Bullet, Ambush and others....

[WaltL1]

Oh, I see. When you look at the universe, is anything out of place? Does anything not belong? It fits perfectly. Everything. Even Bullet! This is why a believer such as myself looks as God as one. One mind, one plan. Now if we want to dig deeper than that we can do no better than speculate on whether God is a being, a force, or a group of super gerbils who agreed to the arrangement of the universe. It is unnecessary to go farther back than accepting the One Mind, I consider God as The One regardless of his true form.

Any religeon that professes belief in the order and plan in the universe is worshiping this God. Some call him by different names, some have different ideas based on cultures, traditions and scriptures but if we are going to have a serious conversation then we have to look at how believers think alike and look at the common ground before looking at differences.


So, do you think the universe is orderly and neat or random and chaotic?

So Ive given this a bit of thought and without trying to be a smart butt I find the universe to be "orderly chaotic". Particularly when I consider man's place in it.
Not sure how deep into this you want me to get but if you are looking for a quick answer... that's it.
If you want me to explain I will.

 

[Day trip]

So Ive given this a bit of thought and without trying to be a smart butt I find the universe to be "orderly chaotic". Particularly when I consider man's place in it.
Not sure how deep into this you want me to get but if you are looking for a quick answer... that's it.
If you want me to explain I will.

No, I really like that. I can’t imagine it said any better. So my interpretation/imagination says, orderly = there is organization / a plan, chaotic = I cannot understsnd all of the plan

I assume you’ve explored St Thomas Aquinas’ Five Ways or Five Proofs from Summa Theologiciae. So I’m addressing the Teleological Arguement in case you’re wondering where I’m coming from.

Here is a real nice summary if needed:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Ways_(Aquinas)

 

[WaltL1]

No, I really like that. I can’t imagine it said any better. So my interpretation/imagination says, orderly = there is organization / a plan, chaotic = I cannot understsnd all of the plan

I assume you’ve explored St Thomas Aquinas’ Five Ways or Five Proofs from Summa Theologiciae. So I’m addressing the Teleological Arguement in case you’re wondering where I’m coming from.

Hmmmm....
My thoughts are more along the lines of... and I'm not great at putting my thoughts into words so you may have to read between the lines a bit......
Take the universe or at least what we know to be "out there". Things smashing into each other, burning up, dying, barren... one might consider that "chaotic".
However that's a human description. If things are SUPPOSED to crash into each other etc based on the environment well then its "orderly" or couldn't happen any other way.
So enter man into the equation. You used the description of "everything fitting perfectly".
A bug the size of a pin head can kill us.
The earth is 70% water and we cant breathe underwater.
Eat the wrong mushroom. Dead.
Get bit by a rattler. Dead.
..... Dead
..... Dead
Not sure this place is "perfect for us". We owe our existence for getting around all the things that kill us.
Your sitting in your house. You put the heat on or you put the air on or you wear heavy clothes or light clothes or.... because we aren't comfortable with the temperature.
I don't see "everything (especially us) fitting perfectly".
We divert rivers, rape the land, pollute the air, use all the resources....
Not sure we are "perfect for the earth".
Now remove man from the equation and imagine this earth.... now I see "everything fitting perfectly".
We are the chaos.
As far as a "plan".
No I don't see a "plan".
Planning is something that man does.
I dont see a plan behind a meteor smashing into the earth. It happened because it was flung there by its environment.
There is no "plan" (that we know about) for me not to understand.
That's how I come up with "orderly chaotic"

 

[Israel]

Hmmmm....
My thoughts are more along the lines of... and I'm not great at putting my thoughts into words so you may have to read between the lines a bit......
Take the universe or at least what we know to be "out there". Things smashing into each other, burning up, dying, barren... one might consider that "chaotic".
However that's a human description. If things are SUPPOSED to crash into each other etc based on the environment well then its "orderly" or couldn't happen any other way.
So enter man into the equation. You used the description of "everything fitting perfectly".
A bug the size of a pin head can kill us.
The earth is 70% water and we cant breathe underwater.
Eat the wrong mushroom. Dead.
Get bit by a rattler. Dead.
..... Dead
..... Dead
Not sure this place is "perfect for us". We owe our existence for getting around all the things that kill us.
Your sitting in your house. You put the heat on or you put the air on or you wear heavy clothes or light clothes or.... because we aren't comfortable with the temperature.
I don't see "everything (especially us) fitting perfectly".
We divert rivers, rape the land, pollute the air, use all the resources....
Not sure we are "perfect for the earth".
Now remove man from the equation and imagine this earth.... now I see "everything fitting perfectly".
We are the chaos.
As far as a "plan".
No I don't see a "plan".
Planning is something that man does.
I dont see a plan behind a meteor smashing into the earth. It happened because it was flung there by its environment.
There is no "plan" (that we know about) for me not to understand.
That's how I come up with "orderly chaotic"

