Questions For End3

[TheRedneckProfessor]

Referring back to the "Free Will" thread started by RavenStar, I was wondering how, according to your current world view, you would approach the following points of inquiry:

 

1. Given that free will is an illusion and that everything that happens in our lives, including our "choices", is nothing more than a manifestation of god and its plan:

     a.) How does it benefit god's plan to manifest itself in me as an atheist?

     b.) If there is no benefit to god's plan for me to be an atheist, then what is the purpose of my becoming one?

 

2. How is it possible for an extant god to manifest itself in the unbelief of the people it created as manifestations of itself?

 

3. Explain how god's manifestation in a rapidly growing number of people is a rejection of the claim that god exists correlates to your belief that it does.  Or, what is your justification for believing in a god that manifests itself as a rejection of its own existence?

 

I don't mean for these questions to be misconstrued as any kind of attack on your current world view, so please do not mistake my intentions.  I thoroughly enjoyed our previous discourse; and am merely seeking to clarify for both of us what your present stream of consciousness involves.

[Guest end3]

Referring back to the "Free Will" thread started by RavenStar, I was wondering how, according to your current world view, you would approach the following points of inquiry:

 

1. Given that free will is an illusion and that everything that happens in our lives, including our "choices", is nothing more than a manifestation of god and its plan:

     a.) How does it benefit god's plan to manifest itself in me as an atheist?

     b.) If there is no benefit to god's plan for me to be an atheist, then what is the purpose of my becoming one?

 

2. How is it possible for an extant god to manifest itself in the unbelief of the people it created as manifestations of itself?

 

3. Explain how god's manifestation in a rapidly growing number of people is a rejection of the claim that god exists correlates to your belief that it does.  Or, what is your justification for believing in a god that manifests itself as a rejection of its own existence?

 

I don't mean for these questions to be misconstrued as any kind of attack on your current world view, so please do not mistake my intentions.  I thoroughly enjoyed our previous discourse; and am merely seeking to clarify for both of us what your present stream of consciousness involves.

1) I think any time we question something it helps us understand.  I would gather "to know" Jesus is to know God and is an integral part of the plan.  Additionally, I believe the manifestation of God is somewhat like a resultant vector. 

 

2)  If I'm reading you correctly, I would say any number of forces could lead a "manifestation" off whatever the straight-line path we would know if we "were finished".

 

Thinking about #3.  Thanks,

[Guest end3]

To #3.  In the first part of your question, did you mean a rapidly growing population that are non-believers?  I am assuming the second part of your question is a restatement of the first.  With that said:

 

The answer is simple Prof......not to sound pat, but it's John 3:16.  Isn't the desire really, regardless of everything to have that FULL understanding necessary to exact beauty, love, etc.?  Jesus fills the gap between my manifestation and that straight and narrow path.

 

A teaching tool maybe?  To teach us what is Love?  We need an anti to understand. 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

 

Referring back to the "Free Will" thread started by RavenStar, I was wondering how, according to your current world view, you would approach the following points of inquiry:

 

1. Given that free will is an illusion and that everything that happens in our lives, including our "choices", is nothing more than a manifestation of god and its plan:

     a.) How does it benefit god's plan to manifest itself in me as an atheist?

     b.) If there is no benefit to god's plan for me to be an atheist, then what is the purpose of my becoming one?

 

2. How is it possible for an extant god to manifest itself in the unbelief of the people it created as manifestations of itself?

 

3. Explain how god's manifestation in a rapidly growing number of people is a rejection of the claim that god exists correlates to your belief that it does.  Or, what is your justification for believing in a god that manifests itself as a rejection of its own existence?

 

I don't mean for these questions to be misconstrued as any kind of attack on your current world view, so please do not mistake my intentions.  I thoroughly enjoyed our previous discourse; and am merely seeking to clarify for both of us what your present stream of consciousness involves.

1) I think any time we question something it helps us understand.  I would gather "to know" Jesus is to know God and is an integral part of the plan.  Additionally, I believe the manifestation of God is somewhat like a resultant vector. 

 

2)  If I'm reading you correctly, I would say any number of forces could lead a "manifestation" off whatever the straight-line path we would know if we "were finished".

