[anon11]

Re: So God gave us free will.

Where does it say in the Holy Bible that God is tolerant?

You might want to take a look at THIS.

Well it says motivating people away from sin. Instead you people seem too bent on bashing people so they are instead motivated away from christianity. Being intolerant of a sin and a person are two different things. Chasing someone away with insults and threats before u can convert them doesn't seem like a very effective way of saving people.

[Seeker]

Re: So God gave us free will.

Well it says motivating people away from sin. Instead you people seem too bent on bashing people so they are instead motivated away from christianity. Being intolerant of a sin and a person are two different things. Chasing someone away with insults and threats before u can convert them doesn't seem like a very effective way of saving people.

Motivate? Where is that in the Bible? Everyone has free will. Stop being a wimp.

[ForGodsSake]

Re: So God gave us free will.

Well it says motivating people away from sin. Instead you people seem too bent on bashing people so they are instead motivated away from christianity. Being intolerant of a sin and a person are two different things. Chasing someone away with insults and threats before u can convert them doesn't seem like a very effective way of saving people.

Get you facts right heretic. Then come back with some sensible posts heathen.

[The Black Lion]

Re: So God gave us free will.

why?

Why do you believe that human beings have free will?

[Roberta]

Re: So God gave us free will.

Why do you believe that human beings have free will?

Because the jews have not figured out how to make a profit on it (yet).

[Ezekiel Bathfire]

Re: So God gave us free will.

Why do you believe that human beings have free will?

The Lord God of Hosts created Man
He permitted the Fall of Man
He asks us to accept Him.
He provides salvation for all through His Word as witnessed in the Bible (KJV1611)
Those who accept His Word are admitted to Glory.

See, for you, it’s like buying a car – the car will go just as well without insurance but you’re likely to be pulled over and punished – nevertheless, you had freewill – exercise it wisely and in accordance with the law.

There are those who would translate

Eph:1:4: According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:

as indicating thatThe Lord could have preordained that some would be saved and some not before even Adam was placed upon the Earth – we here at Landover do not read this verse in that way and we are correct. The emphasis is “as he hath chosen us in him” means simply that before the world was created God had outlined the plan above and the Saved™ will reach True Salvation™

Does this help you O melanistic leonoid?

[The Black Lion]

Re: So God gave us free will.

Ezekiel Bathfire,

Thank you for sharing your perspective.

I personally am of the philosophy that the mind is a construct engineered toward fulfilling the needs of the biological organism. The inherent consciousness of a human being, that which perceives, is identified with the mind. I see the mind and consciousness as two separate entities. Thus a human male might state "I want to have sex with that woman" or "I want to eat those oatmeal raisin cookies" when in fact the mind is simply reflecting the biological imperative of the flesh and/or the psyche (ego) is compelled to reproduce a positive experience. So perhaps a truer statement by the human male would be, "A biological imperative compels me to mate with women".

I guess my point is that when we are angered, jealous, joyous, lustful or sorrowful these emotions are not a conscious decision perpetrated by that which perceives (i.e. the consciousness), but is an automated predefined psycho-biological response to external impressions. Throughout our lives the sensual impressions we receive shape and build upon our ego, whose foundation is initially built upon three basic initiatives: 1.) Avoid that which is perceived as not enjoyable. 2.) Seek that which is perceived as enjoyable. 3.) Do not cease living.

Each individuals persona is a culmination of their experiences and genetic predispositions in relation to those three basic initiatives. Given a particular sensual impression the mind-body will react in one, and only one way, based on its conditioning. And therefore the conscious will identify with this psychological response without any genuine conscious awareness of the minds inner workings (sub-consciousness).

Example: Someone punches us and we get angry and take actions based on that anger. We don't decide to be angry and no actual conscious reflection on the event takes place before we act. Our behavior is autonomic.

I considered the concept of free will despite the presence of biological imperatives and seek/avoid conditioning; However, without the ego the consciousness, that which perceives, has no inherent motivation that I can comprehend.

[One-eyed Jack]

Re: So God gave us free will.

I will pretend to be an atheistical heathen for a moment here, Black Lion, and see if I can add anything.

Loose definitions: Non-freewill behavior, no matter how complex, is deterministic. Freewill behavior must therefore incorporate non-deterministic elements: ie, there must be some possibility of randomness in it.

