Struggling with the concept of a "God"

by littleblueuk 50 Replies latest jw experiences

song19

Thinking of random chance...
Given X number galaxys in the universe... containing Y numbers of stars.
The odds for Earth like planets exists many times over...

If, like God... The universe was infinite...
There could be, by implication an infinite number or Earths...
All by nothing more than random chance.
Currientology... this is a good point... and my hubby and I were discussing this too. If we are a result of chance, and the universe is infinite... than I would believe 100% that there are more earths out there, or at least more walks of life. Sadly in our lifetime, we'll probably never know one way or the other.
Ever since 'seeing the light', I have found this part of the journey difficult, not knowing what to believe... but I am glad I can do it without fear. If we were created and God gave us free will... than I exercise that right to think independently. Being FREE is such a relief... I can't believe I lived most of my life in fear. You know my mom left the Catholic Church because she couldn't believe in eternal torment in Hell after death... but that fear was replaced by the fear of eternal death at Armageddon... how I wish she could see that. How I wish I saw that sooner!
Awakened07

God regards the fallen human race as his enemy. God makes it clear that he is not the "father" of those that break his laws; and ALL break his laws. To be a child of God, a person must be born again, into HIS family. The evidence around us supports these premises. Of course, bible cults, paganism and atheism are short-term options for folks prior to judgment. They just aren't very wise ones.
With actual Christians like these, who needs spoof websites? Anyway. As for probability mentioned in posts above, it often becomes impossibly small because one goes from the end result down. What I mean is, one assumes that the 'end result' is the only result possible, and that the end result was a planned goal. For example: Let's take a look at all of us reading this thread. We know it's a fact that we're here, and that we're reading the thread. So it has happened. It is happening. Now, take a look at your day today. Could something have occurred that would have prevented you from being here right now? Of course it could have. And if it had, you wouldn't be here right now. Now look at your entire life. Could events have happened in your life to alter the course of events, so that for instance you were still a JW, and therefore wouldn't be here now? Of course. Now look at your parents' lives. How many things had to come together at the right times in their lives for you to eventually come along? Now look through events in your grandparents' lives, and so on and so forth, for all the things that had to happen on specific dates in each and everyone's lives for everything to be exactly as it is today. Now you can extend this to every one of us sitting here reading this. And you can also extend it to those people in some way responsible for the invention of the computer and the internet, and their ancestors and all that had to happen for everything to be exactly as it is today in their lives. -Now what are the odds that you and I and everyone here are here, right now, reading this thread on these computers? The odds of all those things coming together over thousands of years in billions of people's lives in exactly the right order at the exact time in each person's life to produce this exact outcome, is infinitely small. In other words, it's impossible that we're all here right now! But is it? Of course not! We are here right now, reading this! If the goal thousands of years ago was that we should sit at our specific desks at our exact computers at this particular time, then the odds of that happening by chance would be non-existent. But it has happened. We are sitting here. But - - - had things down the line been slightly different - - - - - well, then things had been slightly different (or very different, depending)! And we'd be none the wiser. That reality would have been the reality. It is "impossible" that we're here - but it has happened. We are here.

Perry

In other words, it's impossible that we're all here right now! But is it? Of course not! We are here right now, reading this!

Parameter	Max. Deviation
Ratio of Electrons:Protons	1:10 37
Ratio of Electromagnetic Force:Gravity	1:10 40
Expansion Rate of Universe	1:10 55
Mass of Universe1	1:10 59
Cosmological Constant	1:10 120
These numbers represent the maximum deviation from the accepted values, that would either prevent the universe from existing now, not having matter, or be unsuitable for any form of life.

