Epicurean Paradox.

[SnakeLord]

What meaning does free will have if one can choose only one path?

Not a great deal. But you're falling in to the same error as lg.. It is not the only path you can go down, it is the only path you will go down.

That's standard for every human currently in existence. You have gone down a specific path.... You chose to go to the pub last night.. You're arguing that because you took that one path the other path was not available. It was, you chose not to go down it.

As explained on my last post: gods knowledge of the path you will go down does not hinder your free will. If you suggest it does then none of us have free will anyway and thus your argument becomes moot. If you suggest it doesn't then having a bunch of people that only choose one path does not hinder their free will to choose another one.. they simply choose not to.

-----

Lg: Your post has instantly seemed to have gone off into your usual vague, quite meaningless meandering and lack of actual question answers. There are however a couple of things worth addressing.

I wasn't aware that I had to argue in agreement with your idea that the living entity is not eternal

Ultimately you don't. We have spoken before and you have stated that there are an infinite amount of like spirity entities in some spiritual realm. We, (those of us that chose to come to the material realm), are merely a miniscule drop in the ocean. Can it be stated that all those spirity entities that never choose to come to the material world still have free will? Our non existence would hinder that.... how?

what you deem "good" can easily turn out to be something else

'Good' as used relates to good as this entity sees it.

If your internet provider can determine what you are downloading before it gets to your hard drive, does that hinder what you choose to download?

No. That's the point.

 

[lightgigantic]

Not a great deal. But you're falling in to the same error as lg.. It is not the only path you can go down, it is the only path you will go down.

That's standard for every human currently in existence. You have gone down a specific path.... You chose to go to the pub last night.. You're arguing that because you took that one path the other path was not available. It was, you chose not to go down it.

As explained on my last post: gods knowledge of the path you will go down does not hinder your free will. If you suggest it does then none of us have free will anyway and thus your argument becomes moot. If you suggest it doesn't then having a bunch of people that only choose one path does not hinder their free will to choose another one.. they simply choose not to.

your argument is just another version of "You have no free will"
:shrug:

 

[Revolvr]

Not a great deal. But you're falling in to the same error as lg.. It is not the only path you can go down, it is the only path you will go down.

So you at least admit now that the concept of free will does not have "a great deal" of meaning if everyone is predisposed to make only the right choice.

God wishes for people's allegiance to be freely given. If God had done something magical so that everyone always chose God over Satan, God Himself would know that he had not given people complete free choice.

If God really wanted His creations to actually love Him and appreciate what He does for them, He would have to work out this rebellion/sin problem right out in front of the whole universe, so that God's own created beings would be able to know for themselves what God is like and they would be able to choose to really serve Him.

The entire Bible is about God working with us to help us make the right choices. "I will strengthen you, Yes, I will help you, I will uphold you with My righteous right hand". (Isaiah)

 

[Medicine*Woman]

So you at least admit now that the concept of free will does not have "a great deal" of meaning if everyone is predisposed to make only the right choice.

God wishes for people's allegiance to be freely given. If God had done something magical so that everyone always chose God over Satan, God Himself would know that he had not given people complete free choice.

If God really wanted His creations to actually love Him and appreciate what He does for them, He would have to work out this rebellion/sin problem right out in front of the whole universe, so that God's own created beings would be able to know for themselves what God is like and they would be able to choose to really serve Him.

The entire Bible is about God working with us to help us make the right choices. "I will strengthen you, Yes, I will help you, I will uphold you with My righteous right hand". (Isaiah)

*************
M*W: Revolvr, I'm glad you're on this forum, because it would be a sad thing to know you were here but refused to learn the truth about your religious delusions.

 

[SnakeLord]

So you at least admit now that the concept of free will does not have "a great deal" of meaning if everyone is predisposed to make only the right choice.

Pay close attention - you have changed what was asked.

"What meaning does free will have if one can choose only one path?"

The important part is bolded. I have not anywhere in my arguments stated that these people can only, but that they will only. There is a vast difference.

You have free will, you can choose to kill your neighbour, you can choose not to kill your neighbour. The fact is that you will only ever choose one of those paths. How does my knowledge of which one of those you will choose in any way change the fact that you chose it?

Your argument is stating that if a god knows in advance what you're going to do, and if a person ever makes a specific choice then that person has no free will..

That leaves no human in existence with free will and the argument need not continue.

God wishes for people's allegiance to be freely given. If God had done something magical so that everyone always chose God over Satan, God Himself would know that he had not given people complete free choice.