 

Thinking about #3.  Thanks,

 

 

1) The problem is that, as an atheist, I am no longer questioning anything.  My questions are done and my position is firm.  Also, a vector is something which carries an item into another being; how can I be a manifestation of god and also have the manifestation of god brought into me from the manifestation of god in order for me to be a manifestation of god?  I suggest Occam's Razor.  This answer, therefore, does not adequately address the original question.

 

2) This is in direct contradiction to your original position.  If I am a manifestation of god, then no other factors can be involved in my life.  If any number of factors could have led me to reject god's existence, then I am not a manifestation of god; I am something god tried to manifest until other things like rational thought and logic got in its way.

 

 

To #3.  In the first part of your question, did you mean a rapidly growing population that are non-believers?  I am assuming the second part of your question is a restatement of the first.  With that said:

 

The answer is simple Prof......not to sound pat, but it's John 3:16.  Isn't the desire really, regardless of everything to have that FULL understanding necessary to exact beauty, love, etc.?  Jesus fills the gap between my manifestation and that straight and narrow path.

 

A teaching tool maybe?  To teach us what is Love?  We need an anti to understand. 

 

3) So god manifests itself as unbelief in me because it loved me so much that it killed jesus?  I'm not sure I can even begin to make sense out of that. 

 

Again, I'm not trying to attack your position; I hope my response doesn't come off as being harsh.  I'm simply trying to understand you.  Unfortunately, these answers have not helped.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

To be fair, your answer to number 3 does give your reasons for continuing to believe in god; however, I think my response also raises a pertinent question: Why would god manifest itself as unbelief in someone whom it loved enough to kill jesus?  More importantly, why would god not simply manifest itself as belief in everyone and forgo the sacrifice of jesus?  (We've already established that free will is an illusion, thus it will not suffice as an answer).

[Guest end3]

1) The problem is that, as an atheist, I am no longer questioning anything.  My questions are done and my position is firm.  Also, a vector is something which carries an item into another being; how can I be a manifestation of god and also have the manifestation of god brought into me from the manifestation of god in order for me to be a manifestation of god?  I suggest Occam's Razor.  This answer, therefore, does not adequately address the original question.

 

In my mind, we discussed that free will was somewhat of an illusion.  If this is the case, I don't see that it matters that you are done or set.  You still play a role in other's vectors/outcomes.  Matter of fact, the understanding of love might well be enhanced via your search and am reasonably sure you elect you choose "godly" over willing "sin" even now.  The key would be faith in the Christ for our lack of direction...on occasion : ).

 

 

 

2) This is in direct contradiction to your original position.  If I am a manifestation of god, then no other factors can be involved in my life.  If any number of factors could have led me to reject god's existence, then I am not a manifestation of god; I am something god tried to manifest until other things like rational thought and logic got in its way.

 

Let me clarify.  I am probably not as educated as you and may not be able to convey or understand the rigid meaning of words as well as I would like or in my attempts to use them correctly.  Please understand that I have a difficult time discerning the difference in manifestation and creation.  I am, to my knowledge a panantheistic type.  I can't separate in my mind pantheistic and panantheistic because I see the created as essentially God.  I don't know what other choice we have.  I wasn't intentionally trying to frustrate, but often have that affect.  Again, I would desire to communicate better and without error.  Apologies.

 

To your statement.  I agree, you can have no other factors in your life except those created/manifested of God.  I disagree.  I would say that we could have many manifestations/creations of God that could direct us to non-belief.

 

 

3) So god manifests itself as unbelief in me because it loved me so much that it killed jesus?  I'm not sure I can even begin to make sense out of that. 

 

How do we know that our purpose is not to be a mechanism to bring x or y to an understanding of HIm regardless of my profession of Christ?  As I said, I feel certain that  many here have a better understanding of Love than do the fundamentalist faction. 

 

These conversations are difficult on this medium Prof.  I laughed at your post this morning ..."stream of consciousness".  My mind stays more confused than rational,  so you are not offending me and I don't want to offend you by my contradicting my own points....as my own view changes let's just say often.  I take a lot of b vitamins and that seems to help clarity but sometimes I remain foggy.

