Pug
UR father's brother's nephew's former roommate
+652|6513|Texas - Bigger than France

Kmarion wrote:

Congrats, you have successfully made the transition from cosmic evolution to basic philosophy. We have looked inwards for just as long. I think therefore I is . Advancements in technology as well as deductive reasoning has convinced us to look at the whole universe. We began our quest by looking at was right infront of us (Ancient civilization, fossils, Geography). I believe you accurately described the inward approach when you said "step back". This is just my opinion.
No, not really.  I'm saying...why do we think the answers are in space?  Can we not use science to understand what's around us?
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6571|132 and Bush

Pug wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Congrats, you have successfully made the transition from cosmic evolution to basic philosophy. We have looked inwards for just as long. I think therefore I is . Advancements in technology as well as deductive reasoning has convinced us to look at the whole universe. We began our quest by looking at was right infront of us (Ancient civilization, fossils, Geography). I believe you accurately described the inward approach when you said "step back". This is just my opinion.
No, not really.  I'm saying...why do we think the answers are in space?  Can we not use science to understand what's around us?
Do we not explore both? Why do you think one excludes the other?
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Pug
UR father's brother's nephew's former roommate
+652|6513|Texas - Bigger than France

Kmarion wrote:

Do we not explore both? Why do you think one excludes the other?
Sure, I certainly don't think one has more merit over the other...which is what I'm saying.

I'm just making a general observation about the significance of the sky.  Why is Heaven in the sky?...you know that kind of thing.

I do understand that if we can understand the big bang, then perhaps we can conceptualize the mechanics...if you understand creation then you get a better grasp on the theory God created the universe.

I unfortunately do not believe that understanding the big bang is going to explain much spiritually.  Let me explain: I hand you a piece of paper that definitively proves God exists.  Based on this information he exists, and based on no contact or influence from God throughout history, there's likely to be no detectable change in any aspect of our lives.

So I ask - proving God exists change anything besides our point of view?
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6571|132 and Bush

Pug wrote:

So I ask - proving God exists change anything besides our point of view?
Depends on many things. It's a tough question to answer without know knowing the definitive components of creation. I'd list some possible scenarios.. but I've got to go show property . I'll pick this back up later.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
rawls2
Mr. Bigglesworth
+89|6531

Turquoise wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

You say god created us beforehand knowing every action we would make. But if god gave us control of our souls than that is not true. Given your beliefs it's understandable the concept of soul would elude you.

I personally don't think the idea of a creator demands that a plan is in place as Stingray suggested.
It all started with this quote.  Kmarion and I were discussing free will in another thread.

I personally feel that, if God is both omnipotent and omniscient, free will doesn't exist.  My argument is that, if God set everything in place knowing exactly how it would all happen, then we're just doing what he planned.

Kmarion feels differently, but I'll let him elaborate... 

How do the rest of you feel?
I believe that God has a plan for the people that is pre-destined. However, he gives us, as individuals, the free will to chose a path that puts you close to him or a path that puts you with the other guy.
IRONCHEF
Member
+385|6461|Northern California
Good topic.

I know for a fact that we were given our free agency the moment Adam and Eve partook of the fruit, and were given the ability to know right from wrong.  I believe that 100%.  I know that we are "agents unto ourselves" with the ability to exercise that agency to our blessing or to our cursing.  If it were not so, God would be a liar, the overall plan would be false and unobtainable, and we'd not be on an eternal path of progression.

I also know that God is omniscient allowing him to know all that happens in his domain and that he is all knowing...especially concerning us, his children.  JUst as we watch our little ones grow up and make choices, so too does God.  Just as we can predict the behaviors, the actions, and choices of our little ones, so too does God.  In this, he can plainly see our future based on our talents, knowledge, understanding of things, our diligence, our behaviors, everything.  This is why murder is so bad...it is the premature end of someone's life before it finishes in it's own due course.