Incorrect. Regardless to whether you're even born or not, god knows what choices you will make using your own free will, your "complete free choice". I for instance choose only to do good using my complete free will. god knows this. Whether anyone else ever exists or not does not change the fact that I have made that choice using my complete free will.

Take some time to actually think about it..

 

[nova900]

Its not so much about teaching us to be good but enabling us to forget being stupid

In other words rejecting the ignorance of our ego (evil) to embrace our true inner nature which is part of God.
The challenge as met by figures such as Krishna, Jesus,Aset(Isis) and others---to allign ourselves with God as separate individuals while at the same time being part of the greater whole (God) and remain in that state while still dwelling in the physical universe.

This is just my take on God. Not God as a separate entity that is apart from his creation but rather the concept that God dwells within all of us as smaller portions of the same being and that all of creation everywhere is in essense part of God.
As the Ancient Egyptians would have said "From the one..came the many"

 

[Revolvr]

Your argument is that God could have created people who only did good, who only made the right decisions, and that would solve the problem of good vs. evil, eliminating evil, while still allowing for free will.

My argument is that yes, God could have done that. You are absolutely correct. But obviously God didn’t. The question is why?

We have free will, and with that comes the freedom to choose poorly. This I am sure we both agree. Eliminating evil by simply eliminating evil would only prove God has the power to create anything God pleases. It would not prove that good is better than evil. By giving us the choice we learn for ourselves.

You are trying to get rid of the “free will” argument against the original thesis by stating one can have free will in the absence of choice over good and evil. Your argument fails because obviously one must have free will to choose evil for evil to exist. And one could never learn to choose good over evil in the absence of evil.

The Christian belief is that there is essentially a universal war between good and evil – evil represented by Satan. The war is not won by simply eliminating evil. That doesn’t convince anybody of anything. This is a war of ideas not power.

 

[nova900]

If he can but does not want to, then he is spiteful -- which is equally foreign to god's nature.

If we are separate from God as opposed to "God already resides within us"--the internal concept as opposed to the "apart from God" concept, then yes..spiteful would be accurate.

I know it seems cruel when you think of God standing by while people starve to death or are beaten and murdered or suffering in poverty but if we are indeed all already smaller bits of the greater whole (God) then the suffering or evil we experience in this tiny stretch of time would be no more than God stubbing his /her toe.

 

[SnakeLord]

My argument is that yes, God could have done that. You are absolutely correct.

That's a start, at least you now understand the concept.

Eliminating evil by simply eliminating evil would only prove God has the power to create anything God pleases.

One could surely at this point state that theists already know god has such power, eliminating evil would merely prove omnibenevolence and make for a more peaceful world.. sort of like a heaven or something.

Your argument fails because obviously one must have free will to choose evil for evil to exist.

But as shown, they do still have that free will. They can choose to do evil but they don't.

And one could never learn to choose good over evil in the absence of evil.

Two important objections:

1) At this stage we need to then take a look at the general theist argument that all of us are born with an innate understanding of good and evil.

2) One most certainly could choose to do good in the absence of evil because life does not work in opposites but differences in relation to a standard baseline. There exists no such thing as 'hot' or 'cold'. At this stage the only thing that exists is moderate. The temperature for the first time ever actually increases. Hot now exists even though cold does not. You recognise hot because it is different to the standard, not the opposite.

One can choose to do good in the absence of evil. I would assume this to also be so in heaven otherwise all the inhabitants aren't going to be able to do anything.

The Christian belief is that there is essentially a universal war between good and evil

Yes, I saw the cartoon. "By the power of Greyskull!"

The war is not won by simply eliminating evil

He-Man would have done it if he really had the power as would any other entity that fights for the forces of good. Marduk.. there's a real god.. Saw the evil tiamat and killed the bitch. He didn't become an "evil apologist", he destroyed evil. Kindly, in your own words tell me why this god can't or wont just do away with satan and done with it. Killing satan does not prevent humans from having free will, what it does do is remove an evil entity that is quite well known for tempting and possessing humans.

If you claim this god needs to see who will or wont go to him then he needs just create the heavenly realm with those people without causing everyone else eternal damnation - because he knows every choice well in advance. Nothing changes by actually having us run through this simulation other than many people burn - an eternal torture created by that very same being.

That doesn’t convince anybody of anything.

Hell yeah it does.

 

[Revolvr]

Two important objections:

1) At this stage we need to then take a look at the general theist argument that all of us are born with an innate understanding of good and evil.

