PDA

View Full Version : GOD Vs Science !



megimoo
04-13-2010, 01:56 PM
GOD Vs Science !
EMAIL
A science professor begins his school year with a lecture to the

students, "Let me explain the problem science has with religion."

The atheist professor of philosophy pauses before his class and then

asks one of his new students to stand.

"You're a Christian, aren't you, son?"
"Yes sir," the student says.

"So you believe in God?"
"Absolutely."

"Is God good?"
"Sure! God's good."

"Is God all-powerful? Can God do anything?"
"Yes."

"Are you good or evil?"
"The Bible says I'm evil."

The professor grins knowingly. "Aha! The Bible!" He considers for a

moment. "Here's one for you. Let's say there's a sick person over

here and you can cure him. You can do it. Would you help him?

Would you try?"
"Yes sir, I would."

"So you're good...!"
"I wouldn't say that."

"But why not say that? You'd help a sick and maimed person if you

could. Most of us would if we could. But God doesn't."

The student does not answer, so the professor continues. "He doesn't,

does he? My brother was a Christian who died of cancer, even

though he prayed to Jesus to heal him. How is this Jesus good?

Hmmm? Can you answer that one?"
The student remains silent.
"No, you can't, can you?" the professor says. He takes a sip of water

from a glass on his desk to give the student time to relax.

"Let's start again, young fella. Is God good?"
"Er...yes," the student says.

"Is Satan good?"
The student doesn't hesitate on this one. "No."

"Then where does Satan come from?"

The student falters. "From God"

"That's right. God made Satan, didn't he? Tell me, son. Is there evil

in this world?"
"Yes, sir."

"Evil's everywhere, isn't it? And God did make everything, correct?"
"Yes."

"So who created evil?" The professor continued, "If God created

everything, then God created evil, since evil exists, and ac cording

to the principle that our works define who we are, then God is evil."
Again, the student has no answer.

"Is there sickness? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All these terrible

things, do they exist in this world?"

The student squirms on his feet. "Yes."

"So who created them?"
The student does not answer again, so the professor repeats his

question.
"Who created them?" There is still no answer. Suddenly the lecturer

breaks away to pace in front of the classroom. The class is

mesmerized.

"Tell me," he continues onto another student. "Do you believe in

Jesus Christ, son?"

The student's voice betrays him and cracks. "Yes, professor, I do."

The old man stops pacing. "Science says you have five senses you

use to identify and observe the world around you. Have you ever

seen Jesus?"
"No sir. I've never seen Him."

"Then tell us if you've ever heard your Jesus?"
"No, sir, I have not."

"Have you ever felt your Jesus, tasted your Jesus or smelt your

Jesus? Have you ever had any sensory perception of Jesus Christ,

or God for that matter?"
"No, sir, I'm afraid I haven't."

"Yet you still believe in him?"
"Yes."

"According to the rules of empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol,

science says your God doesn't exist. What do you say to that, son?"

"Nothing," the student replies. "I only have my faith."

"Yes, faith," the professor repeats. "And that is the problem science

has with God. There is no evidence, only faith."

The student stands quietly for a moment, before asking a question

of His own. "Professor, is there such thing as heat?"
"Yes," the professor replies. "There's heat."

"And is there such a thing as cold?"
"Yes, son, there's cold too."
"No sir, there isn't."

The professor turns to face the student, obviously interested. The

room suddenly becomes very quiet. The student begins to explain.

"You can have lots of heat, even more heat, super-heat, mega-heat,

unlimited heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat, but we don't

have anything called 'cold'. We can hit up to 458 degrees below

zero, which is no heat, but we can't go any further after that.

There is no such thing as cold; otherwise we would be able to go

colder than the lowest -458 degrees."

"Every body or object is susceptible to study when it has or

transmits energy, and heat is what makes a body or matter have or

transmit energy. Absolute zero (-458 F) is the total absence of heat.

You see, sir, cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of

heat. We cannot measure cold. Heat we can measure in thermal

units because heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir,

just the absence of it."

Silence across the room. A pen drops somewhere in the classroom,

sounding like a hammer.

"What about darkness, professor. Is there such a thing as darkness?"
"Yes," the professor replies without hesitation. "What is night if it

isn't darkness?"

"You're wrong again, sir. Darkness is not something; it is the

absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright

light, flashing light, but if you have no light constantly you have

nothing and it's called darkness, isn't it?

That's the meaning we use to define the word. "In reality, darkness

isn't. If it were, you would be able to make darkness darker,

wouldn't you?"

The professor begins to smile at the student in front of him. This

will be a good semester. "So what point are you making, young

man?"

"Yes, professor. My point is, your philosophical premise is flawed to

start with, and so your conclusion must also be flawed."

The professor's f ace cannot hide his surprise this time. "Flawed?

Can you explain how?"

"You are working on the premise of duality," the student explains.

"You argue that there is life and then there's death; a good God and

a bad God. You are viewing the concept of God as something finite,

something we can measure. Sir, science can't even explain a

thought."

"It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never seen, much less

fully understood either one. To view death as the opposite of life is

to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive

thing.

Death is not the opposite of life, just the absence of it."

"Now tell me, professor. Do you teach your students that they

evolved from monkey?"

"If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, young

man, yes, of course I do."

"Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?"

The professor begins to shake his head, still smiling, as he realizes

where the argument is going. A very good semester, indeed.

"Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work

and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor,

are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you now not a scientist,

but a preacher?"

The class is in uproar. The student remains silent until the

commotion has subsided.

"To continue the point you were making earlier to the other student,

let me give you an example of what I mean."

The student looks around the room. "Is there anyone in the class

who has ever seen the professor's brain?" The class breaks out into

laughter.

"Is there anyone here who has ever heard the professor's brain, felt

the professor's brain, touched or smelt the professor's brain? No one

appears to have done so. So, according to the established rules of

empirical, stable, demonstrable protocol, science says that you have

no brain, with all due respect, sir."

"So if science says you have no brain, how can we trust your

lectures, sir?"

Now the room is silent. The professor just stares at the student, his

face unreadable.

Finally, after what seems an eternity, the old man answers. "I guess

you'll have to take them on faith."

"Now, you accept that there is faith, and, in fact, faith exists with

life," the student continues. "Now, sir, is there such a thing as evil?"

Now uncertain, the professor responds, "Of course, there is. We see

it everyday. It is in the daily example of man's inhumanity to man.

It is in the multitude of crime and violence everywhere in the

world. These manifestations are nothing else but evil."

To this the student replied, "Evil does not exist sir, or at least it

does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God. It is

just like darkness and cold, a word that man has created to describe

the absence of God. God did not create evil. Evil is the result of

what happens when man does not have God's love present in his

heart. It's like the cold that comes when there is no heat or the

darkness that comes when there is no light."

