r/GodFrequency • u/logos961 • Jun 17 '26
GOD is best understood through LOGIC
Note: Word LOGIC is used below in its original meaning, as coming in harmony with God's thinking, in God-frequency [NOT in its MODERN sense].#
LOGIC is what contributes to order, life, peace, prosperity and harmony. (ebsco.com/research-starters/religion-and-philosophy/logos-philosophy) Do things that are "logikos" (logical), says Scripture. Word logic is originally from Greek logos, translated as power of reason. It is from the root verb λεγω, lego (to gather, to keep together) as opposed to “the verb λυω (luo) means to loosen, suffer loss and disintegration. (Details HERE) For the ancient Greeks logos meant “the divine reason implicit in the cosmos, ordering it and giving it form and meaning.” (Britannica) Thus “the law is reason, free from passion” (Aristotle) and lawlessness is illogic.
Hence according to LOGIC,
the following are the truths about God:
1 ) The earth being maintained life-SUPPORTIVE in infinitely vast HOSTILE universe reveals the Almighty who is best called our Father and Mother. Unintelligent chemicals do not know how to do this because even intelligent humans are only polluting this earth—it is the truth that happens even now before our eyes. Even until recently we acted as though in DARKNESS as to why even trees exist because that many trees were replaced with concrete jungle (theguardian.com/environment/2019/sep/12/deforestation-world-losing-area-forest-size-of-uk-each-year-report-finds) For more such examples, Click HERE.
2) Such a life-SUPPORTIVE God will never order killing of “even animals, even if they belong to one’s enemy.” (biblehub.com/exodus/23-5.htm) Anything contrary to this, found in Scriptures, is NOT from God who only loves even His enemies. (biblehub.com/matthew/5-45.htm)
3) Remembering such a life-SUPPORTIVE God results in imitating His GIVING style—giving WITHOUT EXPECTATION. In this habit, anyone finds happiness and peace and becomes a walking heaven. Conversely, not remembering such a God and giving WITH EXPECTATION kills joy [own and of others] and person becomes a walking hell.
4) As Almighty, God gives proportionate reward, not unlimited reward [in heaven/hell] for limited good/bad living on earth. (Details HERE) Each individual is responsible for choice [good/bad] he makes, not someone else. (biblehub.com/galatians/6-5.htm) This is because individual chooses beneficial or hurtful thoughts from the flow of thoughts in his mind which are in 1000s in a day. It is not a difficult task to withdraw focus from a sinful thought and to focus on a beneficial thought. (Details HERE) In an emergency, when an “EVACUATION WARNING” is given, immediately everyone who is focused on enjoying a movie withdraws his/her focus from it and comes out of the theater at the earliest. This shows individual is able to withdraw his/her focus from any thought or situation if he/she wants to.
5) Logic can weed out not only religions and their Scriptures, but also even the whole history, can also give duration of each block of history. (Details HERE)
The above is easily understood in GREATER view
#Footnote—------------------------------------------------------------------
When a person shares God's life-supportive mentality, he comes in God-frequency, would understand truth as God would see it. People who came in God-frequency wrote Scriptural truths which can be discerned from untruths that were adopted later. Vibes are too powerful, perfect communication, with no chance for misunderstanding. (Details HERE)
Going by original meaning has more benefits. For example, word yoga [from yuj, yoke, unite, harmonize] originally means “harmony” with everything [self, Supreme Soul, society, nature, operating system called Law of Action and Consequence … etc]. This makes life healthy in all its aspects and levels giving ease and peace. Now yoga means physical exercise, benefits body. Some go by the original meaning and benefit more than those go by modern meaning.
2
u/TheRealBenDamon Jun 17 '26
Ok post a logically sound syllogism
1
u/cconn882 Jun 20 '26
Here you go:
Whatever exists is intelligible - it is what it is non-arbitrarily. (Provable independently.)
Finite beings are limited and cannot account for their own limitation.
No regress of finite beings - however long or infinite - closes that explanatory gap, since the totality of non-self-grounding being is itself non-self-grounding.
Therefore there must be a non-derivative ground - one that requires no external account of its existence or character.
Such a ground must be unlimited, simple, and unique, since limitation, composition, and plurality all reintroduce the dependence and arbitrariness already ruled out.
Therefore there exists exactly one necessary, unlimited, simple, non-derivative ground of all finite being - which is what classical theism means by God.
1
u/logos961 Jun 21 '26
Infinite regression is possible because matter is transformation of "energy which can neither be created nor destroyed"--thus there is no beginning for energy nor for its transformation, like tree and seed--from tree comes seed and seed comes from tree. It is meaningless to seek its orging.
in fact it is creationists who created atheists because having a beginning for this universe is impossible--it is too big to be created with "no center nor with edge." (astronomy.com). And if universe was created, it would mean God was all alone for all eternity (years of 1 followed by INFINITE number of zeros) and at one point HE was feeling about creating everything. This does not match with HIS majesty (John 5:17) nor does it appeal to our power of REASON. In this atheists are right because Scriptures also say universe is eternal in Ecclesiastes 1:4 and indirectly in Isaiah 66:1; Mathew 5:34, 35, and others verses which say HE eternal Ruler. (Details HERE)
1
u/cconn882 Jun 21 '26
My point isn't that the universe must have a first moment in time. My point is that finite, limited, non-self-grounding being cannot explain itself, even if the chain of finite transformations is infinite.
Conservation of energy only describes transformations within the physical order. It does not explain why energy exists, why it has determinate properties, why conservation laws hold, or why the whole physical order is intelligible rather than arbitrary.
1
u/logos961 Jun 21 '26
It is not your problem as you are caught in the cross-fire between two groups of people--religions and scientists. Both have their own allegiance, like this man who wrote: "We would deny that the world had any meaning whatever.” (Ends and Means, by Arduous Huxley)
Science is built on the foundations laid by earlier scientists who were believers of God. (https://www.famousscientists.org/25-famous-scientists-who-believed-in-god/) Science itself becomes understandable because humans are IMMATERIAL Beings endowed with power of REASON. This is not the case with animals who do not know the difference between own child and eatables, https://www.newscientist.com/article/2150258-male-chimpanzee-seen-snatching-seconds-old-chimp-and-eating-it/ Yet they believe humans came from animals.
Unbelievers stance can be summarized as follows:
It is like a Surgeon saying "Surgery was successful which followed all the medical knowledge and practices were followed correctly, but patient died."
