Missing link found
- Thread starter CCGR
- Start date
Under your worldview of deliberate creation, humans cannot be the only things with purpose. Water also has a purpose, as does oxygen, as does...et al.[b said:
So, after creating such a purposeful planet, why make millions of purposeless floating rocks occupying an inconcievably large amount of purposeless space?
Kidan
Moderator
why not?
As a programmer, when I'm building a program, rather than make an air-tight closed system for a single purpose, I leave 'hooks' where i can drop in other dlls (or drop it in as a dll) for reuse. That framework of hooks is purposeless, yet I still take the time to implement it for every project I build. Why? Because I may choose to add things on later, or the original project may evolve to the point where it needs those hooks for some other task.
Just because we don't see a purpose for something now, doesn't automatically mean it's a waste of time, effort, energy and space.
As a programmer, when I'm building a program, rather than make an air-tight closed system for a single purpose, I leave 'hooks' where i can drop in other dlls (or drop it in as a dll) for reuse. That framework of hooks is purposeless, yet I still take the time to implement it for every project I build. Why? Because I may choose to add things on later, or the original project may evolve to the point where it needs those hooks for some other task.
Just because we don't see a purpose for something now, doesn't automatically mean it's a waste of time, effort, energy and space.
Master~Plan
New Member
I guess we can classify 2 types of purpose. Purpose relative to God, and purpose relative to humans.[b said:
If an animal dies, bottom line, God doesn't care. A human however might care because that animal might be the humans lunch, pet, or the human might have some other interest... The only thing with purpose to God is humans.
like I briefly mentioned earliers the stars light up the night sky along with the moon. what are the chances that the sun and the moon would work so well together?
God made this continent we are on way before anyone knew it was here or knew it existed. I don't think it surprises God that we made boats, or that we made space ships.
If I were to respond fully to this, it would spark a whole new debate -- questions such as "Why would a perfect being create anything" and the very simple and logically following "Why would God ever feel the need to add something else to his creation later?" That could be a rather lengthy discussion, however, and would probably be better suited to its own thread. It's also not a topic I really feel like debating at the moment. Thanks for your input, Kidan, as always.[b said:
And yet, if humans have purpose to God, and oxygen has purpose to humans, doesn't oxygen serve a purpose to God? Oxygen is one of his ways of keeping us alive. These "two types of purposes" are one in the same.[b said:
God doesn't care? Why not? He created them. I find it very hard to believe in the first place that an omnipotent god would create something and then actually care about anything he created, but why are humans so special? Is it because they were created in "their" image? What does that mean, anyway?[b said:
I'm not sure what the chances are, but I am pretty sure that it doesn't really matter. Ever heard of the anthropic principle?[b said:
He sure seemed surprised (and alarmed!) by the Tower of Babel, eh?[b said:
Master~Plan
New Member
ok, thats reasonable.[b said:
if by "thier" you mean "His", then thats exactly why. I don't know or understand God fully yet, so I really can't say.[b said:
doesn't matter? might not matter to you, but I'm glad the moon is conveniently there at night. please fill me in, how does the anthropic principle tie in here?[b said:
Bible isn't specific on God's mood about Babel. I am surprised that God didn't say "look at man try to make a tower to heaven, what an imagination..." instead he said "If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them..." like they really were capable of building a tower to the heavens! crazy stuff... heh, but then you might not be so impressed because you don't accept any of it anyway...[b said:
Master~Plan
New Member
(btw, I think kidan had an extreemly good point)
[b said:
I said "their" because in Genesis Yahweh strangely says "Let us create man in our image.[b said:
I never said the moon didn't matter. I said the odds of it happening didn't matter.[b said:
There's a couple ways to approach this. The anthropic principle states something that might seem brutally obvious, even insulting at first. It says, basically, that if the universe were not the way it is, we would not be able to observe it. That is, if the universe were not in the "fine-tuned" fashion that apologists frequently champion, we would not be here, and thus would not be able to marvel at how "fine-tuned" it is. Now, while this is dealing with the universe in a more general sense, and is also dealing with the more microscopic yet vitally important details of the universe (i.e. the strength of gravity), we can easily apply it to the moon. If the moon were not aligned in this way, enabling it to shine on the Earth during certain parts of the month, we would not be able to go "Oh wow, I'm so glad the moon is there." It wouldn't be a thought, and you wouldn't miss it one bit. It should also be pointed out that due to periods of new moons, a) we are quite capable of carrying on our lives without moonlight, and b) the moon was not aligned in such a way as to shine on the earth all year round. I might ask, if the moonlight is such a blessing, why does it wax and wane?
Another way to look at this would be to examine the "probability" for such an alignment occuring in nature. A mathemetician may rattle off some ridiculously large number, like 9.1x10^17:1, but many would say that because it happened, the probability of it occuring was actually 1.
That's another time with that, let's move on..
I'm not sure what you're driving at. Also, I'd really appreciate it if every other post of yours and others' didn't end with "But since you don't believe in all this anyway......" Listen, while I don't believe it, I'm quite capable of discussing it. Studying it is what made me disbelieve it, so come, let us reason together.[b said:
Does anybody else find the whole Babel thing similar to a child dropping rocks on an ants nest. God creates us flawed but finds us still too perfect and so sticks another obstacle in our path. I say "What the hell" - the kind of mind that could come up with the apple tree would have got us eventually... 
Kidan
Moderator
actually, he's not punishing them for their unity, but for thier overt disobedience.
In genesis 9:1 He told them to spread out and replenish the earth, and rather than do that, they build this tower and try to cluster together.
In genesis 9:1 He told them to spread out and replenish the earth, and rather than do that, they build this tower and try to cluster together.
Master~Plan
New Member
yeah, if the world wasn't the way it is I would not be able to say how sophisticated it is, However the world is the way it is because there is a Creator. The anthropic principle does not apply to the moon, because our moon is not the only moon in existance that we can observe. If there was no moon and stars, then all noctournal life would not exist.(minus bats) We can get into a huge hypothetical discussion, but when you get down to it, its all speculation. If you don't see the "coincidence" of the moon, then theres not alot more to be said...[b said:
There's no coincidence -- the antropic principle carries over once again, and that "nocturnal life" would not be there to be observed existing if the moon were not there. This is not very hard to understand! If you're playing poker and all the aces are removed from the deck, you're not going to see any ace high flushes. Put them back in, and the game will get more interesting.[b said:Quote[/b] (Master~Plan @ April 03 2004,7:06)]yeah, if the world wasn't the way it is I would not be able to say how sophisticated it is, However the world is the way it is because there is a Creator. The anthropic principle does not apply to the moon, because our moon is not the only moon in existance that we can observe. If there was no moon and stars, then all noctournal life would not exist.(minus bats) We can get into a huge hypothetical discussion, but when you get down to it, its all speculation. If you don't see the "coincidence" of the moon, then theres not alot more to be said...[b said:
But you're right, theres not much more to be said. If you can't come up with a better "argument" than an appeal to wonder, I've nothing more to say to you.
Master~Plan
New Member
[b said:
[b said:
Master~Plan
New Member
*sigh* ok, I guess eon totally destroyed my logic because we all know what life would be like if there was no moon. Second my argument was not based on life without a moon, it was based on the odds of a moon and sun working together. My argument was also based on how the anthropic principle does not apply to the moon. Lets not bicker about hypothetical situations. What I "mean by 'it's all speculation' " is that we simply don't know what life would be like if there was no moon/stars. The part about noctournal life was a moot point, as I pointed out in the original argument. Sorry about the confusion.[b said: