Free Will

Welcome back, CI.

Can anyone say categorically that cause and effect does not extend indefinitely into the past? Or is it certain that anything at all existed before the first cause?

Perhaps our perception of cause and effect does not allow us to discern the absolute reality or, if you will, absolute truth.

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

Can anyone say categorically that cause and effect does not extend indefinitely into the past?

Not until God is proven or disproven--and I don't mean the individual proven.
Until then the answers will vary.

Quote:

Or is it certain that anything at all existed before the first cause?

Definitely not. We first have to prove the first cause. I only referred to that as one of the concepts of God. One I have. But I have 'proven' God on a personal and private level. So that makes it a non-unilaterally applicable concept.

Quote:

Perhaps our perception of cause and effect does not allow us to discern the absolute reality or, if you will, absolute truth.

Good point. I think that is very profound. Absolute probably doesn't come into the formula for someone who would answer your first question with 'cause and effect are infinitely behind and beyond the present.'
For many who say they believe God to be the first cause, it seems, from their actions and words about what they believe, that they really don't see themselves as being an effect and God as a cause.
That's the thing about what I'll call the 'christian free will' concept--basically related to the salvation issue. Many say God is the boss, but yet one has to choose to follow Christ and if not, they go to hell. End of story. They don't see God as the ultimate Cause over all, because if they did, they would see that the choice they present as free will is still just a choice within a framework determined by God, not themselves. Because the choice determines the fate in that version of free will, and if God is the cause, then God determines the fate. And if that is believed, then there is not eternal torture resort named 'hell.'

0 Replies

Well, there isn't any 'resort' named hell; and the soul does not survive death, a few biblical points disregarded by religionists.

But as to the nature of space, time and causality, I would venture to say that to the God whose name means 'he who causes to become', time is something over which he has complete control.

If you view time as a stream, we are caught up in it and if we, on occasion, may slow it down, it nevertheless moves inexorably toward the future.

Think of the power you might have if you could stop the stream.

Then imagine how much more power you would have if you could not only stop time but move at will to a point further up the stream into the past.

If God possesses that sort of free will and truthfully created us in his image, then perhaps we have a free will, albeit limited by the forces of nature.

0 Replies

Some people believe they have that power by strapping on some bomb and detonating it in the middle of a crowd. Time stops for those killed. Whether alah will grant them 72 virgins is the unknown answer.

0 Replies

Neologist, I think a better metaphor, better than a stream, is that of a pond. In the pond there is constant surface change. But that change is always in a present--the pond goes nowhere; it has no future upstream or past downstream. Therefore one cannot get out of the boat (in the present) and run upstream or backstream as in fantastical time travel tales.

C.I., what's this about 72 virgins? We Americans prefer 72 porn stars, don't we?

0 Replies

Neo,
Why do you say that the sould does not survive death?

0 Replies

Wolf_ODonnell wrote:

Doktor S wrote:
I know the bible better than the vast majority of christians I have ever talked to. I read from it pretty much daily, I have a copy of the NIV in my bathroom.
Knowing the bible in a christian dominated society has proven rather a useful commodity!

Fantastic. Now I'm even more confused as to what a Satanist entails than ever before. From your intial post, your brand of Satanism sounded rather Gnostic to me.

Gnostic? No, although there are people that call themselves Satanists who are really gnostics, I am not one. Satanism bares very little resemblance to gnosticism. Which post are you referring to?

Quote:

Now you sound like a devout Christian.

Unlike many that use the label 'atheist' to describe themselves, I try not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. I assume you are talking about my biblical knowledge? Knowledge is power my friend, and knowledge of a thing that is used to control the herd is priceless.

Quote:

And is that a Swastika in your avatar? Or is it a manji?

My avatar is a caricature of charles manson. I am not a fan of his work, merely the picture.

Quote:

Some may argue there is no such thing as free will. It can be argued that all actions are based on the primitive desire to survive and those actions that aren't are defective and unnatural.

I am generally the one making those arguments, minus the last part about 'defective' or 'unnatural'. Everything that exists within nature is natural, by its very definition.

0 Replies

Intrepid wrote:

Neo,
Why do you say that the sould does not survive death?

I've posted these verses from Ecclesiastes before, but:

Solomon wrote:

All that your hand finds to do, do with your very power, for there is no work nor devising nor knowledge nor wisdom in Sheol, the place to which you are going. (ch 7 vs 10)
For the living are conscious that they will die; but as for the dead, they are conscious of nothing at all, neither do they anymore have wages, because the remembrance of them has been forgotten. 6 Also, their love and their hate and their jealousy have already perished, and they have no portion anymore to time indefinite in anything that has to be done under the sun. (ch 9, vs 5,6)

That does no mean there is no hope for resurrection.

