Anonymous wrote:OP, what so you mean by "no one can explain how magnets work"? The force can be measured and we can create magnets.

Um, that wasn't OP. That was someone making fun of OP.

OP here, ready to tinker with the definition of this being whose existence we have been debating for some time now.

I must assume many PPs have had some fun tossing straw men around, while others have seriously underscored the difficulty of knowing a concept which is, by definition, beyond our comprehension.

But while God, if He exists, is a mystery by His very nature, our existence is an effect of the Cause, and some aspects of the Cause can be understood through our existence. Physicists and mathematicians observe regularly occurring effects and ascertain knowledge of their causes without observing the causes themselves. Now, God is not a gluon or a quark, which are parts of the physical world. But the properties essential to our understanding of the physical world raise the questions whose answers are God.

Two of those questions are causality and information.

Atheists and theists each have their own issues with causality: things don’t come into existence without a cause, yet there is no explanation for the first cause (who caused God?). A materialist explanation rests on the inescapable assumption that matter and energy came from nothing. This relies on as-yet undiscovered principles of physics. In contrast, the theist notion of causality accounts for the sophistry of an "Uncaused Cause" without violating the laws of physics. Before the Big Bang, there was no physical universe, no space, and no time. The Cause is outside of time and space. There is no difference between what it is and that it is. It exists necessarily. This is God.

A metaphysical concept that encompasses this understanding of God's nature is a mind. Information theory (which pops up in computer science, cosmology, genetics, evolutionary theory...) assumes a separation between an object and its representation, as well as the involvement of someone capable of understanding this relationship. Information needs a sender and a receiver, an encoding/decoding mechanism, and a code to represent something (which is distinct from the symbols of the code itself).

Materialistic processes cannot produce coded information. Everything in the materialist universe represents only itself. Everything we know about information requires a Mind, because there is no known mechanism by which natural processes produce information. That Mind is God.

From here, we can understand more of God's attributes, such as God is One, God is infinite, God is eternal, God is transcendent and immanent, omniscient and omnipotent (it is too late at night for those separate discussions now). But the concepts of causality and information are an excellent beginning, because they demonstrate that God authored science, the material universe, physics, and life. So our increased understanding of the physical world and the forces that govern it can only bring us closer to understanding God. There is no conflict.

So that is why I cannot get excited about evolutionary theory in and of itself. It could well be true. When theories about the material universe are used to prove a negative that is outside the scope of such inquiries, that is irrational.

As a general response to the specific complaints of the day: of course I do not hate Dawkins, and I can understand why other skeptics out there would not want to stand behind his work. The only reason I addressed him specifically was to illustrate the problem of closed minds. If skeptics are truly interested in pursuing the truth, wherever it may lead, they would not fall back on ad hominem attacks, or other logical fallacies.

Again, I am only too glad to admit my limitations. I am just a mom. Though I found the referenced scientific papers fascinating, they present no challenge to faith in God, when God is understood not as the picture in the Sistene Chapel, but the most real thing there is.

My question now is, why is it so important to not believe in God?

Anonymous wrote:OP here...I saw someone finally mentioned the grumpiness of my naturalist/materialist/empiricist/evolutionist/skeptic/atheist DCUM PPs! Whew!

Where's the love? Really...what is it that makes skeptics so cranky?

I'm the one who asked you about your disbelief in the FSM (which you still haven't explained, I'll note), not cranky at all. However, I can understand crankiness from those on my side because in the last couple of decades there has been an assault on non-Christians and on reason in this country. (I didn't take your first post as part of that.) Time was, each side could keep its condescending thoughts about the other quiet, but some people on your side decided to make this a war. If you (i.e., not you but one) are going to get in my face with your religion, then yes, I will tell you how foolish I think you are.

Anonymous wrote:OP here...I saw someone finally mentioned the grumpiness of my naturalist/materialist/empiricist/evolutionist/skeptic/atheist DCUM PPs! Whew!

Where's the love? Really...what is it that makes skeptics so cranky?