 

I enjoy it if you can tolerate the meandering to clarify my own understanding. 

[slave2six]

Referring back to the "Free Will" thread started by RavenStar, I was wondering how, according to your current world view, you would approach the following points of inquiry:

 

1. Given that free will is an illusion and that everything that happens in our lives, including our "choices", is nothing more than a manifestation of god and its plan:

     a.) How does it benefit god's plan to manifest itself in me as an atheist?

     b.) If there is no benefit to god's plan for me to be an atheist, then what is the purpose of my becoming one?

 

2. How is it possible for an extant god to manifest itself in the unbelief of the people it created as manifestations of itself?

 

3. Explain how god's manifestation in a rapidly growing number of people is a rejection of the claim that god exists correlates to your belief that it does.  Or, what is your justification for believing in a god that manifests itself as a rejection of its own existence?

 

I don't mean for these questions to be misconstrued as any kind of attack on your current world view, so please do not mistake my intentions.  I thoroughly enjoyed our previous discourse; and am merely seeking to clarify for both of us what your present stream of consciousness involves.

 

This is the sort of thing that people who believe in god discuss. Those of us how reject such a notion cannot accept the premise. I fail to see the point in trying to figure out the motives, thoughts or workings of an imaginary being. 

[Guest end3]

To be fair, your answer to number 3 does give your reasons for continuing to believe in god; however, I think my response also raises a pertinent question: Why would god manifest itself as unbelief in someone whom it loved enough to kill jesus?  More importantly, why would god not simply manifest itself as belief in everyone and forgo the sacrifice of jesus?  (We've already established that free will is an illusion, thus it will not suffice as an answer).

So per the story, our creation was instructed not to participate in the options of good and evil.  So I guess the response should be, what would the plan be AFTER the fact.  How do you fix the creation that now has a larger knowledge than intended.  This is why I am more panantheistic than pantheistic because I believe there a separation between God and the created.  Yet, I also see it as all God. 

 

I'll default that I have been talked into a corner, but let me rest my brain and I will come out swinging ...lol.  Thanks P.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

 

1) The problem is that, as an atheist, I am no longer questioning anything.  My questions are done and my position is firm.  Also, a vector is something which carries an item into another being; how can I be a manifestation of god and also have the manifestation of god brought into me from the manifestation of god in order for me to be a manifestation of god?  I suggest Occam's Razor.  This answer, therefore, does not adequately address the original question.

 

In my mind, we discussed that free will was somewhat of an illusion.  If this is the case, I don't see that it matters that you are done or set.  You still play a role in other's vectors/outcomes.  Matter of fact, the understanding of love might well be enhanced via your search and am reasonably sure you elect you choose "godly" over willing "sin" even now.  The key would be faith in the Christ for our lack of direction...on occasion : ).

 

 

 

2) This is in direct contradiction to your original position.  If I am a manifestation of god, then no other factors can be involved in my life.  If any number of factors could have led me to reject god's existence, then I am not a manifestation of god; I am something god tried to manifest until other things like rational thought and logic got in its way.

 

Let me clarify.  I am probably not as educated as you and may not be able to convey or understand the rigid meaning of words as well as I would like or in my attempts to use them correctly.  Please understand that I have a difficult time discerning the difference in manifestation and creation.  I am, to my knowledge a panantheistic type.  I can't separate in my mind pantheistic and panantheistic because I see the created as essentially God.  I don't know what other choice we have.  I wasn't intentionally trying to frustrate, but often have that affect.  Again, I would desire to communicate better and without error.  Apologies.

 

To your statement.  I agree, you can have no other factors in your life except those created/manifested of God.  I disagree.  I would say that we could have many manifestations/creations of God that could direct us to non-belief.

 

 

3) So god manifests itself as unbelief in me because it loved me so much that it killed jesus?  I'm not sure I can even begin to make sense out of that. 

 

How do we know that our purpose is not to be a mechanism to bring x or y to an understanding of HIm regardless of my profession of Christ?  As I said, I feel certain that  many here have a better understanding of Love than do the fundamentalist faction. 

