RLK massively respected Hugh McCann and even had a episode memorializing him after his death RLK is a probative, curious TV host - the more questions he asks, the better he thinks it is going! Learn before posting
Any one who makes claims about what an intentional deciding god does and thinks those assertions constitute a viable explanation of anything is no where near the truth.
@@leonreynolds77 If God is love and God is omnipotent, then why does evil exist? There are profound questions and issues, but the Bible does not have the answers. There are the kind of things I mock with my sermons.
The fallacy is believing that the things we think are correct are correct. What if all the wisdom we possess is actually a mass delusion? Time, causation, determinism? Remember according to the Christian tradition we weren’t always like this. We were one way in the Garden of Eden, and then we ate of the fruit of the tree of good and evil. What if that “temporarily” makes us ignorant? What if part of that ignorance is the obtuseness that we think of as wisdom? What if evolution, science, religion, government, are impediments to our true nature? What if the elixir of immortality was available to us but we weren’t interested in it? Instead our rational will was more interested in vain pursuits? So interested it actually acted like a force? Turning the thoughts of people away from their freedom, to the vain purposes of temporary success/ignorance? What if time was a disease that we could be cured of? Would you take the cure or would it be easier to spend more time in the familiarity of your “wealth”?
The truth is within you. If you can't recognise it, then don't try to fabricate what you don't understand. God is not intellectually understood, and neither is love. Intellectual understanding cannot explain, nor can it reveal God. Only you can find the love that is within you. Only you can find God, for the divine being is also within you, like the tree is already there within its seed.
For the universe to make sense the future has to be open. Otherwise there is no point to us experiencing reality unfold. Or at least in my opinion there is no point.
@@josebegui *"As Neil deGrasse Tyson would say the universe is under no obligation to make sense to you."* ... And I absolutely disagree with Tyson (even though he's a character in my 0-by-1 cartoon). When the universe demonstrates *reliable, predictable, repeatable orchestration* that totally centers around *logic* (mathematics) ... then it is *OBLIGATED* to make sense to us all. A universe that "doesn't make sense" (i.e., "illogical") would be one that is unpredictable, unrepeatable and unreliable. *Example:* If Newton's 1st law of motion only applied half the time, Mayer's Law of Conservation of Energy was not really a "law," and E=MC2 is never constant, .... then Tyson would be right.
@@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC The comment is that 'for the universe to make sense the future has to be open.' My point is that a predetermined future due to pure cause and effect makes sense too.
So whether there is god or gods or whatever make no difference other than to make you feel more comfortable. So, you feel more comfortable now, great. Now what?
Of ALL the things in the Bible, free will is the greatest gift of all! The right to choose, to disbelieve or to reaffirm what we learn and discover. God granted this right to every person. Pre-destiny arguments are a masterbullshyt scientific position to disavow free will. But how else can science and atheists try to to debunk the God theory. Adam and Eve made a choice because GOD did NOT pre-determine our lives! What a gift!
Gödel’s theorems / simultaneous infinite and finite ( Mandelbrot set/ Jacob horn) Placeholders of reality The descriptive language of emptiness, void, vacuum is not an indication that nothing is something. Dualism is the understanding that the essence of anything existing in a material world is an expression of the material as a function of its immaterial state. Definitionally essence can be argued that essence is something. However our language fails us is this logic formality. This is the limit of language and the language of logic. Math has its limits to our understanding via Gödel. Logic has its limits by mathematics specifically in its geometry. The Mandelbrot set is simultaneously infinite ( limitless borders) and finite ( limited area) . Other mathematical geometry is also a limit of logic( Jacob’s horn). Reality as described in quantum theory is itself a mathematical construct which implies a limit to our understanding reality via both math and logic ( entanglement, Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle, Schrodinger’s cat black holes, the Big Bang, etc). This has lead to a misunderstanding by language what is meant by dualism. Consciousness too has run up against the limits of mathematics, logic and physics as a perception of this reality. Consider numbers: we implicitly understand that when we count that there is no actual number, or numbers. We are counting things or the absence of things. We are counting forward and backwards on an “imaginary “ number line. The same is true with all maths. Maths is a placeholder, a conceptual construct of what we understand to be actual. We can placehold emotions, understanding, meaning and purpose, etc., in a similar manner with the caveat that emotions, consciousness can be materially expressed as functions of the interaction of material things. They are linguistically expressed as emergent to the material. However this too becomes cumbersome to understanding of dualism vs non dualism. So then given math and emotions can math be expressed as emergent from the material in a manner similar to emotions as expressed in terms of emergence? Are things like consciousness, emotions, math and logic non real placeholders? Are they nonexistent? Are they emergent? Is essence emergent to existence? This is the fundamental question of