It seems to the atheist that there is evolutionary value in elements of randomness. Genetic codes are scrambled in a pseudo-random fashion during reproduction; mutation can introduce a more truly random variation in the code. These non-deterministic elements are one of the prerequisites for Darwinian evolution: without that element of random variation no natural selection would be effective.

Posit learning as the evolution of a mind: variations in thought are tested, and those which prove effective are retained and used while the modes of action which are less effective are abandoned.

In this case elements of randomness would be just as important as in biological evolution. For instance, non-deterministic thinking could benefit creative problem-solving in which you try things in a semi-random fashion and evaluate the results in order to find unexpected insights into a problem.

Such randomness can arise in the brain. First, the complexity of the brain is sufficient to allow chaotic behavior. Obviously this must be controlled, but an element of chaos could give rise to the randomness needed for certain creative modes.

Also, the electrochemical processes at the neuron level may be susceptible to quantum effects, which could introduce true randomness. A geiger counter, for instance, can detect a random quantum event -- the decay of a radioactive nucleus -- and amplify it through a cascade mechanism until it becomes evident in macroscopic, classical physics: electrical current and sound. The neuron net could do the same thing.

----

But as a Christian I know the truth: if Man does not have freewill then God is just jerking off.

~~ OEJ

[The Black Lion]

Re: So God gave us free will.

Interesting theory, Jack.

However, I think it hinges on the assumption that mutation is, in fact random when that may very well not be the case. I'm going to make some assumptions myself here so bear with me.

Assuming the big bang represents initial configuration of this material reality and that the laws of physics are immutable, it stands to reason that given any particular circumstance that only one outcome should theoretically be possible because the nature of physics. And by physics I refer to physic as an Objective Truth and not simply the limited degree to which we as human beings understand. Therefore, every sequential event from the initial of matter configuration/positioning of matter to current configuration/positioning of matter is inherently predetermined. Otherwise, the laws of physics are in fact mutable and in such a conclusion one could surmise that there is no true laws when it comes to physics.

In conclusion, “mutations” that we may classify as random may not be random at all.

[Unfalsifiable]

Re: So God gave us free will.

Laws of physics now contain randomness according to the "scientists". Quantum Mechanics which is supposedly the "most proved theory in science" shows us that. So no need to moo off, God can do both, he's all powerful for example.

[Ezekiel Bathfire]

Re: So God gave us free will.

Ezekiel Bathfire,

Thank you for sharing your perspective.

I personally am of the philosophy that the mind is a construct engineered toward fulfilling the needs of the biological organism. The inherent consciousness of a human being, that which perceives, is identified with the mind. I see the mind and consciousness as two separate entities. Thus a human male might state "I want to have sex with that woman" or "I want to eat those oatmeal raisin cookies" when in fact the mind is simply reflecting the biological imperative of the flesh and/or the psyche (ego) is compelled to reproduce a positive experience. So perhaps a truer statement by the human male would be, "A biological imperative compels me to mate with women".

I guess my point is that when we are angered, jealous, joyous, lustful or sorrowful these emotions are not a conscious decision perpetrated by that which perceives (i.e. the consciousness), but is an automated predefined psycho-biological response to external impressions. Throughout our lives the sensual impressions we receive shape and build upon our ego, whose foundation is initially built upon three basic initiatives: 1.) Avoid that which is perceived as not enjoyable. 2.) Seek that which is perceived as enjoyable. 3.) Do not cease living.

Each individuals persona is a culmination of their experiences and genetic predispositions in relation to those three basic initiatives. Given a particular sensual impression the mind-body will react in one, and only one way, based on its conditioning. And therefore the conscious will identify with this psychological response without any genuine conscious awareness of the minds inner workings (sub-consciousness).

Example: Someone punches us and we get angry and take actions based on that anger. We don't decide to be angry and no actual conscious reflection on the event takes place before we act. Our behavior is autonomic.

I considered the concept of free will despite the presence of biological imperatives and seek/avoid conditioning; However, without the ego the consciousness, that which perceives, has no inherent motivation that I can comprehend.

I would require your own understanding of “ego” unless by that you mean a sense that you are who you are and have a survival instinct, this is not surprising as God created us thus.

