What does God do?

Discussion in 'Religion' started by James R, Nov 11, 2017.

  1. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,968
    Here you go rationalist. Go through it all, then get back to me.
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existence_of_God

    And some of us say, you are currently unable to access God, and are prepared to wait until such time that you can. You're not called "atheist" for nothing.

    *shakes head*
    We get it. There is no God for the atheist mindset.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    I'm glad scientists are, at last, looking into the mechanics behind atheism, exposing it for the sham that it is.

    Hopefully you will learn something from it.

    http://www.sciforums.com/threads/sc...might-not-exist-and-that’s-not-a-joke.160736/

    Jan.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,935
    No problem. There's some special way to access God that not everyone has.

    So, it's not by examining what God actually does, here today, on the planet, in trees and other examinable processes.
    Which was kind of the point of the thread.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,968
    The point of the thread was answered right near the beginning, and again.
    I responded by stating the pointlessness of the question. But all was either ignored, received further pointless questioning.

    Do you really believe we can't tell the difference between a pointless set of questions, and real enquiry?

    Jan.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Musika Last in Space Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,701
    The detail of you repeatedly framing the question in a political vacuum.

    It's more that there is no space between willing and action ... much like the use of word "intervening" to describe your own consciousness .... under normal circumstances it becomes odd to suggest there is a "space" one is "filling". Under normal healthy conditions, you don't have to rigorously focus your will or undergo some democratic process . You just desire it, and your arm moves. The space between your will and action is practically instantaneous.

    I am not saying that. What I am saying is that you are begging the question if you insist on framing the q in a political vacuum.

    Yet here you are, citing his lack of direct appearance in the sciences as some sort of conclusive basis for atheism.

    The real question is what makes you think it is valid to cite science, since in this regard it cannot go further than suggestions.

    Its more to the point that your grasp of botany is not anywhere complete enough to meaninfully talk about ultimate causes. No need to introduce God when one can just as easily cite the projected trajectory of the future of empirical botanical investigation to undercut whatever "completeness" you care to currently advocate.

    Or is it a case of expecting atheists to have no better reasons for disbelieving than mere faith that their current level of knowledge about tweaking knobs is sufficient to excise God from the picture?

    If they can't abandon their faith in empiricism as the final last word in epistemology, I guess so. Its difficult to fathom how such people would have any other option before them.


    The word "harmony" can be used both in and out of an id context. I imagine that even the staunchest advocate of scientific chaos appreciates, at the very least, some elements of harmony when it comes to determining their payroll slip.

    Then it appears that you have determined that God, should he exist, must exist in a necessary relationship with the observable world of trees and what not.
    IOW since one can examine a tree and not see a direct connection to God, this throws a grave doubt on the very existence of God (IYHO).

    Precisely.
    Evolution doesn't necessarily empower or discredit a theistic or atheistic world view beyond mere suggestions.

    It means that if you study the effect, then by necessity, the cause must reveal itself. So in the case of a car accident, the forensic team arrives on the scene and examines the accident (the effect) and proceeds to work out how it was caused. If necessary cause and effect was not in play, there would be no point in bringing in a forensic team.

    So as it pertains to this topic, you are suggesting that the activity of God should be necessarily observable by examining the phenomenal world (the effect).

    There are problems with this idea of yours, namely that it is common experience that persons can cover their agency as causes.
    This can occur either through their own resourcefulness or the limitations of knowledge from those left to examine the effect. So, here we have God, a figure attributed with all resourcefulness, being pitted against the necessarily meager empirical investigative capacities of human society.

    Depends on how you tie it in to the effect.

    For instance we may have an old painting with a sky rendered red by the artist. Obviously the painting is an effect of the artist, but we cannot adequately trace the necessary cause for the artist painting the sky in that particular manner (assuming they had access to a palette more varied than red). They could just have easily painted it blue or grey or white or green.

    IOW it is the nature of free will that it is not governed by necessary relationships of cause and effect.

    So, in the absence of any information about the baker/cake owner, can you also determine why a cake was made and not a loaf of bread, or why anything was made at all?

    If our free will is the one thing God doesn't mess with, existing in a world that required us to deduce His existence through observing it would defeat the purpose.

    So once again, we are back to what you estimate to be the necessary relationship between God (the cause) and the universe (the effect). If God is going to "bake a cake", it is impossible for him to do it in a manner that flies under the radar of an atheist, or so you would have us believe.

    According to their resourcefulness, there is no (necessary) requirement for a person to act in a particular manner. This is why, for example, psychology remains markedly distinct from physics.
     