language, mathematics, logic limitations. If we are to say that language, mathematics, logic etc are emergent to existence, as emergent to consciousness then we are left with the oddity of such language that everything material and immaterial are emergent non real expressions of reality. Thus the reality is an illusion claim. If everything is an illusion by its fundamental physical nature and by its descriptive meaning are we then also dealing with these concepts as non real, placeholders, etc. If everything material in existence is in a physical state of flux and entanglement ( observed, measured) is consciousness as such the generator or the emergent properties of existence? Consider that if real things come into existence by non real existence are all things non things? These language failures are literally death traps is we take them as perceptively true, reality. Step in front of a non real real train and suffer the consequences of the limits language , placeholders. th-cam.com/video/k2etiDVaSB4/w-d-xo.html&feature=share
The non-living material world is fixed; the living world is open; Christians who know what's going on know the "Dynamic Omniscience" view of GOD and the world is the correnct view.
@mtshasta4195 no. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume English is not your first language. I did not make an assumption. To assert a claim without any evidence other than "just trust me" is just that, an assumption.
As i understood it, a ordning to him, when god created us, he instantly knew our entire lives, but Although he instantly Saw what what we did, he did not choose what we did, we did! I dont belive in god or free-Will, but I Think thats what he meant!
If you can believe that a snapshot of the universe as it is now, needs no creator then perhaps none of the snapshots in the space-time continuum need one but then how does that snapshot make the free will decision?
There's no predestination where everything has been set. We the created make our own decision abd often our own destiny. The mental blockage with this evident and plain truth are his dogmas and belief systems. What we sow we shall reap, plain and simple.
If you don't know yourself, then how can you know God? If you don't believe in yourself, then how can you believe in God? When you find yourself, you'll find that the divine source is also within you and has never been separate from you.
I'm not a theist by any stretch, but why do these people struggle so much with a problem that can be solved simply by saying God is outside of time? He made his creatures, they did what they did, and the beginning, middle, and end all were instantaneous. We experience the experiment in time. We live our choices linearly with freewill and the lot, but it's already happened from God's perspective. He knows the future and we have freewill. Done.
Well, not sure about that. God being outside of time, doesn't necessarily mean that for Him everything is instantaneous. That would limit God, making it impossible for him to "see" the lapse of time. So we end up with the same issue of limiting God to allow for our free will.
@johnnyblue4799 The assumption I always see is that we understand what "being outside of time" would be. The truth, of course, is that we can't even imagine it. We assume a kind of static existence. Fair enough. That makes logical sense from our perspective and within our framework of reality, but truth be told, we have no idea it would work that way. If I were to believe in an all-powerful, all-knowing "God," then I would describe it as such. When talking about things that can not be tested, seen, verified, etc, why limit yourself? If I were to believe in such an entity, I would imagine it to be the creator of time itself... something for our benefit, but something it isn't limited by. I would write off any logical argument presented by humans as an obvious inability to understand its realm. That would be my argument. I hear theologians tap dance around physic, and science in general, to make their God fit with both the supernatural and science. Why bother? The sky is the limit. In fact, you have me thinking now, why even consider that the explanation for God could be captured with our language or mathematics and our brains? A God should be beyond all of that.
@@Jinxed007 I can find no fault in what you wrote. I can only say that, as an Orthodox Christian, I have not heard any priest saying something different during any sermon. We do not pretend to understand God. We only understand what God Himself revealed to us. We do not pretend to understand God rationally, because God is way beyond our capacity of reasoning. The book of Job for instance has some verses saying that. God is the creator of everything, time included. The Nicene Creed, which is a short summary of the faith says it clearly in the first part: "I believe in one God, Father Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all ages; Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten, not created, of one essence with the Father through Whom all things were made. ..." So the Son is begotten before all ages, before time itself. We can use science up to a point, as tools to understand God's creation, not God Himself. Because God also created our minds, as tools to help us. The more people come up with scientific discoveries, the more it becomes clear to a lot of people that the universe has a design behind it. Where science falls short, is explaining the why. Why does the universe exist? Why do we love? What is the purpose of everything? The science might be very good at describing processes, but not intent. I see God as the primordial cause, the reason everything exists and the maintainer of everything. I don't know why things exist, I doubt we really know very well how it all came to be. I wouldn't go as far as to say that God is outside time and space. I think it's more likely that God contains time and space if it's to say that He is omnipresent.