Because you condescend. You keep positioning god as something that is accessible by reason or a reason-like process, which gives you a greater view into the workings of the universe than a skeptic can ever have. Which drives them batshit crazy because it's not true.

In reality, faith is a belief.
It does not contradict existence, but it can't be proven by existence.
It is not accessible by reason or a reason-like process.
It is perfectly reasonable not to believe in God. There is no logic that proves him.
It gives insight into morality, but it does not give superior information on the universe. This has been proven time and time again. Science gives us superior information into the universe.

The best way to reach out to atheists is to have respect for their skepticism. They are being reasonable. It makes no sense for God to hide and then make heaven dependent on believing in him. Where is the good in that?

No, the good in people is in seeking and doing good. Whether we find it in church or by studying creation, this is a purpose that is clear to many skeptics and believers alike.

Lastly, never subordinate science to any other form of inquiry. If God created the universe, he must be most pleased that people apply energy and intellectual rigor to comprehend, appreciate, and honor it.

And this is why, as a lifelong Christian, I have written as though I am a taunting skeptic.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh please I can't wait for the definition of God.

How about you open with some philosophy.

Then ask a provocative question about atheism or science. Don't answer it, but drop some points about the limits of what they know. Use that to "answer" the question without answering it.

Pause for some romantic wonderment about the beauty of the world. We're not talking Divine Watchmaker, but if the intricacy or the beauty of the world inspires some people, who are we to argue?

There it is! Gap in atheists, wonderment about creation. God!

Close with warm fuzzies.

I seem to have misplaced my left shoe. Do you know where it is, atheist? Can you explain how it went missing? I thought not. Does Charles Darwin know? No! Cause he's dead.

In a world of half-seen shadows, where the sunlight dapples mysteriously from the dew-kissed leaves on the trees, no one can explain how magnets work. And magnets are quite like love, really, since it's all about attraction that you can't see. But just because no human who ever lived knows how magnets work, or love works, and can measure neither, that doesn't mean we live in a world without strange attraction.

Therefore, GOD!

PP here: damn, I forgot to add an inspiring bible quotation. Sorry, here you go:

Deuteronomy 25:11-12 - If two men, a man and his countryman, are struggling together, and the wife of one comes near to deliver her husband from the hand of the one who is? striking him, and puts out her hand and seizes his genitals, then you shall cut off her hand; you shall not show pity.

Also you forgot the update on OP's day and how the kids are doing.

OP, what so you mean by "no one can explain how magnets work"? The force can be measured and we can create magnets.

OP here...I saw someone finally mentioned the grumpiness of my naturalist/materialist/empiricist/evolutionist/skeptic/atheist DCUM PPs! Whew!

Where's the love? Really...what is it that makes skeptics so cranky?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh please I can't wait for the definition of God.

How about you open with some philosophy.

Then ask a provocative question about atheism or science. Don't answer it, but drop some points about the limits of what they know. Use that to "answer" the question without answering it.

Pause for some romantic wonderment about the beauty of the world. We're not talking Divine Watchmaker, but if the intricacy or the beauty of the world inspires some people, who are we to argue?

There it is! Gap in atheists, wonderment about creation. God!

Close with warm fuzzies.

I seem to have misplaced my left shoe. Do you know where it is, atheist? Can you explain how it went missing? I thought not. Does Charles Darwin know? No! Cause he's dead.

In a world of half-seen shadows, where the sunlight dapples mysteriously from the dew-kissed leaves on the trees, no one can explain how magnets work. And magnets are quite like love, really, since it's all about attraction that you can't see. But just because no human who ever lived knows how magnets work, or love works, and can measure neither, that doesn't mean we live in a world without strange attraction.

Therefore, GOD!

Ha! I'm a Christian.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh please I can't wait for the definition of God.

How about you open with some philosophy.

Then ask a provocative question about atheism or science. Don't answer it, but drop some points about the limits of what they know. Use that to "answer" the question without answering it.

Pause for some romantic wonderment about the beauty of the world. We're not talking Divine Watchmaker, but if the intricacy or the beauty of the world inspires some people, who are we to argue?

There it is! Gap in atheists, wonderment about creation. God!