2) One most certainly could choose to do good in the absence of evil because life does not work in opposites but differences in relation to a standard baseline. There exists no such thing as 'hot' or 'cold'. At this stage the only thing that exists is moderate. The temperature for the first time ever actually increases. Hot now exists even though cold does not. You recognise hot because it is different to the standard, not the opposite.

1) No we don't - that is a separate thread. Irrelevant. For this discussion we only need to have an understanding that good and evil exists.

2) Oh grasshopper, with what will you measure temperature if everything is the same temperature? If everything is "moderate" how does one define a baseline? How does one even develop a temperature scale if one has knowledge of only one temperature? Grasshopper, whenever we measure anything, we measure it relative to some difference. Life does work in differences. Without difference there is no measurement, no baseline, no scale. Without evil one cannot understand good.

You aren't trying to say there is a baseline for morality are you? Or that God causes entropy to decrease?

Sorry I cannot respond to your other paragraphs - I just don't watch enough cartoons. Is this where you get your views of theology, from cartoons?

I think you are grasping at straws and arguing for the sake of argument once again. I leave you then with this one last thought for you to contemplate: I tell you most solemnly grasshopper: Better is the evil of good.

 

[SnakeLord]

1) No we don't - that is a separate thread. Irrelevant. For this discussion we only need to have an understanding that good and evil exists.

Not irrelevant at all, for if we are all born with an innate understanding of good and evil before even witnessing the existence of good and evil then your entire argument goes down the pan. One does not need people up and about doing evil things to know it exists. If only people that chose to do good were created then they would still have free will, would only do good and yet would have knowledge of evil because they are born with that knowledge.

Irrelevant? I think not munchkin.

Grasshopper, whenever we measure anything, we measure it relative to some difference. Life does work in differences.

Munchkin, I said that in my last post.. "You recognise hot because it is different to the standard, not the opposite."

It says that you measure difference, you don't measure opposites. An eskimo does not measure the cold of his igloo by taking a trip to the bottom of a volcano. He measures differences to the norm. "Shit, it's colder than normal".

Without evil one cannot understand good.

Yes they can. Any difference to the norm in either direction gives rise to that thing without the opposite needing to exist.

Sorry I cannot respond to your other paragraphs - I just don't watch enough cartoons. Is this where you get your views of theology, from cartoons?

If it helps you actually respond to what was asked I shall remove the mention of He-Man? I mean c'mon, your best response is that you don't watch cartoons? Humour certainly isn't lost on you.

"Marduk.. there's a real god.. Saw the evil tiamat and killed the bitch. He didn't become an "evil apologist", he destroyed evil. Kindly, in your own words tell me why this god can't or wont just do away with satan and done with it. Killing satan does not prevent humans from having free will, what it does do is remove an evil entity that is quite well known for tempting and possessing humans.

If you claim this god needs to see who will or wont go to him then he needs just create the heavenly realm with those people without causing everyone else eternal damnation - because he knows every choice well in advance. Nothing changes by actually having us run through this simulation other than many people burn - an eternal torture created by that very same being."

There you go, cartoon reference removed. Can you respond to it now?

P.S Listen carefully munchkin, my name ain't grasshopper.

 

[lightgigantic]

*************
M*W: Revolvr, I'm glad you're on this forum, because it would be a sad thing to know you were here but refused to learn the truth about your religious delusions.

as opposed to your blissful atheistic takes on religion, huh?

 

[Medicine*Woman]

as opposed to your blissful atheistic takes on religion, huh?

*************
M*W: Why is it so hard for theists to believe that atheists can be happy?

 

[lightgigantic]

*************
M*W: Why is it so hard for theists to believe that atheists can be happy?

Its their ability to discuss religion that tends to shroud me in doubt ....

 

[Medicine*Woman]

Its their ability to discuss religion that tends to shroud me in doubt ....

*************
M*W: It's a proven fact that atheists are more knowledgeable about religions than their own believers are. That, in itself, makes us happy.

 

[lightgigantic]

*************
M*W: It's a proven fact that atheists are more knowledgeable about religions than their own believers are. That, in itself, makes us happy.

proven fact?
:roflmao:

 

[Kerry Dorsey]

He didn't become an "evil apologist", he destroyed evil. tell me why this god can't or wont just do away with satan and (be) done with it.
Nothing changes by actually having us run through this simulation other than many people burn - an eternal torture created by that very same being.

Very well put - I think that is the best rephrasing of the questions this paradox offers I've ever read.