Posted: 08 August 2012 at 9:31am | IP Logged
Originally posted by King-Anu
Being omnipotent does not mean one has to exercise that potency. Not preventing a wrong does not automatically mean one is not willing to prevent a wrong. It is not about willing here.
The framework of life in context of religion is that we are left to live our own lives. We are responsible for our actions in response to the situations we get. God does not control everything despite having the ability to do so and this is why we have a concept of heaven and hell where we will be judged according to situations we faced and how we dealt those situations.
There is no paradox and therefore I refute this.
What's the meaning of this test? The test is stupid. What exactly is he testing? Faith? Parents also test their children time to time, but if they can foresee a danger, will they leave their children's back? I don't think so. And the test is rigged. For example, take psychopaths. They have physical problems, i.e. such brain chemistry that they don't have a conscience. they don't feel anything. So, how can you say killing is wrong of him, when he can't tell?
And take children who have cancer or such disease, or even an adult. What are you testing by giving a good person pain? Faith? Should we start testing the faith of our loved ones by inflicting pain? That's sadistic, and I don't think a sadistic God is benevolent. If he is, then we should give domestic violence the status of "Godly" act. After all, we are testing the faith of our spouse.
And if he is designing humans, why put evil there? If you are designing a robot, will you program it to having destructive thoughts? If there is a designer, then he designed evil. Another sadistic characteristic.
Originally posted by King-Anu
Now I have not studied other sciences much however happen to go through biology a little. I know that at the level of cell membrane we have channels lined by gates which respond to voltage produced by exchange of ions (between inside and outside cell) through preceeding channels and in this manner a signal propogates. Now can you please enlighten me how the heck can that happen randomly? lol. From DNA to complex organs and system and their coordination just happened randomly because the condition and the envrionment was suited for that. What was the need that led to all this? lol.
The problem with atheists in my view is that they have closed their mind not only to idea of God but to idea of intelligence behind life. Now I don't care if you want to call that intelligence god, alien or goblin. But please don't tell me that this one structure (human body) which i happen to study and there are many other such structure came into existence as a result of a big bang and then random processess over billion of years. Its a joke. Its like saying a television came into existence randomly. This is a thought out design.
Lets settle on one thing. That life and whatever is happening is intelligence based. You can be open as to whats the intelligence. Now whatever it is it seems to me it will always be illogical from current view of science followed by logic. For example once you assume that DNA came somehow then all the structure make sense as they are coded in DNA
Then you run in the problem of creation of God. You go to all lengths, explaining how all this is so wonderful that how the heck can it happen randomly. But you don't continue the reasoning chain back to God. You say how can all these wonderful things exist without intelligent designer. Then answer how can such a entity which create all these wonderful things exist without intelligence creation? If all these things need a creator, then the creator of all these wonderful things also need a creator. So, who was behind him?
And I addressed your second point back in the thread, so allow me to copy paste because I am not gonna type that again.
"The Universe came first and then we evolved because situation was right. Situation was not right so that we could come, we came because it was right. You are reversing cause and effect. When you put a water into a container, it takes the shape of container. You don't say the container was designed to hold the water in that exact shape, no. You say the water takes the shape of container. Likewise, we adapted and evolved according to the conditions, Universe didn't adapt for us. If there was a intelligent creator, why not create life everywhere in Universe? Because nobody was creating, we just randomly evolved in the right conditions. Now, only one right conditions in such a big area as our solar system and even galaxy, does it seem like intelligent creation? No, it appears random."
So, you see if and intelligent being will create Universe, he will make it full of life and not with such rigorous limits that large distance change kills you, asteroids floating through space that can bang into Earth any time, etc. So no, I can't settle on the fact that it seems intelligent creation. Because such low probabilities of life makes me conclude that it is all random.
Originally posted by King-Anu
In conclusion the idea of God is not that illogical once you agree that there is intelligence behind whatever is going on. I have assessed is from non-religious angle as well and I believe more the science discovers more stronger my belief that there is intelligence behind all this.
No, I gave you my reasoning why it seems there is randomness in what is happening. So, I still believe that the concept of God is illogical. And no, the more science develops, the more we will disprove the existence of God. Once God was the answer of everything, from rain to sun to food to seasons. Now, we have explained all that and limited it to creation of the Universe. And as we discover more answers, we will take away that credit too.