Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Kent Stevens · 08-28-2002, 04:39 PM

If god is a perfect being then he also has perfect responsibility for his actions. For God seemingly was the first cause which in turns tiggers everything else to occur. God with his perfect foresight planned good to happen but he also planned bad to happen.

For seemingly God deliberately created Angels, heaven, and Ghandi. But he would then also deliberately create Demons, the Devil, hell, and Hitler.

Even under god we are not free in a legal sense. If someone threatens you with extreme torture for a long time, this along as with other threats does not make you free. But God is threatening us with brutal and inhumane punishment if we do not believe that he exists. The idea that God is also offering heaven does not take away from his enslaving threats.

Even if there is no hell with only lesser degrees of heaven on offer, in a sense we are God's donkey. We are mainly doing things not because they are either intrinsically good or bad, but because of God's carrots.

08-28-2002, 04:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Kent Stevens:

Even if there is no hell with only lesser degrees of heaven on offer, in a sense we are God's donkey. We are mainly doing things not because they are either intrinsically good or bad, but because of God's carrots.

We never follow God's carrot but we do follow Lord God's (2nd cause) carrot. And we are Lord God's donkey which is why on the journey to Bethlehem Joseph-the-Jew (third cause) is depicted as following the donkey on which Mary was enthroned (Mary is Lord God's effective cause).

You are correct because ultruism and cowardice are not actions performed for intrinsic reason.

Mark_Chid · 08-28-2002, 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Amos:


Ahaaa Kent, now I see why "free will" is bunk.

But Kent, nothing of God is created in the world but all is created in heaven and so God has nothing to do with evil in the world. In fact, God is two causes removed from the world that you and I know. "God" is the first cause and is also exhausted by the first cause (or he would be the first and second which is impossible). "Lord God" is the second cause and he, in turn, is also exhausted by the second cause. "Like god" is the third cause and that is the identity we think we are and because we claim to know who we are, we do the things we do according to our own free will.

We are free to do things we do because our own first and second cause (personal God and Lord God) are there but they are very much submissive to our rational thoughts (they usually wake up when we go to sleep and cause our dreams). So it is wrong to assume that God is responsible for evil or else we would not have a free will. We have a free will but are not totally free in our will and that is what the free will argument is about. This also means that total freedom is possible and for this to be realized all we need to do is know who we really are.

Amos - this post genuinely makes no sense whatsoever, because you have not any way defined what the words 'God', 'Lord God' and 'Like God' mean, and in what sense they are different to each other. Without such a definition, all I can read is 'burble burble burble God Burble Burble'

Kent Stevens · 08-29-2002, 11:07 AM

Quote:

We never follow God's carrot but we do follow Lord God's (2nd cause) carrot. And we are Lord God's donkey which is why on the journey to Bethlehem Joseph-the-Jew (third cause) is depicted as following the donkey on which Mary was enthroned (Mary is Lord God's effective cause).

Maybe you have got rid of the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. But at least one of these gods created the things that are good and evil in this world.

I have a hard time just understanding your unusual theology. You do not even dispute that we are like a beast of burden to a hypothetical God.

08-29-2002, 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mark_Chid:


Amos - this post genuinely makes no sense whatsoever, because you have not any way defined what the words 'God', 'Lord God' and 'Like God' mean, and in what sense they are different to each other. Without such a definition, all I can read is 'burble burble burble God Burble Burble'

Mark these definitions are not mine but are found in Gen.1 (God), Gen.2 (Lord God) and Gen.3 (like god).

God is first cuase, Lord God is second cause and like god is third cause.

God is creation, Lord God is formation and like god is procreation.

In case you wonder, this perspective takes all of the burble out of the bible.

08-29-2002, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Kent Stevens:


Maybe you have got rid of the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. But at least one of these gods created the things that are good and evil in this world.

No because heaven is a place on earth (both mental and hysical) and since there is no pain or sickess in heaven evil is not of God and only exist in our imagination with the undesired result that we are affected by these imaginations and cause them to occur and even participate in their effect, ie. we do not like pedophiles etc.

The Holy Trinity is just an inspired exposition of the workings of our own mind wherein we can become God after the Hole Trinity is resolved.

Infinity Lover · 08-29-2002, 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Amos:


No because heaven is a place on earth (both mental and hysical) and since there is no pain or sickess in heaven evil is not of God and only exist in our imagination with the undesired result that we are affected by these imaginations and cause them to occur and even participate in their effect, ie. we do not like pedophiles etc.

The Holy Trinity is just an inspired exposition of the workings of our own mind wherein we can become God after the Hole Trinity is resolved.

Isn't it funny how we can shunt the negative effects religion has on this world, by saying nah, that's just us....

without realizing it really, really is JUST US?