One man posts this and sees or says "everything wrong!"

And by this is satisfied with his indictment.
But...what is he not posting...indeed cannot begin to apprehend or contain in posting that indicates to him "this appears wrong"?

 

[Israel]

And if perhaps he is given to see, discover, begin to learn, be taught...what seems so wrong is absolutely perfect...even in this...a door is opened to all possibility, beyond mere appearance. A man needn't find condemnation only...in what appears to him, so wrong.

 

[WaltL1]

One man posts this and sees or says "everything wrong!"

And by this is satisfied with his indictment.
But...what is he not posting...indeed cannot begin to apprehend or contain in posting that indicates to him "this appears wrong"?

If you remove man's judgement of what is "right" or "wrong" then the way it is is just the way it is and couldn't be any other way.
Perfect "orderliness'? Including what we deem "chaos"?
Orderly chaotic.

 

[660griz]

And if perhaps he is given to see, discover, begin to learn, be taught...what seems so wrong is absolutely perfect...even in this...a door is opened to all possibility, beyond mere appearance. A man needn't find condemnation only...in what appears to him, so wrong.

Except the child didn't have a choice.

 

[Day trip]

Hmmmm....
My thoughts are more along the lines of... and I'm not great at putting my thoughts into words so you may have to read between the lines a bit......
Take the universe or at least what we know to be "out there". Things smashing into each other, burning up, dying, barren... one might consider that "chaotic".
However that's a human description. If things are SUPPOSED to crash into each other etc based on the environment well then its "orderly" or couldn't happen any other way.
So enter man into the equation. You used the description of "everything fitting perfectly".
A bug the size of a pin head can kill us.
The earth is 70% water and we cant breathe underwater.
Eat the wrong mushroom. Dead.
Get bit by a rattler. Dead.
..... Dead
..... Dead
Not sure this place is "perfect for us". We owe our existence for getting around all the things that kill us.
Your sitting in your house. You put the heat on or you put the air on or you wear heavy clothes or light clothes or.... because we aren't comfortable with the temperature.
I don't see "everything (especially us) fitting perfectly".
We divert rivers, rape the land, pollute the air, use all the resources....
Not sure we are "perfect for the earth".
Now remove man from the equation and imagine this earth.... now I see "everything fitting perfectly".
We are the chaos.
As far as a "plan".
No I don't see a "plan".
Planning is something that man does.
I dont see a plan behind a meteor smashing into the earth. It happened because it was flung there by its environment.
There is no "plan" (that we know about) for me not to understand.
That's how I come up with "orderly chaotic"

It seems everything is orderly and neat right up to the point of man. Even the animals act instinctively through genetic programming and remain orderly. This is how the myth described Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. Sinless our language says. Of course early man and animals and rocks and atoms are sinless, they did what they were programmed to do, what their physical and chemical structures allowed them to do. Every piece of matter and energy acted, responded to and was acted upon exactly as it was created to do from the beginning.

Did something change? Did the structure of the universe somehow become different? Is mankind just a “virus” in the program? The plan, the universe did not change, Man did change. He developed and progressed above all of the other creatures and matter in the universe. You can see the divisions through evolution that created other primates that are close to man but still below the level of development of mankind. Who is to say that we are the final product? We may be nothing more than a link to the next stage. But we can make choices and we can act on those choices so what we do with our lives is up to us.

The plan was there all along. Our creation myth speaks of the metaphor of eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. The common interpretation of this myth is that God was tricked by his own creation, that the serpent outsmarted God. This is garbage.