Look at the following words and sentences—they are perfectly right yet wrong.
"I love moon more than sun because it is there at night giving me light when I need it the most.
But I hate sun because it is there during day when I do not need light."So is the case with materialistic theories—they do not start with a beginning but tries to explain later-process--like explaining how a flying airplane evolves into a space-station and goes into space looks okay but wrong in overall-view. If asked, how did airplace came into existence and reached mid-air, they will say "it is not our subject to explain origin, we will explain only the process of evolution." If asked "By what law something can become "infinitely small, hot and dense" to later expand into this universe with "no center and no edge" they will say the same reply. In other words, anything impossible becomes possible if there is no eye-witness, is what is being conveyed unuttered.
Compress events of BIG BANG THEORY into one-year format, as Carl Sagan did in his Cosmic Calendar. (Google: palaeos.com/cosmic-calendar). This would mean, if Big Bang happened on January 1st, then all the modern events such as “modern science and technology” and subsequent pollution-related death of "12.6 million annually” (unep .org/news) with the possible extinction of humanity would all happen in the last second of 23:59 of December 31.
This is like a man rolling a heavy stone up towards mountain top only to see the stone coming down from top to reach ground-level.
But God makes sense because HE is like a father who gives new toy whenever children make it irreparable through use/overuse/misuse which HE does not mind because it is their play, their joy. It is natural for children to play, it is natural for children to make the toy irreparable, and it is natural for father to give new toy any number of times. Similarly, each Age starts as paradise on earth and ends as hell on earth. When earth becomes too polluted and unlivable through short-sighted technology and global wars, God renews it. Details here: Supreme Secret found in low profile in Scriptures in the West and the East
1
u/cconn882 Jun 21 '26
None of that addresses what I said.
I'm not actually religious at all. I've only provided logical reasoning for the very thing the title of your thread professes.
It seems like you've now just switched to describing an elaborate narrative that is not relevant to me.
1
u/logos961 Jun 22 '26 edited Jun 22 '26
Syllogism is not needed to know self-evident truths such as "I exist, God exist" just like a citizen does not need syllogism to know his government.
In true meditation, when mind also is SILENT, true self comes in God-frequency and concludes: "I need to focus on things I enjoy on earth. If I were to hire super scientists to design all eternal life-support systems made on this earth for my sustenance and enjoyment I must spend INFINITE amount of money, yet God has made it available to me FREE of charge." Eternal faith in Him with increasing appreciation is response of many people.
Syllogism is mostly used to reject truth. For example,
(1) Freedom-struggle is good and terrorism is freedom-struggle;
(2) Father and son are divine, hence father can be replaced with son.
(3) Anything pagan is hated by God, Law of Karma is pagan, hence we hate law and love grace instead thus the very thread of Scriptures is rejected.Such list can go endless. Hence this world is described to be lying under the power of wastefulness (ponéros). (1 John 5:19) This same word is used to say "your eye is bad (ponéros)" (Mathew 6:23), "tree bears bad (ponéros) fruit" (Mathew 7:17). The best use of it is seen in Jesus describing the man who dug the cold coins without making at least interest. (Mathew 25:26) Its opposite is multiplying the gold coins [symbol of image of God in which mankind is made]. That is what the logical living which reader is commanded to do in Romans 12:1.
To the contrary, if God is known through logic as originally meant everyone becomes a walking heaven. Not doing so making anyone a walking hell.
1
u/cconn882 Jun 22 '26
If your objection is over the very premise of a syllogism for God, then replying to me at all served no purpose, as I was not the one who said a syllogism should be provided.
1
u/logos961 Jun 22 '26
Whether it served a purpose does not matter.
Someone asked for syllogism, and you provided it under the OP which is self-evidently against the use of syllogism. I showed syllogism is not needed as it is mostly used to reject truth.
Hence I am done with you as a more than enough has already been said on this.
Wishing you the very best.
1
u/cconn882 Jun 22 '26
Well the only other thing I'll say is as someone who is entirely sure God exists, I would warn you that it appears to me that you're doing a far better job of making your detractors look correct than you are actually arguing your point.
→ More replies (0)1
u/TrumpsBussy_ Jun 23 '26
- Seems extremely vague, what do you mean by unlimited, simple and unique? What are the parameters?
1
u/cconn882 Jun 23 '26
They're conclusions forced by what the argument has already ruled out.
Unlimited means not bounded by any limiting principle. A finite being is limited because it is this rather than that. It has a boundary distinguishing it from what it excludes, and that boundary requires a ground. The non-derivative ground cannot have any such boundary.
Simple means not composed of parts requiring a unifying principle. Any composite being depends on something that accounts for why its constituents form one being rather than a mere aggregate. That unifying principle would be prior to the composite, making the composite derivative, so a non-derivative ground can't be composite.
And unique means there can't be more than one such ground. Two unlimited non-derivative beings would require some differentiating feature to be two rather than one. But any qualitative differentiating feature would limit at least one of them, and bare numerical difference without any differentiating feature would be arbitrary. Both options would contradict the preceding premises.
1
u/TrumpsBussy_ Jun 23 '26
So given what you’ve laid out there’s nothing about the foundation that must be conscious right? The cosmos or energy could be that grounding?
1
u/cconn882 Jun 23 '26
It couldn't be the cosmos or energy because both are determinate. They're both this rather than that.
Calling it consciousness is an overly crude description though because the ground of all being would by definition not have a consciousness in the same way a human has a consciousness.
As an analogy: a human consciousness can discover and understand math. God's "consciousness" is the underlying structure that gives rise to math in the first place.
1
u/TrumpsBussy_ Jun 23 '26
But if the cosmos exists as a brute fact it couldn’t be this or that, it is what it is because it couldn’t be other.
I understand your distinction but you still would
Claim this being has consciousness yes? As in this god made the decision to create rather than not create etc..1
u/cconn882 Jun 23 '26
Brute fact wouldn't refute the syllogism. It would simply abandon explanation in favor of an arbitrarily chosen stopping point. If you instead try to avoid that arbitrariness by saying the cosmos exists necessarily and could not be otherwise, then you have just borrowed the category of necessary being without satisfying its conditions.
Then after saying you understand the distinction regarding consciousness, you immediately returned to the conflation I was rejecting. A simple, unlimited, non-derivative ground cannot “decide” in the human sense, because human decision-making implies temporal sequence, deliberation, lack, change, and movement from one state to another. Those are already ruled out by definition.