08-30-2002, 04:51 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Infinity Lover:


Isn't it funny how we can shunt the negative effects religion has on this world, by saying nah, that's just us....

without realizing it really, really is JUST US?

By "us" you mean unbelievers, right?

Not really because all believers are unbelievers until they understand what they first believed to be true or not true.

Kent Stevens · 08-30-2002, 11:54 AM

Choice and determinism exists simultaneously. We have systens that simultaneously choose and at the same time these systems do what must occur. It is wrong to say that all systems choose. It is correct to say that all systems do have alternatives, and that having alternatives are related to having choice.

This is the solution to my initial quandry about the artificial distinction between systems with free will, and those systems without free will. We are like the weather in that what happened yesterday must have happened due to various causes. We are unlike the weather in that we choose what happens. We are like the weather in that alternatives exist to what happens.

A set of traffic lights displays mechanical choice but at the same time it acts deterministically. In a similar way we have human choice but we also act deterministically.

There is an overlap between the concept of alternatives and the concept of choice. For choice to occur there must be alternatives. But, if there are alternatives available to a system, does not mean that there is necessarily choice going on.

Quantum events are not chosen, but are instead realised. But if we could use quantum events as the basis of making human choices. We could make quantum dice, quantum coins, and quantum lottery machines. This is possible because all systems display alternatives. We could even use the state of the weather for making a random decision with.

We can also claim that other systems display the property of being free just as we display this property. A ship could be said to be free to sail where it would, until it is overcome by the power of a storm, which makes it goes in one direction only. Also, matter could be said to be free to go in a certain direction in outer space, until it encounters the gravitational power of a much larger object.

Choice can exist simultaneously with determinism. They are not mutually incompatible. Systems have alternative possibilities, and yet at the same time they are determined.

Kent Stevens · 08-30-2002, 12:08 PM

Quote:

No because heaven is a place on earth (both mental and hysical) and since there is no pain or sickess in heaven evil is not of God and only exist in our imagination with the undesired result that we are affected by these imaginations and cause them to occur and even participate in their effect, ie. we do not like pedophiles etc.

If this is the case then criminals might not be held morally responsible. If God does not have culpability then maybe a criminal can also claim that pain and suffering is an illusion, and therefore they are not responsible for their actions.

But of course there is real pain and suffering in this world. Of course these actions are due to various causes which would include God if he existed. To deny pain and causation is to accept delusion.

[ August 30, 2002: Message edited by: Kent Stevens ]

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-28-2002, 04:39 PM	#121
Kent Stevens Regular Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 484	If god is a perfect being then he also has perfect responsibility for his actions. For God seemingly was the first cause which in turns tiggers everything else to occur. God with his perfect foresight planned good to happen but he also planned bad to happen. For seemingly God deliberately created Angels, heaven, and Ghandi. But he would then also deliberately create Demons, the Devil, hell, and Hitler. Even under god we are not free in a legal sense. If someone threatens you with extreme torture for a long time, this along as with other threats does not make you free. But God is threatening us with brutal and inhumane punishment if we do not believe that he exists. The idea that God is also offering heaven does not take away from his enslaving threats. Even if there is no hell with only lesser degrees of heaven on offer, in a sense we are God's donkey. We are mainly doing things not because they are either intrinsically good or bad, but because of God's carrots.

08-30-2002, 11:54 AM	#129
Kent Stevens Regular Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 484	Choice and determinism exists simultaneously. We have systens that simultaneously choose and at the same time these systems do what must occur. It is wrong to say that all systems choose. It is correct to say that all systems do have alternatives, and that having alternatives are related to having choice. This is the solution to my initial quandry about the artificial distinction between systems with free will, and those systems without free will. We are like the weather in that what happened yesterday must have happened due to various causes. We are unlike the weather in that we choose what happens. We are like the weather in that alternatives exist to what happens. A set of traffic lights displays mechanical choice but at the same time it acts deterministically. In a similar way we have human choice but we also act deterministically. There is an overlap between the concept of alternatives and the concept of choice. For choice to occur there must be alternatives. But, if there are alternatives available to a system, does not mean that there is necessarily choice going on. Quantum events are not chosen, but are instead realised. But if we could use quantum events as the basis of making human choices. We could make quantum dice, quantum coins, and quantum lottery machines. This is possible because all systems display alternatives. We could even use the state of the weather for making a random decision with. We can also claim that other systems display the property of being free just as we display this property. A ship could be said to be free to sail where it would, until it is overcome by the power of a storm, which makes it goes in one direction only. Also, matter could be said to be free to go in a certain direction in outer space, until it encounters the gravitational power of a much larger object. Choice can exist simultaneously with determinism. They are not mutually incompatible. Systems have alternative possibilities, and yet at the same time they are determined.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.