Just Accidental?

[ArtieE]

Where does it say that?

In the Bible. "He knows everything that has happened and everything that will happen." Does God Know Everything? (Omniscient)

 

[Deeje]

In the Bible. "He knows everything that has happened and everything that will happen." Does God Know Everything? (Omniscient)

From your link....
"The omniscience of God means that He has perfect knowledge, perfect understanding, and perfect wisdom as to how to apply the knowledge."

This is exactly what omniscience means. But applying it to the bigger picture, you can see that God exercises this knowledge in a specific manner.

For instance.....I believe that when God created the first humans, he gave them free will but indicated to them that it had limits....very reasonable ones. He did not say very much more than 'obey me and trust that the limits I set are for your benefit'. He did not need to say more. He had given them everything they needed, not just to exist, but to find joy in all that he had created for them. He had also given the man an extensive education.

In the "days" that God allotted for his creative works, he concluded each one with an expression of satisfaction with the progress thus far. He even increased his level of satisfaction with the creation of man at the end of the 6th "day". So from his perspective, all was as it should be. Then it says God "rested" from his creative works, meaning that all was exactly as he purposed up to that point.

But the 7th day was never concluded with any declaration, and the Apostle Paul spoke about the 7th day as still continuing.

The Bible is a record about God's dealings with humankind during this period. It is thousands of years long, and was allotted from the beginning to iron out all the 'bugs' that free will was probably going to create, so that at the end of this period, God can also conclude it with a declaration of complete satisfaction.

Man's excursion into sin was his choice, not God's. So it does not mean that he planned for it to happen, nor does it mean that he foreordained it. It could have resulted in a number of outcomes. The woman could have rejected the serpent's offer.....the man could have rejected his wife's offer....each would have had a different result, but still dealt with during this allotted time. Free will was not a mistake.

He reserved this period so that free will could be exercised in whatever way it would, and it could be successfully dealt with in this timeframe without messing up what comes next....eternity.

We humans are testing ourselves in this period. We are telling our Creator exactly who and what we are. He will then select those who will fit well into the world he will create at the end of that time.

After the 7th day is over, having chosen the citizens of his Kingdom, he can then get on with the rest of his plans for the universe. We will already be examples of what he is looking for. There is no limit to the possibilities of what may come in the infinite future.

I personally think this is a brilliant strategy. God has no place for rebels, either in heaven or on earth, so he gives us all we need to prove ourselves, one way or another.

 

[ArtieE]

I personally think this is a brilliant strategy. God has no place for rebels, either in heaven or on earth, so he gives us all we need to prove ourselves, one way or another.

For more information about God's plan see The Urantia Book. It's much more detailed than the Bible. Paper 4 - God's Relation to the Universe | Urantia Book | Urantia Foundation

 

[Deeje]

For more information about God's plan see The Urantia Book. It's much more detailed than the Bible. Paper 4 - God's Relation to the Universe | Urantia Book | Urantia Foundation

So you are more inclined to believe a book that talks about aliens than the Bible? Really? Doesn't that make followers of Urantia more like Scientologists? I have read some of the Urantia papers...they are quite creative in the detail, (like fiction written into a true story) but those embellishments are not scripture.....and completely meaningless to me.

But again, you can see that God forces no one to believe in him or to serve him.....all are free to choose their position. God is just taking notes about all of us so that names can be recorded in his "Book of Life".....if you are not in the book, then you have no future in God's plans. I want what God is offering and I am more than happy with his terms......others may not.

 

[Sapiens]

So you are more inclined to believe a book that talks about aliens than the Bible? Really? Doesn't that make followers of Urantia more like Scientologists? I have read some of the Urantia papers...they are quite creative in the detail, (like fiction written into a true story) but those embellishments are not scripture.....and completely meaningless to me.

Seems about the same to me.

 

[Deeje]

Seems about the same to me.

I am not surprised Sapiens. You view is somewhat narrow.

 

[Sapiens]

I am not surprised Sapiens. You view is somewhat narrow.

I believe you have that backward. It takes a very narrow view to split the hairs that you need to in order to make the claim that both are not fairy tales.

 

[Deeje]

I believe you have that backward. It takes a very narrow view to split the hairs that you need to in order to make the claim that both are not fairy tales.

Or it takes getting down off your pedestal long enough to see that your elevated view is hampered by a specific visual impairment.

Humans do not have vision like hawks so they need to be at ground level to discern things clearly.

 

[Deeje]

What kind of response do these images evoke in you?

Now imagine these scenes without sight, hearing, smell, taste and touch.....it would all be completely useless....wasted.

The natural world tells us that it delights our senses for a reason.

If someone tells you that this is just the result of a series of fortunate coincidences, can we say in all honesty that none of this was designed purely for our enjoyment? Surely only a fool would deny it.

 

[ArtieE]

So you are more inclined to believe a book that talks about aliens than the Bible? Really?

No. But it's much more detailed than the Bible so why not read it if you want to learn more?

Doesn't that make followers of Urantia more like Scientologists?

Don't know enough about Scientology to say.

I have read some of the Urantia papers...they are quite creative in the detail, (like fiction written into a true story) but those embellishments are not scripture.....and completely meaningless to me.

If we had the Urantia Book to begin with instead of the Bible maybe you would have a different opinion.

 

[ArtieE]

What kind of response do these images evoke in you?

Now imagine these scenes without sight, hearing, smell, taste and touch.....it would all be completely useless....wasted.

Nature would have existed anyway even if there were no organisms with senses and a brain. Were such scenes wasted on the dinosaurs? What kind of response would they evoke in dinosaurs?

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Where does it say that? He does not control his intelligent creatures by force. He gives them free will but does not choose to foreknow everything they will do with their choices. He allows free will to be exercised and then he responds to the action. This is what is repeated countless times in the Bible. Men act.....God responds. He has never left his people without guidance, which means that they have no excuse to disobey him.

According to scripture satan was once a righteous angel who at some point chose to follow an unrighteous course. Judas too was chosen as a righteous one, but chose to betray his master for a price. God can choose to know whatever he wishes, but he does not presuppose what everyone will do. He allows all to choose their own course and then he judges them on their choice.

I understand that you feel the need to hold your god blameless whatever it does. Unbelievers have no such obligation, and are free to apply the same standards to that god that they would to anybody else. My take is that with omniscience and omnipotence comes omniresponsibility, including responsibility for choosing to remain ignorant about that which you can effortlessly know. Even in a court of law, we hold people responsible for what they should have known, as with a negligent parent or somebody breaking a law, ignorance of which is not an acceptable excuse.

Edit:

For instance.....I believe that when God created the first humans, he gave them free will but indicated to them that it had limits....very reasonable ones. He did not say very much more than 'obey me and trust that the limits I set are for your benefit'.

I would hold such a god responsible for the decision to grant free will and then impose limits with sever punishments. Give the race of creatures he created, that was never going to be possible. The first two failed as has everybody since.

Man's excursion into sin was his choice, not God's.

Nope. God remains omniresponsible for what He has created and allowed.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

So you are more inclined to believe a book that talks about aliens than the Bible? Really?

I'm certainly no less inclined to do so. Extraterrestrials would be natural and need not be able to create universes. That makes their existence and thus their visitation to earth more likely than a god's, not less likely.

I have read some of the Urantia papers...they are quite creative in the detail, (like fiction written into a true story) but those embellishments are not scripture.....and completely meaningless to me.

Then you should understand why others feel the same way about scripture before citing it as authoritative. It's meaningless to unbelievers except in the same way any other book such as the Iliad or Beowulf might be.

you can see that God forces no one to believe in him or to serve him

That's true with leprechauns and vampires as well. They never force you to believe in them.

It's always seemed remarkable to me that a god that wants to be known, loved, understood, obeyed, and worshiped would in every case choose to do what a nonexistent god would do: Nothing. How does that make sense?

It's this collection of occurrences which, though possible if such a god existed, not only seem unlikely, but are absolutely required in a godless universe. In a godless universe with creatures inventing god, the gods would always be undetectable and need to be believed in by faith.

In a universe with no god in which creatures had invented one that the inventors tell us wants our obedience, we would have wills inconsistent with the wishes of such a god and be told that the god allows us to exercise them against its will, and will punish us at a time and place where nobody ever sees it.

Incidentally, nobody forced me or anybody else to believe in the sun. It's unavoidable. There is no need to believe in that which is self-evident. In a universe created and ruled by a god that wants to be known, such a god would be known the way the sun is.

 

[Deeje]

If we had the Urantia Book to begin with instead of the Bible maybe you would have a different opinion.

