Searching for GOD...

[Alan Burns]

First, how many opportunities over the last three billion or so years do you think there have been for mutations to have occurred?

And how many beneficial mutations do you need to generate every brain cell, every blood vessel, every hair, every bone, every muscle,  ......

[torridon]

And how many beneficial mutations do you need to generate every brain cell, every blood vessel, every hair, every bone, every muscle,  ......

Even an infinite number of mutations would not create a god though.  You're still trying to explain something difficult by suggesting something impossible. Our common experience is that complex things arise by combing simpler underlying elements

[Alan Burns]

Even an infinite number of mutations would not create a god though.  You're still trying to explain something difficult by suggesting something impossible. Our common experience is that complex things arise by combing simpler underlying elements

But God was not created.  God is the essence of creation - that which exists, beyond this universe, beyond our limited imagination.

[Stranger]

But God was not created.  God is the essence of creation - that which exists, beyond this universe, beyond our limited imagination.

How improbable is that? How about you examine that idea with the same level of incredulity you bring to other subjects?

Let me remind you what I asked before:-

...what do you think are the odds against your god just happening to exist, instead of all the other gods, multiple gods, no gods at all, purple universe making pixies, the Great Green Arkleseizure, the famous pasta based deity etc. etc?

How likely is your god in comparison to the universe we find ourselves in? How much more complex is your god compared to the universe?

How come your incredulity doesn't extend to your own favourite fairy tale?

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

And how many beneficial mutations do you need to generate every brain cell, every blood vessel, every hair, every bone, every muscle,  ......

Just one in each case. If, say, someone is born with a mutation to her blood cells that makes her immune to bilharzia then all of her blood cells will be resistant, not just one of them.

Look, you are of course entitled to your personal opinions about "God", a "saviour Jesus" and indeed anything else that takes your fancy. What you're not entitled to though are your own facts - you completely misunderstand evolution and the significance of large numbers and of long periods of time, you've been corrected on it several times and yet you just repeat the same misunderstandings to support yet another argument from personal incredulity.

And that's both logically hopeless and dishonest.

[torridon]

But God was not created.  God is the essence of creation - that which exists, beyond this universe, beyond our limited imagination.

And that's just a nice little baseless assertion born of nothing at all with no grounds to justify it that conveniently gets you out of having to think.

[Shaker]

But God was not created.  God is the essence of creation - that which exists, beyond this universe, beyond our limited imagination.

Your imagination appears to have few if any limits however, Alan

[Rhiannon]

But God was not created.  God is the essence of creation - that which exists, beyond this universe, beyond our limited imagination.

No, Alan. A lot of nice people on this thread have taken the time to explain things to you here. In simply asserting woo you appear not to have bothered listening to any of them.

[Alan Burns]

No, Alan. A lot of nice people on this thread have taken the time to explain things to you here. In simply asserting woo you appear not to have bothered listening to any of them.

I was just trying to explain God as portrayed in the bible - to quote -
 I am who am

[bluehillside Retd.]

Alan,

But God was not created.  God is the essence of creation - that which exists, beyond this universe, beyond our limited imagination.

So you assert.

I think we've pretty much exhausted your toolbox now haven't we: some un-argued assertions, a bunch of repeated logical fallacies, and for good measure a few untruths about the facts that contradict your personal faith beliefs.

Are we done here then?

[Alan Burns]

And that's both logically hopeless and dishonest.

What is dishonest about a sincere belief that the billions of beneficial mutations which brought us into existence did not happen by chance?

[bluehillside Retd.]

Alan,

I was just trying to explain God as portrayed in the bible - to quote -
 I am who am

The hit number from La Cage aux Folles?

And what you actually did was to commit yet another logical fallacy, called reification. You asserted as true a statement about "God"; you did not preface that with, "but a book says...." etc.

[Stranger]

I was just trying to explain God as portrayed in the bible - to quote -
 I am who am

A concept that you seem to just blindly accept without a hint of the incedulity you save for any other options. This despite having no objective evidence of its existence and no hint of a logical argument.

Double standards writ very, very large.

[Alan Burns]

Your imagination appears to have few if any limits however, Alan

Yes, it is one of God's wonderful gifts. 

[bluehillside Retd.]

Alan,

What is dishonest about a sincere belief that the billions of beneficial mutations which brought us into existence did not happen by chance?

When you make a mistake that you have corrected - several times in fact - but you just repeat the mistake in response, then you're heading toward the dishonest.

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

Yes, it is one of God's wonderful gifts. 

So you imagine.

[Shaker]

A behind-the-scenes peek at poor old bluey at his computer typing to Alan: https://youtu.be/B_Lnz64vXB8

[bluehillside Retd.]

Shakes,

A behind-the-scenes peek at poor old bluey at his computer typing to Alan: https://youtu.be/B_Lnz64vXB8

Dammit, I knew I should have turned of my webcam.

Luckily though I prayed to Alan's god afterwards so I'm all better now...

[Alan Burns]

Alan,

When you make a mistake that you have corrected - several times in fact - but you just repeat the mistake in response, then you're heading toward the dishonest.

You will have to put it down to my God given stubbornness, because I can't accept that my belief in God's creative intervention to bring me into existence is a mistake.

[SusanDoris]

What a dismally vending machine view of existence you have - insert belief, receive pat on head from Jesus.

Who, by the way, has been dead for a very, very, very long time and belief in whom has no gifts to me more wonderful than the world has already provided.

Agreed as usual. And on the subject of music, I have recently listened to a biography of Henry Purcell byBruce Wood ( President of Purcell Society) and googled one of his 'fantazias', so was very interested to hear that Radio 3's composer of the week is Henry Purcell. Spooky or what?!

[Stranger]

You will have to put it down to my God given stubbornness, because I can't accept that my belief in God's creative intervention to bring me into existence is a mistake.

There's that self-importance again...

[Rhiannon]

You will have to put it down to my God given stubbornness, because I can't accept that my belief in God's creative intervention to bring me into existence is a mistake.

I'm not sure 'stubbornness' is quite the word for it.

I can understand it when people say 'this is what I believe and I know it doesn't make sense but it's how I experience things.' But the contortions and contradictions that you go through in order to shore up your beliefs don't make sense to me. At some point they must feel dishonest to you, surely?

[bluehillside Retd.]

Alan,

You will have to put it down to my God given stubbornness, because I can't accept that my belief in God's creative intervention to bring me into existence is a mistake.

Well your imaginary god more likely but that's not the issue in any case. Your critiqued evolutionary theory on the basis that you think the sequence of mutations necessary for you to exist is so unlikely ("practically zero" as I recall) as to invalidate the theory. I and other explained to you that this is erroneous thinking because it depends entirely on the false notion that you were the end game all along, whereas in fact evolution neither knows nor cares what species it produces.

The honest thing for you to do now therefore would be to say something like, "OK, I got that wrong and I see now that I cannot use the supposed unlikeliness of an evolutionary outcome to support my argument from personal incredulity about the existence of God." 

You could also if you felt like it say something like, "But I still have other reasons for believing in God that I may (or may not) choose to share here".

Simply denying or ignoring where you went wrong though is just dishonest, and it does you no credit. No credit at all.

[Maeght]

I was just trying to explain God as portrayed in the bible - to quote -
 I am who am

I thought that was Gloria Gaynor? Seriously though, you can interpret all that from those few words?

[bluehillside Retd.]

torri,

I prefer the Busoni piano transcription, solo violin kind of sets my teeth on edge :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixGv5CQky8s

There are some nice classical guitar performances of this piece too. Here for example:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bht3jaKKpbk