"God of the Gaps" and other things.

I have always had a big problem with people saying "the God of the Gaps" because it implies that just because we understand how a natural mechanism works that is could not possibly have been designed. I would argue that because the mechanisms of the world work on precise constants that are rationally intelligible that therefore implies design.

I have made many post attempting to get unbelievers to see God in Science as I do, but I believe now that I will never reach anyone that way. No two human minds are the same. We each walk through life everyday narrating our own story. Step out of that narration and examine yourself as you make each choice, and understand your story maybe a bit better. I am not here to tell anyone how to live there life or what to believe. I can only tell you parts of my own story and hope that maybe you find a bit of Truth for yourself to better your life. I am no role model. I have done and continue to make terrible choices. I make these choices even when i regret the choice before its made. It proves one Truth to me. I am what the Bible describes as a sinner. I am physically and mentally unable to resist and conquer sin. I am weak and can move none of the obstacles out of my way. To be honest I hate the person that I am, and even when I do good I still hate the real me. Even though I found a way to forgive and clear all my wrongs which brings me more joy than I can imagine there is a simultaneous feeling of sadness as I ponder the choices I have allowed my image to make.

My body is my image, and it is broken as it is no longer my heavenly Father's image but the image of Fallen Man that I walk around in. I wish I could tell you there was a way to beat it on your own, but the truth is the Flesh is far stronger than our infant Spirits. This truth lead me to another. I need something or someone to intervene. I don't know how to stop or escape the thoughts that I don't want to think. I can't I can't stop it on my own. So what, or who, could save me. Frantic, alone, and lost a sheep in the woods, who but Shepherd could come and find me. He nurtured my lost spirit, and he continues to feed it as it slowly gains health and hopefully eventually I won't even think thoughts that are foreign to my renewed nature.

No Scientist can tell me that those truths about myself are not true nor can one say that they are delusions. Nor can a scientist ever produce a mechanism that disproves something on the level of an agent, such as God. Scientist discover mechanism after mechanism and on a spiritual level these things are only helpful to truly understand the nature of God and his character. These things carry no true weight on the existence of God.

A belief is a choice that a person has decided to resonate with. I choose to resonate with Christ and YHWH. I choose to resonate with the idea that Christ is the Lamb the Shepherd chose to sacrifice for the whole of the flock. Can any of these beliefs ever be called wrong or untrue on any reliable terms?

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Dear ServantOfTheLamb,

A very interesting and worthwhile overview of the basic problem. I secretly rejoice when someone says I believe in a God of the Gaps. If they're thinking along those lines, eventually, if they're honest, they will see that all of the "explaining" they're doing leads to the point where everything is a "Gap."

Only the feebly desperate, or those ignorant of science, ever ask for proof of God, or claim they have proof that He doesn't exist. Those can all be ignored without losing a bit of truth.

In a case like this, where science has nothing to say, all that can be done is for both sides to say, "I have some evidence, and some arguments, pick a side." I don't recall Atheists coming up with any argument other than "If I were God I wouldn't have allowed (Death, sin, illness, war. whatever it is). While this seems to be the most frequent argument, it still takes all I can muster to avoid laughing at it.

As you point out, accepting the Christian's claims, leads to greater heights of revelation and deeper experiences of love. You don't hear that from non-believers. The practical, pragmatic, American or European should give serious weight to God simply because of His effects.

Oh, and somewhere in a religious discussion you'll find someone saying that belief in God causes wars. You can either laugh at that, too, or point out that some religions have that as part of their belief, Islam for example, and some don't.

You may not want to bring it up, because it is controversial, but there are bad religions.

Well, nice post. Like your style. Don't get sucked into the idea that you're here to please men, and you'll be fine.

With respect,
Charles1952

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Good thread.

Intelligence cannot arise from the unintelligible. Logic is not possible from illogical sequences. Determined states cannot arise from indeterminate wave function (physics / Copenhagen Interpretation). Functionality cannot arise from that which is functionless. Intent (by design) cannot come from an unintentional sequence of events. Purpose cannot come from purposelessness. Design cannot arise apart from conscious intent and clear purpose. Unity must have all of the above or we are left with chaos. Order always has a purpose and function in a logical sequence toward a determined end.

