Uranium

[DEK]

At the risk of sounding ignorant, what is the gift of Agency?
Is it something I've probably heard of, just not by that name?

[suminonA]

Warning: I’m one of those persons that can be best described as being an atheist. Yet, my interest in this thread is not only on the “scientific” side, but also on the “moral philosophy/religion” one. And I tend to take such subjects quite seriously, meaning that I’m interested in learning as much as I can, while not offending the others. Therefore I come with many questions, beware!

If God sees us as children, then he'll want us to grow and learn, even while he cares for us.

If I may ask, how does God care for you, exactly? I know the religious experience is very personal, thus being very different from person to person. Would you share some of it here?

It also bears mentioning that, by itself, uranium is neither good nor bad. It is the people who use it who decide whether it will be used to power cities or destroy them. I'm also fairly certain (somebody please correct me if I'm wrong) that uranium, in its natural form, is too diluted to be of any use for good or evil. It takes a long process to refine it, and it is during that process that human influence takes effect, deciding what it will be used for.

I completely agree with this.

I think what Hive_King meant is that God, being God, could have designed the physical laws of the universe in such a way that uranium could generate power without being destructive.

I’m still not convinced about that. Anything can be destructive, given enough intelligence.

A.

[anonshadow]

Why did God create the sun? When it goes supernova, it will wipe us out.

I suppose you say "us" as in "Humans", because none of the present living individuals would actually be a witness to the Sun going supernova.

So, how do you know that Humans won't colonise other planets before that happens?

I think you missed my point. And the irony in the statement.

[suminonA]

Why did God create the sun? When it goes supernova, it will wipe us out.

I suppose you say "us" as in "Humans", because none of the present living individuals would actually be a witness to the Sun going supernova.

So, how do you know that Humans won't colonise other planets before that happens?

I think you missed my point. And the irony in the statement.

*rereads the post on page 1*
Ok, I'll admit that.

Still I'd say that your analogy is not correct, as Humans won't chose what will happen to the Sun. That is why I took it so literally.

A.

[hive_king]

Wow, this thread got more attention than i thought it would.

Satan the Devil contradicted God, therefore questioning His right to rule. So God is allowing time for man to rule himself so it can be proven that we need Him.

Are you saying you're perfectly happy with all the pain, suffering, death, and destruction in the world just so long as God can prove a point? Seems drastic.

Yes, but God does not use power to force his authority(2 Corinthians 9:7). His sovereignty is based on the fact that, as Creator of the universe, he knows what is best for everyone. Satan was challenging that by essentially claiming that God was withholding something good (i.e. the forbidden fruit) from his loyal subjects. God could have destroyed him in an instant for the challenge, but that would have left it unanswered. So to prove His sovereignty, God allowed has humans to rule themselves for a time. Then, once it has been determined that he is the best choice for ruler, people will willingly serve Him.

I'm sorry, but I must disagree with you. If expelling Adam and Eve from the garden of Eden, the great flood, countless attacks and destruction on Israel and other things in the bible isn't God using power to force his authority, I don't know what is.

And humans aren't truly ruling over ourselves, if you go by the bible, Satan, who rules all the nations of the earth, is ruling us. Therefore, its not a fair contest. But I'll start a new thread about that.

I think what Hive_King meant is that God, being God, could have designed the physical laws of the universe in such a way that uranium could generate power without being destructive. In my opinion, that is something like never letting your son or daughter do anything dangerous, no matter what their age. Sure, they don't get hurt, but they never learn all the lessons that go along with being hurt. Part of the joy of raising a child (or so I'm told) is watching them become, at least to some degree, independant. If God sees us as children, then he'll want us to grow and learn, even while he cares for us. It

DEK, that's exactly what I mean, God could have made the universe how he pleased.

It seems to me that you're comparing the horrific death of thousands to people to a skinned knee. Think of it if it were your family and your loved ones who died in some sort of nuclear explosion. Would you really just brush it off as a "human-wide learning experience"?

Besides, according to almost every church with the exceptions of the Mormons, God doesn't want us to "grow up" as a race. As soon as HE has decided we failed, he'll take over and rule us all directly, never letting us be anything other than children.

I’m still not convinced about that. Anything can be destructive, given enough intelligence.

A.

Destroy a city with a flower, I'd like to see you try.

[pooka]

I guess the question is not why God created Uranium, but why he created Lucifer.

