Relativity of time and faith in God

Jeff250 · Post by **Jeff250** » Wed Apr 23, 2014 8:32 am

Sergeant Thorne wrote:
Jeff250 wrote:Would it violate our free will to have given us better predispositions?
Are our dispositions a positive or negative quantification? Are we like humanity or merely unlike our creator? Is our behavior a lack of responsibility, love, consideration, or a surplus of something else? I think the answer is obvious, and you are operating on a mistaken assumption in your question.

My assumption is that we could have had better predispositions, which is obviously true, because some people already have better predispositions than others. For instance, all else being equal, someone who isn't genetically predisposed to addiction has better predispositions than someone who is.

Tunnelcat · Post by **Tunnelcat** » Wed Apr 23, 2014 9:35 am

Spidey wrote:We live in a universe of duality, nothing relative can exist without its opposite.

Up needs down
Yes needs no
Front needs back
In needs out
Left needs right
On needs off
Good needs bad…etc.

In the case of god, most western religions have chosen to separate the two into different beings. But like the coin, if god does exist, it’s more likely to be two aspects of the same thing.

The trick is balance, choosing to do good while leaving evil dormant, but still in existence.

IMHO

Why? Nature has entropy to balance creation, but I don't see nature having an evil component. Nature just does what nature does, create and destroy, eat or be eaten. There is no emotionality to the process. And why does good need to be balanced with evil anyway? Good and evil are human concepts, so we should have full control over it. All our good deeds will always be countered by nature's entropy anyway and we'll never have that unbalanced free ride to Shangri-La. So why do we have to always have good deeds countered by evil deeds? Why can't good be predominant, then let nature take it's course as it always has to balance things? We don't need people killing each other, or stealing from each other, or hating each other to have balance with the universe.

vision · Post by **vision** » Wed Apr 23, 2014 1:01 pm

tunnelcat wrote:Why can't good be predominan...

Good is already dominant. This is something those with apoclytic worldviews can't understand. Humanity could not thrive if competition exceeded cooperation. This is also a principal rule of evolution ("survival of the fittest" is a highly misunderstood and misused concept). Regardless of what people want to think, the fact is violence has gone down and mortality has risen globally since the beginning of civilization. Until it goes the other way there is no indication we are reaching some sort of end game for humaity (though we are not without major problems that need solutions).

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Wed Apr 23, 2014 1:55 pm

Jeff250 wrote:
Sergeant Thorne wrote:
Jeff250 wrote:Would it violate our free will to have given us better predispositions?
Are our dispositions a positive or negative quantification? Are we like humanity or merely unlike our creator? Is our behavior a lack of responsibility, love, consideration, or a surplus of something else? I think the answer is obvious, and you are operating on a mistaken assumption in your question.
My assumption is that we could have had better predispositions, which is obviously true, because some people already have better predispositions than others. For instance, all else being equal, someone who isn't genetically predisposed to addiction has better predispositions than someone who is.

So who should God have given better dispositions?

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Wed Apr 23, 2014 2:47 pm

So a relatively supreme being created, what is to those he created, a complete universe full of possibilities and creatures that has existed now for 14 billion years. Hundreds of millions of years longer than our life cycle....
And we assume to know his purpose for creating all of it?!?

Even if (and you have to recognize this is a big IF).... even if he really has told some of us why he did it, what reason do any of us have to believe he told the truth?

A being so far advanced and relatively omnipotent by comparison might just as well tell us a story he wants us to believe that serves his true purpose and isn't anything close to what we were told or the writings passed down between generations from those who were told!

Using what you do know about how lesser creatures are treated, trained, groomed and sometimes harvested....reconciled with the extremely questionable story of our purpose/origin....you should arrive at extreme doubt that anyone has any clue at all as to why a 'god' would have created us!

We might merely be an extremely tasty exotic treat but genetically not ripe enough for the tender palate of a supreme being. A crop that ripens better and produces a higher yield when they are trained to maintain some form of spiritual discipline!

We could be just a few more generations short of being baked and then ground up and sprinkled over an omelette!

Jeff250 · Post by **Jeff250** » Wed Apr 23, 2014 6:52 pm

Sergeant Thorne wrote:So who should God have given better dispositions?