Awakened, I like your reasoning!
Evidence for the Fine Tuning of the Universe
by Rich Deem
Introduction
The constants of the laws of physics have been finely tuned to a degree not possible through human engineering. Five of the more finely tuned numbers are included in the table below. For comments about what scientists think about these numbers, see the page Quotes from Scientists Regarding Design of the Universe
Fine Tuning of the Physical Constants of the Universe
Parameter Max. Deviation
Ratio of Electrons:Protons 1:10 37
Ratio of Electromagnetic Force:Gravity 1:10 40
Expansion Rate of Universe 1:10 55
Mass of Universe1 1:10 59
Cosmological Constant 1:10 120
These numbers represent the maximum deviation from the accepted values, that would either prevent the universe from existing now, not having matter, or be unsuitable for any form of life.
Degree of fine tuning
Recent Studies have confirmed the fine tuning of the cosmological constant (also known as "dark energy"). This cosmological constant is a force that increases with the increasing size of the universe. First hypothesized by Albert Einstein, the cosmological constant was rejected by him, because of lack of real world data. However, recent supernova 1A data demonstrated the existence of a cosmological constant that probably made up for the lack of light and dark matter in the universe. 2 However, the data was tentative, since there was some variability among observations. Recent cosmic microwave background (CMB) measurement not only demonstrate the existence of the cosmological constant, but the value of the constant. It turns out that the value of the cosmological constant exactly makes up for the lack of matter in the universe. 3
The degree of fine-tuning is difficult to imagine. Dr. Hugh Ross gives an example of the least fine-tuned of the above four examples in his book, The Creator and the Cosmos, which is reproduced here:
One part in 10 37 is such an incredibly sensitive balance that it is hard to visualize. The following analogy might help: Cover the entire North American continent in dimes all the way up to the moon, a height of about 239,000 miles (In comparison, the money to pay for the U.S. federal government debt would cover one square mile less than two feet deep with dimes.). Next, pile dimes from here to the moon on a billion other continents the same size as North America. Paint one dime red and mix it into the billions of piles of dimes. Blindfold a friend and ask him to pick out one dime. The odds that he will pick the red dime are one in 10 37 . (p. 115)
The ripples in the universe from the original Big Bang event are detectable at one part in 100,000. If this factor were slightly smaller, the universe would exist only as a collection of gas - no planets, no life. If this factor were slightly larger, the universe would consist only of large black holes. Obviously, no life would be possible in such a universe.
Another finely tuned constant is the strong nuclear force (the force that holds atoms together). The Sun "burns" by fusing hydrogen (and higher elements) together. When the two hydrogen atoms fuse, 0.7% of the mass of the hydrogens is converted into energy. If the amount of matter converted were slightly smaller—0.6% instead of 0.7%— a proton could not bond to a neutron, and the universe would consist only of hydrogen. With no heavy elements, there would be no rocky planets and no life. If the amount of matter converted were slightly larger—0.8%, fusion would happen so readily and rapidly that no hydrogen would have survived from the Big Bang. Again, there would be no solar systems and no life. The number must lie exactly between 0.6% and 0.8% (Martin Rees, Just Six Numbers).
Fine Tuning Parameters for the Universe
strong nuclear force constant
if larger: no hydrogen would form; atomic nuclei for most life-essential elements would be unstable; thus, no life chemistry
if smaller: no elements heavier than hydrogen would form: again, no life chemistry
weak nuclear force constant
if larger: too much hydrogen would convert to helium in big bang; hence, stars would convert too much matter into heavy elements making life chemistry impossible
if smaller: too little helium would be produced from big bang; hence, stars would convert too little matter into heavy elements making life chemistry impossible
gravitational force constant
if larger: stars would be too hot and would burn too rapidly and too unevenly for life chemistryif smaller: stars would be too cool to ignite nuclear fusion; thus, many of the elements needed for life chemistry would never form
electromagnetic force constant
if greater: chemical bonding would be disrupted; elements more massive than boron would be unstable to fission
if lesser: chemical bonding would be insufficient for life chemistry
ratio of electromagnetic force constant to gravitational force constant
if larger: all stars would be at least 40% more massive than the sun; hence, stellar burning would be too brief and too uneven for life supportif smaller: all stars would be at least 20% less massive than the sun, thus incapable of producing heavy elements
ratio of electron to proton mass
if larger: chemical bonding would be insufficient for life chemistry
if smaller: same as above
