(urth) Information, etc.

[Chris]

Kieran said:
>>>b) This is God we're talking about here.  You know - omniscient,
>>>omnipotent, omnipresent, creation-ex-nihilo, rising-from-the-dead
>>>God.  Is anybody really worried that he couldn't get information
>>>out faster than light if He wanted to?
>>
>>Deists, I would suppose.
>
>Umm.... I suppose it depends upon your form of Deism.   Some would say God 
>is bound by the laws of physics.  Others would say that she wrote the laws 
>and do whatever she damn well pleases.    Especially since God exists 
>outside of time.

It's a little more/less complicated than that, and the philosophical problem 
(religion taken for granted) is actually human knowledge/experience. To 
grossly oversimplify, we demand consistency from nature. The religiously 
dangerous course to take is to say that God *can't* violate the laws of 
nature, and some have taken it. The course that has seemed safer to others 
is to say that God can, but *won't*, violate the laws of nature for whatever 
reason - usually because of his benevolence towards us, sometimes because of 
his rationality, etc. Of course to say that God won't violate the laws of 
nature presumes that we can know something - a significant amount, really - 
about God, which is itself kind of a thorny issue.

I have to admit I was just being glib, though.