The Urantia papers were written much later. They are not inspired works or they would be included in scripture.

Nature would have existed anyway even if there were no organisms with senses and a brain. Were such scenes wasted on the dinosaurs? What kind of response would they evoke in dinosaurs?

And that is just the point. "Nature" was put in place for us to admire. God already planned for our arrival as the unique creatures that we are. We alone have the senses and ability to enjoy creation, not just use it. Animals have no appreciation for any of it, because all they see is food and opportunities for reproduction. It's a day to day business for them. They have no ability to plan consciously for anything but the here and now.

Only humans have a concept of past, present and future and can plan their tomorrows based on past and present experiences using their intellect. We alone have a moral sense. There are no creatures on earth like us.

Beauty is made for us to appreciate and to be moved to thank the one who provided it. When was the last time you saw cows appreciating a sunset?

 

[Mister Silver]

"God did it" is the easy "not using my brains" answer. Forgive me if I prefer to actually use my brain rather than resort to a "science makes my brain hurt" answer.

 

[Deeje]

I would hold such a god responsible for the decision to grant free will and then impose limits with sever punishments. Give the race of creatures he created, that was never going to be possible. The first two failed as has everybody since.

If you even remotely understood God's purpose in our creation and could see past the end of your nose, you would see the brilliance in his method. It isn't obvious unless you really know scripture...and understand time.

God remains omniresponsible for what He has created and allowed.

What he has created and allowed is more profound than you can imagine, but never revealed to those who wish to judge the Creator on circumstantial evidence on a purely human level.

You know nothing about him....and will continue to know nothing because you have closed both your mind and your heart. If you have judged God, then he will have judged you.

I'm certainly no less inclined to do so. Extraterrestrials would be natural and need not be able to create universes. That makes their existence and thus their visitation to earth more likely than a god's, not less likely.

The Bible is full of extraterrestrials...what do you think angels are?

What makes you think that God is something more "supernatural" than they are? He is a spirit, just like they are, except that he is responsible for the existence of all life apart from himself. The material creation came well after their creation and whatever realm they inhabit. It is just as real as the dimension we inhabit, but it is not one with which we are familiar. You think that is impossible?

It's meaningless to unbelievers except in the same way any other book such as the Iliad or Beowulf might be.

It can be as meaningless as you want it to be....but it does not require your belief in it to be true. God's purpose for his universe will go ahead, with us or without us. We have choices to be included in God's plans or excluded. He promises that it will be worth all we have been through to attain it.

It's always seemed remarkable to me that a god that wants to be known, loved, understood, obeyed, and worshiped would in every case choose to do what a nonexistent god would do: Nothing. How does that make sense?

It is also remarkable that he has never left mankind without direction and knowledge of his existence and his intentions...yet free will has always led them into selfishness. Was free will a mistake then? Or was it a tool in God's hands to test out our motivation and genuine love for him and what he stands for?
It is what separates the sheep from the goats. Which do you want to be?

 

[ArtieE]

Beauty is made for us to appreciate and to be moved to thank the one who provided it. When was the last time you saw cows appreciating a sunset?

There were sunsets billions of years before there were humans Deeje... the universe is full of pretty sunsets nobody sees.

 

[SkepticThinker]

The Urantia papers were written much later. They are not inspired works or they would be included in scripture.

And that is just the point. "Nature" was put in place for us to admire. God already planned for our arrival as the unique creatures that we are. We alone have the senses and ability to enjoy creation, not just use it. Animals have no appreciation for any of it, because all they see is food and opportunities for reproduction. It's a day to day business for them. They have no ability to plan consciously for anything but the here and now.

Can you demonstrate any of this?

How about the ugly and harmful things in nature? Were those made so we could admire their beauty as well?

Only humans have a concept of past, present and future and can plan their tomorrows based on past and present experiences using their intellect. We alone have a moral sense. There are no creatures on earth like us.

Hmm well then it's pretty weird that squirrels and chipmunks are known to collect food to prepare for winter given that according to you humans are the only beings that can "plan their tomorrows based on past and present experiences using their intellect."

Beauty is made for us to appreciate and to be moved to thank the one who provided it.

And what about the ugly stuff?

When was the last time you saw cows appreciating a sunset?

How on earth could you ever know if a cow can appreciate a sunset?