So if our life has a plan, and it has many things to accomplish, is that the same as "pre-destined?"  Some may think so.  BUt with so many variables, influences, and alternate decisions to make, it's also possible to stray from such a plan...making it more of a "fore-ordained" life than a "pre-destined" life.  There is talk of fore-ordination in the scriptures which means in this life, we are "destined" to live certain ways....this in no way means we are compelled to do so...since we obviously aren't.  Hitler was not pre-destined or fore-ordained to do what he did.  Did he have the character traits and tendencies necessary to be the monster he was?  Sure...we all have different characteristics.  Was there a chance he could have risen above his pre-destined or fore-ordained path, absolutely.

Mormons receive what is called a "Patriarchal Blessing."  It's a document we always keep and read and memorize.  In it are some fascinating things about your life...specificially at times, general at others.  Among the things in it are your lineage as pertaining to the tribes of Israel (to fulfill prophecy regarding the gathering of Israel), a blessing to come forth in the first resurrection, etc, etc.  Also in it are many, many things pertaining to your life, past, present, and in the future...all things told to you by an old man you've never met, who puts his hands on your head, pronounces this long, detailed blessing.  He records it and transcribes it to you and sends you a copy.  THere are many things in this blessing that talk about your life, the paths you should take, the blessings that can come of taking them, etc.  If you don't take those paths, you simply don't get the blessings.  I've seen some of my blessing unfold, some hasn't.  My P Blessing talks about my wife (even though I got it 7 years before meeting her) and my children...all of which have come true so far.  My wife's P BLessing talks about me very specifically, and it has come true.  Some could say the P BLessing is much like God's version of what a psychic does..except it's all true, and serves a righteous purpose.
Laika
Member
+75|5914
I think we are predestined to do what we want.
RAIMIUS
You with the face!
+244|6685|US

Turquoise wrote:

I personally feel that, if God is both omnipotent and omniscient, free will doesn't exist.  My argument is that, if God set everything in place knowing exactly how it would all happen, then we're just doing what he planned.
I think there is a difference between knowing what will happen versus forcing it to happen.  If someone put a hundred dollar bill under a sign that said, "Feel free to take this money," most people would take it.  This is forseeable, but not forced in any way.  (Not the best comparison, but I think it demonstrates my point).
kylef
Gone
+1,352|6464|N. Ireland
Perhaps it isn't "God has planned your every move", but more "God will know what your main 'thing' in life will be" and "God knows what you will do whenever you start thinking about it".
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6376|North Carolina

pierro wrote:

Without a God there is no free will:
If there is no god or supernatural force in the universe then humans are just glorified computers and have no more free will then the desktop I’m working on now

God > Logic:
Could god make a stone even god could not lift? The answer is that of course god could…god would create the stone that even god could not lift and then lift it anyways. You may say that makes no logical, but that is the point…you cannot apply logic to anything that is omnipotent and omniscient (i.e. God).

With a God there can be free will:
As was stated before, the argument against there being free will relied upon applying logic to God’s omnipotence and omniscience. As I demonstrated above, god can do anything and you can’t apply logic to it…that includes allowing for paradoxes such as creating beings with free will while still possessing omnipotence and omniscience. While I can’t say that God chose to give humans free will, I can say that with a God the possibility for free will exists as God can do anything and without a God there cannot be free will.

There is a God:
The argument for god’s existence is the question “What created the universe if it wasn’t God?” There is no argument against this other then countering with “Then what created God?” But as I demonstrated before, you cannot apply this sort of logic to God and therefore the counter-argument of “Then what created God?” does not stand…I could counter with “God created itself” and although that doesn’t make logical sense you cannot apply logic to God and the argument would stand. All the while, the question “What created the universe if it wasn’t God?” would still not have an answer other than “God”, proving God’s existence.
But our minds operate on logic, so...  if we cease trying to be logical, then we go insane.
IRONCHEF
Member
+385|6461|Northern California

Turquoise wrote:

But our minds operate on logic, so...  if we cease trying to be logical, then we go insane.
So that explains the mind of a woman...
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6376|North Carolina

pierro wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

But our minds operate on logic, so...  if we cease trying to be logical, then we go insane.
-I think a paradox has been created…I’m saying logically logic doesn’t apply and your saying (I think) logically there has to be logic (otherwise what would you use to demonstrate that there is no logic)…but logic breaking down (as it does in this paradox) can mean only one thing, something greater than logic exists ie God
Right, but you just used logic to determine that.  There is no escaping logic, when it comes to human thought -- unless you become insane.