 

These conversations are difficult on this medium Prof.  I laughed at your post this morning ..."stream of consciousness".  My mind stays more confused than rational,  so you are not offending me and I don't want to offend you by my contradicting my own points....as my own view changes let's just say often.  I take a lot of b vitamins and that seems to help clarity but sometimes I remain foggy.

 

I enjoy it if you can tolerate the meandering to clarify my own understanding. 

 

 

1) It is true that I do try to do "right" over "wrong", meaning I attempt to limit those actions that would result in negative consequences for myself and others, while looking for opportunities to commit actions that are beneficial.  This, however, is a matter of ethics and morality, not of faith.  I still fail to see the benefit of my atheism in promoting belief in others, whether I chose it or it was manifested in me by god.

 

2) I think we are both still confused as to whether you believe we are, ourselves, manifestations of god, or whether the circumstances, influences, and general "stuff" of our lives are manifestations of god, while we remain seperate.  Possibly, you think that both are true: We are physical manifestations of god, and the "stuff" that makes up who were are and what our lives become are also manifestations of god.  However, if I am a manifestation of god, then god exists; but if my rejection of god's existence is also a manifestation of god, then what exactly is god trying to tell the world in having manifested such a contradiction in me?  What is its meaning?  Again, what benefit is this duality to anyone's faith?

 

3) I know that the purpose of my life is whatever I decide it is; I have made a concious decision not to lead x or y toward or away from god.  If x or y choose to walk with me or follow me in any particular direction, then that is to their purpose, not to mine.  And if there be any love involved, then so much the better.

 

I do see the rambling confusions you go through and I understand them; they do not offend me, I only want to tease them into clarity.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

 

To be fair, your answer to number 3 does give your reasons for continuing to believe in god; however, I think my response also raises a pertinent question: Why would god manifest itself as unbelief in someone whom it loved enough to kill jesus?  More importantly, why would god not simply manifest itself as belief in everyone and forgo the sacrifice of jesus?  (We've already established that free will is an illusion, thus it will not suffice as an answer).

So per the story, our creation was instructed not to participate in the options of good and evil.  So I guess the response should be, what would the plan be AFTER the fact.  How do you fix the creation that now has a larger knowledge than intended.  This is why I am more panantheistic than pantheistic because I believe there a separation between God and the created.  Yet, I also see it as all God. 

 

I'll default that I have been talked into a corner, but let me rest my brain and I will come out swinging ...lol.  Thanks P.

 

 

Take your time; I'm enjoying this.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

 

This is the sort of thing that people who believe in god discuss. Those of us how reject such a notion cannot accept the premise. I fail to see the point in trying to figure out the motives, thoughts or workings of an imaginary being. 

 

 

With all due respect, slave, nothing you've just said is beneficial to the overall purpose of this thread; in this instance, it merely denigrates the position of an individual who has doubts and is earnestly seeking to address them in an honest manner.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

 

To be fair, your answer to number 3 does give your reasons for continuing to believe in god; however, I think my response also raises a pertinent question: Why would god manifest itself as unbelief in someone whom it loved enough to kill jesus?  More importantly, why would god not simply manifest itself as belief in everyone and forgo the sacrifice of jesus?  (We've already established that free will is an illusion, thus it will not suffice as an answer).

So per the story, our creation was instructed not to participate in the options of good and evil.  So I guess the response should be, what would the plan be AFTER the fact.  How do you fix the creation that now has a larger knowledge than intended.  This is why I am more panantheistic than pantheistic because I believe there a separation between God and the created.  Yet, I also see it as all God. 

 

I'll default that I have been talked into a corner, but let me rest my brain and I will come out swinging ...lol.  Thanks P.

 

 

I don't mean to intrude upon your intellectual hiatus, but I should point out, before I get pounced upon by some greater mind than my own (of which I'm certain there are many), that the inherent fallacy in this proposition is that an omniscient, omnipotent, god could have created a more fool-proof system in which humanity would not have fallen into the trap of participating in the options of good and evil, especially if it was intended all along that our free will would be illusory.  We would then need to address the issue of what would be the benefit to god's plan to knowingly create/manifest the flaw in our nature that would lead to the discovery of the flaw in god's plan.