Anyone who believes in God, in an all knowing, all powerful, all loving being who just made this one misjudgement is being foolish. It was God’s plan from the beginning to create man in his own likeness and image, in other words, the ability to choose. To excuse ourselves because we feel guilty about not always choosing wisely by blaming God, blaming the serpent, this is foolishness. Quite frankly it undermines God’s free love.

So why all the “chaos” now? Now that man has entered the picture, is the universe less than perfect? No, this is why we say God chose man. Creation wasn’t just a matter of having a nice rock garden with bugs and people crawling around. Creation occurred to grow love, to grow God and in order to do so, mankind has to be able to choose between “good and evil”. God willingly chose to suffer with mankind as mankind grew up. As a Father, he created man in order to offer himself, his very being which is love. Love cannot be stored up or preserved. Love that is not freely given away dies.

But I’m getting way ahead of myself. So once man enters the scene there has been a common theme: the desire to worship. Early man wished to worship something outside of himself, Baal, Zeus, idols, golden Statues, etc.

Do you think that the common archeological findings of religious artifacts and temples and idols suggest that mankind was genetically programmed to worship a god (small g here)? is it our nature to worship? Why? Or why not?

 

[660griz]

It seems everything is orderly and neat right up to the point of man. Even the animals act instinctively through genetic programming and remain orderly. This is how the myth described Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. Sinless our language says. Of course early man and animals and rocks and atoms are sinless, they did what they were programmed to do, what their physical and chemical structures allowed them to do. Every piece of matter and energy acted, responded to and was acted upon exactly as it was created to do from the beginning.

Did something change? Did the structure of the universe somehow become different? Is mankind just a “virus” in the program? The plan, the universe did not change, Man did change. He developed and progressed above all of the other creatures and matter in the universe. You can see the divisions through evolution that created other primates that are close to man but still below the level of development of mankind. Who is to say that we are the final product? We may be nothing more than a link to the next stage. But we can make choices and we can act on those choices so what we do with our lives is up to us.

The plan was there all along. Our creation myth speaks of the metaphor of eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. The common interpretation of this myth is that God was tricked by his own creation, that the serpent outsmarted God. This is garbage.

Anyone who believes in God, in an all knowing, all powerful, all loving being who just made this one misjudgement is being foolish. It was God’s plan from the beginning to create man in his own likeness and image, in other words, the ability to choose. To excuse ourselves because we feel guilty about not always choosing wisely by blaming God, blaming the serpent, this is foolishness. Quite frankly it undermines God’s free love.

So why all the “chaos” now? Now that man has entered the picture, is the universe less than perfect? No, this is why we say God chose man. Creation wasn’t just a matter of having a nice rock garden with bugs and people crawling around. Creation occurred to grow love, to grow God and in order to do so, mankind has to be able to choose between “good and evil”. God willingly chose to suffer with mankind as mankind grew up. As a Father, he created man in order to offer himself, his very being which is love. Love cannot be stored up or preserved. Love that is not freely given away dies.

But I’m getting way ahead of myself. So once man enters the scene there has been a common theme: the desire to worship. Early man wished to worship something outside of himself, Baal, Zeus, idols, golden Statues, etc.

Do you think that the common archeological findings of religious artifacts and temples and idols suggest that mankind was genetically programmed to worship a god (small g here)? is it our nature to worship? Why? Or why not?

There have been numerous studies.
Some say it is an evolutionary benefit to assure survival and work in groups. Since it is hardwired, the smart folks learned how to control large groups and get free food, and later, free money.

"Another experiment involved asking subjects to cut up a treasured photograph. When his team then measured their sweat production - which is what lie-detector tests monitor - there was a jump in the reading. This did not occur when destroying an object of less sentimental significance.

'This shows how superstition is hardwired into our brains,' he added."

 

[Israel]

If you remove man's judgement of what is "right" or "wrong" then the way it is is just the way it is and couldn't be any other way.
Perfect "orderliness'? Including what we deem "chaos"?
Orderly chaotic.

I know we get into the area of "a wash"...even if you don't receive it, see it, or agree with it.

For every photo with child and vulture, one could post child and birthday cake, surrounded by friends and family. And even if one were to do some calculation and discover "more children celebrate happy birthdays...than don't"...or vice versa, and the result were shown to be completely contrary, it still remains "a wash".
I see order/I see none.