If you take any of these away, you are left with disorder and randomness.

In the end, we have one conclusion. Since light is a wave function that is in a superposition state when not observed, the observer creates probable states with consciousness and intent. Once observed, the wave becomes a particle. Apart from the observer, no substance can be arranged with unity and purpose. The Copenhagen Interpretation of quantum mechanics reveals the fact that matter cannot create consciousness. It's the other way around. The observer collapses the wave function. Any physicist that tells you otherwise is lying and knows it.

a reply to: charles1952

I've no doubt got some laughs for you. I don't consider myself an Atheist and I don't choose to believe in Gods and Devils. I choose to be neutral, live and let live.

Why because the way the human race has turned out and getting worse each day sense the beginning scare's the hell out of me. It just seems like a bad experiment gone real bad with no end in sight, I'm just saying.

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Can any of these beliefs ever be called wrong or untrue on any reliable terms?

This one:

but I believe now that I will never reach anyone that way.

I think that, of those 700+ stars, some of those posts are probably from people you've reached at least partially, and many of your posts likely made some people doubt their doubts. Maybe then your posts weren't the last proverbial blow of the trumpet at Jerico but maybe it was one of the ones that helped?

Nevertheless, you have / had chosen a difficult flock, as the wisdom of men is made to confine those who will not see the simple truths; and so using their wisdom to show God's presence / work is likely one of the most difficult things to do because of its audience.

See: 1 Corinthians

But if you do help someone who is truly lost, that is glory to God.

See: Luke 15

With that said, and now in short, I don't think it's impossible to help that audience, but if you feel like you should stop trying, then maybe it is time to dust off your feet?

See: Matthew 10:14, Mark 6:11, Luke 9:5

originally posted by: charles1952

Dear ServantOfTheLamb,

A very interesting and worthwhile overview of the basic problem. I secretly rejoice when someone says I believe in a God of the Gaps. If they're thinking along those lines, eventually, if they're honest, they will see that all of the "explaining" they're doing leads to the point where everything is a "Gap."

psudo-spiritual gibberish.

Only the feebly desperate, or those ignorant of science, ever ask for proof of God, or claim they have proof that He doesn't exist. Those can all be ignored without losing a bit of truth.

So it's the Religious who now have a better understanding of science than the scientists huh??
Maybe you shouldn't just ignore what others have to say all the time.

In a case like this, where science has nothing to say, all that can be done is for both sides to say, "I have some evidence, and some arguments, pick a side." I don't recall Atheists coming up with any argument other than "If I were God I wouldn't have allowed (Death, sin, illness, war. whatever it is). While this seems to be the most frequent argument, it still takes all I can muster to avoid laughing at it.

If that's the only argument you've heard from non-believers then you must not have been listening. See what happens when you ignore everything other have to say?

As you point out, accepting the Christian's claims, leads to greater heights of revelation and deeper experiences of love. You don't hear that from non-believers. The practical, pragmatic, American or European should give serious weight to God simply because of His effects.

Typical Christian claiming superiority over all others. Once again, maybe you don't hear that from non-believers because you've chosen to not listen to anyone but yourself.

Oh, and somewhere in a religious discussion you'll find someone saying that belief in God causes wars. You can either laugh at that, too, or point out that some religions have that as part of their belief, Islam for example, and some don't.

Attacking others beliefs now too. How very typical.

You may not want to bring it up, because it is controversial, but there are bad religions.

Well, nice post. Like your style. Don't get sucked into the idea that you're here to please men, and you'll be fine.

With respect,
Charles1952

You're right about that at least. There certainly are bad religions!!

a reply to: mOjOm

Dear mOjOm,

What in the world took you? I've been here for years, and NOW you want a piece of me? Well, as you say over and over that I've missed out on the good Atheist arguments, I'm looking forward to hearing them from you.

