That's not IC and AJ. Those are just quantas of power in the world, and they have no more significance than whether they please you or not. Don't look at em as cartesian substances that have freewill, but as democritean atoms moving around and making a great racket.
What I'm talking about is your battle with the big man in the sky. Forget about his zombies. This guy has a rap sheet of logical and metaphysical violations so long it makes the Don's ninety some felonies look like the crimes of a petty thief. You're the prosecutor now, Gary. You're the Godwhacker...
Gary's Corner
-
Gary Childress
- Posts: 13524
- Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
- Location: It's my fault
Re: Gary's Corner
Holding God accountable for the wrongs in the world is like holding Pol Pot accountable for genocide while you're rotting in one of Pol Pot's prisons. Pot's laughing and frolicking all the way during your trip to the gallows. That'll teach Pol Pot next time he tries to do evil, right?
-
promethean75
- Posts: 7802
- Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 10:29 pm
Re: Gary's Corner
All philosophical kidding aside, the fact is that a creator of a universe can't be held accountable for anything it does for the same reason a person can't be held accountable for what they do. But this is a complex matter... let's work it out.
First, 'accountable' means what? Acknowledging being the cause of something? Then yes, a creator is the cause of its creation. But that's never what someone means when they say 'accountable'.
What they mean is a) something bad is happening, and b) the cause of this bad thing should be reprimanded, blamed, etc.
Kay, two things. Why is what is happening called 'bad' by you? Could it be that you're just weak and have suffered in some way... could it be that you had the whole thing wrong and there is no 'good' and 'bad', only strong and weak?
Second, why should god not let bad shit happen? Because you don't like it? Well, see, that would be weakness again. God is no sooner obligated to you than you are obligated to him, or 'it', this creator we're chatting about.
Finally, does this creator have a choice not to create, or be what it is, or want what it wants, etc?
Imagine God's first-person conscious experience of himself. It's a lot like yours, ain't it? See where I'm going.....?
God would have no more freewill than you... which is precisely none.
By now, your brain should be short-circuiting by you trying to make your way through these questions, and rightly so. In demonstrado; this christian concept of god is a pure impossibility.
First, 'accountable' means what? Acknowledging being the cause of something? Then yes, a creator is the cause of its creation. But that's never what someone means when they say 'accountable'.
What they mean is a) something bad is happening, and b) the cause of this bad thing should be reprimanded, blamed, etc.
Kay, two things. Why is what is happening called 'bad' by you? Could it be that you're just weak and have suffered in some way... could it be that you had the whole thing wrong and there is no 'good' and 'bad', only strong and weak?
Second, why should god not let bad shit happen? Because you don't like it? Well, see, that would be weakness again. God is no sooner obligated to you than you are obligated to him, or 'it', this creator we're chatting about.
Finally, does this creator have a choice not to create, or be what it is, or want what it wants, etc?
Imagine God's first-person conscious experience of himself. It's a lot like yours, ain't it? See where I'm going.....?
God would have no more freewill than you... which is precisely none.
By now, your brain should be short-circuiting by you trying to make your way through these questions, and rightly so. In demonstrado; this christian concept of god is a pure impossibility.
-
promethean75
- Posts: 7802
- Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 10:29 pm
Re: Gary's Corner
The god freewill paradox. I just invented it. Check it out.
If god has a 'choice', which means is at a point where there are two or more possible outcomes which will be settled by this choice, who or what created the plurality of outcomes? Watch this. If option A and B both exist, god would have had to create both A and B prior to having to choose between them. So, god would have created something just so he would be able not to choose it later on. You follow? It's brain-fry, Gary. Moreover, he would know in advance what he would choose, so the whole choice would be a charade.
God is sitting in his nothingness. He can do one of two things. Stay in nothing or create something. What would compel him to create something? Is he bored, or lonely, etc? If so, can he choose not to be and just keep the nothingness? Brain-fry, Gary. Hey, this is you guys... you guys are the anthropomorphists, not me. I'm just showing you what your concept works out to be.
And where tf did god come from, anyway? Is this a boot-straps deal, or are there infinite turtles all the way down?
No, seriously, how much Spinoza have you read, Gary?
If god has a 'choice', which means is at a point where there are two or more possible outcomes which will be settled by this choice, who or what created the plurality of outcomes? Watch this. If option A and B both exist, god would have had to create both A and B prior to having to choose between them. So, god would have created something just so he would be able not to choose it later on. You follow? It's brain-fry, Gary. Moreover, he would know in advance what he would choose, so the whole choice would be a charade.
God is sitting in his nothingness. He can do one of two things. Stay in nothing or create something. What would compel him to create something? Is he bored, or lonely, etc? If so, can he choose not to be and just keep the nothingness? Brain-fry, Gary. Hey, this is you guys... you guys are the anthropomorphists, not me. I'm just showing you what your concept works out to be.
And where tf did god come from, anyway? Is this a boot-straps deal, or are there infinite turtles all the way down?
No, seriously, how much Spinoza have you read, Gary?