How to prove that GOD exists from a scientific point of view?

[dickyh995]

The evidence you and I have to account for is the universe we live in.
What is your reasonable explanation for why it is here?

Is there a why question here? I'm more interested in the "how" and until that is well evidenced "I don't know" is the honest answer.

 

[Ken-1122]

My reply directly quoted your question "In your view, did she have a choice?" I answered "yes" and included a short list of possible choices. You specifically said "No" to that reply. That's not agreeing with my statement that she had a choice, it is very clearly disagreeing with it. After that, you turned it into a discussion of what "know" means.

Seems we had a misunderstanding here. When I said no, it was in reference to the short list of possible choices you provided, not that she didn't have a choice. I was as certain she wouldn't have picked any of the other choices you mentioned as I was that she wouldn't pick Chocolate ice cream. But you're right; she could have picked any of those other choices you mentioned just as she could have picked chocolate, even though I was 100% certain she would not.

 

[Kylie]

If you knew your own future, you would be able to change it, which means you don't know your own future.

How could I change my future if my future is predetermined?

 

[Kylie]

You had the choice of jumping out of the plane, or not jumping. What does falling have to do with whether you chose or not?

It's starting to seem like you are deliberately misinterpreting my posts.

 

[Kylie]

Ok, so how does the question of whether God caused it, or inanimate First Cause caused it make any difference? It was predetermined, going to happen exactly as it did, either way.

There is no difference. I'm just using God as a mechanism to illustrate the point I am trying to make - namely that if anything is predestined, we can't have free will.

 

[Mark Quayle]

The intellectual dishonesty on display is not mine

You're now confusing the final choice made with the options presented. Of course only one option will ultimately be chosen. The part you are unable to grasp is that, until you have chosen that final option, all other options must be available. If I present you with only one option, you will select it, but you will not choose it. For you to choose you must have more than one option available, and they must actually be available, not just appear to be available.

Didn't mean to confuse you. Let me say it more plainly. "You are presented with options, regardless whether only one will be chosen and that path come to pass. But as it turns out, which you can't deny, only one option comes to fruition --the one you chose.

 

[Mark Quayle]

That is not a definition. If you're so sure of your position, why can't you provide a definition as requested? Why the avoidance?

I'll ask again - please define predestination for us so we can see where it allows for free will.

I don't understand why I should play your game. I've defined predestination just about as many ways as I can without straying from what I believe.

Do you have a problem with dictionaries? Merriam Webster
Definition of predestination

1: the act of predestinating : the state of being predestinated
2: the doctrine that God in consequence of his foreknowledge of all events infallibly guides those who are destined for salvation

Actually, I have a problem with #2. That is to say, it is accurate, when it is understood that his foreknowledge is also his forecausing. It is not as a result of his foreknowledge that he guides, and it is not only about salvation that he predestines.

 

[Mark Quayle]

There is no difference. I'm just using God as a mechanism to illustrate the point I am trying to make - namely that if anything is predestined, we can't have free will.

If there is no difference then, and since you categorically rule out God, you admit to First Cause and as a result, admit to caused choice, then you align with me in that Free Will is not quite free --in fact you go further than I do, claiming you even don't have choice? Or are you therefore (since we DO choose) logically ruling out First Cause?

 

[Tolworth John]

Is there a why question here? I'm more interested in the "how" and until that is well evidenced "I don't know" is the honest answer.

No the honest answer is to say,' I don't know and will consider other option may be valid untill other answe are found.'
It is dishonest to reject an answer just because it destroys ones world view.

 

[Kylie]

If there is no difference then, and since you categorically rule out God, you admit to First Cause and as a result, admit to caused choice, then you align with me in that Free Will is not quite free --in fact you go further than I do, claiming you even don't have choice? Or are you therefore (since we DO choose) logically ruling out First Cause?

In the predestined scenario, you can imagine that the predestination is caused by whatever you want. I was using God as an example, but you can use something else if you'd prefer.

These situations I am giving are only to demonstrate why I think we can't have both free will AND predestination at the same time.

 

[Strathos]

If white plays perfectly. If is a very powerful word. Think about what it means.

Yeah, and God 'plays' the universe perfectly. Hence the analogy.

Also consider that you said no more than 549 moves. I bolded those words and asked you to explain them. You're just ignoring them. Take responsibility for your failing and learn from it.

If black plays perfectly he can survive 549 moves. If he plays imperfectly, it will end sooner.

 

[Ohj1n37]

Nah.