The professor sat down.

fettpett
04-13-2010, 02:06 PM
I love that one, there is another one similar, if i find it i'll post it

fettpett
04-13-2010, 02:12 PM
here it is it's an urban legend though, it's pretty good however:

There was a professor of philosophy there who was a deeply committed atheist. His primary goal for one required class was to spend the entire semester attempting to prove that God couldn't exist. His students were always afraid to argue with him because of his impeccable logic. For twenty years he had taught this class and NO ONE had ever had the courage to go against him. Sure, some had argued in class at times, but no one had ever *really gone against him* (you'll see what I mean later). Nobody would go against him because he had a reputation.

At the end of every semester, on the last day, he would say to the class of 300 students, "If there is anyone here who still believes in God, stand up!" In twenty years, nobody ever stood up. They knew what he was going to do next. He would say, "Because anyone who believes in God is a fool. If God existed, he could stop this piece of chalk from hitting the ground and breaking. Such a simple task to prove he is God, and yet he can't do it." And every year he would drop the chalk onto the tile floor of the classroom and it could shatter into a hundred pieces. All of the students could do nothing but stop and stare. Most of the students were convinced that God couldn't exist. Certainly, a number of Christians had slipped through, but for 20 years they had been too afraid to stand up.

Well, a few years ago there was a freshman who happened to enroll in the class. He was a Christian, and had heard the stories about this professor. He had to take the class because it was one of the required classes for his major. And he was afraid. But for three months that semester, he prayed every morning that he would have the courage to stand up no matter what the professor said or what the class thought. Nothing they said or did could ever shatter his faith, he hoped. Finally, the day came. The professor said, "If there is anyone here who still believes in God, stand up!" The professor, and the class of 300 people looked at him, shocked, as he stood up at the back of the room. The professor shouted, "YOU FOOL! If nothing I have said all semester has convinced you that God doesn't exist, then you are a fool! If God existed, he could keep this piece of chalk from breaking when it hit the ground!" He proceeded to drop the chalk, but as he did, it slipped out of his fingers, off his shirt cuff, onto the pleats of his pants, down his leg, and off his shoe. And as it hit the ground, it simply rolled away, UNBROKEN. The professor's jaw dropped as he stared at the chalk. He looked up at the young man and then ran out of the lecture hall. The young man who had stood up proceeded to walk to the front of the room and share his faith in Jesus for the next half hour. 300 students stayed and listened as he told of God's love for them and of his power through Jesus.

wilbur
04-13-2010, 02:26 PM
That professor sure didn't know a damn thing about philosophy - of course, neither did the Christian kid - all their arguments were poor.

Any person who has studied enough to acquire employment as a professor of philosophy, you can bet has heard and knows extremely well, the various forms of the argument that 'evil is the privation of good' - and has heard and knows very well, the objections to such arguments.

megimoo
04-13-2010, 02:52 PM
That professor sure didn't know a damn thing about philosophy - of course, neither did the Christian kid - all their arguments were poor.Just like fishing for large mouth bass .I just cast some live bait and up pops Our South Carolina Heathen !:D

CaughtintheMiddle1990
04-13-2010, 04:03 PM
So I guess either you believe in only God or only Science? Can't be both?

megimoo
04-13-2010, 04:29 PM
So I guess either you believe in only God or only Science? Can't be both?Why not ?What to you is science,is an innate knowledge,something people are born with rather than something people have learned through experience. or Empiricism,that asserts that knowledge arises from sense experience.Every step in science was preceded by some small advance in previous knowledge with few breakthroughs.Every new fact proven was gained on the back of some previous known fact, Ad infinitum .

Sonnabend
04-13-2010, 04:32 PM
That professor sure didn't know a damn thing about philosophy - of course, neither did the Christian kid - all their arguments were poor.

Says an acolyte of the Church of Al Gore. :rolleyes:

CaughtintheMiddle1990
04-13-2010, 04:33 PM
Why not ?What to you is science,is an innate knowledge,something people are born with rather than something people have learned through experience. or Empiricism,that asserts that knowledge arises from sense experience.Every step in science was preceded by some small advance in previous knowledge with few breakthroughs.Every new fact proven was gained on the back of some previous known fact, Ad infinitum .


True but you're seeminly pitting in the OP God against Science. Why can't there be a God who works through science to create? It would in my mind make the God even more complex and masterful, seeing how intricately our world, solar system and universe has been created--everything fine tuned to the exact detail, especially in the case of our planet--it makes the idea of a God much more fascinating. I've always thought Science answers the ''How'', religion answers the ''What'', ''Who'' and ''Why''.

FlaGator
04-13-2010, 04:53 PM
So I guess either you believe in only God or only Science? Can't be both?

I believe in both.

FlaGator
04-13-2010, 04:57 PM
Just like fishing for large mouth bass .I just cast some live bait and up pops Our South Carolina Heathen !:D



Seriously. Bait a thread with a Christian post and wilbur makes a beeline to it. It's like watching Pavlov's dog drool.

megimoo
04-13-2010, 05:30 PM
Seriously. Bait a thread with a Christian post and wilbur makes a beeline to it. It's like watching Pavlov's dog drool.Kinda like fun but also sad in a way.The world is full of confused creatures that deny their creator !

Wei Wu Wei
04-13-2010, 05:45 PM
People who believe in God: the problem of free will is a common one so I'd like to hear your views.

Do we have free will?

God is omniscient, and knows everything you will do in advance. The fact that God can "see" or "know" this means that the future is determined. We're moving through a timeline and God is above it and can see the line ahead of us.

If this is true, then although we cannot see it because we are moving within the timeline, our future is already set, so no event could happen otherwise. The future, as God knows it, MUST happen, if it's knowable and known by God.

So, if there's a set future that must happen, it means we have no real freedom in our actions.

M21
04-13-2010, 05:47 PM
If you think of science as a tool for those who don't have the gift of faith to seek him where they aren't looking. Science is just the natural outpouring of what we who have faith alrerady know to be true in Romans 1:20. God giving us something to do, as it were, until his return.

M21
04-13-2010, 05:51 PM
People who believe in God: the problem of free will is a common one so I'd like to hear your views.

Do we have free will?

Reformed Doctrine of Predestination. Author: Boettner, Loraine.

Find it and read it. ;) It will answer your questions and God's eternal decree will make sense.

