M Good morning, lovely day.
E Not bad for another day
M I have a question
E Fire away.
M Who or what, do evolutionists us to explain the making and maintenance of the lowly electron.
E We don’t
M Do you try.
E No. What is the use. Nobody can. You theist can’t
M But we try. It is the essential remit of all science. To keep questing even when it looks impossible.
E. Awe, common. It is a matter of faith for you. You believe God created everything.
M. That is true but it doesn’t keep us from trying to understand. We have nothing to lose. Yes it’s a matter of faith but so it is for you. In fact you need more faith than we do.
E How so?
M. The more evidence and logic the less effort it needs to believe, correct?
E I suppose so. So you think you theists have more evidence to support your faith in a Creator than us evolutionists to support our belief there is/was no Creator.
M You put it well. The question we both face is what explanation fits the most basic phenomena. And surely an electron is most basic. Did an elephant, eagle or some super-man make everything? None of these have nearly enough intelligence. It would have to be something or someone with colossal intelligence to do the math required to make everything fit and balance so exactly.
E Or possibly nudge things in a particular direction as they evolved.
M Now you are speaking like a theist. There was intent. One way to understand creation is by asking why creation. Christians believe God’s intent was to have freely choosing, mature friends. If that was His intent, would he not make some creature He could readily converse with. So that creature would have to be friendly and capable of understanding the way the Creator thinks, would he not. So God made some creature to be like Himself only a little lower so he didn’t get grand designs of wanting to take over. And this is what the bible says.
Humans are friendly, gregarious, social. This gives us some idea of what would be the motivation on Whoever made man. If you can grant that whoever made man would want a creature to either experiment with, watch for amusement or use for work or interact with as friend. Since humans can most readily understand and converse with those fellow creatures who are most similar, it would be fair to assume God made man in His own image.
Having made this creature now called human, of necessity He would need to create an environment that sustained and challenged him. To ensure that man not only chose God to follow but needed to keep choosing, this environment would need to make him struggle to
ensure he constantly depended on God to survive.
Because God was essentially friendly, He would want to be known but not without effort. God would build into human’s curiosity and necessity so that humans would keep learning and investigating. This is more and more like what we observe in humans and the universe, is it not.
E. I don’t totally agree with your line of reasoning but you got me thinking. If more data fits your faith than ours, it would make sense to adopt your faith. Then you are also postulating it is easier to be a theist than an atheist. But I am not going to give up that easily.
M. Fair enough. See you next week.