you to quote some more Scripture out of context or without context.

READY! SET! ....... GO!!!!!!

Ge 1:31 ¶ And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

Nope. I don't want that. What I asked above doesn't have anything to do with that.

Are you okay?

Note: I made a mistake. First I said God created the universe fine tuned. That's wrong. God created the universe perfectly tuned. But now, due to decay, it has gone from "perfect" to "fine."
 
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Sure, I like Circular Reasoning!
Site Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
27,353
12,617
Space Mountain!
✟1,545,131.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Are you okay?
No, I'm not okay. I've never been okay, and I won't be okay as long as I'm stuck in a Fallen World that keeps poking me.

.... But, I'M BUST'N OUT !!! :ahah:
Note: I made a mistake. First I said God created the universe fine tuned. That's wrong. God created the universe perfectly tuned. But now, due to decay, it has gone from "perfect" to "fine."

I would simply as that we "know" God created the universe through special prophetic communication.

We don't need to adopt modern Cosmology and Physics to "support" the Biblical prophetic message. We also don't need to somehow explain to the world "HOW" God did it, as if we're required to do so. We're not.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,858,119
52,925
Guam
✟5,249,614.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I would simply [say?] that we "know" God created the universe through special prophetic communication.

Indeed.

We don't need to adopt modern Cosmology and Physics to "support" the Biblical prophetic message.

Indeed.

God said it, that settles it.

We also don't need to somehow explain to the world "HOW" God did it, as if we're required to do so.

If God explained it to us, then yes, we should explain it to others.

We're not.

The world has a natural tendency to ask questions.

But what they do with the answers is a different matter.
 
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Sure, I like Circular Reasoning!
Site Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
27,353
12,617
Space Mountain!
✟1,545,131.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Amen!
Indeed.

God said it, that settles it.
Amen! .....but with the caveat that we truly need to do our best to understand what it is "God said." As you know, prophetic speech and spiritual lessons from God's Word aren't always meant to be easily understood. However, they'll be understood by those who seek God's Will in reaching further, better understanding.
If God explained it to us, then yes, we should explain it to others.

Right. But that doesn't mean we'll have to try to do so in purely 21st century scientific terms that physics and geology provide. No, we'll do it by robust and prayerful explication of the biblical texts.
The world has a natural tendency to ask questions.
Yes, they do. But philosophers, who ask more questions than anyone, also know that the ability to discern between questions that can be answered from those that can't be answered is an important ability to acquire. And I think Jesus and His Apostles stated similar recommendations. That's where Christian Discernment comes into play. Having faith in Christ isn't fully reliant on answering all of our questions, although a number of our questions can be answered.
But what they do with the answers is a different matter.

Yeah, but we who are Christian want to do our best to help disambiguate the potential for passing along what God intends to be the knowledge of Christ that He actually wants to be communicated.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

NxNW

Well-Known Member
Nov 30, 2019
8,603
5,965
NW
✟323,577.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
The results above and below are due to blind chance with not an ounce of intelligent design I take it, other than human intelligence taking a hand in organising the flower arrangement?
Where is the supernatural force? Snowflakes and other complex systems develop because matter has the property of organizing itself when energy is passed thru it, within certain parameters. That property has not been quantified yet, but some sort of Law of Emergence is there waiting to be described. But again, self-organization is built into matter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hans Blaster
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,858,119
52,925
Guam
✟5,249,614.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
.....but with the caveat to this is that we truly need to do our best to understand what it is "God said."

By way of example, here is the first thing God said in Genesis 1 ...

Ge 1:3 ¶ And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

Now ... what more do we "truly need to do our best to understand what it is God said"?

As you know, prophetic speech and spiritual lessons from God's Word aren't always meant to be easily understood.

Indeed.

And what does God say we should do about it?

2Ti 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

However, they'll be understood by those who seek God's Will in reaching further, better understanding.

But what about those who aren't seeking God's will?

They ask good questions, but then won't accept the answers.

Right. But that doesn't mean we'll have to try to do so in purely 21st century scientific terms that physics and geology provide. No, we'll do it by robust and prayerful explication of the biblical texts.

But when I give them a passage of Scripture, and that's not good enough for them, then I'll usually try and answer their question on their terms.

And if I find out that neither God nor I can change their thinking, then I have to assume they either have a mental block, or they are falling victim to a Biblical principle that they've been warned about.

Yes, they do. But philosophers, who ask more questions than anyone, also know that the ability to discern between questions that can be answered from those that can't be answered is an important ability to acquire.

Again though, it's what they do with those questions they know can't be answered is what makes a difference.