Free will isn't a "'problem" because It's not in the Bible.

megimoo
04-13-2010, 05:51 PM
True but you're seeminly pitting in the OP God against Science. Why can't there be a God who works through science to create? It would in my mind make the God even more complex and masterful, seeing how intricately our world, solar system and universe has been created--everything fine tuned to the exact detail, especially in the case of our planet--it makes the idea of a God much more fascinating. I've always thought Science answers the ''How'', religion answers the ''What'', ''Who'' and ''Why''.
Science is an attempt to explain GOD'S works of creation.It in itself,of itself is nothing,it seeks follow the path/trail that GOD left when he created everything,to follow his footsteps if you will .
In the past I have posted proof of GODS creation and Wilbur has never challenged it or offered a rebuttal but he constantly complains if I re post it .

Have you ever wondered why this earth of ours is so perfectly placed from our primary or why we are blessed with such perfect conditions for life.We have a great abundance of air to breath and water, aqua vita, and a 'sealed atmosphere' to keep it from boiling off into space.It's almost as if it were custom made for GODS creatures on earth.

FlaGator
04-13-2010, 05:55 PM
People who believe in God: the problem of free will is a common one so I'd like to hear your views.

Do we have free will?

God is omniscient, and knows everything you will do in advance. The fact that God can "see" or "know" this means that the future is determined. We're moving through a timeline and God is above it and can see the line ahead of us.

If this is true, then although we cannot see it because we are moving within the timeline, our future is already set, so no event could happen otherwise. The future, as God knows it, MUST happen, if it's knowable and known by God.

So, if there's a set future that must happen, it means we have no real freedom in our actions.

First off, how do you define free will? Secondly, because God knows what is going to happen in advance how does that hinder your ability to choose? Finally I would like for you to answer your own question, do we have free will?

First of all, how would you define freewill? Secondly how would the fact that God knows everything undermine freewill?

wilbur
04-13-2010, 07:53 PM
True but you're seeminly pitting in the OP God against Science. Why can't there be a God who works through science to create? It would in my mind make the God even more complex and masterful, seeing how intricately our world, solar system and universe has been created--everything fine tuned to the exact detail, especially in the case of our planet--it makes the idea of a God much more fascinating. I've always thought Science answers the ''How'', religion answers the ''What'', ''Who'' and ''Why''.

Well, if you had a God that only worked through scientifically discoverable natural processes, then that universe would be indistinguishable from a Godless universe, as far as we are concerned - everything could be explained via natural phenomena.

In that case, God would not be needed to explain anything - and as an explanation, would get slashed by occam's razor. As it so happens, this universe looks like such a place.

wilbur
04-13-2010, 07:56 PM
In the past I have posted proof of GODS creation and Wilbur has never challenged it or offered a rebuttal but he constantly complains if I re post it .

Haha!



Have you ever wondered why this earth of ours is so perfectly placed from our primary or why we are blessed with such perfect conditions for life.We have a great abundance of air to breath and water, aqua vita, and a 'sealed atmosphere' to keep it from boiling off into space.It's almost as if it were custom made for GODS creatures on earth.

Megs, you're like a puddle of water in a pothole, acting astonished at how every nook, crack and crevice in the concrete fits your shape perfectly. Why that pothole must have been made just for you!

Constitutionally Speaking
04-13-2010, 08:41 PM
So I guess either you believe in only God or only Science? Can't be both?


I see no conflicts.

Rockntractor
04-13-2010, 08:45 PM
Haha!



Megs, you're like a puddle of water in a pothole, acting astonished at how every nook, crack and crevice in the concrete fits your shape perfectly. Why that pothole must have been made just for you!

You compare Megs to a pothole while you sound like a pothead!:rolleyes:

FlaGator
04-13-2010, 09:08 PM
Well, if you had a God that only worked through scientifically discoverable natural processes, then that universe would be indistinguishable from a Godless universe, as far as we are concerned - everything could be explained via natural phenomena.

In that case, God would not be needed to explain anything - and as an explanation, would get slashed by occam's razor. As it so happens, this universe looks like such a place.

Perhaps our science isn't advanced enough to detect God. Kind of like science was not advanced enough until the 17th century to discover that the Earth was not the center of the solar system.

It's kind of odd though that some of us have reviewed the science (and philosophical thought) and came to the conclusion that their is a God. Actually quantum physicists are starting to come to the conclusion that the universe looks more like a thought. I wonder who'd doing the thinking Fido? I would be willing to bet that if positive proof was found tomorrow you'd still deny it.

Rockntractor
04-13-2010, 09:13 PM
I don't believe in Wilbur, he doesn't exist. He is just a sock someone invented!

FlaGator
04-13-2010, 09:20 PM
I don't believe in Wilbur, he doesn't exist. He is just a sock someone invented!

Science hasn't proved that he exists. He could be a badly programmed bot or a George Berkeley illusion.

wilbur
04-13-2010, 09:27 PM
Perhaps our science isn't advanced enough to detect God. Kind of like science was not advanced enough until the 17th century to discover that the Earth was not the center of the solar system.


Well, if thats the case, it would still mean that the hypothesis of God is superfluous and unjustifiable through science - right now. And there would be little reason to indulge in such speculation, as a serious endeavour.



It's kind of odd though that some of us have reviewed the science (and philosophical thought) and came to the conclusion that their is a God.

I could say its kind of odd that some people review the science, and believe in ghosts and bigfoot. Or alien abductions. But its not really that odd... our brains are notoriously poor at objective reasoning and critical thinking. Even today, most people's reasoning skills are abysmal. We're riddled with dozens of different kinds of bias that constantly battle to skew our perspectives, all of the time. Heck, you believe because you had some sort of mystical experience, if I recall (which is not at all unlike alien abduction stories, in a way) - not for some logical objective reason.


Actually quantum physicists are starting to come to the conclusion that the universe looks more like a thought. I wonder who'd doing the thinking Fido? I would be willing to bet that if positive proof was found tomorrow you'd still deny it.

The strangeness inherent in quantum mechanics has become a vehicle for new age drivel and spiritualist no-nothings, like Deepak Chopra, to try and legitimize their mystic non-sense. I can assure you, the physicist community is having no such spiritual shake up.

fettpett
04-13-2010, 09:28 PM
People who believe in God: the problem of free will is a common one so I'd like to hear your views.

Do we have free will?

God is omniscient, and knows everything you will do in advance. The fact that God can "see" or "know" this means that the future is determined. We're moving through a timeline and God is above it and can see the line ahead of us.

If this is true, then although we cannot see it because we are moving within the timeline, our future is already set, so no event could happen otherwise. The future, as God knows it, MUST happen, if it's knowable and known by God.

So, if there's a set future that must happen, it means we have no real freedom in our actions.

just because God sees A particular future and tells us about it, does not mean that is the future that will happen. There are examples of such in the Bible.

A) The Israelites leave Egypt and stop at Sinai, spend their time there (whole Golden Calf thing) then proceeds the Canaanite boarder. Once there Moses sends in Joshua, Nathan and 10 other spies. At this point God has told them to go and claim the land as their own, he will let the land fall into their hands. Spies come back, and the Isrealites rebel and end up wandering the wilderness for 40 years, losing everyone of that generation, except Joshua and Nathan.