A very interesting and worthwhile overview of the basic problem. I secretly rejoice when someone says I believe in a God of the Gaps. If they're thinking along those lines, eventually, if they're honest, they will see that all of the "explaining" they're doing leads to the point where everything is a "Gap."
psudo-spiritual gibberish.

Well, let's say we look at everything we've "explained" and we see there's only a few tiny details left unexplained. One of those teensy-tiny details, is why anything exists at all. So far, science keeps trying out more and more elaborate explanations, always ending with "Of course, we'll never know . . ."

Go ahead, explain everything, and there is still left those massive question marks: "HOW did we come to be?" "WHY did we come to be? "WHAT is our real purpose here?" Science doesn't know, will never know, can never know.

Only the feebly desperate, or those ignorant of science, ever ask for proof of God, or claim they have proof that He doesn't exist. Those can all be ignored without losing a bit of truth.

So it's the Religious who now have a better understanding of science than the scientists huh??
Maybe you shouldn't just ignore what others have to say all the time.

Scientists have the same understanding. They know they can't answer those questions and never will be able to. It's perfectly fine if you don't accept religion's answers, that's between you and God. But remember, science doesn't even have an answer.

In a case like this, where science has nothing to say, all that can be done is for both sides to say, "I have some evidence, and some arguments, pick a side." I don't recall Atheists coming up with any argument other than "If I were God I wouldn't have allowed (Death, sin, illness, war. whatever it is). While this seems to be the most frequent argument, it still takes all I can muster to avoid laughing at it.

If that's the only argument you've heard from non-believers then you must not have been listening. See what happens when you ignore everything other have to say?

So? What are they? Not objections to a particular religion, objections to God, Himself. Go ahead, accuse me of ignoring you if you care to, but I'm not.

Attacking others beliefs now too. How very typical.

By reporting, honestly, that war against the Infidels is a major part of Islam, I'm attacking them? Then honest reporting of Islam is an attack?

So let's do this one or two at a time.

1.) Science does, or does not, have the capability to prove God exists?

2.) Atheists (Those who believe there is no God) have several arguments besides God's "Cruelty, meanness, wrath, Insensitivity, etc." to show he does not exist.

I'm listening intently.

a reply to: charles1952

a reply to: charles1952

I appreciate your thoughts brother. I am not here to please men only to try and plant a small seed in those who are willing to listen. I believe that trying to express how God is represented in Science is unexplainable to an nonbeliever because they don't know God. You cannot prove him in Science, but you can definitely see his attributes. I believe that there are other ways of reaching people, but a person must be open minded to the idea of belief. A person must also be able to recognize that they have a soul. The funny thing is that even those who do not believe in a soul live as though they have one.

You may not want to bring it up, because it is controversial, but there are bad religions

I am not a fan of religion in general. I would say the majority of people go looking for God and find religion instead (This statement does not exclude members of local church buildings); Religion is probably one of Satan's most useful tools against humans.

a reply to: AlephBet

Loved your response man.

a reply to: Battleline

I've no doubt got some laughs for you. I don't consider myself an Atheist and I don't choose to believe in Gods and Devils. I choose to be neutral, live and let live. Why because the way the human race has turned out and getting worse each day sense the beginning scare's the hell out of me. It just seems like a bad experiment gone real bad with no end in sight, I'm just saying

What do you think Christians are referring to we the say the Fall of Man? As we fall further from God with time our moral state declines and therefore the world declines in my opinion. The weathers been acting strangely for sometime now, and things in the middle east are heating up. People are being removed from power. The media will coat it nicely but most likely it will all come to one leader one religion and one currency.

originally posted by: charles1952
Dear mOjOm,

What in the world took you? I've been here for years, and NOW you want a piece of me? Well, as you say over and over that I've missed out on the good Atheist arguments, I'm looking forward to hearing them from you.

Oh stop, you're gonna make me blush....

