God's will and quantum mechanics

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Ah, there are more than just a few Christians that can tell you they were profoundly changed. It's not going to be every last person in a church, but it will be more than just a few in many churches.

This even ties into the thread topic in a way. In the OP, a theory is offered for discussion on how (physically through physics) God is choosing things to happen in order to accomplish His purposes. A hypothesis about how He might be intervening. In the text of scripture, God specifically is said to work to help us change for the better, including sending us trials or such that might help us to change. So, one motivation for this OP theory is trying to offer a hypothesis on how that might be done. Of course, many hypotheses about how God might intervene are possible.

OK. I look forward to seeing the evidence.

 

[Halbhh]

OK. I look forward to seeing the evidence.

If you mean for the OP theory, it could be a while if ever. These 'interpretations' of QM seem to all be without any supporting evidence that singles them out above other theories, save for taking Copenhagen as a final theory (one way to interpret the Copenhagen Interpretation is to theorize it's the final thing and there's nothing else coming, lol).

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

If you mean for the OP theory, it could be a while if ever. These 'interpretations' of QM seem to all be without any supporting evidence that singles them out above other theories, save for taking Copenhagen as a final theory (one way to interpret the Copenhagen Interpretation is to theorize it's the final thing and there's nothing else coming, lol).

No, I was referring to the claim that a God belief helped prevent wrongdoing (see post #44).

The Copenhagen interpretation is the least convincing of the major interpretations, introducing, as it does, an ad-hoc instantaneous probabilistic wavefunction-collapse discontinuity into its otherwise uniform and deterministic evolution.

 

[Halbhh]

No, I was referring to the claim that a God belief helped prevent wrongdoing (see post #44).

The Copenhagen interpretation is the least convincing of the major interpretations, introducing, as it does, an ad-hoc instantaneous probabilistic wavefunction-collapse discontinuity into its otherwise uniform and deterministic evolution.

Well, you can see it's straightforward to expect that if a person truly does believe in God and understands God see all that they do.... and if the person has some awareness of the many warnings to us about that:

From Christ we read these famous words to us:

12 “So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets. 13 Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. 14 For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few.

...21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not...do many mighty works in your name?’ 23 And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’
24 “Everyone then who hears these words of mine and does them will be like a wise man who built his house on the rock. 25 And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house, but it did not fall, because it had been founded on the rock. 26 And everyone who hears these words of mine and does not do them will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand. 27 And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell, and great was the fall of it.”

It's just so clear: if we don't do as He taught, we will be destroyed after this life....

So, if you can consider what that would mean to someone that truly believes....someone that believes will have this awareness of the real situation causing them at times to admit wrongs they have done and 'repent' (turn away) from that particular kind of wrong -- for which repentance we know we receive redemption -- and so that person will have with gradual lasting changes in their personality/behavior. That's not hard to expect would happen some, right? Sure, not everyone will be the same -- some might reform better/sooner, etc. -- but it's like a constant gravitational force towards positive change...if one believes. Notice that emphasis -- I say "if one believes". Many in churches do not believe in this manner. But many do also. Churches tend to have some that believe and some that do not.

 

[FredVB]

God's will isn't the reality, God is good. We can see a lot of good on the reality that is from God, but it is not all good, and those things would not be, as God is good, unless things are happening that are not God's will. We have responsibilities and we are fallen from living according to God's will, from the first disobedience to God. Repentance is needed, and that is willing to turn away from living like we can go on without God, and seeking to do according to God's will when God's grace is made known to us. Many who come to that still need to learn there is God's perfect will, and that is known with knowing there was God's perfect design in the beginning with things that were right for us.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Well, you can see it's straightforward to expect that if a person truly does believe in God and understands God see all that they do.... and if the person has some awareness of the many warnings to us about that: ...

I understand that one might expect that to be the case, but it's a testable expectation (hypothesis) for which I've seen no evidence in support.

For example, we know from experiments that given subliminal cues that they're being watched, e.g. a nearby poster with a face on it, or even just an image of eyes, people tend to act more honestly - whether they're believers or atheists. If a god belief had the effect you suggest, we'd expect that believers would tend to act more honestly than atheists whether or not they have the subliminal cues - but they don't. Similarly, your suggestion would lead us to believe that religious societies should have significantly less crime than secular ones, but AFAIAA, they don't (except where harshly punitive regimes are in control).

