Freewill Revisited

[ecco]

I also see that some atheists throw sometimes more overboard than only "God concept"
Thereby missing out on things like "mystical experiences" or even enlightenment

What's wrong with discarding useless things?
Before we throw things overboard, we evaluate whether they have any value.

You seem to assume that we have not evaluated mystical experiences and enlightenment and ancient aliens and the universe communicating with itself and with us and, and, and.

 

[stvdv]

Consider this phrase: "I stopped talking long enough to think about what and how I should say something".
Or when seeing a friend about to do something stupid: "Don't do it. Take some time to think about it".
Similarly: "Put brain into gear before operating mouth"
Some Americanisms can be a bit difficult to understand at first glance.

Yes these examples make sense.

I do remember in this context another experience. Whenever I get on a train, meaning my body gets into motion, I notice that my mind (thought train) slows down tremendous. And whenever I sit down on a chair my mind starts running more. Other people told me something similar when jogging and I have it when biking also

So even in this experience I can see "Stop to Think" seems to be true.

 

[ecco]

So your answer is that God could just wipe out (kill) all evil people because God is omnipotent? I acknowledge that answer but I have a rebuttal. An evil person has free will so that evil person can change and become good. Thus it would be an injustice on the part of God to wipe out (kill) an evil person, without giving them a chance to change. Thus your answer does not solve the problem.

Did you miss this part about "warning shots" and encouragement?

"Be good or else this may happen to you". It's just like keeping children in line in December. "Santa's making a list and checking it twice". Many children, or people seeing the pile of ashes, would choose to be good. No one is forced to do any thing, they are "encouraged".

Evil people will receive their punishment through courts of law in this life. If justice is not served in this life it will be served in the afterlife, as evil people will have to realize the evil they did and they will suffer knowing that, since they will no longer be able to fool themselves after they die. God might also punish them for their evil, I don’t know.

Do you really want to stray this far from your original post: (my emphasis)

God created humans with the capacity to eliminate all evil in the world and sent us Messengers to give us the teachings and laws that are necessary to do so. Humans passing the buck to God just shows their own laziness and immorality.

Besides that, atheists who say this about God have never thought it through. They have never stopped to think how God could eliminate evil without taking over human free will.​

​

I never asserted that atheists do not think things through in general. I only asserted that you have not thought through how God could eliminate evil without taking over human free will.

Asked and answered.

There is nothing silly about the God concept.

How Diamonds Buy Guns for Wars in Africa – Exploring Africa THE WORLD WAS CREATED FROM A DROP OF MILK At the beginning there was a huge drop of milk
Then Doondari (God) came and he created the stone.
Then the stone created iron;
And iron created fire;
And fire created water;
And water created air.
The Doondari descended a second time. And he took the five elements
And he shaped them into man.
Then Doondari (God) came and he created the stone.
Then the stone created iron;
And iron created fire;
And fire created water;
And water created air.
The Doondari descended a second time. And he took the five elements
And he shaped them into man.
Then Doondari (God) came and he created the stone.
Then the stone created iron;
And iron created fire;
And fire created water;
And water created air.
The Doondari descended a second time. And he took the five elements
And he shaped them into man.​

Is this silly or is this worthy of serious consideration?

To me it is just as worthy of serious consideration as the writings of the OT, the NT, of Mohammed and those of Bahá'u'lláh.

 

[stvdv]

One does not have to be a goblin in order to define "goblin".

I rely on people whose job it is and has been to define words. I just look up definitions in the dictionary. I also keep in mind that some words have two entirely different meanings. Words like "belief" and "faith".

Rationally speaking there is nothing sensical about omniscience. That doesn't mean we can't have fun with and make fun of the concept.

Gods are the creations of man's imaginings. What more do you need to know?

That's an interesting analogy.

That would be correct if I intentionally made the bike defective, blindfolded my son, made him ride barefoot and put spikes on the pedals. I would then blame my son for falling off the bike. Then I would take his bike away and never allow him to have another. I would tell his younger sister that she also is not allowed to have a bike because of what her brother did. When they are a little older I would take all their toys away and make them sit in a bathtub of cold water for a day.

As bad as that sounds, it doesn't begin to compare to what God did with A&E.

About omniscience:
You are talking about "just the definition". I was thinking about "how to achieve this omniscience" when I was replying. Of course "just a definition" is easy. But really understanding, knowing, being omniscient is something else. Even in math (at school) I wanted to know everything about the basics, and when I got it, I could solve most difficult things much easier. Same with this omniscience. Once you really know the definition, how it works, the basics then you can tap into it. A bit more sophisticated than my math problems of course, so it takes many more years to get really good in it, but I have experienced (already a little bit) that it is possible to tap into this vast source called "omniscience". That is the interesting part of spirituality, there are so many more dimensions to explore than the average human ever gets to.

