Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/7


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   If God Ever Stopped Intervening In Nature....
shadow71
Member (Idle past 2933 days)
Posts: 706
From: Joliet, il, USA
Joined: 08-31-2010


Message 31 of 708 (705005)
08-21-2013 8:21 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by NoNukes
08-20-2013 9:19 PM


Re: If God Ever Stopped Intervening In Nature....
NoNukes writes:
No. It is God's will that you have choices.
So it is logical that we can reject his will and live with the consequences.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by NoNukes, posted 08-20-2013 9:19 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by NoNukes, posted 08-21-2013 9:59 PM shadow71 has not replied
 Message 35 by NoNukes, posted 08-21-2013 10:02 PM shadow71 has not replied

  
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2284
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 6.8


Message 32 of 708 (705006)
08-21-2013 8:35 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by shadow71
08-21-2013 8:17 PM


Re: If God Ever Stopped Intervening In Nature....
Giving them the free will to accept him or to reject him.
Which is it then? do we have free will or does god control each life as you previously claimed?

It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds
soon I discovered that this rock thing was true
Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil
Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet
All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world
And so there was only one thing I could do
Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry
Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan
Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On
*not an actual doctor

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by shadow71, posted 08-21-2013 8:17 PM shadow71 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by shadow71, posted 08-21-2013 9:09 PM DrJones* has not replied

  
shadow71
Member (Idle past 2933 days)
Posts: 706
From: Joliet, il, USA
Joined: 08-31-2010


Message 33 of 708 (705007)
08-21-2013 9:09 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by DrJones*
08-21-2013 8:35 PM


Re: If God Ever Stopped Intervening In Nature....
DrJones writes:
Which is it then? do we have free will or does god control each life as you previously claimed?
God controls our life, but we have the free will to reject God, and then our providence is very different from the eternal salvation, God grants through his son Jesus, who gave his human life for the forgiveness of our sins.
Basically the choices of each human is to accept God and his love for us or to reject God. The decision to accept or reject has consequences in the afterlife.
This is obviously my belief and not a theological expert opinion. If you believe in the God I believe in, then these statements are not as radical as many of you may take them to be

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by DrJones*, posted 08-21-2013 8:35 PM DrJones* has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by kofh2u, posted 08-24-2013 10:00 AM shadow71 has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 34 of 708 (705010)
08-21-2013 9:59 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by shadow71
08-21-2013 8:21 PM


Re: If God Ever Stopped Intervening In Nature....
NoNukes writes:
No. It is God's will that you have choices.
shadow71 writes:
So it is logical that we can reject his will and live with the consequences.
There is at least a little equivocation regarding the word "will" in your response. I do not believe that God directs that everything goes as he wants or that everyone does as he preferes. So disobedience to God does not constitute anything particularly powerful or our part or weak on God's part.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by shadow71, posted 08-21-2013 8:21 PM shadow71 has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 35 of 708 (705011)
08-21-2013 10:02 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by shadow71
08-21-2013 8:21 PM


Re: If God Ever Stopped Intervening In Nature....
NoNukes writes:
No. It is God's will that you have choices.
shadow71 writes:
So it is logical that we can reject his will and live with the consequences.
There is at least a little equivocation regarding the word "will" in your response. I do not believe that God directs that everything goes as he wants or that everyone does as he preferes. So disobedience to God does not constitute anything particularly powerful or our part or weak on God's part.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by shadow71, posted 08-21-2013 8:21 PM shadow71 has not replied

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 3819 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 36 of 708 (705187)
08-24-2013 9:51 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Straggler
08-13-2013 9:13 AM


Re: If God Ever Stopped Intervening In Nature....
I have come across the idea that some god set things in motion and then left the universe entirely to it's own devices. I have come across the idea that some god set things in motion and then watched the universe unfold but gave the odd helping hand or caused the odd miracle here and there.
Its like the First Cause kind of definition for a Creator God.
It is as good as saying that the material universe was the consequence of some dark energy that pre-existed the Big Bang, and was converted into the Cosmos of Matter and the accompanying Space/time required to hold it.
But continuing that line of reasoning, the Natural Laws inherent in the Physics of Energy might be consider the Spirit of that god which did not disappear, and continued to run the machinery behind a world wherein all things are possible according to the Law of Probability.
Miracles abound when we consider the odds against events we know to have transpired which were very unlikely at the time.
And, true, even the Laws of Physics are in play when we breathe, this Spirit of God at work at all times.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Straggler, posted 08-13-2013 9:13 AM Straggler has not replied

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 3819 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 37 of 708 (705188)
08-24-2013 10:00 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by shadow71
08-21-2013 9:09 PM


Re: If God Ever Stopped Intervening In Nature....
God controls our life, but we have the free will to reject God, and then our providence is very different from the eternal salvation, God grants through his son Jesus, who gave his human life for the forgiveness of our sins.
You are merely saying that Reality, and the sanity of living in Reality is what ought control our decisions in this life, if one removes the charged and misleading theological jargon while examining what you say here in the light of a Creator God whose spirit is still at work as that Network of Natural Laws which unfold every next frame of Reality.
When Jesus said, "I am the Truth," and you must be believe in "me," as the symbol of Truth, he was stating this same idea that Truth is the image of Reality we need picture in our mind before we made decisions, or we chance the insanity of opposing the father to the next frame of our existence.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by shadow71, posted 08-21-2013 9:09 PM shadow71 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by shadow71, posted 08-25-2013 3:41 PM kofh2u has not replied

  
shadow71
Member (Idle past 2933 days)
Posts: 706
From: Joliet, il, USA
Joined: 08-31-2010


Message 38 of 708 (705260)
08-25-2013 3:41 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by kofh2u
08-24-2013 10:00 AM


Re: If God Ever Stopped Intervening In Nature....
kofh2u writes:
You are merely saying that Reality, and the sanity of living in Reality is what ought control our decisions in this life, if one removes the charged and misleading theological jargon while examining what you say here in the light of a Creator God whose spirit is still at work as that Network of Natural Laws which unfold every next frame of Reality.
I am not saying "reality" is what controls our decisions. I am saying that God through creation, that is continuing, provides us with the gifts necessary to fulfill his will and providence. Reality is not God, nor does reality, in my belief, control our decisions.
The "misleading theological jargon" is fundamental to my faith.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by kofh2u, posted 08-24-2013 10:00 AM kofh2u has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by ringo, posted 08-25-2013 5:52 PM shadow71 has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(1)
Message 39 of 708 (705267)
08-25-2013 5:52 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by shadow71
08-25-2013 3:41 PM


Re: If God Ever Stopped Intervening In Nature....
shadow71 writes:
The "misleading theological jargon" is fundamental to my faith.
Yeah, that's about it. God controls everything BUT we can (and do) reject his control.
Bad things happen when your car rejects your control.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by shadow71, posted 08-25-2013 3:41 PM shadow71 has not replied

  
JRTjr01
Member (Idle past 2954 days)
Posts: 97
From: Houston, Texas, U.S.A.
Joined: 08-24-2013


Message 40 of 708 (708158)
10-05-2013 11:29 PM


I just read through this string, and I found the conversation most enjoyable. Thank you to all whom have participated.
Many seam to thing that ‘a god having total control’ and us having ‘Free will’ is inherently contradictory.
I believe if we could define a few terms, and put some things into perspective, it would go a long way to helping us with this issue.
First, I would like to suggest that if you do not accept the premise that ‘God exists’ then nothing, from that point on, is going to make any sense to you.
Second, would you not say that: Just because something seems contradictory does not necessarily mean that it is contradictory; and therefore wrong?
For example:
I believe it was in the eighteenth century that we figured out the Light propagates as both Waves and Particles. This went against all convention since ‘Waves’ and ‘Particles’ are two totally different things; however, Light had properties of both.
It was not until Einstein’s theirs gave way to multiple dimensions that we could resolve the Wave/Particles paradox.
Just like with Light, if we can accept ‘God’ exists and operates independent of our universe; then it brings, what seemed like, a contradiction into an understandable and reasonable explanation.
Getting the correct ‘Perspective’ is the first step in any scientific endeavor; is it not?
So, if I am trying to limit ‘the Creator’ to ‘the creation’ then what the Bible says about God would seem ridiculous; however, if we see God as existing and operating in 11+ dimensions (I.e. inside and outside of our universe) then, just like with Light, the seeming contradictions disappear.
I realize I am getting long winded here, and I do apologize.
Thank you for reading,
JRTjr

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by Coyote, posted 10-05-2013 11:46 PM JRTjr01 has replied
 Message 42 by NoNukes, posted 10-06-2013 12:57 AM JRTjr01 has replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 41 of 708 (708161)
10-05-2013 11:46 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by JRTjr01
10-05-2013 11:29 PM


Welcome
Welcome to the fray!
Getting the correct ‘Perspective’ is the first step in any scientific endeavor; is it not?
While that is true it is only part of the story.
Science deals with evidence, which in turn is used to construct hypotheses. Those are tested etc. etc. leading to the formulation of theories, which are the single best explanations for a particular set of facts.
The problem I see for your approach is it relies on logic, rather than evidence. Logic is just a way of manipulating data, and it does not guarantee accurate results. If the data is faulty, logic will reach faulty conclusions--logically. That follows Kettering's Law: "Logic is an organized way of going wrong with confidence."
It would seem that if you are going to discuss, scientifically, the properties and behaviors of deities, as you propose, it would first be necessary to produce evidence that deities exist. Then the scientific method and logic could come into play.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by JRTjr01, posted 10-05-2013 11:29 PM JRTjr01 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by NoNukes, posted 10-06-2013 1:07 AM Coyote has replied
 Message 47 by JRTjr01, posted 11-02-2013 10:55 PM Coyote has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 42 of 708 (708164)
10-06-2013 12:57 AM
Reply to: Message 40 by JRTjr01
10-05-2013 11:29 PM


ust like with Light, if we can accept ‘God’ exists and operates independent of our universe; then it brings, what seemed like, a contradiction into an understandable and reasonable explanation.
Whoa...
You aren't going to be able to convince anyone that you've solved the irresistible force vs immovable object conundrum just by saying so. If you think you've got this sorted out, then show the chain of logic that makes some of those things that people thought were contradictory into something reasonable.
In short I'm asking you to do the following:
Start with your initial premises
1. God Exists
2. God operates independent of our universe.
And show that ‘a god having total control’ and us having ‘Free will’ is not inherently contradictory.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by JRTjr01, posted 10-05-2013 11:29 PM JRTjr01 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by JRTjr01, posted 11-02-2013 11:53 PM NoNukes has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 43 of 708 (708165)
10-06-2013 1:07 AM
Reply to: Message 41 by Coyote
10-05-2013 11:46 PM


Re: Welcome
It would seem that if you are going to discuss, scientifically, the properties and behaviors of deities, as you propose, it would first be necessary to produce evidence that deities exist. Then the scientific method and logic could come into play.
I think it could be a useful exercise to postulate that the laws of physics are invariant in form in any reference frames and to discuss the consequences of such a postulate even without collecting evidence that the postulate is true. Would you suggest that such a procedure is unscientific?
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by Coyote, posted 10-05-2013 11:46 PM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by Coyote, posted 10-06-2013 10:28 AM NoNukes has replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 44 of 708 (708180)
10-06-2013 10:28 AM
Reply to: Message 43 by NoNukes
10-06-2013 1:07 AM


Re: Welcome
I think it could be a useful exercise to postulate that the laws of physics are invariant in form in any reference frames and to discuss the consequences of such a postulate even without collecting evidence that the postulate is true. Would you suggest that such a procedure is unscientific?
No, that's what I would consider to be modeling. That is a very useful tool in science.
However, for a model to accurately reflect reality it must work from evidence and assumptions based on reality.
Adding deities, whose nature and behaviors are based entirely on speculation, to a model would put one in the realm of philosophy or theology more than science no matter how accurately the laws of physics were modeled.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by NoNukes, posted 10-06-2013 1:07 AM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by NoNukes, posted 10-07-2013 10:27 AM Coyote has not replied
 Message 46 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-07-2013 10:35 AM Coyote has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 45 of 708 (708219)
10-07-2013 10:27 AM
Reply to: Message 44 by Coyote
10-06-2013 10:28 AM


Re: Welcome
No, that's what I would consider to be modeling. That is a very useful tool in science.
However, for a model to accurately reflect reality it must work from evidence and assumptions based on reality.
Einstein spent nearly a decade "modeling" before he was able to get something he could compare with reality. Einstein's assumption about invariance was a bit of a leap of faith. It made sense, but that is no guarantee of scientific success.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by Coyote, posted 10-06-2013 10:28 AM Coyote has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024