I don't consider myself Atheist though either. I don't claim "there is no God". I don't know if there is. Plus, if there is, it's nothing like any God Religion has defined for us so far.

"HOW did we come to be?" "WHY did we come to be? "WHAT is our real purpose here?" Science doesn't know, will never know, can never know.

Ok, so we don't know and possibly may never know some things for sure. What's wrong with that?? Religion doesn't know either. They all say they do of course, but they don't.

Just because some folks come up with an interesting theological theory doesn't mean they are right.
That goes for Science though too. I don't see a problem simply admitting we don't have all the answers.

Scientists have the same understanding. They know they can't answer those questions and never will be able to. It's perfectly fine if you don't accept religion's answers, that's between you and God. But remember, science doesn't even have an answer.

That's fine. Then I guess I just have to keep looking then. Personally, I'd rather keep searching for the right answer rather than accept an incorrect one just because it was simpler that way. Besides, who's to say that there is an answer to be found in the first place. Maybe "The" answer to all those questions and more is something we can't even imagine. So why sell myself short ya know?? Better to keep all options open.

So? What are they? Not objections to a particular religion, objections to God, Himself. Go ahead, accuse me of ignoring you if you care to, but I'm not.

You mean just generalized objections to God without the context of any Religion to define what God is??
Well, I have no objections to something which isn't defined. Without knowing what God is first, there is nothing to object to.

So let's do this one or two at a time.

1.) Science does, or does not, have the capability to prove God exists?

I don't know. What is this God thing which needs proving?? You speak of it as if it's already proven, so where is your proof??

2.) Atheists (Those who believe there is no God) have several arguments besides God's "Cruelty, meanness, wrath, Insensitivity, etc." to show he does not exist.

I'm listening intently.

I'm not an Atheist remember. Actually, those aren't even good arguments against God. They are arguments against a Loving God perhaps, but what if God is really just a A-hole who likes hurting his Creations?? Then all those things would make sense.

I think before anyone can try and Disprove something, you'd first have to have some evidence of it being there. What I've been shown as evidence of God so far is either too conflicting, illogical, flimsy, or unsubstantiated for me to buy into.

That doesn't mean I don't believe in something larger and more vast and impressive within the universe though. You can call it God if you want to, but that all seems much to personal and limiting. All such characteristics and definitions given by Religions Everywhere just seem like man trying to control everything because humanity fears what is beyond their understanding.

a reply to: mOjOm
Ha ha you did kind of attack charles. I have always found you far more respectful than that when you and I have conversations.

I don't consider myself Atheist though either. I don't claim "there is no God". I don't know if there is. Plus, if there is, it's nothing like any God Religion has defined for us so far.

This is a bit sweeping statement that really holds no weight. You seem more along the lines of an agnostic, so how could you say one way or the other? How would you know what God was like as you don't even attempt to have a relationship with Him? I am just saying this statement is not evidence of anything. What makes you think you know such a thing?

I'm not an Atheist remember. Actually, those aren't even good arguments against God. They are arguments against a Loving God perhaps, but what if God is really just a A-hole who likes hurting his Creations?? Then all those things would make sense.

Thats the problem of Evil and we both know you don't believe that Evil exist as our conversation on an objective moral realm went on for sometime. You cannot justify this argument based on your belief that morality is subjective. Also the origins of Evil are explained in the Bible so does the fact that we all see Evil somewhere in the world, even those who try and say there view of morality is subjective, evidence for God? It is arguments like the Problem of Evil that show that morals are not subjective.

I think before anyone can try and Disprove something, you'd first have to have some evidence of it being there. What I've been shown as evidence of God so far is either too conflicting, illogical, flimsy, or unsubstantiated for me to buy into.

Thats the problem with asking for Scientific evidence either way friend. Science works on the level of a philosophical mechanism were as God works on the level of an agent. Mechanisms are only capable of describing how a system functions. Science will never have a mechanism that describes the agent. Philosophically speaking, it isn't logical to expect to see evidence in the way that you want to see it in nature. As I have said many times already Science only serves to allow us to better understand the Creation which gives us insight to the attributes of the Creator.

