Is The Creator Waiting...

[William]

William: On the fair presumption that we exist within a Creation, thus there is a Creator...

Q: Can we fairly ascertain that said Creator is expecting us to clean up our collective mess, and live according to Nature?

I think that this is the likely case. I think this because I understand we are imbued with certain qualities which, when handled correctly, are capable of assisting us in doing what must be done.

The main problem with this understanding appears to be that people in general have not found and activated that key insight - not because they do not have it or are not interested in it - but because they have been distracted from knowing that they even have it...and so even mere mention of it causes issue.

Current world events now allow us the opportunity to rethink...

[Diagoras]

Unfortunately your shredding up of my words from the OP coupled with the unreasonable request to have so many definitions for well known and simply ideas, leaves me with nothing to work with in relation to the OPQ and the reply you gave.

Go well.

Maybe it comes across as unreasonable to you, but have you ever considered that your posts are often so vaguely worded as to make meaningful debate nigh on impossible? It's like grasping smoke.

If I ask what you mean by 'collective mess', it's because you're leaving the field wide open for different interpretations of what constitutes a 'mess'. Does that mean 'political systems becoming unworkable', or 'environmental degradation', for example? Two very different types of 'mess', I'm sure you'll agree. It's not unreasonable to ask for clarification of the themes and ideas you feel important enough to start a new topic on. Same goes for 'certain qualities' and 'correctly'. These words and phrases are simple and in common use, but are also flexible enough to be used within many different contexts. All I'm asking you to do when you introduce such words into debate is to make it clear to the reader how exactly you expect those words to be treated. It's incumbent on everyone in debate to be as specific as possible, rather than for the reader of such threads to guess the intent of every word and phrase.

You'll find that I have no "issue" with clarity, should that ever eventuate.

[1213]

William: On the fair presumption that we exist within a Creation, thus there is a Creator...

Q: Can we fairly ascertain that said Creator is expecting us to clean up our collective mess, and live according to Nature?
...

I think Bible God is showing higher way than nature seems to give. But, if you mean, should we take care of nature, then I think that is what Bible tells us to do. But I dont think it should be implemented to us in fascistic way, like some environmentalists want.

[Charles]

Q: Can we fairly ascertain that said Creator is expecting us to clean up our collective mess, and live according to Nature?

GOD certainly doesn't want us to live according to our fallen nature but in accord with HIS perfect nature.

One Christian pov is that though we did create this mess by deviating from HIS plans for us, the reason HE created us, that we cannot clean this mess up in the least as the addictive power of sin over the sinner's mind is absolute. Therefore all the 'cleaning up' will be by GOD for us, not us for GOD.

First HE must sanctify, make holy, those who put their faith in HIM and who got HIS promise of salvation (ie, by our election to heaven) but who then chose to be sinful and therefore liable to judgment. When sanctified they are no longer liable to be destroyed in the judgment upon the eternally evil reprobate who rejected HIM as a false god and a liar. Once the last sinful elect has been sanctified and made heaven ready according to HIS promise to them, then the day of judgement will occur and all the evil in this reality will be banished to the outer darkness...cleaned up as you put it.

[William]

William: Unfortunately your shredding up of my words from the OP coupled with the unreasonable request to have so many definitions for well known and simply ideas, leaves me with nothing to work with in relation to the OPQ and the reply you gave.

Go well.

Diagoras: Maybe it comes across as unreasonable to you, but have you ever considered that your posts are often so vaguely worded as to make meaningful debate nigh on impossible? It's like grasping smoke.

If I ask what you mean by 'collective mess', it's because you're leaving the field wide open for different interpretations of what constitutes a 'mess'. Does that mean 'political systems becoming unworkable', or 'environmental degradation', for example? Two very different types of 'mess', I'm sure you'll agree. It's not unreasonable to ask for clarification of the themes and ideas you feel important enough to start a new topic on. Same goes for 'certain qualities' and 'correctly'. These words and phrases are simple and in common use, but are also flexible enough to be used within many different contexts. All I'm asking you to do when you introduce such words into debate is to make it clear to the reader how exactly you expect those words to be treated. It's incumbent on everyone in debate to be as specific as possible, rather than for the reader of such threads to guess the intent of every word and phrase.

You'll find that I have no "issue" with clarity, should that ever eventuate.

William: My initial impression of your first post in this thread was that you had neglected to see that I had left the idea of 'mess' open and up to the individual to say.
That is to say, I was open to the individual responding to the question asked, from their own perspective of what they consider a 'mess'

Therefore, the "collective mess" is whatever we all regard as 'The Mess'.

As can be seen, some might argue "What Mess?" while others don't deny there is a mess but don't want to include everyone else's idea of what constitutes a 'mess' into that, saying - rather - that "The Creator will clean it up" ...

...while still (but wait there's more!) others say "Even if we exist within a Creation, we are gifted with the intellectual and material means to clean up the mess, and so "Yes!" The Creator is expecting us to clean up the mess."