That old man isn't explaining how God is all knowing and we have free will. He is double talking out both sides of his mouth and dilly-dallying around the question. If God is all knowing, omniscient. He knows all that has happened and ever will happen. Then he knows what we are gonna do. How is that free will? He snickered when he said "it's existence". Lol, if it exists that is ultimate and supercedes any decision we make. The outcome exists he admitted it. But he is still gonna just say we have free will. BS, he explained nothing at all.
@@hudsontd7778oh, this is the “burn” one. Those who lack belief are fools. I bet you feel good when you trot this one out. This is like getting picked on in grade school and running to tell your big brother, only your big brother is just a figment of your imagination. These words do nothing, they mean nothing. You’re an easy mark and vulnerable to whatever grift or manipulation those willing to enact upon you choose. Such a servile and weak way to spend your one life. Oh well, better you than me. But still, don’t you ever wish you had some dignity or feel like being honest about your situation might be better than cloaking yourself in this mask of cultural security? It’s just weird to me is all.
@mtshasta4195 I think you might have meant WITHOUT irrational emotion. the implication being hilarious, of course (I'm assuming you're a theist) as to demands ? - maybe tomorrow, if I feel like it
If God was all knowing and always present. How could any decisions be made? To decide you have to have choices to think about the outcomes and what kind of end you are looking for. But again if God is all knowing he couldn't make a choice. There couldn't be a choice of anything. Stop talking like God was sitting around and one day just thought hey maybe I'll make some humans and a galaxy etc...and if he did do all that he would be the worst absentee father in the history of mankind
Of all the possible worlds, God foreknows one particular world, and that foreknowledge creates the world as we know it. God is in this sense the cosmic observer and the incarnate mind/spirit of every soul, including plants and animals. Every human mind is as free as the mind of God, because it is the mind of God thinking. God knows both good and evil. God can think about evil without being evil. Just as God's mind was incarnate in Christ Jesus, so God's mind is incarnate in every creature and aspect of creation, without that creature representing the character of God because God is able to know evil and to understand how evil thinks. Just as we used to play with dolls or soldiers as children, we held a good soldier in one hand and the bad guy in the other and we understood how both would think and interact, while sympathizing with the good guy. This world is God thinking about good and evil and letting them play out as any good logition or chess player would, while requiring a level playing field. We are the mind of God thinking from within our incarnate perspective while God also occupies a distinct omniscient perspective. This world need not be set. God is free to think otherwise and create a nearly infinite number of worlds, and yet he may not need to do that to conceive of the best possible world.
This argument goes around fruitlessly in circles because the guest seems not to address Dr. Kuhn’s point, which appears to me to be not only valid, but unarguable.
He shows God atributies but It is approaching rambling rhetoric. He thinks his brains are figure out God atributies are absurd and pedantic. Proof out and lack a lot experiences. Absolutetly rubbish rethoric.
Hugh seems like a very nice man, but he has a blind spot the size of Everest in ignoring the supposed all-knowing nature of his God. He is using Hawking's version of god that simply sets the universe in motion and walks away, leaving a completely deterministic future. This would completely negate any involvement by god to do things like inspire the bible, sacrifice himself to himself, or answer prayer. So much coping he does....
Anyone representing a theistic argument struggles to explain Free Will, but that doesn't mean it can't be reconciled. An omniscient, omnipotent God is perfectly "free" to create imperfect things in order to lead them toward perfection. To claim that God can't do this is to limit to his omnipotent powers ... which is changing the definition. My nontheistic opinion is that *the future cannot be known for certain.* The future is a specific degree of probability that's based on information derived from past and present events. From these two variables, one can make a prediction with near 100% certainty, ... but never 100% certainty. ... The future is never "known" until it becomes the present.