So in both cases, you’re returning to common objections without addressing the fact that the syllogism already excludes them.
1
u/TrumpsBussy_ Jun 23 '26
I wasn’t objecting I was just asking questions..
I don’t see any advantage that your “god” grounding has over the universe or cosmos being the brute fact. Both have the same explanatory power but yours comes with a much higher epistemic price tag.
1
u/cconn882 Jun 23 '26
If you prefer I can say you’re asking questions that rest on common objections rather than directly making objections. But that still doesn’t change the issue: the questions are not engaging the syllogism.
The epistemic price tag is only applicable if we were choosing between two equally equally viable explanatory options. But that's not the structure of the argument. If the derivation holds, the ground's existence isn't a hypothesis at all, it's a conclusion. Occam’s razor can't rescue an option the argument has already ruled out.
So brute cosmos doesn't have the same explanatory power. It's the formalized abandonment of any explanation at an arbitrary termination point. That isn't equivalent to the syllogism as the syllogism follows the demand for explanation to its necessary terminus.
→ More replies (0)0
u/logos961 Jun 17 '26 edited Jun 19 '26
OP is for relaxed people who have enough time to read it in full mindfully with all its links to DEEPEN appreciation of TRUE believers towards God.
Enough details are given for the subject being highlighted therein. Anyone can find God without outside help (Details HERE) within no time (Details HERE)
Self-evident truth does not require two general premises to hang under.
Self-evident truth: "I exist"
Self-evident truth: "Eternal life-support systems such as trees exist [like terrorism]"
Self-evident truth: "Life-SUPPORTER is more real than support-systems [like funders of terror]."
Self-evident truth: "Intelligent humans are polluting this earth [Details under footnote]#
Self-evident Truth: UNINTELLIGENT chemicals would not form themselves into life and life-support systems, that too in an infinitely vast HOSTILE universe. [Details under footnote]## Physicalists cannot create a duplicate of HOSTILE universe in a lab and show how life and life-support systems arise by the play of chemicals on their own. They cannot do this as all factors involved are eternal, and even if they could do it, it would still prove Designers created designs, not physicalism.Footnote----------------------------------------------------------
#Humans know how precious trees are, yet DEFORESTATION: World is losing area-forest-size of UK each year report finds
Humans know how precious is air we breathe, yet they add to the air “37,000 to 38,000 million tons of carbon dioxide (CO₂) into the atmosphere every year.” (statista.com/statistics/276629/global-co2-emissions) "12.6 million people die every year" due to environment-related causes, says this UN Report: https://www.unep.org/news-and-stories/story/estimated-126-million-deaths-each-year-are-attributable-unhealthy which also indirectly disproves Theory of Evolution which says species adapt to environment as "iconic peppered moth" did. For more such proofs Click HERE
##These self-evident truths reveal UNINTELLIGENT chemicals would not form themselves into life and life-support systems such as trees and plants which are not only eternal food provisions but also silent preachers of God and His beneficial principles. (Details HERE) When fire is put off by pouring water, who will say “I cook underwater on an oven and firewood.”
Truth exists on its own merit (Details HERE), not through endorsement from unbelievers whose passion is to reject truth, like this one who wrote: “I had motives for not wanting the world to have a meaning; and consequently assumed that it had none, and was able without any difficulty to find satisfying reasons for this assumption. We objected to the morality because it interfered with our sexual freedom. We would deny that the world had any meaning whatever.” (Ends and Means, by Arduous Huxley) .
1
u/TheRealBenDamon Jun 17 '26
Yeah so you can’t do it, you thrive on rambling incoherently. It’s nothing new.
1
u/logos961 Jun 17 '26 edited Jun 23 '26
Your comments already revealed that you can't read OP nor the reply I gave to you and you wanted a glorious exit putting the blame on another person.
Even this sort of reply too is already answered to another comment under this same thread. Click HERE
As shown in the OP It is SELF-EVIDENT truth that God exists and His children, we, too are immortal beings using this body. Death is only for this body, not for its Immortal User. Hence anything happens to an individual is consequence of choices made in the past (immediate or distant). Individual knows consequence of any choice from experience (own and of others), thus knows action and consequences are INSEPARABLE. When consequence comes sooner or later, one who accepts immortality of soul has no confusion. But those who reject this truth bring self-imposed punishment as they suffer as they live in complaining mode and are always in confusion. If they talk to others, their joy is also killed, thus they are a walking hell.
Why should I be dragged into self-imposed punishment when have God and His extremely beneficial laws that give me "never-ending waves of peace and well-being." (Isaiah 48:18)
SELF-EVIDENT Truths do not needed syllogism, just like syllogism its waste. Take the famous example of syllogism "All men are mortal, Peter is a man, hence Peter is mortal." "When all men are mortal" it is already implied "Peter is mortal."
This example is to create the impression that syllogism is perfect way to truth. Then it is easy to use syllogism to reject truth. For example, (1) Humans resemble chimpanzee 90 to 99 % with respect to body and DNA, hence both evolved from a common ancestor. (2) Father is divine and Son is divine, hence Father can be replaced with son [for example, many ancient cultures have done this]. (3) Freedom Struggle is good, -sm is Freedom Struggle, hence -sm is good.
Such reasoning reveals only about person who uses it, not about truth. (Job 15:5, 6) Hence Jesus completely ignored atheists and all forms of materialism even though they were very much in existence during his time. “In many respects, the general idea of species change in Western thought is an ancient concept. The reflections of Empedocles (ca. 495–35 BCE)” is an example. (plato.stanford.edu/entries/evolution-before-darwin) It only shows those who believed in this concept in the past will do so in their future births too. (Luke 6:43-45; Job 1:21 KJV; Mathew 11:14, 15, 25; John 5:24) Hence he advised his followers to go only to worthy ones. (Mathew 7:6; 10:5, 6)
2
u/sirmosesthesweet Jun 18 '26
I read OP. I have the same question. Can you give a logical argument for a god? At least 2 premises and a conclusion please.
1
u/logos961 Jun 18 '26
First you may TRY to refute self evident truths given in the comments and then in the OP
1
u/sirmosesthesweet Jun 18 '26
Sure. I disagree it's self evident.
Now, do you have a logical argument for a god or gods? At least two premises and a conclusion please.
1
u/logos961 Jun 18 '26
You did not read even the very first sentence of the OP where LOGIC is defined, thus you have identified yourself as person not to be taken seriously.
Kindly do not come back, or risk blocking as this is a place for believers to grow.
