Mutually Exclusive?

[PolyHedral]

In this case "waiting" is an example of our troubles. Yes there is no waiting external to time. We however are within time and I was refering to our perspective of the track layer.

I can quite easily, but only because someone did the geometry for me, and this is where the objection comes from. There are no decisions when you remove time. There is only a series of fixed points that follow on from each other.

 

[orcel]

. There are no decisions when you remove time. There is only a series of fixed points that follow on from each other.

We however are within time. Hence we perceive time. And from within the temporal perspective we have no knowlege of the pre-known and agreed to fate and make our choices free of that forknowlege. Hence we have a temporally perceived free will.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

re: predestination & free will: it sounds almost like a paradox but the difference is the perspective. Being temprol we face a decision and make a choice. Being extra-temporal God see's the choice and allows us the authority to make it all "before" we ever did = predestination.

Imagine a train. A train can only go where the track is already. now imagine we are the engineer and God is laying the track. He "waits" for our decision as to where to go and then lays the track.

So basically your god is not omniscient....?

re: omnipotent: If God exsists external to this universe as the creator He can "hold" the universe in total and examine any and every aspect. He would be ominpotent and omnipresent and all knowing too.

What if you're wrong and just guessing because your book really doesn't say? What if your god exist within its own space and time?

What if...wait for it....wait for it.....now read my Jodi Foster signature below....

 

[orcel]

So basically your god is not omniscient....?

No, God would be onniscient, my example is intended to be viewed within time. From the extra-tempral perspective God knows the decision and every other decision as well.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

No, God would be onniscient, my example is intended to be viewed within time. From the extra-tempral perspective God knows the decision and every other decision as well.

So if it is omniscient then free will is invalid. Then through its view there is no right, no wrong, no good, no bad and no sin. We all exist within its creation and are already doing exactly what it created us to do.

 

[camanintx]

Nothing part of this universe can exist outside of time. But if an external creator does in fact exist and created this universe, then that external creator must exist external to this universe. And since time is a property of this universe then that external creator must exist external to time. Note; I did not say before time as that would be meaningless.

Also this of course does not claim what that external creator is. Some current quantum physics theories suggest and external creator that they have labeled a multiverse.

This only makes sense if you assume that time is a fundamental property of this universe, like space or mass. Relativity and experience tells us that time is just a mathematical construct based on our perspective from the here and now and has no actual physical existence, hence nothing can be external to time. Anything that acts or is acted upon (in other words, change) can be represented as a function of time (before t, t and after t), otherwise it is static and unchanged and may as well not exist.

 

[camanintx]

Imagine a train. A train can only go where the track is already. now imagine we are the engineer and God is laying the track. He "waits" for our decision as to where to go and then lays the track.

And if God told the engineer this, would the engineer be able to change their mind?

 

[camanintx]

How can an eternally static being be omnipotent?

re: omnipotent: If God exsists external to this universe as the creator He can "hold" the universe in total and examine any and every aspect. He would be ominpotent and omnipresent and all knowing too.

You didn't answer the question. If God is eternally static, in other words unchanging, how can it be omnipotent since it can't even change it's mind?

 

[Skwim]

re: God acting while remaining unchanged: God's actions appear as chage within our tempral universe. But from an extra-temporal perspective each "action" is a static connection between God and our universe.

Show your evidence.

re: school: I agree, evolution like gravity ought be taught in public schools. And for the pupblic schools teaching religion. Why?

Why what? You're not clear here.

 

[orcel]

Show your evidence.


Why what? You're not clear here.

re: evidence: Evidence? We're talking about possible interaction between an unproven god and the physical world. No evidence exists, nor can it. Meanwhile that's not the point i was makeing, rather I was describing what an external non-temporal perspective of that interaction would look like.

re: Why what? I was stating that I do not see why creationism or religion should be taught in public schools. Evolution is a good, strong, sound scientific theory and needs to be taught. Creationism, and Inteligent Design are religious theology and need to be taught in church, sunday school and at home.

