Why did god create...

[Erik Mesoy]

Why did god create...

• 
  Each time I get into a thread like this, I've usually decided that my previous answer is poor, so let me toss this one out and see what you think:
  
  They are emergent properties of the creation/existence of a universe with a certain set of physical laws.
  
  On the issue of why God didn't create a universe with a different set of physical laws, I have two hypotheses. One, other universes may have worse emergent properties. (On a smaller scale, this sort of thing happens constantly on Dungeons&Dragons forums where one guy says "How about we change this rule to work like this" and another guy objects "But then this could be used to do this, and that would be even worse".) Two, this may be the only logically possible universe, with all physical constants deriving from some sort of Grand Unified Field Theory-esque statement.
  
  (Unless you're a Calvinist.)

 

[MobBoss]

very provable, they found cancer deformation on dinosaur bones.
http://www.bioedonline.org/news/news.cfm?art=598
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2003/oct/23/dinosaurs.science
http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/ancient/AncientRepublish_975839.htm
http://arxiv.org/vc/arxiv/papers/0704/0704.1912v2.pdf
It got proven.

accept it.

or what are you going to bring as an counter?
dino's lived together with man?
it's all a big ploy of God to test our faith!!!!!111
Lies, all damned lies!

actually, it would be funny, unfortunaly, there are poeple out there who come up with such silly excuses

No, I will simply accept it, with the caveat that the study being done is as accurate as it can be when studying something so old. The study is indeed suggestive that cancer did occur in dinosaurs. I have no problem with that.

As to your witicisms, I will simply point out, that unlike you, I dont automatically rule anything out. Especially in dealing in the concept of a being(s) that can essentially make anything imaginable occur at their whim.

Maybe I just have a better imagination than you do.

 

[philippe]

No, I will simply accept it, with the caveat that the study being done is as accurate as it can be when studying something so old. The study is indeed suggestive that cancer did occur in dinosaurs. I have no problem with that.

As to your witicisms, I will simply point out, that unlike you, I dont automatically rule anything out. Especially in dealing in the concept of a being(s) that can essentially make anything imaginable occur at their whim.

Maybe I just have a better imagination than you do.

Yep, it's the "God is tricking us and it's all a ploy" excuse.

 

[Cutlass]

Either God set things in motion and let them take their own path or there isn't a god.

 

[Den Valdron]

@DV: Well, you don't see the purpose. Clearly then, it doesn't exist.

Clearly, not seeing a purpose I do not infer the existence or nonexistence of a purpose.

Clearly, looking at the evidence, I can refute or reject as nonexistent, an alleged purpose which is not consistent with the evidence.

Clearly, not seeing a purpose, you feel at liberty to fabricate one without regard to the evidence. Good for you.

As to my 'anger', I perceive you clawing for the moral high ground, stepping above the fray so as to establish your enlightened superiority over shallow mud beings such as myself. Nothing doing. Sarcasm is a response driven by anger. I seem to recall you acknowledging sarcasm. It's tough to be enlightened, isn't it.

As for myself, I merely consider your views trite.

And I am well aware that people suffer.

Yes. In your world view, it's all part of the big plan.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

I am not trying to establish my superiority to you. If I gave this impression, I apologize; if I did not, and you are simply reading into my comments what you want, then the problem lies with you.

You say there is no purpose, I say there is, and you don't see it. I don't claim that my knowing of the purpose makes me better than you, and I don't expect to convince you of anything.

 

[Aegis]

Either God set things in motion and let them take their own path or there isn't a god.

That is how I see things. If there is a God (and I do believe in a higher being that created everything), s/he just kinda wound up the universe and let everything go off on it's own. S/he either has a hands-off approach to our existence and is simply watching us or is completely apathetic. Either way, we're on our own and S/he will not interfere with our lives to save us from great pain, suffering or mass death.

 

[MobBoss]

Yep, it's the "God is tricking us and it's all a ploy" excuse.

No, I offer no excuse......I simply like to keep my options open for the reasons I stated.

 

[philippe]

No, I offer no excuse......I simply like to keep my options open for the reasons I stated.

still an excuse in my book.

 

[Arwon]

All things dull and ugly,
All creatures short and squat,
All things rude and nasty,
The Lord God made the lot.

Each little snake that poisons,
Each little wasp that stings,
He made their brutish venom.
He made their horrid wings.

All things sick and cancerous,
All evil great and small,
All things foul and dangerous,
The Lord God made them all.

Each nasty little hornet,
Each beastly little squid--
Who made the spikey urchin?
Who made the sharks? He did!

All things scabbed and ulcerous,
All pox both great and small,
Putrid, foul and gangrenous,
The Lord God made them all.

Amen.

 

[lovett]

Is that what you think maximal disvirtuosity is? Simply causing as much suffering in another person as they can physically bear is bad, sure, I don't recommend it, but eventually they will die. Given that we have identified God with maximal virtuosity, then the antithesis would be (according to the LDS view) having a sure knowledge of Him, and rejecting Him.

Surely killing god (virtuosity) would be worse then simply ignoring it?

