Free Will

neologist wrote:

OK, and to aver that in creating man in his own image, God would have omitted the attribute of free will, implies what about Luther?

Probably that Luther believed that God could not retain complete sovereignty if he gave man a self-dertermined will.

I suspect Luther would say that man does have a "free" will in that he makes choices based on what he desires the most, but that there is also this "bondage of the will" in that his desires are constrained to his nature. The main difference between God and man (as far as the will) is that God determines God's own choices, whereas man's choices are ultimately detrermined by God.

I

0 Replies

I think that 'unchanging' is not at all the same as 'God does not change'--unchanging implies stagnation and decay/death, but 'does not change' says 'stability' to me,
but those are just my .02

As far as God creating us in His image-- I don't think that is about free will, at all. I understand that, somehow, to be saying that we were created as/for/to be a reflection (such as the mirror darkly) of His thoughts.

That also ties in with the Revelation 13 'image of the beast.' Man is the beast and that idol is the god that man makes which is nothing more than imaginative thought based on limited conceptions based on what we see when we look at ourselves. That's why God seems so ungodlike to many--because it's not God but god.
'man jr. the god of self-delusion and petty hate crimes'

0 Replies

What then, was the purpose of the Edenic command?

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

What then, was the purpose of the Edenic command?

Neo, who are you asking this question of?

I

0 Replies

First one to jump in gets it. Laughing

0 Replies

Do you mean the commandment not to eat from the tree?

To experience material existence--both the happiness and the misery and all the associated sensual snares and pleasures as well as the abstinence, the endless mind games and even to play with toys and have pets and just learn how to love each other in spite of all the misery. So that when we return we are 'all grown up.'

Really, the whole bible thing is simply about the raising of a child no different than we most all do at least one time--only it is in the spiritual that this happens.

All we every do is 'growing up.' Who knows, when this one's behind us there are probably 15 other facets of existence, besides just the three we know, body, soul and spirit.

Maybe God isn't merely triune but centennial--and so we only have to grow up 97 more times after this.

Laughing

You just never know...

0 Replies

Neologist asks if an "idea" is an "event." Nice question. I do think it is essential, from the beginning, to note that "event" IS an idea. And perhaps the term, "idea-ing" would best fit with the notion of "event."
At the same time, there is no such "thing" as AN EVENT. The term artificially "freezes" a process into a thing. There is only event-ing.
Neo, is that outside your box?

0 Replies

My conception of the Fall from Eden and its meaningful meaning for us is that Adam and Eve committed no sin (commandment is merely a metaphor, like the so-called "laws" of nature). Once they ate from the tree of knowledge of good and bad (and all other dualisms), they were AUTOMATICALLY divorced from their non-dualistic bliss. They were not "caste out" of Eden as a punishment; they "fell out" of their blissful state by virtue of their new-found ability to dissect, classify, and "analytically freeze" their unitary, flowing, essentially non-problematical experience. What they did was not "evil", it was spiritually stupid.

0 Replies

JLN--

You write stuff good.

0 Replies

Quote:

But I don't get what you mean in the one before where you say that the self "is a recognition of the existence of a conscious being within spacetime".
I'm having trouble with the "existence of a conscious being" part.
First, I don't think anything is more or less conscious than any other thing (which also means that I pretty much find it useless to refer to "consciousness" in that context, at least).
Second, I haven't found any reason to support the idea that there are any "beings" that are separate from "being". IOW, there is no clear, defining line between my "self" and anything else.

Well I just think that to the best of our knowledge, a tree is not conscious, a rock is not conscious, and certainly any other inanimate objects are unconscious.

I don't understand your second point. If you mean that we are "one" with the universe, yes that is true. However, it is also true that our consciousness arises in a specific spacetime. By the way, are you a Buddhist philosopher? Smile

0 Replies

I'm just experience. That makes me what I experience, as in the zen saying "All things enlighten me." Same applies to you, of course.

0 Replies

Ray wrote:

Quote:
But I don't get what you mean in the one before where you say that the self "is a recognition of the existence of a conscious being within spacetime".
I'm having trouble with the "existence of a conscious being" part.
First, I don't think anything is more or less conscious than any other thing (which also means that I pretty much find it useless to refer to "consciousness" in that context, at least).
Second, I haven't found any reason to support the idea that there are any "beings" that are separate from "being". IOW, there is no clear, defining line between my "self" and anything else.

Well I just think that to the best of our knowledge, a tree is not conscious, a rock is not conscious, and certainly any other inanimate objects are unconscious.

I don't understand your second point. If you mean that we are "one" with the universe, yes that is true. However, it is also true that our consciousness arises in a specific spacetime. By the way, are you a Buddhist philosopher?

I am nothing of the sort.

As for consciousness...How can anyone say what is really conscious and what isn't? I've never seen a good definition for that word. My best guess is that consciousness just is.
Granted, there are different types of awareness, however, and I wouldn't say that a tree is aware in the same way that you are. And a rock may not even be aware, at all. So, maybe it's just that we use the word "consciousness" when we really mean "awareness".
What do you think?

0 Replies

JLNobody wrote:

Neologist asks if an "idea" is an "event." Nice question. I do think it is essential, from the beginning, to note that "event" IS an idea. And perhaps the term, "idea-ing" would best fit with the notion of "event."
At the same time, there is no such "thing" as AN EVENT. The term artificially "freezes" a process into a thing. There is only event-ing.
Neo, is that outside your box?

A little rock paper scissors here: if an event is an idea and there is no such thing as an event, I'm confused. Where did you get that idea?

OK, sorry. Is an idea an effect?

Then, If we look at the Edenic story metaphorically; (I don't.) But if we do, why can't we say Adam and Eve had only one moral choice: whether or not to accept their built in moral compass, or chart their lives without it?

0 Replies

Quote:

Is an idea an effect?

Yes, just like any other cognative function.
The brain has reaction X, which causes experience Y

0 Replies

Doktor says "The brain has reaction X, which causes experience Y."
Here we have X with an agent, "brain", and X is the agent of Y.
Experience does not occur without a brain. It may be thought of as a function of braining. But the brain is itself an idea, an experience. It seems that the dichotomy of mind and brain is false. They are one; you simply can't have one without the other. One might say that a dead brain in a jar is a brain without mind/experience. But is that right? Is that clump of matter really a brain when it is not functioning as a brain, or what we mean by "brain"?

0 Replies

A functioning brain has firing neurons, active neural net pathways. Active electrical energy.
Mind is to brain as windows is to computer.

0 Replies

What if it is a MAC? :-)

0 Replies

Dok--
In your opinion, what will continue to exist after you die?

0 Replies

Intrepid wrote:

What if it is a MAC? :-)

then you end up as a scientologist.

0 Replies

echi wrote:

Dok--
In your opinion, what will continue to exist after you die?

Your family, your offspring, your genetics.

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know