For example, people won't ask the dimensions of the Ark, as those dimensions are clearly stated in the Scriptures.

What they will ask ... probably as a sort of "I gotcha" question ... is something like, "How could all those animals fit aboard the Ark?"

And this is where I then go into speculation mode and speculate that the inside of the Ark was bigger than its outside.

And this is just what academia wants -- to bait someone into speculating so as to level accusations of adding to the Scriptures or [insert accusation here].

If they can't handle the answer, they shouldn't ask the question.

And I think Jesus and His Apostles stated similar recommendations. That's where Christian Discernment comes into play. Having faith in Christ isn't fully reliant on answering all of our questions, although a number of our questions can be answered.

I do my best though to answer all questions put to me.

At first, I'll try and answer with respect to how they asked me.

But if I suspect they're asking me questions so as to make me look foolish, I certainly won't disappoint them.

They want to play games, I can play just as hard.

Yeah, but we who are Christian want to do our best to help disambiguate the potential for passing along what God intends to be the knowledge of Christ that He actually wants to be communicated.

Yes, and they can read it for themselves everything they need to know about Christ in the Bible.

Anything else they "need to know" they'll have to wait and ask God themselves.

For example, if some academian has got to know what it is Jesus wrote in the sand -- and they have to know it so badly they can't sleep at night -- I say they have a problem.

They need to learn "the patience of Job."
 
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Sure, I like Circular Reasoning!
Site Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
27,353
12,617
Space Mountain!
✟1,545,131.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
By way of example, here is the first thing God said in Genesis 1 ...

Ge 1:3 ¶ And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

Now ... what more do we "truly need to do our best to understand what it is God said"?
Sure. Some bits and pieces of the Bible can be quoted without much difficulty and we all can (more or less) come to immediate agreement about their seeming meaning. However, taking a simple example like Genesis 1:3 that's obviously not bogged down by too much semantic ambiguity (other than the fact that it wasn't written in English, let alone Jamesian English) doesn't make the rule for all cases.

What if I counter by quoting another example?

Genesis 2:2 And on the seventh day God ended His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done.

How do we know with absolute confidence that the 7th day was of the same nature in length and meaning as each of the first six days?


Indeed.

And what does God say we should do about it?

2Ti 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

But what does "study" mean here specifically? Does it just mean 'read the Bible'? Read it in a certain way or with a certain Jewish framework? What methodology is being implied? (It doesn't say).
But what about those who aren't seeking God's will?

They ask good questions, but then won't accept the answers.
It's not our job as Christians to 'make them believe.' This isn't a war of conquest.
But when I give them a passage of Scripture, and that's not good enough for them, then I'll usually try and answer their question on their terms.
What would be better is to answer their questions in scholarly terms that are congruent with Biblical truth and the strong effort to "showing thyself approved." Personally, I don't overly concern myself with answering questions in other people's terms, particularly when their terms are often illogical, confused or ininformed. Moreover, Reality and Truth don't bend for any of us, even if God Himself does incline down to us in His Spirit.
And if I find out that neither God nor I can change their thinking, then I have to assume they either have a mental block, or they are falling victim to a Biblical principle that they've been warned about.
Perhaps. But that's not always the case. Sometimes, we who are Christian aren't very capable in communicating what God wants us to communicate. I've been at fault for that from time to time, I'm sure. So has everyone else.

Again though, it's what they do with those questions they know can't be answered is what makes a difference.

For example, people won't ask the dimensions of the Ark, as those dimensions are clearly stated in the Scriptures.

What they will ask ... probably as a sort of "I gotcha" question ... is something like, "How could all those animals fit aboard the Ark?"

And this is where I then go into speculation mode and speculate that the inside of the Ark was bigger than its outside.

And this is just what academia wants -- to bait someone into speculating so as to level accusations of adding to the Scriptures or [insert accusation here].

If they can't handle the answer, they shouldn't ask the question.

No, that's not a wise way to handle that sort of situation. Speculation is similar to 'private interpretation.' I'd stay away from that because if we're imputing meaning into God's Word where there originally was none, then we're guilty of misrepresentation. We are not free to speculate. However, we are free to admit that "we don't know." Besides, in apologetics, we aren't required by the Lord or by anyone to have an answer for just any question that any Tom, Dick or Sally just happens to articulate on the cusp of a hot Saturday afternoon as they stare out the window.

That's not what we're doing here.

I do my best though to answer all questions put to me.

If I were you, I'd do some rethinking on what it means to answer people's questions. There needs to be some further discernment there in that endeavor.