However, if I may make so bold as to paraphrase your above argument, you suggest that Mankind, in common with all living beings is here to propagate his species and to do so requires food and shelter. We here at Landover would agree. The Lord told Man to go forth and multiply and ensured that the fruits of the earth were bountiful. Further he gave us dominion over the earth. So whilst other life-forms are fruitful and abundant, we, being the top of the food-chain by virtue of God’s command and design, are most successful.

There are “scientists” who state this obvious part of The Lord of Host’s design is explained by the brain having two parts – a basic instinct part and a reasoning part. We here at Landover would say that we knew that already.

As far as deviation from the norm is concerned the Lord only once (as far as I am aware but am open to correction) mentions His surprise at this happening: Jer:2:21: Yet I had planted thee a noble vine, wholly a right seed: how then art thou turned into the degenerate plant of a strange vine unto me? The story is allegorical of the state of the children of Israel.

In De:22:9: Thou shalt not sow thy vineyard with divers seeds: lest the fruit of thy seed which thou hast sown, and the fruit of thy vineyard, be defiled. We see that the Lord, Always wise, cautions against interbreeding and in Jer:13:23: Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil. We see the unlikelihood of mutation, other than by Act of God, where he may smite someone ill or dead (thus taking him out of the gene-pool – whatever that is!)

Let us assume a creature A that exists on plant B only. The Lord’s purpose for the plant B ceases to exist and thus the creature dies. Over the 6000 years of the Earth’s existence, creature A had ample opportunity to find other sources of sustenance, but refused. This is what Darwinistas call natural selection. But, in the example, we see it is God’s Plan.

Here I refer you to the Talents as related in Matthew 25 and is an example of freewill – God instructing Man to use his talents as he will (but obviously in a Godly way – no point in spending the money on an iron chariot to use as a get-way vehicle from robbing moneylenders)

I hope this explains the correct stance of Landover Baptist Church and that you have no quibble with it. We hope to bring you within the flock and fold here. Such a pity otherwise to see the Fires of Eternal Damnation stoked with an ignorant soul...

[Brother Temperance]

Re: So God gave us free will.

But as a Christian I know the truth: if Man does not have freewill then God is just jerking off.

~~ OEJ

And? What would be so wrong with that? Our Lord is perfectly free to just jerk off if He so wishes. Why, I find the idea of a God and no freewill infinitely more comforting than freewill and no God. A secularist who believes in freewill is inevitably faced with the challenge of actively constructing a framework of meaning for their life - with no God to do it for them, they must decide for themselves on a system of values to give their life purpose. On the other hand, having a God who controls all our actions is a far more cheery prospect - if, as you suggest, He is "just jerking off", then I can go to sleep each night secure in the knowledge that, in some minor, insignificant way, I have helped play my appointed role in His blessed playing with Himself. What could be more fulfilling than that?

[Ezekiel Bathfire]

Re: So God gave us free will.

Interesting theory, Jack.

However, I think it hinges on the assumption that mutation is, in fact random when that may very well not be the case. I'm going to make some assumptions myself here so bear with me.

Assuming the big bang represents initial configuration of this material reality and that the laws of physics are immutable, it stands to reason that given any particular circumstance that only one outcome should theoretically be possible because the nature of physics. And by physics I refer to physic as an Objective Truth and not simply the limited degree to which we as human beings understand. Therefore, every sequential event from the initial of matter configuration/positioning of matter to current configuration/positioning of matter is inherently predetermined. Otherwise, the laws of physics are in fact mutable and in such a conclusion one could surmise that there is no true laws when it comes to physics.

In conclusion, “mutations” that we may classify as random may not be random at all.

< one could surmise that there is no true laws when it comes to physics.> or one could surmise that, as yet, we do not understand.

One thing becomes clear in asking so called scientists a basic question such as, “Well why does that happen?”; they don’t know.

150 years ago, there was one basic theory of the universes and, perhaps Isaac Newton – as weird and ungodly a man as you could wish to meet in a month of Sundays – was the final word for the "scientific community". We have now reached a point where there are 11 theories of String Theory plus those who believe in the Big Bang plus all the factions that believe slight variations of this theory. It is well known in the “scientific” world, that unless you have your own theory, you are nothing but a hanger-on or Yes-man. So, as many as there are “scientists” so are there theories.