Doesn't Uranium have some medicinal applications? Possibly to treat the cancer and hyperthyroidism that God also allows to exist?

[hive_king]

Lucifer wasn't created by God, he was made by the good ol' mommy/daddy way.

You're missing the point, pooka. God could have made uranium so that it wouldn't cause amazingly big explosions and so it WOULDN'T kill cities full of people. If he is all-loving, why didn't he? Did he love all the people who died in Hiroshima and Nagasaki because he made the universe just so?

[Taalcon]

At the risk of sounding ignorant, what is the gift of Agency?
Is it something I've probably heard of, just not by that name?

Agency = Free Will

Agency is the ability and privilege God gives us to choose and to act for ourselves.

[suminonA]

God could have made uranium so that it wouldn't cause amazingly big explosions and so it WOULDN'T kill cities full of people. If he is all-loving, why didn't he? Did he love all the people who died in Hiroshima and Nagasaki because he made the universe just so?

When a tool is misused, we can blame the one to use it. But what about natural disasters like volcano eruptions, hurricanes, earth-quakes and the like? Who's to blame for the deaths that they cause?

A.

[Taalcon]

Nobody.

[mr_thebrain]

so rather than insuring against "acts of god" we should insure against "acts of nobody"

i know that i'm not as intelligent as some of those who post in this section... cuz apparently you have to be religious to be smart... but at some point god has to be responsible. you can't put all the good things on god, and then not blame god then for the bad things.

so either there is a god, and he's a piece of crap.

or there is no god. everything is chance.

we were given free will. fine. god put distructive materials on the earth, to be used for good. fine. maybe he put it here to tempt us into sinning. sure.

k if a parent leaves a knife on the floor, and then their child hurts themself on it, it would be irresponsible parenting. so is god being a irresponsible diety?

one way or another it goes all the way to god, unless there is no god.

[Taalcon]

"Natural Disasters" works for me. I really don't think the majority of such things are 'acts' of anyone. It's nature running its course.

[suminonA]

Then I'd say that Humanity is also a "natural disaster".


A.

[mr_thebrain]

god produced nature, he created the earth to act the way it acts, and produce materials that are harmful. god can be blamed for nature too.

[DEK]

Wow, I missed a lot this weekend.

(1 John 5:19) “We know we originate with God, but the whole world is lying in the [power of the] wicked one.”
Which means, basically, that Satan is the one to blame for the condition of the world. In addition, many natural processes have been disrupted by human influence (e.g. global warming), and this has worsened natural disasters. This goes back to what I was saying before, about God letting humans rule themselves for a while. He does not at this time intervene in natural events.



Quote:

Are you saying you're perfectly happy with all the pain, suffering, death, and destruction in the world just so long as God can prove a point? Seems drastic.

God did not cause all the suffering, etc. just to prove a point. Satan's rebellion and Adam and Eve's sin caused imperfection in humans, which has resulted in what we see today. God is simply taking the steps to ensure that it never happens again. He is proving beyond all doubt that he is a much better ruler than anyone else, so that in case someone else should try to rebel in the future, He can strike the rebel down without having to prove His sovereignty again.

I'm sorry, but I must disagree with you. If expelling Adam and Eve from the garden of Eden, the great flood, countless attacks and destruction on Israel and other things in the bible isn't God using power to force his authority, I don't know what is.

Adam and Eve were expelled for disobeying a direct order (its God's garden, so he can do that).
The Flood was to wipe the slate clean and give humanity a chance to start over after some angels decided to take wives and procreate (creating the wicked Nephilim race).
And Israel is a special case: they had a pact with God, and He reserved the right to punish them if they broke their end of it.

It seems to me that you're comparing the horrific death of thousands to people to a skinned knee. Think of it if it were your family and your loved ones who died in some sort of nuclear explosion. Would you really just brush it off as a "human-wide learning experience"?

That's not how I meant it to sound. Of course our current situation is far more serious. Even Jesus wept when he heard of the death of Lazarus - John 11:33-36. But we have already been promised that death and suffering are only temporary - John 11:25. So, I would not "brush off" the death of anyone I know, let alone my own family and loved ones, but I would understand that it is a small price to pay for the reward of eternal life.

If I may ask, how does God care for you, exactly? I know the religious experience is very personal, thus being very different from person to person. Would you share some of it here?

I didn't mean that he takes care of us, like babysitting, but rather that he cares about what happens to us.

