by jimwalton » Tue Mar 22, 2016 3:31 pm
> unless you are positing that it is impossible for an all powerful being to impart knowledge to humans in a way that they can all understand unambiguously.
What I'm positing is that a dynamical world is superior to a static one. I think you would admit that the natural world is dynamic, with a large number of systems that interact, balance, and even depend on each other. Some exhibit characteristics more like chaos (though that is a scientific category of a dynamical system) and other more like order and purpose. It is within these categories that we find human knowledge.
Have you ever tried to balance a broom handle on the palm of your hand? You can do it for a while, but eventually something (distraction, wind, your movements) causes it to become less stable, and it falls. This principle was posited by a meteorologist in the late 60s, who wrote a paper titled, "Predictability: Does the Flap of a Butterfly's Wing in Brazil Set Off a Tornado in Texas?" This thought was so important we now know it as the Butterfly Effect. Even if we had delicate sensors in every square foot of the globe and its atmosphere, we would still not be able to reliably (100%) predict the weather. The "Butterfly Effect" would always be present.
Our world seems to manifest a huge number of interacting chaos systems: weather patterns, electrical impulses, the firing pattern of neurons in the brain, ecosystems, etc. Should God stop all of that? I contend that a dynamic world in which free creatures can exercise genuine creativity, thereby bringing about truly novel effects, is a better world than a static world. A consequent corollary is that God would want to create a dynamic world. For instance, since both our circulatory system and nervous system are beneficial chaotic systems, there is strong empirical evidence to say that dynamical systems are beneficial to life. The heart can recover from occasion arrhythmias; our brains can recover from some injuries. In addition, if the brain were static, creativity wouldn't be possible. If the natural system were just linear and status, natural processes (trees, snowflakes, clouds, shorelines, faces) couldn't produce novel outcomes.
Hopefully you can see that while God might have created a static world of nonlinear dynamical systems, eliminating all reason, creativity, and scientific inquiry, and people being born who would turn against him, and he might have created a world where his sovereignty imparted knowledge, this would not be a desirable world. Natural science, engineering, and education would be vapid; courage and excitement would be absent. The more desirable world is the one where people have real life choices, real life freedom, the great potential to choose God, and the real option to choose against him.
> When everyone on Earth can observe the Sun in the exact same way, is there any doubt as to the Sun's existence?
There are many things that exist that don't have empirical qualities or data to go along with them: time, memories, pain, reason, intuition, justice, knowledge, love, to name a tiny few. We are mistaken to think that the best proof of existence is being able to "observe [something] in the exact same way." Most of what we know if not by such observation, though the sciences have achieved wonders in that field. It is not the only field, however. If all knowledge and learning has to be reduced to empirical observation, you have just deprived humanity of most of what we know.
> Non believers generally don't believe the veracity of holy books.
Much of that non-belief is a priori, not evidentiary. You don't believe because you choose not to believe. The Bible has mountains of evidence corroborating what's written in it.
> There is no evidence the Exodus even happened.
There is no evidence one way or the other. Actually, if you examine the story of the Exodus in the Bible, and examine all available documents and artifacts, there is no direct evidence proving that the Exodus never happened. Egypt was overflowing with foreign slaves; some Asiatic foreign people groups actually came to power; slave built in the cities of Rameses; the exodus route was a sensible one—while there is no evidence supporting the exodus, there is no evidence contradicting it either.