[Divine Insight]

I think Bible God is showing higher way than nature seems to give.

This was among the profound questions I had when I was a believer. Why is it that God didn't provide us with a good example in nature? He creates a dog-eat-dog nature that had no moral character at all. Including horrific diseases and natural disasters.

So why should a creator God expect us to actually go against the creation that he created to try do do better than he could do?

Moreover, I would say that many human, possibly even the majority actually do try to do better than the natural world that this creator (if he existed) had created. So humans have already surpassed that criteria quite a long time ago.

So nature isn't even compatible with the God portrayed in Biblical mythology. Why should that be the case?

[Divine Insight]

William: Unfortunately your shredding up of my words from the OP coupled with the unreasonable request to have so many definitions for well known and simply ideas, leaves me with nothing to work with in relation to the OPQ and the reply you gave.

Go well.

Diagoras: Maybe it comes across as unreasonable to you, but have you ever considered that your posts are often so vaguely worded as to make meaningful debate nigh on impossible? It's like grasping smoke.

If I ask what you mean by 'collective mess', it's because you're leaving the field wide open for different interpretations of what constitutes a 'mess'. Does that mean 'political systems becoming unworkable', or 'environmental degradation', for example? Two very different types of 'mess', I'm sure you'll agree. It's not unreasonable to ask for clarification of the themes and ideas you feel important enough to start a new topic on. Same goes for 'certain qualities' and 'correctly'. These words and phrases are simple and in common use, but are also flexible enough to be used within many different contexts. All I'm asking you to do when you introduce such words into debate is to make it clear to the reader how exactly you expect those words to be treated. It's incumbent on everyone in debate to be as specific as possible, rather than for the reader of such threads to guess the intent of every word and phrase.

You'll find that I have no "issue" with clarity, should that ever eventuate.

William: My initial impression of your first post in this thread was that you had neglected to see that I had left the idea of 'mess' open and up to the individual to say.
That is to say, I was open to the individual responding to the question asked, from their own perspective of what they consider a 'mess'

Therefore, the "collective mess" is whatever we all regard as 'The Mess'.

As can be seen, some might argue "What Mess?" while others don't deny there is a mess but don't want to include everyone else's idea of what constitutes a 'mess' into that, saying - rather - that "The Creator will clean it up" ...

...while still (but wait there's more!) others say "Even if we exist within a Creation, we are gifted with the intellectual and material means to clean up the mess, and so "Yes!" The Creator is expecting us to clean up the mess."

Many humans do complain that much of humanity is not addressing what they consider to be "The Mess".

Not only this, but much of what many humans consider to be "The Mess" isn't even created by humans. Just look at the current Covid-19 mess. Humans didn't create that. In fact, if a creator God exists, then he's the one who designed and created the Covid-19 virus. So the problem here would be with the creator, not with the humans.

I've already answered you main question in the OP:

From the OP:

William: On the fair presumption that we exist within a Creation, thus there is a Creator...

Q: Can we fairly ascertain that said Creator is expecting us to clean up our collective mess, and live according to Nature?

Unlike you I see no reason to presume a creator to begin with. And in answer to your question, it would be the creator who is either incompetent or malevolent, not the humans.

Here's a question for you: If there is a Creator why did the creator create all sources of energy to cause pollution? How was that not a dirty trick to begin with? Even burning wood for fuel unleashes large amounts of CO2 into the air. Coal, oil, and other fossil fuels are even much worse as they also produce toxic and poisonous gasses such as carbon monoxide.

Why didn't this creator create pollution-free fuels for us to use. Even when we discovered nuclear energy it produces extremely lethal radioactive waste. Why didn't this creator design clean fuel sources? The creator is the one who made everything messy, not us. We're just stuck with what we have to work with.

And humans certainly didn't create the Covid-19 mess. If their is a creator the responsibility for that mess is entirely on him.

Here's another thing. China is actually dealing with the Covid-19 problem quite effectively. Mainly because of their socialist way of life. They are currently monitoring all of the individuals in their population dictating to them how they must behave and work. Something a free democracy like the USA cannot even do as it would be considered an infringement upon the individual rights of the citizens.

Also, a cooperative socialism is far better than a competitive capitalism. Yet, the Western world ops to compete with each other. I would suggest that this is a "mess" that we have created for ourselves. So should we then conclude that the Creator (if there is one) is smiling down on China with great approval, and frowning upon the western countries?

There are a lot of people who are trying to improve the way humans live. Bernie Sanders and his followers certainly come to mind. But they are viewed with disgust by those who would prefer to maintain the status quo of greed.

So is the Creator smiling down on Bernie and his followers and frowning on those who support corporate greed?

Also, why punish the good people by forcing them to live in societies with the greedy people.

As you ask, Why would a Creator God be waiting for? He can surely already see that there are many good humans on the planet. Why not just wave his magic wand and do away with the flunkies and let the good people take over?