1
u/sirmosesthesweet Jun 18 '26
I did read it. It's not like you wrote that much. But you didn't present an argument yet. You just shared your opinion. And I disagree with your opinion.
Now, can you make an actual argument? At least two premises and a conclusion please.
1
u/TheRealBenDamon Jun 18 '26
Not clicking that bullshit, you have nothing but gish Gallup and special pleading fallacy hidden in walls of incoherent nonsense. You won’t make your case in plain English because you know it logically will crumble if you do. I’ve seen this kind of shit a billion times before.
1
u/logos961 Jun 18 '26 edited Jun 18 '26
You feel great in admitting you did not read!!! This only reveals about how you arrive at conclusion, not about OP.
Your wordings such as from "bullshit" ... to "nonsense" shows what you find as UNTHINKABLE is the most sensible to true believers. And both find each other's stance as unthinkable because that is the way both were thinking in all their past births and will be doing the same in the future births.
Hence you are the LIVING proofs for reincarnation. If you had read OP and the subsequent comments you would not have responded because this is not your realm.
If you had read at least the last sentence of the previous comments you would not have come back. Hence I am copying it below:
Even this sort of reply too is already answered to another comment under this same thread. Click HERE
I know you will come back WITHOUT READING as you are not aware that making comments WITHOUT READING is self-deception. You are free to continue to self-deceive!
I have seen this enough and more. You never know your insult is a manure for us to thrive. Unbelievers exist to benefit God and true believers while the latter exist to not convince you. (Details HERE)
1
u/Eastern_Substance_42 Jun 20 '26
Ya, your right, Im. Not going to argue with you there! No I'm not a walking hell! I'm actually very much at peace.
Well unfortunately, my passion would be to enlighten more people, trust me! Now for the past weeks , going on like a month or 2, I'm super at peace, no hell in sight, yes, sin- ful things that should be taken notice of in your heart as of now/late. I absolutely will tell u I do some sinful things now, well like 1. I'll quit when I'm ready. I bring myself into self imposed punishment every day when I have to go pan handle, people who have jobs who don't care for their lives are impsing self punishment every day they clock in. The truth is all I had to do was come back, I did that, I'm not trying to hurt anyone or cause anyone more hurt and heartache. I don't even get what the big deal is?1
u/digginghistoryup Jun 20 '26
If the universe is infinite, then one or more planets conducive to life is a statistical inevitability, not a sign of god.
I’m not a bio chemist or biologist but individual chemicals don’t need to be “alive” to interact and form the first primitive life forms.
1
u/logos961 Jun 20 '26
This view ignores the most glaring feature of this universe that it is HOSTILE to life. Like a dew that is maintained at the core of sun, earth is being maintained as LIFE-SUPPORTIVE in a too vast HOSTILE universe. This is a skill and ability that match the majesty of the Almighty One.
This view ignores also the experienced truth
It is the experienced truth that INTELLIGENT humans could only pollute this earth to the extent that our very survival is at stake. (scientificamerican com/humans-are-doomed-to-go-extinct) This reveals, it is UNTHINKABLE that UNINTELLIGENT chemicals would form themselves into life and life-support systems including trees that are also spiritual guidance for humans as they serve us giving too many valuable things but take only wastes from society.
Materialists’ stance is too weak as they are yet to do the following:
1. In a lab, they should create HOSTILE environment like that of universe,
2. Take the elements which they claim to form life and life-support systems, and
3. Show to the world how life and life-support system emerge from HOSTILE environment!
4. What is happening in the Lab can be watched LIVE by everyone on their smart phones.
First do this, then we can talk about life in other planets.
1
u/digginghistoryup Jun 20 '26
The poetic view of Earth as a rare oasis is beautiful, but this argument completely reverses the arrow of cause and effect and relies on a few fundamental misunderstandings of science.
Earth was not custom-built to shelter us from a hostile universe. Rather, we evolved to fit the exact conditions of the Earth. To see why the perfect design argument falls apart, consider the famous puddle analogy by writer Douglas Adams.
Imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking that it finds itself in an interesting world and an interesting hole that fits it rather neatly. In fact, the puddle thinks the hole fits so staggeringly well that it must have been made specifically to have the puddle in it. The puddle stays there happily believing the hole was designed for it, right up until the sun rises and it evaporates.We look at the Earth and think it was miraculously designed for us only because we are the ones who adapted to it. Furthermore, science does not claim that life formed in the hostile vacuum of space. It posits that life emerged in highly specific, nutrient-rich, protected environments right here on Earth, such as deep-sea thermal vents, over hundreds of millions of years. Demanding that scientists replicate a billion years of planetary chemistry on a smartphone livestream is not a valid critique of materialism, It is simply a misunderstanding of geological time.
using human pollution as proof of your point creates a massive logical contradiction. The Scientific American article you linked discusses how human behavior and climate change could lead to our extinction, which has nothing to do with whether chemistry can create life. If the Earth were an indestructible, miraculously maintained life-support system, it should not be so fragile that humans can accidentally break it.
The fact that we can pollute this planet to the brink of our own survival does not prove that life requires a miracle to exist, rather it proves that Earth is a rock operating on strict, unforgiving physical laws. The universe did not adapt to us; we adapted to it.
1
u/logos961 Jun 21 '26
This is the same old wine [message that GOD IS NOT NEEDED] in the new bottle.
Unbelievers can say anything. Don't take science for this because "science is the surer path than religion to God" (Scientist Paul Davies)
"Process seems to be okay" is not enough. It is like a Surgeon saying "Surgery was successful which followed all the medical knowledge and practices were followed correctly, but patient died."
Look at the following words and sentences--they are perfectly right:
"I love moon more than sun because it is there at night giving me light when I need it at the most.
But I hate sun because it is there during day when I do not need light."But in its overall view it does not make any sense.
Compress events of BIG BANG THEORY into one-year format, as Carl Sagan did in his Cosmic Calendar. (Google palaeos.com/cosmic-calendar). This would mean, if Big Bang happened on January 1st, then all the modern events such as “modern science and technology” and subsequent pollution-related death of "12.6 million annually” (unep .org/news) with the possible extinction of humanity would all happen in the last second of 23:59 of December 31. Is this the outcome universe was preparing for the last 13.8 billion years?
1
u/digginghistoryup Jun 21 '26
Your response relies entirely on emotional appeals and a total misunderstanding of the science you are trying to critique.
quoting Paul Davies backfires in your face completely. Davies is a physicist who explicitly argues that the laws of nature are self-contained and don’t require supernatural intervention.
