I gave the following analogy in another thread and feel I should expand on it in a separate thread.

I have an analogy for you Zandore. Let’s say you are a brilliant scientist that creates a new biological insect for a specific purpose, let’s say to rid crops off harmfully destructive insects.
All appears to be going well when you notice that the destructive insects have struck a deal with your new breed and they are no longer doing what you have created them to do and some have actually began to work for the destructive ones.
Do you have the right to destroy your creation?
Do you allow them to run amuck with the destructive ones?
If you answer is no, what other measures can you take to get things back on track again.
Perhaps a separation of the two species or how about making a better deal with them?
In this position what would your course of action be?


Now if that brilliant scientist had the ability to actually become part of his own creation, would that give him the leverage he needed to get his creation back for the original purpose he created them for? What other avenues could he explore to obtain the same results?
I think this should inspire the assorted intellects we have here.
Lets see what the Berry clan can come up with.
Remember no bloodshed and keep it civil you all know my position on the matter.
Fire away.
All The Best Irish

i think you may want to make it clear that leading the created insects to kill the other ones instead of the plants is merely symbolic of our struggle with overcoming sin. Cause, people seem to like pointing out bloodshed these days.

I think it is a good analogy.

I think we were created for a purpose and that purpose was ignored for the sake of 'eating plants.' The other insects liked it, but the created ones weren't made for that purpose. And if you don't get them on the right path, then they will devour the whole garden and seek to devour whatever they can find. I think becoming part of his own creation was a good analogy too. You would think that the other insects would listen, seeing that this insect is the very same that watches over them day and night. But they would not. Instead, they hung this insect on a thorn and continued eating at the garden. Three days later this insect returns to life and goes back up to the scientist. Now before he did that, he had some insects that had followed him and saw that. They listened to the scientist and thus tried to persuade the other insects from eating the garden, but they were killed by the 'turncoats.' The scientist, seeing that none of his efforts worked to influence the majority to turn back, took up the insects that listened to his commands, and then burned the garden and all the insects therein so that he may start a new one. His insects that he saved now have the benefit of enjoying peace in the new garden, away from persecution and suffering.

This is all an analogy of what the Bible is speaking about.

Irish your perspective has alot to do with how you will answer this ...
God is just a word for life IMO all of life so all of life is a part of all of life no part of life is superior or over another part of life , no part of life would be interested in telling other parts of life what to do, i understand the purpose of your analogy is to explian why your truth believes this thus it justifiys a beleif in 'god'and gives validation to why you find yourself in a religion that inspires division and intolerance, You are doing 'gods' bidding if you will.....This is the core idea that we are seperate from not only life but each other and this allows for all kinds of heinous behavior...I beleive in onenesss we are all conneceted and each part of life is congruent and viable to the whole thus making it impossible for me to answer, even for the purposes of hypothetical, it makes no sense to me.......As a mother i have no purpose or original intent to create my kids for that I'd have to get back too, as a mother that they are happy is really all that matters what ever that means to them....

Sheri, You are not playing right, this is a thought exercise and you have been promoted to god status that a good place to be. Now play nice and tell us what a goddess like you would do to solve the problems of the insects.
Luv Irish

Sorry Irish I missed this the first time

Lets try to set up some perimeters.

In that sense as a start:
1) Are these "biological insects" sentient?
2) Do they have emotions (compasion, hate, love)?
3) Do they have families (like we do)?

Lets try to set up some perimeters. OK then

In that sense as a start:
1) Are these "biological insects" sentient? They have some of the abilities of the scientist, the ability to pro-create themselves and self awareness they have a sense of purpose but are community driven.

2) Do they have emotions (compassion, hate, love)? They have the ability to create or destroy and the knowledge to know consequence, so yes we will give them emotion.

3) Do they have families (like we do)? We as scientists have no such time for luxuries of those kind were loners, but we feel as if our creation are like family to us, so we encourage the concept.

I would find the last remaining good insect, instruct him to build a giant boat (an ark if you will) then have him gather 2 of every other species of insect (only the good ones of course) Once he has accomplished this mission I would then flood the earth for 40 days and 40 nights....thus cleansing the Earth of all evil insects....

In my persepctive this issue doesn't exist Irish sorry

Are you saying you lack imagination?

Did you actually just hijack your own thread....this is a new tactic...

No. It is a scenario within possibility. I am not asking anyone to believe anything; I am just asking what you would do as the scientist in this position. A chance if you like to play god.
Irish

Hijacking a thread generally means to get on a thread that someone else has started and change the topic, or start a conversation which does not apply to the thread itself.....this is usually done by someone who did not start the thread...but since you engaged in a conversation with...whatshername....you hijacked your own thread....well done...

Irish Imagine 'god' had no preference in anything least of all what you are doing.....What
would you do????would you see good and evil???would you see division??would you see unity????Imagine what it would actually be like to actually think for ones self make decisons watch the outcomes make changes if needed???No Irish I'm no the one who lacks imagination lol......

