Question for you Religious types

[Capnkumquat]

Why can't the divine plan be as simple as " I want you to know me as your God and creator, love one another, and do as much as possible with the cosmos I created"?

This means in the universe that you and I know as consensus reality we should pray (communicate with God), explore all of creation (God must really like matter as he made an awful lot of it), treat each other with kindness, love, and respect as directed by God and desired by most major monotheistic religions (something that has been in short supply around the world and in this forum.)

-----------------------------
Should the Geneticist build a slave race?
So, if the geneticist were devout, he would know that God (major religion monotheistic God) expects us to do "good". Creating a slave race...certainly "not good". I will not call it evil but I cannot imagine a situation in which millions of disposable people getting maimed and killed for my benefit as good. He, the geneticist, should certainly recuse himself of building a slave race.

Do the built people have souls?
I will assume from the scenario the geneticists believes in souls and he is wondering about his creations. I think there is a misinterpretation of what a soul is...the bible and earlier works talks about the soul as something we are, not something we have. We are souls. By being in creation, choosing between good and evil, by every choice we make we mark ourselves as to what that soul is. Certainly a built body with freewill, would have its chance to become either a hellish dictator, or a selfless caring humanitarian.

Is the geneticist a God?
This question seems to parallel the "sin of Adam". If you eat the apple then you will be like God (signed–your friend the serpent). Technology is a great thing, but don't fool yourself, if there is a God and he made all, you will never be like him no matter how much you tinker with the stuff he made. A devout geneticist would know that much at least.

When he makes his own universe out of nothing, then we'll talk.

Anyhow, I'll probably be crucified (figuratively of course) for even taking this thread seriously.

 

[fitzbew88]

And why can't this Super-view change from moment to moment? Why does being a Super-being mean that you cannot change your plan in response to prayer? Why can't a super-being decide to let me have free will?

Because you're thinking in terms of human timespace interaction.

Of course. That's where I AM, and also where the Plan (I'm stipulating to the existence of the Plan) is being played out. And this is where God is conducting his work. So why can't God give me free will and have a flexible Divine Plan?

Yes, but so what? Nothing in that description of God forbids me from having free will or forbids Him from altering his plans based on my free will.

Also, assuming for a millisecond GOD didn't "know" what you were going to do next, for you to be able to surprise god would mean his intellectual capacaity was not sufficient to predict your behaviours, which doesn't make sense either.

My intellectual capacity is immense compared to this Ant crawling around my desk. Yet, I can't predict with certainty what it will do next. I will allow it to do whatever it wishes, and only intervene if it starts heading for my donut. Why can't God employ a similar philosophy?

You say this doesn't make sense, but to me it makes perfect sense. Perhaps God can predict with 99.9% accuracy what I am going to do next. But it is still *my* choice.

God either knows everything or he doesn't and if he DOESN'T then he's not god, in which case debates about a divine plan and/or prayer become wholly irrelevant and utterly pointless.

Why would the debates become pointless? And ... again .... why can't God change his predictions based on what I choose?

The God in the Bible stories I heard as a child was clearly trying to convince me to make the right choice --- yet, the stories show without a doubt the entity in question was virtually all-powerful.

I can watch the ant for a few minutes and predict with a high degree of certainty what it will do next, where it will go. I have the power to swoop down and crush it, or rescue it and return it to the outside. Or I can just let it live its life, making whatever choices it wishes. I am still all-powerful (compared to the ant!) and virtually omniscient. But despite my power, I choose not to exercise it. I will let the ant find its own way, as long as it stays away from my breakfast!

 

[fitzbew88]

Switching angles a bit, I want to look at this notion of “free will” helping to alter things. This notion that “God” is omniscient in the present but may be limited by our free will to manipulate the future. He makes executive decisions he believes will further him to the “goal” (whatever that is) but has no real certain view of the distant future nor the ability to invoke a “do over”.

That would make him less a god and more of a universal CEO and the Divine plan wouldn't be a plan at all, more like a Divine Guide book or Celestial Liner notes.

It's a question of absolutes. If we have any influence in the way things are run (prayer) then God cannot be in absolute control (divine plan). In other words, if we gain power, god must lose it, making him a "small g" god at best.

