If God had Free Will ...

[Iacchus]

From this thread (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=1261415#p1261415)

So, if God had free will, and He existed on the other side of this "void" you folks keeps referring to, wouldn't His free will also extend into our "little world?" This by the way, would coincide with this spiritual "thingee" that I brought up in the original post. Meaning, the fact that we have free will or, the appearance of it -- similar to the appearance of evolution that is ;) -- constitutes evidence don't you think?

[Ryokan]

You never tire of this, do you?

[Babe from Missouri]

I made tuna fish patties for dinner, and they didn't suck at all.

-Mix two cans tuna with two eggs, several tbspns flour, and season the mixture.
-Fry in skillet. I used a touch of olive oil, but veggie oil or butter would work.

makes 4 patties

[kmortis]

I made tuna fish patties for dinner, and they didn't suck at all.

-Mix two cans tuna with two eggs, several tbspns flour, and season the mixture.
-Fry in skillet. I used a touch of olive oil, but veggie oil or butter would work.

makes 4 patties

mmmm....tuna

Mama Mortis challenged me by asking "does chicken go well with apples?" I demonstrated, conclusively, that they do, in fact, go well together by making a roulade of apples and cheddar in chicken, with a homemade applesauce (i thickend it slightly with corn starch). Oh, I seasoned the chicken with cinnamon, nutmeg and a touch of ginger, for that apple pie flavor.

[Just thinking]

How can God have Free Will, or even the ability to think?

Here is part of a lengthy argument I made that entertained (in part) such a hypothesis ...

Can God think?

Thinking is a process by which information is collected, understood and analyzed; and then new ideas develop which can be solutions to problems, new designs or patterns for construction, or any number of new art forms, just to list a few. The key element to thinking is developing new ideas. This is fine for you and me (and most living things) and even someday, computers. But what of a deity that knows everything? All solutions to any and all problems are already known and fully understood. All possible art forms and compositions are already known. All future outcomes are already known. Even all that He is going to do is known by Him. Since all is known in advance (and all outcomes as well), He can never have a 'New' idea -- He already knew He would have it. The process of Him thinking makes no sense. So maybe it's not necessary for a God to think -- but consider this . . . He can't ever change His mind about anything either, because He already knows His final actions. And now for the clincher -- you and I can think, and we can change our minds.

[c4ts]

Why go anywhere when you could spin around in a circle forever?

[kmortis]

Why go anywhere when you could spin around in a circle forever?

Ooo..ooo...I can bring a baseball bat, if you'd like. It makes spinning around so much easier.

[Tricky]

If God had Free Will ...

Could he turn down the position of "God"?

[bagtaggar]

I made the most delicious, low budget fettuchini alfredo with grilled chicken the other day. Had it with a ceasar salad and some chilled pino grigio. Not bad for a student with no time on his hands. My girlfriend and I enjoyed it together, then we watched "City of Lost Children".

What a great movie!

[HeyLeroy]

I made tuna fish patties for dinner, and they didn't suck at all.

-Mix two cans tuna with two eggs, several tbspns flour, and season the mixture.
-Fry in skillet. I used a touch of olive oil, but veggie oil or butter would work.

makes 4 patties


Think I'll try this with salmon.

Iacchus: Please learn the difference between evidence and appearance.
And get a hammer to pull the nail that's holding your shoe to the floor.

[bruto]

From this thread (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=1261415#p1261415)

So, if God had free will, and He existed on the other side of this "void" you folks keeps referring to, wouldn't His free will also extend into our "little world?" This by the way, would coincide with this spiritual "thingee" that I brought up in the original post. Meaning, the fact that we have free will or, the appearance of it -- similar to the appearance of evolution that is ;) -- constitutes evidence don't you think?

Assuming at the moment that God has free will, as I imagine he must if we are to define God as omnipotent (He's a muddled enough god as it is without the paradox of having to obey his own laws or anyone else's), I see no reason why that should extend to his creation. An omnipotent God can create whatever he damn well pleases. He need not provide us with free will at all unless he decides that that would make for a better world, or perhaps that makes the show more amusing to watch. The evidence may point to free will (or it may point to deterministic chaos), but if God is God, he pretty much has to be unbound by necessity.

[clarsct]

I have a neat dish I do with Cpt. Morgan. You make a marinade of peach nectar, pineapple juice, honey, rum, and a dash or two of lemon juice. Cube the chicken into bite-sized pieces and let them soak.

Cut up some potatoes, I find that Yukon Gold works the best, and sautee in butter, parsley, basil, thyme and rosemary. Cook until the butter is pretty much absorbed into the potatoes. Add Balsmic Vinegar and reduce until the liquid is completely absorbed.

Add the chicken and the marinade. Bring to a boil, reduce heat and cover. simmer for about 20 minutes, or until the chicken is done. I usually thicken the sauce with some cornstarch.

Not too shabby for something I made up while drunk.

Sorry for the lack of measurements, I never measure. One 12oz can peach nectar, one of the little cans of Dole pineapple juice..erm...about a cup or so of rum, and a dash of honey and lemon. (One cup for it, one for me....)

Spice as desired, and the you want about a quarter inch of vinegar in the bottom of the skillet. I use a 12 inch, high-sided stainless steel skillet. I am not reponsible for the taste if you use aluminium.

[kmortis]

I made the most delicious, low budget fettuchini alfredo with grilled chicken the other day. Had it with a ceasar salad and some chilled pino grigio. Not bad for a student with no time on his hands. My girlfriend and I enjoyed it together, then we watched "City of Lost Children".

What a great movie!

