[PLUG-TALK] Michael, On the subject of God.

Jeme A Brelin jeme at brelin.net
Fri Nov 14 20:31:23 UTC 2003


Mostly I'm joining in this to hopefully end it.  It's the most pointless
and absurd discussion in which mankind ever indulges and I wish folks
would wise up and drop it already.

On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Russ Johnson wrote:
> * Michael C. Robinson <michael at robinson-west.com> [2003-11-14 10:40]:
> > Now your just acting like Jeme.
> Please. Because I shoot holes in your theory?

Heh.

> > Just because one outcome out of a set of outcomes occurs, that does
> > not prove there was only one possible outcome.
>
> Thank you for proving my point.

He didn't prove your point, Russ.  You're just too stuck in natural
thought to comprehend the supernatural jive he's laying down.

Is it logical?  No.  But it doesn't have to be because it's about a
magical being who lives above the clouds.

> However, that DOES preclude any being from knowing what you will do.

No, it doesn't if you think of time as something we're stuck in linearly
and God is outside.

> Let's say god has the ability to see all time, as you claim.
> He sees a decision looming for you, and the decision you will make.
> Now, if he sees that decision, then how could you make a different
> decision when you get to that point in time?

...because God, in this line of argument, is outside time.  The decision
is not "looming" because the timeline is only linear and unidirectional to
us limited natural beings.

Does the act of filming a person and watching it later remove the free
will of the filmed at the time of filming?  That's a mediocre analogy
because we're stuck in a linear, forever-moving, unidirectional timeline,
but it does go a little bit to showing the idea here.

Assume there is a God who is outside time.

There is no "before" and "after" to such a thing.  God would now know
things before you did them, It would just know things.  God doesn't do
this, then that.  God would not know things before you because God is not
in your temporal stream.  That God is always in the present tense and
there is no future or past.

I think that at least the Old Testament God (who is VERY different from
the God of Jesus) is explicitly like this and is defined as I AM.

Now, you run into all kinds of logical catastrophe if you also allow this
creature outside of time to be omnipotent.  You pretty much have to
believe in the "infinite parallel universes" idea in order to reconcile
this God's ability to know all AND to assert influence in the natural
world.  But that's more impractical sophistry than even I can stomach.

> > If we are predestined, why did Judas, whom Jesus loved, go to Hell?

If God is all-powerful and Jesus was the living power of God on Earth, why
would Judas, whom Jesus loved, go to Hell?

That's a rhetorical question.  The point is that a God that allows Hell
and requires worship is an asshole.

I'm not going to argue the point because it's stupid.  The point of this
email is just to correct Russ' messed-up reasoning in Michael's imaginary
world.

> > Is always knowing alone what choices your going to make change those
> > choices?
>
> No, but if some being knows what you will decide, then you don't have
> free will.

You're wrong on both counts, Russ.  First, if you think you know what
choice you're going to make, that knowledge and attitude will influence
the actual choices you make.  Second, some being's knowledge of your
choices only calls into question your free will (I don't think any logic
could show that your free will is actually removed) IF that knowledge is
acquired before the decision point.  To say that God (assuming above
definitions of such a thing) knows what you WILL decide is to imply that
God knows it before you act which further implies that God is temporal.

> The choice is set. If god knows you will choose 'a', then you CAN'T
> choose 'b'. You may 'think' you've chosen, but god knew it, so you
> didn't make a choice. Your choice was predestined. i.e It was already
> made, because god knew what you would do.

Even without the bogus and pointless arguments about faeries, gods, and
the world that disappears when you close your eyes, it's easy enough to
show that free will is an illusion.  You are an electro-chemical engine
made up of discrete, comprehensible natural processes.  A thought is the
stimulation of certain chemical reactions by electrical impulse.  In order
for a thought to trigger another thought, a physical process must be set
into motion by the electrical and chemical outcome of the reactions that
caused the previous thought.  Since these are reactions in the physical
world (which we can, to some extent, manipulate through drugs, external
electrical sources, or physical modification of the brain), they are the
inevitable result of the physical laws and initial conditions.  Hence, any
belief in "free will" to the extent that a person's thoughts or actions
are avoidable must be an illusion.

However, it is an utterly convincing illusion that is part of the very
structure of our physical minds.  I believe it is impossible to truly
surrender that illusion to reality even though it is absolutely contrary
to everything we know.

This is just more proof that the human mind is a device too flawed to
trust with the stewardship of our planet.  If we are capable of this
unshakeable denial of fact for our own convenience, what other doublethink
goes unnoticed?

J.
-- 
   -----------------
     Jeme A Brelin
    jeme at brelin.net
   -----------------
 [cc] counter-copyright
 http://www.openlaw.org




More information about the PLUG-talk mailing list