Why is it a question of absolutes? Why couldn't the all-powerful choose to refer to their power only when it suits Them?

Is there a reason to believe a Creator cannot just plant a seed and let the tree grow however it wishes? And only prune it as necessary (if there is a problem)?

 

[Capnkumquat]

Fitzbew88,
Nice...just nice.

I remember having a discussion once with someone about the nature of God and they were saying: "If God were the all powerful architect of the divine plan then how could there be freewill, because if God knows the outcome of all actions then I am not acting freely, I am just acting on a script that has been laid out before me."

This statement belies a complete and utter misunderstanding of what the existence of an all powerful infinite being might be. If God is all powerful and beyond all time and space then our human conception of time would have absolutely no meaning. For God, all time is now! Past to us, is now For God. Future to us, is now for God. God knows the future, not because he engineered it (obliterating freewill in the process) but because he is already there watching it unfold.

Omnipotence by definition is beyond all of our petty understanding. Merely understanding the concept and how it might relate to us in any meaningful way is practically at the edge of human conception. Think about it if you like, but it is unlikely that you or I will come up with anything even remotely encompassing the idea.

 

[fitzbew88]

Nice...just nice.
...

Omnipotence by definition is beyond all of our petty understanding. Merely understanding the concept and how it might relate to us in any meaningful way is practically at the edge of human conception. Think about it if you like, but it is unlikely that you or I will come up with anything even remotely encompassing the idea.

I think you are certainly right (we cannot comprehend it) -- but I still don't see a reason why the existence of God (and prayer and a Divine Plan) means that I have no free will.

As problematic as it is in many ways, "organized" religion has never instructed me that I do not have free will. In fact, the opposite seems to be true. "Organized" religion has always been fervently focused on trying to help me make the right choice.

Of course, I have no idea what the truth is. Perhaps my choices aren't changing anything. But as of yet I have heard no convincing argument that I do not have free choice or that the [supposed] Divine Plan cannot be flexible.

 

[Seth]

I still don't see a reason why the existence of God (and prayer and a Divine Plan) means that I have no free will.

The problem is when people think of free will they think of the opposite of this:

You shall have no other gods before me
You shall not make wrongful use of the name of your God
Remember the Sabbath and keep it holy
Honor your Father and Mother
You shall not murder*
You shall not commit adultery
You shall not steal
You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor
You shall not covet your neighbor's house
You shall not covet your neighbor's wife

I know free will MEANS something quite different, but not to the majority.

 

[CapnG]

Why is it a question of absolutes? Why couldn't the all-powerful choose to refer to their power only when it suits Them?

IT's absolutes because that's what being GOD means. As you just said, he's ALL-powerful, not semi-powerful or extremely powerful, he can do ANYTHING. If there is a Divine Plan, then the almighty has already chosen if, when and how to employ it's powers and to what capacity. Omniscient, remember?

Is there a reason to believe a Creator cannot just plant a seed and let the tree grow however it wishes? And only prune it as necessary (if there is a problem)?

You say that like God wouldn't know exactly how long it would take the tree to grow, when and where to prune it or exactly how long the tree will live.

I remember having a discussion once with someone about the nature of God and they were saying: "If God were the all powerful architect of the divine plan then how could there be freewill, because if God knows the outcome of all actions then I am not acting freely, I am just acting on a script that has been laid out before me."

That is essentially what I am saying... repeatedly. God is simply doing whatever the hell he's doing and we're all along for the ride.

If God is all powerful and beyond all time and space then our human conception of time would have absolutely no meaning. For God, all time is now! Past to us, is now For God. Future to us, is now for God.

Correct.

God knows the future, not because he engineered it (obliterating freewill in the process) but because he is already there watching it unfold.

Ah but God DID engineer what we percieve to be the future. And he did it day 1, millisecond 1. He had all of timespace mapped out from the get-go (Divine Plan).

Let me try and explain my viewpoint one more time: a key element you guys seem to be missing here is that a Divine Plan would require NO flexibility because in order for God to be truely omniscient he not only has to know everything in the universe he has to know everything about EVERYTHING including HIMSELF. Which is easy enough since all time is "now" to God. He knows what your prayers are before you ask them AND whether or not they will be answered. He knew it from the start. He had to, because he's GOD.

