Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

I am religious and believe in free will

70 (27.6%)

I am religious and do not believe in free will

10 (3.9%)

I am not religious and believe in free will

113 (44.5%)

I am not religious and do not believe in free will

61 (24%)

Total Members Voted: 249

[Teneb]

But muh predestination

If predestination is a thing, God's a dick and no two ways about it.

But he's also God, so we're not really in a position to complain.

I want a refund to speak to His manager. He is unionized, right?

[Rolepgeek]

What's more, you're creating something of a conundrum here, without actually taking into consideration the metaphysical forces at play. If he doesn't give people free will, and they do evil, it's his fault since he predetermined what they would do. If he does give people free will, and they do evil, it's his fault because he let them. Bit of a 'damned if you do, damned if you don't', to pardon the pun. From what I know, Heaven/happy afterlife isn't perfect, it's just better. If you love something, let it go. If it comes back to you, it is yours.

That's a pretty false dichotomy. He's damned either way because, either way, he's allowing evil. He could, you know, have people not do evil, especially in the situation of "doesn't give people free will," but even in the other situation, humans DO have tendencies. Like we have a tendency to shun the outgroup/strangers, or a tendency to not eat babies. He could change those to be less evil-tending.

So yes he's damned either way cuz there's still evil. It's not the free will that's the problem, it's the evil causing! V:

Also: The world doesn't have to be perfect for it to be a HELL of a lot (puns!) better than it is now. Case in point: Harlequin babies. Most of you know not to google that, but a world without such a disease would be marginally better than ours which does have them. Still not perfect, but better. Worms that lay eggs in your eyes or veins, putting people in areas of the world with vastly different opportunities for development, thereby indirectly causing genocide and slavery (Europe vs Australia vs the America vs Africa, a la Guns Germs and Steel), peanut allergies. All of these are further examples of the same principle.

A lot of shit that just doesn't need to be that, were he just to go "You know what, let's NOT have peanut allergies!" would be fixed with no impact on humans beyond preventing needless suffering.

I really can just point back at the whole thing about multiworld theory and god's hosting of a nigh-infinite number of worlds that have more goodness than evil in them, or will in the future. I was gonna say something about you viewing it as needless and God understanding the purpose behind it, but meh.

If people were different, they'd be different. 'We aren't perfect, therefore God is both imperfect and an asshole' is a bit pointless. I actually find it rather interesting that so many people are willing to drop the 'omnibenevolence' part (and take it all the way around into actively malicious) before they're willing to drop the 'truly fully omnipotent in every sense of the word' or the 'truly fully omniscient in every sense of the word' parts.

Also: A tendency towards perfection would be a leash, when he's trying to do the whole 'love something, let it go'. If he's giving people free will, no, he can't have people not do evil. That defeats the point of free will, which is of being our own individuals honestly and being more than puppets for God's amusement. You point out all the crappy things that do exist and say 'why can't we have a world without these' and a. maybe there already are quite a few, and b. how many crappy things do you think might have existed that he didn't let exist? Yeah, whatever, God's supposed to be perfect, but perfection includes goodness in this context, so if you're going to discard that you may as well consider discarding some other bits. And in order to love someone, they don't have to be perfect.

[Putnam]

well there's imperfections like "sometimes people kill people" and then there's imperfections like "every single human being and the vast majority of other mammals have a nerve in their larynx that is required for the brain to control it that goes all the way out of the neck, wraps around the aorta and goes up back right next to where it started". The latter is pretty dumb.

[Amperzand]

I think the reason people drop the omnibenevolence part before the other two is that while the Bible never says anything other than "Yes, he knows everything and can do anything", but he certainly does some unpleasant stuff, or tells people to do so, on a number of occasions.

[Rolepgeek]

well there's imperfections like "sometimes people kill people" and then there's imperfections like "every single human being and the vast majority of other mammals have a nerve in their larynx that is required for the brain to control it that goes all the way out of the neck, wraps around the aorta and goes up back right next to where it started". The latter is pretty dumb.

He also didn't make women until after men, which would've meant having to create the broken Y chromosome and then turn it into an X chromosome again, and he did so by taking a rib from the first guy. Which also means that their family would've been incredibly incestuous if they were to give rise to all of humanity.

You call it an imperfection, god calls it character. Perfect is the enemy of the good.

[penguinofhonor]

It takes a lot of assumptions to decide that god could have made the universe a lot better and that it deserves to die for the choices it's made. Maybe this is the best possible universe, and god is the only thing stopping it from being completely hellish. I sure don't know, so I wouldn't use the state of the universe as justification to kill anything.