It is just a little scenario within possibility nothing about probability. I am not asking you to believe in god or even debate the issue here. Just asking for a little imagination and put your self in the scientist’s shoes. Oh well perhaps one of the other Berry clan will play along!
Luv Irish

i suppose irish lol

Well Irish, as a fallible imperfect man, such a thing might happen; but if I were a infallible, perfect and all-knowing god I would have seen that this new biologic construct was going to be subsumed and would have taken steps to ensure that this did not happen. Of course, if as this infallible, perfect and all-knowing god, I let that construct be subsumed, it would be obvious that either I wasn’t all-knowing or I wanted an excuse to punish my innocent creation because I liked to inflict pain and suffering! Very poor analogy! This is what I posted on the other thread and is still relevant!

Ok Mako, for this thread then you are a brilliant scientist but also a fallible imperfect man. How would you solve the dilemma what steps would you take to resolve what a occurred.

Why sir, I would create a greater biologic construct that could not be subsumed to destroy the destructive insects and reprogram those first biologic constructs to do their original job and be resistant to subsumation! What I would not do is make belief in me or my greater biologic construct necessary for admission back into the laboratory and life after mission completion!

Good, now we are thinking. In order to reprogram those first biologic constructs to do their original job you need to round em up? And remove some of their abilities in order to make them resistant correct? How would the old react to the new entities moving in to do the job, would they build a resistance.

who/what declared me a god?

declaring myself a god is meaningless.

if it is something so irrational as the human,
then i think that the declaration is also meaningless.

three words; "Return to dust."

OK where to start.....

With in the set parameters as asked and agreed upon:

Option 1
Walking away and ignoring/forgetting about my creations. (Mako )

Option 2
Discover what I did wrong and HUMANELY destroy me creations as quickly and as painlessly as possible.

Option 3
Blame my creations for some thing I did wrong.
Drown all but a hand full in a global flood.
Murder whole colonys for a perceived wrong (sin?).
Cause one colony to make warfare on another for some minor difference or perceived difference.
Order whole towns to be slaughtered and order/condone the queen childs (young females) to be used as mating slaves
Play perverted games with their lives (I.E. Job)

I can make this part of option 3 long but I hope you understand what I am getting at.


What would I do?

A no brainer....#2
I do not torture either mindless creatures or sentient, feeling, self aware beings.

What would you do Irish? Within the parameters of your analogy what would your actions be?

Its an analogy.

I know I could never see myself as powerful as a God. But for the sake of the analogy, I'll use my logic (like it matters). I would help them realize who they really are and that they are meant for a different life than the other insects. These insects are meant to clean out the garden of the devourers. Now, say that these insects breed and you get a mix of both types. These become conflicted and develop mental problems. They wait for their savior bug to come and cleanse them and heal them. Yeah I think God has got it right. I know it.

apparently you missed the point.

declaring myself a god to those insects i created in my lab does NOT make me a god to those insects I created in my lab. Only the insects could declare me a god, and if they are as irrational and incomplete in their understandings as humans are, they are not qualified to pronounce something a god.

I’d create a bird that needed to eat insects to survive. A bird that only ate insects that didn’t taste of the first destructive insects.

Keep the balance

Well first I would gather an inquisition party and burn all the little heathens bastards on little wooden stakes until they saw the evils of their ways. Just Kidding!

Seriously I would go along the line of thoughts of Mako and attempt to re-program them back to their original purpose.
Knowing that they were influenced by the destructive ones there is a good chance that many of them could be convinced of their original purpose and return to that design. As bluefinger pointed out there probably was some in breeding between the species. It now may be possible to genetically manipulate some of the destructive ones to serve along with the new breed.
First and foremost I would have to establish a form of communication so that they would understand what I had created them for in the first place. Giving them a choice to be apart of the original purpose or having them go someplace else so that the work can get done. There are several methods I could use to establish this.
A. Using their form of language both verbal and written.
B. By demonstrating that I am not governed by the same limitations they exist in to establish authority.
C. Establishing communication with those most respected in the community, there leaders and their elders.
D. Or becoming one of those respected in the community to gain their trust and respect.
If I am unable to convince the entire community I might have to take more evasive action to cleanse the crop field and start over. Those that I had established communication with would be asked to remove themselves from the area to be cleaned. And would return to the fields after the new crop is established to nurture and care for it as they were originally intended to do.
Irish

Irish......invalid answer.

You did not follow the parameters you yourself set in both the OP and in post #6.
No mention of crop fields was made.

Other than that not to bad of an answer. To bad some one/thing could have been like that.

Umm, I thought that he did mention "crops"

Although, I'd have to ask then...Who created the crops?

He did not specify that they had been applied so therefor I assumed they were still in the lab.

and Zan I wonder if the sky is pink today

Nope, no reason to round them up, the new improved construct would reprogram them as it encountered them. Reprogramming would not remove any other their abilitiies, it would simply enhance their existing programs. Since the other imperfect constructs would not recognize the reprgrammed constructs and the reprogrammed constructs would simply do their orignal job, there would be no reason to build up resistance and by the time the defective constructs met the new improved construct (ver 1.2) it would be too late to build up resistance.


but after giving them all the necessary internal and external parameters to operate as "programmed".

Irish.....no answer to my charge?