That's why I was asking for evidence in support of the expected effects on wrongdoing of a god belief.

 

[FredVB]

I wonder what basis would be had for discerning between good and bad. Is it conforming to cultural expectations without questioning? What if someone else disagrees? How will it be shown who is right? The one with a greater number of others who agree to something?

 

[FireDragon76]

I do not want to endorse Francis Collins because he removed the Government ban and approved the money for high-risk research on the coronavirus.

You do realize that's a logical fallacy? Just because a scientist allegedly (and it's by no means proven, it's more a conspiracy theory) does something you don't like doesn't mean what he has to say isn't true.

But before all of that corruption, he did write a book on DNA being the "Language of God".

The problem is the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. God is only good. Man is good and evil. That is why he is perishing because he is a dichotomy. It gets complicated trying to understand God's plan and purpose.

You're engaged in category confusion. "the Tree of knowledge of Good and Evil" is a religious symbol taken from what has been known as a mythic story since Augustine. It is not science or metaphysics.

 

[Diamond7]

Just because a scientist allegedly (and it's by no means proven)

I have done my own research and arrived at my own conclusions. Although it may be difficult to get the language model bots to accept my conclusions. They seem to want to try to protect the directors of programs.

 

[Diamond7]

You're engaged in category confusion. "the Tree of knowledge of Good and Evil" is a religious symbol taken from what has been known as a mythic story since Augustine. It is not science or metaphysics.

"Mystic story" is the wrong term and a weakness of public education that does not teach mythology. The Bible is considered to be a paradigm or an archetype. Disney likes to use archetypes (like the warrior princess). I can come up with a LONG list of words you can use. Allegory, homiletics, symbol, parable and so on.

For many religious communities, including Christians, Jews, and Muslims, the Bible is considered to be a sacred text that contains both historical fact and divine truth. These individuals view the stories in the Bible as being literally true and believe that they are revelations from God about the nature of the world and humanity's place in it.

It is important to respect different perspectives and to maintain a respectful and professional tone, especially when discussing sensitive topics such as religious beliefs. It is essential to engage in respectful and open-minded dialogue, even when people disagree, in order to promote understanding and promote a positive and inclusive environment.

The idea is that in order to have productive and meaningful conversations, it is important for all parties to approach the conversation with respect, openness, and a willingness to listen and understand different perspectives.

 

[FireDragon76]

"Mystic story" is the wrong term and a weakness of public education that does not teach mythology. The Bible is considered to be a paradigm or an archetype. Disney likes to use archetypes (like the warrior princess). I can come up with a LONG list of words you can use. Allegory, homiletics, symbol, parable and so on.

For many religious communities, including Christians, Jews, and Muslims, the Bible is considered to be a sacred text that contains both historical fact and divine truth. These individuals view the stories in the Bible as being literally true and believe that they are revelations from God about the nature of the world and humanity's place in it.

It is important to respect different perspectives and to maintain a respectful and professional tone, especially when discussing sensitive topics such as religious beliefs. It is essential to engage in respectful and open-minded dialogue, even when people disagree, in order to promote understanding and promote a positive and inclusive environment.

The idea is that in order to have productive and meaningful conversations, it is important for all parties to approach the conversation with respect, openness, and a willingness to listen and understand different perspectives.

Is this taken from a chat bot?

 

[Hans Blaster]

"Mystic story" is the wrong term and a weakness of public education that does not teach mythology.

We learned a bit of mythology in elementary school. None of the christian kind as it was a public school and the pupils could get confused.

 

[FireDragon76]

We learned a bit of mythology in elementary school. None of the christian kind as it was a public school and the pupils could get confused.

All myths are potentially mystical, depending on the context. Mystical just implies there is something hidden within them that is understood at a deeper level than the surface appearances, typically by treating the stories as symbols.

It is possible to see Genesis 1-2 as "true myths", in the sense that somebody like C.S. Lewis did. But that's not a justification for confusing them with a scientific account of the natural world, or a philosophical account of metaphysics.