Why is God Hidden?

[Bro Dave]

Let’s, just for the sake of this conversation, accept that God exists, and has “always” existed(although that word has no meaning outside of a time/space reference) Let us also consider that if God were to create a time/space universe for the purpose of creating beings with the potential of achieving a relative perfection, He would by necessity, need to remain hidden. This is because imperfect beings, scurrying around gaining experience, are doing so only because of some relative level of discomfort. If God were to be right there, provably present and directly contactable, the entire focus of survival would be for God to create a welfare state where they are taken care of with no effort on their part, and therefore, no chance of further growth. This would be entirely counter to His reason for their creation! However, God would have to be available in some way, to share in those experiences, and to guide his Kids. So, God, being spirit, gives his Kids that attribute as well, in the form of a soul. And so the partnership begins; God and humankind, experiencing this material realm. The human making judgment calls, and he/she and God experiencing the results. Good calls, make life a little easier. Bad calls, lead to more difficult, but even richer experiences, all of which eventuates in wisdom and therefore growth of the human soul.

Bro Dave

[Bro Dave]

Add all the "fortutious" confluences of all the life on our planet, and there is no possiblilty of it being accidental.
Take the eye. There is engineering at its delicate best! Think just of the number of highly specialized, transparent tissues that all come together optically, and not only focused, but wired in a way we really cannot comprehend, to a brain that makes sense of it all. Lucky.... REAL "lucky"!

Oh dear Dave! I'm not the most eloquent of 'explainers' here, but there is a very simple explanation for this apparently improbable outcome. Unfortunately it is so simple and I can't imagine that you have never been presented with it, so I must sadly conclude that you have set up a mental block about the issue. I'm going to go briefly off-topic to present you with a hopefully different example of this that you could actually experiment with yourself if you wanted to:

Pardon me, I just threw up trying to swallow all that smarmy condescension…

If you had ever owned a copy of Photoshop equipped with a "Kais Power tools" plug-in you might have been familiar with the concept of directed randomness. In the case of the computer software I mention, an series of random choices by the program produce an array of visual textures (images). If you wanted, for example to make an image of wood-grain you would start by studying the selection of images the program first puts up. Of these you would choose the one which looks most like wood-grain (of course none look anything like it (yet)) but you choose the closest nonetheless.

Then from this choice the program breeds a new selection of images based on the properties (genes) of the one you just chose and introduces random variations on these properties in order to create an new selection of images -- from which, once again, you choose the one that most looks like wood-grain.

As you repeat this exercise, the images presented to you become more and more like the sort of target you have in mind. Infact, so powerful is this technique that you can end up with such a knotty old woodworm infested tree-trunk that anyone else could be fooled into thinking that it was a real image.

Now what this demonstrates is that by adding direction to randomness we can take away all the 'luck' -- so long as the direction is consistent, the accumulation of random influences results in something complex and coherent.

All that “proves” is that negative entropy is demonstrable. This is an interesting twist, since negative entropy is usually use to prove a Creator, so you get points for being imaginative.

In the case of the eye, the 'direction' is that creatures with better eyesight win in the global arms-race that is life. That's all it takes.

Really! Would you care to venture a guess how many chemicals there are that could be detrimental versus the tiny chance of the PERFECT chemical just HAPPENING to appear, at exactly the right location? The chances of failure are staggering, while those of success practically non-existent! Then put the eyes,(TWO of them) into a body chock full of other happy accidents, and happily connect them correctly to a brain that can make sense out of this bunch of random, non directed accidents. And you think believing in God is a stretch???:roll:

Please…

Bro Dave

[Curious]

Take the eye. There is engineering at its delicate best! Think just of the number of highly specialized, transparent tissues that all come together optically, and not only focused, but wired in a way we really cannot comprehend, to a brain that makes sense of it all. Lucky.... REAL "lucky"!

Am I to take it from this answer that the spectacles shown on your avatar are purely for the sake of vanity? I, along with the majority of my family have appalling eyesight. Those people I know with good eyesight tend to have parents with good eyesight and also tend to have children who have good eyesight. Am I to conclude from this that their designer was superior to my own or is it that inheritence plays a major role here?