ratio of number of protons to number of electrons
if larger: electromagnetism would dominate gravity, preventing galaxy, star, and planet formation
if smaller: same as above
expansion rate of the universe
if larger: no galaxies would formif smaller: universe would collapse, even before stars formed
entropy level of the universe
if larger: stars would not form within proto-galaxies
if smaller: no proto-galaxies would form
mass density of the universe
if larger: overabundance of deuterium from big bang would cause stars to burn rapidly, too rapidly for life to form
if smaller: insufficient helium from big bang would result in a shortage of heavy elements
velocity of light
if faster: stars would be too luminous for life support if slower: stars would be insufficiently luminous for life support
age of the universe
if older: no solar-type stars in a stable burning phase would exist in the right (for life) part of the galaxy
if younger: solar-type stars in a stable burning phase would not yet have formed
initial uniformity of radiation
if more uniform: stars, star clusters, and galaxies would not have formed
if less uniform: universe by now would be mostly black holes and empty space
average distance between galaxies
if larger: star formation late enough in the history of the universe would be hampered by lack of material
if smaller: gravitational tug-of-wars would destabilize the sun's orbit
density of galaxy cluster
if denser: galaxy collisions and mergers would disrupt the sun's orbit
if less dense: star formation late enough in the history of the universe would be hampered by lack of material
average distance between stars
if larger: heavy element density would be too sparse for rocky planets to formif smaller: planetary orbits would be too unstable for life
fine structure constant (describing the fine-structure splitting of spectral lines) if larger: all stars would be at least 30% less massive than the sun
if larger than 0.06: matter would be unstable in large magnetic fields
if smaller: all stars would be at least 80% more massive than the sun
decay rate of protons
if greater: life would be exterminated by the release of radiation
if smaller: universe would contain insufficient matter for life
12C to 16 O nuclear energy level ratio
if larger: universe would contain insufficient oxygen for life
if smaller: universe would contain insufficient carbon for life
ground state energy level for 4 He
if larger: universe would contain insufficient carbon and oxygen for lifeif smaller: same as above
decay rate of 8 Be
if slower: heavy element fusion would generate catastrophic explosions in all the stars
if faster: no element heavier than beryllium would form; thus, no life chemistry
ratio of neutron mass to proton mass
if higher: neutron decay would yield too few neutrons for the formation of many life-essential elements
if lower: neutron decay would produce so many neutrons as to collapse all stars into neutron stars or black holes
initial excess of nucleons over anti-nucleons
if greater: radiation would prohibit planet formation
if lesser: matter would be insufficient for galaxy or star formation
polarity of the water molecule
if greater: heat of fusion and vaporization would be too high for life
if smaller: heat of fusion and vaporization would be too low for life; liquid water would not work as a solvent for life chemistry; ice would not float, and a runaway freeze-up would result
supernovae eruptions
if too close, too frequent, or too late: radiation would exterminate life on the planet
if too distant, too infrequent, or too soon: heavy elements would be too sparse for rocky planets to form
white dwarf binaries
if too few: insufficient fluorine would exist for life chemistry
if too many: planetary orbits would be too unstable for life
if formed too soon: insufficient fluorine production
if formed too late: fluorine would arrive too late for life chemistry
ratio of exotic matter mass to ordinary matter mass
if larger: universe would collapse before solar-type stars could form
if smaller: no galaxies would form
number of effective dimensions in the early universe
if larger: quantum mechanics, gravity, and relativity could not coexist; thus, life would be impossible
if smaller: same result
number of effective dimensions in the present universe
if smaller: electron, planet, and star orbits would become unstableif larger: same result
mass of the neutrino
if smaller: galaxy clusters, galaxies, and stars would not form
if larger: galaxy clusters and galaxies would be too dense
big bang ripples
if smaller: galaxies would not form; universe would expand too rapidly
if larger: galaxies/galaxy clusters would be too dense for life; black holes would dominate; universe would collapse before life-site could form
size of the relativistic dilation factor
if smaller: certain life-essential chemical reactions will not function properlyif larger: same result
uncertainty magnitude in the Heisenberg uncertainty principle
if smaller: oxygen transport to body cells would be too small and certain life-essential elements would be unstable
if larger: oxygen transport to body cells would be too great and certain life-essential elements would be unstable
cosmological constant
if larger: universe would expand too quickly to form solar-type stars