B) God gives very explicit instructions on how to farm the land, farm for 6 years, let the ground stay fallow for the 7th. basically an early form of crop rotation. He says that if they keep that, he'll bless them with enough in the 6th year for the 7th. Again they don't follow the instructions and they have a number of famines

C) God sets up his example of government with the Judges. If they follow this course God will bless them and be an example to the world. Isrealites again rebel and demand a King. They choice Saul, and the whole Saul/David/Solomon situation happens and the Kingdom ends up splitting up and conquered.

Mathew 19:26 But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.

Now he may have been talking about the rich man and all, but the point still stands. It is arrogant to think that we can define something that is infinite. And while the Arguments in the OP and my post may not be true or the greatest arguments, they are getting across the point that sometimes just because we can't sense things it doesn't mean it's not true, and thus the point of Faith.

Our Free will has very little to do with historical events but in whether or not we will follow Him or not. THAT is our choice.

Rockntractor
04-13-2010, 09:29 PM
Science hasn't proved that he exists. He could be a badly programmed bot or a George Berkeley illusion.
I have seen a few words attributed to him, but no pictures or anyone that has met him or has first hand knowledge of him. He is a myth according to the evidence I have seen.

CaughtintheMiddle1990
04-13-2010, 09:32 PM
Well, if thats the case, it would still mean that the hypothesis of God is superfluous and unjustifiable through science - right now. And there would be little reason to indulge in such speculation, as a serious endeavour.



I could say its kind of odd that some people review the science, and believe in ghosts and bigfoot. Or alien abductions. But its not really that odd... our brains are notoriously poor at objective reasoning and critical thinking. Even today, most people's reasoning skills are abysmal. We're riddled with dozens of different kinds of bias that constantly battle to skew our perspectives, all of the time. Heck, you believe because you had some sort of mystical experience, if I recall (which is not at all unlike alien abduction stories, in a way) - not for some logical objective reason.



The strangeness inherent in quantum mechanics has become a vehicle for new age drivel and spiritualist no-nothings, like Deepak Chopra, to try and legitimize their mystic non-sense. I can assure you, the physicist community is having no such spiritual shake up.

So Wilbur, how do you think the universe came about, it's nature, etc?

wilbur
04-13-2010, 09:37 PM
So Wilbur, how do you think the universe came about, it's nature, etc?

I think the only honest answer anyone can give to that question is "I don't know".

fettpett
04-13-2010, 09:37 PM
Well, if thats the case, it would still mean that the hypothesis of God is superfluous and unjustifiable through science - right now. And there would be little reason to indulge in such speculation, as a serious endeavour.

yes, but God specifically asks us to believe in him and trust in him through Faith, exactly what the OP was about



I could say its kind of odd that some people review the science, and believe in ghosts and bigfoot. Or alien abductions. But its not really that odd... our brains are notoriously poor at objective reasoning and critical thinking. Even today, most people's reasoning skills are abysmal. We're riddled with dozens of different kinds of bias that constantly battle to skew our perspectives, all of the time. Heck, you believe because you had some sort of mystical experience, if I recall (which is not at all unlike alien abduction stories, in a way) - not for some logical objective reason.

On this point there is a lot of unexplained things that happen. Now I don't believe in Ghosts, and I don't believe that Aliens would want to come here. BUT there is strong evidence in findings and sightings that Bigfoot and other crypto's are out there, though they may not be what we think they are.



The strangeness inherent in quantum mechanics has become a vehicle for new age drivel and spiritualist no-nothings, like Deepak Chopra, to try and legitimize their mystic non-sense. I can assure you, the physicist community is having no such spiritual shake up.

and you speak for the entire physicist community? there are many physicist out there that will tell you, you are wrong

CaughtintheMiddle1990
04-13-2010, 09:39 PM
I think the only honest answer anyone can give to that question is "I don't know".

I'm not asking you for a factual response--"I don't know" would be a factual response--I'm asking what your opinion is on how it started. Purely your own opinion.

wilbur
04-13-2010, 09:43 PM
I'm not asking you for a factual response--"I don't know" would be a factual response--I'm asking what your opinion is on how it started. Purely your own opinion.

I honestly don't hold one with any amount of confidence.

If we boil it down to 3 possibilities traditionally considered, which are law, chance, or design..... I'd probably go with law, but not for any positive reason. Only for the reason that design and chance are pretty well ruled out.

CaughtintheMiddle1990
04-13-2010, 09:44 PM
I honestly don't hold one with any amount of confidence.

If we boil it down to 3 possibilities traditionally considered, which are law, chance, or design..... I'd probably go with law, but not for any positive reason. Only for the reason that design and chance are pretty well ruled out.

Law?

wilbur
04-13-2010, 09:44 PM
and you speak for the entire physicist community? there are many physicist out there that will tell you, you are wrong

No, of course not - I'm only relaying what I have observed.

wilbur
04-13-2010, 09:45 PM
Law?

Physical law (ie. mindless force).

CaughtintheMiddle1990
04-13-2010, 09:48 PM
I honestly don't hold one with any amount of confidence.

If we boil it down to 3 possibilities traditionally considered, which are law, chance, or design..... I'd probably go with law, but not for any positive reason. Only for the reason that design and chance are pretty well ruled out.


Physical law (ie. mindless force).

Hm. If there is an abscence of God, I feel that the universe and every being that has and ever will exist ''willed'' itself into existence. When you boil it down it's really almost..idk absurd and disturbing. If there is a God, what created it? How could it just always be? If something created God, what or who created God's creator? If there is no God--then what is this universe? Does it simply exist because you or I observe it to? Before you're born and when you die, to you the universe doesn't exist. What is the universe's purpose?

Sometimes I like to think the universe is literally an expanding cancer cell or something inside another being, or just a group of cells inside something else.

Sonnabend
04-14-2010, 05:33 AM
Faith and science are like the shoes on your feet...you can get farther with both, than you can with just one.

FlaGator
04-14-2010, 06:18 AM
Well, if thats the case, it would still mean that the hypothesis of God is superfluous and unjustifiable through science - right now. And there would be little reason to indulge in such speculation, as a serious endeavour.



I could say its kind of odd that some people review the science, and believe in ghosts and bigfoot. Or alien abductions. But its not really that odd... our brains are notoriously poor at objective reasoning and critical thinking. Even today, most people's reasoning skills are abysmal. We're riddled with dozens of different kinds of bias that constantly battle to skew our perspectives, all of the time. Heck, you believe because you had some sort of mystical experience, if I recall (which is not at all unlike alien abduction stories, in a way) - not for some logical objective reason.