I LOVE City of Lost Children. When it was in the theatres, many, many moons ago, my buddies and I took a trip into downtown Chicago to the only theatre in the area that was playing it. The scene where all the cyclopes are sitting in their arena, onna big screen...priceless.

Interestingly enough, we were introduced to it from an interview with Terry Gilliam. He said it was one of the most visually stunning films he'd ever seen. We figured that if HE thought that.....

And that dinner sounds good too. Did you make your own alfredo or store bought?

[Iacchus]

Think I'll try this with salmon.

Iacchus: Please learn the difference between evidence and appearance.
And get a hammer to pull the nail that's holding your shoe to the floor.The Universe is very much like a seed, which evolved into a tree. Now, is this evidence of the type of evolution you're referring to or, just an appearance? How can you tell that the whole thing came about randomly or, that it was in fact guided? Now isn't the seed, in conjunction with everything else governed by the laws of nature, evidence of that which is determined beforehand?

[bruto]

I LOVE City of Lost Children. When it was in the theatres, many, many moons ago, my buddies and I took a trip into downtown Chicago to the only theatre in the area that was playing it. The scene where all the cyclopes are sitting in their arena, onna big screen...priceless.

Interestingly enough, we were introduced to it from an interview with Terry Gilliam. He said it was one of the most visually stunning films he'd ever seen. We figured that if HE thought that.....

And that dinner sounds good too. Did you make your own alfredo or store bought?

Great movie. My daughter recommended it a few years ago. If you like the particular visual sense of it, you should try hunting down a copy of Delicatessen, too. It's currently out of print, I think, and has never made it to DVD, but it's worth the effort.

[kmortis]

Great movie. My daughter recommended it a few years ago. If you like the particular visual sense of it, you should try hunting down a copy of Delicatessen, too. It's currently out of print, I think, and has never made it to DVD, but it's worth the effort.

I saw Delicatessan on tape. Another Marc Caro masterpiece. He and that actor (he's the qunituplet in City and the main in Deli) work really well together. Gotta love any twisted tale about cannabalism.

[HeyLeroy]

The Universe is very much like a seed, which evolved into a tree. Now, is this evidence of the type of evolution you're referring to or, just an appearance? How can you tell that the whole thing came about randomly or, that it was in fact guided? Now isn't the seed, in conjunction with everything else governed by the laws of nature, evidence of that which is determined beforehand?

What 'type' of evolution am I referring to?
Please provide proof that the evolution of said tree was guided. Please explain "evidence of that which is determined beforehand", I don't understand your question. Yes the seed is governed by the laws of nature. How is this evidence of predetermination?

[Iacchus]

What 'type' of evolution am I referring to?
Please provide proof that the evolution of said tree was guided. Please explain "evidence of that which is determined beforehand", I don't understand your question. Yes the seed is governed by the laws of nature. How is this evidence of predetermination?Well, if something is governed wholly by something else, shouldn't that pretty much ensure a "predictable" outcome?

[HeyLeroy]

Well, if something is governed wholly by something else, shouldn't that pretty much ensure a "predictable" outcome?


Predictable by whom?

[Iacchus]

Predictable by whom?By whomever it is that's familiar with how it works.

[HeyLeroy]

By whomever it is that's familiar with how it works.

There's a whole @sshat full of variables (dare I venture an infinite number) that would have to be taken into account in order to approach predictability, and those variables would be constantly changing. So, no, the way you are stating the question I would say no.

And the universe is not like a seed that grew into a tree. Seeds don't evolve into trees, they grow into trees. They take nourishment from their environment (water and chemicals from the ground and heat and light from the sun), so I don't see how a seed is like the universe. Everything that is in the universe was contained in the singularity, according to the Big Bang theory.

(edited for spelling)

[Iacchus]

From the thread (http://206.225.95.123/forumlive/showthread.php?postid=1266012#post1266012)

way that Iacchus and other LFW'ers use the term, it is completely incoherant. But then, they're mostly incoherant about everything.

Put your bat away.And of course, if you were to read the orginal post (http://206.225.95.123/forumlive/showthread.php?p=1263388#post1263388), you would understand that I was a compatibilist. Yeah, and just think, if God's existence was based upon free will, and yet, the only way that could be maintained is through determinism, that would explain how (according to Biblical sources) God could endow man with free will, and yet still project ahead of time in full detail, how man will behave.

[Tricky]

From the thread (http://206.225.95.123/forumlive/showthread.php?postid=1266012#post1266012)

And of course, if you were to read the orginal post (http://206.225.95.123/forumlive/showthread.php?p=1263388#post1263388), you would understand that I was a compatibilist. Yeah, and just think, if God's existence was based upon free will, and yet, the only way that could be maintained is through determinism, that would explain how (according to Biblical sources) God could endow man with free will, and yet still project ahead of time in full detail, how man will behave.
LOL. You say you're a compatibilist? Then why don't you explain to us what you think that means?

The scenario you have just described is a logical impossibility. If anyone knows the future for certain, then there can be no such thing as free will. If there is such thing as free will, then no one can know the future for certain. They are mutually exclusive.

If God knows what you will do, then you are powerless to do anything else. You have no choices, even if you think you do. Honestly, Iacchus, we've been over this with you before.

[Iacchus]

LOL. You say you're a compatibilist? Then why don't you explain to us what you think that means? I already have.

[kmortis]

I already have.

Could one of the mods please change his name to "Humpty Dumpty"? It would give people fair warning as to the real-time redefinition of terms.

[Tricky]

I already have.
Could you show me where you have done that, or (to make it easier) just repeat it? I truly cannot see how you could possibly squeeze your beliefs under a compatibilist umbrella.

[Belz...]