Of course you can make fun of the concept, nothing wrong with that, but I prefer to unravel the concept. That intrigues me.

About "Gods are the creations of man's imaginings. What more do you need to know?":
Again, there is plenty that intrigues me here. Why people create "God". When you create, does it work. Just sitting on your chair debating about it, won't give you experience. Debating can be fun as an exersize, but again, to experience and dive deep into it gives you "real experience", so you get "real knowledge", at least about that "imagination". Of course I know the whole world is just an illusion, but within this illusion I also know that there is a lot of mystery possible.

Atheist dismiss this "God" creation as imagination. But I know from personal experience that, although it is an illusion, just as the whole world is an illusion, that within that illusion this "God" creation can really do some magic. For example a friend of mine was really advanced spiritually. He got a car accident and broke 13 bones in his body. When in the ambulance His Master came in a vision and told him "No operation, you know yoga, you can cure all by yoga". I have seen that he managed. I am not that advanced, but I have my own, smaller experiences.

So yes, there is much more I like to know.

About my analogy:
You were talking about God, being omniscient "He planned the fall of man"
My analogy was as simple as that. Whenever you teach a 4 year old riding the bike, you know he will fall down once at least. It's not that you are planning him to fall. It's just all part of the learning process.

That was all my analogy was about. No need to add blindfolds, spikes. Those are your extra creations. I kept it very simple in my analogy. Just showing you that there is no need to interpret omniscient with "He planned the fall of man". Of course you are free to fantasize about that, but for me it is much more simple. I do not take the Bible literally, I try to find the basics, to filter out the things human added, so that I get a picture that works for me, that makes sense.

I don't buy the story many Christians try to sell about A&E and that we are all doomed because of their mistakes. I don't even believe in their interpretation of this Genesis story. Their interpretation makes no sense to me.

To me spirituality is simple. Not easy, but it is simple. This I know. Much simpler than math, but math is easier, because our mind is complex.

But I agree with you, that the picture many Christians try to evangelize is "BAD", that's why I use my common sense to interpret.

 

[Trailblazer]

How Diamonds Buy Guns for Wars in Africa – Exploring Africa THE WORLD WAS CREATED FROM A DROP OF MILK At the beginning there was a huge drop of milk
Then Doondari (God) came and he created the stone.
Then the stone created iron;
And iron created fire;
And fire created water;
And water created air.
The Doondari descended a second time. And he took the five elements
And he shaped them into man.
Then Doondari (God) came and he created the stone.
Then the stone created iron;
And iron created fire;
And fire created water;
And water created air.
The Doondari descended a second time. And he took the five elements
And he shaped them into man.
Then Doondari (God) came and he created the stone.
Then the stone created iron;
And iron created fire;
And fire created water;
And water created air.
The Doondari descended a second time. And he took the five elements
And he shaped them into man.
Is this silly or is this worthy of serious consideration?

To me it is just as worthy of serious consideration as the writings of the OT, the NT, of Mohammed and those of Bahá'u'lláh.

It is your choice if you want to lump everything together. Apparently, you cannot see the difference between real scriptures and nonsense. God does not care what you see or do because God does not need anyone's belief, since God is FULLY self-sufficient.

“This is the changeless Faith of God, eternal in the past, eternal in the future. Let him that seeketh, attain it; and as to him that hath refused to seek it—verily, God is Self-Sufficient, above any need of His creatures.” Gleanings, p. 136

“Consider the mercy of God and His gifts. He enjoineth upon you that which shall profit you, though He Himself can well dispense with all creatures.”
Gleanings, p. 140

“Your Lord, the God of mercy, can well dispense with all creatures. Nothing whatever can either increase or diminish the things He doth possess. If ye believe, to your own behoof will ye believe; and if ye believe not, ye yourselves will suffer.”
Gleanings, p. 148

“He who shall accept and believe, shall receive his reward; and he who shall turn away, shall receive none other than his own punishment.” Gleanings, p. 339

 

[stvdv]

Perhaps you realize, somewhere deep down inside, that if you really started thinking, you might find the whole God concept is silly. So, instead, you don't think and ignore the thoughts of those who do.