The strangeness inherent in quantum mechanics has become a vehicle for new age drivel and spiritualist no-nothings, like Deepak Chopra, to try and legitimize their mystic non-sense. I can assure you, the physicist community is having no such spiritual shake up.


I am not talking about new ageism. Physicists, real physicists are thinking this. I point you to the book the Quantum Enigma by Bruce Rosenblum and Fred Kuttner. Wiki has a decent article on the Quantum mind http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mind. So you see you, I can assure you that the physicist community is considering the possibility that the universe is more that just matter and that consciousness and the universe may be heavily entwined. These ideas are being purposed by no less than Roger Penrose.

wilbur
04-14-2010, 09:57 AM
I am not talking about new ageism. Physicists, real physicists are thinking this. I point you to the book the Quantum Enigma by Bruce Rosenblum and Fred Kuttner. Wiki has a decent article on the Quantum mind http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mind. So you see you, I can assure you that the physicist community is considering the possibility that the universe is more that just matter and that consciousness and the universe may be heavily entwined. These ideas are being purposed by no less than Roger Penrose.

But not many, was my point - you might find a few, maybe. But there is no movement sweeping the physics community, as most reject the idea that the functions of the brain have any real close connection to quantum mechanics.

You can even find a true biologist or two who believe in intelligent design - but that doesn't really mean much.

wilbur
04-14-2010, 10:48 AM
Secondly how would the fact that God knows everything undermine freewill?

Its often argued that in a deterministic universe, freewill is simply an illusion and that everything about us, including the choices we make, are simply the result of prior causes. Of course, those prior causes would have prior causes themselves. And the prior causes of those prior causes, would themselves have even more prior causes. One could theoretically trace these chains of prior causes all the way back to the beginning of the universe itself, or the 'first cause'. In that case, nothing we do is a matter of choice, but really what we must do - our actions are not free, they are predetermined by prior states of the universe. And, its argued (mostly by theists), that if this is the case, it destroys any kind moral accountability, since nothing we do is a matter of choice. In other words, we're like dominoes, and nothing we do is really our own fault.

Theists resist all of those ideas very vehemently, obviously. Most Christian theists (and most people) tend to traditionally believe in contra-causal freewill. That is, their freedom to make and follow through with choices is not predetermined by prior states of the universe. Therefore, choices are free, and there is moral accountability and all that good stuff.

The problems comes in, when one considers God's omniscience in tandem with those beliefs. If God knows what we will do, before we do it, the universe is basically reduced back to determinism. We could no longer think of ourselves as free beings, but as machines, who when fed a specific set of inputs, will produce a specific set of outputs. And since God is alleged to have been the one who set in motion every single input we receive, while knowing exactly every piece of output we would produce, every one of our 'choices' can be traced back to Him (aka the 'first cause'). So we're still dominoes.

Then that beloved moral accountability goes out the window too. So there you have it - omniscience undermines freewill, and takes all traditional thoughts about moral accountability with it!

There are some arguments that attempt to rectify the situation - but they are rather torturous thought castles that, I think, are wonderful examples of absurdity.

FlaGator
04-14-2010, 12:13 PM
But not many, was my point - you might find a few, maybe. But there is no movement sweeping the physics community, as most reject the idea that the functions of the brain have any real close connection to quantum mechanics.

You can even find a true biologist or two who believe in intelligent design - but that doesn't really mean much.

You really should rethink that opinion. It is growing and some of the more prominent names in theoretical physics are looking into in. Buy hey, stay inside your little box if it helps to comfort you.

FlaGator
04-14-2010, 12:15 PM
Its often argued that in a deterministic universe, freewill is simply an illusion and that everything about us, including the choices we make, are simply the result of prior causes. Of course, those prior causes would have prior causes themselves. And the prior causes of those prior causes, would themselves have even more prior causes. One could theoretically trace these chains of prior causes all the way back to the beginning of the universe itself, or the 'first cause'. In that case, nothing we do is a matter of choice, but really what we must do - our actions are not free, they are predetermined by prior states of the universe. And, its argued (mostly by theists), that if this is the case, it destroys any kind moral accountability, since nothing we do is a matter of choice. In other words, we're like dominoes, and nothing we do is really our own fault.

Theists resist all of those ideas very vehemently, obviously. Most Christian theists (and most people) tend to traditionally believe in contra-causal freewill. That is, their freedom to make and follow through with choices is not predetermined by prior states of the universe. Therefore, choices are free, and there is moral accountability and all that good stuff.

The problems comes in, when one considers God's omniscience in tandem with those beliefs. If God knows what we will do, before we do it, the universe is basically reduced back to determinism. We could no longer think of ourselves as free beings, but as machines, who when fed a specific set of inputs, will produce a specific set of outputs. And since God is alleged to have been the one who set in motion every single input we receive, while knowing exactly every piece of output we would produce, every one of our 'choices' can be traced back to Him (aka the 'first cause'). So we're still dominoes.

Then that beloved moral accountability goes out the window too. So there you have it - omniscience undermines freewill, and takes all traditional thoughts about moral accountability with it!

There are some arguments that attempt to rectify the situation - but they are rather torturous thought castles that, I think, are wonderful examples of absurdity.

You have no understanding and I am to busy to explain it to you right now. It has nothing to do with determinism. Go check out one of R. C. Sprouls videos on free will and the soverency of God.

FlaGator
04-14-2010, 12:17 PM
Roger Penrose on the fine tuning of the universe.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WhGdVMBk6Zo&feature=player_embedded

Hardly a hack...

M21
04-14-2010, 12:25 PM
Wilbur you might find Martin Luther's "Bondage of the will" an interesting read someday.

wilbur
04-14-2010, 05:58 PM
You have no understanding and I am to busy to explain it to you right now. It has nothing to do with determinism. Go check out one of R. C. Sprouls videos on free will and the soverency of God.

Nothing to do with determinism? The sketch of an argument I was presenting was to show that the omnipotence you seem to believe in (ie. God knows all of our choices already), results in the equivalent of determinism.

fettpett
04-14-2010, 06:05 PM
Nothing to do with determinism? The sketch of an argument I was presenting was to show that the omnipotence you seem to believe in (ie. God knows all of our choices already), requires a deterministic universe.

only in your flawed thinking. If you read my post to weiwei, you would see that. Just because God has an outcome that is determined does NOT mean that our choices are pre-determined. Our choice is pretty simple, follow or not. that is ultimately the only thing that matters. All our other choices flow from that one.

God may KNOW all the outcomes of our choices, doesn't mean He makes us choose them.

wilbur
04-14-2010, 06:59 PM
only in your flawed thinking. If you read my post to weiwei, you would see that. Just because God has an outcome that is determined does NOT mean that our choices are pre-determined.