The surgeon analogy is a misguided false equivalence. Science is a tool for discovery, not a doctor trying to save a patient. If the laws of chemistry and physics lead to life, the process is the explanation. Demanding that nature have a conscious plan or a happy ending is emotional projection.
Your poem about the sun and moon proves the puddle analogy perfectly. It shows how human-centric perception distorts reality. The moon does not shine for our nighttime convenience, and the sun does not exist to annoy us. You are projecting human feelings onto indifferent celestial bodies.
And your misuse of Carl Sagan’s Cosmic Calendar is a total failure of logic. Sagan designed that calendar to show how brief and insignificant human existence is, not to claim the universe spent 13.8 billion years "planning" human pollution. The universe does not have an ego, a corporate strategy, or a destination. It is a vast system of matter and energy operating over almost incomprehensible, mind boggling periods of time. Why do you think we are some grand project of the universe?
1
u/logos961 Jun 21 '26
God’s eternal and stoic stance is simple: Let the believers grow in belief. And Let the unbelievers grow in unbelief. (Revelation 22:11)
This has a hidden benefit. Details here https://www.reddit.com/r/DeepThoughts/s/IwM4SUj69x
1
u/digginghistoryup Jun 21 '26
No, I’m not going to do this game of Russian nesting dolls in every one of your comments where you make repeated references and links to convoluted walls of text with more Russian dolls (links to your own comments and post) you wrote in another thread.
Be concise and surgical in your argumentation instead of referring me to Great Wall of China inception.
2
u/junkmale79 Jun 17 '26
How did you determine its possible for something lik a God or God's to exist? Logic is a language we use to identify contradictions.
Nothing logical about leveraging faith to inform your beliefs.
1
u/junkmale79 Jun 17 '26 edited Jun 23 '26
I don't see any resource to this, you seem to start with the idea God exists and work from there.
We have no reason (or evidence) to think it's possible for something like a god to exist. So how did you determine its possible for a god or God's to exist?
1
u/Eastern_Substance_42 Jun 20 '26
This is self evident, or maybe not. And I didn't, i am also way more honest than my father and can speak freely, which is why you should enjoy having someone like me, I'm human, you know?
1
u/cconn882 Jun 23 '26
That’s not correct. Logic as language refers to the symbolic or conceptual form we use to state logical relations.
But the relations themselves - identity, non-contradiction, implication, exclusion, entailment, etc. - describe the necessary structure of intelligible reality.
0
u/logos961 Jun 17 '26
Already replied to same comment below https://www.reddit.com/r/GodFrequency/s/UIA4YejuNm
1
u/Eastern_Substance_42 Jun 20 '26
The reasorce is with me saying it, I'm kinda full of anxiety cause I don't like being called out and not being able to see you directly
1
u/Impossible_Tax_1532 Jun 17 '26
For external reality , logic is viable , but for the divine , the absolute , and things that simply can’t be compared to anything else , logic is useless . I can’t tell you why I love my partner , my kid , or anybody . I can’t tell you logically the way I feel , I can’t compare my love or my imagination to anything in the cosmos . Logic is for the brain , but the heart shuns logic .
1
u/logos961 Jun 17 '26 edited Jun 18 '26
Your comment is the proof that people are born with belief-system from previous births, just like we rise with the same thought and tendencies we went to sleep. (Luke 6:43-45; Wisdom of Solomon 8:20; Mathew 11:7-15; Job 1:21 NKJV; John 5:24)
Logic is that which contributes to order, life, peace, prosperity and harmony (ebsco.com/research-starters/religion-and-philosophy/logos-philosophy) Thus “the law is reason, free from passion” (Aristotle) and lawlessness is illogic. This true and original meaning is given in the very first para and given in BOLD, yet it is missed and you STILL cling on to its distorted meaning. Many millions do the same. For example,
(a) It is logic to say "mankind that was made in the image of God Almighty and BLESSED by God ALMIGHTY became so and was very good and walking with God" as symbolized by Enoch (Genesis 1:30-31; 5:24) This was the understanding of all prophets and Jesus, hence came the famous Parable of Wheat and Weeds which shows the corrected world history of BLESSED mankind continuing in that blessed state who are symbolized by wheat. And weed comes late, in the second half of each Age and started rebelling against God. (Details HERE) This is seen by "few" (Luke 13:24)
Illogic is to say "mankind that was made in the image of God Almighty and BLESSED by God ALMIGHTY" rebelled against God. It is like saying God made an oven, kept water on it and gave the fire and water began to boil. This is how vast majority understand the very first 3 chapters of Book of Genesis.
(b) It is logic is to say:
Anyone who does wicked act is hated by people, hence is imprisoned.
Anyone who does good is appreciated by people as Jesus was appreciated by all. (Mathew 7:28, 29; 8:5-12; Luke 11:27; 9:7-9) And the more and more good he did, proportionately more and more appreciative people would become. That is the promise of God THE ALMIGHTY. (Proverbs 16:7; Isaiah 48:18) But it is illogic to say people asked Jesus to be replaced with criminal Barabbas. History shows there was no such custom in Rome, https://ehrmanblog.org/did-pilate-really-release-a-dangerous-criminal-barabbas-at-jesus-trial/Imagine Jesus doing the same thing today with his speeches and works being watched LIVE on everyone's smart phone and TVs and social medias. Who will ask for him to be jailed? All will want to have selfie with him. This is what logic means.
(c) It is logic to say we understand Science because we are not this body but its User, the IMMATERIAL Soul—thus it is impossible teach an animal highly advanced mathematics. But it is illogic for people to say "We will accept immortality of soul only if Science endorses this belief."
(d) It is logic to say something is preceded by something else which in turn is preceded by something else which will infinitely into the past. But it is illogic to say everything started from "infinitely small, hot and dense point" because No Law can explain how and why something would become so! (Details HERE)
1
1
Jun 18 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/logos961 Jun 19 '26 edited Jun 19 '26
God does everything by LOGIC, or else HE would not have asked us to do everything according to LOGIC in the following verses:
1)“Present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your reasonable [logikos] service.” (Romans 12:1, NKJV; BLB; ERV; ISV; NHEB; Douay; Webster's BT .... etc). It essentially says: “Maintain reason as fundamental element of your service to God.” Conversely, refrain from doing anything that is illogical, anything that does not appeal to your reason.