  8. Vociferous Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,046
    As far as the laws a physics, trees growing, etc., I agree, God does not seem to intervene.
    Of course.
    Incompatibilist free will.
     
  9. Capracus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,324
    Man’s perceived intervention is part of the natural order of things. We are all slaves to a deterministic existence. So what does a god do? What it has to do, just like the rest of us.
     
  10. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,397
    Would you like to unpack those three words for me? I could take a stab at what you mean, but it would probably be better if you made yourself clear.
     
  11. Vociferous Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,046
    Yes, you're belief in hard determinism is why you don't believe in a God, and likely don't believe in real free will either.
    Since compatibilist free will seems to pretty much redefine free will so much that it is effectively eliminated, incompatibilist free will is the only one that could represent an actual intervention. Free will is only compatible with hard determinism because it is doesn't actually intervene in deterministic events.

    So real free will is likely how God acts to intervene.
    "for it is God who works in you to will and to act in order to fulfill his good purpose." Philippians 2:13
     
  12. Capracus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,324
    Did I say I don’t believe in a god? And why would the actions of a god not be a result of universal causation?
    How is that suppose to work? How can a distinction be made between the deterministic and nondeterministic neural processes responsible for decision making?
     
  13. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,077
    Is that so?
    I don't believe in god because it's a stupid concept

    hard determinism -
    Hard Determinism is the theory that human behaviour and actions are wholly determined by external factors, and therefore humans do not have genuine free will or ethical accountability

    hard determinism definition - Google

    Can't say I agree - I'm certain some of my internal factors play a role in my actions

    Certainly as I understand the biggest restrictions on free will come from the master of the Universe - PHYSICS.

    Followed by intangibles. Make plans - organise everything perfect - along comes the spanner

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  14. Vociferous Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,046
    So you believe in a deistic God? That would also explain the disbelief in free will.
    A deistic God, by definition, cannot be caused by its own effect ("be a result of universal causation").
    Hard determinism bars intervention. And the distinction between deterministic and nondeterministic processes should be obvious.
    Seems your chosen definition is lacking.
    Of course, hard determinists do not deny that one has desires, but say that these desires are causally determined by an unbroken chain of prior occurrences.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incompatibilism#Hard_determinism

    "Man can do what he wants, but he cannot will what he wills." Arthur Schopenhauer ​
     
  15. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,077
    Don't believe in god - any size / shape / colour / flavour

    PHYSICS runs the Universe and does not contain any anthropomorphism

    The Butterfly effect writ to a ridiculous extreme

    Occurrences are being stopped all the time and NOT going any further and NOT paying any further role in future events

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: Apr 20, 2018
  16. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    I thought God was the first cause. How do you have determinism before the universe existed?
     
  17. Xelor Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    208
    I really cannot say what God does. I know what the notion of God doing things does for people who embrace that notion.
     
  18. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,502
    No photos? Well it did not happen.

    It is interesting how theists can employ reason to determine there is a god and yet are unable to employ such reason to determine religion is a cruel and baseless con job.

    And the way a theist resorts to dishonest tactics as if such dishonest tactics are entirely acceptable to confuse any opposition to their delussional belief. Such dishonesty goes unnoticed by themselves and I am sure they simply switch off to the fact they frequently are dishonest in presenting their belief, which is after all mere unsupported opinion.

    Do they for one moment ever believe they may be wrong? In the face of all the incorrect inclusions and made up nonsence in the bible still they could never be wrong.

    Tells one something about the depth of their delusion.

    Consider that this god of theirs saw fit to only enlighten one section of humanity, then not the best educated or informed or indeed civilized folk on the planet, this apparent truth causes no question and nor does anyone wonder why god would not visit say the Chinese who certainly at that time were far superior in culture technology and education and so presumably more capable of embracing the knowledge said god could deliver.
    Well seems strange to me and I suggest it will seem strange to any thinker.

    One can wonder why at some point when this wonderful faultless god deciding he did not like his human creation he opted to wipe the slate by killing all humans... except one human and his family, by causing an impossible flood, but saw fit to tell one single human (who went on to live to a ripe old age of 800 years) of his plan and that a boat should be built to save humanity (not an efficient plan leaving one of the bad batch around one could say) ....how can theists present here and argue the ins and out of a god and scrutinise all detail in arguement with intellectual arrogance, but fail to address the lies in the bible...they can not do so because when it comes to real thought they are totally incapable and can only resort to quoting tired words of some ancient perhaps mythical human, not because those words offerred supposedly by such ancient human contain logic or evidence but because they sound "neat" ..so you want to reply? well quote this or that passage of the bible, there is a passage for any logic in there if you are inteligent you will have memorised it..inteligence is the ability to memorise right?... but sounding neat and clever is ok of course but, and unfortunately here I am employing generalisation, they fail to analyse the merit of ancient words and revere them simply because they are ancient and heck quoting sure beats having your own considered opinion.blah blah blah book whatever passage whatever..case closed word of god all over I win...so stupid.