I am more interested in whatever "in man" allows a sensitivity to, even the most rudimentary sense of and response to "order"...and/or for want of a better word, chaos.
I am completely disabused of any notion that chaos is perceptible...of chaos. I am far more persuaded it takes a great deal of order to:
1. Begin to even perceive order.
2. Even enter into imagining a thing that might appear...chaos.

And I am wholly convinced "order" is never an optional consequence (for want of a better phrase) to chaos.
One can argue against this I understand, and do not, have not, within my ability or desire to squelch response.

(And Bullet...here I'll slap myself for going where I go...cause I know it's hard to reach through this screen...more than we know, even)

Done.

"one could say" might say, etc...[slap administered]

"in the infinitude of chaos...order could come, as one of an infinite number of consequences." (Doesn't that infinitude sound kinda pretentious...what should I better say?)

But I think Walt, you get my meaning. Of all the possibilities of an infinite number of simultaneous and unending crashes (so to speak)..."maybe" some order could result. Would it be for "how long"? Would it be long enough for order to perceive itself...in the midst of all "other" chaos?

I am not strictly speaking here of matter/space/ etc...but "chaos" (if I could) of itself. Could time...come out of chaos? Material? Space? be generated to its own laws and restrictions...and not only so...but to a point of a thing...anything...within it or without it...to perceive it?

Even this becomes "a wash" one could say "sure"...to one like me who finds chaos locked up only to self unknowing.

Sure again...(another slap) "one could say"

"Nothing is known!"

But I am persuaded the one who might say this...has not gone very far on the trail laid in those words.

 

[Day trip]

There have been numerous studies.
Some say it is an evolutionary benefit to assure survival and work in groups. Since it is hardwired, the smart folks learned how to control large groups and get free food, and later, free money.

"Another experiment involved asking subjects to cut up a treasured photograph. When his team then measured their sweat production - which is what lie-detector tests monitor - there was a jump in the reading. This did not occur when destroying an object of less sentimental significance.

'This shows how superstition is hardwired into our brains,' he added."

Well we certainly know that worship is a learned trait, for the good and bad of that. I think it is interesting that there could be a genetic urge to worship. Here I go with my religion stuff, “an innate calling from God!”

As far as the second study, I’m not sure superstition is the right cocnclusion. I was going through old photos the other day and I just could not throw away any photos of my mom or dad. (I’m talkkng about the many bad photos and second prints) They have both passed 10 and 12 years ago. It wasn’t superstition, it was maybe attachment, maybe respect, maybe love but I still have the photos.

Superstition seems more learned to me but I could see how a fear response/defense response is possible - for example - I went over to that cedar tree and was stung by a wasp. Now cedar trees always make me nervous. Learned or genetic?

 

[WaltL1]

It seems everything is orderly and neat right up to the point of man. Even the animals act instinctively through genetic programming and remain orderly. This is how the myth described Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. Sinless our language says. Of course early man and animals and rocks and atoms are sinless, they did what they were programmed to do, what their physical and chemical structures allowed them to do. Every piece of matter and energy acted, responded to and was acted upon exactly as it was created to do from the beginning.

Did something change? Did the structure of the universe somehow become different? Is mankind just a “virus” in the program? The plan, the universe did not change, Man did change. He developed and progressed above all of the other creatures and matter in the universe. You can see the divisions through evolution that created other primates that are close to man but still below the level of development of mankind. Who is to say that we are the final product? We may be nothing more than a link to the next stage. But we can make choices and we can act on those choices so what we do with our lives is up to us.

The plan was there all along. Our creation myth speaks of the metaphor of eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. The common interpretation of this myth is that God was tricked by his own creation, that the serpent outsmarted God. This is garbage.

Anyone who believes in God, in an all knowing, all powerful, all loving being who just made this one misjudgement is being foolish. It was God’s plan from the beginning to create man in his own likeness and image, in other words, the ability to choose. To excuse ourselves because we feel guilty about not always choosing wisely by blaming God, blaming the serpent, this is foolishness. Quite frankly it undermines God’s free love.

So why all the “chaos” now? Now that man has entered the picture, is the universe less than perfect? No, this is why we say God chose man. Creation wasn’t just a matter of having a nice rock garden with bugs and people crawling around. Creation occurred to grow love, to grow God and in order to do so, mankind has to be able to choose between “good and evil”. God willingly chose to suffer with mankind as mankind grew up. As a Father, he created man in order to offer himself, his very being which is love. Love cannot be stored up or preserved. Love that is not freely given away dies.