If there's a Creator God who is looking for good people, there are plenty to be found. It would be foolish on his part to be sitting around waiting for the selfish and greedy people to catch up.

So if there is a Creator God as you propose, then it's he who must be either incompetent, malevolent, or simply not paying attention. Because there are plenty of humans who would love for things to be better.

[Zzyzx]

.

Q: Can we fairly ascertain that said Creator is expecting us to clean up our collective mess, and live according to Nature?

GOD certainly doesn't want us to live according to our fallen nature but in accord with HIS perfect nature.

This is said with great certainty. How do you know so much about 'God' and what 'he' wants? Would that be from reading ancient texts by writers who expressed similar great certainty and believing their claims and stories? Do you make up or embellish?

Is there any assurance that any or all of it is true and accurate? Why should anyone believe your or ancient writers' claims of knowledge?

[William]

.

William: Can we fairly ascertain that said Creator is expecting us to clean up our collective mess, and live according to Nature?

Charles: GOD certainly doesn't want us to live according to our fallen nature but in accord with HIS perfect nature.

Zzyzx: This is said with great certainty. How do you know so much about 'God' and what 'he' wants? Would that be from reading ancient texts by writers who expressed similar great certainty and believing their claims and stories? Do you make up or embellish?

Is there any assurance that any or all of it is true and accurate? Why should anyone believe your or ancient writers' claims of knowledge?

William: It is not so important to the thread topic and question, what people believe The Creator might be like in terms of personality and any hand me down ideas about that.

If that is the way the Member sees 'the mess', then that is all the answer the question requires.

How these points of view about that, might look together (the collective mess) and whether we can ascertain from this combination of answers and our shared reality, whether we are most likely to be expected by The Creator to clean up that collective mess - together - or whether The Creator will be doing this for us...or perhaps a combination of the two.

[William]

William: Unfortunately your shredding up of my words from the OP coupled with the unreasonable request to have so many definitions for well known and simply ideas, leaves me with nothing to work with in relation to the OPQ and the reply you gave.

Go well.

Diagoras: Maybe it comes across as unreasonable to you, but have you ever considered that your posts are often so vaguely worded as to make meaningful debate nigh on impossible? It's like grasping smoke.

If I ask what you mean by 'collective mess', it's because you're leaving the field wide open for different interpretations of what constitutes a 'mess'. Does that mean 'political systems becoming unworkable', or 'environmental degradation', for example? Two very different types of 'mess', I'm sure you'll agree. It's not unreasonable to ask for clarification of the themes and ideas you feel important enough to start a new topic on. Same goes for 'certain qualities' and 'correctly'. These words and phrases are simple and in common use, but are also flexible enough to be used within many different contexts. All I'm asking you to do when you introduce such words into debate is to make it clear to the reader how exactly you expect those words to be treated. It's incumbent on everyone in debate to be as specific as possible, rather than for the reader of such threads to guess the intent of every word and phrase.

You'll find that I have no "issue" with clarity, should that ever eventuate.

William: My initial impression of your first post in this thread was that you had neglected to see that I had left the idea of 'mess' open and up to the individual to say.
That is to say, I was open to the individual responding to the question asked, from their own perspective of what they consider a 'mess'

Therefore, the "collective mess" is whatever we all regard as 'The Mess'.

As can be seen, some might argue "What Mess?" while others don't deny there is a mess but don't want to include everyone else's idea of what constitutes a 'mess' into that, saying - rather - that "The Creator will clean it up" ...

...while still (but wait there's more!) others say "Even if we exist within a Creation, we are gifted with the intellectual and material means to clean up the mess, and so "Yes!" The Creator is expecting us to clean up the mess."

Divine Insight: Many humans do complain that much of humanity is not addressing what they consider to be "The Mess".

William: Be that as it may, The OPQ is not asking the question "Do many humans complain that much of humanity is not addressing what they consider to be the mess?"

[Divine Insight]

William: Be that as it may, The OPQ is not asking the question "Do many humans complain that much of humanity is not addressing what they consider to be the mess?"

Who cares?

I've already answered the OPQ:

Q: Can we fairly ascertain that said Creator is expecting us to clean up our collective mess, and live according to Nature?

Any Creator who would be waiting for us to live according to Nature would be fool. It should be clear that ancient humans were living more in accordance with Nature than we are today as they seemed to have no problem killing each other and inflicting cruel and unusual punishments on each other.

Today we have actually risen above the immoral and brutal behaviors of Nature.

As to the other things I've commented on, this was also in response to other things you had said in your OP.

From YOUR OP:

William: I think that this is the likely case. I think this because I understand we are imbued with certain qualities which, when handled correctly, are capable of assisting us in doing what must be done.

You said it. So asking you to clarify what you are talking about is fair game:

What exactly do believe "must be done"?

If you don't want to talk about it that's fine. But let's not pretend that you didn't bring up the topic.