Religion and Ethics BBS

Religion and Ethics BBS
[ Religion and Ethics BBS ]

I've become more a Deist than an Atheist, but even that causes issues, philosophically.

Posted by CE0802 on April 10, 2025, 3:55 am

The more I see the complexity of the human body, the less I think it came about through abiogenesis and evolution.

The random mutation and natural selection methodology just doesn't get me there.

I mean, simple stuff like your body rejecting food that it somehow knows is not good (I recently had what I think was food poisoning). Am I to believe that at some point some organisms HAD that reflex and some DIDN'T, and that the ones who HAD that reflex survived to pass that gene on, while those who DIDN'T died?

So maybe there WAS a "creator". But if there was, I see no evidence that it gives a sh*t what happens to us.

But that raises the question of WHY it created us. To what purpose?

well..is God self-aware...or self-existent?

Posted by scott on April 10, 2025, 9:22 am, in reply to "I've become more a Deist than an Atheist, but even that causes issues, philosophically."

I believe He is both... (using 'He" as a relative term.. we're not talking about His nature here, yet.)

He has a domain in reality and in the spiritual. And is capable of connecting those two for humans. Creation became "soiled', for keeping it a simple term, by sin. And He has overcome that as well.

Faith does have much to do with the who, how, as also the when... but that's the bridge to Him for us, right?

But first you have to believe He actually IS... or can be, for curiosity's sake, to enjoin yourself to more than the possibilities, but also the eventualities in Him. He does things with order and in order.

God is described in the Bible as both self-aware and self-existent. His self-awareness is evident in His ability to communicate, make decisions, and establish relationships with humanity, as seen throughout Scripture. For example, in Exodus 3:14, God reveals His name as "I AM," signifying His eternal and self-existent nature.

The concept of God's self-existence, also known as "aseity," means that He exists independently and is not contingent upon anything else. He is the uncaused cause of all things, eternal and self-sufficient. This doctrine underscores His unique and divine nature.

What do you think about these attributes of God?

The Bible is Psalms 14:1 - The fool says in his heart, "There is no God."

And pretty much no one here wants to be seen as a fool, correct?

In order for anything to exist, an uncaused something, or someone, must exist. It is not an uncaused effect that must exist, for there can be no such thing. Self-creation, an uncaused effect, may be an illogical contradiction, but a self-existent, “uncaused cause” is not.

This “uncaused cause” must have the power of being within itself—it must exist in and of itself. This cause must be eternal, for that which does not exist cannot later bring itself into existence. Moreover, this cause must be personal for an impersonal one could not create personal beings. Only a personal, self-existent God can answer the question: “Why is there something rather than nothing?”

https://learn.ligonier.org/devotionals/gods-self-existence

Link below, is a sermon on self-existence/self-awareness...

https://sljinstitute.net/systematic-theology/theology-proper/attributes-of-god-part-ii-where-did-god-come-from-or-the-self-existence-of-god/

A very good question, that.

Posted by 7:77 on April 10, 2025, 8:31 am, in reply to "I've become more a Deist than an Atheist, but even that causes issues, philosophically."

While I remain an atheist, I consider deism to be an alternative that doesn't require looking the other way when some thorny questions arise. Moreover, while an argument-from-complexity can't prove the existence of God, the complex nature of the universe is certainly compatible* with such a belief.

But the main thing I wanted to say was that I agree that if some sort of Creator exists, there's no compelling reason for me to believe that it is somehow concerned with minutely judging our adherence to the moral/ethical doctrine of various Bronze Age tribes, doctrines that are frankly arbitrary and even of dubious ethical standing in places. Makes no sense to me...

* So's atheism, and the broadly universal tendency of adaptive systems to accrete complexity over time shows how that could work. It's still an open question...and I'm fine with that.

The problem I have is that these random mutations are all happening...

Posted by CE0802 on April 10, 2025, 10:56 am, in reply to "A very good question, that."

...at the same time.

So it's not like random mutations are occurring in a vacuum that are resulting in the formation of the eye.

Those mutations are occurring at the same time that OTHER mutations are occurring that are moving towards whatever - longer necks, better hearing, longer fir, wings, whatever.

So all of those mutations are occurring, at the same time, with some animals dying that don't have some of them, some dying that have a few but not all, some passing on the genes, some not.

Even over hundreds of billions of years, I don't see how that can get you from a single cell organism to what exists today.

With earlier, simpler life forms...

Posted by 7:77 on April 10, 2025, 5:35 pm, in reply to "The problem I have is that these random mutations are all happening..."

...the number of individuals (astronomical) and the rapidity of generational turnover allow for pretty rapid change, but less populous, longer-lived organisms would obviously have a lower rate of change. It seems like enough to me, but that perception is really subjective, so for it to seem different to you isn't something I can object to.