From this thread (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=1261415#p1261415)

So, if God had free will, and He existed on the other side of this "void" you folks keeps referring to, wouldn't His free will also extend into our "little world?" This by the way, would coincide with this spiritual "thingee" that I brought up in the original post. Meaning, the fact that we have free will or, the appearance of it -- similar to the appearance of evolution that is ;) -- constitutes evidence don't you think?

Again, you're giving too much evidential weight to your thoughts.

[Belz...]

The Universe is very much like a seed, which evolved into a tree. Now, is this evidence of the type of evolution you're referring to or, just an appearance? How can you tell that the whole thing came about randomly or, that it was in fact guided? Now isn't the seed, in conjunction with everything else governed by the laws of nature, evidence of that which is determined beforehand?

No.

[Iacchus]

Again, you're giving too much evidential weight to your thoughts.So, where did the "blue print" for the Universe come from then? Or, is it possible that the whole thing came about strictly on a "imaginary" level?

[bagtaggar]

Iacchus, your philosophical masterbation might look cool to your high school friends, but to the rest of us you come across as a pseudo-intellectual and a clown.

[Iacchus]

Could you show me where you have done that, or (to make it easier) just repeat it? I truly cannot see how you could possibly squeeze your beliefs under a compatibilist umbrella.Well, obviously I believe in determinism or, haven't you gathered that much? Otherwise why would I insist that there's no such thing as true randomness? Whereas in order for free will to exist, it would have to exist in accord with determinism, otherwise we would have no means of defining it nor, would there be any implications that is has substance. I'm suggesting determism is a direct result of free will or, an original cause if you will.

[kmortis]

So, where did the "blue print" for the Universe come from then? Or, is it possible that the whole thing came about strictly on a "imaginary" level?

So where is the "blue print" for the universe? Or is it possible that you imagined the entire thing?

[Belz...]

So, where did the "blue print" for the Universe come from then? Or, is it possible that the whole thing came about strictly on a "imaginary" level?

Neither. Again, you're only considering the options you want to consider. There is no "blue print". Therefore your question is meaningless.

[Belz...]

Well, obviously I believe in determinism or, haven't you gathered that much? Otherwise why would I insist that there's no such thing as true randomness?

Actually, singularities are supposed to exist in a state of pure randomness, if I understand it correctly. So does the underlying fabric of existence.

[Iacchus]

So where is the "blue print" for the universe? Or is it possible that you imagined the entire thing?Well, I suppose it is possible for the architect to "presuppose" the existence of a house.

[kmortis]

Well, I suppose it is possible for the architect to "presuppose" the existence of a house.

The exception here is, I can, go to my local town offices and find out who built my house. It has a deed and title. THis will list who the builder is. I can, if the firm is still around or the architech is still alive, look up who built it and meet them.

Even if they are dead, I can track down the designer reliably.

We CANNOT do that with the universe.

[Iacchus]

The exception here is, I can, go to my local town offices and find out who built my house. It has a deed and title. THis will list who the builder is. I can, if the firm is still around or the architech is still alive, look up who built it and meet them.

Even if they are dead, I can track down the designer reliably.

We CANNOT do that with the universe.What if the records got burned in a fire or, some thief broke in and stole them, how could you tell then?

[Iacchus]

And so what if it "begs the question." Isn't this what I'm trying to get you to look at here? I'm not suggesting you have to buy into anything, I am merely posing a "what if?"

[kmortis]

What if the records got burned in a fire or, some thief broke in and stole them, how could you tell then?

Are you honestly proposing that a fire broke out in the Akashik Recordkeeping house and THAT'S why we have no proof of a god???:confused:

[Upchurch]

If God had Free Will ...

Could he turn down the position of "God"?
I've always thought the ultimate expression of Free Will, maybe even its definition, is to be in a situation where you have every right, ability, and inclination to perform an act and you refrain from doing so.

[Iacchus]

Are you honestly proposing that a fire broke out in the Akashik Recordkeeping house and THAT'S why we have no proof of a god???:confused:Well, acutally I would be more inclined to believe that somebody stole them or, concealed them from view. Or, I suppose it is possible, that maybe it all did go up in a Big Bang? :D

[kmortis]

Well, acutally I would be more inclined to believe that somebody stole them or, concealed them from view. Or, I suppose it is possible, that maybe it all did go up in a Big Bang? :D

Good to see that you are safe from ever leaving here to persue a career in stand up. ;)

Well, to paraphrase many people here "That would assume their existance to begin with." So, give evidence. I'll save you a post. There isn't any.

And, if God had Free Will, does that mean that he didn't pay his lawyer?
Thank you, tip your waitress
I'm here all week. :)

See, I'm safe too.

[Just thinking]

And so what if it "begs the question." Isn't this what I'm trying to get you to look at here? I'm not suggesting you have to buy into anything, I am merely posing a "what if?"

I've already posted as to why God (or a biblically described one) cannot have Free Will -- that does not preclude randomness or Free Will to lesser beings; perhaps a look into Vacuum Genesis (http://www.astronomycafe.net/qadir/ask/a11241.html) might do right about now.

[Iacchus]

If God had Free Will ...

Could he turn down the position of "God"?
I've always thought the ultimate expression of Free Will, maybe even its definition, is to be in a situation where you have every right, ability, and inclination to perform an act and you refrain from doing so.Yes, I would be inclined to agree.

[Iacchus]

I've already posted as to why God (or a biblically described one) cannot have Free Will -- that does not preclude randomness or Free Will to lesser beings; perhaps a look into Vacuum Genesis (http://www.astronomycafe.net/qadir/ask/a11241.html) might do right about now.And what if God's love was uconditional, say like the way the sun radiates its light down on the planet, would it really matter what God portends to knows or doesn't portend to know?