If godlike entities revealed themselves, I would want to learn from them. I would try to ask them questions if they're a sentient entity and follow them if necessary. If the universe is run by an impersonal force like karma, I'd try to study it in a more scientific way.

[Kot]

Okay, I'd like to present you with a challenge. Think about what being God is like. Imagine that there is nothing except you and infinite power. Now, create something perfect. Do you think that's possible? Have you done better? I'm not claiming that God is perfect, far from it. I simply think we are in no position to judge a divine being with infinitely more knowledge and experience than each of us, and if he has made mistakes, then quite honestly, why can't we forgive Him?

Since he is all powerful and whatnot, that what apparently he himself claims. Get your shit straight God, you're either awesome and amazing and best thing ever or murderous tyrant that poses as best thing ever. Heavenly Kim Jong Un is still Kim Jong Un.

Maybe he has made mistakes, but so have we, and many of us can forgive each other. Think about it, if he made you, without him you'd never have existed. You'd never have enjoyed anything, never had a single thought or experience. Why curse His name?

If he didin't make me, I wouldn't give a shit because I wouldn't exist. I mean, gee, thanks for the fish, but ultimately God is akin to a teenager murdering ants by thousands in his own garden. You certainly don't think thats really bad, but for the ants he's proably evil incarnate, and the idea of ants developing nuclear weapons one day is pretty amusing.

Are you certain of that? I mean other than the whole, if you're certain he can create a perfect world, you should also be fairly certain he can smite you straight to eternal torture. Antagonising infinitely powerful entities is a bad idea, usually. Refusing to worship, sure, but actively annoying?

If he smites me to eternal torture I will at least be eternally tortured knowing that in the end I was right, he's an tremendous dick and should be removed. Oh, and yeah, speaking of Job, I really liked that part when God literally killed (and we're speaking pre-Jesus times here, so no heaven for them, IIRC) off his seven sons and three daughters only because he had an bet with Satan. The whole Job thing is really weird for me, as IIRC it was about wether Job will forsake God for what he did to him, and he was really close to do so until God basically came in and told him that he can do whatever he wants because he's a God. Really nice of him.

What's more, you're creating something of a conundrum here, without actually taking into consideration the metaphysical forces at play. If he doesn't give people free will, and they do evil, it's his fault since he predetermined what they would do. If he does give people free will, and they do evil, it's his fault because he let them.

Nah, if he gives us free will and we do evil, it's our fault. The thing is that he is capable of creating a world without evil WHILE giving us free will (unless if you lose it when you go to heaven, which doesn't really seem that much better than hell to me).

Bit of a 'damned if you do, damned if you don't', to pardon the pun. From what I know, Heaven/happy afterlife isn't perfect, it's just better. If you love something, let it go. If it comes back to you, it is yours.

Dunno, maybe, I don't really remember all the holy texts so I can't provide quotes if the Heaven is perfect, but I do certainly remember getting that vibes everytime it's mentioned.

Holy shit. That's a bit of a revelation/twist on it's head. Setting that temptation in the Garden of Eden was His 'letting us go'. The key to the cage and our own experiences. Our own lives, free will, knowledge. Yeah, He cast us out for it, but that's half the point. Otherwise we would've been stagnant, in the Garden forever. Now we can either stay away or return. Huh. Still don't believe it, but it casts it a bit better light when you think of it that way.

That in turn reminds me of this... In that case, I'll hapilly go away and see humanity rule the heavens by themselves.

I really can just point back at the whole thing about multiworld theory and god's hosting of a nigh-infinite number of worlds that have more goodness than evil in them, or will in the future. I was gonna say something about you viewing it as needless and God understanding the purpose behind it, but meh.

In that case it really makes me wonder if he really "loves his children". I mean, okay, loving parent's shouldn't really close you in perfect home so you can't experience any uncomfortable stuff, but if he makes it better or worse for different children, then yeah, he has problems.

If people were different, they'd be different. 'We aren't perfect, therefore God is both imperfect and an asshole' is a bit pointless. I actually find it rather interesting that so many people are willing to drop the 'omnibenevolence' part (and take it all the way around into actively malicious) before they're willing to drop the 'truly fully omnipotent in every sense of the word' or the 'truly fully omniscient in every sense of the word' parts.

