Theophilus, a serious question.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

If you believe God created the living things on this planet, can you please explain to me why he chose a process politely called "defecation" to be part of those living things?

NB: This is not a question that "well, it feels good when you do it" or a "you need to get rid of waste" type answers will deal with. I mean WHY do we need to do this at all? Billions of tons of poo-poo dumped on the planet every year? C'mon, that needs explaining if there's a "guiding hand".

[colubridae]

Or why did sHe create cancer?

[Theophilus]

I would look to physiology for your answer to that one GZ. Basically there appears to be diminishing returns in extracting nutrition from food so rather than digest everything the majority of nutrition is extracted and the remainder is dumped (to coin a phrase). Of course if you were a rabbit once around the system just ain't enough

Did God design everything, or did he design the design process to continually adapt to a changing and aging earth?

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I would look to physiology for your answer to that one GZ. Basically there appears to be diminishing returns in extracting nutrition from food so rather than digest everything the majority of nutrition is extracted and the remainder is dumped (to coin a phrase). Of course if you were a rabbit once around the system just ain't enough

But why "design" such a, pardon me, shitty system in the first place?

Did God design everything, or did he design the design process to continually adapt to a changing and aging earth?

Oh, don't give me that evolution garbage, I don't believe in Darwin.

[Feck]

How does the parable of the good seed explain the actions of an all knowing all powerful god ? doesn't does it ! and it goes no way towards the origins of"evil" ! so all in all it's a bit of a waste of all that paper

[Theophilus]

How does the parable of the good seed explain the actions of an all knowing all powerful god ? doesn't does it ! and it goes no way towards the origins of"evil" ! so all in all it's a bit of a waste of all that paper

Crikey, that was a bit of a change in direction. The parable of the sower explains why not everybody (the seeds) responds in the same way to God (the sower). It was having rather a side-swipe at the Pharisees. I'm not sure where you're linking it to evil or the subject of this thread. You've lost me a bit I'm afraid.

[Rum]

I would look to physiology for your answer to that one GZ. Basically there appears to be diminishing returns in extracting nutrition from food so rather than digest everything the majority of nutrition is extracted and the remainder is dumped (to coin a phrase). Of course if you were a rabbit once around the system just ain't enough

Did God design everything, or did he design the design process to continually adapt to a changing and aging earth?

The only point I can see where science fails to answer questions - and even there, the scientific method is exploring fruitfully, is at the actual 'creation' of the universe - at the point of the Big Bang. I think science has rolled the clouds of superstition slowly back from beliefs that the seasons are controlled by god(s), that our behaviour is attributed to them and that god sees every sparrow which falls and all the rest of the theistic nonsense that has plagued humanity..to that one moment.

For me however, the fact that science and rationality has rolled back those clouds of ignorance is rather a good sign that the current 'brick wall' of the Big Bang will be breached by reason. There is no reason to suddenly opt for 'superstition mode' because we are at the boundaries of our understanding.

[Theophilus]

I would look to physiology for your answer to that one GZ. Basically there appears to be diminishing returns in extracting nutrition from food so rather than digest everything the majority of nutrition is extracted and the remainder is dumped (to coin a phrase). Of course if you were a rabbit once around the system just ain't enough

Did God design everything, or did he design the design process to continually adapt to a changing and aging earth?

The only point I can see where science fails to answer questions - and even there, the scientific method is exploring fruitfully, is at the actual 'creation' of the universe - at the point of the Big Bang. I think science has rolled the clouds of superstition slowly back from beliefs that the seasons are controlled by god(s), that our behaviour is attributed to them and that god sees every sparrow which falls and all the rest of the theistic nonsense that has plagued humanity..to that one moment.

For me however, the fact that science and rationality has rolled back those clouds of ignorance is rather a good sign that the current 'brick wall' of the Big Bang will be breached by reason. There is no reason to suddenly opt for 'superstition mode' because we are at the boundaries of our understanding.

Rum

I actually agree with you. My God is a God of the explained and unexplained and I see no merit in ignorance. I love science (it's been my life and my living) and so am very happy to point GZ in the direction of physiology for the answer to his question.

[Rum]

I would look to physiology for your answer to that one GZ. Basically there appears to be diminishing returns in extracting nutrition from food so rather than digest everything the majority of nutrition is extracted and the remainder is dumped (to coin a phrase). Of course if you were a rabbit once around the system just ain't enough

Did God design everything, or did he design the design process to continually adapt to a changing and aging earth?