Re: The problem I have is that these random mutations are all happening...

Posted by Christopher Blackwell on April 10, 2025, 5:33 pm, in reply to "The problem I have is that these random mutations are all happening..."

CEO802, Some mutations work and some don't, so only those that work survives, then as conditions change, so do the mutation that will work under the new condition. Sort of a self-correcting device in an ever-changing world.
s

Our Galaxy has billions of planets that could support life.

Posted by Ken C on April 10, 2025, 8:07 am, in reply to "I've become more a Deist than an Atheist, but even that causes issues, philosophically."

So far we only know of one planet that does have life (that's Earth).

Maybe life on Earth was just extremely lucky to get so many beneficial random mutations.

Re: Our Galaxy has billions of planets that could support life.

Posted by Christopher Blackwell on April 10, 2025, 5:44 pm, in reply to "Our Galaxy has billions of planets that could support life."

Ken, also life could be different sizes, based on different ingredients and lived at different speeds, from ultra-fast to ultra-slow, so that we might not recognize it as being alive.

Life could also be brief.

Posted by 7:77 on April 10, 2025, 10:37 am, in reply to "Our Galaxy has billions of planets that could support life."

Simple (VERY simple) life will likely turn out to be quite abundant in the universe, and even in our galaxy. Our ability to tell if an exoplanet supports very basic microscopic life (the form our planet's life existed in for the rather large majority of time that there was any life at all here) is very limited. We're not even certain about some satellites of our gas giant neighbors in our own solar system. The exoplanets orbiting other stars that have been identified as being to some degree candidates for life are all basically right in our galactic back yard, and we can't "see" them well enough to tell if they even have macro-sized life, to say nothing of the much-more-probable microscopic critters. We've looked at only an infinitesimal sliver of our universe so far...and will probably not expand that sliver all that much before our species goes extinct (even if that takes millions of years). Space is that big...

The only way our "window" significantly expands is if an extraterrestrial species evolves technology and starts sending emissions outward at lightspeed: radio signals, and suchlike. Depending on both signal strength and the sophistication of our detectors, that would expand our "window" enormously...but still probably not realistically beyond our own galaxy (one of literally trillions). Our galaxy has a diameter of about 100,000 light years. We're not on the extreme edge, but for simplicity's sake, let's say that 100k light years represents the furthest we could detect an artificial signal from (although we can't even come close to that for any signal we could produce, even something like nuclear detonations). We've only had the ability to detect (or send) such signals even in a crude manner for a little over a century. And even the next-nearest galaxy would be way beyond the distance from which we could detect a civilization that was anything less than a Kardashev Type III. The signal from anything lesser would become far too dispersed before it got anywhere near us.

So any alien civilization we'd have a chance of knowing about would have to have hit the stage of generating detectable signals within the last 100,000 years. 100k years is an eyeblink in terms of astronomical time. There could have been literally millions of such civilizations in our galaxy alone, existing sequentially w/o overlap, that went extinct before we got to the point of being able to detect their emissions. Unless we eventually stumble across their remains out there (a massive longshot...), we'll never know they existed.

That's what I mean by life being "brief." How long do technology-using species last? We have no idea...but our own species isn't at all old (in an astronomical sense), and we've already hit the point where we could kill ourselves off, to say nothing of things like comet and asteroid strikes, nearby supernovae, lethal plagues, and so forth. Space is big...and so is time. It could very well turn out that we'll never be a combination of near enough and near-simultaneous enough to any form of extraterrestrial life or even evidence of its remains to know if we're not alone.

It's not even questionable

Posted by Gustavo on April 10, 2025, 4:51 am, in reply to "I've become more a Deist than an Atheist, but even that causes issues, philosophically."

the human body was designed by a creator.

But that "Creator" need not be God, but rather the Process of Evolution.

Posted by DFM on April 11, 2025, 2:09 pm, in reply to "It's not even questionable"

"The human body was designed by a creator." But WHY?

Posted by CE0802 on April 10, 2025, 8:07 am, in reply to "It's not even questionable"

The question is WHY a "prime mover" would create anything in the first place?

If this Being is all-powerful

Posted by Trish on April 10, 2025, 9:58 am, in reply to ""The human body was designed by a creator." But WHY?"

perhaps humans were some kind of experiment, hobby, or tinker toy.

IF God ever interacted with humans it was long, long ago. I think it got bored. I mean...humans really aren't that facinating.

That was one of the weirdest explanations to me. Not yours. I don't mean that.

Posted by CE0802 on April 10, 2025, 10:47 am, in reply to "If this Being is all-powerful"

Someone once said that god created his creation because he wanted to be worshiped.