But I’m getting way ahead of myself. So once man enters the scene there has been a common theme: the desire to worship. Early man wished to worship something outside of himself, Baal, Zeus, idols, golden Statues, etc.

Do you think that the common archeological findings of religious artifacts and temples and idols suggest that mankind was genetically programmed to worship a god (small g here)? is it our nature to worship? Why? Or why not?

It seems everything is orderly and neat right up to the point of man.

Again, orderly and neat are human concepts. They describe how we think things should be or how we view things or judge things to be.
The universe is neither orderly nor disorderly until WE judge it to be or not to be. The universe is just the way it is.

Is mankind just a “virus” in the program?

The earth might describe us as that.
But as you said we just evolved to be what we are. That doesn't mean our evolution was a positive thing for anything other than us.

The plan was there all along.

A human plans.
We give our gods human qualities so we can relate to them.
If you believe your particular god is responsible for creation you therefore believe this was his plan.

So why all the “chaos” now? Now that man has entered the picture, is the universe less than perfect?

There is no "perfect". It is what it is.
However man's presence here negatively impacts the rest of what is around us.

So once man enters the scene there has been a common theme: the desire to worship. Early man wished to worship something outside of himself, Baal, Zeus, idols, golden Statues, etc.

That's a fact and an interesting one.
Man's quest to answer the classic question of how "did I get here"?
Maybe. Probably. Could be. Might not be.

Do you think that the common archeological findings of religious artifacts and temples and idols suggest that mankind was genetically programmed to worship a god (small g here)? is it our nature to worship? Why? Or why not?

See my response above. Does seem to be in our nature to worship. From gods to baseball players to movie stars to Charlie Manson to .......

 

[Israel]

Again, orderly and neat are human concepts. They describe how we think things should be or how we view things or judge things to be.
The universe is neither orderly nor disorderly until WE judge it to be or not to be. The universe is just the way it is.

The earth might describe us as that.
But as you said we just evolved to be what we are. That doesn't mean our evolution was a positive thing for anything other than us.

A human plans.
We give our gods human qualities so we can relate to them.
If you believe your particular god is responsible for creation you therefore believe this was his plan.

There is no "perfect". It is what it is.
However man's presence here negatively impacts the rest of what is around us.

That's a fact and an interesting one.
Man's quest to answer the classic question of how "did I get here"?
Maybe. Probably. Could be. Might not be.

See my response above. Does seem to be in our nature to worship. From gods to baseball players to movie stars to Charlie Manson to .......

However man's presence here negatively impacts the rest of what is around us.

A little more than a mouthful said.
And more than interesting.

 

[660griz]

Well we certainly know that worship is a learned trait, for the good and bad of that. I think it is interesting that there could be a genetic urge to worship. Here I go with my religion stuff, “an innate calling from God!�

As far as the second study, I’m not sure superstition is the right cocnclusion. I was going through old photos the other day and I just could not throw away any photos of my mom or dad. (I’m talkkng about the many bad photos and second prints) They have both passed 10 and 12 years ago. It wasn’t superstition, it was maybe attachment, maybe respect, maybe love but I still have the photos.

Superstition seems more learned to me but I could see how a fear response/defense response is possible - for example - I went over to that cedar tree and was stung by a wasp. Now cedar trees always make me nervous. Learned or genetic?

Superstition, belief in gods, same thing.

su·per·sti·tion

noun: superstition

excessively credulous belief in and reverence for supernatural beings.

Here is another study that may be a little more to the point.

"For reasons we don't entirely understand, some people seem very predisposed to either being very religious or not at all and in fact, the research tells us that's highly genetic," she said.

That's not to say your genetics decide whether you're Catholic or Muslim but how deeply you embrace whichever faith or spiritual philosophy you identify with.

Ms Sharman said researchers have used twin studies to exclude environmental effects, such as one's upbringing, social networks or external tragedies.

"Identical twins share 100% of their DNA and non-identical twins share 50%," she said.

"By analysing twins, they've found quite conclusively religiosity is a genetic trait.

"Even in identical twins separated at birth with quite different belief systems end up with the same level of religiosity whether on one end of the world or the other."