I also see that some atheists throw sometimes more overboard than only "God concept"
Thereby missing out on things like "mystical experiences" or even enlightenment
But even if you are a spiritual person, it's very likely you miss out on those also

What's wrong with discarding useless things?
Before we throw things overboard, we evaluate whether they have any value.

You seem to assume that we have not evaluated mystical experiences and enlightenment and ancient aliens and the universe communicating with itself and with us and, and, and.

Nothing wrong with discarding useless things. And very good to evaluate before throwing overboard. I fully agree.

No I do not assume:
You wrote "..... you might find the whole God concept is silly .....".
My natural reply ".... some atheists throw more overboard than only God concept ....".
You gave your opinion, I gave my reply. Nothing more, nothing less. I got a little feeling you were assuming "God concept is silly", hence my reply.
I am okay if someone throws God concept overboard, but I don't let them throw my mystical experience and enlightenment overboard. Personally I don't care about ancient aliens, but it's fine with me, if you investigated that. I did also experience "universe communicating with itself/us" (that's why I like this youtube 1m20s). That is an area that I also really like, thanks for reminding that one. This exersize I did already many years ago, forgot about it almost.

I do not criticize others what they believe. I even don't have an opinion whether or not they are on the right path, like many Christians claim to know. I believe not in Satan, nor in Hell, nor in Heaven (except a heaven on earth). I am only interested in spirituality, not in dogmas. I don't believe theist are better or worse than atheist. Just be happy, I believe that is most important. And don't make others unhappy in the process.

 

[sealchan]

Thanks for clarifying. I learn even a new word "facetious". But it was not meant to be funny. Even after your explanation I did not get it. But Ecco was so friendly to make it very clear. I won't forget this any time soon.

I did not read Trailblazer's comment well, so I misread Ecco's context and took his line "See Trailblazer, we atheists have stopped to think" exactly as it was said. I mean if Ecco had written "we atheists have stopped, to think" or even better "started to think" I might have realized it. Maybe for english speaking this is obvious. I just did not see it that way. I learn every day new english lines on RF.

But even now I think it's a funny way to say it. "We have stopped to think". I mean "stopped thinking to think", or "stopped talking to think" or "stopped life to think"; as if "life can be stopped". Anyway I get it now that this is a normal way to say it in the english language.

I feel sorry for anyone who has to try to make sense of the English language. I've heard it isnt very consistent.

 

[sealchan]

There might be one small problem. How to define "omniscient" when you are not "omniscient"?


Very good question: How can anyone who is "not omniscience" say something which makes sense about "omniscience"?
And even more difficult the problem "what about God being omniscient". To know and define "God" is the biggest problem, yet to be solved.


I just had 1 thought. If a father (you) has a son, and at age 4 (of the son) decides to teach him to ride the bicycle.
In your analogy "the logical consequences are that you planned the `fall of your son from his bicycle`". Do I understand this correctly?

If you are a good father you give your children experiences that they can learn from, not ones which irrevocably change your life forever for the worse...that is just abusive. By many Christian ways of reading the story, God should have just given Adam & Eve the knowledge of good vs evil. There was no point in leaving it as a temptation then punishing them for succombing.

 

[stvdv]

I feel sorry for anyone who has to try to make sense of the English language. I've heard it isnt very consistent.

English is quite good. When I make notes I do so in English (less words needed to say the same as compared to Dutch).
English "stop to think" I would rather say "Think first" or "count to 10 first" (although that's also a waste of brainpower)
English is also better than Dutch to explain spiritual things {although Sanskrit language is the best I think}

 

[stvdv]

If you are a good father you give your children experiences that they can learn from, not ones which irrevocably change your life forever for the worse...that is just abusive. By many Christian ways of reading the story, God should have just given Adam & Eve the knowledge of good vs evil. There was no point in leaving it as a temptation then punishing them for succombing.

I interpret this whole Adam & Eve thing different. First they were in paradise. I see the snake as the Kundalini. When you go against your conscience, not seeing/following the Divine anymore (start judging; seeing good/bad, esp. feelings/faith of others) the Kundalini flow is gone and you are "out of paradise". This is not eternal, neither is this a punishment. It was just a lesson to be learned. But Genesis lesson was not learned, that's why later on in the Bible this lesson was repeated. I believe "do not judge" is the way to enlightenment. Hence I like the phrase "stop to think"

 

[sealchan]

I interpret this whole Adam & Eve thing different. First they were in paradise. I see the snake as the Kundalini. When you go against your conscience, not seeing/following the Divine anymore (start judging; seeing good/bad, esp. feelings/faith of others) the Kundalini flow is gone and you are "out of paradise". This is not eternal, neither is this a punishment. It was just a lesson to be learned. But Genesis lesson was not learned, that's why later on in the Bible this lesson was repeated. I believe "do not judge" is the way to enlightenment. Hence I like the phrase "stop to think"

It is very possible that the Adam and Eve story took the snake from existing myth where it was revered and put it in a role of being cursed intentionally as part of the program of demolishing the Goddess and the rest of the local pantheon.