The only point I can see where science fails to answer questions - and even there, the scientific method is exploring fruitfully, is at the actual 'creation' of the universe - at the point of the Big Bang. I think science has rolled the clouds of superstition slowly back from beliefs that the seasons are controlled by god(s), that our behaviour is attributed to them and that god sees every sparrow which falls and all the rest of the theistic nonsense that has plagued humanity..to that one moment.

For me however, the fact that science and rationality has rolled back those clouds of ignorance is rather a good sign that the current 'brick wall' of the Big Bang will be breached by reason. There is no reason to suddenly opt for 'superstition mode' because we are at the boundaries of our understanding.

Rum

I actually agree with you. My God is a God of the explained and unexplained and I see no merit in ignorance. I love science (it's been my life and my living) and so am very happy to point GZ in the direction of physiology for the answer to his question.

I have picked up on that from your posts. When I was a Christian (a long time ago now) I did not let superstition override logic and reason either. In the end logic and reason did however overcome faith in something that in the end became totally without substance to my way of thinking.

Good luck to you, but I find it hard to understand your stance. 'Grace' perhaps in the religious mindset.

[Theophilus]

Or why did sHe create cancer?

Ah, tricky one that. I only have a few ways of looking at it that fall short of a truly satisfying answer.

One thing we can keep in mind is that continual cell division is the normal means of growth and repair in the body, and so the flip side to cancer is that our bodies grow and repair themselves. It is only when the control mechanism of this division goes wrong that cancer develops. So if we ask "is it generally good that cells divide?" we can say "yes, usually".

Another thing I keep in mind is that we all die; it's about the only certainty and so perhaps we should start by asking why do we live and die rather than worrying initially about how we die.

For a Christian we have an advantage that we believe we are only seeing part of the picture. Though there may be suffering in this life we don't know what happens after and maybe the complete package makes more sense than only seeing half the picture. Some sort of analogy is to consider a baby having her jabs - if we stop time just after she has had the jabs all we see is a baby in pain deliberately inflicted by her parents and a doctor. It is only when we see the full picture of later immunity from something worse does the original pain make sense.

Can good in this life ever come out of suffering? Perhaps. Perhaps it makes the human race more compassionate and care for each other more?

If we assume there is a God for a moment, then we may also speculate that suffering may help someone reach out to God which could ultimately be good for them.

As I say I don't pretend to have a totally satisfying answer, but there are some ways we can start to explore the difficult subject of suffering.

[Elessarina]

But why "design" such a, pardon me, shitty system in the first place?

And why place the shit sytem right next to the fun parts?

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I actually agree with you. My God is a God of the explained and unexplained and I see no merit in ignorance. I love science (it's been my life and my living) and so am very happy to point GZ in the direction of physiology for the answer to his question.

And yet you have demonstrated that you understand "God" is an untestable concept? What is your "science"? Homeopathy?

[Theophilus]

I actually agree with you. My God is a God of the explained and unexplained and I see no merit in ignorance. I love science (it's been my life and my living) and so am very happy to point GZ in the direction of physiology for the answer to his question.

And yet you have demonstrated that you understand "God" is an untestable concept? What is your "science"? Homeopathy?

At least homeopathy is safe

Well, it is unless you need some proper medicine.

But there are lots of areas of my life I don't feel a need to use scientific method. I didn't apply science to falling in love, and I don't apply science to when I play music. I love science, but I don't see it as a Swiss Army Knife for life. Science is great but that doesn't mean it's useful for everything. Science and faith, to me, are two compatible but different parts of my life.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I actually agree with you. My God is a God of the explained and unexplained and I see no merit in ignorance. I love science (it's been my life and my living) and so am very happy to point GZ in the direction of physiology for the answer to his question.

And yet you have demonstrated that you understand "God" is an untestable concept? What is your "science"? Homeopathy?

At least homeopathy is safe

Well, it is unless you need some proper medicine.

But there are lots of areas of my life I don't feel a need to use scientific method. I didn't apply science to falling in love, and I don't apply science to when I play music. I love science, but I don't see it as a Swiss Army Knife for life. Science is great but that doesn't mean it's useful for everything. Science and faith, to me, are two compatible but different parts of my life.

So the most important part of your life, that which deals with your immortal soul, isn't subjected to the scientific method? Is that because you know it fails the test?

[Valden]

But why "design" such a, pardon me, shitty system in the first place?

And why place the shit sytem right next to the fun parts?

Or make it so our DNA matches the Chimp by 99%. We even look a lot alike to our cousins.
Very stupid design. If we're so special, we shouldn't even have DNA that matches any other animals, nor should we even be an animal in the first place (because we are.)

The ONLY thing that sets us apart from all other animals is our intelligence. And some days, I question the intelligence of many humans.