Said a writer who wasn't there.

Believe what you will.

To any Christians reading this, remember these verses and understand what they mean,

Do you think I have come to bring peace to the earth? No, I have come to divide people against each other!

If any household or town refuses to welcome you or listen to your message, shake its dust from your feet as you leave.

All I have seen is one possible future, and it isn't set in stone.

This is a valid argument and I too have thought of this before. It makes me happy to see someone who is philosophically minded. Now let's expand upon it.

If we are to attempt to understand the infinite nature of God let's say every time he were to look into the future and he himself made a change it would cause a ripple, the butterfly effect. This would mean as you have said would cause another future. This effect is compounded with each change he makes and becomes exponential and if anything to me reveals the infinite nature of God and his plan for us.

People are not predestined to do what I saw them do, since I was able to prevent them from doing those things. And I can predestination be altered?

So if the events MUST happen the way I saw in the vision, then there is no choice, no free will. Events are locked in place, they cannot be altered.

Perhaps we have different definitions of free will and predestination.

Let's start with free will. I am not sure how you would define it, but many people mistakenly think that free will means making a choice free from influence. This is not true. No human is free from influence you can see that through simple observation. Free will is the capability to choose without being forced to come to a decision; meaning that even though we are influenced ultimately the final decision was ours alone. This can be seen through observation, often people who make decisions that are contrary to the situation are deemed strong willed.

From what I gather if we are predestined you see life as a movie. I play many video games and like to study how they are made from design perspective. I would argue life is more like an open world video game or a simulation. We have set properties that determine our personality and those influence how we interact with each other and the world. From a deterministic standpoint if someone were to know all the properties within the entire simulation they could extrapolate what would happen. If that specific someone were to then make a minor change it would alter said simulation and another extrapolation would need to be calculated. Would this not seem to make more sense than seeing life as movie?

Now when it comes to how God has predestined us he has done it by way of how salvation is achieved. He has made known to the world that if you want to be with him you are to choose to love him and follow him. He has called the weak, the broken, and the lost by being a father figure, a savior, a lowly servant being born in a manger. He shows to those who understand how much he loves us all by dying for us.

If God wanted to predestine the rich he would possibly require a large donation to be saved. If God wanted to predestine the famous he would possibly require a large following to be saved. I think you might get the picture. God predestines those who are saved by way of salvation by adding a variable to the simulation. That variable then separates those of us who want God, and those who do not want God. God sent his Son into the world not to condemn the world, but that through his Son the world might be saved. The thing is God knows not everyone will want to be with him because of the very fact that you and others try to argue against, we have free will. God's desire is to have a people that love him and if he were to let's say micro manage the simulation so that everyone chose to love him would that really be love or would he simply be forcing his will on everyone?

It seems that many people are willing to sacrifice their free will, so that they have an excuse to not believe. The usual argument is, that if God is good and all knowing I don't have choice, so he must be not all knowing, not all good, or not real. Hopefully I have explained how God can be all knowing and all good. It's ultimately your choice what to do with the information I have given you.

 

[SLP]

Yet you can show no better cause.

If that is the case, it is a fallacy to fall back on 'my God did it.'

First Cause simply is. There is no need to describe it according to my God.

I don;t care what you think re: 'your God', such fallacious reasoning does not provide evidence for the cause, much less prove it.

The necessary attributes of first cause simply make sense.

Yup - Odin did it.

But if God is not First Cause, he is not God.

Then I guess He is not God.
Sorry to tell you.

 

[SLP]

There is only one God. What name you use is up to you.
Dr. Karma if you will.

Cool empty assertions premised on fear and ignorance.

No thanks.

 

[Kylie]

This is a valid argument and I too have thought of this before. It makes me happy to see someone who is philosophically minded. Now let's expand upon it.

If we are to attempt to understand the infinite nature of God let's say every time he were to look into the future and he himself made a change it would cause a ripple, the butterfly effect. This would mean as you have said would cause another future. This effect is compounded with each change he makes and becomes exponential and if anything to me reveals the infinite nature of God and his plan for us.

But this isn't predestination. It can't be, not if it is changeable.

Perhaps we have different definitions of free will and predestination.

Let's start with free will. I am not sure how you would define it, but many people mistakenly think that free will means making a choice free from influence. This is not true. No human is free from influence you can see that through simple observation. Free will is the capability to choose without being forced to come to a decision; meaning that even though we are influenced ultimately the final decision was ours alone. This can be seen through observation, often people who make decisions that are contrary to the situation are deemed strong willed.