 

[Katzpur]

To be a creationist, in common modern terminology, is more than just being a theist. It means rejecting modern biology and geology in favor of a Biblical explanation of life on earth.

A creationist is somebody who accepts God as creator. Theories as to how and when God created differ amoungst creationists.

Oh dear. I'm not a creationist by Autodidact's definition but I am by orcel's definition. What do I do now! :sleep:

 

[RitalinO.D.]

Oh dear. I'm not a creationist by Autodidact's definition but I am by orcel's definition. What do I do now! :sleep:

Pick one and run with it?

 

[ellenjanuary]

Oh dear. I'm not a creationist by Autodidact's definition but I am by orcel's definition. What do I do now! :sleep:

Orcel's definition is not the one commonly used. Belief in god as creator does not automatically make one the type of creationist that denies science. And despite my arguing with him, I agree with many things he says...

But I got bottom-line on this issue. You are what you say you are - which to my knowledge is Katzpur, a considerate and intelligent member of LDS who assists in keeping me from becoming totally anti-Mormon.

And correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[Katzpur]

But I got bottom-line on this issue. You are what you say you are - which to my knowledge is Katzpur, a considerate and intelligent member of LDS who assists in keeping me from becoming totally anti-Mormon.

LOL! Well, I'm certainly happy to be a part of such a noble endeavor!

And correct me if I'm wrong.

I've been known to be pretty inconsiderate (though seldom without provocation), and while I think I'm reasonably intelligent with respect to some topics, I'm absolutely clueless on others. I guess that's pretty much the same as with most people, though.

At any rate, if I were going to try to clarify/restate my own beliefs on the question posed by the OP, I'd have to say that I believe in a God who created our universe and the life on it (and probably other universes as well). I also believe that the process by which He did so has been described by scientists as "evolution." I definitely don't see science as evil or scientists as the enemy. I see them as using the brains that God gave them to discover and explain how it all happened. Most of the details are over my head, but that doesn't bother me a lot.

 

[ellenjanuary]

I've been known to be pretty inconsiderate (though seldom without provocation), and while I think I'm reasonably intelligent with respect to some topics, I'm absolutely clueless on others. I guess that's pretty much the same as with most people, though.

At any rate, if I were going to try to clarify/restate my own beliefs on the question posed by the OP, I'd have to say that I believe in a God who created our universe and the life on it (and probably other universes as well). I also believe that the process by which He did so has been described by scientists as "evolution." I definitely don't see science as evil or scientists as the enemy. I see them as using the brains that God gave them to discover and explain how it all happened. Most of the details are over my head, but that doesn't bother me a lot.

Which, if I may, seems more like theistic evolution; but I wouldn't call you a creationist.

And I'm an egghead... things that are over my head are like reality TV, but I'm able to understand science... you know, like an egghead.

I'm more into a deist kinda perspective with extras... but basically the thought of the anthropic principle, god just throwing a fistful of numbers into the mix... that's just way cool to me. But I am a mathematician. A lot of things I find cool, put most people to sleep; and this kinda "hands off programmer god" ain't gonna be warm and cozy to most. Thus I'm not against "personal creator god" per se, as much as I'm against impeding the progress of science (which ain't perfect, but produces real-world unilateral beneficial miracles) with a creationist manifesto that ain't even Biblical (as I have posted in other threads).

 

[Katzpur]

Which, if I may, seems more like theistic evolution; but I wouldn't call you a creationist.

That sounds like a title I can live with.

And I'm an egghead... things that are over my head are like reality TV, but I'm able to understand science... you know, like an egghead.

Science was always my weakest subject. It was literally all I could do to pull C's in any required science class, and I studied like there was no tomorrow. Otherwise I got pretty much straight A's with a handful of B's thrown in to keep me humble. Reality TV, though... that's my kind of mindless entertainment.

 

[ellenjanuary]

That sounds like a title I can live with.

Score one for compassionate debate,

Science was always my weakest subject. It was literally all I could do to pull C's in any required science class, and I studied like there was no tomorrow. Otherwise I got pretty much straight A's with a handful of B's thrown in to keep me humble. Reality TV, though... that my kind of mindless entertainment.