[Belz...]

And what if God's love was uconditional, say like the way the sun radiates its light down on the planet, would it really matter what God portends to knows or doesn't portend to know?

If God's love was unconditional, then there wouldn't be a hell.

[bruto]

And what if God's love was uconditional, say like the way the sun radiates its light down on the planet, would it really matter what God portends to knows or doesn't portend to know?

Then the Universalists would be right, and all the rest of all the creeds and sects and schisms and cults would be a bunch of gratuitous bother. It's a nice idea. I like it, but unfortunately, like reincarnation, the main argument for it is just wishful thinking.

The sun shines equally on saints and sinners, and regardless of what nutters and nincompoops like Pat Robertson believe, it will continue to do so, and to cloud over to us all, without regard for what we are doing or believing, although some of us may not get a full dose through our tinfoil hats.

P.S. I don't think "portend" means what you think it means.

[Iacchus]

Then the Universalists would be right, and all the rest of all the creeds and sects and schisms and cults would be a bunch of gratuitous bother. It's a nice idea. I like it, but unfortunately, like reincarnation, the main argument for it is just wishful thinking.

The sun shines equally on saints and sinners, and regardless of what nutters and nincompoops like Pat Robertson believe, it will continue to do so, and to cloud over to us all, without regard for what we are doing or believing, although some of us may not get a full dose through our tinfoil hats."That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust." ~ Matthew 5:45 (http://bible.gospelcom.net/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=5&version=9)

P.S. I don't think "portend" means what you think it means.Yes, that could be. I'm just saying that whatever it is Gods is professed to have knowledge of (by what we or others might say) or, isn't professed to have knowledge of.

[bruto]

"That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust." ~ Matthew 5:45 (http://bible.gospelcom.net/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=5&version=9)

Yes, that could be. I'm just saying that whatever it is Gods is professed to have knowledge of (by what we or others might say) or, isn't professed to have knowledge of.

I'm guessing the word you were after was "purport."

[Just thinking]

And what if God's love was uconditional, say like the way the sun radiates its light down on the planet, would it really matter what God portends to knows or doesn't portend to know?

My post was to display the contradictory idea of a biblically defined God and a being that can think. The two are diametrically opposed. It's only another chapter or step in seeing how such an entity is highly unlikely. It reduces God to nothing more than a computer software program -- but then again, if God is not as defined in the Bible, then He is not so powerful and knowing. In other words, not God. He's not there if He do and not there if He don't.

[Iacchus]

I'm guessing the word you were after was "purport.""And what if God's love was uconditional, say like the way the sun radiates its light down on the planet, would it really matter what God is purported to know or, isn't purported to know?"

Yes, that would seem to make a lot more sense. Thanks.

[Iacchus]

My post was to display the contradictory idea of a biblically defined God and a being that can think. The two are diametrically opposed. It's only another chapter or step in seeing how such an entity is highly unlikely. It reduces God to nothing more than a computer software program -- but then again, if God is not as defined in the Bible, then He is not so powerful and knowing. In other words, not God. He's not there if He do and not there if He don't.With respect to the rules which govern the matrix that we all abide by (i.e., generated by a super computer?), God is all-powerful and all-knowing. Beyond that, I couldn't even begin to assess it.

[Iacchus]

If God's love was unconditional, then there wouldn't be a hell.How so? It's my understanding that hell simply represents a state that's in accord with what people are interiorly. So, if people go to hell, it's purely out of the love of evil that they wind up there. How would this contradict the notion of God's love being unconditional? If God didn't allow for this separation of the good from the bad -- in effect, everything in accord with likes and dislikes -- there would be nothing but eternal conflict.

[kmortis]

How so? It's my understanding that hell simply represents a state that's in accord with what people are interiorly. So, if people go to hell, it's purely out of the love of evil that they wind up there. How would this contradict the notion of God's love being unconditional? If God didn't allow for this separation of the good from the bad -- in effect, everything in accord with likes and dislikes -- there would be nothing but eternal conflict.

Ahh, it's good to back amongst the rational. ;)

According to most Christian doctrine, I'm destined for hell (there's a couple of them that I escape due to my past status as a believer, but I'll ignore those for now). How is my disbelief equal to a love of evil? I don't love evil (rape, murder, unnecessary death and destruction etc.), I just don't agree that the Xian god is THE Godtm, or that he has any more existance than the dude in my avatar.

[Iacchus]

According to most Christian doctrine, I'm destined for hell (there's a couple of them that I escape due to my past status as a believer, but I'll ignore those for now). How is my disbelief equal to a love of evil? I don't love evil (rape, murder, unnecessary death and destruction etc.), I just don't agree that the Xian god is THE Godtm, or that he has any more existance than the dude in my avatar.And if what I'm saying about hell is correct, then obviously people have twisted it around to suit their own purposes ...

45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. ~ Matthew 5:45 (http://bible.gospelcom.net/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=5&version=9)... perhaps to foster some "hidden" evil in themselves?

[kmortis]

And if what I'm saying about hell is correct, then obviously people have twisted it around to suit their own purposes ... perhaps to foster some "hidden" evil in themselves?

And if what I'm saying about hell is correct, then it just doesn't matter anymore than us arguing about what it's like to live on Endor, or Terminus, or at Battle School.

Hell is the theological stick to Heavens carrot. Since I don't believe in the later, why would I believe in the former?

Getting back to something approaching the OP. I remember a story where in the end it was discovered that Satan repented. Anyone know what i'm talking about?