[Guest end3]

I would like to review to see if you have any objections at this point.

 

Per creation, we are going to set aside the notion of free will within creation itself regardless.  I would like to realistically take that off the table despite the illusion.

 

And, we also understand  that God contains the qualities of good and evil and humanity has delved into those contents within their range of freedom.

 

Also, I would understand that God, knowing Himself completely would understand the outcome or "correct" or "moral" or "amoral" /result of said use of good and evil.  An aside, you know that would really suck knowing all/everything.

 

And we would know that humans "in the image" would not know the end result of said use of good and evil and are instructed to use good regardless, have wisdom, blah blah.

 

One of my thought's a few years ago was that God has no "equal" and that perhaps He was trying to create an equal so that he would not be lonely.  So a creation of grouping of those that knew how to be God, aka Jesus and his church would be as near equal as He could come. 

 

I don't know sir.  But, please in the interim review what I am less foggy about today and let me know if you have objections.

 

 

Thanks

[TheRedneckProfessor]

I would like to review to see if you have any objections at this point.

 

Per creation, we are going to set aside the notion of free will within creation itself regardless.  I would like to realistically take that off the table despite the illusion.

 

And, we also understand  that God contains the qualities of good and evil and humanity has delved into those contents within their range of freedom.

 

Also, I would understand that God, knowing Himself completely would understand the outcome or "correct" or "moral" or "amoral" /result of said use of good and evil.  An aside, you know that would really suck knowing all/everything.

 

And we would know that humans "in the image" would not know the end result of said use of good and evil and are instructed to use good regardless, have wisdom, blah blah.

 

One of my thought's a few years ago was that God has no "equal" and that perhaps He was trying to create an equal so that he would not be lonely.  So a creation of grouping of those that knew how to be God, aka Jesus and his church would be as near equal as He could come. 

 

I don't know sir.  But, please in the interim review what I am less foggy about today and let me know if you have objections.

 

 

Thanks

 

I accept tabling free will.

 

I will accept the notion that god contains both good and evil provided that it is agreed that the duality of good and evil within humanity is the direct result of being created in god's image and has nothing to do with original sin.

 

I accept that we are discussing a purportedly omniscient god which would therefore know the future and the results of good and evil being used and misused (especially given it has everything planned already).

 

I cannot accept that humans would not know the results of the use of good/evil, given our capacity to weigh the potential outcomes of the decisions we make, which is the basis of our moral code.  If you want to say humans cannot accurately predict the future or do not know the ultimate outcome of things, I will agree.

 

Lastly, if the church is meant to be the equal of god, then either god is extremely pathetic, or it really set low standards for itself.  That or god really does have a really messed up sense of humor.  I mean, the proverbial crazy cat lady isn't lonely; she has her cats.  Perhaps that would have been an analogy that more closely fit the known facts.

 

Agreed?

[Guest end3]

Where did you want to go from here Prof, if you will remind me please.  I will post an answer to 14 asap....

[TheRedneckProfessor]

I guess the only point I'm still not clear on is: Is my rejection of god's existence is a manifestation of god, and if so, what would be the purpose of god manifesting iself in said rejection?

[RipVanWinkle]

"I guess the only point I'm still not clear on is: Is my rejection of god's existence is a manifestation of god, and if so, what would be the purpose of god manifesting itself in said rejection?"

 

If I may put it another way: How would the manifestation of god's existence if he is

rejected make anything different from the rejection of god if he does not exist? bill

 

I hope you don't object to my stepping in and making a suggestion, Professor.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

"I guess the only point I'm still not clear on is: Is my rejection of god's existence is a manifestation of god, and if so, what would be the purpose of god manifesting itself in said rejection?"

 

If I may put it another way: How would the manifestation of god's existence if he is

rejected make anything different from the rejection of god if he does not exist? bill

 

I hope you don't object to my stepping in and making a suggestion, Professor.

 

No objections here.

[Guest end3]

Going to go ahead and comment even though it is late.....and maybe I am not reading you both correctly.  but if we are disregarding "limited free will", then one, there is no contradiction in that a manifestation of God contains both life and death.  If we are speculating on purpose, my initial guess that I stated a few posts back was it's necessary to become "finished".  By finished, I think it's Strong's G5046....complete, perfected.

