What if Creationists were Athiest for a day?

[Arkilogue]

Evolution, big bang, natural selection etc aren't atheistic.

Not atheistic per se, but naturalistic - as scientific principles, they are based on the assumption that no god directly interferes with them. That's already asking to much for some of the religious.

Perhaps there are benefits to non-interference?

[robvalue]

I take it you don't subscribe to an all powerful God then? Because the word "benefit" implies there is some structure in which it has to work.

[Arkilogue]

I take it you don't subscribe to an all powerful God then? Because the word "benefit" implies there is some structure in which it has to work.

I mean benefits for us. And yes, I have found a nested structure (of the universe) that God operates for our benefit. The individual features of the structure could be considered "gods" as they directly influence the structure of matter as forces. Like the individual colors are still "light", just not all of it all at once.

The entire structure would be considered the Image of God....The God no image can be drawn of. The God in this consideration is an endless ocean of quark matter, trillions of times denser, hotter and more metastable than atomic matter. There is no border, no edge, no space beyond to define a form.

But when it vibrates (cavitates) the metaverse into being like a stack of planes of bubbles in an ocean, the bubbles are finite spatial "unfoldings" of the original infinite "particle" union. They are all the same, created at different times in different spaces.

There is further structure inside each universe.

All of this is still contained by the original Infinite Substance, The God, above and below the metaversal stack, and it is not diminished by the moving apart to make space for infinite universes.

The first layer of the structure predicts the subjective story/relationship of the Son of God, the Holy Spirit and God the Father. Even the "virgin birth"

[Alex K]

Not atheistic per se, but naturalistic - as scientific principles, they are based on the assumption that no god directly interferes with them. That's already asking to much for some of the religious.

Perhaps there are benefits to non-interference?

Especially the nonexistent gods - non-interference comes much more naturally to them.

[Arkilogue]

Perhaps there are benefits to non-interference?

Especially the nonexistent gods - non-interference comes much more naturally to them.

Or to a parental God who does not interfere with the developing embryo. Or to a farmer God who does not pull on the fruit/plant to make it grow faster.

[robvalue]

Those are flawed analogies because God is all powerful. Humans are not.

Benefits for us again implies some sort of constraints. An all powerful God can have things set up however it wants, so that intervention can be as good as, or better than, non intervention.

[Arkilogue]

Those are flawed analogies because God is all powerful. Humans are not.

Benefits for us again implies some sort of constraints. An all powerful God can have things set up however it wants, so that intervention can be as good as, or better than, non intervention.

If there is anything at all to some historic accounts, intervention does take place and it's minimalist.

And from many of those accounts there are more, greater interventions coming whether directly or indirectly.


God is All powerful and all knowing of what is required from start to finish. Some finishes take time to set, some blades need time to anneal.

If God did it all for us, there would certainly be unity...but the good that grows out of the free-will of Man is an over-unity.

[account_inactive]

Maybe they'd kill themselves?

lol

[robvalue]

Those are flawed analogies because God is all powerful. Humans are not.

Benefits for us again implies some sort of constraints. An all powerful God can have things set up however it wants, so that intervention can be as good as, or better than, non intervention.

If there is anything at all to some historic accounts, intervention does take place and it's minimalist.

And from many of those accounts there are more, greater interventions coming whether directly or indirectly.


God is All powerful and all knowing of what is required from start to finish.  Some finishes take time to set, some blades need time to anneal.

If God did it all for us, there would certainly be unity...but the good that grows out of the free-will of Man is an over-unity.

He's not all powerful if there is something "required" that he didn't also set the requirement up for.

Did he make the rules, or show up one day with the rules in place? It doesn't seem sensible that it's both.

[Arkilogue]

If there is anything at all to some historic accounts, intervention does take place and it's minimalist.

And from many of those accounts there are more, greater interventions coming whether directly or indirectly.


God is All powerful and all knowing of what is required from start to finish.  Some finishes take time to set, some blades need time to anneal.

If God did it all for us, there would certainly be unity...but the good that grows out of the free-will of Man is an over-unity.

He's not all powerful if there is something "required" that he didn't also set the requirement up for.

Did he make the rules, or show up one day with the rules in place? It doesn't seem sensible that it's both.

God didn't "make" the rules, God unfolded them from his own self existence. Not intelligent design, bio-geometric design.

Like you get the same colors from white light in the same order each time. Inherent design.