Free will in heaven?

[gaara4158]

Everything we observe has a beginning , a middle and an end. Something that begins can't be the beginner. What is an alternative? A universe that is an infinite regress. That kind of infinity isn't the infinity conceptualized by physicists. Can the pot tell the potter what he made it for? What is right for it to be used for and what would be a wrong use?

In the words of Neil Degrasse Tyson, we’ve got top people working on that question. And to add a quip of my own, if chamberpots could talk, they’d have some choice words for the potter.

The foundation of animal morality is the sensitive powers of the soul. That is the sum of their power. That being so their morality is similar to some humans who seek the good of their flesh instead of their spirit. The good that the sensitive powers seek is limited to the senses. "If it feels good do it". Will, reason and conscience reside in the intellect. The good that is the natural object of the will is the good of God. "Do what ought to be done". There are no intellectual powers evident in the life of other animals. For example an animal experiencing a blow that causes pain experiences that suffering without interpreting with self awareness. So if it feels a blow continuously one after another it doesn't experience it as an accumulated experience of suffering like a human. For us we would be thinking "when will this end?" The animal would have to be self aware for that. Without it the animal experiences the pain of the blow that is current and is unable to connect it to the preceding blows. There isn't an awareness of how long it's been happening. That requires an "I am" kind of awareness This is an added dimension to suffering that requires intellect and only humans experience. The Elephants visit graveyards because they are very developed social animals. It's attachment that draws them to the smell of their dead family members.

Again, how can you be so sure? Are you a zoologist? You’re making a lot of definitive claims about the psyches of all nonhuman animals, and using religious vocabulary no less. I’m just wondering what your credentials are to be making these claims.

That science assumes that the universe is intelligible is an act of faith in an immutable underlying structure. Governed by laws that we can use to predict outcomes and by laws that scientists rely on to do science is evidence that the universe is not chaotic at all.

What do you mean? Chaos is ubiquitous in the universe. Stars burn out and explode. Planets collide. Oil rigs malfunction. People get lost and starve to death. Betrayal happens. Finding a balance between chaos and order is a constant struggle in every individual’s life. The fundamental assumption that the universe is intelligible is provisional, upheld for as long as it aids the production of predictive models of reality.

Placing a god at the foundation for an intelligible universe saddles him with responsibility for everything we intelligently observe, including chaos and evil.

 

[Ana the Ist]

The foundation of animal morality is the sensitive powers of the soul. That is the sum of their power. That being so their morality is similar to some humans who seek the good of their flesh instead of their spirit. The good that the sensitive powers seek is limited to the senses. "If it feels good do it". Will, reason and conscience reside in the intellect. The good that is the natural object of the will is the good of God. "Do what ought to be done". There are no intellectual powers evident in the life of other animals. For example an animal experiencing a blow that causes pain experiences that suffering without interpreting with self awareness. So if it feels a blow continuously one after another it doesn't experience it as an accumulated experience of suffering like a human. For us we would be thinking "when will this end?" The animal would have to be self aware for that. Without it the animal experiences the pain of the blow that is current and is unable to connect it to the preceding blows. There isn't an awareness of how long it's been happening. That requires an "I am" kind of awareness This is an added dimension to suffering that requires intellect and only humans experience. The Elephants visit graveyards because they are very developed social animals. It's attachment that draws them to the smell of their dead family members.

Everything we observe has a beginning , a middle and an end. Something that begins can't be the beginner. What is an alternative? A universe that is an infinite regress. That kind of infinity isn't the infinity conceptualized by physicists. Can the pot tell the potter what he made it for? What is right for it to be used for and what would be a wrong use?

That science assumes that the universe is intelligible is an act of faith in an immutable underlying structure. Governed by laws that we can use to predict outcomes and by laws that scientists rely on to do science is evidence that the universe is not chaotic at all.

You're pretty much just writing a bunch of deepities.

 

[Eloy Craft]

You're pretty much just writing a bunch of deepities.

Deepities? ☺ Im sorry. Im a lazy writer. I'm willing to clarify though if asked.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

Again, you assume that gasses mixed with the helium wouldn't vary in the different locations.

