Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 88 (8890 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 02-19-2019 9:36 AM
142 online now:
caffeine, PaulK, Stile, Tangle, Theodoric (5 members, 137 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 847,682 Year: 2,719/19,786 Month: 801/1,918 Week: 88/301 Day: 6/54 Hour: 2/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
4748
49
505152Next
Author Topic:   Free will vs Omniscience
Tangle
Member
Posts: 6616
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 721 of 780 (848610)
02-12-2019 2:49 AM
Reply to: Message 720 by Phat
02-11-2019 5:35 PM


Re: ** FOREknowledge**
Phat writes:

The whole argument, silly though it is, is what Tangle can and can not freely do and how much a hypothetical God character could or would know.

And that's why it's silly. The omniiscient god idea is quite plainly a human invention that ties people in knots because it's yet another religious paradox that can't be escaped from.

It's only solved by admitting that omniscience can only exist in a god if he is the epitomy of evil - creating an nasty experiment that results in the torture and death of the creatures he makes for his own sadistic pleasure.

As to what I'd say to your god, well that's also silly, but allowing the conceit for a moment, try this, it's only a minute or so long:

Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 720 by Phat, posted 02-11-2019 5:35 PM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 722 by vimesey, posted 02-12-2019 6:44 AM Tangle has responded
 Message 725 by Phat, posted 02-12-2019 10:13 AM Tangle has responded

  
vimesey
Member
Posts: 928
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011
Member Rating: 6.7


Message 722 of 780 (848612)
02-12-2019 6:44 AM
Reply to: Message 721 by Tangle
02-12-2019 2:49 AM


Re: ** FOREknowledge**
Hi Tangle - your link's broken on my mobile, but I presume this is Stephen Fry's wonderful response to that question ?

Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 721 by Tangle, posted 02-12-2019 2:49 AM Tangle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 723 by Tangle, posted 02-12-2019 7:50 AM vimesey has responded

    
Tangle
Member
Posts: 6616
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 723 of 780 (848616)
02-12-2019 7:50 AM
Reply to: Message 722 by vimesey
02-12-2019 6:44 AM


Re: ** FOREknowledge**
Yup. Thanks, fixed, I hope.

Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 722 by vimesey, posted 02-12-2019 6:44 AM vimesey has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 724 by vimesey, posted 02-12-2019 8:27 AM Tangle has not yet responded

  
vimesey
Member
Posts: 928
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011
Member Rating: 6.7


Message 724 of 780 (848620)
02-12-2019 8:27 AM
Reply to: Message 723 by Tangle
02-12-2019 7:50 AM


Re: ** FOREknowledge**
Yep - working now.

Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 723 by Tangle, posted 02-12-2019 7:50 AM Tangle has not yet responded

    
Phat
Member
Posts: 12042
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 725 of 780 (848622)
02-12-2019 10:13 AM
Reply to: Message 721 by Tangle
02-12-2019 2:49 AM


Re: ** FOREknowledge**
Oh, Stephen! Fryed us again!

Of course, the internet has rebuttals to his ostentatious argument.

Stephen Frye and God Granted most of the Christian responses are unsatisfactory for my intellect, but I see a recurring pattern amongst this line of questioning in general. The atheists always limit God to the character defined in the book. They hold the characters metaphorical feet to the fire in that regard. The book is not all that we have. What we have are the same tools that the authors of the book had. God, if God exists is more complex than can be described in a book. Second, if God could prevent every evil malady that nature throws at our species, the result would be a reality totally unlike the one we now inhabit. Pain and suffering seem to be a part of the overall human growth process. You may argue that this simply proves that natural selection and evolution are reality and that God is fantasy. So we digress.

For the record, I thought that Dawkins response was much more rational than was Stephen Fryes:

Dawkins writes:

In a universe of electrons and selfish genes, blind physical forces and genetic replication, some people are going to get hurt, other people are going to get lucky, and you won't find any rhyme or reason in it, nor any justice. The universe that we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but pitiless indifference.

This seems more in line with AZPaul3, who believes that we simply essentially reproduce and die...hence why worry about some magical future when our job is to maximize our present living moment. I can't quite stomach the indifference part of that world view, however. Evolution seems every bit as cruel as any God could be.

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. ~RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith

You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo

Subjectivism may very well undermine Christianity.
In the same way that "allowing people to choose what they want to be when they grow up" undermines communism.
~Stile


This message is a reply to:
 Message 721 by Tangle, posted 02-12-2019 2:49 AM Tangle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 726 by ringo, posted 02-12-2019 10:57 AM Phat has responded
 Message 728 by Tangle, posted 02-12-2019 11:41 AM Phat has not yet responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 16136
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 726 of 780 (848625)
02-12-2019 10:57 AM
Reply to: Message 725 by Phat
02-12-2019 10:13 AM


Re: ** FOREknowledge**
Phat writes:

God, if God exists is more complex than can be described in a book.