[Iacchus]

Hell is the theological stick to Heavens carrot. Since I don't believe in the later, why would I believe in the former?Yes, people should be allowed to believe what they like, within reason that is.

[bruto]

Iacchus, while I find your conception of hell more attractive than most, I think you'll find most religious sects describe it rather differently, as a punishment imposed, rather than a state of current being, even if it is deemed a consequence of choice or free will.

The Biblical passage about the sun shining on all alike is, I think, quite explicitly not about the issue of eternal damnation, but about the idea that you cannot expect that judgment to apply to the world or the present time. Among other things, I would take it as a pretty direct and explicit rejection of the wacko ideas of people like Pat Robertson, that God is constantly screwing around with the weather in order to punish the living. But most Christians would not go so far as to say that God's love is quite unconditional, even though it's presumed that it is shown to us in one way or another during our lives. We're left an opportunity to reconcile until the moment we die, but after that, it's quite conditional indeed, to a degree that varies with the sect. Whether you believe that it ends just in eternal darkness, or with little red guys stabbing you with pitchforks, whether you go into the details of circles of hell and purgatory or not, Hell is a punishment, it's eternal, and it entails a permanent loss of god's love. There are not many Christian sects that consider the rejection of the concept of eternal damnation doctrinally acceptable, and plenty that label it an outright heresy.

[bruto]

Adding to the above, I just happened to be sitting here, where a friend has just come back from her Lutheran service, bringing back the program, containing today's Biblical text (Zephaniah 1):

The word of the LORD which came unto Zephaniah the son of Cushi, the son of Gedaliah, the son of Amariah, the son of Hizkiah, in the days of Josiah the son of Amon, king of Judah.

2I will utterly consume all things from off the land, saith the LORD.

3I will consume man and beast; I will consume the fowls of the heaven, and the fishes of the sea, and the stumbling blocks with the wicked: and I will cut off man from off the land, saith the LORD.

4I will also stretch out mine hand upon Judah, and upon all the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and I will cut off the remnant of Baal from this place, and the name of the Chemarims with the priests;

5And them that worship the host of heaven upon the housetops; and them that worship and that swear by the LORD, and that swear by Malcham;

6And them that are turned back from the LORD; and those that have not sought the LORD, nor enquired for him.

7Hold thy peace at the presence of the Lord GOD: for the day of the LORD is at hand: for the LORD hath prepared a sacrifice, he hath bid his guests.

8And it shall come to pass in the day of the LORD's sacrifice, that I will punish the princes, and the king's children, and all such as are clothed with strange apparel.

9In the same day also will I punish all those that leap on the threshold, which fill their masters' houses with violence and deceit.

10And it shall come to pass in that day, saith the LORD, that there shall be the noise of a cry from the fish gate, and an howling from the second, and a great crashing from the hills.

11Howl, ye inhabitants of Maktesh, for all the merchant people are cut down; all they that bear silver are cut off.

12And it shall come to pass at that time, that I will search Jerusalem with candles, and punish the men that are settled on their lees: that say in their heart, The LORD will not do good, neither will he do evil.

13Therefore their goods shall become a booty, and their houses a desolation: they shall also build houses, but not inhabit them; and they shall plant vineyards, but not drink the wine thereof.

14The great day of the LORD is near, it is near, and hasteth greatly, even the voice of the day of the LORD: the mighty man shall cry there bitterly.

15That day is a day of wrath, a day of trouble and distress, a day of wasteness and desolation, a day of darkness and gloominess, a day of clouds and thick darkness,

16A day of the trumpet and alarm against the fenced cities, and against the high towers.

17And I will bring distress upon men, that they shall walk like blind men, because they have sinned against the LORD: and their blood shall be poured out as dust, and their flesh as the dung.

18Neither their silver nor their gold shall be able to deliver them in the day of the LORD's wrath; but the whole land shall be devoured by the fire of his jealousy: for he shall make even a speedy riddance of all them that dwell in the land.

Now I realize that not all Christians would take this text literally, but an astonishingly large number do. Yep, folks. Atheist? How about just strange apparel? You're toast!

[Belz...]

How so? It's my understanding that hell simply represents a state that's in accord with what people are interiorly. So, if people go to hell, it's purely out of the love of evil that they wind up there. How would this contradict the notion of God's love being unconditional? If God didn't allow for this separation of the good from the bad -- in effect, everything in accord with likes and dislikes -- there would be nothing but eternal conflict.

First, it's all too easy a cop-out to say that people who go to hell WANTED to go to hell. No one wants to fo to hell. GOD sends them there.

Second, if God loves unconditionally, it doesn't make sense that he should be so cruel as to condemn one for eternity for a short lifetime's worth of "evil".

Third, I was under the impression that, in heaven, there could BE no conflict. Also, if there CAN be conflict in heaven, then there WILL be conflict as long as there's at least two people up there. Better send them ALL to hell.

[Just thinking]

With respect to the rules which govern the matrix that we all abide by (i.e., generated by a super computer?), God is all-powerful and all-knowing. Beyond that, I couldn't even begin to assess it.

Your evidence for such a claim .... we await.

... people should be allowed to believe what they like, within reason that is.

Again, I have posted my logical argument showing your claim to be impossible for a thinking being -- your logical argument to support your claims?

(Logic: The science/study of reason.)

[Iacchus]

First, it's all too easy a cop-out to say that people who go to hell WANTED to go to hell. No one wants to fo to hell. GOD sends them there.Sure, everyone wants to go to heaven. But, when they begin to discover it's not permissible to commit murder, rape or, any other manner of "vile deed," and begin to suffer grievous torments (interiorly) if they even begin to think of it, they automatically cast themselves down into hell.