[Taalcon]

In my understanding, the trials are not just evidence to be used in the Grand Case For Sovereignty. More and more I'm coming to understand that point of view, and respect it. But I still do not agree.

For me, the trials are an intended beneficial part of life. Adam and Eve were not created in Eden proper, they were brought there after being told of the conditions of staying there.

While earth was created for man, Satan was allowed to run free. He deceived Eve into thinking that partaking of the Tree was the only way to achieve Wisdom, and to become like her Father. In partaking, she transgressed the comandment, fell into mortality, and would be expelled from the perfection of the Garden.

When she brought the fruit to Adam, Adam was not deceived, but was conflicted between two orders he had been given:

a) to not partake of the tree
b) cleave to his wife, and to multiply and fill the earth with her

Adam saw it as a dilemma - in his mind, it was not a matter of simply obeying or disobeying, but a decision had to be made. Each act, in his mind, would result in disobeying of His Father's command.

a) If he did not partake, he could not remain with Eve and multiply the earth as commanded
b) If he did partake, he would violate that standing order, but he would remain with Eve

He chose to partake of the fruit and remain with his wife. They were expelled from the Garden, separated from the presence of God, but the earth also fell to match their condition.

They had now personally experienced Perfection, and it's opposite. They had a personal knowledge of Good and Evil.

God knew this would happen. Which is why, in my understanding, the Atonement of Christ was prepared 'before the foundation of the world'.

Joy, and a fulness of the presence of God, would be able to be appreciated so much more now that the converse had, and will, be experienced by all men.

The struggles we deal with in this life help us to grow, to overcome, and to more appreciate that which is good. God does want us to 'grow up'. While Satan lied when he said that by partaking Eve would 'not die', he was correct in stating that by partaking she could "Be as God, knowing good from evil." What he also didn't tell her is that it would be a gruelling, difficult process.

In my understanding, we are children of God subjected to a school in order to grow up to be like Him.

Could there have been another way? I don't know. But this way was indeed provided for, and is working according to God's design.

Disasters, death, and affliction do seem horrible and terrible when this sphere or 'system of things' is seen as the extent of existence. Even for those with a hope for Eternal Life and a Resurrecttion, the temporary loss of friends and family can be very hard, and seem far less temporary than it is.

But in the end, this life is but a moment. It's school. We're here to learn, to grow, and to progress.

Someone once said, "It is not for us to merely endure the storms, but to choose the right while they rage". We're being tempered.

Also, in my understanding, all who are or have been born on earth chose this course. While our memory of this has been veiled, we knew before we came that we would be subject to pain and suffering. We also all knew it would be worth it.

So in one sense, according to my understanding of things, if any sort of fault is going to be maintained for our subjection to suffering, in the Eternal scheme of things, it is that it is our own. We chose to subject ourselves to it.

[suminonA]

Adam and Eve were not created in Eden proper, they were brought there after being told of the conditions of staying there.

While earth was created for man, Satan was allowed to run free. He deceived Eve into thinking that partaking of the Tree was the only way to achieve Wisdom, and to become like her Father. In partaking, she transgressed the comandment, fell into mortality, and would be expelled from the perfection of the Garden. […]

Do you take the “history” of Adam and Eve as literally true, or is it just a metaphorical interpretation of some other events? Either way, how convinced are you that it spells the truth about the actual history?
Further more, what do you think about the connection between this history and the way women were treated in early history of “faithful” Humanity?

A.

[Taalcon]

Do you take the “history” of Adam and Eve as literally true,

Yes.

or is it just a metaphorical interpretation of some other events?

Yes.

Either way, how convinced are you that it spells the truth about the actual history?

Significantly.

Further more, what do you think about the connection between this history and the way women were treated in early history of “faithful” Humanity?

Many people have in times past used misinterpretations of Truth to bring forth Bad Things never intended by the original good.

[DEK]

In my understanding, the trials are not just evidence to be used in the Grand Case For Sovereignty. [...] For me, the trials are an intended beneficial part of life.

While I agree that trials are not just evidence, I don't think they were part of God's original plan. His plan was for Adam and Eve, as perfect humans, to live on and fill the Earth. After Adam sinned and introduced sin, God expanded his plan to include this detour.

I am also loath to believe that God would put Adam into a situation where he would be, essentially, forced to sin, and yet still punish him for it.