Somehow I got a 126 in college physics.

Love is what keeps me humble (or at least it is always working in that direction), knowing that intelligence has value; but knowing that people themselves are the true precious commodity.

 

[RitalinO.D.]

I'd have to say that I believe in a God who created our universe and the life on it (and probably other universes as well). I also believe that the process by which He did so has been described by scientists as "evolution." I definitely don't see science as evil or scientists as the enemy. I see them as using the brains that God gave them to discover and explain how it all happened. Most of the details are over my head, but that doesn't bother me a lot.

Is this a train of thought that is taught in the LDS or is this belief something you came about by your own means?

 

[Katzpur]

Is this a train of thought that is taught in the LDS or is this belief something you came about by your own means?

Well, there are over 14 million members of the LDS Church today. It would be virtually impossible for me to tell you how common my perspective is among that many different people. I will tell you a couple of things that may help you to make an educated guess for yourself, though. Latter-day Saints are encouraged to get all the education they possibly can. Our leaders aren't afraid that we're going to learn something they don't want us to learn. As a religious group, we consistently rank among the better-educated people in the United States. LDS women, in particular, are more likely to have advanced degrees than women of many other religions. We are also taught that it is important for us to embrace truth wherever we may find it and not reject it simply because we found it in a place where we least expected to find it. Awhile back, I read a statement (I think it was on www.adherents.com, but I can't be 100% sure) that said that Utah (which is 60-70% Mormon) has one of the highest concentration of scientists in the U.S. Finally, as Knight Owl pointed out on another recent thread, "Along this line, mainstream scientific theories of evolutionary biology, old-earth geology and paleontology are openly taught at BYU and BYU-Idaho, without apology, and have been for at least five decades, will full approval of BYU's Board of Trustees. What's more, a notable number of the BYU and BYU-Idaho faculty are well published in these disciplines. Two areas in which BYU researchers are particularly noted are the collection and analysis of dinosaur fossils (see BYU dinosaur museum) and bioinformatics, i.e., the sequencing and analysis of DNA for studies in evolution, medicine and other applications (see BYU bioinformatics program)." So, with that said, you can safely assume that I am not an anomaly among members of my Church.

 

[RitalinO.D.]

Well, there are over 14 million members of the LDS Church today. It would be virtually impossible for me to tell you how common my perspective is among that many different people. I will tell you a couple of things that may help you to make an educated guess for yourself, though. Latter-day Saints are encouraged to get all the education they possibly can. Our leaders aren't afraid that we're going to learn something they don't want us to learn. As a religious group, we consistently rank among the better-educated people in the United States. LDS women, in particular, are more likely to have advanced degrees than women of many other religions. We are also taught that it is important for us to embrace truth wherever we may find it and not reject it simply because we found it in a place where we least expected to find it. Awhile back, I read a statement (I think it was on www.adherents.com, but I can't be 100% sure) that said that Utah (which is 60-70% Mormon) has one of the highest concentration of scientists in the U.S. Finally, as Knight Owl pointed out on another recent thread, "Along this line, mainstream scientific theories of evolutionary biology, old-earth geology and paleontology are openly taught at BYU and BYU-Idaho, without apology, and have been for at least five decades, will full approval of BYU's Board of Trustees. What's more, a notable number of the BYU and BYU-Idaho faculty are well published in these disciplines. Two areas in which BYU researchers are particularly noted are the collection and analysis of dinosaur fossils (see BYU dinosaur museum) and bioinformatics, i.e., the sequencing and analysis of DNA for studies in evolution, medicine and other applications (see BYU bioinformatics program)." So, with that said, you can safely assume that I am not an anomaly among members of my Church.

Understood, and thanks for the clarification. I wasn't sure if this was part of the LDS dogma or not.

Also, I've heard BYU is a really good school, but I would imagine it would be tough to adhere to their (in my eyes) overly oppressive rules. I know I couldn't, even if I was religious.