A Fallen, Fine Tuned Universe

Author: Jarrett_Ludolph

Posts

Total: 83
Jarrett_Ludolph
Jarrett_Ludolph's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 52
0
0
7
Jarrett_Ludolph's avatar
Jarrett_Ludolph
0
0
7
There are two ideas I want to discuss in this forum, the idea of a fallen world, and a finely tuned Universe.

The idea of a fallen world is a defense against the Problem of Evil, saying that evil entered the  world when people sinned. thus, the Problem of Evil does not bring into question God's goodness and power, because it's man's fault. This "fallen world" idea is strictly contradicted by the Teleological Argument

The Teleological Argument (or the fine tuning argument) says that the world is so perfect, that a God must have created it. 

So what is the problem with these two mindsets? 

The fallen world describes an imperfect world around us, and the fine tuned world (from the Teleological Argument) describes a prefect world around us. These two ideas contradict each other, so the Christian must either drop  the teleological argument (one of the best arguments for God), or drop the idea of a fallen world (the best response to the Problem of Evil)

if you think the world is so fallen and bad because of sin, stop trying to find design in everything!
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
Isn't the idea that man created evil by sinning ALSO a problem because it's something created by an entity other than god, and something that he didn't think of and apparently can't control and abhors?
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,436
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@ludofl3x
sin is not a thing.  In other words it is not a creation.  It is a verb for want of a better of word. Sin is described as a breach of a law. It is an act or an omission. So strictly speaking it is not a thing - which has been created. In other words, it is not inconsistent with God creating all things.  
EtrnlVw
EtrnlVw's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,869
3
3
5
EtrnlVw's avatar
EtrnlVw
3
3
5
-->
@Jarrett_Ludolph
This "fallen world" idea is strictly contradicted by the Teleological Argument

There's no contradiction in the manner you proposed both concepts because one is a moral issue that involves the moral state of man. "World" as in a fallen world is not synonymous with "state of the universe" in this context, rather the state of mankind....the Bible refers to the "world" in relation to the presence of mankind, and as a system of morality. Example below...

"12 For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms."

The "fined tuned" concept just deals with the manner in which God established creation. It is not a moral concern and not relevant to mankind in this context. Two totally different ideas here.

The problem I have though is a separate issue.

The Teleological Argument (or the fine tuning argument) says that the world is so perfect, that a God must have created it.

I don't think anyone is claiming that the universe is so perfect, if they are then they are mistaken. Perfection is not the focus here IMO. The physical world or universe can never be perfect and doesn't have to be perfect to make the argument that the universe "appears" fine tuned.
I think it is more realistic and accurate to say that the way in which the universe exists, appears created and the processes that are involved appear intelligent. The products of the universe appear to have been the products of desired outcomes therefore it is rational to consider it was created through an intelligent Source. This is the basis of such an argument, no perfection needed and really no "design" needed either.
To invoke perfection is a non sequitur. God created the physical world or the natural world symbiotic with death and decay, so perfection plays no role in the physical universe in relation to designs because of those two factors.

Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,436
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Jarrett_Ludolph
There are two ideas I want to discuss in this forum, the idea of a fallen world, and a finely tuned Universe.
Thanks for this topic.  

The idea of a fallen world is a defense against the Problem of Evil, saying that evil entered the  world when people sinned. thus, the Problem of Evil does not bring into question God's goodness and power, because it's man's fault. This "fallen world" idea is strictly contradicted by the Teleological Argument
God created the world. He created it good and very good.  Perfect is perhaps one way to describe it. I am undecided however because I currently don't see good as perfect and yet some might argue if it was not perfect it must be flawed somehow. Again I am not persuaded that not perfect means somehow flawed.  If we see three  similar items for sale in a shop of a type of coffee machine. The difference being that they are degrees of good better best. Three prices. The more expensive has more features. Does this make the least expensive one, the one with lesser features, flawed? I don't think so.  Yet I suppose someone might say - it is not the best one. And that might be true for some people. But not for all people.  Some people might prefer the least expensive one - because the best features are useless to them. Degrees between good and very good - do not mean that good is somehow imperfect.  Sorry for that digression. 

God created the world and it was good and very good.  He also created the heavens. Sin entered the world through one man. Human choice - decision was the impetus in this case of sin. Sin is not a creation. It is an action or an omission.  Evil and Sin are not synonymous.  I agree that the problem of Evil does not bring into question God's goodness nor power.  I reject the idea that a "fallen world" contradicts the Teleological Argument".  

The Teleological Argument (or the fine tuning argument) says that the world is so perfect, that a God must have created it. 
I am not sure I agree that this is how the TA ought to be represented - but assuming for the sake of your argument you are correct. Let us continue to your discussion.   