    So dear theists step outside your arrogance from intellect and examine critically the book you hold up as gods word and see if you are capable of detecting any lies falsehoods or stupid thinking...and then of necessity having to throw out the book (the basis of your faith) look at the real world, indeed the universe (noting that the observable universe diameter be in the order of 100 billion light years diameter and there is much much more than that) and ask really what reasonable evidence is there for any god whatsoever who could create any of it or all of it and be at all preoccupied upon one small part of the world..really?

    Has your brain not evolved to a level where you can put all that together and realise you are the victim of a con job? Use your brain and think things through rather than worship writtings of ancients crippled with superstition and ignorance.

    At that point then be honest with yourself and realise your beliefs are probably not your own but the understandable result of programing from an early age where you could only accept and recall without the yet to be developed ability to think for yourself unfettered by childhood brain washing.

    Just try thinking with your brain and just dont use it to regurgitate delusional nonsence.

    Be honest with others but above all please be honest with yourself.

    I will now get on my little pony and ride away.☺
    Alex
     
  19. Capracus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,324
    I believe in whatever god is shown to reasonably exist. Without having sufficient knowledge of universal dynamics, I’m not about to presume the qualities and capabilities of any such entity, and anyone who presumes to have sufficient knowledge is not being reasonable. My disbelief in free will is based on the accumulation of human knowledge and experience that contradicts its existence.
    Determinism doesn’t bar anything, it merely describes action in proper context. If a distinction between deterministic and nondeterministic action were obvious we wouldn’t be having this discussion. There is no reason to believe that the same deterministic properties that appear to operate universally inside and outside of our brains, don’t also govern the conscious thoughts produced by those brains. So if you have any evidence to the contrary, hopefully my prodding will stimulate you to present it.
    That’s the beauty of imagining the divine, the imaginer gets to make all the rules, regardless if they conform to reality or not. If God was the sum of a deterministic universality, then God would just be along for the same ride as the rest of us, only with a vastly different perspective and set of qualities.
     
  20. Xelor Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    208
    Yep.

    Some do acknowledge the "may be" aspect, but they opt to conduct themselves as though they are not wrong.
     
  21. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,077
    Do the words "we cannot know the mind of god" "moves in mysterious ways" mean anything to your heathen mind?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Come back come back. Still time to repent. We only have another 4 days to go as the current word around is the world ends 24 July 2018

    We will all find out then who has been right or wrong

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  22. Vociferous Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,046
    I didn't ask you, but thanks for the materialism proselytizing.
    Who said they were?
    So long as you don't forward obvious contradictions, like a deistic God being the result of the universe it created, you're free to believe whatever you like.
    Do you think nondeterministic action allows for free will? If not, why would the distinction matter?
    Do you think synaptic action potentials are deterministic?
     
  23. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,502
    Yes those words mean this to me.

    The con merchants pushing the fable need an avenue where they can hide from confronting the obvious that the whole deal is a bucket of nonsence and so they invoke mystersism rather than address the flaws in the fairey tale.

    "Why did my dog die why did god not save him"..."well Jimmy you must understand god moves in mysterious ways and besides your puppy is now in heaven and happy to be with god"...and we know that is a lie cause dogs dont have a soul so they cant go to heaven☺ but then no one has a soul as that is just more unsupported nonsence made up to support the lie...and so it goes one lie leads to another and another.

    The beauty of religion the point can never be reached where the lie can be proved a lie and so it continues.

    The request to prove there is a god is always answered with "Prove there is no god".

    And you cant argue with belief even if it is no more than a dressed up opinion.

    These threads annoy me as they rush past any proof and right into discussing qualities of god.

    Stop proof please...
    Lets first establish there is a god then we can consider its attributes.

    I dont know why I bite as there is no reason I should care about the delussions theists indulge.

    Its just sad that apparently intelligent folk cant work out they are the victims of a massive con job.

    Its tiresome ...time to ride off.

    Its like kids sitting in the dark with torches scaring themselves by telling ghost stories...both find it titillating but both are talking nonsence.
    Its a santa for grown ups who have never grown up.
    Alex
     
    Last edited: Apr 20, 2018

Share This Page