[suminonA]

Do you take the “history” of Adam and Eve as literally true,

Yes.

or is it just a metaphorical interpretation of some other events?

Yes.

How do you manage to combine the two?

Further more, what do you think about the connection between this history and the way women were treated in early history of “faithful” Humanity?

Many people have in times past used misinterpretations of Truth to bring forth Bad Things never intended by the original good.

So, it is a Human fault. Then, don’t you think that Humanity would have been better off without that missinterpretable Truth? If we were not prepared for it then, then why not wait for the right time to reveal it? Or are we damned to always make the bad choice before realizing which way is the Truth?

BTW, my atheistic way to see this issue is that the story was constructed by Humans to justify their (wrong by today standards) view on things, and had to admit/adapt when they were proved to be wrong. Whose fault is it that “religious truth” has to recede as the Human knowledge advances? What do you think of Giordano Bruno's fate?

A.

PS: these are questions directed to anyone who would like to answer, I have no intention to "attack" anyone in particular.

[pooka]

You're missing the point, pooka. God could have made uranium so that it wouldn't cause amazingly big explosions and so it WOULDN'T kill cities full of people. If he is all-loving, why didn't he? Did he love all the people who died in Hiroshima and Nagasaki because he made the universe just so?

If it didn't explode, it wouldn't be Uranium. God did make several dozen perfectly good elements that don't explode, and for thousands of years mankind didn't do much exploding. I don't know, maybe the Jehovah's witnesses are right and Satan did start running riot about 90 years ago.

What you don't get is that physical death and suffering is not the final determinant of existence (unless you do believe that, but I can't abide such an existence, since it would mean I am crazy.) Some people say the term "Higher Power" (as used in AA) demeans God, but I think it is a very important reminder that God's judgement and wisdom and perspective is beyond mankind's. The other alternative is that people are the greatest thing there is. Ar-Rajul-hu Al Akbar.

[hive_king]

But what if we are?

[Taalcon]

It's a great big universe
And we're all really puny
We're just tiny little specks
About the size of Mickey Rooney.
It's big and black and inky
And we are small and dinky
It's a big universe and we're not.

-Yakko

[suminonA]

We’re big because our imagination can encompass the whole Universe. And there is still room for doubt!

A.

[Eaquae Legit]

Ar-Rajul-hu Al Akbar.

How exactly does this translate, pooka? I'm used to Allah-hu akbar, but this one's unfamiliar.

[vendor]

can anybody here name a fuel (with the exception of wood products) that cannot be turned into a bomb? That's one of the main reasons cold fusion has been discarded, because infinite free energy equals free powered bomb of infinite magnitude. Can humans just not be trusted with fuel? With each new fuel type our society has grown. uranium is no exception.
[/i]

[suminonA]

What do you call "fuel"? Is any source/form of usable energy "fuel"?
I'm thinking of energy that can be drawn from waterfalls, winds, tides and even the Sun. Is there a "waterfall bomb"?

A.

[hive_king]

What about coal? And I've not yet seen a "natural gas" bomb. Geothermel duct bomb? Not to mention what SummonA mentioned.

[vendor]

coal + saltpeter + sulfer = gun powder

Natural gas - contents under pressure will explode if punctured or sufficient heat applied.

water, tides, and wind aren't fuel themselves, but forces that push turbines and the movement of the turbines generate electricity.

I stand corrected, the heat from the sun is the only fuel I can't think of to make explosive.

[DEK]

Maybe not a bomb, but it has been used as a weapon.
Back when there were wood ships, some guy used a concave mirror to focus sunlight and set them on fire.

[hive_king]

Archimedes is to you, "some guy?" What are the youth of America coming to?

Regardless, there is a huge leap from "exploding can of natural gas" to "whoops, there went Hiroshima!"

[vendor]

different levels of responsibility

[DEK]

The point isn't whether a particular item may be used as a weapon or not. The fact is that using them as weapons speaks to the nature of the person wielding it, not that of the item itself. In other words, things can be weapons because we choose to use them that way; the objects themselves are neither bad nor good, that part is up to us.

[hive_king]

But things have much different potential for damage than others, that's one of the main points of this thread. What would scare you more? Being attacked by a group armed with guns, or a group armed with doughnuts?

[DEK]

Naturally, the gun-toting group is more frightening. But for me, the other group would still scare me (not because of the doughnuts, but because of the group attack).