0 Replies

JLNobody wrote:

Neologist, I think a better metaphor, better than a stream, is that of a pond. In the pond there is constant surface change. But that change is always in a present--the pond goes nowhere; it has no future upstream or past downstream. Therefore one cannot get out of the boat (in the present) and run upstream or backstream as in fantastical time travel tales.

C.I., what's this about 72 virgins? We Americans prefer 72 porn stars, don't we?

You may have indeed described the nature of time. However, it is often referred to as if it were a stream. That's what I was using.

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

time is something over which he has complete control.

No doubt.
But--'time' as we are concerned with does not exist for God. It exists for man, only, and had a starting place and ending place. That's not to say that sentient life has a start or end--but man's mortality is measured by time and memory.

And our time is governed by the mechanical progression of our solar system. Outside of that, time is either varied in isolated similar systems or it is just not.

Quote:

Think of the power you might have if you could stop the stream.

I think, that to have the power to stop the stream also means there is the wisdom present to not throw a wrench in the workings.

The power lies in being able to create the 'clock' and then wind it for the time desired for time to last.
IMHO, that is.

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

Intrepid wrote:
Neo,
Why do you say that the sould does not survive death?

I've posted these verses from Ecclesiastes before, but:

Solomon wrote:
All that your hand finds to do, do with your very power, for there is no work nor devising nor knowledge nor wisdom in Sheol, the place to which you are going. (ch 7 vs 10)
For the living are conscious that they will die; but as for the dead, they are conscious of nothing at all, neither do they anymore have wages, because the remembrance of them has been forgotten. 6 Also, their love and their hate and their jealousy have already perished, and they have no portion anymore to time indefinite in anything that has to be done under the sun. (ch 9, vs 5,6)

That does no mean there is no hope for resurrection.

That's interesting. So do you contend that all who have died are just waiting there, dormant, to someday be resurrected?

0 Replies

Why do people worry so much about AFTERLIFE? What about BEFOREBIRTH? As I recall the "eternity" before my birth was no problem at all. I see no reason to think that the "eternity" after my death should not be the same--no problem at all.
Moreover, there will be no-one to have a problem. I cannot even think of myself ever being IN A STATE OF DEATH. There will not be a "me" to be dead.
And I cannot think of a "me" who was ever waiting to be born.
The entire issue is a false one, a fiction with which we cause ourselves much misery and self-deception.

0 Replies

JLN--

Agreed. 100%.
BTW is there even really a "me", now?

0 Replies

People usually don't worry about what has gone before them.... they worry more about what comes after them. Worry is probably not even the right word.

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

Can anyone say categorically that cause and effect does not extend indefinitely into the past? Or is it certain that anything at all existed before the first cause?

Perhaps our perception of cause and effect does not allow us to discern the absolute reality or, if you will, absolute truth.

The only idea that makes any sense to me is that cause/effect extend infinitely into both the future and the past (hypothetically, of course, since neither future nor past have ever existed).

0 Replies

(...or ever will exist)

0 Replies

echi wrote:

. . . That's interesting. So do you contend that all who have died are just waiting there, dormant, to someday be resurrected?

A different topic, of course; but, yes. The Hebrew word 'sheol', often translated 'hell', simply means 'the grave'.

You might want to read John 5:28 for some insight as to what hope there is for those who have died.

If you believe the bible, that is.

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

If you believe the bible, that is.

Not in the same way that you do, it seems.

0 Replies

You would have to refute using the bible.

0 Replies

Actually, the word in John 5:28 is not 'hades' but 'mnēmeion' which means not grave in the same sense as hades being the unknown place but a place of 'remembrance.'

Matthew 27:52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,

This 'grave' is the root word of the one in the verse in John, 'mnēmeion', and it means 'grave,' but, as I said, not the forgotten kind. It is more like a sepulchre or tomb--pretty much what we think of as graves these days.

Even though Malachi was Hebrew (or possibly aramaic I can't recall off the top of my head, but very likely), there is a verse:

Malachi 3:16 Then they that feared the LORD spake often one to another: and the LORD hearkened, and heard it, and a book of remembrance was written before him for them that feared the LORD, and that thought upon his name.

The word for 'remembrance', earlier in the OT is the same as 'Noah' and also in Ezekiel chapter 14 which is very interesting in this light.

It might be more about the 'book of life' rather than the grave that 'the preacher' writes about in the OT.

Dunno.

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know