U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-06-2019, 05:45 PM
 
Location: City-Data Forum
7,931 posts, read 4,674,276 times
Reputation: 1325

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
We humans are strange creatures. We create many versions of God with all manner of ridiculous and absurd attributes and stories and then some of us pretend that by refuting those versions and stories we refute the existence of God. It is beyond silly. God may be many things but it is unlikely that we know anything about them so it is preposterous to proclaim what God MUST be to qualify as God. At a bare minimum God simply needs to be responsible for our existence and the existence of everything else. Any other attributes would be superfluous.
Yet if parents have "free-will" then a separate entity God cannot be "responsible" for the existence of a fetus unless it interferes during their coitus, thus preventing all of the other "possible people" that could have formed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-06-2019, 07:18 PM
 
39,354 posts, read 26,414,573 times
Reputation: 5996
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuminousTruth View Post
Yet if parents have "free-will" then a separate entity God cannot be "responsible" for the existence of a fetus unless it interferes during their coitus, thus preventing all of the other "possible people" that could have formed.
Being responsible for the EXISTENCE of everything and the processes that constrain them in no way requires that anything is micro-managed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-06-2019, 07:27 PM
 
Location: City-Data Forum
7,931 posts, read 4,674,276 times
Reputation: 1325
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
Being responsible for the EXISTENCE of everything and the processes that constrain them in no way requires that anything is micro-managed.
The constraint is part of the micro-managing. But regardless,

What I was pointing out was that you said,
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
[...snip...] At a bare minimum God simply needs to be responsible for our existence and the existence of everything else. Any other attributes would be superfluous.
However, each separate subcategory of causality is caused directly by the previous, and only indirectly by the original cause or the second cause after that.

In most Abrahamic religions, implicitly, God only has "indirect" responsibility for the creation of an ordered substance (e.g. a person from a mass of cells that other person carried and decided upon actions that led to that existence). So if a god has free-will, and a human has free-will, both are agents of "responsibility for existence." One is directly responsible for "our existence" in the semantic term of "literally us, as specific humans that grow from two-cells to single cell to multicellular" (i.e. our parents), and one (the one in the Deist "role" sense) would be indirectly responsible.

And yes, I am aware that explicitly they (the Abrahamists) want to feel that a perfect infallible entity is the direct cause of themselves in similitude and above all other natural beings.

Otherwise, it would be an intervening Theist entity involved in the coitus deeply and superbly (even if by foreplanning the coitus in its intricacies or intricately controlling the determined structure of the coitus through being the Sustainer) .

Last edited by LuminousTruth; 05-06-2019 at 07:43 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-06-2019, 08:09 PM
 
39,354 posts, read 26,414,573 times
Reputation: 5996
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuminousTruth View Post
The constraint is part of the micro-managing. But regardless,

What I was pointing out was that you said, However, each separate subcategory of causality is caused directly by the previous, and only indirectly by the original cause or the second cause after that.

In most Abrahamic religions, implicitly, God only has "indirect" responsibility for the creation of an ordered substance (e.g. a person from a mass of cells that other person carried and decided upon actions that led to that existence). So if a god has free-will, and a human has free-will, both are agents of "responsibility for existence." One is directly responsible for "our existence" in the semantic term of "literally us, as specific humans that grow from two-cells to single cell to multicellular" (i.e. our parents), and one (the one in the Deist "role" sense) would be indirectly responsible.

And yes, I am aware that explicitly they (the Abrahamists) want to feel that a perfect infallible entity is the direct cause of themselves in similitude and above all other natural beings.

Otherwise, it would be an intervening Theist entity involved in the coitus deeply and superbly (even if by foreplanning the coitus in its intricacies or intricately controlling the determined structure of the coitus through being the Sustainer).
I find your thought processes intriguing. They suggest a very curious and exacting intellect engaging issues at very fundamental levels. I appreciate the rigor but in rambling discourse such as found here in the forum, I suspect it can be quite frustrating for you. Constraints upon processes CAN be seen as micro-managing but only in the strictest sense of one-time management by structure. Deism, as it applies to the physical structure and functioning of our Reality, is most logical. But a living conscious intelligent God cannot be ruled out when accounting for the interactions of our conscious Self in decision-making. We can't rule out or assume no interventions or micro-managing occurs because we simply "Do Not Know."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-06-2019, 11:05 PM
 
582 posts, read 347,460 times
Reputation: 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tired of the Nonsense View Post
Christians believe in the Father, the Son, and the Holy spirit. Three Gods? Is this polytheism?
Certainly seems that way at times because there are various places in the Bible showing a dialogue between Father and Son which is obviously seen as two separate persons.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-08-2019, 05:48 PM
 
12,656 posts, read 4,796,674 times
Reputation: 1317
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tired of the Nonsense View Post
Christians believe in the Father, the Son, and the Holy spirit. Three Gods? Is this polytheism? Christians say no. These are merely aspects of the one true creator Being.