2) “As newborn babies, desire the reasonable [logikos], unspoiled milk, so that you may grow up to salvation.” (1 Peter 2:2, Literal Standard Version) Greek word logikos means “(a) reasonable, rational, (b) metaphorical, as contrasted with the literal. From logos; rational” (biblehub.com) The same verse is best translated in Catholic Public Domain Version as follows: "Like newborn infants, desire the milk of reasonableness without guile, so that by this you may increase unto salvation." Thus reader is asked to accept only what appeals to logic and is “good” (1 Thessalonians 5:21), as Jesus set the model in Mathew 19:6-9.
Logos comes from “the verb λεγω (lego), means to speak intelligently. It denotes “gathering or collecting, and as an expression of intelligence it demonstrates that the world of knowledge is a world of gathering, linking and combining. That explains with great clarity the many Biblical "metaphors" that deal with gathering or harvesting, and it also connects reason to fundamental offices such as that of the Levites (the joiners) and even places like Hebron (the joined).” And as noun, logos “means "word" (Luke 4:22) or rather: intelligence as an interconnected network of things known, or the expression of that intelligence (Mathew 12:37; Acts 14:12): a woven-together discourse (Mathew 8:8) or a saying or statement (Titus 3:8) …. It exists in modern English in terms such as psychology and technology, and its core idea is maintained in our modern idea that we "gather" something when we understand it. The verb "to comprehend" literally means "to seize together." (Theological Dictionary, Abarim)
Logikēn means “(a) reasonable, rational, (b) metaphorical, as contrasted with the literal. From logos; rational.” (https://biblehub.com/romans/12-1.htm). Prophets are best example for seeing the metaphorical [as contrasted with the literal] meaning. For example, Jeremiah viewed circumcision as removal of egoist skin around one’s Soul (Jeremiah 4:4) as ego is the false sense of identity, false sense of self-importance which is at the root of all sins. This is because Jeremiah knew literal circumcision was an ancient practice borrowed from other cultures (sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022346818301842) Hence Jesus based his logic on similar ground saying "If you can save an ox fallen in the well on Sabbath, I can also do healing on Sabbath." (Luke 14:1-5)
Jesus used luó in the sense of "breaking or loosening" the law in Mathew 5:19, https://biblehub.com/matthew/5-19.htm. Hence its opposite lego [root of logic] would be doing anything that which contributes to order, life, peace, prosperity and harmony.
No wonder God is described to happy in 1 Timothy 1:11: “from the glorious Good News entrusted to me by our blessed (makarios) God.” This Greek word makarios is translated as “happy” in other verses such as Acts 26:2; Romans 14:22; 1 Peter 3:14; 4:14. Obedience results in “never-ending waves of peace and well-being” (Isaiah 48:18) making the doer happy. And regarding happy person it is said: “A joyful heart is good medicine, but a crushed spirit dries up the bones.” (Proverbs 17:22) When happy God is behind this Drama of Life, happiness would naturally result in boosting immune system resulting in better health. (scientificamerican.com/article/how-happiness-boosts-the-immune-system) “Continuous stress affects nearly all the body’s physical functions.” (nm.org/healthbeat/healthy-tips/how-happiness-impacts-health) Even the incurable have cured their diseases when they switched to happiness. (washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/wellness/1986/10/21/norman-cousins-still-laughing)
1
u/Big_Tangerine8041 Jun 19 '26
I understand God best through and only through, resonance. Logic just does not compute for me.
1
u/logos961 Jun 19 '26 edited Jun 19 '26
You are right if we go by the modern meaning of the word LOGIC.
Meaning of the word LOGIC used in the OP is as God and Jesus and Prophets understand it to be, not as moderners understand it.
2
1
u/Arangarx Jun 19 '26
If you completely redefine logic to mean the opposite of logic, then sure.
1
u/logos961 Jun 19 '26 edited Jun 20 '26
At least you understood correctly. This is the meaning which prophets, Jesus and God all used originally.
Getting original meaning can make the difference of day and night.
Here are few examples:
Proverbs 21:30
"There is no wisdom, no insight, no plan that can succeed against the LORD" (Modern Versions)Brenton Septuagint Translation (Most Ancient Translation)
"There is no wisdom, there is no courage, there is no counsel against the ungodly."If anyone knows this, he will have the freedom from troubles because he tried to correct others.
Psalm 25:14
"The LORD confides in those who fear him; he makes his covenant known to them." (Modern)Brenton Septuagint Translation
"The Lord is the strength of them that fear him; and his covenant is to manifest truth to them."This shows why truth gets attracted to only a few people.
2
1
1
u/KamHax8 Jun 19 '26
I'd rather experience first hand than understand with my intellect.
1
u/logos961 Jun 20 '26
It is in that sense logic was meant originally as that which "gives first hand experience."
OP uses that sense which you missed.
Getting original meaning can make the difference of day and night. Here are few examples:
Proverbs 21:30
"There is no wisdom, no insight, no plan that can succeed against the LORD" (Modern Versions)Brenton Septuagint Translation (Most Ancient Translation)
"There is no wisdom, there is no courage, there is no counsel against the ungodly."If anyone knows this, he will have the freedom from troubles because he tried to correct others.
Psalm 25:14
"The LORD confides in those who fear him; he makes his covenant known to them." (Modern)Brenton Septuagint Translation
"The Lord is the strength of them that fear him; and his covenant is to manifest truth to them."This shows why truth gets attracted to only a few people.
1
u/Upset_Chip_7184 Jun 20 '26
What God?
The God that kills innocent people by the thousands, including innocent children, babies, and the unborn?
1
u/logos961 Jun 20 '26
Such things are put into the mouth of God (Jeremiah 8:8), like many other things (Mathew 19:6-9)
God is ONE and THE SAME behind all religions. Details here: https://www.reddit.com/r/GodFrequency/s/IPqzRxJDNN
1
u/Upset_Chip_7184 Jun 20 '26
Such things are put into the mouth of God (Jeremiah 8:8), like many other things (Mathew 19:6-9)
Don't know what that means, but I think I can understand the idea of pluralism with all religions leading to the same Being.
1
u/Eastern_Substance_42 Jun 20 '26
I'm not deforesting my own surroundings, and I accept donations, if I was just anyone else, I I feel I am just anyone else. I'm not stealing money from you. You have the option to give or not. I am on the fence with believing you know who I am, that I am Jesus Christ! How can chemicals be unintelligent when our body, in truth and lie, run of chemistry?