Why? Why could He not be less complex? After all, the people who wrote the book were awed by things they didn't understand. What if those things were just done by extraterrestrial technology, a few steps above ours? Even IF those events really happened, why would the writers not exaggerate the powers required?

Phat writes:

if God could prevent every evil malady that nature throws at our species, the result would be a reality totally unlike the one we now inhabit.


Yes. Every second of human history has been humans trying to do that. It's definitely what we want. We're making the improvements that God can't (not omniscient) or won't (evil) make for us.

And our geese will blot out the sun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 725 by Phat, posted 02-12-2019 10:13 AM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 727 by Phat, posted 02-12-2019 11:31 AM ringo has responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 12042
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 727 of 780 (848627)
02-12-2019 11:31 AM
Reply to: Message 726 by ringo
02-12-2019 10:57 AM


GOD: Complex or ET?
ringo writes:

Why could He not be less complex? After all, the people who wrote the book were awed by things they didn't understand. What if those things were just done by extraterrestrial technology, a few steps above ours?

I suppose that I should consider this as a valid argument. You and jar always pointed out how I and many fundamentalist Christians wanted a God that was capable of solving every dilemma and wiping away every tear. (After smiting the rest of us for daring to rebel against His authority)

I'll think outside my comfort zone for a moment and consider that the scenario could be true. Its like i said to Tangle, though. Evolution is every bit as cruel and unfavoring as any God that could be dreamt up. As long as we are imagining a hypothetical God, what is so wrong with the One that Jesus so lovingly called "Father"? He seems good enough for Jesus. Frankly, everything I liked about my Dad was that he could help me get out of trouble, find answers, and learn to become as successful as he was. I could live with a God like that.

We're making the improvements that God can't (not omniscient) or won't (evil) make for us.
God can still be omniscient and not make changes. We have no place to judge Him as evil since we are not the center of the universe. At best, we should just do it ourselves as you suggest. Judging God is beyond our pay grade.

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. ~RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith

You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo

Subjectivism may very well undermine Christianity.
In the same way that "allowing people to choose what they want to be when they grow up" undermines communism.
~Stile


This message is a reply to:
 Message 726 by ringo, posted 02-12-2019 10:57 AM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 729 by ringo, posted 02-12-2019 11:47 AM Phat has responded

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 6616
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 728 of 780 (848629)
02-12-2019 11:41 AM
Reply to: Message 725 by Phat
02-12-2019 10:13 AM


Re: ** FOREknowledge**
Phat writes:

Of course, the internet has rebuttals to his ostentatious argument.

It doesn't. What it has are a number of excuses for how the world is the way it is. The problem of suffering has never been answered and can't be because it's another paradox. A universally benevolent god would not permit such suffering. By definition.

The book is not all that we have.

Ok, I'm going to contradict myself now - more accurately, I'm going to add to it. The book is not all you have - it's probably not even the most important. We know this to be the case because you all read something different in the book; the book is moderated by your experience and background. Your early learning about the book from your church, parents, school, friends, society etc will affect what you see in the book. This is also why some countries, states, towns see things differently to others. It's cultural.

That's one. But the other thing you have is your personal experience. This revelation thing where something happened that you interpret as God. That, I'm sure, cements the belief in place and without that you'd get much milder form of the disease. It's a bit circular because the more intense the belief the more likely the revelation is likely to happen. Seeing Jesus's face in tea leaves and Faith's rapture for example.

For the record, I thought that Dawkins response was much more rational than was Stephen Fryes

He's answering a different question Phat. But, of course, it's the same ground being trod.

This seems more in line with AZPaul3, who believes that we simply essentially reproduce and die...hence why worry about some magical future when our job is to maximize our present living moment. I can't quite stomach the indifference part of that world view, however. Evolution seems every bit as cruel as any God could be.

There is no god Phat, evolution is just describing the way life is the way it is. Evolution explains why there is suffering; religion can't (unless you accept that god is evil.)


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 725 by Phat, posted 02-12-2019 10:13 AM Phat has not yet responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 16136
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 729 of 780 (848631)
02-12-2019 11:47 AM
Reply to: Message 727 by Phat
02-12-2019 11:31 AM


Re: GOD: Complex or ET?
Phat writes:

As long as we are imagining a hypothetical God, what is so wrong with the One that Jesus so lovingly called "Father"? He seems good enough for Jesus.


Which Jesus? The one in the book that you reject or the one that you make up in your head?

Phat writes:

God can still be omniscient and not make changes.


Yes, if He's evil.

Phat writes:

We have no place to judge Him as evil since we are not the center of the universe.


Why would we have to be "the center of the universe" to know the difference between good and evil?

And our geese will blot out the sun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 727 by Phat, posted 02-12-2019 11:31 AM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 730 by Phat, posted 02-12-2019 11:50 AM ringo has responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 12042
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 730 of 780 (848633)
02-12-2019 11:50 AM
Reply to: Message 729 by ringo
02-12-2019 11:47 AM


Re: GOD: Complex or ET?
ringo writes:

Why would we have to be "the center of the universe" to know the difference between good and evil?