I'm not sure if there's anyone who couldn't benefit.

snoopy · Post by **snoopy** » Thu Apr 24, 2014 8:16 am

Just getting here... so a couple things to catch up on:

On the OP, Sigma: Generally your problem is humanizing/limiting God. He doesn't exist by the same rules as the universe... so it's a logical fallacy to apply the limitations of the universe to God. In fact, one of the explicit curses of sin is decay - so we're told that the finite life of things in the universe is an explicit difference between God and our world.

Jeff, on your rejection of the idea that God has dominion to do as He chooses with His creation: then you reject God.

Jeff250 wrote:My assumption is that we could have had better predispositions, which is obviously true, because some people already have better predispositions than others. For instance, all else being equal, someone who isn't genetically predisposed to addiction has better predispositions than someone who is.

Understand that from God's perspective, there really is no matter of degree. We are all born in sin, and it's a simple as that. Sin is an inheritance from Adam, who is our ancestor. That's where we all are here and now... if we want to go back and question why we are here ultimately we're going to be judging "our way" vs. "God's way." The important part is that God's gone to very far lengths (sacrificing His own son) to free us from this predicament.

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Thu Apr 24, 2014 8:36 am

Jeff250 wrote:I'm not sure if there's anyone who couldn't benefit.

You miss the point--you've answered your own question: you asked if it would have infringed on our free will if God would have given us better dispositions, but then you observe that some people do have better dispositions. Now do you somehow not believe that this is a development stemming from their free will?

It's an ignorant line of thinking, though. The Bible shows that God created everything to be very good--man didn't even have to work hard to have food. Man rebelled and was separated from God, and ever since man has been rebelling against God. So now you ask why God didn't somehow make man more congenial toward one another in their rebellion against the way God intended things to be? Do you recognize how backwards that is? Being a selfish, destructive prick is an expression of free-will driven primarily by a wrong focus in life when it comes right down to it. Some people may not be smart enough to know exactly what goes together to make them a selfish prick, but they developed that personality, in whatever degree of ignorance or clarity.

snoopy · Post by **snoopy** » Thu Apr 24, 2014 10:17 am

Sergeant Thorne wrote:You miss the point--you've answered your own question: you asked if it would have infringed on our free will if God would have given us better dispositions, but then you observe that some people do have better dispositions. Now do you somehow not believe that this is a development stemming from their free will?

It's an ignorant line of thinking, though. The Bible shows that God created everything to be very good--man didn't even have to work hard to have food. Man rebelled and was separated from God, and ever since man has been rebelling against God. So now you ask why God didn't somehow make man more congenial toward one another in their rebellion against the way God intended things to be? Do you recognize how backwards that is? Being a selfish, destructive prick is an expression of free-will driven primarily by a wrong focus in life when it comes right down to it. Some people may not be smart enough to know exactly what goes together to make them a selfish prick, but they developed that personality, in whatever degree of ignorance or clarity.

Good luck trying to figure out the whole "free will" vs. "God's sovereignty" question. Romans 9 makes it pretty clear that some idea that we choose our own fate thanks to "free will" is wrong. We are, however, still responsible for the sins that we commit. If you reflect on your own life, you won't be able to name a time when you felt coerced by God into the choices that you made; yet it's a Biblical truth that God set those choices out for you ahead of time. If you try to work it out by logic, you're always going to come back to your assumptions about what's most important and what constitutes "goodness" and "justice."

sigma · Post by **sigma** » Thu Apr 24, 2014 10:44 am

snoopy wrote:Understand that from God's perspective, there really is no matter of degree. We are all born in sin, and it's a simple as that. Sin is an inheritance from Adam, who is our ancestor. That's where we all are here and now... if we want to go back and question why we are here ultimately we're going to be judging "our way" vs. "God's way." The important part is that God's gone to very far lengths (sacrificing His own son) to free us from this predicament.

I see a typical view of the encoded human who is more inclined to believe God's perspective than a human perspective on the point of view of God.