Awakened07

I wrote:
But - - - had things down the line been slightly different - - - - - well, then things had been slightly different (or very different, depending)! And we'd be none the wiser. That reality would have been the reality.
with regards to us being here at this forum right now as a product of events in our ancestral past, and events in our own lives.
2+2 will get you a step further.
BTW, could I perhaps interest you in a few slightly used, paperback and hard cover editions of the WBTS' Creation books? I can't use them anymore, but you on the other hand can simply rip out the pages containing doctrine, and will instantly have some colorfully illustrated books to use in your preaching work. Free of charge.
Perry

It's okay to "not know", in fact it's more honest. The atheist merely takes things one step further and says, based on the preponderance of evidence available, that there isn't enough evidence to be a believer.
Gopher,
Do you have any idea how utterly ignorant that statement is? .... I mean, based on the perponderance of evidence?
Please, please tell us what your perponderance of evidence is for your position of "there is no God".
As a believer, I have presented my scientific perponderance of evidence a few posts above. This is my foundation for belief in a Designer. Please present your evidence for "there is no God" .
HB

Awakened07,
Thank you for explaining clearly a concept which has been half formed in my head for a while but which I have not been able to put into words.
What made me ponder was when I found out, in the process of researching my family tree, how many people we are each directly descend from. We have 8 Gt Grandparents and the number doubles each generation you go back, so we all descend from 4,194,304 twentieth Gt Granparents and so on.
Back in the middle ages, i f just one of your 4 million+ direct bloodline ancestors as a child (or at least before they conceived the baby that became one of your 19th Gt Grandparents), had happened to step in front of an ox cart or whatever, and had been killed, you would not exist.
The probability of any of us as individuals existing in our present form is incredibly small, but nevertheless, we are here.
I do not personally believe there was an intelligent Being directing events and purposely bringing couples together from the beginning of time just to lead to my birth, or that this Being engineered my meeting my husband so that an as yet unknown individual will exist in another 20 generations. I feel that I am here by chance not Providence. (Do any Christians feel differently and feel you were destined to be born ever since time began?)
That thought led me to consider that the reason all the other amazing things in the universe exist which at first seem to be too complex or well-designed to be a product of chance, could indeed be just that, chance.
jstalin

If you see a child that is starving and you have the means to help the child, but withhold that help, are you acting in a moral way?
If you say "no" (and I agree with you), then how can we say that it is OK for "god" to do so?
OnTheWayOut

I am disturbed by the suffering of the innocent.
A close relative has a debilatating disease and is in the final stages.
He will die at a young age (50 or so) because of it. He attended
some seminar where another person with the same disease was
saying how God kept her illness in remission, so she won't be
dying soon. This angered my relative. "Does that mean that
God thinks less of me? I don't deserve a cure? Why? I never
killed anyone or even stole from people."
I am even more disturbed by the suffering of children. The God of
the Bible allowed the slaughter of people who never knew him, including
children. He allowed young girls to become captive and raped by the
same people who killed their parents and brothers, to produce more
followers of the God of the Bible. He promises more suffering upon
children.
Thanks for your thoughts.
Awakened07

Awakened07,
Thank you for explaining clearly a concept which has been half formed in my head for a while but which I have not been able to put into words.
Thanks for 'getting it', and for brilliantly extrapolating on it.
The God of the Bible allowed the slaughter of people who never knew him, including
children.
Oh, he did "better" than that. He killed David and Bathsheba's baby as a punishment meant for David...!
And cursed whole lineages of 'wrongdoers', not just the individual 'wrongdoer'. That's some divine justice right there.
Some people go through life from birth to death at 90 y.o. with not much more than the sniffles. Others are chained to a wheelchair or bed their entire lives, with excruciating pain.
I guess some are born with more original sin than others.
shamus100

It's pretty damned obvious to me that Christianity is not the way to god. It is amazing that it's the same old argument over the 'christian' god when there are many other religions out there, like Buddism, etc. The only reason why we talk of christianity is because we were mostly born in north america or europe. It's funny how nobody opens they're minds to the possibilities....
I'm with the rest - if this is how god runs things, I'll take the dirt nap. The bible is one of the most awful and violent books out there.

Struggling with the concept of a "God"

Evidence for the Fine Tuning of the Universe by Rich Deem

Introduction

Degree of fine tuning

Fine Tuning Parameters for the Universe

Share this

Evidence for the Fine Tuning of the Universe
by Rich Deem