 

[fitzbew88]

I still don't see a reason why the existence of God (and prayer and a Divine Plan) means that I have no free will.

The problem is when people think of free will they think of the opposite of this:

You shall have no other gods before me
You shall not make wrongful use of the name of your God
Remember the Sabbath and keep it holy
Honor your Father and Mother
You shall not murder*
You shall not commit adultery
You shall not steal
You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor
You shall not covet your neighbor's house
You shall not covet your neighbor's wife

I know free will MEANS something quite different, but not to the majority.

I apologize, but I don't understand what you mean --- at least as far as how it's related to my quoted statement.

 

[fitzbew88]

Why is it a question of absolutes? Why couldn't the all-powerful choose to refer to their power only when it suits Them?

IT's absolutes because that's what being GOD means. As you just said, he's ALL-powerful, not semi-powerful or extremely powerful, he can do ANYTHING. If there is a Divine Plan, then the almighty has already chosen if, when and how to employ it's powers and to what capacity. Omniscient, remember?

But why can't he give me free will if He so chooses? Because he's all-powerful he's trapped in a prison of His own plans? It just doesn't seem like an intellectually honest conclusion to me.

Don't get me wrong! You may be right! It just doesn't seem logical to me.

Is there a reason to believe a Creator cannot just plant a seed and let the tree grow however it wishes? And only prune it as necessary (if there is a problem)?

You say that like God wouldn't know exactly how long it would take the tree to grow, when and where to prune it or exactly how long the tree will live.

If he chooses to do so, why not? He is God.

God knows the future, not because he engineered it (obliterating freewill in the process) but because he is already there watching it unfold.

Ah but God DID engineer what we percieve to be the future. And he did it day 1, millisecond 1. He had all of timespace mapped out from the get-go (Divine Plan).

Perhaps he did. But why can't it change? After all, God *does* have free will, right?

Let me try and explain my viewpoint one more time: a key element you guys seem to be missing here is that a Divine Plan would require NO flexibility because in order for God to be truely omniscient he not only has to know everything in the universe he has to know everything about EVERYTHING including HIMSELF. Which is easy enough since all time is "now" to God. He knows what your prayers are before you ask them AND whether or not they will be answered. He knew it from the start. He had to, because he's GOD.

But why couldn't it change from second to second? Being a Super-being does not preclude you from taking a hands-off approach and permitting your creations to make their own decisions.

 

[CapnG]

But why can't he give me free will if He so chooses? Because he's all-powerful he's trapped in a prison of His own plans? It just doesn't seem like an intellectually honest conclusion to me.

Well that's the beauty of it, isn't it? You may in fact have free will, or you may simply be coming to the descisions pre-calculated in the Divine Plan. Either way, from YOUR perspective, you have made a choice.

Don't get me wrong! You may be right! It just doesn't seem logical to me.

I don't know if there is a "right and wrong" here, this is philosophy, not chemistry!

If he chooses to do so, why not? He is God.

Perhaps he did. But why can't it change? After all, God *does* have free will, right?

But why couldn't it change from second to second? Being a Super-being does not preclude you from taking a hands-off approach and permitting your creations to make their own decisions.

A three-fer! Being a Super-being wouldn't preclude you from anything but it would eliminate the need for such things since it would effectively have all been done ahead of time and been done from moment to moment AND been retroactively corrected (if need be) upon it's conclusion due to the advantages of your timeless nature.

 

[Brian Now]

This statement belies a complete and utter misunderstanding of what the existence of an all powerful infinite being might be. If God is all powerful and beyond all time and space then our human conception of time would have absolutely no meaning. For God, all time is now! Past to us, is now For God. Future to us, is now for God. God knows the future, not because he engineered it (obliterating freewill in the process) but because he is already there watching it unfold.

Underdog, assuming what you say is true about time it doesn't change anything really. Imagine a situation where you find a way to communicate directly with God. You ask "Hey, God, what I am going to be doing 5 years from today?". How God knows the answer to that question doesn't matter. If he tells you that you'll be jobless living out of the back of your car then that's the way it will be!

