The problem with prayer.

[popsthebuilder]

Though the plan will not change, the pieces and amount of pieces making up the whole can vary.

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

What does that even mean.

Basically that GOD's plan will ultimately come to fruition, but we do have the potential to be part of it or not.

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

[FatAndFaithless]

What does that even mean.

Basically that GOD's plan will ultimately come to fruition, but we do have the potential to be part of it or not.

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

So does he plan to have me be a part of it, or not?  Can I change God's plan by asking?  How will I know his response?

And how do you know this much about God's plan?

[Drich]

Is asking him for war, hunger, disease, and atheism (redundant, obviously, in your opinion) to go away -not- asking him for what he wants for us?

Why would you assume the God wants us to have life easy? All of those things while yes they do suck and bring hardship and even death on a massive scale, long term have indeed benefited man.

think about it a moment.. We are essentially on top of the food chain, and those 'terrible' things you mentioned are what keeps humanity in check and killing this planet. Those are the checks to our banance, the ying to our yang, without them humanity would sweep across this planet like a virus rendering it uninhabitable with in just a few hundred years.

In addition to keeping humanity at bay those 'terrible' things have also spawned, inspired refined modern life.

Where you only see the bad, in war and hunger I see a space program, air lines, Genetically enhanced foods, opportunity for us to serve and feed the hungry and homeless, I see atheism keeping religion from taking us into another dark age I can see a potential balance in all things... If I can see this balance and the 'good' that can come from your bad, then why wouldn't God be able to see the same? If there is indeed a 'greater good' that comes from a generation's suffering the benefits the whole of Humanity, then why would God want to take that suffering away?

[The Grand Nudger]

I assumed nothing...I asked a question.  Seeing as how your god is on board with all of those things, I don't know why I'd personally ask it for anything..let alone worship it.  I don't have to cry out to heaven to find a warmonger, or an HIV superfan...or what have you.  They exist here, in real life....and I have no time for them.

(I do think it's funny that you wouldn't at least allow that god wanted atheism to go away...isn't that the point of a/s/king...to make the atheism go away, isn't that what your god wants... lol?)

[Nay_Sayer]

Is asking him for war, hunger, disease, and atheism (redundant, obviously, in your opinion) to go away -not- asking him for what he wants for us?

Why would you assume the God wants us to have life easy? All of those things while yes they do suck and bring hardship and even death on a massive scale, long term have indeed benefited man.

think about it a moment.. We are essentially on top of the food chain, and those 'terrible' things you mentioned are what keeps humanity in check and killing this planet. Those are the checks to our banance, the ying to our yang, without them humanity would sweep across this planet like a virus rendering it uninhabitable with in just a few hundred years.

In addition to keeping humanity at bay those 'terrible' things have also spawned, inspired refined modern life.

Where you only see the bad, in war and hunger I see a space program, air lines, Genetically enhanced foods, opportunity for us to serve and feed the hungry and homeless, I see atheism keeping religion from taking us into another dark age I can see a potential balance in all things... If I can see this balance and the 'good' that can come from your bad, then why wouldn't God be able to see the same? If there is indeed a 'greater good' that comes from a generation's suffering the benefits the whole of Humanity, then why would God want to take that suffering away?

 So god is inept and cannot make life good without suffering?
Very disappointing, If I have infinite power I'd just, you know, poof it all away.

[Neo-Scholastic]

We don't know enough about any initial conditions of the Universe to conclude that a quantum vacuum at that point isn't nothing

That’s a silly statement. In this context, nothing means the absence of all existence as such. In contrast to this, the quantum vacuum is nothing in relationship to what does exist, kinda like holes.

You're the one proposing these laws came from a god - make your case.

I proposed no such thing. I showed that physical laws are not brute facts.

If there are absolutes, primitives, and/or fundamentals, then at some point those who wonder must accept some things as brute facts. The issue at hand is this: has the chain of explanations gone as deeply as possible? The Principle of Sufficient Reason only applies until it doesn’t. As a general rule, atheists stop too early and send boys to do the tasks of men. They take some things as brute facts, like quantum vacuum, even though those things do not satisfy the criteria for fundamentals.

And superintelligent beings with literally zero external evidence for their very existence do? [satisfy the criteria for a fundamental]

I’ve heard the ‘zero evidence’ bromide so many times I put the evidence in my signature. But in answer to your question, yes, the God of Classical Theism adequately satisfies the criteria of a fundamental: fully in act, efficacious, necessary, non-contingent, simple, etc.

I’m not sure exactly what you mean by ‘that conclusion’. What conclusion? Anyway, we have strayed far from the OP topic of prayer.

The conclusion that reality existed before time began.

Scripture says nothing about whether reality existed before time. Genesis begins with the Hebrew letter Bet not Aleph. Some interpret that to mean that even Genesis has a back story. Even still, it stands to reason that regardless of whether or not time extends into the infinite past, reality must at the very least be logically prior to time.

[The Grand Nudger]

I'd love to hear that backstory.  That would have been a useful narrative.  Instead we get dragons and some shit about bats being birds with a ton of begats for filler.

[Neo-Scholastic]

I'd love to hear that backstory.  That would have been a useful narrative.  Instead we get dragons and some shit about bats being birds with a ton of begats for filler.

The back story is John 1:1

[The Grand Nudger]

I'm not sure why you would think so.  Where did -that- come from..since we've both agreed that from nothing...nothing comes?

[Cyberman]

We don't know enough about any initial conditions of the Universe to conclude that a quantum vacuum at that point isn't nothing

That’s a silly statement.

Well not really, because we literally don't have that information to the standard whereby models can be made with any confidence. We may never be able to, given that all laws of physics necessarily break down at the point of initiation. I'm expecting and hoping Alex will jump on me with regards to this, since he is far more specialised in this area, however I'm not completely unlearned myself.

In this context, nothing means the absence of all existence as such. In contrast to this, the quantum vacuum is nothing in relationship to what does exist, kinda like holes.

Right, but it seems we're talking past each other. Essentially what's happening is we're looking at an impassable mountain and you're saying there must be a river on the other side, because there's one on this side. Whereas I'm saying that we just don't know enough about the landscape beyond the mountain, even that there is one.

You're the one proposing these laws came from a god - make your case.

I proposed no such thing. I showed that physical laws are not brute facts.

They kind of are, until they encounter insanely extreme conditions, such as inside black holes or the birth of the Universe. But let's cut to the chase: where do you suppose these laws came from? And what supports your supposition?

If there are absolutes, primitives, and/or fundamentals, then at some point those who wonder must accept some things as brute facts. The issue at hand is this: has the chain of explanations gone as deeply as possible? The Principle of Sufficient Reason only applies until it doesn’t. As a general rule, atheists stop too early and send boys to do the tasks of men. They take some things as brute facts, like quantum vacuum, even though those things do not satisfy the criteria for fundamentals.

And superintelligent beings with literally zero external evidence for their very existence do? [satisfy the criteria for a fundamental]

I’ve heard the ‘zero evidence’ bromide so many times I put the evidence in my signature. But in answer to your question, yes, the God of Classical Theism adequately satisfies the criteria of a fundamental: fully in act, efficacious, necessary, non-contingent, simple, etc.

Great, so you have a conclusion defined to supply a testable explanation. Now follow it through - investigate whether it accurately follows observation. Imagine how many murders would be attributed to Smurfs if detectives simply stopped after the first part.

The conclusion that reality existed before time began.

Scripture says nothing about whether reality existed before time.

GC said it did and that this could be discerned from scripture; I'm simply trying to follow his line.