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Thu Apr 24, 2014 11:02 am

snoopy wrote:
Sergeant Thorne wrote:You miss the point--you've answered your own question: you asked if it would have infringed on our free will if God would have given us better dispositions, but then you observe that some people do have better dispositions. Now do you somehow not believe that this is a development stemming from their free will?

It's an ignorant line of thinking, though. The Bible shows that God created everything to be very good--man didn't even have to work hard to have food. Man rebelled and was separated from God, and ever since man has been rebelling against God. So now you ask why God didn't somehow make man more congenial toward one another in their rebellion against the way God intended things to be? Do you recognize how backwards that is? Being a selfish, destructive prick is an expression of free-will driven primarily by a wrong focus in life when it comes right down to it. Some people may not be smart enough to know exactly what goes together to make them a selfish prick, but they developed that personality, in whatever degree of ignorance or clarity.
Good luck trying to figure out the whole "free will" vs. "God's sovereignty" question. Romans 9 makes it pretty clear that some idea that we choose our own fate thanks to "free will" is wrong. We are, however, still responsible for the sins that we commit. If you reflect on your own life, you won't be able to name a time when you felt coerced by God into the choices that you made; yet it's a Biblical truth that God set those choices out for you ahead of time. If you try to work it out by logic, you're always going to come back to your assumptions about what's most important and what constitutes "goodness" and "justice."

I don't struggle with the free will vs God's sovereignty question. We have a free will, and God is sovereign. How exactly that works may be difficult to figure out from our perspective, since it is the domain of God, but they are both proven. The fact that God is sovereign, meanwhile, does not detract from the free will of men at all.

Jeff250 · Post by **Jeff250** » Thu Apr 24, 2014 3:35 pm

Sergeant Thorne wrote:You miss the point--you've answered your own question: you asked if it would have infringed on our free will if God would have given us better dispositions, but then you observe that some people do have better dispositions. Now do you somehow not believe that this is a development stemming from their free will?

Your choices play a part, but they aren't the only player. From the example that I gave earlier, some people are genetically predisposed toward addiction. That stems from their genetics, not from any choice that they made, and you can improve their predisposition toward addiction just by changing their genetics and without infringing on their free will.

snoopy wrote:Jeff, on your rejection of the idea that God has dominion to do as He chooses with His creation...

I don't know what that means. But what I'm not understanding is how God creating the universe implies that God can ethically do whatever he wants with that universe. What does it mean for God to be good, if nothing God can do to us can ever be evil?

snoopy wrote:Understand that from God's perspective, there really is no matter of degree. We are all born in sin, and it's a simple as that. Sin is an inheritance from Adam, who is our ancestor. That's where we all are here and now... if we want to go back and question why we are here ultimately we're going to be judging "our way" vs. "God's way." The important part is that God's gone to very far lengths (sacrificing His own son) to free us from this predicament.

If that's God's perspective, then what determined God's perspective on this matter if it's led to such consequences for us and him!

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Thu Apr 24, 2014 5:45 pm

I don't know about that. From my relatively limited experience with addiction I find it to be psychological, despite any physical factors.

Top Gun · Post by **Top Gun** » Thu Apr 24, 2014 6:32 pm

...and psychological issues are caused by physical brain chemistry, which is determined largely via genetics, so there you are.

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Thu Apr 24, 2014 6:37 pm

That might be the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

vision · Post by **vision** » Thu Apr 24, 2014 7:45 pm

Sergeant Thorne wrote:That might be the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

Have you never taken a science course? Well lucky for you the Internet offers many free accredited online classes.

flip · Post by **flip** » Fri Apr 25, 2014 4:51 am

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epigenetics

Here's a good place to start. Seems we can change our brain chemistry.

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Fri Apr 25, 2014 7:20 am

I don't doubt that our brain chemistry fluctuates or changes, and I guess I don't have a problem with the related notion that people's brains can be different, what I have a problem with is the idea that it determines a person's choices or outlook on life. I think you're blaming hardware for a software problem. What we have here is some form of medievalism disguised as modern science. Influence is not determination, except in the absence of will.

sigma · Post by **sigma** » Fri Apr 25, 2014 7:55 am

By the way. For all who are interested in this topic. If you can find this book, I really recommend it.

http://www.bestrussianbuy.com/en/abook5 ... ingularity

flip · Post by **flip** » Fri Apr 25, 2014 10:12 am

Well, I definitely do not know how the physical and meta-physical were conjoined, but I do believe that our choices can determine which parts of a gene are activated or put to sleep and this is done through chemicals and then that activated portion of the gene is also inheritable but with the ability of the inheritor to also activate or put to sleep certain portions themselves and then that is inheritable by the next generation.