At first, I'll try and answer with respect to how they asked me.

But if I suspect they're asking me questions so as to make me look foolish, I certainly won't disappoint them.

They want to play games, I can play just as hard.

If we resort to playing hard ball, we might want to recognize that in doing so, we do it out of our own personal decisions to do so and not always and necessarily because God is leading us to do so.

Yes, and they can read it for themselves everything they need to know about Christ in the Bible.

Anything else they "need to know" they'll have to wait and ask God themselves.

For example, if some academian has got to know what it is Jesus wrote in the sand -- and they have to know it so badly they can't sleep at night -- I say they have a problem.

They need to learn "the patience of Job."

That's true. I have no disagreement on those points.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,858,119
52,925
Guam
✟5,249,614.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
If I were you, I'd do some rethinking on what it means to answer people's questions. There needs to be some further discernment there in that endeavor.

From AI Overview:

Several prominent figures and celebrities have publicly stepped away from Christianity after struggling with unanswered questions and philosophical doubts, particularly regarding the problem of evil, suffering, and strict dogma.
  • Charles Templeton: Once a prominent evangelist and close friend of Billy Graham, Templeton left the faith after struggling with the intellectual and moral problems of suffering, eventually writing Farewell to God.
  • Katy Perry: Raised in a strict Pentecostal household by pastor parents, the pop star left the church and her gospel music career behind, citing that her childhood questions weren't answered and she wanted to explore her own path.
  • Daniel Radcliffe: The Harry Potter actor, who was raised in a culturally Christian environment, stepped away from the religion, citing that he left because the faith tried to claim "all the answers" without allowing for human complexity

QV also:

My question is this: what is your explanation for this gap between the academic world and popular thinking? And especially, why haven't these answers reached the churches? Why do so many people lose their faith, because they think no one can answer their questions, while there is a wealth of philosophy and theology available to them, but just floating in an academic vacuum? And as young academic students, who do know that there are these answers: what could we do to help Christ's cause in this?

SOURCE
 
Upvote 0

dlamberth

Senior Contributor
Site Supporter
Oct 12, 2003
20,485
3,306
Oregon
✟1,073,562.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Politics
US-Others
I had no idea who Charles Templeton was. So I Googled him and of course Google answered with it's own AI. It looks to me that Templeton struggled with a lot of the very same issues raised here in CF.

Here's Google's AI response:

Charles Templeton Charles Templeton - Wikipedia left the faith due to growing intellectual doubts regarding the validity of the Old Testament, the reality of Creation, and the problem of suffering Farewell to God: My Reasons for Rejecting the Christian Faith. Unable to reconcile his analytical studies with Christian dogma, he resigned from the ministry in 1957 and detailed his departure into agnosticism in his book Farewell to God: My Reasons for Rejecting the Christian Faith.

Once a leading North American evangelist alongside Billy Graham Charles Templeton: Missing Jesus, Templeton's deconstruction was largely driven by several factors:
- Biblical Inconsistencies: He struggled with the historical accuracy of the Bible, the creation fable, and how to reconcile the teachings of the church with modern reason Farewell to God: My Reasons for Rejecting the Christian Faith.

-The Problem of Evil: He could not reconcile the concept of a loving, all-powerful God with the reality of widespread suffering, death, and evil in the world Farewell to God: My Reasons for Rejecting the Christian Faith.

-Intellectual Rigor vs. Blind Faith: While his contemporary Billy Graham chose to accept the Bible on faith, Templeton insisted on critical analysis, arguing with Graham that avoiding hard questions was "intellectual suicide" The Tragic Story of Charles Templeton | Michael Patton on Patreon.

Despite rejecting Christianity and ultimately becoming an atheist, Templeton maintained a deep, lifelong emotional reverence for Jesus, famously telling Lee Strobel A Pastor Says Farewell To God?... in a late-life interview that he considered him the greatest human being who ever lived and tearfully confessed, "I miss Him" The Tragic Tale of Charles Templeton | Precept Austin.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: AV1611VET
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,858,119
52,925
Guam
✟5,249,614.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Despite rejecting Christianity and ultimately becoming an atheist, Templeton maintained a deep, lifelong emotional reverence for Jesus,

My favorite go-to question for those who have left the faith -- one I've asked more than once here -- is:

Why would believers turn their backs on all this:

Psalm 34:8 O taste and see that the LORD is good: blessed is the man that trusteth in him.

Psalm 51:12 Restore unto me the joy of thy salvation; and uphold me with thy free spirit.


Hebrews 6:4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,
5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,

... to become atheists?
 
Upvote 0