That doesn't mean I don't believe in something larger and more vast and impressive within the universe though. You can call it God if you want to, but that all seems much to personal and limiting. All such characteristics and definitions given by Religions Everywhere just seem like man trying to control everything because humanity fears what is beyond their understanding.

So maybe your not agnostic either lol. God is not in the universe. The fact that space time matter and the laws of physics began 1 in 10^-43 seconds means that if there is a God. He is spaceless timeless and immaterial. These are Characteristics given to very few Gods, which is why it makes narrowing the religions down so easily.

Here is where I am at with the whole god debate.

I don't see any evidence of a deities existence therefore I don't believe in one, however I openly admit I could be wrong and one or more could exist. That position is called agnostic atheism.

Here is the big difference between my position and most of those I debate against.

I admit I could be wrong. It is to bad I have not seen those taking the opposite stance on the existence of deities on here say they could be wrong.

If someone is certain on either stance they need to show why they are certain. Unfortunately I haven't seen any convincing arguments from either side and certainly no evidence.

Can any of these beliefs ever be called wrong or untrue on any reliable terms?

since you asked...yes. calling them wrong/untrue and proving it is another ball of wax.

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb
Ha ha you did kind of attack charles. I have always found you far more respectful than that when you and I have conversations.

If I came across a little rough I apologize. I'm not trying to hurt anyone's feelings or anything.

This is a bit sweeping statement that really holds no weight. You seem more along the lines of an agnostic, so how could you say one way or the other? How would you know what God was like as you don't even attempt to have a relationship with Him? I am just saying this statement is not evidence of anything. What makes you think you know such a thing?

That is another one of those phrases that make no sense to me. What sort of Relationship are you talking about?? I have a relationship with many different people both friends and family, but they all kind of hinge on at least the fact that they independently exist in a form that is objectively present. In other words they have some kind of independent form and presence which exists outside my own mind. I can't say the same for God. That doesn't mean God isn't around somewhere I guess, but I certainly can't find him. So explain to me how your "Relationship" works exactly.

Thats the problem of Evil and we both know you don't believe that Evil exist as our conversation on an objective moral realm went on for sometime. You cannot justify this argument based on your belief that morality is subjective. Also the origins of Evil are explained in the Bible so does the fact that we all see Evil somewhere in the world, even those who try and say there view of morality is subjective, evidence for God? It is arguments like the Problem of Evil that show that morals are not subjective.

Actually, as far as that whole Objective/Subjective thing goes, the more I read up on it the more I think we need to use slightly different terms. That is a very well known debate actually and it seems we should be using Relative and Absolute with Objective and Subjective too. There are other aspects to that whole debate as well, but that's a different topic for a different time, so I suggest we set that topic aside for now.

Thats the problem with asking for Scientific evidence either way friend. Science works on the level of a philosophical mechanism were as God works on the level of an agent. Mechanisms are only capable of describing how a system functions. Science will never have a mechanism that describes the agent. Philosophically speaking, it isn't logical to expect to see evidence in the way that you want to see it in nature. As I have said many times already Science only serves to allow us to better understand the Creation which gives us insight to the attributes of the Creator.

I'm not saying anything must be scientific per se. We've talked about this before as well. You say you've had a personal experience of some kind. Something paranormal which proved God to you. That experience however was yours and yours alone, but it did change your perspective. Well, I simply cannot say the same. I can't and won't say you're wrong either. Or that it didn't happen as that would be insane of me to say. However, since the same didn't happen to me I can't very well act like it did either. So again, I'm not saying "There absolutely is NO God", but I obviously can't say there is either. I have no credible evidence to show that there is, nor a personal experience to show that there is. At best all I have would be philosophical ideas and concepts which aren't evidence of anything. I have those same ideas and concepts of dragons and goblins too but that doesn't make them real either.