But God didn't create a world - God, the one, or nirguna Brahman, is one without a second. There couldn't be God and then a world. To create implies action, for there is no act by God. For to act entails action, thus a result or karma, thus action is in time. For God isn't limited or circumscribed in time or any phenomena. To act implies desire, for any action is a reaction from a thought, desire, yearning, wish. God doesn't wish, or yearn, or desire, for God is complete, and pne without a second. Overcoming the mind is very difficult.
@@gettaasteroid4650 He found a really fancy new word for it. I'll make a point of ignoring it and stick to the 'hard' problem, because guess what, it's a lot easier to get your head round it and that's what matters to me. BTW, Griffin isn't Chalmers.
Life can only be understood backwards; but it must be lived forwards.
― Søren Kierkegaard
This guy is not equipped to have this conversation, Robert is trying to literally educate him to even ask him the question
RLK massively respected Hugh McCann and even had a episode memorializing him after his death
RLK is a probative, curious TV host - the more questions he asks, the better he thinks it is going!
Learn before posting
@darkknightsds if you watch more CTT you will know when it's going well like the Arnold Scheibel interviews, and when it is less so like this one
Any one who makes claims about what an intentional deciding god does and thinks those assertions constitute a viable explanation of anything is no where near the truth.
it explains nothing but it is the beginning of tyranny
In a universe with free will, evil becomes possible.
Predetermined would be extremely boring, even for God and pointless too.
Bad exists because Satan and evil exists, not because Gods design was bad or off.
_"Bad exists because Satan and evil exists..."_
Source?
Satan and evil are examples of God's design was bad or off.
Another paradox. "God didn't create evil, yet evil exists." So some things exist that God didn't create? Just saying.
@@leonreynolds77
If God is love and God is omnipotent, then why does evil exist?
There are profound questions and issues, but the Bible does not have the answers.
There are the kind of things I mock with my sermons.
The fallacy is believing that the things we think are correct are correct. What if all the wisdom we possess is actually a mass delusion? Time, causation, determinism?
Remember according to the Christian tradition we weren’t always like this. We were one way in the Garden of Eden, and then we ate of the fruit of the tree of good and evil. What if that “temporarily” makes us ignorant? What if part of that ignorance is the obtuseness that we think of as wisdom? What if evolution, science, religion, government, are impediments to our true nature?
What if the elixir of immortality was available to us but we weren’t interested in it? Instead our rational will was more interested in vain pursuits? So interested it actually acted like a force? Turning the thoughts of people away from their freedom, to the vain purposes of temporary success/ignorance?
What if time was a disease that we could be cured of? Would you take the cure or would it be easier to spend more time in the familiarity of your “wealth”?
You’re free to make the one and only choice.
😂
he doesn't make any sense.
None at all. This is the worst bunch of contradictory hogwash I have ever listened to on the channel.
In West it is not ( open) without sacrife, which needs love.
The truth is within you. If you can't recognise it, then don't try to fabricate what you don't understand. God is not intellectually understood, and neither is love. Intellectual understanding cannot explain, nor can it reveal God. Only you can find the love that is within you. Only you can find God, for the divine being is also within you, like the tree is already there within its seed.
For the universe to make sense the future has to be open. Otherwise there is no point to us experiencing reality unfold. Or at least in my opinion there is no point.
As Neil deGrasse Tyson would say the universe is under no obligation to make sense to you.
@@josebegui *"As Neil deGrasse Tyson would say the universe is under no obligation to make sense to you."*
... And I absolutely disagree with Tyson (even though he's a character in my 0-by-1 cartoon). When the universe demonstrates *reliable, predictable, repeatable orchestration* that totally centers around *logic* (mathematics) ... then it is *OBLIGATED* to make sense to us all.
A universe that "doesn't make sense" (i.e., "illogical") would be one that is unpredictable, unrepeatable and unreliable. *Example:* If Newton's 1st law of motion only applied half the time, Mayer's Law of Conservation of Energy was not really a "law," and E=MC2 is never constant, .... then Tyson would be right.
@@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC Excellent cartoon
the universe doesn't care what may or may not make sense to you.
you are commiting the fallacy of personal incredulity
@@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC The comment is that 'for the universe to make sense the future has to be open.' My point is that a predetermined future due to pure cause and effect makes sense too.