This genetic link was discovered by accident, according to Ms Sharman.

She said researchers in the United States of America were analysing links between genetics and alcoholism, and found the revealing data amongst groups which didn't drink due to their religion.

"Someone finally decided to analyse that data and it's now been replicated all over the world," she said.

In some studies, this genetic phenomenon has been linked to the individual's "existential uncertainty", meaning one's level of religiosity would naturally depend on how unsure or anxious a person is about their existence.

 

[Israel]

Superstition, belief in gods, same thing.

su·per·sti·tion

noun: superstition

excessively credulous belief in and reverence for supernatural beings.

Here is another study that may be a little more to the point.

"For reasons we don't entirely understand, some people seem very predisposed to either being very religious or not at all and in fact, the research tells us that's highly genetic," she said.

That's not to say your genetics decide whether you're Catholic or Muslim but how deeply you embrace whichever faith or spiritual philosophy you identify with.

Ms Sharman said researchers have used twin studies to exclude environmental effects, such as one's upbringing, social networks or external tragedies.

"Identical twins share 100% of their DNA and non-identical twins share 50%," she said.

"By analysing twins, they've found quite conclusively religiosity is a genetic trait.

"Even in identical twins separated at birth with quite different belief systems end up with the same level of religiosity whether on one end of the world or the other."

This genetic link was discovered by accident, according to Ms Sharman.

She said researchers in the United States of America were analysing links between genetics and alcoholism, and found the revealing data amongst groups which didn't drink due to their religion.

"Someone finally decided to analyse that data and it's now been replicated all over the world," she said.

In some studies, this genetic phenomenon has been linked to the individual's "existential uncertainty", meaning one's level of religiosity would naturally depend on how unsure or anxious a person is about their existence.

In some studies, this genetic phenomenon has been linked to the individual's "existential uncertainty", meaning one's level of religiosity would naturally depend on how unsure or anxious a person is about their existence.

Good stuff right there.

 

[bullethead]

Back it up to who? You? Why? You know there is no God.

I do not know anything for sure.
I have set out to find a god but cannot.
When I ask the people who claim that they know there is a god and have a relationship with a god and tell me all about what god thinks, how he acts and claims to be able to interpret god's words...I ask them to show me.

They can't and you can't. So why would I even consider your god to exist?

 

[Day trip]

I do not know anything for sure.
I have set out to find a god but cannot.
When I ask the people who claim that they know there is a god and have a relationship with a god and tell me all about what god thinks, how he acts and claims to be able to interpret god's words...I ask them to show me.

They can't and you can't. So why would I even consider your god to exist?

I understand. I was poking at you just for fun. I hope I didn’t upset you. As you know, God is not provable by scientific facts, that’s why I was poking.

God is mystical and trying to find him through brain power alone is pointless. It requires a vulnerability. Too often people seem to be too vulnerable and therefore believe anything. It’s a tough balance between being vulnerable and being gullible. The question comes down to, can you hold that tension of unknowing until you are enlightened? It’s not like, “oh, NOW I get it”. It’s building a foundation of intuitions, reading between the lines. Sometimes we have to tear it all back down and start over but even that is progress.

It’s so difficult because if you are not walking that line of ‘vulnerable but not gullible’ then you can fail either way. You know baptism. What is it? Getting dipped in water so you don’t have any sins? No, No and No! But that’s all you see if you are too gullible. If not vulnerable enough then it’s pointless nonsense. Baptism means immersion and is not a one time thing but a long ongoing process. Dipping in water is just the symbolic version.

True knowledge of God depends upon immersion in the Holy Spirit, in scriptures and in life. Only then does that knowledge function as an entire form of life. We live by the wisdom gained from a wealth of knowledge. We don’t think our way to an understanding of God so much as we live our way to it.

That’s why I can’t prove to you anything. You have to seek for yourself.

If someone where sincerely curious and seeking, I would recommend Matthew Chapters 5-7, feed on it over and over until you’re strong enough for the next meal. Hold the tension until it makes so much sense that you can no longer deny it than you could deny your very existence. If it just doesn’t make sense, let it go. That’s one building block in the foundation.