EDIT: This is terribly simplified of course but I'm not trying to write an essay, just to say that it's an error to claim that humans are prisoners of their genome when in fact they have the ability to determine it's expression. Choice.

vision · Post by **vision** » Fri Apr 25, 2014 5:51 pm

Sergeant Thorne wrote:...what I have a problem with is the idea that it determines a person's choices or outlook on life.

There are decades of research and a billion dollar industry related to anti-depressants, anti-psychotics, and other mood stabilizers. If these drugs didn't have the ability to change people's outlook or decision making they wouldn't be able to exist.

Sergeant Thorne wrote:I think you're blaming hardware for a software problem.

Of course, this "software" you speak of is the imaginary soul or essence of a person for which there is no evidence. Until we discover this software we are left with hardware to work with.

Jeff250 · Post by **Jeff250** » Fri Apr 25, 2014 8:32 pm

Sergeant Thorne wrote:Influence is not determination, except in the absence of will.

It's not determination, but it doesn't have to be for it to affect people's behavior.

Here's another example that's perhaps more abstract--what if getting revenge didn't feel so good? If getting revenge didn't feel so good, wouldn't we still have free will?

I just don't buy that having free will adequately explains why we are all dicks. The theory that we evolved from animals does a better job of that.

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Sat Apr 26, 2014 3:59 am

Who said it was free will alone that was to blame?

Jeff250 · Post by **Jeff250** » Sat Apr 26, 2014 8:38 am

I wouldn't say that either--I think the theory that we evolved from animals explains the rest perfectly. But to respond to the original claim that "you can't blame God for how others act and then at the same time want free choice," my argument is that wanting free choice and blaming God for how others act is perfectly consistent. If God gave us free will, then he also could have given us much better brains that make much better decisions still without violating any of our free will.

flip · Post by **flip** » Sat Apr 26, 2014 8:59 am

Well, He is giving us the brain that we choose.

Edit: But He gets to choose too

. He is choosing those who have chose the mind of Christ.

sigma · Post by **sigma** » Sat Apr 26, 2014 12:59 pm

I think that ultimately the determining factor of high spirituality of people is not genetics or heredity, not a religion and not the intellect, and it's not even logic. It's only the inner individual voice of God of each person, IMHO. A good man is not necessarily your friend. And a bad person not necessarily your enemy. Sometimes good people make great stupidity and harm others, being in full confidence that they are good. And sometimes frank ruthless criminals are risking their lives for the sake of justice and goodness. At least in my life I've seen a few examples.

vision · Post by **vision** » Sat Apr 26, 2014 6:29 pm

flip wrote:Well, He is giving us the brain that we choose.

When did you choose your brain and can you get a refund?

flip · Post by **flip** » Sat Apr 26, 2014 6:31 pm

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Sat Apr 26, 2014 7:27 pm

Jeff250 wrote:I wouldn't say that either--I think the theory that we evolved from animals explains the rest perfectly. But to respond to the original claim that "you can't blame God for how others act and then at the same time want free choice," my argument is that wanting free choice and blaming God for how others act is perfectly consistent. If God gave us free will, then he also could have given us much better brains that make much better decisions still without violating any of our free will.

There is a major deception permeating our culture (maybe our world), and it involves the idea that reality could be anything. Like the rules are abstract, and it could have been this way, or it could have been that way. There's nothing abstract about reality. That to me has been one of the major revelations of my life. People in our day have a severely warped sense of reality which does not allow them to play with a full deck.

I also think you have a very stunted concept of a person's will. Will is not merely the ability to make binary decisions.