So maybe your not agnostic either lol. God is not in the universe. The fact that space time matter and the laws of physics began 1 in 10^-43 seconds means that if there is a God. He is spaceless timeless and immaterial. These are Characteristics given to very few Gods, which is why it makes narrowing the religions down so easily.

Again, so you're claim is that God exists. That you participate in some kind of relationship. Yet also say God is Shapeless, Formless, Timeless, Immaterial, etc. while also being everywhere at all times too. Both independent yet part of everything at the same time. How does a Relationship function with a Being that is Outside Time, Has No Form and is Immaterial in every way?? You must see why such a statement makes no sense, right??

a reply to: charles1952

Go ahead, explain everything, and there is still left those massive question marks: "HOW did we come to be?" "WHY did we come to be? "WHAT is our real purpose here?" Science doesn't know, will never know, can never know.

if i may ask...how do you know what science will be able to tell us a million years down the road?

The assumption behind the "God of the gaps" phrase is that belief in God is ONLY necessary to explain the otherwise inexplicable.
But that isn't true. "Accounting for the inexplicable" is a line of argument sometimes used when "proof" of God is demanded, but it's not the real reason why the Biblical God is believed in.
The real reason is that the Bible is about the whole history of communication between the Biblical God and his people, and the believer accepts the stories of communication. If the concept of God "explains" anything, that's just a bonus.

"God" and "natural causes" don't have to be alternatives.
I'm quite open to believing that God is capable of working through natural causes.

a reply to: mOjOm

If I came across a little rough I apologize. I'm not trying to hurt anyone's feelings or anything.

No feelings hurt I just think if we are going to get to truth we all need to be respectful.

That is another one of those phrases that make no sense to me. What sort of Relationship are you talking about?? I have a relationship with many different people both friends and family, but they all kind of hinge on at least the fact that they independently exist in a form that is objectively present. In other words they have some kind of independent form and presence which exists outside my own mind. I can't say the same for God. That doesn't mean God isn't around somewhere I guess, but I certainly can't find him. So explain to me how your "Relationship" works exactly.

That wasn't the point of my response, as the point I was trying to get you to see is that you dont have the authority to say that no God described in any religions ancient scriptures exist. Thats a sweeping statement. How do you honestly make that statement with any authority? Can you disprove every religions God? Not that you would have to do that for me it would only be one. My relationship with God is similar to that that you have with both friends and family except rather than being physical it is purely spiritual. As I said in the OP if you begin to step outside of your thoughts and examine yourself you find that your consciousness exist on plane outside of the flesh.My relationship with God is experienced as I examine my narration were I used to be alone God is now there with me. He occasionally gives his input, but normally I feel he protects me. Not physically but spiritually. I feel the pressure of spiritual attacks. There is a literal presence around me when they come and shelter in the lord is the only place I can fend those attacks off. The times I lose those battles are when I do not seek his shelter. God lets me act freely, and is there for me always and forgives me when I ignore him. It gives me a strong sense of loyalty and love to Him. I cannot really explain our relationship to you, but that is the best I can describe my experience.

but they all kind of hinge on at least the fact that they independently exist in a form that is objectively present. In other words they have some kind of independent form and presence which exists outside my own mind.

Well that is quite the opposite. When you see and touch and taste what we consider physical reality those are all sensations experienced in the mind, and the physical is nothing more than a very good illusion. Many things exist that you don't experience with your senses. Do you deny that the laws of logic exist? What about math?

I have no credible evidence

Give me some idea of what you consider evidence?

originally posted by: DISRAELI
"God" and "natural causes" don't have to be alternatives.
I'm quite open to believing that God is capable of working through natural causes.

So why not just leave them as Natural Causes???

Why insist that some or all events that have Natural Causes must also sometimes or always be the result of some paranormal agent when it's not needed???

a reply to: mOjOm
Because of the communications, as I said earlier.
If the Biblical God actually says "I do these things", then the logical options are.
1) God does it, and the people who say "natural causes do it" are wrong.
2) Natural causes do it, and God's claim is not to be believed.
3) God does it working through natural causes, so both are right.