 

[ambush80]

No, I really like that. I can’t imagine it said any better. So my interpretation/imagination says, orderly = there is organization / a plan, chaotic = I cannot understsnd all of the plan

I assume you’ve explored St Thomas Aquinas’ Five Ways or Five Proofs from Summa Theologiciae. So I’m addressing the Teleological Arguement in case you’re wondering where I’m coming from.

Here is a real nice summary if needed:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Ways_(Aquinas)

Those arguments are really just God of the Gaps arguments.

The Quinque viæ (Latin "Five Ways") (sometimes called "five proofs") are five logical arguments regarding the existence of God summarized by the 13th-century Catholic philosopher and theologian St. Thomas Aquinas in his book Summa theologiciae. They are:

1. the argument from "motion";
2. the argument from causation;
3. the argument from contingency;
4. the argument from degree;
5. the argument from final cause or ends ("teleological argument").

Aquinas expands the first of these – God as the "unmoved mover" – in his Summa Contra Gentiles.[1]

1. "Everything has a cause"--Except the un-caused cause. Self defeating from the get go. There have been many religious traditions that asked "Where did it all come from?" and they were content with the answer "It was always there". Picking aoine answer over the other is a preference, like for ice cream.

2. This is the un-caused cause argument again. Some people have put forth the idea that stuff is here because it's more likely that there would be stuff than not. Picking one argument over the other is just a preference. Neither can be proven. I may not understand it completely but it seems to me that the argument goes: we know stuff is here. It could just as not be here, but it is. Given those two potentials, it's just as likely that stuff will be here as not, but there is stuff. People argue "Nothing can come from nothing" but do they REALLY know what the nature of nothing is any more than they know what the nature of infinity is? It's out of all of our paygrades yet people insist that they know it can't be any other way than the one they prefer.

3. Un-caused cause.

4. "There are heirarchies that prove there's a design".

"The fourth proof arises from the degrees that are found in things. A hierarchy of each quality. For there is found a greater and a less degree of goodness, truth, nobility, and the like. But more or less are terms spoken of various things as they approach in diverse ways toward something that is the greatest, just as in the case of hotter (more hot) that approaches nearer the greatest heat. In the hierarchy of complexity one might find a worm lower down, a dog higher, and a human higher than that."

These are judgements made by humans. "Of course God judges things the way we do because we are made in his image". OR--"The God of Squares has four sides". Meaning, we make God in our image and he likes and dislikes the kinds of thing we do. This bears out with the simple observation that the God(s) of one culture like the aspects of that culture.

4. "Intelligent Design". Everyone should know the arguments against this. If you don't then it's because you're lazy.

 

[ambush80]

About the un-caused cause; think about why you think you know what this un-caused cause is like. Where did your concept of this "being" come from and why is it necessarily a being? Look for the bias.

 

[ambush80]

I understand. I was poking at you just for fun. I hope I didn’t upset you. As you know, God is not provable by scientific facts, that’s why I was poking.

God is mystical and trying to find him through brain power alone is pointless. It requires a vulnerability. Too often people seem to be too vulnerable and therefore believe anything. It’s a tough balance between being vulnerable and being gullible. The question comes down to, can you hold that tension of unknowing until you are enlightened? It’s not like, “oh, NOW I get it”. It’s building a foundation of intuitions, reading between the lines. Sometimes we have to tear it all back down and start over but even that is progress.

It’s so difficult because if you are not walking that line of ‘vulnerable but not gullible’ then you can fail either way. You know baptism. What is it? Getting dipped in water so you don’t have any sins? No, No and No! But that’s all you see if you are too gullible. If not vulnerable enough then it’s pointless nonsense. Baptism means immersion and is not a one time thing but a long ongoing process. Dipping in water is just the symbolic version.

True knowledge of God depends upon immersion in the Holy Spirit, in scriptures and in life. Only then does that knowledge function as an entire form of life. We live by the wisdom gained from a wealth of knowledge. We don’t think our way to an understanding of God so much as we live our way to it.

That’s why I can’t prove to you anything. You have to seek for yourself.

If someone where sincerely curious and seeking, I would recommend Matthew Chapters 5-7, feed on it over and over until you’re strong enough for the next meal. Hold the tension until it makes so much sense that you can no longer deny it than you could deny your very existence. If it just doesn’t make sense, let it go. That’s one building block in the foundation.

What do you think of this?: