|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 93 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: If God Ever Stopped Intervening In Nature.... | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shadow71 Member (Idle past 2962 days) Posts: 706 From: Joliet, il, USA Joined: |
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DrJones* Member Posts: 2290 From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 6.9 |
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shadow71 Member (Idle past 2962 days) Posts: 706 From: Joliet, il, USA Joined: |
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kofh2u Member (Idle past 3848 days) Posts: 1162 From: phila., PA Joined: |
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kofh2u Member (Idle past 3848 days) Posts: 1162 From: phila., PA Joined: |
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shadow71 Member (Idle past 2962 days) Posts: 706 From: Joliet, il, USA Joined: |
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 440 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
shadow71 writes:
Yeah, that's about it. God controls everything BUT we can (and do) reject his control. The "misleading theological jargon" is fundamental to my faith. Bad things happen when your car rejects your control.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JRTjr01 Member (Idle past 2983 days) Posts: 97 From: Houston, Texas, U.S.A. Joined: |
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2134 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: |
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
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 Exists2. 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2134 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: |
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
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
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024