The immensity of the universe;addendum (The nature of a \'Creator\')

by dhw, Saturday, January 30, 2016, 13:30 (3219 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: In October 2015 it was reported that astronomers had captured the destruction of a solar system a mere 570 light years away from Earth (long, long, long after life is believed to have begun). I do not understand why your almighty God should create billions of suns and zillions of stars which appear and will eventually disappear, when all he wanted to do was assemble the elements with which he could produce life on Earth. You do not seem to understand it either, so please explain why the destruction of a solar system 570 light years away (as an example to illustrate the whole problem) seems to you to be orderly, personal and directed.-DAVID: I think your problem is that you do not think in the context of what is known about the universe. We know stars explode all the time spreading elements. In the case you cited a star with planets exploded, and we observed that for the first time. So? This is the pattern of how elements spread around, nothing more and it provides for our life. Nothing unusual to me. God provides through evolution of the universe for the elements needed for the creation of life. Obviously I don't know why He did it this way.-You believe that the billions of solar systems and zillions of stars that come and go are all for the purpose of creating life and, specifically, humans. But you don't know why God did it this way, or cannot “discern God's method”, and clearly cannot tell me why it all seems “personal and directed” and “done in an orderly fashion”. In other words, you cannot see how what is known about the universe fits in with your beliefs, but your beliefs must be right, and therefore you can't see why I have a problem detecting any order or personal direction in what is known about the universe! However, we both have the same problem: neither of us KNOWS the context of what is known about the universe, and it is what we don't know that gives rise to all these discussions. I can only explain why the gaps you acknowledge make your hypothesis as difficult for me to accept as any other explanation that humans have come up with.