So what is the problem with these two mindsets? 
With respect -
The fallen world describes an imperfect world around us, and the fine tuned world (from the Teleological Argument) describes a prefect world around us. These two ideas contradict each other, so the Christian must either drop  the teleological argument (one of the best arguments for God), or drop the idea of a fallen world (the best response to the Problem of Evil)

if you think the world is so fallen and bad because of sin, stop trying to find design in everything!
Hmmm.  Firstly, do Christians suggest that the "fallen world" is referring to the "world" as defined as everything including the animals, plants, and the environment? Or is it just related to humanity and their relationship with God? Secondly, when Christians talk of a "fallen world" what does "fallen" mean? Does it mean 1, absolutely rotten, 2, tainted like a drop of ink in a glass of water, 3, some middle ground? In other words, what is the difference between a non-fallen world and a fallen world? 

Christians believe that humanity is capable of doing great and wonderful things.  And it is also capable of doing evil and monstrous things. Humanity can do good because it is made in God's image. And yet since God's image in humanity has been tarnished, it also is capable of evil.  

Personally, I think it is human nature which has fallen in the primary sense.  Nature or the world is also impacted. Hence why we talk of the entire world groaning.  Yet the TA as you put it - and the Fallen World Argument as you suggest - prior to sin entering the world - even on your assumptions is the same. 

It is the nature of the fall of the world which is the issue.  To what extent does the fall of human nature impact upon the world at large? The Christian view is that the impact is significant for humanity - since sin brought about a division between God and Humanity.  And humanity's decision has tainted the world and impacted the world around it ever since. Yet, has this sin or fall so distorted the world that we can not recognize its creator.  Has it so distorted it that it actually contradicts who made it? 

Even after a house fire - where the house has been altogether destroyed - we can look at the ruins and recognize it has a designer.  

My view again is that the fallen world and the sin on it has not so impacted the world that it contradicts the TA. 

janesix
janesix's avatar
Debates: 12
Posts: 2,049
3
3
3
janesix's avatar
janesix
3
3
3
-->
@Jarrett_Ludolph
It is not the fine-tuning that shows the world/universe is perfect. It is the use of a set of numbers and ratios that shows that the universe is an orchestra. And an orchestra needs an orchestrator.
RoderickSpode
RoderickSpode's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,044
2
2
2
RoderickSpode's avatar
RoderickSpode
2
2
2
-->
@Jarrett_Ludolph
Also, because God is a person, we get insight from the bible about His nature, likes, and dislikes.

Even before the fall, creation is described as chaotic (imperfect). Throughout scripture we see how God elevates what is flawed, despised, ignored (imperfect). If God came to earth again as a human, and went car shopping, He might pass up the BMWs, Teslas, Ferraris, etc. Buy the old Ford, or Chevy that no one wants, restore it, and make it classic car show quality.

While the universe and earth are not perfect, there's restoration going on moving creation in that direction of eventual perfection.






Lit
Lit's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 58
0
1
4
Lit's avatar
Lit
0
1
4
-->
@Jarrett_Ludolph
As others have suggested, the fallen world concerns humanity. The disobedience in the garden led to the knowledge of evil (they knew God so they knew Good) because the disobedience marked a stain on the soul, known as sin, which inclines man's nature towards evil, even though man can and does aspire towards goodness, hence a spiritual battle. 

The conscience holds the memory of goodness and therefore order, here on earth. God gave earth to man to rule over and have dominion over. Whether we believe what the bible says overall, humanity has assumed this role naturally in terms of vets and animal shelters and the like.

If the conscience holds the memory of order, what if the conscious finds order within the universe?

This is a great and interesting topic discussion you have here.
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
There is design in everything in the universe but for its disorganized matter and energy, of which the universe has in abundance for future creation. This is an ongoing, eternal process. Of what has been created, that is, organized matter and energy, there is opposition in all things. If you will, good and evil. One does exist without the other, and it is not a matter of God losing control; it is a matter of his following natural law, which is why he is God; he follows perfectly, but we do not. Yet.
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,615
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret
Sin is described as a breach of a law.#3



What and who's law?


Sin entered the world through one man.#5

What is sin?  



zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,062
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@EtrnlVw
@janesix
@Tradesecret
@Athias
@RoderickSpode
That's one way of putting it.

And that's another way of putting it.

And that's another way of putting it.

And that's another way of putting it.

And that's anther way of putting it.

It's a pity that no one knows the perfect way to put it.

As the Caddie said to the Golfer.
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,436
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Stephen
So out of all of the responses - you ask me? LLOL! Wow I feel famous.  

1. God's law as revealed in the Bible.

2. Sin is any want of conformity unto, or transgression of, the law of God.  
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,436
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@zedvictor4
As i read the answers - everyone is saying the same thing - except in their own words. And when people say the same thing in their own words as others - then there is an obvious uniformity. 

Well done guys - and girls. 
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret
sin is not a thing.  In other words it is not a creation.  It is a verb for want of a better of word. Sin is described as a breach of a law. It is an act or an omission. So strictly speaking it is not a thing - which has been created. In other words, it is not inconsistent with God creating all things.  
So where did the concept of sin and evil come from? Did god authorize its existence, or did man create it without god's consent?