At Matthew 15:14 Jesus is recorded to have said this: "If, then, a blind man guides a blind man, both will fall into a pit."
So whether there is god or gods or whatever make no difference other than to make you feel more comfortable. So, you feel more comfortable now, great. Now what?
Of ALL the things in the Bible, free will is the greatest gift of all! The right to choose, to disbelieve or to reaffirm what we learn and discover. God granted this right to every person.
Pre-destiny arguments are a masterbullshyt scientific position to disavow free will. But how else can science and atheists try to to debunk the God theory.
Adam and Eve made a choice because GOD did NOT pre-determine our lives! What a gift!
Gödel’s theorems / simultaneous infinite and finite ( Mandelbrot set/ Jacob horn)
Placeholders of reality
The descriptive language of emptiness, void, vacuum is not an indication that nothing is something.
Dualism is the understanding that the essence of anything existing in a material world is an expression of the material as a function of its immaterial state.
Definitionally essence can be argued that essence is something. However our language fails us is this logic formality.
This is the limit of language and the language of logic.
Math has its limits to our understanding via Gödel. Logic has its limits by mathematics specifically in its geometry. The Mandelbrot set is simultaneously infinite ( limitless borders) and finite ( limited area) . Other mathematical geometry is also a limit of logic( Jacob’s horn).
Reality as described in quantum theory is itself a mathematical construct which implies a limit to our understanding reality via both math and logic ( entanglement, Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle, Schrodinger’s cat black holes, the Big Bang, etc).
This has lead to a misunderstanding by language what is meant by dualism. Consciousness too has run up against the limits of mathematics, logic and physics as a perception of this reality.
Consider numbers: we implicitly understand that when we count that there is no actual number, or numbers. We are counting things or the absence of things. We are counting forward and backwards on an “imaginary “ number line. The same is true with all maths. Maths is a placeholder, a conceptual construct of what we understand to be actual. We can placehold emotions, understanding, meaning and purpose, etc., in a similar manner with the caveat that emotions, consciousness can be materially expressed as functions of the interaction of material things. They are linguistically expressed as emergent to the material. However this too becomes cumbersome to understanding of dualism vs non dualism. So then given math and emotions can math be expressed as emergent from the material in a manner similar to emotions as expressed in terms of emergence?
Are things like consciousness, emotions, math and logic non real placeholders? Are they nonexistent? Are they emergent? Is essence emergent to existence?
This is the fundamental question of language, mathematics, logic limitations.
If we are to say that language, mathematics, logic etc are emergent to existence, as emergent to consciousness then we are left with the oddity of such language that everything material and immaterial are emergent non real expressions of reality. Thus the reality is an illusion claim.
If everything is an illusion by its fundamental physical nature and by its descriptive meaning are we then also dealing with these concepts as non real, placeholders, etc.
If everything material in existence is in a physical state of flux and entanglement ( observed, measured) is consciousness as such the generator or the emergent properties of existence?
Consider that if real things come into existence by non real existence are all things non things?
These language failures are literally death traps is we take them as perceptively true, reality. Step in front of a non real real train and suffer the consequences of the limits language , placeholders.
th-cam.com/video/k2etiDVaSB4/w-d-xo.html&feature=share
The non-living material world is fixed; the living world is open; Christians who know what's going on know the "Dynamic Omniscience" view of GOD and the world is the correnct view.
The framework of the ocean is somewhat set. But the fish within are free to swim in whatever direction they choose...within that framework
unless b theory is right !
then what you said is wrong
The future is what we, collectively, have caused to be put into motion. According to the laws of cause and effect.
Hugh, surely you see sir that these are grand assumptions backed by nothing but your feelings.
Just as your opinion is,eh?
@mtshasta4195 no. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume English is not your first language. I did not make an assumption. To assert a claim without any evidence other than "just trust me" is just that, an assumption.
As i understood it, a ordning to him, when god created us, he instantly knew our entire lives, but Although he instantly Saw what what we did, he did not choose what we did, we did! I dont belive in god or free-Will, but I Think thats what he meant!
This is how Quantum System in Nature works.
In the very distant future,everything will disintegrate
The art of dancing on the head of a pin.
If you can believe that a snapshot of the universe as it is now, needs no creator then perhaps none of the snapshots in the space-time continuum need one but then how does that snapshot make the free will decision?
