Philosophy Now Forum

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23, 2021 10:36 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23, 2021 10:14 pm Why did God bother creating the tree? What do you think?

The existence of, at minimum, one forbidden thing was the minimal requirement necessary if mankind was going to make a free choice of relationship with God. Without such an option, there would have been no free will possible. The relationship between God and man could never have been anything but volitionless on the the human side.

In other words, we would have been robots.

The risk of giving mankind a genuinely free choice was that mankind would not choose the good, but would choose the evil. And, of course, mankind did that. But was the possibility of volitional relationship worth it? Yes.

We could have a relationship with God without trouble, the tree. God however chose otherwise. Why so?

bahman wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23, 2021 11:17 pm We could have a relationship with God without trouble

We couldn't be capable of relationship with God unless we had the option of "trouble." We could have had a robot "relationship," but not a genuine, free-will one.

Think of it this way: one of the great things about a relationship is that your partner could have chosen somebody else. But she didn't; she chose you. Of all the things she could have chosen, she freely agreed to be with you. How important is that? How would things be different if you knew she was forced into the relationship, and actually had had no choice at all? What would that do to the nature of your mutual connection? Isn't it awfully important that she did have an alternative?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23, 2021 5:52 pm I find the idea that there is a God that we can have a loving everlasting relationship with, very complicated.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23, 2021 9:45 pmI accept that. But is there a particular reason that it is "complicated" to you?

I understand that a loving everlasting relationship with myself is possible, but not with a God, unless God is myself.

can a thing known know it knows it is a thing?

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23, 2021 9:45 pmI'm doing it right now.

I know that I am a human being. I know that I am knowing I am a human being.

But do you know that the human being is known, but it's not the human being knowing that known?

If you know you are knowing you are a human being, then you must also know that your knowledge of being a human being is only temporal knowledge, you must know that knowledge appears and disappears along with the body at death. The body that you are now aware of having will one day die, and there will be no knowledge there after, neither was there any knowledge even before that body was born.

So the idea of eternal life makes no sense. The only way it makes sense to me, is if time doesn't exist and we exist as material form forever appearing and disappearing in the context of pure infinite energy never having been created thus cannot be destroyed.

I think the nondualists are correct in how they unravel the material form back to it's basic fundamental source which is the emptiness of space apparently full of form, albeit a temporal and transient ethereal type of form.

I think the attributes are mental constructs though, appearances within the human mind, and not from some God who existed forever prior to the human body. Who then just one day while sitting around forever decided to make a human being. This never made sense.

I can sense I am energy and that I am part of the whole that will go on indefinitely as energy, but the vehicle that is my body is a temporal show of that energy, and so I cannot have knowledge of the eternal energy, nor of befores and afters my bodies temporal appearance and disappearance.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23, 2021 9:43 pm Well, the answer to that is simply that free will entails that one has no less than one opportunity for genuine choice (but possibly more) to do something other than what God chooses. But beyond that, a choice, once made, is a choice.

It's like what happens at a wedding: two people freely agree to "forsaking all others, as long as they both shall live." That choice is made freely; but once made, it sticks. The fact that they keep to it afterwards does not mean the choice to forsake others was forced or not genuinely free. In fact, it is all the more significant, because it shows that it was genuinely the choice they committed to.

So if two people both agree to stick to their own original free choices, but then one of them decided to change their mind, won't that be a positive and good thing for both of them. So even if one breaks what was first a genuine choice, surely the doing something other than this original genuine choice is also a genuine choice. What has this choosing got anything to do with what God wants and chooses?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 9:16 am I understand that a loving everlasting relationship with myself is possible, but not with a God, unless God is myself.

So...you have no problem with the idea of "loving yourself," but don't think anybody else could to it? Or am I misunderstanding that?

If you know you are knowing you are a human being, then you must also know that your knowledge of being a human being is only temporal knowledge,

Why?

...you must know that knowledge appears and disappears along with the body at death.

I don't believe that's true, obviously. As a Christian, I believe in eternal life. I don't believe knowledge disappears at death.

I think the attributes are mental constructs though, appearances within the human mind, and not from some God who existed forever prior to the human body. Who then just one day while sitting around forever decided to make a human being. This never made sense.

It does to me. Why could not a Supreme Being decide to create things? And if he did, and even if I didn't understand all He was doing, does that make it less possible for Him to do it? It's hard to see why that would follow.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 12:49 pm So if two people both agree to stick to their own original free choices, but then one of them decided to change their mind, won't that be a positive and good thing for both of them.

Not quite my point. My point is merely that when two people agree to prefer one another, that does not imply they've lost their freedom. It means they've exercised a choice to which they've committed...that's all.

I intended no particular comment on divorce, though I understand people who have been through it find it very painful and unpleasant.

What has this choosing got anything to do with what God wants and chooses?

I was speaking of human freedom of the will. (God, of course, is at liberty to "want and choose" anything consonant with His own character.)

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 1:34 am

bahman wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23, 2021 11:17 pm We could have a relationship with God without trouble

We couldn't be capable of relationship with God unless we had the option of "trouble." We could have had a robot "relationship," but not a genuine, free-will one.

Why not? In a place, Paradise without the tree, we could have a relationship with God and could be free.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 1:34 am Think of it this way: one of the great things about a relationship is that your partner could have chosen somebody else. But she didn't; she chose you. Of all the things she could have chosen, she freely agreed to be with you. How important is that? How would things be different if you knew she was forced into the relationship, and actually had had no choice at all? What would that do to the nature of your mutual connection? Isn't it awfully important that she did have an alternative?

