That's not possible!!! Only we, the theists (and not all of us, only us, the true belivers!!!) can do that!!!! EDIT: it was supposed to have been "ONLY WE...", not "ALL WE", which happened by some divine providence, I don't know...
Bloody infidels how dare you mock me. Don't you know I gave you all free will so you can worship me or burn in Hell
If there is a god, but no heaven, then that god isn't God? I think a lot of theologians would also insist on omniscience, (a god that doesn't know everything isn't God), omnipotence, (a god that can't do everything isn't God), perfection, (a god with flaws, needs or any finite limit isn't God), and omnibenevolence, (a God that was capable of doing "evil" wouldn't be God) -- although none of these are universal or required. Some of these are good launching points. Prove there is no absolute "good" or "evil", and you eliminate the possibility of a being defined by benevolence or malevolence. 'Having faith' implies certitude untroubled by reason, or evidence. Faith: "Hope" derived from fear ( obedience). Everyone has beliefs, or so I am told. As a child, I used to believe in God, but that belief disappeared after being exposed to the world for long enough. Now my beliefs are based on what is observable in this world, making only one assumption; that what we observe is real. Because of my beliefs, I am unable to take the leap of faith required to believe in a God figure. That inability is what leads me to pose this question: Why do people consider believing in God the default viewpoint?!?
You are totally excluding the possibility of non-existence which I find worrysome. It's the same lunacy as the people proclaiming "God loves you even if you don't believe in him". That's mental institution talk and offensive to every sane person.
To say that free will is not possible when God already knows the outcome is a fair point, but i believe God is giving us free choices even if he knows the outcome, but at least afterwards we can say He gave us all a chance. The big challenge here again is that the "afterwards" has not yet come to be, so we have to have a lot of faith in Him to validate this statement
Edited my above post - was that free will... in an error/typo? Is that a proof that there is such a thing as freedom but it comes in through the back door, by a mistake? Hmmmfff... heavy....
Where exactly was the free will in your argument? How can you say both that, all creatures owing to the same composition act the same way, and that they have free will? What actually makes the will free? All you did in your argument was give God a suppressed omniscience.. A truly omniscient God would have a knowledge of the exact composition of each being and thus be able to know the whole sequence of causes and effects that would result in His choices. You can't say both "God is giving us free choices" without contradicting yourself (This is the paradox that free will and an omniscient creator present) for example; free will suggests the robot is thinking for itself, but our omniscient creator (the programmer) demands, it must only be following orders. The point is that the robot has only one course of action - the course the programmer (note that the programer is God and robot is the human) designed it to perform, and so regardless of who's doing the thinking, the machine has no free will. Non sequitur. This is simply bare assertions, because nothing follows you describe here from a simple premise of " having lot of faith". I'd expect a reasoned argument, not blind assertions.
sid16, you have a valid point and I'm trying to first understand your viewpoint From my perspective it seems like you make very careful analysis of everything by measuring them or quantifying them with something more familiar to work with in this case using the two terms Programmer & Robot. God = Programmer Human = Robot, programmed by the most intelligent Programmer, BUT no robot have been able to achieve self-awareness with all our technology and super computers combined, so He did not just program us, he gave us Self awareness which is unmeasurable more then just programming. Self-awareness just simply cannot be programmed, because it is part of something you cannot precisely quantify or measure - it is part of our human soul. To be self aware also gives us free will otherwise we are just a robot doing what it is was programmed to do without having a true sense what is going on - the two is part of one another. When any one of us were small children our parents taught us rules which we had to trust & believe in without question and yet we tried to follow our own heads, but only much LATER on realized why they said it and then it made sense, so yes a LEAP of FAITH that cannot be proven now, but only later on as the lesson our parents told us.