I don't see that your post really addresses much of anything that I presented. You show some examples where God makes some pseudo contracts with people, who then later fail to live up to them - and therefore don't get any of the rewards in the contract.

But my post talks about the incompatibility of a certain kind of omniscience, and contra-causal freewill (otherwise known as libertarian freewill). Your post doesn't really address that.



God may KNOW all the outcomes of our choices, doesn't mean He makes us choose them.

If God has absolute knowledge of all of our future choices, that really doesn't leave any room for sort of real choice now does it? We could not do anything other than what he knows we will do. Such a state of affairs can't really be called anything other than determinism. Furthermore, God's role as the sole creator of everything, necessitates that he is the prime mover in this deterministic chain of events - therefore he literally DOES make us "choose" our choices.

fettpett
04-14-2010, 07:22 PM
I don't see that your post really addresses much of anything that I presented. You show some examples where God makes some pseudo contracts with people, who then later fail to live up to them - and therefore don't get any of the rewards in the contract.

But my post talks about the incompatibility of a certain kind of omniscience, and contra-causal freewill (otherwise known as libertarian freewill). Your post doesn't really address that.



If God has absolute knowledge of all of our future choices, that really doesn't leave any room for sort of real choice now does it? We could not do anything other than what he knows we will do. Such a state of affairs can't really be called anything other than determinism. Furthermore, God's role as the sole creator of everything, necessitates that he is the prime mover in this deterministic chain of events - therefore he literally DOES make us "choose" our choices.

have you ever read anything on timelines, alternate history, alternate universes? well the theories surrounding them are varied, but some of the more commonly excepted ones are:

a) time is like a river that has rocks dropped into it. depending on the size of the divergence time will flow apart creating separate "histories" then converge back into one stream. all leading to the same point and one timeline.

b) there are few points where histories divide, these are Major events, ie wars, "Great Men" ect. they are few timelines and are very closely linked. sometimes they converge if they aren't that far apart.

c) every choice anyone makes, makes new timelines. making literally an infinite number of timelines, with every possibility playing out.

regardless of which one turns out to be "true" they all go along with you're "determination" because anything can happen regardless of our choices or everything goes a particular way, and regardless of the possible change will continue on that path.

FlaGator
04-14-2010, 08:53 PM
Nothing to do with determinism? The sketch of an argument I was presenting was to show that the omnipotence you seem to believe in (ie. God knows all of our choices already), results in the equivalent of determinism.

Correct... nothing to do with determinism. The fact that God knows in advance what are choices are going to be in no way effects the choices I make. Your in ability to grasp the fact that God exists outside of time gives rise the the illusion of determinism. In the universe things move from past to future and we make choices within this frame work. Our choices are not predetermined. We are free to and capable of making any decision or taking any option. There is nothing stopping me from taking any path I choice.

God is not a participant in the arrow of time. In fact God sees all things at once and experiences all things at once. I believe that from God's perspective that right now his is creating the heavens and the Earth, and talking to Moses from a burning bush, and pouring his wrath out upon His son who is nailed to a cross, and listening to my prayers to Him asking Him to open your heart and mind to the truth of God.

You have to stop imagining that God is a person and lives under the same constraints as a human. The world unfolds to us moving from then to now to when but for God the totality of the universe is experienced all at once and even the phrase 'all at once' is misleading because it implies the passage of time that God doesn't experience unless he chooses to.

fettpett
04-14-2010, 09:07 PM
Correct... nothing to do with determinism. The fact that God knows in advance what are choices are going to be in no way effects the choices I make. Your in ability to grasp the fact that God exists outside of time gives rise the the illusion of determinism. In the universe things move from past to future and we make choices within this frame work. Our choices are not predetermined. We are free to and capable of making any decision or taking any option. There is nothing stopping me from taking any path I choice.

God is not a participant in the arrow of time. In fact God sees all things at once and experiences all things at once. I believe that from God's perspective that right now his is creating the heavens and the Earth, and talking to Moses from a burning bush, and pouring his wrath out upon His son who is nailed to a cross, and listening to my prayers to Him asking Him to open your heart and mind to the truth of God.

You have to stop imagining that God is a person and lives under the same constraints as a human. The world unfolds to us moving from then to now to when but for God the totality of the universe is experienced all at once and even the phrase 'all at once' is misleading because it implies the passage of time that God doesn't experience unless he chooses to.

well said, far more eloquently than I've been today...I've been kinda fried from lack of sleep since last week

FlaGator
04-14-2010, 09:14 PM
well said, far more eloquently than I've been today...I've been kinda fried from lack of sleep since last week

Thank you for your kind words. This is something that I spend a lot of time thinking about about.

I pray you get some sleep.:)

wilbur
04-14-2010, 09:19 PM
have you ever read anything on timelines, alternate history, alternate universes? well the theories surrounding them are varied, but some of the more commonly excepted ones are:

a) time is like a river that has rocks dropped into it. depending on the size of the divergence time will flow apart creating separate "histories" then converge back into one stream. all leading to the same point and one timeline.

b) there are few points where histories divide, these are Major events, ie wars, "Great Men" ect. they are few timelines and are very closely linked. sometimes they converge if they aren't that far apart.

c) every choice anyone makes, makes new timelines. making literally an infinite number of timelines, with every possibility playing out.

regardless of which one turns out to be "true" they all go along with you're "determination" because anything can happen regardless of our choices or everything goes a particular way, and regardless of the possible change will continue on that path.

Well, your speaking of a different kind of omniscience now, if it can even be called that. In your scenarios, God doesn't seem to actually know what our choices will be.

fettpett
04-14-2010, 09:23 PM
Thank you for your kind words. This is something that I spend a lot of time thinking about about.

I pray you get some sleep.:)

thanks, i appreciate it

fettpett
04-14-2010, 09:30 PM
Well, your speaking of a different kind of omniscience now, if it can even be called that. In your scenarios, God doesn't seem to actually know what our choices will be.

not really, How you're thinking is what FlaGator said, a finite being that can be defined. What we're talking about is a Infinite God that can't be. Regardless of how you view the time stream, it's all going in one direction, forward. But God can see everything from the beginning to the end.

Personally, I view history/time-stream like a road that has forks in it. as we come upon the we make the choice (individually or as a civilization) on which direction to go. sometimes there's only two options, sometimes there are more. but WE have the choice on which one to follow. Some may end, some continue, some are good choices others are bad, but WE have the freedom to choice which road we want to go down.

wilbur
04-14-2010, 09:31 PM
Correct... nothing to do with determinism. The fact that God knows in advance what are choices are going to be in no way effects the choices I make. Your in ability to grasp the fact that God exists outside of time gives rise the the illusion of determinism. In the universe things move from past to future and we make choices within this frame work. Our choices are not predetermined. We are free to and capable of making any decision or taking any option. There is nothing stopping me from taking any path I choice.

