The Ultimate Truth

[Lionel20]

In my adult years I've always had this visceral affirmation that other areas in my cerebrum could never fully make sense of. I can't shake it, I've learned to embrace it, this idea, that considers itself much more certain than an idea, seems indigestible by the empirical evidence. Yet I insist it to be true.

This is how I define my faith somewhat. A faith in a Source that has empowered the nature of the universe in a way that I cannot fully comprehend. It's not specifically a faith in the Bible, although I credit the Bible for the awakening thoughts. The authors and organizers of the Bible for the most part, I presume were on the same journey that I'm on, trying to understand this seemingly inexplicable belief that empirical sciences don't appear to have the capabilities to satisfy.

[Divine Insight]

From the subatomic level on up, our reality is far too structured and complex for there 1.) not to be a Creator 2.) for the Creator to not have purpose for the creation

How do you know our realty is far too structured and complex for that?? We have run computer simulations that show very complex structures can be arrived at by the interactions with very simple rules. Can you show now this is not the argument from ignorance.??

You make an absolutely excellent point Goat. It has indeed been proven via computer simulation that our complex universe can indeed arise from extremely simple rules.

So Lionel's argument is indeed an argument from ignorance. His premise is simply false, and has already been proven to be so.

[Lionel20]

Complexity is only relative to how well you understand something. The better you understand it, the less complex it becomes.

eg:

When I was 5 years old, Addition was a very complex form of Mathematics.
When I was 16 years old Addition was a piece of cake, the most basic of all maths. Basic calculus was the complex from of Mathematics.
When I was in my early 30s I went and did a computing degree. Basic Calculus was a piece of cake. Differential Calculus became the complex maths.

We look at the world, often with wonder and we can't fathom how things could possibly be, but when we understand things better, it becomes less complex to us.

The thing I find with Creationists is they tend to only look at certain parts of the universe. They marvel at all that is complex, beautiful and amazing, but refuse to look at anything that would show incompetent or even malevolent design. (Just look at Creationists documentaries and you'll see this is true). There are many things that show extremely terrible design on this planet. Some things are very ugly and horrific.

Evolution makes way more sense to me now than Creation ever did. For me choice has nothing to do with it. The thing that most closely matches what I see in reality is what I am more likely to believe.

My life experiences have brought me to the opposite conclusions. The more I know about most perceived complexities in life, the more I begin realize how much more I don't know.

The quantum world is a good example, I've been reading a good amount recent scientific articles on it. Some of the studies have opened my mind up to possibilities I previously never thought of.

[Lionel20]

We have a choice to do what?

To believe in a God or not believe in a God?

Why should that be important?

Also just because Christianity works best for you doesn't mean much. Clearly Buddhism works better for a Buddhist. And atheism works better for an atheist. And do we really need to go though all the other religions? Obviously Islam seems to work very well for those who love to become terrorists in the name of Allah.

I actually have no problem with many world religions. I think Taoism and Buddhism are very nice religions. I wouldn't mind having a Taoist or Buddhist as a next door neighbor at all. I've also met many Wiccans that seem to have a very nice religion and I wouldn't mind having them as neighbors either.

I would actually prefer to have scientists as next door neighbors and especially scientists who are indeed atheists because that demonstrates that they are very clear and unbiased thinkers indeed.

We don't need to believe in a God to be a good person. In fact, religions that proclaim otherwise are clearly false. I might add that the Christian dogma (i.e. the Bible) does indeed make the false claim that non-believers cannot be good people. It does this in both the Old and New Testaments.

In fact, I hold that people who need to believe in a God in order to be good people are clearly not good people at all. Because if they wouldn't be good if they didn't believe in a God then it's crystal clear that this is indeed who they truly are.

In fact, if you stop and think about that for a moment it should bring to you a profound revelation.

Imagine that a God truly does exist, and this God cares about morality. Who then do you think this God would be more impressed by? A religion person who would not be good if they thought there was no God? Or an atheists who is good anyway simply because it's what they truly want to be in their heart?

Nothing could please a REAL GOD more than a good atheist.

A good atheist would be a clear example of a person who is genuinely good simply because it's what they want to be and for no other reason.

So if there is a "God", He/She/It/Them, would be most thrilled by good atheists than by any other humans.

Religious people who are constantly trying to appease God, and only trying to do what's right to appease God, would actually be quite pathetic to be sure.

We have a choice to use the biochemical tools we were born with to execute our purpose or not. That's my inclination. When I study the biochemical makeup of our DNA, and how dependent our supporting environment is on other factors within the galaxy, it would be more mind-blowing to me that anything this well-structured wouldn't have a purpose. But ultimately, however much God invested in mankind, he also allowed for us to have a choice to not exercise that purpose.

