Free Will

Then, who's going to judge god whether he goes to heaven or hell? ....although he did sacrifice his son.

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

Doktor S wrote:
neologist wrote:
Doktor S wrote:
Hum.
Ok Neo.
Would you say it was within gods power to know the things he selectively decided not to know?
I would say so.

I smell a trap.

If he was and is capable of knowing everything, would that not make him at least partially responsible for the 'evils' of the world?
You are getting very close to the central issue of the universe: Does God have the right to ask the free will obedience of his sentient creatures?

Well..err..perhaps...
But the issue I am on is this: if god, as you define him, were to exist;ie not knowing what man would do post-eden...then he is not in fact all knowing.
This opens his knowledge of anything else to scrutiny.
I am trying to see exactly how you logically circumvent this.

I mean, as I have already been on about..the alternative is a god that can know/does know the outcome of mans destiny, and it seems to me that god would have a lot to answer for, or be outright 'evil'.

0 Replies

god = evil. Makes a whole lot of sense to me!

0 Replies

real life wrote:

The idea that this God was man's idea is ludicrous.

Yet absolutely biblical! The 'image of the beast' in Revelation is this man-made god...

And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.
(Revelation 13:15 KJV)

The beast? Man. Reference:

I said in mine heart concerning the estate of the sons of men, that God might manifest them, and that they might see that they themselves are beasts.
(Ecclesiastes 3:18 KJV)

The image of the beast? The reflection of man's self-conception which is commonly known as 'god' these days.

0 Replies

Doktor S wrote:

I mean, as I have already been on about..the alternative is a god that can know/does know the outcome of mans destiny, and it seems to me that god would have a lot to answer for, or be outright 'evil'.

Has the fat lady sang yet? Not quite. What is man's destiny? Can you say, at this point?

God created evil--he confessed this long ago...

I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.
(Isaiah 45:7 KJV)

0 Replies

Yeah, somewhere along the line, logic has all been lost to the bible's teachings.

If god knew everything beforehand, and he knew satan was coming up to bring sin to mankind, god could have easily said, 'no humans for planet earth, cause it'll bring too much suffering to the majority.' Instead, he went ahead with 'creating' this world knowing evil was coming.

Logic can be nasty sometimes.

0 Replies

What we need is a nice friendly religion, with a nice friendly god that works hard, but admits he oftentimes can't cut the mustard.

An avuncular god that relishes giving us extra cheese at the spiritual drive-thru!

0 Replies

Doktor S wrote:

neologist wrote:
Doktor S wrote:
neologist wrote:
Doktor S wrote:
Hum.
Ok Neo.
Would you say it was within gods power to know the things he selectively decided not to know?
I would say so.

I smell a trap.

If he was and is capable of knowing everything, would that not make him at least partially responsible for the 'evils' of the world?
You are getting very close to the central issue of the universe: Does God have the right to ask the free will obedience of his sentient creatures?

Well..err..perhaps...
But the issue I am on is this: if god, as you define him, were to exist;ie not knowing what man would do post-eden...then he is not in fact all knowing.
This opens his knowledge of anything else to scrutiny.
I am trying to see exactly how you logically circumvent this.

I mean, as I have already been on about..the alternative is a god that can know/does know the outcome of mans destiny, and it seems to me that god would have a lot to answer for, or be outright 'evil'.

Must God conform to your standards?

0 Replies

Does your god conform to "any" standard? Your god is incapable of living to his own standards; how can you expect lowly humans to?

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

Does your god conform to "any" standard? Your god is incapable of living to his own standards; how can you expect lowly humans to?

'his own standards' are man's standards--not God's. Basically a whole batch of contradictory, unreasonable, stifling ordinances...

A nest of Freudian dysfunction.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

Then, who's going to judge god whether he goes to heaven or hell? ....although he did sacrifice his son.

I think humans did the 'sacrificing.' If anyone was directly sacrificial, wouldn't it technically be Jesus, personally?

If it was autonomous and for the greater good of all--then is it so bad?

I'm not talking about 'forgiveness of sins.' I believe the purpose was to show us that death is not the end. All of us. Period.

I'm not saying this to argue--this is my opinion and belief, only. I also believe we may all believe as we see fit and are able to do. But it's always good for us to look at things from a different perspective.

But religion clouds the truth considerably, rendering it unbelievable and esteemed as ludicrous. (my opinion, once again)

0 Replies

queen annie, With your last sentence, you made your point.

0 Replies

Here's another case of why "free will" is genetic and environmental. We may feel fortunate that we were not born into that environment, but most things in life are not chosen by us. That my grandfather came to the US in 1893 was lucky for his progeny.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

Does your god conform to "any" standard? Your god is incapable of living to his own standards; how can you expect lowly humans to?

Could the problem be that you are the one attempting to legislate standards for God?

0 Replies

queen annie wrote:

. . . But religion clouds the truth considerably, rendering it unbelievable and esteemed as ludicrous. (my opinion, once again)

Religious leaders have done much to cloud the truth. But the truth is still available to those willing to look.

0 Replies

And what would that truth be?

0 Replies

My guess would be the one offered by the watchtower society?
Wink

0 Replies

I'll repeat my position, if only to get us back on track. The subject of "freewill" (vs. determinism) is not the ego (an imagined agent of action within us); it is a system of usually conflicting (conditioned and unconditioned) drives clothed in cultural values, learned interests, ideas, etc.). This system is not the ego; it is a natural phenomenon, a facet of Nature, or the Cosmos (the Hindus called it Brahma or Brahmin; it may be what some Christians call God).
Ergo, our actions and thoughts are not the properties of a constrained agent (ego). They are the spontaneous operation of that system of drives which operate as an on-going expression of Nature/Cosmos/Brahmin/God. Everything is spontaneous and free, but may not seem so from the perspective of illusory Ego.

0 Replies

Chumly wrote:

And what would that truth be?

This is close:

Denis Diderot wrote:

Mankind will never truly be free until the last king has been strangled with the entrails of the last priest.

0 Replies

Truth is in the eye of the beholder. That's evident from the various beliefs of humans even in the same family (like mine).

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know