 

And again, this is why I lean towards created more than a manifestation.  Maybe I am thinking manifesTED by God rather than a direct part.  Again my apologies but I would also think that we can be a Part rather than simply created with those qualities of God.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

Yes, but the manifestation is not merely life and death.  It contains a proclamation of god's existence and simultaneously a rejection of god's existence; this is a direct contradiction.  Reducing it down to whether the "word" brings "life", or "death", is too simplistic.  The real contradiction still exists.

[Guest end3]

Yes, but the manifestation is not merely life and death.  It contains a proclamation of god's existence and simultaneously a rejection of god's existence; this is a direct contradiction.  Reducing it down to whether the "word" brings "life", or "death", is too simplistic.  The real contradiction still exists.

I don't see it that way at all.  My body contains life and death.  Nature contains life and death.  Life and death are a proclamation of God IMO because God "did" life and death.  To my understanding, this was not instructed for humanity, but per the "fallen" world, there you are.

 

I'm the world's best and "not following" what is trying to be conveyed.  Please feel free to try again if I missed your intent.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

 

Yes, but the manifestation is not merely life and death.  It contains a proclamation of god's existence and simultaneously a rejection of god's existence; this is a direct contradiction.  Reducing it down to whether the "word" brings "life", or "death", is too simplistic.  The real contradiction still exists.

I don't see it that way at all.  My body contains life and death.  Nature contains life and death.  Life and death are a proclamation of God IMO because God "did" life and death.  To my understanding, this was not instructed for humanity, but per the "fallen" world, there you are.

 

I'm the world's best and "not following" what is trying to be conveyed.  Please feel free to try again if I missed your intent.

 

 

I'm not exactly sure how the idea of life and death crept in but it doesn't matter, if it becomes relevant, we can still address it later.  To the point I'm trying to make, think of it this way: If I say, "God exists and Jesus loves you", and then in the next breath I say, "God does NOT exist, and Jesus does NOT love you," have I not contradicted myself?  Didn't I just say two things that were completely opposite in meaning?  In the same way, god's manifestation in me proclaiming its existence while simultaneously denying its existence is contradictory.  This is the point I want to make.

[Guest end3]

 

 

Yes, but the manifestation is not merely life and death.  It contains a proclamation of god's existence and simultaneously a rejection of god's existence; this is a direct contradiction.  Reducing it down to whether the "word" brings "life", or "death", is too simplistic.  The real contradiction still exists.

I don't see it that way at all.  My body contains life and death.  Nature contains life and death.  Life and death are a proclamation of God IMO because God "did" life and death.  To my understanding, this was not instructed for humanity, but per the "fallen" world, there you are.

 

I'm the world's best and "not following" what is trying to be conveyed.  Please feel free to try again if I missed your intent.

 

 

I'm not exactly sure how the idea of life and death crept in but it doesn't matter, if it becomes relevant, we can still address it later.  To the point I'm trying to make, think of it this way: If I say, "God exists and Jesus loves you", and then in the next breath I say, "God does NOT exist, and Jesus does NOT love you," have I not contradicted myself?  Didn't I just say two things that were completely opposite in meaning?  In the same way, god's manifestation in me proclaiming its existence while simultaneously denying its existence is contradictory.  This is the point I want to make.

 

Thanks.

 

Don't give up on me. 

 

God's proclamation/manifestation in us would be the potential for let's say positive and negative.....God creating both.

 

God's manifestation denying itself I don't see as just an extended form of negative. 

[Guest end3]

Just saying it matches.  Exponential negative would be "I don't exist" in contrast to "belonging"....death vs. life,  distant vs. intimate relationships. 

[Adam5]

This is the sort of thing that people who believe in god discuss. Those of us how reject such a notion cannot accept the premise. I fail to see the point in trying to figure out the motives, thoughts or workings of an imaginary being. 

 

Yes, nicely put! There is no point in guessing the thoughts of an imaginary being. Best to leave that to goat and sheep herders of Palestine.