You will naturally resist this outcome with God, and say how you'd never let that happen to yourself, but you know that He can't be God and be wrong at the same time.

 

[Ron Collins]

Personally, I do not believe that the creator of man need be the creator of everything. I think it is easy to ascribe that to him since his abilities seemed limitless to those without the benefits of technology. We are similar to our creator god yet not the same. Much like artificial intelligence promises to deliver.

Let’s suppose that in the future true cognitive AI becomes a reality. At that point we can easily create semi-sentient robots. But, roboticists are already starting to evolve into the realm of organic robotics. The idea is to have parts that can actively repair themselves.

It is not a huge leap to assume that at some point we will create bio-machines (for a lack of a better term) that operate with a degree of cognition and intelligence. Nor is it too far out to assume that these models would be used to fulfill wide and various job functions. Say as a sociological study project.

We find a nice and quiet out of the way place and let the bio-bots alone only checking on them from time to time.

Now, sure, some leaps of logic have to be made here. Let’s not get too caught up in the technical details. It’s the concept I am after here. If these beings are created from wholly inorganic, inert ingredients into living organisms of diminished mental capacity and technological skill were told a very brief and dumbed down story of their creation and then taught some basic skills of survival. To that being, are we not their creator. Would we not seemingly possess limitless power, knowledge, and benevolence?

My point is simply that our concept of God is a human perception of what being a “God” means. That perception is constantly altering. We have hundreds of Religions each with their own dogma because we have no direct access to the source. It’s our best guess. Followers of each religion believe that it is theirs that is “right”. Again, perceptions reign not incontrovertible fact.

Is it possible that our preconceived notions of “God” exist because of our distant ancestors inability to make sense of technology? Could we, humans, have invented the concept of a “God” to explain the inexplicable?

 

[fitzbew88]

I don't know if there is a "right and wrong" here, this is philosophy, not chemistry!

I agree with you (although if there is a God, he is probably laughing at us).

...Being a Super-being wouldn't preclude you from anything but it would eliminate the need for such things since it would effectively have all been done ahead of time and been done from moment to moment AND been retroactively corrected (if need be) upon it's conclusion due to the advantages of your timeless nature.

This makes perfect sense to me.

Stipulating to the existence of God, I wonder what his motive for all this would be. Entertainment? An experiment? (I am surely going to get struck by lightning.)
This could be a whole new thread. Frankly, I'm too exhausted to consider it. :frown:

 

[mike]

"Could we, humans, have invented the concept of a “God” to explain the inexplicable? "

thats the premise behind the god gap theory.
. The idea being that God is invoked to explain the inexplicable. As science has progressed the inexplicable has narrowed and left smaller and smaller gaps in our understanding. These gaps are called upon, by the stubborn believers, to prove God exists.

we humans need explainations, and if the science of the day doesnt provide them then we use "God" as an explaination


is god real ?, only in the sense that your insurance policy doesnt cover "acts of god"

 

[Capnkumquat]

[/quote]
Underdog, assuming what you say is true about time it doesn't change anything really. Imagine a situation where you find a way to communicate directly with God. You ask "Hey, God, what I am going to be doing 5 years from today?". How God knows the answer to that question doesn't matter. If he tells you that you'll be jobless living out of the back of your car then that's the way it will be!

You will naturally resist this outcome with God, and say how you'd never let that happen to yourself, but you know that He can't be God and be wrong at the same time.
[/quote]
-----------------------------
Brian,

Surely the God who is beyond all understanding, creator of the universe, inventor of chocolate and ice-cream would not be fooled into violating freewill in such a simple situation, or disallowing his own omnipotence.

If I were to guess what the supreme being might tell such a supplicant it would be one of two types of prophecy types I have some passing knowledge with.

Type 1. An event is going to happen, there is nothing you can do to stop it so do what I say and you will live or at least turn it to your advantage. (ex. Dear Lot your city is going to be annihilated you should probably sell your house and oh, by the way...don't look bad it could be bad)

Type 2. If you follow a particular course this is what will happen. (ex. Joshua take your army into the promised land and no one will be able to stand against you as long as you follow My rules...got it...hop to it boys!)