Thus, we must use logic to make guesses at the nature of God.  Faith doesn't work too well with the human mind, because it leaves you open to many vulnerabilities.

The best demonstration of how faith can manipulate people is televangelism.  Any logical person should be able to tell that someone who continually asks for money isn't doing it for God.   Yet, people have faith that these so-called ministries are doing God's work.

The more far fetched assumptions we make, the more we become prone to manipulation by others.  This is why I'm atheist.  I'm not assuming there is some invisible God being out there, but I am assuming I have free will because of the pragmatism of taking responsibility for your own actions.

Technically, you may be right that there is no free will without a god, but it's not very practical to live as if there is no free will -- unless...  your goal in life is to be very random and fleeting in your actions (letting your environment determine your choices rather than exerting will to make them).

Last edited by Turquoise (2008-05-28 16:30:20)

Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6571|132 and Bush

Turquoise it sounds like your beef is with the traditional organized religions. There is middle ground to be found between creationist and atheism.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6376|North Carolina

Kmarion wrote:

Turquoise it sounds like your beef is with the traditional organized religions. There is middle ground to be found between creationist and atheism.
Sure, I have many friends that are religious, but my argument is that faith is logically fallacious and that logic should guide us as people rather than tradition or faith.
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6571|132 and Bush

Turquoise wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Turquoise it sounds like your beef is with the traditional organized religions. There is middle ground to be found between creationist and atheism.
Sure, I have many friends that are religious, but my argument is that faith is logically fallacious and that logic should guide us as people rather than tradition or faith.
You are operating on faith right now. Your faith is in the presumption that there is no Creator. We have yet to figure out the origins of life. You are putting up the same restrictive barriers the religious folks do when you say that another persons beliefs is illogical. That's why I said I understand challenging the traditional religious schools of thought (in a respectful way). But nothing in science has ever exclude the idea of a creator.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6376|North Carolina

Kmarion wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Turquoise it sounds like your beef is with the traditional organized religions. There is middle ground to be found between creationist and atheism.
Sure, I have many friends that are religious, but my argument is that faith is logically fallacious and that logic should guide us as people rather than tradition or faith.
You are operating on faith right now. Your faith is in the presumption that there is no Creator. We have yet to figure out the origins of life. You are putting up the same restrictive barriers the religious folks do when you say that another persons beliefs is illogical. That's why I said I understand challenging the traditional religious schools of thought (in a respectful way). But nothing in science has ever exclude the idea of a creator.
Sure, everyone has to have a certain amount of faith.  I have faith that the sun will rise tomorrow, but that doesn't take much faith.  Believing there is no god is a default position because of lack of proof.  The burden of proof must be on belief in a god, not disbelief, unless you want to go down the FSM route.
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6571|132 and Bush

Turquoise wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Sure, I have many friends that are religious, but my argument is that faith is logically fallacious and that logic should guide us as people rather than tradition or faith.
You are operating on faith right now. Your faith is in the presumption that there is no Creator. We have yet to figure out the origins of life. You are putting up the same restrictive barriers the religious folks do when you say that another persons beliefs is illogical. That's why I said I understand challenging the traditional religious schools of thought (in a respectful way). But nothing in science has ever exclude the idea of a creator.
Sure, everyone has to have a certain amount of faith.  I have faith that the sun will rise tomorrow, but that doesn't take much faith.  Believing there is no god is a default position because of lack of proof.  The burden of proof must be on belief in a god, not disbelief, unless you want to go down the FSM route.
First off I think faith is personal. It is a choice in a school of thought. I completely understand siding with the most likely path. But lack of certainty in any direction should not dictate what a person settles for.  We should care less about proving opinions and more about keeping an open mind. In any belief the "proof" fellas are generally the ones that turn me off. Just give me the evidence and let me decide. That's all.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6376|North Carolina

Kmarion wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Kmarion wrote:


You are operating on faith right now. Your faith is in the presumption that there is no Creator. We have yet to figure out the origins of life. You are putting up the same restrictive barriers the religious folks do when you say that another persons beliefs is illogical. That's why I said I understand challenging the traditional religious schools of thought (in a respectful way). But nothing in science has ever exclude the idea of a creator.
Sure, everyone has to have a certain amount of faith.  I have faith that the sun will rise tomorrow, but that doesn't take much faith.  Believing there is no god is a default position because of lack of proof.  The burden of proof must be on belief in a god, not disbelief, unless you want to go down the FSM route.
First off I think faith is personal. It is a choice in a school of thought. I completely understand siding with the most likely path. But lack of certainty in any direction should not dictate what a person settles for.  We should care less about proving opinions and more about keeping an open mind. In any belief the "proof" fellas are generally the ones that turn me off. Just give me the evidence and let me decide. That's all.
I can live with that.
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6376|North Carolina

pierro wrote:

-What I’m trying to do is identify areas where you cannot apply logic…I’m not saying you should explore them (and become insane) and I am certainly not saying you should rely on faith for example when the question is asked “how can an omnipotent God and free will exist at the same time” I can reply you cannot apply logic to God” (which was tried in the OP)…I did the same about “what created God?” etc…

-The best analogy to this I can give is using scientific equipment to identify a miracle (but not study it as that would be impossible)
I guess what I'm aiming for is...  It is most logically sound to not formulate a conclusion on uncertain evidence or evidence that is impossible to empirically determine.

Keeping an open mind is one thing, but making the leap from seeing the uncertainties and unexplained things in life to believing in a religion seems very risky and quite arbitrary.
Diesel_dyk
Object in mirror will feel larger than it appears
+178|5965|Truthistan
Free will versus preordained fate?

I think there is a difference between the creator knowing what is going to happen and the creator actually controling what is going to happen.
The first makes the creator a really good predictive mathematician and the other makes him a dictator.

It would be hard to believe that every step of our lives is preordained and that this is like a record that can be played backwards and forwards. It would serve no purpose if it could not be changed by individual action. Except unless we are all playing parts in a grand prescripted play to teach us and prepare us for something else.

I tend to think that the creator is a trickster and that we learn through our failures. What the creator is doing is waiting to be surprised by individual's unpredictable action so he can ROFL -because being able to predict everything would be pretty boring after a while.
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6500|Global Command
Destiny is a real thing. I know this.
How that relates to Gods plan I cannot say.
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6622|USA

Kmarion wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Kmarion wrote:


You are operating on faith right now. Your faith is in the presumption that there is no Creator. We have yet to figure out the origins of life. You are putting up the same restrictive barriers the religious folks do when you say that another persons beliefs is illogical. That's why I said I understand challenging the traditional religious schools of thought (in a respectful way). But nothing in science has ever exclude the idea of a creator.
Sure, everyone has to have a certain amount of faith.  I have faith that the sun will rise tomorrow, but that doesn't take much faith.  Believing there is no god is a default position because of lack of proof.  The burden of proof must be on belief in a god, not disbelief, unless you want to go down the FSM route.
First off I think faith is personal. It is a choice in a school of thought. I completely understand siding with the most likely path. But lack of certainty in any direction should not dictate what a person settles for.  We should care less about proving opinions and more about keeping an open mind. In any belief the "proof" fellas are generally the ones that turn me off. Just give me the evidence and let me decide. That's all.
My problem with religion today is that falls into the very same pattern as beliefs that are long viewed as rediculous.  Every belief now and in the past has a good and evil a ying and yang, a heaven and a hell, consequences for our actions if our god is not pleased. These same beliefs hold true in modern religion. All this does is convince me that man has made all of this up to fill in the blanks from what we do not know, and we have been doing this from the beginning of our time on earth.