 

[dfnj]

There may be no free will, but for justice reasons we need to act as if it does exist. Treating people as if they were not responsible for their crimes only leads to more crime.

It seems to me people who do serious crimes are not deterred by previous acts of justice. I'm not suggesting how we treat people. But your statement "leads to more crime" may not be true. People who behave morally or immorally may do so in the same frequency regardless of law enforcement. Every religion has the virtually the same rate for adultery. People still commit serious crimes in spite of the threat of eternal damnation. You could argue law enforcement has the opposite effect for certain segments of population. Maybe some people are encouraged to do more crimes because the penalties are so severe.

I generally think people who behave morally do so regardless of laws and religion. And people who behave immorally are probably encouraged by outside factors to do more crimes. What is effective in preventing immoral behavior probably needs to be studied scientifically as opposed to "common sense" superstitions about what deters crimes.

 

[ecco]

About omniscience:
... But really understanding, knowing, being omniscient is something else. Even in math (at school) I wanted to know everything about the basics,

You are confusing knowledge with omniscience and trying to compare the two. I suggest you carefully read and understand the definitions of the two.

Of course you can make fun of the concept, nothing wrong with that, but I prefer to unravel the concept. That intrigues me.

OK. But first you have to understand the concept before you can begin to "unravel" it. Your above comments show you don't understand.

About "Gods are the creations of man's imaginings. What more do you need to know?":
Again, there is plenty that intrigues me here. Why people create "God".

To provide answers to questions that, at the time had no answers and to instill fear and therefore obedience:

Why did our crops die? GodDidIt.
Why did we come from? GodDidIt.
What happens if I'm bad? GodWillPunishYouForEternity

Atheist dismiss this "God" creation as imagination. But I know from personal experience ...

Belief in gods is sustained by anecdotal "evidence" based on personal experience.

About my analogy:

You were talking about God, being omniscient "He planned the fall of man"
My analogy was as simple as that. Whenever you teach a 4 year old riding the bike, you know he will fall down once at least. ...

Just showing you that there is no need to interpret omniscient with "He planned the fall of man". Of course you are free to fantasize about that, but for me it is much more simple.

Once again you are showing you do not really grasp the meaning of omniscience and omnipotence.

I do not take the Bible literally, I try to find the basics, to filter out the things human added, so that I get a picture that works for me, that makes sense.

Some people have their holy scriptures, you have your "gurus". To me, they all come out of the same bucket.

I don't buy the story many Christians try to sell about A&E... that's why I use my common sense to interpret.

You seem to apply more common sense and skepticism to interpreting Christians than you apply to your own views.

 

[ecco]

It is your choice if you want to lump everything together. Apparently, you cannot see the difference between real scriptures and nonsense.

“He who shall accept and believe, shall receive his reward; and he who shall turn away, shall receive none other than his own punishment.” Gleanings, p. 339

You chide me for not seeing the difference between real scriptures and nonsense and then you post references to gleanings:

On the eve of Our departure from ‘Iráq, We have warned the faithful to anticipate the appearance of the Birds of Darkness. There can be no doubt whatever that the croaking of the Raven shall be raised in certain lands, as it hath been heard in recent years.​

To me, and about 99% of the rest of humanity, stuff like the above is nonsense. If you want to believe it, that's OK. But you don't have the moral authority to decree other scriptures are nonsense when yours are just as lame.

 

[stvdv]

It is very possible that the Adam and Eve story took the snake from existing myth where it was revered and put it in a role of being cursed intentionally as part of the program of demolishing the Goddess and the rest of the local pantheon.

That is possible, but I still like to believe that there is at least some truth left in the Bible (meaning "word of God"; and when God His word is "True" then I expect there to be some similarity between Hinduism and Christianity). Using common sense I agree with you that there might have been some human powerplay going on. But would be nice if at least the start of the Bible has some Divine truth in it.