We either knew good and evil because God gave us that, as described in the book, or because we evolved to understand it. Either way, Judging God is still presumptuous unless one believes that God needs to measure up to our imaginative standards.

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. ~RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith

You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo

Subjectivism may very well undermine Christianity.
In the same way that "allowing people to choose what they want to be when they grow up" undermines communism.
~Stile


This message is a reply to:
 Message 729 by ringo, posted 02-12-2019 11:47 AM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 731 by ringo, posted 02-12-2019 12:02 PM Phat has responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 16136
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 731 of 780 (848635)
02-12-2019 12:02 PM
Reply to: Message 730 by Phat
02-12-2019 11:50 AM


Re: GOD: Complex or ET?
Phat writes:

We either knew good and evil because God gave us that, as described in the book...


According to the book, God didn't give it to us. It was against His will. We stole the knowledge, much like Prometheus stole fire.

Phat writes:

... or because we evolved to understand it.


We understand that it is for our benefit, Nobody else's.

Phat writes:

Either way, Judging God is still presumptuous unless one believes that God needs to measure up to our imaginative standards.


They are our standards, Nobody else's. What is presumptuous is thinking that you know what the alien overlord's standards are.

And our geese will blot out the sun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 730 by Phat, posted 02-12-2019 11:50 AM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 732 by Phat, posted 02-12-2019 12:11 PM ringo has responded
 Message 733 by Phat, posted 02-12-2019 12:18 PM ringo has responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 12042
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 732 of 780 (848637)
02-12-2019 12:11 PM
Reply to: Message 731 by ringo
02-12-2019 12:02 PM


Re: GOD: Complex or ET?
They are our standards, Nobody else's. What is presumptuous is thinking that you know what the alien overlord's standards are.
Its as simple as Bill Brights four spiritual laws.

There are only two possible ways to know Gods mind.

1) He gave us insight.
2) We made it up.

Either way is not presumptuous. The point I'm arguing against is making up a God whom you can (or should) correct. Totally puzzling.


Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. ~RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith

You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo

Subjectivism may very well undermine Christianity.
In the same way that "allowing people to choose what they want to be when they grow up" undermines communism.
~Stile


This message is a reply to:
 Message 731 by ringo, posted 02-12-2019 12:02 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 734 by ringo, posted 02-12-2019 12:19 PM Phat has responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 12042
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 733 of 780 (848640)
02-12-2019 12:18 PM
Reply to: Message 731 by ringo
02-12-2019 12:02 PM


Re: GOD: Complex or ET?

According to the book, God didn't give it to us. It was against His will. We stole the knowledge, much like Prometheus stole fire.
Even worse. If we are to hold the God of our discussion to the one in the book, so too should we own up to the fact that we are rebellious thieving humans hellbent on determining our own destiny. And the book has solutions for that.

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. ~RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith

You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo

Subjectivism may very well undermine Christianity.
In the same way that "allowing people to choose what they want to be when they grow up" undermines communism.
~Stile


This message is a reply to:
 Message 731 by ringo, posted 02-12-2019 12:02 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 736 by ringo, posted 02-12-2019 12:22 PM Phat has responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 16136
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 734 of 780 (848641)
02-12-2019 12:19 PM
Reply to: Message 732 by Phat
02-12-2019 12:11 PM


Re: GOD: Complex or ET?
Phat writes:

Its as simple as Bill Brights four spiritual laws.


The four spiritual laws are nonsense.

And your bumper sticker is a false dichotomy. It ignores the humanity-centered life (which incidentally, Christ advocated).

Phat writes:

There are only two possible ways to know Gods mind.

1) He gave us insight.
2) We made it up.


And it's presumptuous to think it's 1 and not 2.

And our geese will blot out the sun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 732 by Phat, posted 02-12-2019 12:11 PM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 735 by Phat, posted 02-12-2019 12:21 PM ringo has responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 12042
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 735 of 780 (848642)
02-12-2019 12:21 PM
Reply to: Message 734 by ringo
02-12-2019 12:19 PM


Re: GOD: Complex or ET?
It ignores the humanity-centered life (which incidentally, Christ advocated).

This communion includes Christ. We are not simply a bunch of evolving humans making up God and Christ. If so, your point is meaningless. Why make up a character and then tell everyone they must do what the character advocates?

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. ~RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith

You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo

Subjectivism may very well undermine Christianity.
In the same way that "allowing people to choose what they want to be when they grow up" undermines communism.
~Stile


This message is a reply to:
 Message 734 by ringo, posted 02-12-2019 12:19 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 737 by ringo, posted 02-12-2019 12:26 PM Phat has responded

  
RewPrev1
...
4748
49
505152Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019