EPTtherefore i am united in god, 'believing, knowing....' are also ridiculous.
dunno Evangerion that is very famous Japan animation ? the end of evangerion shows the god entity that i mentioned above.
Belief in an omnipotent pointless? - Page 13
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
Shingha
Korea (South)3 Posts
therefore i am united in god, 'believing, knowing....' are also ridiculous. dunno Evangerion that is very famous Japan animation ? the end of evangerion shows the god entity that i mentioned above. | ||
|
BigBalls
United States5354 Posts
On November 06 2004 00:18 travis wrote: here is the problem: consciousness is not a physical thing do you understand what I just tried to get at by that? Thought is neurons moving back and forth in our mind. We are chemicals and our thoughts are chemical reactions in our body. I would define consciousness which is basically self awareness and thought as a physical reaction. That might just be the alcohol talking | ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
 )That maybe instead of reality being based upon the physical/material, and the physical/material being the cause of the mental/spiritual, it could be the exact opposite: Perhaps reality is based upon the mental/spiritual, and this is the direct cause of the physical/material. Makes sense, doesn't it? So you know, about 1 year ago I made a post on these forums about why free will doesn't exist and everything is pre-determined. It seems logical, it really does. But I don't think it's right. and one last thing. since you [kind of] gave consciousness a definition that would make it a physical thing, now you would have to define 'awareness' as a physical thing | ||
|
FrEaK[S.sIR]
2373 Posts
We aren't that far into how our brain works T_T | ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
and anyone can define it, they just can't explain it i get what you were saying though but that was my point | ||
|
Mora
Canada5235 Posts
i do not understand. if u are going to do something with no chance of doing anything else, how can u choose to do it. :O | ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
but as i said its all a matter of perception gimme 5 min or so | ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
need to define a couple things omniscient: "having total knowledge and awareness' good? now free will: "the ability to make choices unconstrained by external agencies" those good? | ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
or maybe my thinking really *is* wrong | ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
| ||
|
FrEaK[S.sIR]
2373 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
the problem with what you guys are saying is that you are thinking in terms of time since the christian god(and really any other omniscient entity I could imagine existing) is omnipresent and omnitemporal(meaning everywhere at "everywhen") this view is flawed. im pretty sure you guys are looking at free will in life as guy can make choice: A or B which leads to: A or B or C which leads to: A or B etc(one choice leading to another) since god is intemporal this viewpoint is wrong. god didn't have any effect on what happened, it just did, and he knows this because.. he does. do you see what im saying? claiming that his knowledge of an event somehow makes that event predetermined is wrong because thats incorporates time. it acts like god is a good buddy of yours and you could ask him what is going to happen. it is the same as claiming that anything that has happened in our past was predetermined because of the fact that we know it happened(it may not seem the same, but it is. really) even still this doesn't prove or disprove the argument either way, it just turns it back into a question, which was my point all along. understand what im saying? edit - is becomes was | ||
|
FrEaK[S.sIR]
2373 Posts
To be truly of free will we must be able to make choices without an omnipotent being knowing that that was the choice we were going to make. If he knows that is the choice we were going to make, then there was really no decision to it at all, just time consumed. The past is something that has happened, you can't predetermine the past because to pre determine means to determine beforehand. You can't determine what will happen in the past, that doesn't even make any sense. Past has happened, there is no determining about it. To not see the difference in those 2 seems silly to me. We might also be using freewill incorrectly, let me summarize my main idea. It is POINTLESS to believe in an omnipotent being because he already knows whether your going to heaven or hell, because he is omnipotent. If he does not possess that forsight he is not omnipotent and thus not the abrahamic god. We just got into a side argument about free will being impossible if everything you will or won't do is already known. | ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
:-( | ||
|
FrEaK[S.sIR]
2373 Posts
But it makes the choice already known and thus wasn't a choice at all. | ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
ill wait until someone else reads it | ||
|
FrEaK[S.sIR]
2373 Posts
rather than a real response, lets belittle somebody. Dick. | ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
| ||
Liquid`Daaman
Sweden1225 Posts
| ||
|
FrEaK[S.sIR]
2373 Posts
That is the entire reason I'm even in this discussion is to ignore points made when I'm trying to discuss something, not 'win'. Yup, you got me. Explain your main point more, unless your main point is that him knowing something is going to happen doesn't negate freewill. We have already discussed that to death and all your doing is complicated things that have already been stating with needless dribble. None of us even incorporated time, you did =[ So rather than being a dick, discuss and don't think that I'm ignoring shit, I'm actually trying to discuss. Unless you want to admit to being a completely asshole. | ||
| ||