Second, if God loves unconditionally, it doesn't make sense that he should be so cruel as to condemn one for eternity for a short lifetime's worth of "evil".God's love is unconditional in the sense that He rules by means of ruling love (http://swedenborg.newearth.org/hh/hh49.html#479) ... by what we desire most out of life and understand.

Third, I was under the impression that, in heaven, there could BE no conflict. Also, if there CAN be conflict in heaven, then there WILL be conflict as long as there's at least two people up there. Better send them ALL to hell.Harmony is maintained by keeping everyone in accord with their ruling love.

[Belz...]

Sure, everyone wants to go to heaven. But, when they begin to discover it's not permissible to commit murder, rape or, any other manner of "vile deed," and begin to suffer grievous torments (interiorly) if they even begin to think of it, they automatically cast themselves down into hell.

That doesn't even make sense. You're not getting nearer to convincing me. Points off, here.

Harmony is maintained by keeping everyone in accord with their ruling love.

What the hell is that supposed to mean ? Ruling love ?

[kmortis]

That doesn't even make sense. You're not getting nearer to convincing me. Points off, here.



What the hell is that supposed to mean ? Ruling love ?


Oh, c'mon, you know what "ruling love" is. It's that special kind of love (nudge, nudge) that sells so many "German films".

[bruto]

Sure, everyone wants to go to heaven. But, when they begin to discover it's not permissible to commit murder, rape or, any other manner of "vile deed," and begin to suffer grievous torments (interiorly) if they even begin to think of it, they automatically cast themselves down into hell.

I don't expect to go to heaven or hell, and don't much mind that. So count me out of "everyone." Besides, if what you said were true, religions would not have to scare us with explicit and vivid threats of eternal torture and damnation after life, would they? The people who suffer grievous torments when they even think of sin are not the ones who are going to hell, are they? It's the people who do the crimes without feeling the torment, isn't it? Or are you going to suggest that even to think of a crime is to commit it?

God's love is unconditional in the sense that He rules by means of ruling love (http://swedenborg.newearth.org/hh/hh49.html#479) ... by what we desire most out of life and understand.

Swedenborg?!?!?! Oh, OK, I see we're not going to be getting out of woo-woo territory very soon here!

Harmony is maintained by keeping everyone in accord with their ruling love.[/QUOTE]

Sounds kind of coercive to me, considering how many people of various religions disagree on what that ruling love or anything else is supposed to be. I can't really see a heaven in which Osama bin Laden, Savonarola, John Calvin and Emanuel Swedenborg, for example, will sit down together and feel the love, unless someone is holding a gun to their heads. What kind of heaven is it where nearly everyone will end up having to renounce everything he lived for?

[Iacchus]

I don't expect to go to heaven or hell, and don't much mind that.While in fact, I think it would be wrong for anyone to make such a claim. That would be like putting the cart before the horse ... thus bringing a person's motives under suspicion.

So count me out of "everyone."Same here.

Besides, if what you said were true, religions would not have to scare us with explicit and vivid threats of eternal torture and damnation after life, would they?Not all religions do this, however. Only those who wish to maintain hell over people's heads in order to control "their flock." While even at that rate, it isn't necessarily wrong to inform people that such a place exists. That would be comparable to telling your kids not to go to the neighbors down the street because they do drugs there and it's not good for you.

The people who suffer grievous torments when they even think of sin are not the ones who are going to hell, are they?There's nothing to say people have to go to hell for experiencing guilt or remorse, albeit it's the hell in their minds they're confronted with (I believe) that allows them to do this.

It's the people who do the crimes without feeling the torment, isn't it? Or are you going to suggest that even to think of a crime is to commit it?Yes, to the extent that you begin to think about it with the intent of committing it, that you begin to suffer this kind of anguish.

Swedenborg?!?!?! Oh, OK, I see we're not going to be getting out of woo-woo territory very soon here!It's of my understanding, that Swedenborg was rather moderate in his views.

Sounds kind of coercive to me, considering how many people of various religions disagree on what that ruling love or anything else is supposed to be.Ruling love is simply a matter of what you maintain on a personal level.

I can't really see a heaven in which Osama bin Laden, Savonarola, John Calvin and Emanuel Swedenborg, for example, will sit down together and feel the love, unless someone is holding a gun to their heads. And chances are, if these people are not in accord with each other's ruling love, they will never meet up. Except perhaps in the case of Swedenborg, who was well-known for traversing and exploring these different realms.

What kind of heaven is it where nearly everyone will end up having to renounce everything he lived for?Not so.

[bruto]

To "I don't expect to go to heaven or hell, and don't much mind that." : While in fact, I think it would be wrong for anyone to make such a claim. That would be like putting the cart before the horse ... thus bringing a person's motives under suspicion.

What I meant, perhaps you misunderstood, is that I do not believe in an afterlife at all, in the usual sense of that word, and am not bothered by this.

Not all religions do this [ scare us with the fear of an external hell] , however. Only those who wish to maintain hell over people's heads in order to control "their flock." While even at that rate, it isn't necessarily wrong to inform people that such a place exists. That would be comparable to telling your kids not to go to the neighbors down the street because they do drugs there and it's not good for you.

I didn't say all religions, but certainly some of the major ones do. But you just said it doesn't exist, at least in the sense they claim. So if you are right, they are lying to their followers, whatever their good intentions. It would not be comparable to telling the kids not to go to the kids down the street, etc. It would be more like parents telling their kids to eat their oatmeal or the police will come and arrest them.