Neither one of these violate freewill! They foretell of future events but leave the details to chance and personal ambition. It even allows for the actions of the people most associated with the prophecy to not abide the will or direction of God..usually ending rather poorly. The Bible, Koran, Talmud, etc...are full of such situations in which knowledge of future events allowed the event to be changed.

The future is mutable and God is there to see it change.

---------------------------------

The answer to the question, if God were willing to answer your person would likely be something like...If you keep on your present course, you will end up jobless and homeless in 5 years. I'd recommend you stop gambling, drinking, and fooling around so much.

 

[CapnG]

Stipulating to the existence of God, I wonder what his motive for all this would be. Entertainment? An experiment?

I tend to lean towards the latter. Of course, that would imply purpose, whereas it's also possible that God is insane and created the universe for no reason at all...

This could be a whole new thread. Frankly, I'm too exhausted to consider it. :frown:

Yep. Only question more philosophically tangled than "Does God exist?" would have to be "WHY does God exist?". Until we know why WE exist, we should probably shelve that one.

 

[Brian Now]

Brian,

Surely the God who is beyond all understanding, creator of the universe, inventor of chocolate and ice-cream would not be fooled into violating freewill in such a simple situation, or disallowing his own omnipotence.

That's what they tell us anyway.

If I were to guess what the supreme being might tell such a supplicant it would be one of two types of prophecy types I have some passing knowledge with.

Type 1. An event is going to happen, there is nothing you can do to stop it so do what I say and you will live or at least turn it to your advantage....

Type 2. If you follow a particular course this is what will happen....

Neither one of these violate freewill! They foretell of future events but leave the details to chance and personal ambition.

Ok, those might or might not violate your freewill, but those aren't like my hypothetical conversation with God. In mine, God foretells what you will do/become in the future, not specifically that some external event would happen to you.

But I don't know why we continue talking about this...after all, if you told me you really had this conversation with God I'd think you were crazy.
Speaking of "Conversations with God" has anyone read that Neal Donald Walsch series??

[size=x-small]I'm kidding, please don't flame me because I brought up that tripe.[/size]

 

[Ron Collins]

Surely the God who is beyond all understanding, creator of the universe, inventor of chocolate and ice-cream would not be fooled into violating freewill in such a simple situation, or disallowing his own omnipotence.

I understand that it is meant as humor, but God did not invent chocolate (I think it was the Mayans) or ice cream (Pretty sure it was the Persians). Nor did God invent anything else we use in our daily lives. People did. Ordinary people did. Yet, nearly everything is attributed to God or was inspired by God.

You have done that very thing with your statement. Whether you meant to or not. This sort of language helps to demonstrate a serious chasm of how humans are "meant" to perceive their god.

So the trend is to glorify God in our successes. Yet, when our house burns down or a family member is brutally Murdered, or the family that watches a 2 year old die of cancer, we are not to blame God.

Instead, we vilify man and then provide comfort phraseology to the victim. "You have to have faith" or "They are in a better place now, praise Jesus."

Every time you ask tough questions of religion you get the standard "It is not for us to know or understand" or "the Lord works in mysterious ways".

Sure free will can be invoked to show causality in the murder. But what of the prayers that went out to save the life of the 2 year old? What are we to make of a god that can hear these prayers but chooses to ignore them? A God that chooses to inject as much pain into the world as love.

The concept of Supreme God allowing alterations to his plan through prayer becomes murkier when this is considered. The concept of a Supreme God that would make the death of a 2 year old part of his plan to begin with seems a bit suspect when that same God professes to love us all unconditionally.

 

[CapnG]

The concept of a Supreme God that would make the death of a 2 year old part of his plan to begin with seems a bit suspect when that same God professes to love us all unconditionally.

Incorrect. Humans make the CLAIM God loves us unconditionally because the notion of an indifferent creator frightens people.

 

[BrandonD]

Incorrect. Humans make the CLAIM God loves us unconditionally because the notion of an indifferent creator frightens people.

I agree. People assume when someone says the word "God" that they also mean "benevolent", because all religions that exist today speak of god in a benevolent sense.

But I see no good arguments against an indifferent or even malevolent creator being, and it actually fits observable reality better than a benevolent god.