God is not a participant in the arrow of time. In fact God sees all things at once and experiences all things at once. I believe that from God's perspective that right now his is creating the heavens and the Earth, and talking to Moses from a burning bush, and pouring his wrath out upon His son who is nailed to a cross, and listening to my prayers to Him asking Him to open your heart and mind to the truth of God.

You have to stop imagining that God is a person and lives under the same constraints as a human. The world unfolds to us moving from then to now to when but for God the totality of the universe is experienced all at once and even the phrase 'all at once' is misleading because it implies the passage of time that God doesn't experience unless he chooses to.

I have never assumed that God sat inside our temporal universe - the problem exists for us, whether God is temporal, or completely timeless, or a mix of both (as some theologies contend). If God is experiencing my past, present and future (as I can know them) atemporally, than I still cannot make free choices, in the libertarian sense. I'm destined to simply experience the reel of my life, but will never be free to alter the script.

wilbur
04-14-2010, 09:37 PM
not really, How you're thinking is what FlaGator said, a finite being that can be defined. What we're talking about is a Infinite God that can't be. Regardless of how you view the time stream, it's all going in one direction, forward. But God can see everything from the beginning to the end.


Then this necessitates determinism - here, you cannot make choices that differ from God's foreknowledge. Therefore, freewill is an illusion. Those conclusions follow directly from your thoughts above.



Personally, I view history/time-stream like a road that has forks in it. as we come upon the we make the choice (individually or as a civilization) on which direction to go. sometimes there's only two options, sometimes there are more. but WE have the choice on which one to follow. Some may end, some continue, some are good choices others are bad, but WE have the freedom to choice which road we want to go down.

If God knows everything from beginning to end, then we don't, practically speaking, have any choice in the matter. Any choice we 'pick' is inevitably what we must do. Any deviation would contradict Gods foreknowledge, and we could no longer call him omniscient.

Rockntractor
04-14-2010, 09:39 PM
I have never assumed that God sat inside our temporal universe - the problem exists for us, whether God is temporal, or completely timeless, or a mix of both (as some theologies contend). If God is experiencing my past, present and future (as I can know them) atemporally, than I still cannot make free choices, in the libertarian sense. I'm destined to simply experience the reel of my life, but will never be free to alter the script.

Of course you can't make free choices, your not real, there is no Wilbur. Wilbur is just an imaginary creature thought up by The Warmist Church You're a pigment of my imagination!:rolleyes:

fettpett
04-14-2010, 10:03 PM
Then this necessitates determinism - here, you cannot make choices that differ from God's foreknowledge. Therefore, freewill is an illusion. Those conclusions follow directly from your thoughts above.

If God knows everything from beginning to end, then we don't, practically speaking, have any choice in the matter. Any choice we 'pick' is inevitably what we must do. Any deviation would contradict Gods foreknowledge, and we could no longer call him omniscient.

Lucifer argued the same thing, how could an All-Knowing God give us a choice, and freewill. All he had to do was snap his fingers and start over, with everything. yet he didn't.

Lucifer was given the choice, of following God or following his own selfish desires. Since all life and creation comes from God, separation from that source is death. Lucifer was all but part of the Trinity and thus almost everything God did, only thing he couldn't do was create. God didn't put that seed of jealousy in his head, he had the freewill to choose that. He had Perfection and the entire Universe at his figure tips, and he threw it away. He chose to throw it away.

Just because I can see what my children are doing and know what they could do, doesn't mean I determine what they do. I saw my kids in the pool, I could see what could happen if one of them did something dumb, yet I didn't determine that my son would try and swim to me, even though he can't swim. that was HIS choice. A nearly fatal one, but still his choice.


Of course you can't make free choices, your not real, there is no Wilbur. Wilbur is just an imaginary creature thought up by The Warmist Church You're a pigment of my imagination!:rolleyes:

wilbur
04-14-2010, 10:20 PM
Just because I can see what my children are doing and know what they could do, doesn't mean I determine what they do. I saw my kids in the pool, I could see what could happen if one of them did something dumb, yet I didn't determine that my son would try and swim to me, even though he can't swim. that was HIS choice. A nearly fatal one, but still his choice.

The topic simply doesn't scale down to your analogy in a workable way. You aren't operating from a position of perfect foreknowledge. God allegedly has perfect foreknowledge of all of our choices (you have claimed so more than once), so he doesn't just know what we could do, possibly. He knows what we will do, absolutely. On top of it, as the creator, he is absolutely responsible for actualizing all the circumstances in which those foreknown events will take place (or at the very least, setting up the initial conditions (ie, the dominoes)).

So he actualized a world in which he has perfect foreknowledge of every event therein. Its really of little import whether you want to assign God ultimate culpability for our actions - libertarian freewill still could not co-exist with any of that, and determinism would still have to be conceded.

fettpett
04-15-2010, 12:41 AM
we can't come up with perfect examples, but we can come up with things that we've experienced and can make up things. but because we're imperfect, we're not going to come up with a perfect explanation . Jesus knew that so he came up with parables to help explain these concepts. God knows all possible outcomes, he knows whats in our hearts and minds, but that doesn't mean He's forcing our decisions.

wilbur
04-15-2010, 10:10 AM
God knows all possible outcomes, he knows whats in our hearts and minds, but that doesn't mean He's forcing our decisions.

There are two issues at play here:
1) The compatibility/incompatibility of freewill and omniscience
2) Gods culpability for our 'decisions'

On 1:
The mere existence of an entity that foreknows all of our future decisions, whether its God or not, or whether its responsible for facilitating those decisions or not, necessarily implies some sort of determinism. So shifting the moral blameworthiness away from an omniscient God does not save one from determinism. If our choices are foreknown - we really have no choices.

On 2:
The only way I see for God to escape moral responsibility for all evil actions in the world, as both the one with absolute foreknowledge and absolute power to actualize those circumstances, would be for God to also be subject to the same determinism that we are. In other words, if he was not free to do otherwise. But if God does not actually have freewill, well... that poses even bigger problems for theism.

If our decisions are necessary (ie, could not be otherwise) they are compulsory - they are forced by the hand (or causal chain) that actualized the circumstances (ie God).

FlaGator
04-15-2010, 12:28 PM
I have never assumed that God sat inside our temporal universe - the problem exists for us, whether God is temporal, or completely timeless, or a mix of both (as some theologies contend). If God is experiencing my past, present and future (as I can know them) atemporally, than I still cannot make free choices, in the libertarian sense. I'm destined to simply experience the reel of my life, but will never be free to alter the script.

God doesn't force your choices. You make them. He just is perpared to contend with them.