That makes god awfully petty and conceited and needy, doesn't it?

I always thought of God as creating the world in order to have fellowship

Posted by BornToFarm on April 10, 2025, 12:25 pm, in reply to "That was one of the weirdest explanations to me. Not yours. I don't mean that."

That would make Him quite magnanimous and benevolent. Rather than enjoy his creation by himself, he chose to share it with others, who were also part of his creation.

why not? Maybe hanging out with Jesus wasn't enough?

Posted by scott on April 10, 2025, 9:35 am, in reply to ""The human body was designed by a creator." But WHY?"

But He says, "Let us make man in His image"... he
doesn't explain there, outrightly the why...

The Bible does provide insights into why God created humanity. In Genesis 1:26-28, it states that God created mankind in His image and likeness, giving them dominion over the earth and its creatures. This reflects a purpose of stewardship and care for creation.

Also, the Bible emphasizes that humans were created to glorify God, worship Him, and live in relationship with Him.

The act of creation is also rooted in God's love and desire for connection, as seen in Genesis 1:26-27. These passages highlight the unique role humans play in God's plan and the intentionality behind their creation.

It's on us, the free willed created humans, for our why. And there's an infinate amount of answers to that.

With all due respect, quoting the Bible is meaningless to me.

Posted by CE0802 on April 10, 2025, 10:45 am, in reply to "why not? Maybe hanging out with Jesus wasn't enough?"

To me, there's nothing significant to me about anything in the Bible. It was written by men, without any divine inspiration.

That's one of the biggest puzzles to me about the religious: why do they put so much stock in what's written in the Bible?

Because abject truth is abundant in it...

Posted by scott on April 10, 2025, 11:00 am, in reply to "With all due respect, quoting the Bible is meaningless to me."

All "divine inspiration" aside.. science, history, archeology, philosophy, insights into human nature, morality, and the human condition.

The complexity of relationships, the consequences of choices, and the pursuit of justice and truth. Ethhics. Even atheists have ethicss. For instance, it emphasizes the importance of honesty in relationships and the enduring value of truth. Something Religion and Ethics persues..sometimes..lool...

It also delves into the struggles of human imperfection - physical, emotional, mental , it
offers timeless lessons on forgiveness, humility, and resilience.

These truths resonate universally, regardless of one's faith.

But nothing proves that it's from a god or gods. That's the point.

Posted by CE0802 on April 10, 2025, 12:34 pm, in reply to "Because abject truth is abundant in it..."

You can find all of that - truths, science, history, archeology, philosophy, insights into human nature, morality, the human condition, the complexity of relationships, the consequences of choices, the pursuit of justice and truth, ethics, the struggles of human imperfection: physical, emotional, mental, timeless lessons on forgiveness, humility, and resilience - you can find all of that in books that we know were written by men.

There's no reason that the bible should be any more significant than any other works of friction, history, philosophy, ethics, etc.

books written by men...? Who else BUT God can convince you?

Posted by scott on April 10, 2025, 2:37 pm, in reply to "But nothing proves that it's from a god or gods. That's the point."

As if a goodly portion of them didn't know about God? And applied their curious, creative, and human condition to their books?

Truth outs itself, CEO802 ... how about an example for you? BTW - no one is asking you to believe or disbelieve what's being said.. this is for conversation's sake.

Even those who believe in God/gods, churches, argue the same exact thing.

https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1D8mahy2ih/?mibextid=D5vuiz

God revealed himself, time and again before ANY written word.

I want God to change me.. not me make Him fit into my definition... I really don't have a singular one.

Anyway, I myself wasn't convinced until He did that for me (I got desperate enough to ask).. and the Bible had been in my life from a toddler!

The Bible is AWESOME... but you need that life Spirit) inside to grasp the treasure within it, imho.

Many books are just diverting and understanding isn't without a price..

You're starting to argue like Sprout usually does... which BTW.. whatever happened to him?

But how do you know that to be true?

Posted by CE0802 on April 11, 2025, 4:30 am, in reply to "books written by men...? Who else BUT God can convince you? "

“God revealed himself, time and again before ANY written word.”

You can’t possibly know that to be true. What would be the evidence for that?

Or is this the “Just look at his creation” argument?

A changed life, a spiritual experience and relationship.

Posted by scott on April 11, 2025, 12:23 pm, in reply to "But how do you know that to be true?"

LIS .. it's God who can convince you... I'm just words.

That's a dodge, which in no way addresses your contention that...

Posted by CE0802 on April 11, 2025, 1:48 pm, in reply to "A changed life, a spiritual experience and relationship. "

..."god revealed himself, time and again before ANY written word."