I certainly agree that we face influences, and when we make a choice, there are influences which can affect what we choose. But those influences do not take any of the options off the table. They can only reduce or raise the probability of us choosing those options.

From what I gather if we are predestined you see life as a movie. I play many video games and like to study how they are made from design perspective. I would argue life is more like an open world video game or a simulation. We have set properties that determine our personality and those influence how we interact with each other and the world. From a deterministic standpoint if someone were to know all the properties within the entire simulation they could extrapolate what would happen. If that specific someone were to then make a minor change it would alter said simulation and another extrapolation would need to be calculated. Would this not seem to make more sense than seeing life as movie?

No, I don't think it makes more sense.

If I am playing Tomb Raider, I can choose to kill the enemy guard standing near the hut that contains a medpack, then go inside and get it. But I could also choose to try to sneak past the guard. I can choose to just walk past, in which case I will be spotted and shot (but even then, I may make it closer to the hut some times and then be killed farther away from the hut the next time I try). Or I could just decide to not even try and walk past without killing the guard and forget about getting the medpack.

If we are predestined, then our exact course of action is set in stone and cannot be altered. That's why I used the Jurassic Park example. Every single time I watch the movie, the lawyer always runs to the toilet at the same point, the T-rex always moves its head the same way when she looks at him, then always bites him at the same point in the movie, lifts him at the same speed, shakes him the same number of times. It can never change.

Now when it comes to how God has predestined us he has done it by way of how salvation is achieved. He has made known to the world that if you want to be with him you are to choose to love him and follow him. He has called the weak, the broken, and the lost by being a father figure, a savior, a lowly servant being born in a manger. He shows to those who understand how much he loves us all by dying for us.

If God wanted to predestine the rich he would possibly require a large donation to be saved. If God wanted to predestine the famous he would possibly require a large following to be saved. I think you might get the picture. God predestines those who are saved by way of salvation by adding a variable to the simulation. That variable then separates those of us who want God, and those who do not want God. God sent his Son into the world not to condemn the world, but that through his Son the world might be saved. The thing is God knows not everyone will want to be with him because of the very fact that you and others try to argue against, we have free will. God's desire is to have a people that love him and if he were to let's say micro manage the simulation so that everyone chose to love him would that really be love or would he simply be forcing his will on everyone?

Yeah, I wasn't trying to use the concept of predestination to say something about God, I was using the concept of God to say something about the concept of predestination. The sales pitch about God is not relevant to the discussion.

It seems that many people are willing to sacrifice their free will, so that they have an excuse to not believe. The usual argument is, that if God is good and all knowing I don't have choice, so he must be not all knowing, not all good, or not real. Hopefully I have explained how God can be all knowing and all good. It's ultimately your choice what to do with the information I have given you.

No, I don't think you have. You've simply made a statement and not addressed the contradictions it raises. However, like I said, that discussion is irrelevant, as I'm trying to discuss the concepts of free will and predestination, not the nature of God.

 

[SelfSim]

Believe what you will.
...
It seems that many people are willing to sacrifice their free will, so that they have an excuse to not believe. The usual argument is, that if God is good and all knowing I don't have choice, so he must be not all knowing, not all good, or not real.

See, the thing is that I can still demonstrably retain my free will .. regardless of my beliefs. (I always seem to choose vanilla ice cream over chocolate .. for no particular reason).
A choice is not a decision. Choices can be defined as being made for no reason, whereas decisions can be defined as being made for all sorts of reasons, which include beliefs.

What 'real' means, is up to us to decide.

Hopefully I have explained how God can be all knowing and all good. It's ultimately your choice what to do with the information I have given you.

What you have given, are your belief based opinions .. (which I take as being a well intended contribution).

I can still choose freely, therefore this particular choice, must have nothing to do with your beliefs.

 

[Ken-1122]

How could I change my future if my future is predetermined?

I was coming from the position that your future is not predetermined.

 

[Kylie]

A choice is not a decision. Choices can be defined as being made for no reason, whereas decisions can be defined as being made for all sorts of reasons, which include beliefs.

I gotta say I disagree here. Choice and Decision are synonyms.

 

[Kylie]

I was coming from the position that your future is not predetermined.

If it was not predetermined, then how could I have a vision of it? How can I see something which does not exist?

 

[SelfSim]

I gotta say I disagree here. Choice and Decision are synonyms.

Do you never do something for no particular reason?