Your assumption that, “the laws of physics are immutable,” may or may not be reasonable. Scientists do not know; thus anything that flows from these results is answered by, “I don’t know.”

It is as if we are dealing with an ineffable force, one that we will never understand fully but the results of whose action are apparent to us all, whereas the rationale of the action is not immediately apparent until it is revealed in yet another observation.

The above paragraph encapsulates the Lord God of Hosts.

The Almighty has been disparagingly referred to as the “God of the Gaps”. This is infantile. We cannot blame God for our lack of understanding – it is our weakness of application of the intellect He gave us.

I hope this helps dispelling erroneous thoughts from your untutored mind. Read the Bible – KJV1611 of course - and bring your intellect to bear upon the consistency and truth of the words.

Eternity is always a little longer than people think.

[The Black Lion]

Re: So God gave us free will.

I would require your own understanding of “ego” unless by that you mean a sense that you are who you are and have a survival instinct, this is not surprising as God created us thus.

The core component of our existence is consciousness. I define consciousness as that which perceives. If not for our ability to perceive such impressions as sight, smell, taste, touch, sound, anger, lust, joy, melancholy, basic awareness of being, etc. we wouldn’t have an existence, so to speak. But that consciousness is merely that - a receiver. It has no inherent motivation.

Motivations stem from the mind. The mind is something that is distinct from the consciousness. A human being can detach from the mind and cease thought or also, in this state, observe the mind without identifying with the mind. This is a practical knowledge that anyone can verify for themselves if they put forth the effort. Also the mind of the majority of mankind is a wild untamed construct that will not be quiet. It thinks rather you wish to engage in thought or not. I surmise that anything that is inherently me is something I can control.

The ego I speak of is the result of the uncontrolled mind in response to the body. I’m trying to keep this discussion limited to physical matter so bear with me if I stray off course. When the mind receives the impression of pain a value is set for that impression. This value in the typical human psyche is “avoid”. When the mind receives the impression of lust or hunger it assigns the value of “seek”. And when the mind receives the impression of pleasurable satisfaction it sets the value of “repeat”. These impressions are stored within the mind.

It is my conclusion that thought is composed of an energy. An energy and reality not exactly physical matter, but a form of matter nonetheless. I have not set up the premise for multidimensionality yet so for now I’ll leave it at that. Getting back to the point, this mental energy formation has a potential similar to static energy potential. When presented with the opportunity to thrust into action it will at every chance similar to how static energy will shock a person if the potential is given the opportunity. This can also be likened to like-attracts-like in some circumstances.

My conclusion is that the ego is the sum of these impressions which seek to repeat, avoid, or seek. This ego is the persona of the individual and accounts from every state of consciousness from joy, sadness, jealousy to anger triggers. It is who we are and determines how we react to external stimuli.

I sat in meditation with my mind silent. I entered this practice in hopes of discovering my true motivation or my true will. All I experienced was silence; No anger, no joy, no desire, no pleasure - nothing. Simply stillness and awareness of being.

I hope this has furthered your understanding of my views.

[The Black Lion]

Re: So God gave us free will.

< one could surmise that there is no true laws when it comes to physics.> or one could surmise that, as yet, we do not understand.

That was the point I attempted to make when I stated the laws of physics as an Object Truth for the sake of argument. In this context, the totality of physics itself, not just the areas that human beings are aware of or think they are aware of.

From this position all sequential events are still predetermined. If there are sporadic non-predetermined events then the notion of actual laws of physics are mute. Basically, assuming their is a law it is predetermined regardless of the fact that human being perceive it to be sporadic. The idea of spontaneity is merely a result of a lack of comprehension. The human mind subjectively assigned events to the value of spontaneous. There either is a law or there isn't any law.

Based on the latter assumption I can see where a theist might conclude that, in the absence of absolute law, there is room to assume an outside force is shaping reality and that the seeming appearance of law is in fact the steadfast will of some foreign entity. Granted, a theist could also conclude that even if there is an absolute law at work that it is a program installed which runs on autopilot; The program being the Laws of Physics and the hardware being Matter (or space-time as you like to call it). Both theories further rest on intelligent design as the ultimate manifested means to which a realization that such a “programmer/steadfast will” even exists.