What makes you think, before man had created the written word, that god had revealed himself?

You weren't there. So what makes you think it happened?

I experienced results. But, you can think whatever you want to.

Posted by scott on April 11, 2025, 5:10 pm, in reply to "That's a dodge, which in no way addresses your contention that..."

Probably the same way you "think" you're right.. I just am. I happen to believe the many various writers of the Bible, even if you don't. And it's their testimony and my own, I am assured of.

Someone had to give the give those writers, if they weren't physically there, an orally explained version, storytelling maybe. Historical facts today from archeology, artifacts, and even traditions get passed down if they're important enough, right? There are many "religions" that also believe this, not just my own.

Many people also believe in dinosaurs, ancient pyramids, wealth, right and wrong.. sin... you don't see them... but hey.. they're there. Writing about them didn't make them a "discovery". But cross your dad or mom in something.. and guess what.. you believe in those concepts, and fast.

But I also went looking for Him and found out for myself. There is a combination of ingredients to my faith and belief. There's an action, experience, and personal seeking that gives me the knowledge of and about God.

I happen to believe in God's revelation to me when I asked Him, you don't and perhaps didn't, couldn't, and felt not to.

Ever attended any religious establishment yourself? Not enough "why" for you?

Your lack of curiosity is not my problem really. Go ahead on and live your life.. be happy... find joy... you've read and heard the "Gospel message" by now and the decisions are all made for you, in your heart and mind.

It's actually a better question, why are you here... on this particular message board, that ultimately is of no consequence at all for you. Your questions are answered. You've made up your mind.

Proverbs 14:12 and repeated in Proverbs 16:25. It says, "There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death." It is a cautionary reminder about the limitations of human judgment.

Accepting the limitations of this being the only life there is, then it's over, just doesn't make sense. It's not what, again, the writers of the Bible.. and again, what I know to be true from my own experience.. is right.

And He (God) is. You just saying that I can't believe it, nor should I rely on other's written words, doesn't make it so.

I've read your concepts of right and wrong.. particularly your political beliefs... I respect them.. but you had to be convinced of them first by hearing, experience, knowledge, and practice... apply those to God... then get back to me.

Or just read the Bible, it's way more convincing when you're reading it with a purpose in mind.

Coming here and taking account of my "written" testimony? You're likely not desperate enough to know the truth.

And before you do the "Sprout thing" and regurgitate the question as if I didn't really answer it exactly like you wanted ..

"..."god revealed himself, time and again before ANY written word."

What makes you think, before man had created the written word, that god had revealed himself?

You weren't there. So what makes you think it happened?"

I just plainly believe it as evidenced.

I guess maybe you're new here? Only someone new here could possibly claim...

Posted by CE0802 on April 12, 2025, 6:35 am, in reply to "I experienced results. But, you can think whatever you want to."

...that I lack a curiosity about all things religious.

You made the claim that god had revealed himself long before man invented the written word.

When asked for evidence to prove that claim, you went to "I believe it as evidenced".

If you can't see the logical fallacy of claiming that "evidence" is your evidence, then YOU are the one who is lacking in intellectual curiosity about religion.

Here's the real answer. You said "god revealed himself before man had the written word" because it sounded good to you, without ever actually putting any thought into it whatsoever.

You believe because you believe. You "experienced results". Wonderful. Great. Good for you.

But all you have is your belief. No evidence that what you "experienced" was in any way related to a god or gods.

well.... you're invitation to heaven always stands...

Posted by scott on April 12, 2025, 7:52 am, in reply to "I guess maybe you're new here? Only someone new here could possibly claim..."

it's up to you to accept it... and seeing how we were both born in this time and century... where the written word is... and you want to use your own experience to determine your end instead of othher's testimony... that's your choice.

Or pick any religion.

And we'll both agree on how that ends. Dirt.

Jesus offered better. He offered more. He offered Himself. I'll take Him.

In general I think people are hard wired one way or another

Posted by Trish on April 11, 2025, 11:29 am, in reply to "But how do you know that to be true?"

you could be brought up in a very religious household and have no interest in god or faith whatsoever

you could be brought up in a non-religious home and somehow find faith, perhaps through an experience that couldn't be explained.

my vision of "god" is a multifaceted crystal. When you look you see through the lense of your culture and experiences. This is why portraits of god differ. After all if you are a parent, even a divine one, wouldn't dad have your skin tone and common facial features?

And perhaps (mind you I'm just conjecturing here) each of the facets has a name. Thus we have Allah, Vishnu, Jehova, Elohim, Shiva, Ishtar... etc.

Putting that all aside, I see no evidence of an active deity.

« Back to index

[ Religion and Ethics BBS ]