If there is a God, and you are convinced, are you equally convinced that there is a devil? Where does the devil fall into the meaning of life equation?
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6622|USA

ATG wrote:

Destiny is a real thing. I know this.
How that relates to Gods plan I cannot say.
Why does not random chaos explain away "destiny"? Or is the notion that " shit happens" just to simplistic to be accepted?

Why does there have to be a reason for everything, or a greater purpose for all events tragic. Why can it not be just shitty luck, or the wrong place at the wrong time? When somthing postive happens, like someone winning the lotto, we say, "wow, what a lucky guy", and leave it at that. When a plane crashes we must find purpose in it for some reason, we can not accept " wow, what a bunch of unlucky people.".
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6571|132 and Bush

lowing wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Sure, everyone has to have a certain amount of faith.  I have faith that the sun will rise tomorrow, but that doesn't take much faith.  Believing there is no god is a default position because of lack of proof.  The burden of proof must be on belief in a god, not disbelief, unless you want to go down the FSM route.
First off I think faith is personal. It is a choice in a school of thought. I completely understand siding with the most likely path. But lack of certainty in any direction should not dictate what a person settles for.  We should care less about proving opinions and more about keeping an open mind. In any belief the "proof" fellas are generally the ones that turn me off. Just give me the evidence and let me decide. That's all.
My problem with religion today is that falls into the very same pattern as beliefs that are long viewed as rediculous.  Every belief now and in the past has a good and evil a ying and yang, a heaven and a hell, consequences for our actions if our god is not pleased. These same beliefs hold true in modern religion. All this does is convince me that man has made all of this up to fill in the blanks from what we do not know, and we have been doing this from the beginning of our time on earth.

If there is a God, and you are convinced, are you equally convinced that there is a devil? Where does the devil fall into the meaning of life equation?
No I'm not. That's why I have said several times now that I don't subscribe to the traditional ideas of religion. If there is a creator I don't necessarily believe we are it's employees, forced to obey or else suffer in a wrath of burning hellfire.

Kmarion wrote:

I believe the earth is billions of years old, not six thousand. I believe that life on this planet evolved over billions of years and not six days. Thousands of years ago people were curious as to the origins of life. They asked the people who were supposed to have the answers, the religious leaders. Back then those religious leaders did not have carbon dating or any of the scientific means that we have today. However they needed an answer. In ancient times the religious leaders held a great amount of power. If you gave the wrong answer or one that was to complicated someone else would come up with a more attractive offer and you would be replaced.
http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?pi … 0#p1317940
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6571|132 and Bush

S.Lythberg wrote:

lowing wrote:

Kmarion wrote:


Cycles? Humans comprehend time as linear. Past, present, and future.
Exactly,

Nature does not however, it comprehends, tides, seasons, water evaporating and falling as rain, warm and cold ocean currents, lunar cycles, night and day, dawn and dusk,etc.....Time does not exist in nature.
seasons change with the tilt of the earth, the earth slows in its rotation, the moon drifts away, stars burn out and die

some day, the earth will stop spinning, the moon will drift away, and our sun will cease to give off energy.

time only seems cyclical to us due to the effects of gravity, but all things must come to an end.
Sounds a lot like the the second law of thermal dynamics to me .

S.Lythberg wrote:

based on the visible mass of the universe, it should have stopped expanding millenia ago, but it is currently exhibiting rapid acceleration, for reasons unknown
We should have touched on this more. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Crunch vs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Rip
I watched the The Universe : Cosmic Apocalypse again last night. The apocalyptic scenarios were chilling (some literally).

The entire show can be watched here: http://documentary-log.com/?id=28
The third segment is the best.
Xbone Stormsurgezz

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard