4 ms·

"Why do you think it needs to be an explicit action from the creator as opposed to being just the result of your own actions? " There is no such thing as "my o

by lukan 10mo ago

"Why do you think it needs to be an explicit action from the creator as opposed to being just the result of your own actions? " There is no such thing as "my own actions" if I was created by an allmighty god. And the environment likewise. Then every action would be determined by the allmighty. It all would be just gods playground to test and reward and punish his creations for being how he (or she or it) created them.

1718627440 10mo ago
Christianity also assumes free will and non-determinism, yeah otherwise it would be quite pointless. It also includes the possibility of willfully turning away from God, which is not intended by him. If you think of a place where (most) things behave exactly as God created them, that's the story before that apple[0], but guess what, it ended. [0] ... I know that that is an translation error.
- lukan 10mo ago
  "Christianity also assumes free will and non-determinism" I know, but those concepts are at odds to me with the core concept of allmighty all knowing creator - but sure, anything almighty can also solve any paradoxon - it still does not make sense to me, nor do I see reason to follow that logic.
  - 1718627440 10mo ago
    For me it is rather determinism which invokes a paradoxon and is at odds with the Christian God. This is because of the following: When the universe is deterministic, anything you think, is not because you recognized something to be truthful, or even reflects the truth at all, it all happens simply because that is what the deterministic rules make you think. So what you think does not imply anything about the universe at all. That means that you can't think the universe to be deterministic and be actually right about it. Because if it would be, you couldn't be right about anything. Also along the way you throw away the post-enlightenment concept of science, because it assumes the existence of Laplace's Demon and the scientist having a share in it. Thus, when you believe in determinism, you actually place science at the same level as wizardry.
    - lukan 10mo ago
      "because it assumes the existence of Laplace's Demon and the scientist having a share in it." I really don't follow here. That demon was a simple thought experiment. Nobody ever assumed it is real. If it would be real, a all knowing entitiy, it would be godlike. But why should any scientist assume such a thing can exist for real?
      - 1718627440 10mo ago
        I also don't think it is real, it is just that science kinda acts like it could be real. Any science experiment relies on the observers actually being observes, that the observer isn't the one that is experimented with, that e.g. your eyes do tell you something about the state of the universe, and that your thought process models the logic of the universe. If there is total determinism, there is no guarantee, that measurement tape next to an object for one person shows 10cm, for a second 9.3cm and a third sees a unicorn.
        defrost 10mo ago
        Post-enlightenment science operates on classical determinism subject to a tolerance of error subject to knowledge of initial conditions and properties of the system under observation. Thanks to Stephen Smale's Horseshoe map, Lorenz's Butterfly, the limits of instrumentation and Heisenberg's uncertainty the notion of perfect knowledge and strict determinism are out the window even for simple fully isolated systems that show chaotic behaviour with a few weights on coupled axles. Even with all the datacentres on earth and in space there'll never be a precise and accurate forecast of a vortex in a stream.
        1718627440 10mo ago
        > Post-enlightenment science operates on classical determinism subject to a tolerance of error subject to knowledge of initial conditions and properties of the system under observation. Yes, but the also assume that the observer isn't part of that system, which only holds true if there is free will.
jact 10mo ago
Some seem to intuit that divine freedom is in competition with creaturely freedom. The assumption is that when God is acting, that necessarily drives out the action and initiative of creatures, and vice versa. The ancient Christian conception is that human freedom cooperates (synergizes) with God. Jesus illustrates this concept most clearly, being both divine and human and fully free in both respects. This union is an essential part of the whole plan in this view, that God would be present in His own creation and not infinitely apart from it. In this model the free action and cooperation of created things is essential to accomplishing the divine purpose. On the other hand, if God really does just determine everything, you basically get pantheism where everything is an immediate and direct expression of “God.” That sounds like atheism with steps.
- lukan 10mo ago
  "On the other hand, if God really does just determine everything, you basically get pantheism where everything is an immediate and direct expression of “God.” " Yes, or mysticism. We all exist within the mind of god. I do like those concepts more to be honest, but is indeed a quite different concept from the creator up in the clouds ruling the universe.
  - 1718627440 10mo ago
    I do not think I share your view of what mysticism is, but this: > the creator up in the clouds ruling the universe is what e.g. the olympic gods were, i.e. something that Christianity decries as idols, doesn't accept to be the truth and intends to overcome.
    - lukan 10mo ago
      But the olympian gods surely were not portrayed as perfect or almighty, but full of flaws.
      - 1718627440 10mo ago
        Not as perfect, although their origins were, but almighty as in unaccountable, unquestionable, and above any natural limits, yes.

by lukan 10mo ago

1718627440 10mo ago

Christianity also assumes free will and non-determinism, yeah otherwise it would be quite pointless. It also includes the possibility of willfully turning away from God, which is not intended by him. If you think of a place where (most) things behave exactly as God created them, that's the story before that apple[0], but guess what, it ended. [0] ... I know that that is an translation error.

lukan 10mo ago
"Christianity also assumes free will and non-determinism" I know, but those concepts are at odds to me with the core concept of allmighty all knowing creator - but sure, anything almighty can also solve any paradoxon - it still does not make sense to me, nor do I see reason to follow that logic.
- 1718627440 10mo ago
  For me it is rather determinism which invokes a paradoxon and is at odds with the Christian God. This is because of the following: When the universe is deterministic, anything you think, is not because you recognized something to be truthful, or even reflects the truth at all, it all happens simply because that is what the deterministic rules make you think. So what you think does not imply anything about the universe at all. That means that you can't think the universe to be deterministic and be actually right about it. Because if it would be, you couldn't be right about anything. Also along the way you throw away the post-enlightenment concept of science, because it assumes the existence of Laplace's Demon and the scientist having a share in it. Thus, when you believe in determinism, you actually place science at the same level as wizardry.
  - lukan 10mo ago
    "because it assumes the existence of Laplace's Demon and the scientist having a share in it." I really don't follow here. That demon was a simple thought experiment. Nobody ever assumed it is real. If it would be real, a all knowing entitiy, it would be godlike. But why should any scientist assume such a thing can exist for real?
    - 1718627440 10mo ago
      I also don't think it is real, it is just that science kinda acts like it could be real. Any science experiment relies on the observers actually being observes, that the observer isn't the one that is experimented with, that e.g. your eyes do tell you something about the state of the universe, and that your thought process models the logic of the universe. If there is total determinism, there is no guarantee, that measurement tape next to an object for one person shows 10cm, for a second 9.3cm and a third sees a unicorn.
      - defrost 10mo ago
        Post-enlightenment science operates on classical determinism subject to a tolerance of error subject to knowledge of initial conditions and properties of the system under observation. Thanks to Stephen Smale's Horseshoe map, Lorenz's Butterfly, the limits of instrumentation and Heisenberg's uncertainty the notion of perfect knowledge and strict determinism are out the window even for simple fully isolated systems that show chaotic behaviour with a few weights on coupled axles. Even with all the datacentres on earth and in space there'll never be a precise and accurate forecast of a vortex in a stream.
        1718627440 10mo ago
        > Post-enlightenment science operates on classical determinism subject to a tolerance of error subject to knowledge of initial conditions and properties of the system under observation. Yes, but the also assume that the observer isn't part of that system, which only holds true if there is free will.

jact 10mo ago

Some seem to intuit that divine freedom is in competition with creaturely freedom. The assumption is that when God is acting, that necessarily drives out the action and initiative of creatures, and vice versa. The ancient Christian conception is that human freedom cooperates (synergizes) with God. Jesus illustrates this concept most clearly, being both divine and human and fully free in both respects. This union is an essential part of the whole plan in this view, that God would be present in His own creation and not infinitely apart from it. In this model the free action and cooperation of created things is essential to accomplishing the divine purpose. On the other hand, if God really does just determine everything, you basically get pantheism where everything is an immediate and direct expression of “God.” That sounds like atheism with steps.

lukan 10mo ago
"On the other hand, if God really does just determine everything, you basically get pantheism where everything is an immediate and direct expression of “God.” " Yes, or mysticism. We all exist within the mind of god. I do like those concepts more to be honest, but is indeed a quite different concept from the creator up in the clouds ruling the universe.
- 1718627440 10mo ago
  I do not think I share your view of what mysticism is, but this: > the creator up in the clouds ruling the universe is what e.g. the olympic gods were, i.e. something that Christianity decries as idols, doesn't accept to be the truth and intends to overcome.
  - lukan 10mo ago
    But the olympian gods surely were not portrayed as perfect or almighty, but full of flaws.
    - 1718627440 10mo ago
      Not as perfect, although their origins were, but almighty as in unaccountable, unquestionable, and above any natural limits, yes.