Where do we go if we don't choose God? Hell. Why should we be forced to choose God?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 9:16 am I understand that a loving everlasting relationship with myself is possible, but not with a God, unless God is myself.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 3:17 pmSo...you have no problem with the idea of "loving yourself," but don't think anybody else could to it? Or am I misunderstanding that?

I really don't know what God is? I just keep hearing about God from other sources, but I personally do not know what this God thing is.
I only know myself, and I know others as I know myself, for I'm assuming others are just like me fundamentally except others are experiencing different circumstances to mine.

If you know you are knowing you are a human being, then you must also know that your knowledge of being a human being is only temporal knowledge,

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 3:17 pmWhy?

If it's your knowledge belonging to you, then that which belongs to you will be go with you upon your death, that's what I mean.

...you must know that knowledge appears and disappears along with the body at death.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 3:17 pmI don't believe that's true, obviously. As a Christian, I believe in eternal life. I don't believe knowledge disappears at death.

I personally do not know what you mean by eternal life. But I do know what is a temporal life.

I think the attributes are mental constructs though, appearances within the human mind, and not from some God who existed forever prior to the human body. Who then just one day while sitting around forever decided to make a human being. This never made sense.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 3:17 pmIt does to me. Why could not a Supreme Being decide to create things? And if he did, and even if I didn't understand all He was doing, does that make it less possible for Him to do it? It's hard to see why that would follow.

Well my point is, I do not see the moral sense in creating sentient creatures that can suffer in horrific multiple ways. And suffer not just by nature itself via being burned alive in a bush fire, or even surviving being burnt, only to suffer the excrutiating pain from the burned body parts. Or to suffer at the hands of human beings who inflict horrific blood curdling torture upon other humans and animals.

If I was the supreme being creator, I would say forget it, I'm not going to be that stupid and dumb creating sentient suffering creatures. I just wouldn't bother.
Might as well just claim the supreme being creator is a sadistic serial killer, a lover of pain and suffering, could even call that supreme being creator Satan. If God exists then so does Satan. Perhaps the universe and all it's created sentient creatures is the work of a very dark and negative force. How could we know who the real identity of who the supreme creator is, it could be a good creator or it could be an evil creator.

.

bahman wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 3:58 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 1:34 am

bahman wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23, 2021 11:17 pm We could have a relationship with God without trouble

We couldn't be capable of relationship with God unless we had the option of "trouble." We could have had a robot "relationship," but not a genuine, free-will one.

Why not?

Because people with no alternatives but to do what somebody else wants can't "freely choose" anything...especially relationship.

Where do we go if we don't choose God? Hell. Why should we be forced to choose God?

That's the point: you're NOT forced. You can choose Hell.

And what is Hell? It is exactly what one asks for: a place where one has no relationship with God. Unfortunately, since God is the source of all good, it also means a place where one has none of the good either. But that's a choice.

In the end, we all get what we ask for. That's what free will entails.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 4:00 pm I really don't know what God is? I just keep hearing about God from other sources, but I personally do not know what this God thing is.

Fair enough.

Would you want to know, if you could?

I personally do not know what you mean by eternal life. But I do know what is a temporal life,

I think you do. It's a very straightforward concept, really. It means you don't die.

“Truly, truly, I say to you, the one who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life." (John 5:24)

I do not see the moral sense in creating sentient creatures that can suffer in horrific multiple ways.

Oh. The classic "problem of evil." Yes, I understand.

Well, do you think God could have sufficient reason for allowing some evil to exist?

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 4:09 pm Oh. The classic "problem of evil." Yes, I understand.

Well, do you think God could have sufficient reason for allowing some evil to exist?

I do not know what is God.

If evil is allowed to exist in life, then it's a stupid and dumb idea.

But it's not just about evil, it's about pain and suffering that exists as fact, it's real, it can be experientially known by sentient beings. To me it seems to be a need that does not need to be. It's all so totally senseless.

It makes more sense to me that there is no supreme creator being. There's just what's happening, be it good or bad, be it pain or pleasure, evil or love, that's just what's happening. And whatever and however all this life stuff started I have no knowing idea of any how or why or purpose.

If I could choose to be born, I would have declined. But the fact is there is no chooser, ever. And so that's the only good here.

The only good here is knowing there is a way out of this pain and suffering that is life.

.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 4:54 pm I do not know what is God.

Well, that's the first step, then.

Are you willing to know? Or are you devoted to skepticism regarding that?

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 5:02 pm

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 4:54 pm I do not know what is God.

Well, that's the first step, then.

Are you willing to know? Or are you devoted to skepticism regarding that?

All I know about God is that the concept is a human creation. I know human and what they are capable of, they are selfish takers, so why would I want to get to know something that a human has created. I wouldn't.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 5:13 pm All I know about God is that the concept is a human creation. I know human and what they are capable of, they are selfish takers, so why would I want to get to know something that a human has created. I wouldn't.

Then the answer is, "No, I'm not interested in knowing God. I'm only interested in assuming He's a human fiction."

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 4:04 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 3:58 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 1:34 am
We couldn't be capable of relationship with God unless we had the option of "trouble." We could have had a robot "relationship," but not a genuine, free-will one.

Why not?

Because people with no alternatives but to do what somebody else wants can't "freely choose" anything...especially relationship.

Where do we go if we don't choose God? Hell. Why should we be forced to choose God?

That's the point: you're NOT forced. You can choose Hell.

And what is Hell? It is exactly what one asks for: a place where one has no relationship with God. Unfortunately, since God is the source of all good, it also means a place where one has none of the good either. But that's a choice.

In the end, we all get what we ask for. That's what free will entails.

Why the relationship with God should be so important that people who don't like it deserve to be in Hell? Why people cannot for example be in Heaven and have no relationship with God?