Hindus worship hundreds of deities. Ultimately however, Hindus say that these various deities are really merely aspects of the one true creator Being.

Them that create the beliefs get to create the rules.
no, thats more like a person can be a father, a son, and a brother but be the same person. They could even be the most hated enemy of another, but they are still the same person.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-08-2019, 06:00 PM
 
12,656 posts, read 4,796,674 times
Reputation: 1317
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuminousTruth View Post
The constraint is part of the micro-managing. But regardless,

What I was pointing out was that you said, However, each separate subcategory of causality is caused directly by the previous, and only indirectly by the original cause or the second cause after that.

In most Abrahamic religions, implicitly, God only has "indirect" responsibility for the creation of an ordered substance (e.g. a person from a mass of cells that other person carried and decided upon actions that led to that existence). So if a god has free-will, and a human has free-will, both are agents of "responsibility for existence." One is directly responsible for "our existence" in the semantic term of "literally us, as specific humans that grow from two-cells to single cell to multicellular" (i.e. our parents), and one (the one in the Deist "role" sense) would be indirectly responsible.

And yes, I am aware that explicitly they (the Abrahamists) want to feel that a perfect infallible entity is the direct cause of themselves in similitude and above all other natural beings.

Otherwise, it would be an intervening Theist entity involved in the coitus deeply and superbly (even if by foreplanning the coitus in its intricacies or intricately controlling the determined structure of the coitus through being the Sustainer) .
well presented.

it addresses the notion in the proper light. "Deny everything because some us feel religion is dangerous" is not the most valid interpretations we can come up with. not even close.

But what if the feedback loops do effect the system? for example: My life is continuing to effect the atoms and how they behave in me. Yes, each individual event may not be passed down very far, but the net set of interactions involved, many are repeated, in me "living" are always affecting the material in me.


Motor proteins form and disintegrate. Each motor protein thinking its life time is enough to judge the whole "you" would be kind of funny ... no?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-08-2019, 06:11 PM
 
39,354 posts, read 26,414,573 times
Reputation: 5996
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arach Angle View Post
well presented.

it addresses the notion in the proper light. "Deny everything because some us feel religion is dangerous" is not the most valid interpretations we can come up with. not even close.

But what if the feedback loops do effect the system? for example: My life is continuing to effect the atoms and how they behave in me. Yes, each individual event may not be passed down very far, but the net set of interactions involved, many are repeated, in me "living" are always affecting the material in me.


Motor proteins form and disintegrate. Each motor protein thinking its life time is enough to judge the whole "you" would be kind of funny ... no?
It would be rather disappointing and depressing if we turn out to be motor proteins instead of consciousness, Arach!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-08-2019, 06:29 PM
 
Location: City-Data Forum
7,931 posts, read 4,674,276 times
Reputation: 1325
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arach Angle View Post
no, thats more like a person can be a father, a son, and a brother but be the same person. They could even be the most hated enemy of another, but they are still the same person.
Is it really like that? Can a person be (or believe that they are) their own father, their own son, and their own brother and their own uncle but the same person... without a personality disorder?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-08-2019, 06:47 PM
 
Location: City-Data Forum
7,931 posts, read 4,674,276 times
Reputation: 1325
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arach Angle View Post
[...snip...]

But what if the feedback loops do effect the system? for example: My life is continuing to effect the atoms and how they behave in me. Yes, each individual event may not be passed down very far, but the net set of interactions involved, many are repeated, in me "living" are always affecting the material in me.

Feedback loops specifically affect systems. So I am not sure what sort of "counterpoint" you are trying to make here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arach Angle View Post
Motor proteins form and disintegrate. Each motor protein thinking its life time is enough to judge the whole "you" would be kind of funny ... no?
It would be very funny.
Each "metaphorically sentient" motor protein suspending its judgment of the "cosmos" entirely (and especially in just the experienced --and well-educated consensus-- aspects of it) would be rather ridiculous for us to expect, though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
It would be rather disappointing and depressing if we turn out to be motor proteins instead of consciousness, Arach!
None of that depresses my emotions. It would be rather marvelous actually. Sentient AI Robots would also be marvelous to me and would not depress me. But no human magic would be involved, just math and physics.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. | Please obey Forum Rules | Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top