I didn't say anything about other gases mixed with the helium. You're just dodging the question.

This is like saying that the soil and seed don't matter if it's just going to become a plant.

Another dodge. The seed contains the genetic code that will be in the plant, as well as nutrients that it will consume. So aside from genetics the plant will also share physical material with the seed.

What will remain the same when you get a new body and a new nature in heaven?

Did I say that the rookie shouldn't ask questions? I said the rookie should not so quick to make assumptions. There is nothing wrong with wanting to understand. Maybe you can tell and maybe you can't, but my natural inclination is to question everything. The thing is, when you get lost in the game of just responding and not listening, you're not giving consideration to what is being said. I'm not just giving you answers to defend my position, I'm responding to questions that I've had to wrestle with myself and seek clarity on. I don't claim supreme knowledge, but i am trying to share with you some incites I've seen along the way.

I find it difficult to believe that you've wrestled with a lot of issues like this and remained Christian. There are dozens of seriously crippling things wrong with Christianity.

 

[Eloy Craft]

Again, how can you be so sure? Are you a zoologist? You’re making a lot of definitive claims about the psyches of all nonhuman animals, and using religious vocabulary no less. I’m just wondering what your credentials are to be making these claims.

that would matter if you had evidence that I wrote something obviously unreasonable.

What do you mean? Chaos is ubiquitous in the universe. Stars burn out and explode. Planets collide. Oil rigs malfunction. People get lost and starve to death. Betrayal happens. Finding a balance between chaos and order is a constant struggle in every individual’s life. The fundamental assumption that the universe is intelligible is provisional, upheld for as long as it aids the production of predictive models of real

nothing happens outside known physical laws how much more ordered does the universe have to be to not be chaotic?

Placing a god at the foundation for an intelligible universe saddles him with responsibility for everything we intelligently observe, including chaos and evil.

Not in a universe with rational self determined creatures

 

[holo]

Free will is what makes love so powerful. If you train a dog to greet you at the door with excitement when you get home, does it mean the same thing as when he does it because that's how he feels?

No, but if I had a lot of dogs and my options were to either force them all to be good and feel good, or to let them choose freely and then kill all those who weren't good, I'd go with forcing them. Because I absolutely love dogs.

 

[gaara4158]

that would matter if you had evidence that I wrote something obviously unreasonable.

I didn’t say it was necessarily unreasonable, just vague and unsupported. In other words, talking out your behind.

nothing happens outside known physical laws how much more ordered does the universe have to be to not be chaotic?

Oh, that’s not true at all. There’s plenty we still don’t fully understand in physics. Even if we did, the fact that we can observe and understand chaos doesn’t make it not chaos.

Not in a universe with rational self determined creatures

Yes it does, if the creator made them that way.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I can see why you’d say that if you accept God as some kind of ultimate moral arbiter, but it’s meaningless to someone who doesn’t. I have as much a right to judge God against my standards as he does to judge me against his. If he decides to smite me because I’d rather see billions of people live happily than suffer so a few might come to love this cosmic thug, so be it. I’ll die knowing I’m morally superior.

The key here would be to identify the social space and context by which "you think" you have the right to judge God. Besides, it sounds to me like you're perhaps reacting against a particular shade of Abrahamic religion or a particularly denominational interpretation of Christian doctrine rather than against God/Jesus/the Holy Spirit as He may actually be.

And how is it that you come by the idea that one can be "morally superior" ... if you admit there is no central 'real' core to ethics and morality. It sounds kind of like double-speak.

 

[Eloy Craft]

I didn’t say it was necessarily unreasonable, just vague and unsupported. In other words, talking out your behind.

Don't you think you should posit some rebutle so you aren't just making an ad hominem statement?

Oh, that’s not true at all. There’s plenty we still don’t fully understand in physics. Even if we did, the fact that we can observe and understand chaos doesn’t make it not chaos.

so, there are things we don't understand. Guess how they will be discovered? They will be predicted because matter follows the rules. Chaos
Chaos

noun

1. a state of utter confusion or disorder; a total lack of organization or order.
2. any confused, disorderly mass:a chaos of meaningless phrases.
3. the infinity of space or formless matter supposed to have preceded the existence of the ordered

Yes it does, if the creator made them that way.