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

If you even remotely understood God's purpose in our creation and could see past the end of your nose, you would see the brilliance in his method. It isn't obvious unless you really know scripture...and understand time.

I have no reason to believe that, and neither do you.

You know nothing about him....and will continue to know nothing because you have closed both your mind and your heart.

My mind isn't the closed one here.

The moderator in the debate between Bill Nye and Ken Ham on whether creationism is a viable scientific field of study asked, "What would change your minds?" Scientist Bill Nye answered, "Evidence." Young Earth Creationist Ken Ham answered, "Nothing. I'm a Christian."

Which one of these men's mind is closed? Which do you identify with more?

The Bible is full of extraterrestrials...what do you think angels are? What makes you think that God is something more "supernatural" than they are? He is a spirit, just like they are, except that he is responsible for the existence of all life apart from himself. The material creation came well after their creation and whatever realm they inhabit. It is just as real as the dimension we inhabit, but it is not one with which we are familiar. You think that is impossible?

You are aware, are you not, that I don't believe the things you do? What kind of answer were you expecting from an atheist about questions that assume that there are angels or a supernatural realm? I think angels are mythology and that the word supernatural has no meaning.

Was free will a mistake then?

From the perspective of the Christian god, it was. Why would you give mankind freewill and the urge to sin if you find sin intolerable? Because you want to be surrounded and worshiped by those that will guess that you exist based on no evidence?

And if that's what you want, don't give them the faculty of reason, either.

These are among the reasons that I reject Christian doctrine. It simply doesn't make sense. The story sounds like one that people inventing a god that wants to be known and obeyed would come up with in a godless universe. Much more reasonable is that sin is a meaningless term, will developed through evolution to serve the beasts and man, and that no god is apparent because none can be.

 

[Deeje]

I have no reason to believe that, and neither do you.

I have all the reasons in the world. You apparently lost them by 'throwing the baby out with the bathwater'.

My mind isn't the closed one here.

The moderator in the debate between Bill Nye and Ken Ham on whether creationism is a viable scientific field of study asked, "What would change your minds?" Scientist Bill Nye answered, "Evidence." Young Earth Creationist Ken Ham answered, "Nothing. I'm a Christian."

Which one of these men's mind is closed? Which do you identify with more?

I don't know why you keep throwing these people at me like I have some connection to their ideas....I do not. I have never even heard of these men, let alone espouse what they are saying. I am NOT a YEC....are you listening? I am NOT a creationist. I support Intelligent design....an old earth and a slow and progressive creation over eons of time. The Bible allows for all of these and science agrees with this. What it disagrees with is how it happened.

You are aware, are you not, that I don't believe the things you do? What kind of answer were you expecting from an atheist about questions that assume that there are angels or a supernatural realm? I think angels are mythology and that the word supernatural has no meaning.

You suggested that you could believe in extraterrestrials....what do you think angels are? What is deemed "supernatural" to you in the material realm may be very natural to them in a different one. You cannot say categorically that they can't exist, just that you have never seen them. How much of what science believes about the past was ever seen?

From the perspective of the Christian god, it was. Why would you give mankind freewill and the urge to sin if you find sin intolerable? Because you want to be surrounded and worshiped by those that will guess that you exist based on no evidence?

So you are in a position as a mere mortal to judge the actions of superior being that you know nothing about? There are answers to all our questions as long as we have an open mind....yours is jammed shut and barricaded with stupid question that have simple answers if you will just listen. BTW...you will not find the answers in the churches....that is not true Christianity....been there done that....there are no answers there.

And if that's what you want, don't give them the faculty of reason, either.

Our reasoning ability works very well as long as it isn't clouded by misinformation. Misconceptions abound and it takes true reasoning ability to separate truth from fiction.....but it also takes an open heart....You will never believe what you do not want to believe.....that applies to all of us.

These are among the reasons that I reject Christian doctrine. It simply doesn't make sense.

You rejected fake Christianity....not the truth. I rejected that almost half a century ago, but I never threw God away with bad religion. I saw his hand everywhere.

The story sounds like one that people inventing a god that wants to be known and obeyed would come up with in a godless universe. Much more reasonable is that sin is a meaningless term, will developed through evolution to serve the beasts and man, and that no god is apparent because none can be.

What things "sound like" and what they actually are can be two very different things....but you will never know unless you open yourself up to the possibility that there is so much more to this question than meets the eye.