Speaking of perfection, I think that we're pretty goddamn (hue) fine. Maybe not perfect, but humans are the best (though also the worst, but I guess that's the part of being humans) thing ever. As for the dropping omnibenevolence before omnipotence and omniscience - God presents himself as all of these three things, and wether he is actually omnipotent and omniscient doesn't really make a difference, because if he were omnibenevolent he wouldn't present himself as omnipotent and omniscient while not being such, and if he is actually omnipotent and omniscient then he clearly isin't omnibenevolent because due to his inactions he's a fucking dick.

Also: A tendency towards perfection would be a leash, when he's trying to do the whole 'love something, let it go'. If he's giving people free will, no, he can't have people not do evil. That defeats the point of free will, which is of being our own individuals honestly and being more than puppets for God's amusement.

Ilnesses. People struck by lightings. Wild animals mauling babies. All the other shits that exist and aren't human fault. I'm not asking for humanity to be perfect, as it pretty much is for me, but I'm asking for a better world since majority of evil happening could be prevented by God, and us being constantly tortured by evil pretty much makes us puppets for God's amusement. He's a cruel one.

You point out all the crappy things that do exist and say 'why can't we have a world without these' and a. maybe there already are quite a few, and b. how many crappy things do you think might have existed that he didn't let exist? Yeah, whatever, God's supposed to be perfect, but perfection includes goodness in this context, so if you're going to discard that you may as well consider discarding some other bits. And in order to love someone, they don't have to be perfect.

Oh yeah, thanks for not letting us melt in acidic air, God, you're certainly the best, despite I can't move because you fried my nervous system with a lighting strike and everyone I knew and cared for died due to malaria. I love you.

It takes a lot of assumptions to decide that god could have made the universe a lot better and that it deserves to die for the choices it's made. Maybe this is the best possible universe, and god is the only thing stopping it from being completely hellish. I sure don't know, so I wouldn't use the state of the universe as justification to kill anything.

If we can nuke God, we can nuke anything that could make the place worse. Nukes are certainly the only way to be sure. Or we could fix it and give a middle finger to God because we can't nuke him, but that won't stop me from wanting to because clearly, Humanity > God.

If godlike entities revealed themselves, I would want to learn from them. I would try to ask them questions if they're a sentient entity and follow them if necessary. If the universe is run by an impersonal force like karma, I'd try to study it in a more scientific way.

Godlike? More like really advanced aliens that might have hostile intentions. Sure, go with it, but the second you do shit I'm going to nuke your face and then your homeworld in retaliation. As for the impersonal force - study it and then abuse it to get profits. That's the human way.

[origamiscienceguy]

Interestingly, if you read Genesis, God says, "It is very good." Not, "It's perfect"

[Arx]

... You seem to have a bit of a fixation on trying to solve problems with violent force. Have you considered that there are a hell of a lot of problems that can't be solved by nuking them?

[Frumple]

... well, no, there's very few that can't be solved by nuking them. It's just not a very good solution in almost every case. It's usually an incredibly terrible one, really.

[origamiscienceguy]

I'll quote the dwarf fortress wiki:

"Magma is very well known for being the perfect solution to any problem encountered by dwarves. Giant badger invasion? Pour magma on it. Noble being his usual snotty, useless, arrogant self? Pour magma on it. Door locked due to invaders? Pour magma on it! Flooded your fortress with magma? Congratulations, you just won the game!"

[TD1]

Interestingly, if you read Genesis, God says, "It is very good." Not, "It's perfect"

Interestingly, if you read Genesis, you realise there are two different creation stories. One doesn't even involve the serpent. Or punishment.

[Kot]

Interestingly, if you read Genesis, God says, "It is very good." Not, "It's perfect"

And here we get into problems because different languages have different translations and sometimes certain words are understood in different ways.

... You seem to have a bit of a fixation on trying to solve problems with violent force. Have you considered that there are a hell of a lot of problems that can't be solved by nuking them?

HUMANITY
FUCK
YEAH

[Arx]

So you're admitting you don't actually have any kind of a legitimate argument. Okay.

[penguinofhonor]

The specific Hebrew term used is
טוֹב

This Hebrew dictionary gives us an extended definition for the word: "good, kind, thoughtful, moral ; pleasant ; appropriate, fitting, good for ; successful ; well behaved."
(edit: the second definition on that site is for a slightly different variation of the word; we're talking about the one with the dot on top of the middle letter, but the forum font doesn't seem to like that Hebrew character)

Given this I feel comfortable saying "It is good" doesn't seem to connote perfection, merely satisfaction.