Jeff250 · Post by **Jeff250** » Sat Apr 26, 2014 8:48 pm

I don't understand where you're going with this--are you denying that God could have created us without revenge feeling so good?

sigma · Post by **sigma** » Sat May 03, 2014 7:11 am

I think that people who can think abstractly, are the engine of progress. While people are focused on faith in God, are the engine of the breeding of the human population.
In my opinion, scientists much closer to God, and they much more understanding of the nature of God than religious figures.

sigma · Post by **sigma** » Mon Jun 02, 2014 12:39 pm

Sergeant Thorne wrote: There is a major deception permeating our culture (maybe our world), and it involves the idea that reality could be anything. Like the rules are abstract, and it could have been this way, or it could have been that way. There's nothing abstract about reality. That to me has been one of the major revelations of my life. People in our day have a severely warped sense of reality which does not allow them to play with a full deck.

I also think you have a very stunted concept of a person's will. Will is not merely the ability to make binary decisions.

Would not you agree that belief in God is quite abstract thing? Man can not perceive God through the senses. People who believe in God, believe it is not clear what.
Nevertheless, as I myself have been in extreme situations, I can confidently say that a person is in need of spiritual support in difficult conditions for survival. I know that feeling. But, heck, even in the most difficult situations I did not even have the desire to believe in the God of the Bible. This feeling can be compared with reference to God for support. But I would rather call it superstition or belief in omens. Although I do not deny that one time when I, an atheist, was in the most difficult situation in my life, just reading the Bible helped me to get rid of severe stress and relax.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Mon Jun 02, 2014 2:41 pm

Yeesh, I go fishing for a week or so, and I feel like I missed Vacation Bible School this year.......

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Tue Jun 03, 2014 10:23 pm

callmeslick wrote:Yeesh, I go fishing for a week or so, and I feel like I missed Vacation Bible School this year.......

disciple bulletin board man -- I told ya.

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Wed Jun 04, 2014 6:54 am

I can't image how you wish to do anything but offend with those statements. Maybe we don't like rich people or gingers here either...

Sigma in the Topic Title wrote:Relativity of time and faith in God

Are you two geniuses lost?

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Wed Jun 04, 2014 7:27 am

uh, Thorne, my comment wasn't focused on this thread. I came back to at least four different threads that had returned to various people's version of Christian faith. Ferno was merely commenting on my statement in regards to an introductory PM exchange we had a while back. In other words: Chill, Sarge......

sigma · Post by **sigma** » Wed Jun 04, 2014 11:29 am

callmeslick wrote:Yeesh, I go fishing for a week or so, and I feel like I missed Vacation Bible School this year.......

Perhaps this is a slight deviation from the topic, but still very interesting to me, what trophies you can brag about. Luck was on your side this time? If yes, then I'm very interested, you fished the lake on a paid or wild fish you caught? What tackle and bait? I just tears of curiosity

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Wed Jun 04, 2014 5:10 pm

OT for sigma, briefly:
Every year, I spend a week or more in the wilds of Central Pennsylvania on a stream called Penn's Creek, fishing it and 3 or 4 other wild brown trout streams. Most are under catch and release regs, so 'trophies' are in the form of photos. I've taken FAR bigger fish in other years, but I've done worse than I did this year. Lots of trout, biggest was 16 1/2 inches long(about 3 pounds), and I caught two fish once on the same cast(two flies on leader), both were less than a foot long, but insisted on fighting in two separate directions. End of angling report. Next report; August, after a week of shark fishing in the near surf at night in Virginia.

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Wed Jun 04, 2014 7:11 pm

Sergeant Thorne wrote:Are you two geniuses lost?

You may not know why I'm waving the flashlight around, but it doesn't mean I'm lost.

sigma · Post by **sigma** » Thu Jun 05, 2014 11:24 am

Well, I never caught a wild trout on a fly. It should be very exciting

I go out fishing whenever there is time and good weather conditions for fish. We have a tradition to let young fish, but no one ever let an adult. Standard size fish immediately thrown into a bucket of brine to then pepper, add lemon juice, put on skewers and cook on the fire immediately, or in a portable smokehouse immediately on the shore.
few pictures of fish that can be caught near my country house.
Grass carp and mirror carp naturally bred in the lake artificially efforts residents of our village. A carp, perch and roach wild.