 

[stvdv]

1: You are confusing knowledge with omniscience and trying to compare the two.
2: I suggest you carefully read and understand the definitions of the two.
3: OK. But first you have to understand the concept before you can begin to "unravel" it. Your above comments show you don't understand.
4: Once again you are showing you do not really grasp the meaning of omniscience and omnipotence.
5: Some people have their holy scriptures, you have your "gurus". To me, they all come out of the same bucket.
6: You seem to apply more common sense and skepticism to interpreting Christians than you apply to your own views.

1: I do understand the definitions. You misread my words. You don't know me. And I can tell you that your picture about me is wrong.
2: I have it all quite clear. You again don't know anything about me, but talk as if you know all, just from a few words. Why you do this?
3: I find it a much better practice to unravel things for my self. I don't fill in what your spiritual knowledge is. Much wiser IMO
4: And again you seem to know everything about me. Wow, you must be omniscient how you seem to know all about me.
5: That is your opinion. That's fine with me.
6: And again you seem to know all about me. I don't do that. I do a lot of introspection, I don't spend my time figuring out other's spiritual knowledge.

Religion, faith, belief systems that's just everyone's personal experience. Not for me to judge or have opinion about what others believe. Much more interesting to figure out what I believe. There is so much to figure out for myself, that I do not even have time to think about what others believe.

I don't buy the story many Christians try to sell about A&E... that's why I use my common sense. I do not have the intention to change someone's belief. Only when they try to sell it to me I become sceptic when it feels not good to me. And then I share my view. But I understand more and more that sharing views is not really useful. Most people have their views and will stick to it, esp. when older. So I understand more and more that the wise remain silent.

 

[sealchan]

That is possible, but I still like to believe that there is at least some truth left in the Bible (meaning "word of God"; and when God His word is "True" then I expect there to be some similarity between Hinduism and Christianity). Using common sense I agree with you that there might have been some human powerplay going on. But would be nice if at least the start of the Bible has some Divine truth in it.

I do think that the story holds a great deal of truth. I am a Christian after all. But I recognize that the Judeo - Christian tradition didn't appear out of a vacuum but evolved from material it drew inspiration from.

Furthermore, how it did so provides clues as to it's original revelation and to how that revelation could wear thin after 2000 plus years.

 

[ecco]

1: I do understand the definitions. You misread my words. You don't know me. And I can tell you that your picture about me is wrong.
2: I have it all quite clear. You again don't know anything about me, but talk as if you know all, just from a few words. Why you do this?
3: I find it a much better practice to unravel things for my self. I don't fill in what your spiritual knowledge is. Much wiser IMO
4: And again you seem to know everything about me. Wow, you must be omniscient how you seem to know all about me.
5: That is your opinion. That's fine with me.
6: And again you seem to know all about me. I don't do that. I do a lot of introspection, I don't spend my time figuring out other's spiritual knowledge.

Religion, faith, belief systems that's just everyone's personal experience. Not for me to judge or have opinion about what others believe. Much more interesting to figure out what I believe. There is so much to figure out for myself, that I do not even have time to think about what others believe.

I don't buy the story many Christians try to sell about A&E... that's why I use my common sense. I do not have the intention to change someone's belief. Only when they try to sell it to me I become sceptic when it feels not good to me. And then I share my view. But I understand more and more that sharing views is not really useful. Most people have their views and will stick to it, esp. when older. So I understand more and more that the wise remain silent.

As I said...You seem to apply more common sense and skepticism to interpreting Christians than you apply to your own views. That's OK. Religious people do that all the time.

 

[ecco]

1: I do understand the definitions. You misread my words. You don't know me. And I can tell you that your picture about me is wrong.

From you comment and attempt at analogy, you made it clear that you didn't know the the difference between knowledge and omniscience. My pointing that out was not an attempt to define you.

You got awfully defensive really quickly.

 

[stvdv]

I do think that the story holds a great deal of truth. I am a Christian after all. But I recognize that the Judeo - Christian tradition didn't appear out of a vacuum but evolved from material it drew inspiration from.

Furthermore, how it did so provides clues as to it's original revelation and to how that revelation could wear thin after 2000 plus years.

My reply came out a bit wrong. I also believe that there is a lot of truth in the Bible to be found. And like with all the parables and words given by Saints and Holy Men we all know that there are more layers. First time reading Bible you discover something, but reading again you discover new truths you didn't see before.

Even if not all of the Bible is perfect (I mean if some words got corrupted) does not matter. Because in the end we can't realize the Truth by reading alone. It has to come from within. I remember in this context that my Guru said "Even if your teacher is a crook, no need to look for another teacher. Just make sure you become better than your teacher". That's why I think the Bible can be used to gain all the knowledge, just like other scriptures.