There's nothing to say people have to go to hell for experiencing guilt or remorse, albeit it's the hell in their minds they're confronted with (I believe) that allows them to do this.

Yes, to the extent that you begin to think about it with the intent of committing it, that you begin to suffer this kind of anguish.

I'm not convinced that everyone who sins feels the anguish. If they did, I should think the hell inside them would eventually stop them from doing it and churches would not need to threaten them with an external hell. Yet history suggests that what you propose is not happening. If the Hell felt by people who do evil deeds is all they get, it isn't working very well. It certainly isn't doing the rest of us much good. If this is supposed to be a divine plan, someone should tell the boss it's not working.

It's of my understanding, that Swedenborg was rather moderate in his views.

I suppose that depends on what part of his views you look at, considering that although he was undoubtedly a brilliant man, there's also some evidence that he was barking mad. Then again, maybe he really did commune with angels, and talk with the chubby little inhabitants of the moon in their language of farts. I suppose there's no proof he didn't, right?

Ruling love is simply a matter of what you maintain on a personal level.

And I don't see how people who on a personal level, hate, despise, reject and condemn each other at the deepest core level of faith and practice can be expected to share a harmonious paradise. Sorry, I just don't see it happening.

And chances are, if these people are not in accord with each other's ruling love, they will never meet up. Except perhaps in the case of Swedenborg, who was well-known for traversing and exploring these different realms.

Separate heavens then? With old Swedenbog shuttling between?

Not so. (to my remark: " What kind of heaven is it where nearly everyone will end up having to renounce everything he lived for?", specifically in relation to the sharing of heaven by people who are intent in this life on destroying each other.)

Not much of an answer there.

[Iacchus]

What I meant, perhaps you misunderstood, is that I do not believe in an afterlife at all, in the usual sense of that word, and am not bothered by this.Yes, you are certainly entitled to believe this.

I didn't say all religions, but certainly some of the major ones do. But you just said it doesn't exist, at least in the sense they claim. So if you are right, they are lying to their followers, whatever their good intentions. It would not be comparable to telling the kids not to go to the kids down the street, etc. It would be more like parents telling their kids to eat their oatmeal or the police will come and arrest them.Well, let me put it this way, hell is not the place you want to send anyone, unless they have been prepared to go there.

I'm not convinced that everyone who sins feels the anguish. If they did, I should think the hell inside them would eventually stop them from doing it and churches would not need to threaten them with an external hell.Not to the extent that they begin to embrace the hell inside of themselves.

Yet history suggests that what you propose is not happening. If the Hell felt by people who do evil deeds is all they get, it isn't working very well. It certainly isn't doing the rest of us much good. If this is supposed to be a divine plan, someone should tell the boss it's not working.And which "world" are you referring to here? The one that we live in currently or, the hereafter?

I suppose that depends on what part of his views you look at, considering that although he was undoubtedly a brilliant man, there's also some evidence that he was barking mad. Then again, maybe he really did commune with angels, and talk with the chubby little inhabitants of the moon in their language of farts. I suppose there's no proof he didn't, right? In order to talk about beings and inhabitants from the moon and other planets, in accord with a spiritual reality as well, these beings must necessarily inhabit the moons and planets of our collective unconscious. And, since there was probably a great deal of speculation on the matter in Swedenborg's day (the existence of life on other planets), these are probably the "beings" Swedenborg was referring to.

And I don't see how people who on a personal level, hate, despise, reject and condemn each other at the deepest core level of faith and practice can be expected to share a harmonious paradise. Sorry, I just don't see it happening.Do biggots of the same feather flock together?

Separate heavens then? With old Swedenbog shuttling between?Separate and distinct "societies" within heaven? Yes.

[bruto]

Yes, you are certainly entitled to believe this.

Well, let me put it this way, hell is not the place you want to send anyone, unless they have been prepared to go there.

Not to the extent that they begin to embrace the hell inside of themselves.

And which "world" are you referring to here? The one that we live in currently or, the hereafter?

In order to talk about beings and inhabitants from the moon and other planets, in accord with a spiritual reality as well, these beings must necessarily inhabit the moons and planets of our collective unconscious. And, since there was probably a great deal of speculation on the matter in Swedenborg's day (the existence of life on other planets), these are probably the "beings" Swedenborg was referring to.

Do biggots of the same feather flock together?

Separate and distinct "societies" within heaven? Yes.


And there, I think, ends any hope of what I would have thought might be an actual argument with a trace of rationality. First of all, you cannot seem to make your mind up whether there's an external hell or not, and vary your responses accordingly, and second, if you believe Swedenborg's planetary journeys and interactions with angels and devils have some substantial truth, there's little point in going on. In fact, I can prove that this thread is pointless, because the Flying Spaghetti Monster told me in a vision that if I keep on trying to argue sense and reason with theosophists, my life will be forever cursed with the hell of ersatz rice pasta in vegan sauce. Now that's a threat I take very seriously.

[Iacchus]

And there, I think, ends any hope of what I would have thought might be an actual argument with a trace of rationality. First of all, you cannot seem to make your mind up whether there's an external hell or not, and vary your responses accordingly ...Oh, if you're looking for an external hell, I would say the closest thing to hell on earth would be prison.

... and second, if you believe Swedenborg's planetary journeys and interactions with angels and devils have some substantial truth, there's little point in going on. There's no doubt in my mind that Swedenborg was in contact with this other, spiritual dimension. And, while obviously he was mistaken about the notion of life on the moon and the other planets, he wasn't altogether wrong. For example, consider the relation between the celestial bodies in my two experiences below ...