A creature by definition lacks access to the information required to judge it's creator.

 

[gaara4158]

The key here would be to identify the social space and context by which "you think" you have the right to judge God. Besides, it sounds to me like you're perhaps reacting against a particular shade of Abrahamic religion or a particularly denominational interpretation of Christian doctrine rather than against God/Jesus/the Holy Spirit as He may actually be.

Well, that would depend on where we think rights come from. If might makes right, as some here seem to be saying, then because I have the ability to judge God based on my standards, I automatically have the right to do so. If might doesn’t make right, then you need to explain what gives God the right to judge me and what prevents me from judging God. As far as what concept of God I’m reacting to, you’re right. I’m much more sympathetic to metaphorical interpretations of scripture, but then the concept of a literal, anthropomorphic god dissolves.

And how is it that you come by the idea that one can be "morally superior" ... if you admit there is no central 'real' core to ethics and morality. It sounds kind of like double-speak.

I’m not referring to any objective moral standard, just a moral standard you and I both agree is conducive to human flourishing. It’s not dissimilar to the concept of language. There’s no “real” core to what sounds should correspond to what concepts, but that doesn’t stop us from enforcing vocabulary and grammar for the purpose of clear communication.

 

[gaara4158]

Don't you think you should posit some rebutle so you aren't just making an ad hominem statement?

I never said anything about you. I just asked for your credentials, since what you said was at odds with what actual authorities on the subject have said. Why should we listen to you over them?

so, there are things we don't understand. Guess how they will be discovered? They will be predicted because matter follows the rules. Chaos
Chaos

noun

1. a state of utter confusion or disorder; a total lack of organization or order.
2. any confused, disorderly mass:a chaos of meaningless phrases.
3. the infinity of space or formless matter supposed to have preceded the existence of the ordered

Science operates under the base assumption that the universe is intelligible. That doesn’t mean it necessarily is, just that if it is, we can make predictive models of reality that can help to inform our decisions. What’s your point?

A creature by definition lacks access to the information required to judge it's creator.

Sure. So why trust the creator?

 

[Eloy Craft]

I never said anything about you. I just asked for your credentials, since what you said was at odds with what actual authorities on the subject have said. Why should we listen to you over them?

Why didn't you just post or share what the authority has to say on the subject? That would have prevented alot of useless dialogue.

Sure. So why trust the creator?

If you have a reason to be it's found in the reasoning of your creator.

 

[Eloy Craft]

If might doesn’t make right, then you need to explain what gives God the right to judge me and what prevents me from judging God.

That's been explained. Your answer was basically "nu huh."

If might makes right, as some here seem to be saying, then because I have the ability to judge God based on my standards, I automatically have the right to do so.

Maybe you do have that right. How would you go about doing it?

 

[gaara4158]

If you have a reason to be it's found in the reasoning of your creator.

Sure. Do you have access to that reasoning?

 

[gaara4158]

That's been explained. Your answer was basically "nu huh."

Only because your argument was basically “uh huh!”

 

[gaara4158]

Maybe you do have that right. How would you go about doing it?

I just did.

 

[Eloy Craft]

Sure. Do you have access to that reasoning?

Whether I do or not doesn't change the truth that the reason you exist is His. Reasoning is the human mode of knowing not necessary for God.

 

[gaara4158]

Whether I do or not doesn't change the truth that the reason you exist is His. Reasoning is the human mode of knowing not necessary for God.

That doesn’t get us any closer to a reason to value God’s professed judgement.

 

[gaara4158]

Whether I do or not doesn't change the truth that the reason you exist is His. Reasoning is the human mode of knowing not necessary for God.

Well, you can’t tell me anything I do is immoral unless you do that first, so...

 

[akaDaScribe]

Well then God is a tyrant. Why worship a tyrant?

If you own a company and you decide how the company runs, I don't think that makes you a tyrant.

Everyone may not agree with what you're doing, but it's your call.