There's no predestination where everything has been set. We the created make our own decision abd often our own destiny. The mental blockage with this evident and plain truth are his dogmas and belief systems.
What we sow we shall reap, plain and simple.
You have better luck getting a satisfactory answer from a brick wall.
it is open because we are not laplace's demon.
Da Bible are Open Oh Rob... 😅😂😂😂
If you don't know yourself, then how can you know God? If you don't believe in yourself, then how can you believe in God? When you find yourself, you'll find that the divine source is also within you and has never been separate from you.
The Answer is Yes, that’s why I am an Open Theist.
I'm not a theist by any stretch, but why do these people struggle so much with a problem that can be solved simply by saying God is outside of time? He made his creatures, they did what they did, and the beginning, middle, and end all were instantaneous. We experience the experiment in time. We live our choices linearly with freewill and the lot, but it's already happened from God's perspective. He knows the future and we have freewill. Done.
Well, not sure about that. God being outside of time, doesn't necessarily mean that for Him everything is instantaneous. That would limit God, making it impossible for him to "see" the lapse of time. So we end up with the same issue of limiting God to allow for our free will.
@johnnyblue4799 The assumption I always see is that we understand what "being outside of time" would be. The truth, of course, is that we can't even imagine it. We assume a kind of static existence. Fair enough. That makes logical sense from our perspective and within our framework of reality, but truth be told, we have no idea it would work that way. If I were to believe in an all-powerful, all-knowing "God," then I would describe it as such. When talking about things that can not be tested, seen, verified, etc, why limit yourself? If I were to believe in such an entity, I would imagine it to be the creator of time itself... something for our benefit, but something it isn't limited by. I would write off any logical argument presented by humans as an obvious inability to understand its realm. That would be my argument. I hear theologians tap dance around physic, and science in general, to make their God fit with both the supernatural and science. Why bother? The sky is the limit. In fact, you have me thinking now, why even consider that the explanation for God could be captured with our language or mathematics and our brains? A God should be beyond all of that.
@@Jinxed007 I can find no fault in what you wrote. I can only say that, as an Orthodox Christian, I have not heard any priest saying something different during any sermon. We do not pretend to understand God. We only understand what God Himself revealed to us. We do not pretend to understand God rationally, because God is way beyond our capacity of reasoning. The book of Job for instance has some verses saying that.
God is the creator of everything, time included. The Nicene Creed, which is a short summary of the faith says it clearly in the first part: "I believe in one God, Father Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all ages; Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten, not created, of one essence with the Father through Whom all things were made. ..."
So the Son is begotten before all ages, before time itself.
We can use science up to a point, as tools to understand God's creation, not God Himself. Because God also created our minds, as tools to help us. The more people come up with scientific discoveries, the more it becomes clear to a lot of people that the universe has a design behind it. Where science falls short, is explaining the why. Why does the universe exist? Why do we love? What is the purpose of everything? The science might be very good at describing processes, but not intent. I see God as the primordial cause, the reason everything exists and the maintainer of everything. I don't know why things exist, I doubt we really know very well how it all came to be. I wouldn't go as far as to say that God is outside time and space. I think it's more likely that God contains time and space if it's to say that He is omnipresent.
That old man isn't explaining how God is all knowing and we have free will. He is double talking out both sides of his mouth and dilly-dallying around the question. If God is all knowing, omniscient. He knows all that has happened and ever will happen. Then he knows what we are gonna do. How is that free will? He snickered when he said "it's existence". Lol, if it exists that is ultimate and supercedes any decision we make. The outcome exists he admitted it. But he is still gonna just say we have free will. BS, he explained nothing at all.
I fall into the there is no god and there is no free will camp. Its all physical cause and effect.
Have you read Romans 1:18-23?
@@hudsontd7778oh, this is the “burn” one. Those who lack belief are fools. I bet you feel good when you trot this one out.
This is like getting picked on in grade school and running to tell your big brother, only your big brother is just a figment of your imagination. These words do nothing, they mean nothing. You’re an easy mark and vulnerable to whatever grift or manipulation those willing to enact upon you choose. Such a servile and weak way to spend your one life. Oh well, better you than me.
But still, don’t you ever wish you had some dignity or feel like being honest about your situation might be better than cloaking yourself in this mask of cultural security? It’s just weird to me is all.
