Free will or Determinism?

[Guest the fox]

14 minutes ago, Benguin said:

Not sealed no. God knows the outcome but that doesn’t mean you couldn’t change it.

 

think of it like watching Leicester vs man united 5-3 to us. We know how it ended but the players had free will still.

 We have the free will to do whatever but our fate is known by God so we've already made our future choices. 

Edited 9 August 2018 by the fox

[Benguin]

7 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

But if we accept the concept of intelligent design ('God' for want of a better word) it still leaves us with the same logical conundrum: either 'God' was Himself created (which just pushes the question back - who/what created the creator of the Creator) or 'God' always existed - again, the only logical conclusion. And if we accept either premise, it is no less likely that there is no 'God'.

 

A belief in 'God' isn't supported by logic and thus can only ever be an article of faith.

You’re holding a supernatural being to natural laws by saying who created the creator. 

[Benguin]

9 minutes ago, the fox said:

 We have the free will to do whatever but our fate is known by God so we've already made our future choices. 

 

Agree, apart from the last bit. We are bound by time whereas god is not. God knows our choices but we can still choose. 

[Buce]

3 minutes ago, Benguin said:

You’re holding a supernatural being to natural laws by saying who created the creator. 

 

So what is your belief?

 

Are you saying that 'God' always existed?

[Benguin]

12 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

A singular quantum event or the collapse of an already existing universe (though in that case the infinity argument still applies) are two equally plausible theories off the top of my head.

 

FWIW I don't think the question means that much as it could be any cause at all and it wouldn't affect humanity directly, because even though the idea of a non interventionist god causing the Big Bang is reasonable, the idea of one intervening in human life in a way we can comprehend or understand certainly is not IMO.

I don’t use the Kalam cosmological argument to prove Jesus, only to show belief in a god is logically coherent. Why Jesus exists is a totally different debate. 

[Benguin]

Just now, Buce said:

 

So what is your belief?

 

Are you saying that 'God' always existed?

The Big Bang created time so who or whatever created the Big Bang has to be timeless, so yes God is eternal.

[ozleicester]

21 minutes ago, Benguin said:

At least you’re honest. Without God you cannot claim to know anything.

Nope,

There is no truth because we all see, hear, smell, feel everything differently.

I can (and do) claim to know many things.

[Buce]

2 minutes ago, Benguin said:

The Big Bang created time so who or whatever created the Big Bang has to be timeless, so yes God is eternal.

 

If you can accept that 'God' is eternal then logic dictates that you have to accept that it is equally likely that matter is eternal and thus doesn't need a Creator.

[ozleicester]

Once again... god is not the only option regarding determinism and the discussion should not get lost in arguing that one channel

[Benguin]

4 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

If you can accept that 'God' is eternal then logic dictates that you have to accept that it is equally likely that matter is eternal and thus doesn't need a Creator.

We know from science that that is not possible, of course matter can come from other matter but eventually there would need to have been something from nothing.

[Benguin]

7 minutes ago, ozleicester said:

Nope,

There is no truth because we all see, hear, smell, feel everything differently.

I can (and do) claim to know many things.

Claim to know and know are very different.

[Buce]

2 minutes ago, Benguin said:

We know from science that that is not possible

 

 

 

We know that is not possible in this universe, but the laws that govern this universe were established after its creation; what physical laws existed before the 'Big Bang' are unknown and unknowable.

 

2 minutes ago, Benguin said:

 

, of course matter can come from other matter but eventually there would need to have been something from nothing.

 

Which brings us back to 'God'; if you postulate that He must have always existed, you cannot use the argument to refute the possibility of matter having always existed.

[Drew Peacock]

30 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

A singular quantum event or the collapse of an already existing universe (though in that case the infinity argument still applies) are two equally plausible theories off the top of my head.

 

FWIW I don't think the question means that much as it could be any cause at all and it wouldn't affect humanity directly, because even though the idea of a non interventionist god causing the Big Bang is reasonable, the idea of one intervening in human life in a way we can comprehend or understand certainly is not IMO.

An intervening God.

I know people who praise God if their bus arrives on time or if there is nice weather for their church event, after they prayed for such. But there are also people who pray for their child to recover from cancer, but they don’t.

For me bad things happening doesn’t rule out the existence of God, but if he does exist, his intervening in every aspect of life is a nonsense. Otherwise he favours some people more than others.

Believers in a personal relationship with God are on a win /win. If their prayers are ‘answered’ it’s ‘God is good’. If they are not answered it’s ‘For the greater unknown scheme of things.

 

[Guest]

55 minutes ago, Benguin said:

Truth belongs to god. Without god you can only have illusory truth’s 

You sound crazier with every passing post you make. And you never answered my questions about the afterlife or whether the God you are imagining is an interventionist being.

 

I presume that your belief in a God also means you have to believe in the Devil too. At least I can see the possible interventions of a devil on earth (though I personally just think it's man) whereas your God either doesn't care about his "children" or he's a really nasty bugger worse than the devil.

 

 

52 minutes ago, Drew Peacock said:

But equally how can you claim 100% that God exists? I’d like to believe he/it does but does anybody know for certain?

What is "belief" in this situation? Something the individual needs because of a fear of the alternative?

 

 

28 minutes ago, Benguin said:

You’re holding a supernatural being to natural laws by saying who created the creator. 

Do you believe in "superheroes" like Superman or the possibility that Aliens came and created man on earth?

[leicsmac]

22 minutes ago, Benguin said:

I don’t use the Kalam cosmological argument to prove Jesus, only to show belief in a god is logically coherent. Why Jesus exists is a totally different debate. 

Logically plausible, perhaps, yeah. Given that we don't have any hard evidence for the inception of the rapid inflationary state of the Universe (I hate the term "Big Bang") a creator starting it off is as plausible as any other theory.

 

However, I don't buy the idea of certainty either way and I don't get the appeal of doing more than simply acknowledging the possibility of a creator when sich a being would in ways that we cannot and never can understand and cannot attribute to them with certainty because of that.

 

In short, why worship or praise a being when there's nothing directly in it for you other than to make yourself feel better about life (a pretty decent reason by itself tbh)?

 

2 minutes ago, Drew Peacock said:

An intervening God.

I know people who praise God if their bus arrives on time or if there is nice weather for their church event, after they prayed for such. But there are also people who pray for their child to recover from cancer, but they don’t.

For me bad things happening doesn’t rule out the existence of God, but if he does exist, his intervening in every aspect of life is a nonsense. Otherwise he favours some people more than others.

Believers in a personal relationship with God are on a win /win. If their prayers are ‘answered’ it’s ‘God is good’. If they are not answered it’s ‘For the greater unknown scheme of things.

 

Exactly. Such a creator is either entirely noninterventionist in ways we understand (in which case asking for their help and guidance is of no use) or actively discriminatory (in which case I'm not sure such a deity deserves any kind of praise or worship).

[Drew Peacock]

2 hours ago, FIF said:

 

What is "belief" in this situation? Something the individual needs because of a fear of the alternative?

Not at all fear of the alternative for me. If the world has no deeper meaning than the here and now, then so be it.

I guess intrigue about the possibility is a better description rather than belief.

Something has happened that is far beyond our understanding that causes us to be here and aware that we are here.

Nothing can explain what is truth until we have proof. But not having any proof doesn’t mean it’s not true either.

There is unanswered questions in science and rationality. A missing link. And lots of weird beliefs fill the vacuum for some people.

So because our minds are limited I’m open to any number of possibilities, but realise frustratingly that I will probably never know even when I die.

But maybe then I will. ?‍♂️