And the observation wasn't really about the creation of sin, it's about the creation of evil. 
Sum1hugme
Sum1hugme's avatar
Debates: 37
Posts: 1,014
4
4
9
Sum1hugme's avatar
Sum1hugme
4
4
9
-->
@janesix
"... And an orchestra needs an orchestrator."
  Simply because two things share one quality, like being in harmony, doesn't mean they share another quality, like being orchestrated. 
janesix
janesix's avatar
Debates: 12
Posts: 2,049
3
3
3
janesix's avatar
janesix
3
3
3
-->
@Sum1hugme
In this case, it does.
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,615
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret


1. God's law as revealed in the Bible.
 Example of breaking gods law


2. Sin is any want of conformity unto, or transgression of, the law of God.  
Example of a transgression of the law of god. 


Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,615
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@zedvictor4
And that's anther way of putting it.

It's a pity that no one knows the perfect way to put it.
As the Caddie said to the Golfer.

As the Pastor said to the whore.
Sum1hugme
Sum1hugme's avatar
Debates: 37
Posts: 1,014
4
4
9
Sum1hugme's avatar
Sum1hugme
4
4
9
-->
@janesix
In no case it does, because that's a false analogy fallacy
janesix
janesix's avatar
Debates: 12
Posts: 2,049
3
3
3
janesix's avatar
janesix
3
3
3
-->
@Sum1hugme
You can't have something that HAS to be designed, without a designer. Think about it for a while.
Sum1hugme
Sum1hugme's avatar
Debates: 37
Posts: 1,014
4
4
9
Sum1hugme's avatar
Sum1hugme
4
4
9
-->
@janesix
You haven't demonstrated anything that needs to be designed. Or how that means something like the universe is designed
janesix
janesix's avatar
Debates: 12
Posts: 2,049
3
3
3
janesix's avatar
janesix
3
3
3
-->
@Sum1hugme
I will give you a few clues.

108

1.618

273

153


FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,593
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@Jarrett_Ludolph
Yes, a baby born with tetra-amelia  – defined as the absence of all limbs and also has severe malformations of the face, heart, skeleton and genitals
is proof  of a designer.  Well maybe a drunk one.

Sum1hugme
Sum1hugme's avatar
Debates: 37
Posts: 1,014
4
4
9
Sum1hugme's avatar
Sum1hugme
4
4
9
-->
@janesix
I don't follow
janesix
janesix's avatar
Debates: 12
Posts: 2,049
3
3
3
janesix's avatar
janesix
3
3
3
-->
@Sum1hugme
Try.
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,593
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
A 'missing link' between humans and our ape-like ancestors that lived around 12 million years ago has been unearthed in Bavaria, Germany.
According to researchers, the bizarre creature had arms suited to hanging in trees but legs like ours — making it like an 'ape and human in one'.
The discovery provides the first image of what the last common ancestor of apes and humans looked like — with fossils from this period being rare.
Named Danuvius guggenmosi after a Celtic river god, the find of the broad-chested primate also pushes back the timeline for when walking on two feet began.
Based on the shape of Danuvius' bones, experts have concluded that the animal moved around in a unique way, dubbed 'extended limb clambering'.
Sum1hugme
Sum1hugme's avatar
Debates: 37
Posts: 1,014
4
4
9
Sum1hugme's avatar
Sum1hugme
4
4
9
-->
@janesix
Or you could just speak clearly, exactly what you mean. I'm saying your original statement is a false analogy fallacy, which you don't seem to contest.
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,593
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@janesix
Are the spirals seen in nature based on the golden ratio 1.618 ? Some are, but most are not. The spirals most commonly seen in nature are equi-angular (aka logarithmic) spirals. This simply means that the spiral expands at a constant rate. This occurs because it creates an even flow of energy or distribution of tension. This has nothing at all to do with the golden ratio. Accordingly, all the illustrations of spiral arms of galaxies, curves of ocean waves, spiraling hurricanes, etc. that are incorrectly identified as a “Golden Ratio” or “Golden Spiral” should be relabeled or removed to avoid further confusion in perpetuating this golden ratio myth. There is another type of spiral that is related to the golden ratio, however, that occurs very commonly in nature. The spirals that appear in pine cones, pineapples, seed pods and similar plant structures are usually based on two successive numbers of the Fibonacci sequence. For example, if there are eight spirals in a clockwise direction, you will find thirteen spirals going in the counter-clockwise direction.  Neither of these spirals is necessarily a “golden ratio” spiral on its own, but the ratio of these successive Fibonacci numbers approximates the golden ratio
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@janesix
He cannot Jane. He is too invested in his materialistic worldview. He thinks that if he cannot perceive it, it cannot exist.
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Tradesecret
So out of all of the responses - you ask me? LLOL! Wow I feel famous. 
There is a word for it. Obsession.