[Bro Dave]

Take the eye. There is engineering at its delicate best! Think just of the number of highly specialized, transparent tissues that all come together optically, and not only focused, but wired in a way we really cannot comprehend, to a brain that makes sense of it all. Lucky.... REAL "lucky"!

Am I to take it from this answer that the spectacles shown on your avatar are purely for the sake of vanity? I, along with the majority of my family have appalling eyesight. Those people I know with good eyesight tend to have parents with good eyesight and also tend to have children who have good eyesight. Am I to conclude from this that their designer was superior to my own or is it that inheritence plays a major role here?

Good question. Acutally, had our planet not gone into isolation due to the Lucifer Rebellion, there was to be a genic correction made that would have removed many of our unfortunate evolutionary contaminations.

But that's another story that I suspect you are not interesting in persuing...

Bro Dave


P.S. The spectacles come from 66 years of living and reading too many posts!

[Curious]

Good question. Acutally, had our planet not gone into isolation due to the Lucifer Rebellion, there was to be a genic correction made that would have removed many of our unfortunate evolutionary contaminations.

But that's another story that I suspect you are not interesting in persuing...

Bro Dave


P.S. The spectacles come from 66 years of living and reading too many posts!

Then it would seem that the basic design was flawed as good design should always take into consideration the operational environment. To use an extreme example I could design a very fine looking submarine with an outer shell made entirely of sodium. The fact that the submarine instantly bursts into flame as soon as it comes into contact with water, killing everyone onboard, would in no way suggest that the design was anything other than perfect as, if the navy had not gone into private ownership, I would have replaced the sodium shell with one of stainless steel and titanium. Of course, using this defence, I would be given short shrift.

[Bro Dave]

Good question. Acutally, had our planet not gone into isolation due to the Lucifer Rebellion, there was to be a genic correction made that would have removed many of our unfortunate evolutionary contaminations.

But that's another story that I suspect you are not interesting in persuing...

Bro Dave


P.S. The spectacles come from 66 years of living and reading too many posts!

Then it would seem that the basic design was flawed as good design should always take into consideration the operational environment. To use an extreme example I could design a very fine looking submarine with an outer shell made entirely of sodium. The fact that the submarine instantly bursts into flame as soon as it comes into contact with water, killing everyone onboard, would in no way suggest that the design was anything other than perfect as, if the navy had not gone into private ownership, I would have replaced the sodium shell with one of stainless steel and titanium. Of course, using this defence, I would be given short shrift.

The problem with your assumption is that God did not design the physical unverse to start out in a perfect condition. Perfection is its ultimate goal. Evolution is used as the primary tool to accomplish this. Directed evolution; What a wonderful way to run a universe!

Bro Dave

[QED]

Oh dear Dave! I'm not the most eloquent of 'explainers' here, but there is a very simple explanation for this apparently improbable outcome. Unfortunately it is so simple and I can't imagine that you have never been presented with it, so I must sadly conclude that you have set up a mental block about the issue. I'm going to go briefly off-topic to present you with a hopefully different example of this that you could actually experiment with yourself if you wanted to:

Pardon me, I just threw up trying to swallow all that smarmy condescension…

Sorry, the words happened to express my feelings at the time.

All that ["Photoshop-style texture explorers"] “proves” is that negative entropy is demonstrable. This is an interesting twist, since negative entropy is usually use to prove a Creator, so you get points for being imaginative.

The problem with your assumption is that God did not design the physical unverse to start out in a perfect condition. Perfection is its ultimate goal. Evolution is used as the primary tool to accomplish this. Directed evolution; What a wonderful way to run a universe!

I see from your answer to me and from your discussion with curious that you're actually at home with evolution so long as you keep it in your comfort zone by placing a supernatural hand in there to guide it. So all that separates us really is the guidance system.

In the case of the eye, the 'direction' is that creatures with better eyesight win in the global arms-race that is life. That's all it takes.