And NB: Even if rejecting God with sure knowledge of him were maximally disvirtuous, this would obviously require sure knowledge of him. Most people do not have sure knowledge of God. Thus most people cannot be maximally disvirtuous. Thus their freedom (to do evil) is limited.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

You can't kill God.

And the fact that most people cannot be maximally disvirtuous doesn't show it's impossible; whatever is the most evil thing possible, some people will be incapable.

 

[lovett]

You can't kill God.

Why?

I mean assuming he doesn't try and prevent you.

Also, can he kill himself?

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

No, He can't. There are all sorts of stuff He can't do, and that is one of them. And besides the fact that it's impossible, He could stop you.

This is because killing someone is separating their spirit and their body, which is not possible if one's body is perfected.

(And this is of course just my understanding of LDS doctrine.)

 

[Defiant47]

How do you know God created these and not the sin of mankind?

Where does God's creation end and mankind's begin? Are we responsible for feelings wonderful emotions or is God? A community that prospers in harmony has themselves or God to thank?

"Why did God..." doesn't really matter to me. It's called faith.

Why do you choose to have faith in God and not the tooth fairy or Santa Claus? What about a different religion's God?

Faith is synonymous with willing ignorance and stupidity. "I have decided to ignore all evidence, logic, and sense on this one specific issue."

Exactly.

The thing is, people try to apply logic to God, and right there, everything falls apart. If God truly is omnipotent and transcends anything we could know, how can you possibly apply human logic to Him? Doesn't make sense. I'm definitely no staunch religion supporter, I just don't see how logic can deny God's existence

If you rely on pure logic, then you would arrive at the conclusion that God does not/probably does not exist. I'm not contesting that point. In fact, that claim would not upset most Christians. The whole point is that God CAN defy logic.

Logic is really just using our human brains to deduce how/why things are. If God indeed is how he is described, there's absolutely no reason why he would have to follow the rules of logic as we see it.

Logic does not deny God's existence. It is perfectly possible that our logic does not apply to the higher realm of existence where God might exist, or maybe our logic is just flawed.

However, logic does lead to the conclusion of non-belief. Not that God does not or probably does not exist, but that there's no reason to believe in God (especially a specific God). If you get really deep into it, then the only logical conclusion is agnosticism (at least in my evaluations which have yet to be countered to my satisfaction).

Why should we use logic to evaluate God? This is because logic is the best truth-assessing method we have, and the most consistent. I assume that we should evaluate reality (especially important questions such as the existence of God) using our best method of assessing reality. Thus, we use logic.

 

[Sidhe]

You get into all sorts of problems if you say God doesn't have to be logical in philosophy and theology.

For example refutation of such things as could god create an object he could not lift, the answer only remains plausible if you stick to logic, if you don't then you end up disproving either omniscience or omnipotence, something most theologians wont touch with an unimaginably long barge pole.

I'm pretty sure that is true, having been told as much several time, but the arguments are really really anal and long winded.

 

[Quiet Sound]

Is that what you think maximal disvirtuosity is? Simply causing as much suffering in another person as they can physically bear is bad, sure, I don't recommend it, but eventually they will die. Given that we have identified God with maximal virtuosity, then the antithesis would be (according to the LDS view) having a sure knowledge of Him, and rejecting Him.

I would have said condemning finite beings to infinite, eternal torture - even specifically creating a place of such horror for that purpose - would be closer to the mark. Maybe that's just me.

 

[BasketCase]

Why did god create these (by god, I mean whatever god you believe in):

cancer
hatred
smallpox
AIDS
jealousy
sadism
homosexuality
greed
animals that cause horrible suffering to each other
dwarfism
hemophilia
retardation


Note to sissies: I included homosexuality in that list not because I think it's negative, but because it's something that religious people might think is negative.

I'm an atheist, and I still think homosexuality is abnormal. Anyway:

Exit Mundi already covered this one. Imagine if none of the above existed. Imagine if life were perfect and we were all immortal. Then what?

We would be booooooooored.

Why do you think most of us play Civilization 4? In which armies clash and slaughter each other and whole cities are burned to the ground? Call of Duty 4, loaded with brutal and frightening house-to-house warfare in half-destroyed cities? Why do we like to watch celebrities such as Britney Spears crash and burn?

Because when it's over, we're back in our quiet and boring homes and apartments, with no guns going off and no drug rehab or whatever, and we realize how good we've got it. Well, lots of reasons, actually. But that's definitely one of them.

Suppose God foresaw all this when he was putting the blueprints together and getting the building permits for the Universe? He knew perfection would be boring and pointless (God himself is probably bored out of his ass right now), so he made life imperfect because the overall result is preferable to absolute eternal boredom?

 

[Cannae]

God is everything and anything. It has both good and bad qualities from the extensions it has on everything in the universe. God itself though, is the process of time and creation going forward, but also anything matériel. So probability, the butterfly effect, and fate are the things that cause all events to happen, both of a good and bad essence and nature.

 

[Supermath]

Darkess is the absence of light, not the opposite of it.
Silence is the absence of noise, not the opposite of it.
Black is the absence of colour, not the opposite of it.
Evil is the absence of good, not the opposite of it.

One cannot create an absence of something.