There are indigenous peoples that have their own native beliefs, it is not my role to determine whether or not they are en route to complete their purpose. That's where many Christians have gone awry in my opinions. As a Christian, I simply share would works for me, listen and consider what other say works for them, and leave any "conversions" up to God.

[Lionel20]

How do you know our realty is far too structured and complex for that?? We have run computer simulations that show very complex structures can be arrived at by the interactions with very simple rules. Can you show now this is not the argument from ignorance.??

How organism interact with a system is highly complex, so much so that specialist are still studying it. Considering the many research hours that have been put in since the dawn of the analysis of earthly records, whether human documents, dendrochronology, rock layers, etc., we still can't answer some of life most basic questions.

As I previously mentioned, explain what makes consciousness happen? How did life begin? How does a zygote turn human? What causes us to dream? There's a list of things we have been experiencing every day and we still can't fully explain how or why they happen.

[Goat]

How do you know our realty is far too structured and complex for that?? We have run computer simulations that show very complex structures can be arrived at by the interactions with very simple rules. Can you show now this is not the argument from ignorance.??

How organism interact with a system is highly complex, so much so that specialist are still studying it. Considering the many research hours that have been put in since the dawn of the analysis of earthly records, whether human documents, dendrochronology, rock layers, etc., we still can't answer some of life most basic questions.

As I previously mentioned, explain what makes consciousness happen? How did life begin? How does a zygote turn human? What causes us to dream? There's a list of things we have been experiencing every day and we still can't fully explain how or why they happen.

So, you totally describe the logical fallacy of 'argument from ignorance'.

[Divine Insight]

We have a choice to use the biochemical tools we were born with to execute our purpose or not.

What purpose? No God ever told me that I had any specific purpose in life.

In fact, this is a huge complaint I have with the Bible in general. What was Adam's purpose? It doesn't say. Adam was never given any purpose. Yet ironically it claims that God created for Adam a "helpmate".

Help with what?

What did Adam supposedly need help with? He was never given a purpose.

His purpose certainly couldn't have been to procreate. If procreation was the purpose then Eve would have been created FIRST, and Adam would have been created as a "helpmate" for Eve so that she could go about her business procreating children.

The Bible actually has things entirely backwards. That's because it was actually written by male-chauvinistic pigs.

Worshiping the Bible as the "Word of God" is like worshiping the Taliban or ISIS. The ancient Hebrews weren't much different.

[Lionel20]

So, you totally describe the logical fallacy of 'argument from ignorance'.

I disagree, if you look at the context from what I was saying, I'm explaining how complicated living systems are from the human perspective.

However this:

We have run computer simulations that show very complex structures can be arrived at by the interactions with very simple rules.

is pure anecdotal evidence

[OnceConvinced]

From the subatomic level on up, our reality is far too structured and complex for there 1.) not to be a Creator 2.) for the Creator to not have purpose for the creation

How do you know our realty is far too structured and complex for that?? We have run computer simulations that show very complex structures can be arrived at by the interactions with very simple rules. Can you show now this is not the argument from ignorance.??

You make an absolutely excellent point Goat. It has indeed been proven via computer simulation that our complex universe can indeed arise from extremely simple rules.

So Lionel's argument is indeed an argument from ignorance. His premise is simply false, and has already been proven to be so.

Yes, indeed excellent points. Even the most complex computer program all comes down to simple electronic signals. Two in fact. 0 and 1. (binary).

[OnceConvinced]

As I previously mentioned, explain what makes consciousness happen? How did life begin? How does a zygote turn human? What causes us to dream? There's a list of things we have been experiencing every day and we still can't fully explain how or why they happen.

I would have to ask how did God get there? Any explanation for how God got there or how God works can be applied to things that aren't Gods.

[Lionel20]

From the subatomic level on up, our reality is far too structured and complex for there 1.) not to be a Creator 2.) for the Creator to not have purpose for the creation

How do you know our realty is far too structured and complex for that?? We have run computer simulations that show very complex structures can be arrived at by the interactions with very simple rules. Can you show now this is not the argument from ignorance.??

You make an absolutely excellent point Goat. It has indeed been proven via computer simulation that our complex universe can indeed arise from extremely simple rules.

So Lionel's argument is indeed an argument from ignorance. His premise is simply false, and has already been proven to be so.

Yes, indeed excellent points. Even the most complex computer program all comes down to simple electronic signals. Two in fact. 0 and 1. (binary).

Programming code is the later part of a process that is not as simple as it looks lol, from the trasitstors to the input devices it requires a knowledge of the electromagnetism to build a computer.

What about quantum computing? So much of our world isn't so simple.