Close with warm fuzzies.

I seem to have misplaced my left shoe. Do you know where it is, atheist? Can you explain how it went missing? I thought not. Does Charles Darwin know? No! Cause he's dead.

In a world of half-seen shadows, where the sunlight dapples mysteriously from the dew-kissed leaves on the trees, no one can explain how magnets work. And magnets are quite like love, really, since it's all about attraction that you can't see. But just because no human who ever lived knows how magnets work, or love works, and can measure neither, that doesn't mean we live in a world without strange attraction.

Therefore, GOD!

PP here: damn, I forgot to add an inspiring bible quotation. Sorry, here you go:

Deuteronomy 25:11-12 - If two men, a man and his countryman, are struggling together, and the wife of one comes near to deliver her husband from the hand of the one who is? striking him, and puts out her hand and seizes his genitals, then you shall cut off her hand; you shall not show pity.

Anonymous wrote:On a side note...

Theists: if you ever get the sense that non-theists are grumpy over all this stuff, I think the explanation is that I really, really, really want to sic Feynman on you:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MO0r930Sn_8

And, of course, the rebuttal from the theists:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-agl0pOQfs

On a side note...

Theists: if you ever get the sense that non-theists are grumpy over all this stuff, I think the explanation is that I really, really, really want to sic Feynman on you:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MO0r930Sn_8

Anonymous wrote:Oh please I can't wait for the definition of God.

How about you open with some philosophy.

Then ask a provocative question about atheism or science. Don't answer it, but drop some points about the limits of what they know. Use that to "answer" the question without answering it.

Pause for some romantic wonderment about the beauty of the world. We're not talking Divine Watchmaker, but if the intricacy or the beauty of the world inspires some people, who are we to argue?

There it is! Gap in atheists, wonderment about creation. God!

Close with warm fuzzies.

I seem to have misplaced my left shoe. Do you know where it is, atheist? Can you explain how it went missing? I thought not. Does Charles Darwin know? No! Cause he's dead.

In a world of half-seen shadows, where the sunlight dapples mysteriously from the dew-kissed leaves on the trees, no one can explain how magnets work. And magnets are quite like love, really, since it's all about attraction that you can't see. But just because no human who ever lived knows how magnets work, or love works, and can measure neither, that doesn't mean we live in a world without strange attraction.

Therefore, GOD!

Oh please I can't wait for the definition of God.

How about you open with some philosophy.

Then ask a provocative question about atheism or science. Don't answer it, but drop some points about the limits of what they know. Use that to "answer" the question without answering it.

Pause for some romantic wonderment about the beauty of the world. We're not talking Divine Watchmaker, but if the intricacy or the beauty of the world inspires some people, who are we to argue?

There it is! Gap in atheists, wonderment about creation. God!

Close with warm fuzzies.

A thread about Helios would not have this staying power.

Sadly, this assertion is probably the only thing that would make me drop the thread. Good luck with your definition! I hope the other skeptics never figure out which shell you've got him hidden under!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here...didn't want anyone to think I wasn't still fascinated by the discussion. While I am no biologist, physicist, theologian, philosopher, or great mind, I think my promised post defining God will actually address all of the points raised by the posts today. But that will have to wait for my kids' bedtime. Until then, feel free to continue without me, and I will catch up.

I'm now about 99.9% sure the OP is a non-believer with way too much time on her hands.

.

How so?

If only that were true! But, alas, no, my time is a precious commodity, and yet I continue to engage with my dear fellow DCUMers, who cannot seem to make a point without calling my intelligence or sanity into question. That's ok...as I said at the start of this thread, I have been reading DCUM for a while now, and I know how it works. So I remain.

I just think there could be no greater topic of conversation, and I am honored to experience these varied viewpoints. Because as much as PPs mention mythical figures or the Easter Bunny, we all know there is far more at stake with God. A thread about Helios would not have this staying power.

Either God exists, or not. One position is true, the other position is false. I think a definition of God will help keep the conversation on track. But as I said, that post will have to wait for the kids' bedtime. Until then!