Sid_16, why do you always fail at the same point? God is not objectify able. It is a PITA for the mind who lives from objectification! Can’t you overcome it? Your study makes you blind, I am sorry to say so. Gorski and you are blind with ‘this eye’. Michaela and even more redroad can see with it. So what is ‘that’? Why I do say so? Your mind is creating own issues, (which can make you crazy). It is far easier. Take a seat and watch how mind is creating time by abstracting the present. Replace god with present (moment). God knows nothing before or after. Those are ideas of the mind. Anything happens ever now. THIS now is god as it is! The present moment includes anything already. @mind addicted (studied) people: It is ‘something’ that cannot be understood by discursive thinking. Observe your mind! You have to make an active (practical effort)! Yes. It is already a 'progress'. People who think anything can be understood by the mind (humans) do not use the word god. They think anything can be objectified (is predetermined for science to be understood). Then there are others. They have some ‘things’ left which cannot be explained (objectified). We have the container ‘god’, a ‘higher power’ where those people can put these things inside. And we have those who are awake, enlightened. (I don’t mean that objectified pseudo enlightenment Kant is talking of). They ‘know’ that there is the One life which is ever now, the only reality, the infinite intelligence which was objectified as ‘god’. But not anymore! “So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.” You ARE this ONE life, this infinite intelligence! God and individual are two different ideas (objects) of this One life. One has stopped to objectify the non-objectify able, whilst the one lives presently. One cannot determine oneself! When do science and Philosophy finally get that? That what is. ‘YOU’ and 'GOD' cannot be object of research!!! 'It' is the researcher! Anything one can objectify is not one. Science and Philosohy that is mind related will ever fail. Philosophy has had that wisdom already, current is impoverished. And pure science never had got it. ‚We‘ never can understand what god is, right. God is pure being. The presence which is itself enough.. God has nothing to do with faith. Anything you can have faith in is not god. God means awareness of that what IS. One ‘sees’ god in the affinity of all. One ‘feels’ that anything is tied up in this ONE life. This is pure love which one is feeling. If one doesn’t have that feeling then one cannot comprehend what I say, I am sorry. But it will unveil to everyone. It is the reality. I am waiting for the mind addicted, picking this into pieces and analyzing what I say….do it! It'll make no sense. It was your own will and own will is not free. Let it go and it becomes free will. What is one’s life task? That what one is doing now! Anything else is own will and no freewill! The freedom you have got here is just your idea. You want to start a new job again, that is your own will. But as long as you are not realizing it presently it never becomes freewill. Freewill is god’s will and is ever now. It is as it is and belongs no No-one. I feel like I am playing always the same record here....
If I believe that we are all beings of energy, which I do, because -everything- in our universe is energy in one form or another (even matter is energy) then it would be lunacy to even entertain non-existance. (Energy can neither be created nor destroyed) If that's "mental institution talk" , physics would have to be classified as the folly of the insane. "Physics is the only true science...everything else is just stamp collecting." :Miki
That pretty much sums it up. And also explains why we will never be able to quantify or even understand what GOD is. Faith is Mankinds' cross to bear. GOD doesn't demand or even require our faith to exist. That's why it is said by pretty much -every- spiritual belief system that "GOD is love". It's said in different languages, said in different ways, but pretty much has the same meaning. :Miki.
Ahahahahahaaa!!!! Yen, rarely do I laugh out loud like you just made me!!!! Tthank you kindly!!! Just made my day!!! http://forums.mydigitallife.net/vb4_style/smilies_default/biggrin.pnghttp://forums.mydigitallife.net/vb4_style/smilies_default/biggrin.pnghttp://forums.mydigitallife.net/vb4_style/smilies_default/biggrin.png
@Yen this was written by Dr Charles Alexander Eastman, 1911 born Ohiyesa of the Santee Sioux, in 1858 The writing brings into clarity the idea of "The Great Mystery" from a native point of view as best that words can do IMHO I share this as maybe a way to understand how the "unstudied" come to know their own divinity .. For those here whose perception of the world and their place in it is different I want you to know I personally respect your path .. I only ask that you afford me the same respect ..
Reply to the color part only. Too broad term. An organism that has a well developed central nervous system, senses, a brain that can process complex information, and therefore form a mental representation of the external world and its own body (consciousness), can also sense what is happening to it. That level of self awareness does not necessarily mean that it has free will. What exactly are we aware of in regard to 'self' awareness? Perhaps that ''self'' should first be defined? Refer to post #107
I was expecting this when you come to this conclusion. The fact that despite being A being omniscient, being B doesn't know what Being A knows. Therefore, being B isn't influenced in anyway by the knowledge of being A. Being B is still faced with 2 choices, and he has the ability to pick one. His free will would only be compromised if he already knew what his choice would be before making it. O.K. Let's see the example - P1. The knowledge of anything is not one of the parts of that thing. P2 We can know that we believe things. P3. But belief is something mental. Therefore, 4. knowledge that we believe things is not something mental.