Now here is a thought, free will may be an illusion based on the complex inter-relationships of the data that forms our conscience awareness and our biological make up. It goes something like this, at the moment a choice is to be made and given the exact same physical, mental and environmental precursors a person will always make the exact same choice. What to that person seems like a random, on the spot decision is programmed in to his pysche based on his life experience and his DNA.

If that turns out to be a true statement then the issue of determinism is moot and God's sovereignty and omniscience remains in tact. Just something to add in to the mix as you consider all this.

wilbur
04-15-2010, 01:12 PM
God doesn't force your choices. You make them. He just is perpared to contend with them.

Now here is a thought, free will may be an illusion based on the complex inter-relationships of the data that forms our conscience awareness and our biological make up. It goes something like this, at the moment a choice is to be made and given the exact same physical, mental and environmental precursors a person will always make the exact same choice. What to that person seems like a random, on the spot decision is programmed in to his pysche based on his life experience and his DNA.

If that turns out to be a true statement then the issue of determinism is moot <snip>


Uh, well.. determinism definitely wouldn't be moot if what you describe is true, because what you just described basically is determinism!! And if determinism is true, libertarian freewill is negated. If libertarian freewill is negated, every single theodicy that relies on freewill (ie, God allows evil to preserve freewill, etc) is negated. And every theodicy that relies on human moral accountability is negated (problem of hell, etc).

So give that some thought the next time you think about offering the preservation of freewill as a reason for some evil or imperfection in the world ;)



and God's sovereignty and omniscience remains in tact. Just something to add in to the mix as you consider all this.

I have been saying the whole time, that if there is an omniscient being who foreknows all of our actions, determinism necessarily follows, and the the negation of libertarian freewill follows after that. Then the cookie crumbles even further, and our moral accountability is whisked away as well. But sure, God's omniscience remains intact.... its our freewill that doesn't. And if we do actually have some sort of libertarian freewill, then we now know that it cannot coexist with omniscient God or any being with foreknowledge of all our future choices. So theism would be false, if we had libertarian freewill. Either proposition is a loss for the theist (unless your one of those who does not believe in libertarian freewill - but most do).

Wei Wu Wei
04-15-2010, 05:12 PM
Two things pre-supposed yet undefined that are being implicated in this discussion are:

1. Volition. What makes a free action different from the "action" of a river flowing or the moon rotating around the Earth?

2. Self. What is it that we are supposing is the active agent? Does such an agent exist or is it illusory?

FlaGator
04-15-2010, 05:16 PM
Uh, well.. determinism definitely wouldn't be moot if what you describe is true, because what you just described basically is determinism!! And if determinism is true, libertarian freewill is negated. If libertarian freewill is negated, every single theodicy that relies on freewill (ie, God allows evil to preserve freewill, etc) is negated. And every theodicy that relies on human moral accountability is negated (problem of hell, etc).

So give that some thought the next time you think about offering the preservation of freewill as a reason for some evil or imperfection in the world ;)



I have been saying the whole time, that if there is an omniscient being who foreknows all of our actions, determinism necessarily follows, and the the negation of libertarian freewill follows after that. Then the cookie crumbles even further, and our moral accountability is whisked away as well. But sure, God's omniscience remains intact.... its our freewill that doesn't. And if we do actually have some sort of libertarian freewill, then we now know that it cannot coexist with omniscient God or any being with foreknowledge of all our future choices. So theism would be false, if we had libertarian freewill. Either proposition is a loss for the theist (unless your one of those who does not believe in libertarian freewill - but most do).


Do you put a lot off effort in to misunderstanding simple concepts and twisting them to fulfill some preconceived notion you have? It sure seems like you do.

FlaGator
04-15-2010, 05:19 PM
Two things pre-supposed yet undefined that are being implicated in this discussion are:

1. Volition. What makes a free action different from the "action" of a river flowing or the moon rotating around the Earth?

2. Self. What is it that we are supposing is the active agent? Does such an agent exist or is it illusory?

Those are good questions. I must think about them...

fettpett
04-15-2010, 05:23 PM
not only that, but you twist and make it sound like there is only form of determinist thought, but there isn't. Compatibilism states exactly what we've been saying. God Knows all that will and could happen, yet he gave us Free Will to make our own choices.

Obidence and Love without free will is nothing more that blind automatons that go through the motions.

Rockntractor
04-15-2010, 05:33 PM
I'm ready to star in another movie. I'm tired of the plot in this one!

wilbur
04-15-2010, 07:37 PM
not only that, but you twist and make it sound like there is only form of determinist thought, but there isn't. Compatibilism states exactly what we've been saying. God Knows all that will and could happen, yet he gave us Free Will to make our own choices.


I am a compatibilist myself, which is why I have been careful to explicitly qualify freewill with 'libertarian', or 'contra-causal' this whole time - which is the most popular theory among Christian theists. In fact, its widely regarded among Christian theists, that compatibilistic freewill isn't any kind of true freewill at all. Hence, the problem I have spent some pages elucidating. Contra-casual freewill is the type of freewill deployed when a Christian mentions that "God permits evil to preserve freewill".



Obidence and Love without free will is nothing more that blind automatons that go through the motions.

Compatibilist freewill is defined totally differently from the sort of freewill you allude too, above. Under compatibilism, one most certainly is the kind of automaton you sort of suggest that God does not value.

Our choices are still determined by prior causes, through no fault of our own, in every single relevant way to determinism. It both encompasses the fact that our choices are predetermined, and that our preferences, can at times, be restricted by other forces - other people perhaps. In other words, we are still machines, and the state of being "free" simply refers to the state where we machines are left to our own devices to run our programs.

M21
04-15-2010, 09:42 PM
I've been following along and enjoying the exchange. Here's a video from my playlist that addresses this issue nicely. You might enjoy his polemic.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0eHjQHMWp1M

wilbur
04-15-2010, 11:50 PM
I've been following along and enjoying the exchange. Here's a video from my playlist that addresses this issue nicely. You might enjoy his polemic.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0eHjQHMWp1M

He does a good job in the beginning explaining the incoherency of libertarian freewill. My criticisms in this thread wouldn't strictly apply to that sort of Calvinist belief - though some of it would.

If you listen to the video, at about 9:10 or so, the speaker runs afoul of my view, and touches on some of the issues we have been talking about, when he says, "... they did what He designed for them to do, and holds them accountable 'cause of the proud hearts that they have."

Error! Such moral accountability is incoherent on such a deterministic view. It raises some extreme problems regarding the theistic truism that God is perfectly good and just, among other things.

Rockntractor
04-16-2010, 12:03 AM
The speaker runs a fowl of my view.
http://i686.photobucket.com/albums/vv230/upyourstruly/chicken.gif?t=1271390553