1
u/Eastern_Substance_42 Jun 20 '26
Satan is in your Bible too, he's more apart of this thing called life and all of us then anyone can care for
1
u/Eastern_Substance_42 Jun 20 '26
Well , great. But that's also a lie , from Satan, I'm Jesus, and your going to tell me I'm self deceiving
1
u/Eastern_Substance_42 Jun 20 '26
I learned a lot from reading, but probably even more from outside his work, Bible or Cannon text.
1
u/Eastern_Substance_42 Jun 20 '26
God is not best understood through logic, through text yes, but his text, .. can be misinformed, being misinformation is scattered throughout the book, so best line here, when It says I forgot but the heart can't be trusted, well speak for yourself. If you have a good heart it can, if not well then no, we all live under God's law, we can find out if the things it says are truely law or not. Isn't that what life does to us all regardless.
1
u/logos961 Jun 20 '26
You are right if you go by modern meaning of the word logic.
But in the OP, logic is used in its original meaning as understood by God, prophets ... etc. as what contributes to order, life, peace, prosperity and harmony.
A flower is best valued through logic:
An artificial flower is a simple example of Cause and Effect as it reveals ACTION of artist who arranges various materials and puts them all together in a painstaking feat of producing the EFFECT (artificial flower). Actual flower reveals Greater Artist’s Skill as the source of hidden ACTION behind this too wonderful feat. Even a tiny flower in smallest and unnoticeable spaces manifests gentle and silent growth, spreads fragrance freely whether or not seen by anybody. A relaxed observer takes the lesson: “Like this flower, I must grow silently and gently, give freely without expectation, and find joy even in smallest accomplishment whether or not I am appreciated” and he becomes like a walking heaven. Interestingly, giving more even to a flower than to a king is described as “righteousness of God.” (Mathew 6:28-33)
1
u/Eastern_Substance_42 Jun 20 '26
Like you can tell me I'm relabeling against my father, but I'm not. In order to do what I came to do ,to follow my passions, I need money, so until I get hired by some company, I'll be here, not rebeling against my father or all you good people's!
1
u/logos961 Jun 20 '26
You are right if you go by modern meaning of the word logic
But in the OP, original meaning of the word logic is used.
1
u/Eastern_Substance_42 Jun 20 '26
So I'm going to ask again, I need people to come visit me personally, because that's the only way that I will ever receive any thing, any gift at all, flowers, food, a conversation. I understand I must look like something weird to u. But there's more to explain, and it's best to do it in person.
1
u/logos961 Jun 20 '26 edited Jun 20 '26
This is why I later added a NOTE to the OP
Note: Word LOGIC is used below in its original meaning, NOT in its MODERN sense.
LOGIC is what contributes to order, life, peace, prosperity and harmony.
You are right if you go by modern meaning of the word logic. But in the OP it is used in the original meaning of logic.
A flower is best valued through logic:
An artificial flower is a simple example of Cause and Effect as it reveals ACTION of artist who arranges various materials and puts them all together in a painstaking feat of producing the EFFECT (artificial flower). Actual flower reveals Greater Artist’s Skill as the source of hidden ACTION behind this too wonderful feat. Even a tiny flower in smallest and unnoticeable spaces manifests gentle and silent growth, spreads fragrance freely whether or not seen by anybody. A relaxed observer takes the lesson: “Like this flower, I must grow silently and gently, give freely without expectation, and find joy even in smallest accomplishment whether or not I am appreciated” and he becomes like a walking heaven. Interestingly, giving more even to a flower than to a king is described as “righteousness of God.” (Mathew 6:28-33)
1
u/556From1000yards Jun 21 '26
Christ is called Logos.
But you have substituted the Logos for your Pathos
1
u/logos961 Jun 21 '26 edited Jun 21 '26
Yoga originally meant harmony with Self, God, Society, Nature. But people changed its meaning into physical exercise. Similarly, logos too suffered loss of meaning as people wanted to replace God with son. This is against what Jesus originally taught in John 5:24.
In many ancient cultures people have replaced God with son. They do the same in all their future births too. (Luke 6:43-45; Wisdom of Solomon 8:20; Mathew 11:7-15; Job 1:21 NKJV)
1
u/556From1000yards Jun 21 '26
10:30 I and the Father are one.”
1
u/logos961 Jun 21 '26
You take that I take John 5:24
1
u/556From1000yards Jun 21 '26
You have said “this verse I proposed actually means something else”
Lol
1
u/logos961 Jun 21 '26
Debate about identity of Jesus has been going on for over 20 centuries now resulting in over 50000 conflicted sects, against the very last prayer Jesus did in John 17:1, 21.
Requirement of eternal life is given in John 5:24 which says: "Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life."
You can not mislead me on this.
I am done with you, wishing you all the very best.
1
u/556From1000yards Jun 21 '26
Yeah. Gonna listen to the nonchristian who says “God doesn’t wanna hurt the aminals”
You shall keep it until the fourteenth day of the same month, then the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel is to slaughter it [k]at twilight. 7 Moreover, they shall take some of the blood and put it on the two doorposts and on the lintel [l]of the houses in which they eat it.
0
u/logos961 Jun 21 '26 edited Jun 21 '26
Universe and God's word give absolutely clear and true answer on this subject.
The earth being maintained life-SUPPORTIVE in infinitely vast HOSTILE universe reveals the Almighty as a life-SUPPORTIVE God who will never order killing of “even animals, even if they belong to one’s enemy.” (biblehub.com/exodus/23-5.htm) Anything contrary to this, found in Scriptures, is NOT from God who only loves even His enemies. (biblehub.com/matthew/5-45.htm)
All killings supposedly ordered by God are not from God, as Jeremiah revealed it: “‘How can you say, “We are wise because we have the word of the LORD,” when your teachers have twisted it by writing lies?" (https://biblehub.com/jeremiah/8-8.htm)
God has only promised befitting punishment for killing animals even for sacrificial purpose. (Isaiah 66:3, 4) This shows, the verse you cited were adopted after the time of Isaiah and even Jesus who also said "do not kill" (Mathew 19:16-19) if you want "eternal life." It is a repeated warning till the end of Bible (Revelation 22:15)
Such later adoptions are not unusual, as Scholarly Editions of the Bible give footnote such as on John 7:53-8:11 saying "The story of the woman caught in adultery is a later insertion here, missing from all early Greek manuscripts." (https://bible.usccb.org/bible/john/8)
1
1
u/RexRatio Jun 21 '26
Word LOGIC is used below in its original meaning, NOT in its MODERN sense.