Really! Would you care to venture a guess how many chemicals there are that could be detrimental versus the tiny chance of the PERFECT chemical just HAPPENING to appear, at exactly the right location? The chances of failure are staggering, while those of success practically non-existent! Then put the eyes,(TWO of them) into a body chock full of other happy accidents, and happily connect them correctly to a brain that can make sense out of this bunch of random, non directed accidents. And you think believing in God is a stretch???:roll:

Please…

The answer is that the changes are a great deal smaller than you imagine and the effects are magnified by the inordinately greater number of generations than those you are considering. There is only one guide to the process -- and that is survival. And in this quest, Nature is in no hurry whatsoever. It has been working on this for billions of years. I know fro sure that neither you or I can properly comprehend what even a tiny fraction of this timespan really means. But what I do know is that it counts very heavily towards my explanation rather than yours.

[Bro Dave]

The answer is that the changes are a great deal smaller than you imagine and the effects are magnified by the inordinately greater number of generations than those you are considering.

Strangely, they are discovering that evolution does NOT take place slowly, but happens suddenly( which suggests a recognition of a specific need for change, and it's implementation)

There is only one guide to the process -- and that is survival.

Suggesting at least a consciousness of self, and therefore a desire to survive

And in this quest, Nature is in no hurry whatsoever.

Again, for "Nature" to "be in no hurry", there must be a consciousness of time.

It has been working on this for billions of years.

So, "Nature" IS plotting and planning... Hmmm could it be that "Nature" is actually an expression of what some have called "God"?

I know fro sure that neither you or I can properly comprehend what even a tiny fraction of this timespan really means. But what I do know is that it counts very heavily towards my explanation rather than yours.

Right! I am overwhelmed by both your objectivity, and your humility!

Only kidding. I think you just reject the ridiculous "god" mankind has created. Once we put a name to "god", we ascribe human traits and limitations of language,(and understanding). We may not be as far apart in this as you thought!

Bro Dave

[QED]

The answer is that the changes are a great deal smaller than you imagine and the effects are magnified by the inordinately greater number of generations than those you are considering.

Strangely, they are discovering that evolution does NOT take place slowly, but happens suddenly( which suggests a recognition of a specific need for change, and it's implementation)

Somehow I can't see you reading Gould, but yes, Punctuated Equilibrium has been proposed as a better description of the rate of change of evolution. But timescales are still relative in this respect and normally this argument is conducted with YEC's where there is only a mere few thousand years to play with.

There is only one guide to the process -- and that is survival.
Suggesting at least a consciousness of self, and therefore a desire to survive

And in this quest, Nature is in no hurry whatsoever.
Again, for "Nature" to "be in no hurry", there must be a consciousness of time.

It has been working on this for billions of years.
So, "Nature" IS plotting and planning... Hmmm could it be that "Nature" is actually an expression of what some have called "God"?

You make my point entirely. The human compulsion to anthromorphize everything is utterly unfounded: Natural selection expresses no more desire for survival than the Earth desires to keep on spinning. Only someone attempting to rationalize a belief in a personified god would attempt to offer this interpretation.

Even if there was the tiniest grain of truth in it, the god it would reveal would not be the one that people are used to. It's a worthless concept as far as I'm concerned. It would mean that every time another Pentium 4 processor (Da da de dum) is fired-up inside a PC god would heave another great sigh as he went about chasing the electrons through yet another 178 million transistors. An awful lot of stuff goes on in the universe. I think it's either totally autonomous or totally directed. If it was only partially directed there wouldn't be the consistency we see in the physical laws and all gods omin-characteristics would be trashed.

[Curious]

Good question. Acutally, had our planet not gone into isolation due to the Lucifer Rebellion, there was to be a genic correction made that would have removed many of our unfortunate evolutionary contaminations.

Then it would seem that the basic design was flawed ...

The problem with your assumption is that God did not design the physical unverse to start out in a perfect condition. Perfection is its ultimate goal. Evolution is used as the primary tool to accomplish this. Directed evolution; What a wonderful way to run a universe!

Bro Dave

The problem with this, as I see it, is that the physical universe must then be imperfectly designed, not just that it is imperfect in it's initial state. It might be argued that the main driving force behind evolution is the changing environment so how is it that this changing environment should bring about a corruption or stasis in the genome? What might be seen as a deleterious mutation in the desert might be beneficial in the rain forest. Which part has been poorly designed, the environment, the occupants , or the interface? Which part is so flawed as to require constant patching? That, in my book, shows poor design.

[angelic_spirit]