Ascending to Heaven (http://www.dionysus.org/x0601.html#11)

11 Just prior to the development of the Seal of God (http://www.dionysus.org/terms.html#seal_god), I had an experience where I was taken up into heaven, into a household (February 1987). I was asleep and awoke to find myself in the spirit, suspended in the sky looking at these black "stick figures" of men—they were supposed to be "dead souls." I was doubting my own fate when I was met by a man angel, as we sailed into the night sky with him at the lead. We were ordinarily clad as we sailed passed countless stars, and covered a great distance in a short period. And on we continued. And I began to think, "Man where are we going? Will we ever stop?" I was getting very anxious but, the next moment I was standing on the street in the middle of a neighborhood (by myself).

12 It was still quite dark as I looked around at the houses. They were charming little houses, of different colors, mostly white and yellow, and seemed to glow in the dark: from the streetlights? (They were day-glow colors and it seemed more like a fantasy.) I surmised I was in heaven, but wondered if I was where I really belonged. It all happened so abruptly. I then turned to face what looked like my mother's apartment building and suspected I was at the right place. But I was determined I should have a key to the door and, pulling the keys from out of my pocket, I approached. I fumbled around for a moment or two, but to no avail. I just didn't have the coordination. I was too disoriented.

13 I found myself laying on the ground next to the walkway as a man approached. As I reached out my hand and in a muffled cry asked, "Could you please help me?" (I don't know if it was the same man I departed with?) Before I knew it I was on a hospital bed and he was wheeling me into the house. He wheeled me through the living room and into the kitchen, and we began to talk, and I soon began to recover my vigor. I was fully conscious now, and I could see, I could hear, I could talk, and I possessed my sense of touch, while everything appeared in three dimensions. Moments later his wife stepped in from the other room (bedroom); both had intended for me to stay for they believed I had died. And as I looked over at her to get a closer look, the whole living room became enlivened. Just then I caught a glimpse of the sun through the front window coming up over the mountains. In only an instant I was wide awake, laying on the sofa-bed in the middle of my mother's living room!

14 To me this was an encouraging sign, for although my life had been in a shambles, I knew there was a better place, and I knew it was still accessible. It seemed to be the fulfillment of something Swedenborg (http://www.dionysus.org/terms.html#swedenborg) said about a man's life coming to ruin in the world. That if he were good, God would take him first, before allowing his soul to be destroyed.

The New Church in Heaven (http://www.dionysus.org/x0601.html#15)

15 This prompts the experience I had in the fall of 1986 (November?), which speaks of the New Church (http://www.dionysus.org/terms.html#new_church) in heaven before it sets down on earth (as mentioned in Judith (http://www.dionysus.org/x0404.html#88)). And I had dream, where I was approached by a young woman who reminded me of my sister Cindy—her innocence (http://www.dionysus.org/x0402.html#20). I was standing on a dirt road, near a field about ready to be plowed, and it was a gray evening. And she approached asking about God, I don't recall what, but I suggested she talk to the Father in Heaven and pointed straight up. Looking up at the same time, there it was, a huge shiny full moon, and it was magnificent! When I looked down the young woman was gone. But I looked up again and there they were, two beautiful full moons talking to each other! Across her moon ran a thin dark cloud, or something to that effect.

16 And I was astounded, and thought surely it was a great sign, while all around me in every direction, stars began shooting up to heaven (perhaps a thousand?). This was equally impressive, and I knew these were other people being lifted up to heaven. This went on for three or four seconds and I suspected it would soon be my turn, but I wasn't sure when and, I was hesitant to follow. Looking to where the young woman first stood (to my left), there appeared another woman, and on her head she wore a globe, looking similar to an outdoor light fixture and appearing like a moon. And there was gas swirling around inside, as she "tried" igniting it. A vivid reflection of her indecision, which was a reflection of mine! And I said to myself, "I guess it's my turn," and took a "little hop" and shot up like the rest.

17 In only an instant I was in a large auditorium with a large group of people. I sat in the middle of the front row, and up on stage were two or three people, preparing to give a demonstration. (I'm reminded of the demonstrations Swedenborg (http://www.dionysus.org/terms.html#swedenborg) speaks of in his writings.) But sensing this had something to do with me, specifically, I couldn't sit still. I squirmed in my chair for a moment or two, as I tried to let things proceed, but I couldn't settle down. I don't recall excusing myself, but a moment later I was wide awake in bed.

18 After gaining insight into this several years later, I realized it was preliminary to The Advent of the New Church (http://www.dionysus.org/x0501.html) on earth, that indeed it was the New Church (http://www.dionysus.org/terms.html#new_church) becoming manifest in heaven. And so applies to http://www.dionysus.org/arrow_0.gifRevelation 12:1 (http://bible.gospelcom.net/bible?language=English&version=KJV&passage=Revelation+12:1-6): "And there appeared a great wonder in heaven, a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars." And as Swedenborg (http://www.dionysus.org/terms.html#swedenborg) says in The Apocalypse Revealed, the new church in heaven is expressly implied here—by the moon under her feet! There's also the crown of twelve stars, which suggests something similar to the stars in my dream. Indeed all the elements are here.

19 I also said the young woman reminded me of my sister, which is significant for Cindy (http://www.dionysus.org/x0402.html#19) comes from Artemis (http://www.dionysus.org/terms.html#artemis), the moon goddess! And virgin! (so correlating with this woman's innocence). And this was a couple of years before I made the connection!
In fact, I can prove that this thread is pointless, because the Flying Spaghetti Monster told me in a vision that if I keep on trying to argue sense and reason with theosophists, my life will be forever cursed with the hell of ersatz rice pasta in vegan sauce. Now that's a threat I take very seriously.Have fun!