Admittedly I did not say "field", that was an assumption I probably should have elaborated on. But I fail to see the difference it would make. Care to elaborate your position?
Irish

It would stand to reason that a competent scientist would IN THE LAB seen how the two insect species would have interacted before releasing into the field.

But then that is my opinion.

Let me see if I have this right:

I am a brilliant scientist who creates a new breed of insect to wipe out another breed (btw, I saw that movie, and thought it was a prime example of typical "brilliant monkey" thought processes).

The new bugs no longer perform as desired, would I wipe them out or let them continue.

Assuming that there is a god who created all, then I have interfered with this deitys 'plotline' by creating these new bugs. As a man who created the problem, I have an obligation to correct the problem.

Irish, I respect you deeply and your faith, but I must say that your analogy has a flaw: Your 'brilliant scientist' isn't a god, but is just a man who has just introduced a new factor into the equation of life. Similar to the introduction of rabbits to Australia: a good idea, but with a bad execution. With no natural predators, the rabbits quite literally, were fruitful and multiplied with disasterous effects on the ecology.



How about this one instead:

You are a god who has just finished creating a world with an indigenous, sentient lifeform. What rules do you give your self? Will you interfere whenever you don't like the way your little world is developing? Or would you stand back to just let it be and see where it goes?

If I were God....my only right or...purpose, is to create all things. I have no control though what I create, it just flows out of me continuously. My creation network, which contains all there is and will be, is made available to all who wish to connect to it. I cannot force this action on them directly, they must make the connection, it is possible... seeing they are a part of the web of existence. I do not judge my creations directly, all though the universal web of existence has a way of filtering things. Whatever my creations perceive as truth, is truth. Whatever my creations perceive as lies, are lies. I cannot directly control their perceptions or interpretations. My creations only need to realize I provide all they will ever need or want, I just cannot give it to them directly. They must connect to the creation network first....soon after this intentional action, they will receive the necessary info.
All I can say now is... Good Luck and Godspeed.

High fives my taurus friend , i was scolded for not playing right...lets see what irish sys too you lol

Yeah well, I kind of like getting slapped.....


LOL

You cannot create a sentient being without giving him the spark that will make it a god itself.
There is no more evolution than sentience.

I am still waiting to see what his response is to me.

As this was just a mental exercise and not an attempt to explain creation I was attempting to place fallible human decisions on a scenario similar to the creator giving you an opportunity to explore something unknown from a human perspective. Unless God has joined the forum over the weekend and can explain why He took the steps Himself I can not speak for Him, nor totally understand why He works the way He does. As you, I can only look upon it from a fallible human perspective only because that is my current limitation.
I believe (imo) that God enjoys the random factor and has keen sense of humor also, two attributes many would not agree with me. My reasoning in this is that man was created in His image and they are attributes that man possesses. Therefore the God that I know enjoys a little gambling, a few good jokes and as His first miracle as a human (Jesus) was turning water into wine, maybe He enjoys a drink once in a while. Maybe that’s why I get along so well with Him.
Irish

JMPD1 With all duo respect my friend.

Rule number one “I brought you into existence I have every right to take you out of it”
Rule number two “I will attempt to guide and give direction to get you back to where you belong”
Rule number three “Should we disagree, refer back to rule number one”

Cheers Irish

A good answer Artymoon. If I were to create a god that is the template I would use. But since I don’t have that ability I guess I will have to love what I have.
Irish

Your words.....

"I have an analogy for you Zandore. Let’s say you are a brilliant scientist that..."

and I answered as best I could.


A sense of humor??????
We all know what kind/type of humor he has alright.....

Ps 94:1 - O LORD God, to whom vengeance belongeth; O God, to whom vengeance belongeth, shew thyself.

Ps 149:7 - To execute vengeance upon the heathen, and punishments upon the people;

Isa 34:8 - For it is the day of the LORD'S vengeance, and the year of recompences for the controversy of Zion.

Ps 79:5 - How long, LORD? wilt thou be angry for ever? shall thy jealousy burn like fire?

Ps 80:4 - O LORD God of hosts, how long wilt thou be angry against the prayer of thy people?

And your answers were fine!
As I said before, I don’t claim to speak for God nor do I totally understand His ways of doing things. But I do understand human perspective.
Perhaps your value of life is affected and limited by your own mortality. Where God holds power over death and life and is able to right any wrong perceived by you.
Irish

What God/Gods are you refering to? There are many to choose from!

I do not believe in any so they do not have a hold over me.

Sorry Zandore I was referring to my God. I’ll have you over some day and we’ll go for pints.
I have a friend who does not believe in the laws of gravity but he still manages to keep himself grounded
All the Best
Irish

this dovetails neatly with some of my little musings. in Isaiah, god is quoted as saying "Abraham, my friend"... referring to the jewish people, as if a human speaking about a pet dog or cat. One wonders if God simply watches over the litter, and keeps an eye on the breed from time to time. a favorite pet and its descendants.

since you have raised mortality, irish:

it can be said that it is our finite existance that allows one to live. if one were immortal, love would be meaningless since there would be no sacrifice of finite resources. If this is true, then how could any gods ever love, since they have nothing to loose?