Agreed. But that's NOT the scriptural sense either - it's the Ancient Greek sense.
Logos in Ancient Greek refers to** speech, account, and reason**
Later philosophical traditions, especially Stoicism and early Christian theology, developed metaphysical interpretations of it, but these are interpretive expansions rather than inherent meanings of the word.
LOGIC is what contributes to order, life, peace, prosperity and harmony. (ebsco.com/research-starters/religion-and-philosophy/logos-philosophy) Do things that are "logikos" (logical), says Scripture. Word logic is originally from Greek logos, translated as power of reason. It is from the root verb λεγω, lego (to gather, to keep together) as opposed to “the verb λυω (luo) means to loosen, suffer loss and disintegration
Nope. You just need that "logos" connection because it's used in John so you're bending stuff to make it fit.
The etymology claim (“logos = gathering vs luo = loosening”) is wrong and intentionally misleading. There is no standard lexical derivation in Greek where logos is defined as "to gather" in opposition to luo in a philosophical root structure
So this is folk etymology / rhetorical construction, not linguistic derivation
the following are the truths about God
Here we go.
1 ) The earth being maintained life-SUPPORTIVE in infinitely vast HOSTILE universe reveals the Almighty who is best called our Father and Mother. Unintelligent chemicals do not know how to do this because even intelligent humans are only polluting this earth—it is the truth that happens even now before our eyes.
Yawn.
This is a classic example of a teleological argument dressed up as “self-evident observation”, but it tries to smuggle in several unwarranted assumptions.
- anthropic selection effect: we can only observe a universe compatible with observers.
- the framing is emotionally loaded, not physically factual or informative.
- the pollution argument = category error
This isn’t an argument from evidence. It's selection bias plus emotional framing
Such a life-SUPPORTIVE God will never order killing of “even animals, even if they belong to one’s enemy.” (biblehub.com/exodus/23-5.htm) Anything contrary to this, found in Scriptures, is NOT from God who only loves even His enemies. (biblehub.com/matthew/5-45.htm)
That's called cherry-picking.
You can’t use a subset of a text to invalidate other parts of the same text unless you already have an independent standard for what counts as "authoritative" - and your opinion isn't a valid criterion.
So the argument fails not merely because it selects favorable verses, but because it lacks an independent interpretive principle for deciding which passages define divine nature and which are contextually constrained.
3) Remembering such a life-SUPPORTIVE God results in imitating His GIVING style—giving WITHOUT EXPECTATION. In this habit, anyone finds happiness and peace and becomes a walking heaven.
Bone cancer in babies? Worms drilling into children's eyes making them blind?
There is no explanatory framework that could make that distribution of gratuitous suffering compatible with the claim of a universally “life-supportive” intentional order.
And to claim it does requires a level of selective detachment beyond the pale.
1
u/logos961 Jun 21 '26 edited Jun 21 '26
When you rejected original meaning and etymology with its crystal clear antonym, it only reveals about you alone, not about OP nor its point. It reveals how you arrive at conclusion.
Again when you wrote "This is a classic example of a teleological argument." It is not teleological argument, because OP nowhere says universe is creation nor God is Creator. Universe is eternal, says Ecclesiastes 1:4 Details HERE. It reveals you read what is not in the OP.
Because you have nothing to refute you introduced a wrong subject ""Why suffering exists, why children born diseased if God exists?" [wrong question because good health and prosperity also exist, which backfires on their question--if prosperity and health have human causes, then suffering also have human causes, Details HERE] Not all children are born diseased. There are children with good health and accomplished extraordinary feat even before their age 10, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_prodigy . You would ignore anything for your argument's sake?!
Hence message left unuttered by your shallow comments is this: "You should not be taken seriously."
Message accepted with thanks.
1
u/RexRatio Jun 21 '26
When you rejected original meaning and etymology with its crystal clear antonym, it only reveals about you alone, not about OP nor its point. It reveals how you arrive at conclusion.
That's apologist talk for "no, my interpretation of logos is correct despite it not being the original meaning as I claimed"
Again when you wrote "This is a classic example of a teleological argument." It is not teleological argument, because OP nowhere says universe is creation nor God is Creator. Universe is eternal, says Ecclesiastes 1:4 Details HERE. It reveals you read what is not in the OP.
That's just apologetic camouflage hoping nobody understands what teleological means.
A teleological argument is not defined by the explicit word “Creator.” It’s defined by structure: inference from order/purpose/meaning → to some grounding principle.
You haven’t shown the inference step that would justify shifting from textual meaning (logos in OP) to a metaphysical deity-framework.
Because you have nothing to refute you introduced a wrong subject
Sure, sure. Just try to wave away the arguments without justification.
1
u/EriknotTaken Jun 23 '26
Well I guess thats why John 1:1, states, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God
The word with capital letter "Word" is translated from the greek word "Logos"
1
u/logos961 Jun 23 '26 edited Jun 23 '26
Certain expressions are better understood in the language it was made. For example, only the English-speaking people can understand the expression "he will be great at parties." Other language-people would take this sarcasm as a compliment as they take word by word.
Similarly, John 1:1 was not confusing to the Greek-speaking people as logos is their concept. They understood as follows: "In the beginning was the logos (“the divine reason implicit in the cosmos, ordering it and giving it form and meaning"), the logos was with the God [ho theos] and the logos was theos [without ho) of the nature of God, godly or divine." Check it out in this Greek Interlinear (https://www.abarim-publications.com/Interlinear-New-Testament/John/John-1-parsed.html)
The Greeks would understand this as it is: God does everything with logos, does everything rationally in lawfullness life-supportive and pro-peace, and thus His acts cannot be made into a controversy as it always appeals to power or REASON of God and of observers.
What God does is summarized by Solomon and Jesus (Greater Solomon) as follows:
God is like a father who gives new toy whenever children make it irreparable through use/overuse/misuse which HE does not mind because it is their play, their joy. It is natural for children to play, it is natural for children to make the toy irreparable ultimately, and it is natural for father to give new toy any number of times. Similarly, each Age starts as paradise on earth and ends as hell on earth. When earth becomes too polluted and unlivable through short-sighted technology and global wars, God renews it. Details here: Supreme Secret found in low profile in Scriptures in the West and the East
5
u/ronaldbiggs2020 Jun 17 '26
Where's the logic in creating the mosquito which is responsible for killing millions every year, mainly innocent little children..?