The Mind of God (Introduction)

by David Turell , Sunday, February 08, 2015, 15:07 (3576 days ago)

Larry Moran, an atheist Canadian biochemistry professor, has a blog, Sandwalk, named for a walkway on Darwin's property. He castigates atheist Stephan Fry for attempting to know the mind of God.-http://sandwalk.blogspot.com/2015/01/stephen-fry-blows-it-by-assuming-he.html-Moran's warning:-"That's not what Stephen Fry would do. He makes the assumption that he knows the mind of god and attacks the god for not being nice to humans. In other words, he accepts the problem of evil and assumes that the god he is facing gives a damn about some obscure species on a minor planet in one of billions of galaxies. Later on Stephen Fry concedes that he could be talking to the Greek gods or some other gods but by then it's too late. -" The god he is addressing may or may not have done any of the things in the Bible. If he isn't that god then he will know that Stephen Fry is attacking a strawman. If he is the god of the Bible then presumably he/she/it had his/her/its reasons for doing apparently evil things and Stephen Fry is about to get educated about the real mind of god. That may turn out badly for Stephen Fry. - "If you ever run into any real gods I'd advise you not to mess with them.-"Many of my atheist friends think that Fry's response is fantastic because he really shocks the interviewer, Gay Byrne [Stephen Fry on God]. That's naive. Most intelligent Christians have developed some very good rationalizations concerning the problem of evil. They've heard it all before and they know how to respond. One of the classic responses is that cannot they know the mind of god. But Stephen Fry knows the mind of god and this is puzzling because Fry is an atheist."- On this site I have tried to toe the line of not making Fry's mistake. I try to look at evidence for God's purposes, not his personality. I reject the point that He is playful, bored or callus about suffering. I am not sure about the full extent of his powers. They may have some limits. This is why I have my dilemma about how evolution is controlled by God, which I think it is. I admit I think organism have some degree of inventive ability, based on the new epigenetic discoveries. But at the same time I look at the increasingly complex genome controls that are also being discovered, and all I can see is design. I'll stick with my dilemma approach until evolutions' mechanisms are more clearly delineated. Over-analyzing the mind of God is a mistake.-I feel dhw falls into Fry's trap. Just look back at his suppositions about God's point of view. He could be 'bored'. He could try 'experimenting', to paraphrase some of the discussions we've had. Please, lets quit discussions at that level and simply look at the evidence we have in front of us. I admit struggling to understand God's intentions is entering His mind, but only in one aspect. I equate what I see as the results of evolution to imply purposeful design. I do not then look for an emotional content behind those actions. I really do not know why God did what He did. I don't know how bonded He is to us, if bonded at all. We are here. There must be a cause, and perhaps a reason. There may be no reason and no emotion involved. -I know my view of religion is not warm and fuzzy, but look at Eastern religious thought, not really warm and fuzzy, but certainly more realistic in recognizing how little we can surmise about divine levels of reality. We don't need warm and fuzzy. Just stick to the wonder and enjoyment of the fantastic level of life we enjoy compared to the apes. Don't feel sorry for them. They don't have the capacity to know any better what they are missing.-Thank you, God.