But you decided to listen to the podcast and react with a decision to post up..
Enjoy your predetermined life Pal.
@@mtshasta4195 The decision to listen to the podcast was predetermined by my genetic makeup and my prior life experiences.
good pushback by robert on this childish philosophy.
theist -
"whatever science and philosophy determine - plus my god"
And how exactly is it childish? Be specific and explain yourself with using irrational emotion
@mtshasta4195 I think you might have meant WITHOUT irrational emotion.
the implication being hilarious, of course (I'm assuming you're a theist)
as to demands ? -
maybe tomorrow, if I feel like it
U2...........
😅😂😂😂😂😂😂
If God was all knowing and always present. How could any decisions be made? To decide you have to have choices to think about the outcomes and what kind of end you are looking for. But again if God is all knowing he couldn't make a choice. There couldn't be a choice of anything. Stop talking like God was sitting around and one day just thought hey maybe I'll make some humans and a galaxy etc...and if he did do all that he would be the worst absentee father in the history of mankind
Of all the possible worlds, God foreknows one particular world, and that foreknowledge creates the world as we know it. God is in this sense the cosmic observer and the incarnate mind/spirit of every soul, including plants and animals. Every human mind is as free as the mind of God, because it is the mind of God thinking. God knows both good and evil. God can think about evil without being evil. Just as God's mind was incarnate in Christ Jesus, so God's mind is incarnate in every creature and aspect of creation, without that creature representing the character of God because God is able to know evil and to understand how evil thinks. Just as we used to play with dolls or soldiers as children, we held a good soldier in one hand and the bad guy in the other and we understood how both would think and interact, while sympathizing with the good guy. This world is God thinking about good and evil and letting them play out as any good logition or chess player would, while requiring a level playing field. We are the mind of God thinking from within our incarnate perspective while God also occupies a distinct omniscient perspective. This world need not be set. God is free to think otherwise and create a nearly infinite number of worlds, and yet he may not need to do that to conceive of the best possible world.
This argument goes around fruitlessly in circles because the guest seems not to address Dr. Kuhn’s point, which appears to me to be not only valid, but unarguable.
He shows God atributies but It is approaching rambling rhetoric. He thinks his brains are figure out God atributies are absurd and pedantic. Proof out and lack a lot experiences. Absolutetly rubbish rethoric.
😅😅😅😅
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Bs 😂
Hugh seems like a very nice man, but he has a blind spot the size of Everest in ignoring the supposed all-knowing nature of his God. He is using Hawking's version of god that simply sets the universe in motion and walks away, leaving a completely deterministic future. This would completely negate any involvement by god to do things like inspire the bible, sacrifice himself to himself, or answer prayer. So much coping he does....
Anyone representing a theistic argument struggles to explain Free Will, but that doesn't mean it can't be reconciled. An omniscient, omnipotent God is perfectly "free" to create imperfect things in order to lead them toward perfection. To claim that God can't do this is to limit to his omnipotent powers ... which is changing the definition.
My nontheistic opinion is that *the future cannot be known for certain.*
The future is a specific degree of probability that's based on information derived from past and present events. From these two variables, one can make a prediction with near 100% certainty, ... but never 100% certainty.
... The future is never "known" until it becomes the present.
Freewill can be found in Roger Penrose's conciousnessin the collapse of the wave function. Penrose and Hammerof
But God didn't create a world - God, the one, or nirguna Brahman, is one without a second. There couldn't be God and then a world. To create implies action, for there is no act by God. For to act entails action, thus a result or karma, thus action is in time. For God isn't limited or circumscribed in time or any phenomena. To act implies desire, for any action is a reaction from a thought, desire, yearning, wish. God doesn't wish, or yearn, or desire, for God is complete, and pne without a second.
Overcoming the mind is very difficult.
seems aligned with David Ray Griffin's "panexperientialism with organizational duality"
Sounds serious stuff... whatever it is. 😁
@@catherinemira75 yeah... it's Chalmers' "hard problem"
@@gettaasteroid4650 He found a really fancy new word for it. I'll make a point of ignoring it and stick to the 'hard' problem, because guess what, it's a lot easier to get your head round it and that's what matters to me.
BTW, Griffin isn't Chalmers.