-35 votes

Either God approves or God is powerless to do anything about it

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

The reasoning...

We have waited for over 2000 years, we will wait forever? And wait you will I believe, or at least until the time you live in expires...have you all forgotten vicarious redemption? What is the purpose of the rapture if you all can be saved by vicarious redemption?

Father - Husband - Son - Spirit - Consciousness

Free will BS

So we excuse God for ignoring the little children being raped and tortured because he allows free will.

So if my kid breaks their leg, or falls in the pool and is drowning, and I do nothing, because I want them to have 'free will', will you all accept that?

I don't think so.

God either doesn't exist, or is powerless, or doesn't care.

And yet people still waste time praying to him/it. I quit blessing my food in hopes he can use the extra time to help some tortured kid.

Fortunately you have Bush and Obama

To take away your freedom and replace it with safety.

If you want to give up freedom for safety, honestly what are you doing on a Ron Paul site?

Go fight the war on drugs or the war on terrorism and let us know when you win.

deacon's picture

nice thought

take it one step further
I give you free will...but if you don't do as I say,you will forever burn in a lake of fire
Now doesn't that kinda sorta remove the whole free will deal?

If we deny truth before your very eyes,then the rest of what we have to say,is of little consequence

not if u can choose the lake.

not if u can choose the lake. i don't know if free will exists or not, or any such lakes, but as a point of simple logic, if you have a choice, it doesn't matter what constraints are imposed in terms of consequence. i can say "do as i say or the entire world turns into rock candy." your free will isn't diminished by the consequence. its just a matter of whether you like serving your desires enough to turn into rock candy. many addicts know the consequences of their free choices. they make them anyway because they prefer the indulgence and accept the consequences.

deacon's picture

point taken

BUT, it goes back to,who created everything?
the creation doesn't create,they can only re-create
So what has been created,was created by the creator
So,if you care,then who created everything?
And for what purpose? To give things that people cannot have?
For free will to be actually that,then ones who choose to use it,should not be condemned for doing so,as this then takes away that whole free will stance
right?

If we deny truth before your very eyes,then the rest of what we have to say,is of little consequence

above my paygrade. you can

above my paygrade. you can choose faith in the orderly rationality of the world, where such questions have discernible answers, or you can opt for materialism and its unavoidable irrationalism, and abandon all faith in the reliability of your cognitive faculties. neither is particularly attractive, but you're stuck with one.

Without free will

Existence is pointless.

Without free will we are flesh robots.

Without free will you can not do good nor evil, you can only do as you are directed.

If G_d takes care of everything there is no free will.

Just blindless golems creating & destroying, growing & consuming, over and over, spiritless and pointless.

Well...

I don't know any actual Christians who think God would in any way support the spending millions on these ridiculous buildings. Those people will have to answer to God. And unfortunately, it's the people who pour out their wallets to these idiots that cause these palaces of emptiness to be built.

Free will - it's key. If all of the idiots who give money to the pointless auditoriums pictured above would spend that money on the people pictured below, maybe things would be a tiny bit better.

Do you want to see what God approves of? Do you want to see the example he would like us to follow? There's a really great book about it; and it places great emphasis on this incredible individual named Jesus. Didn't carry a penny, didn't have an auditorium, didn't speak with just those of like-mind, and he didn't put up with the crap. Just look at what he did to the merchants in the temple. He loved everyone, but didn't tolerate sin.

Stop trying to 'pass the buck.' It's our fault that pathetic palaces for false idols are being built with our money, rather than being put toward those in need. Accept the blame. We're not in elementary school anymore - stop blaming the teacher for your bad grades.

For those who use the word God

I ask one question: what is thought? This question may seem irrelevant, but is thought not the tool used to understand and express our understand of God? That thing we call thought, which is 'you', must be understood if one is to invoke the word God. Surely those that use this word must know the truth/nature of thought, that thing that is forever filling the mind. Thought is the dividing element, can a divided mind touch that which is undivided? Some will down vote without responding, this could only mean that there is a defense mechanism against the difficultly of looking at thought, thus there is no self-knowing. Knowing is a verb, an activity of current observation of 'what is', not the accumulation of knowledge which is dead and can never touch that which is living, and is not 'God' living, is not 'God' now? So what is the nature of thought, and what is the nature of the mind that is absent of thought? Can thought understand itself, or does its attempt to do so only cause cyclical motion like a dog trying to catch its own tail?

Enonesoch

deacon's picture

animals have thoughts

are you meaning the reasoning part of the brain,instead of just thoughts?
One can have knowledge,but still no know what to do with it

If we deny truth before your very eyes,then the rest of what we have to say,is of little consequence

Yes

the reasoning part of the brain. The activity of the brain that stores experience in the form of knowledge, and recalls it in the form of memory. Thought is the movement of the word in the brain. It is the activity of effort, the describe, or to understand ones environment. The extraordinary process of thinking has created the technology of this world, it is the brains tool for understanding the physical world. Surely thinking is essential for survival and technology, but it has gone haywire, spilling into areas where it has no place. How is one to know if there is such a thing as non-physical, or as some put it 'spiritual'? Is it within the capabilities of thought, being a physical process of the brain, to know if a non-physical reality exists? Thought is very peculiar, it perceives itself as divided, it says 'My thoughts', 'my knowledge', it has created the Owner, it has created authority. When one gets a cut on ones arm, there physical pain and a scar is left, but what gets hurt when one is called a mean name? And is not the memory of that experience (being called a mean name)also a form of scar on the brain. The accumulation of all our 'good' and 'bad' experiences add together into an intricate web that we have named 'me' and is referred to as 'mine'. All things physical are distinct, all things physical are deteriorating, all things physical are bound to the laws of time as disintegration, is thought physical...I don't know. It acts in the physical brain, and if the brain is damaged so too is thought, but does thought disintegrate? In actuality is thought divided, or is it only divided when activated in the brain? If I get brain damage and thought does not function correctly, that doesn't affect the process in your brain, so thought is not 'mine' although each particular brain produces particular thought because thought is the outcome of the accumulation of our particular physical experiences. Anyway, my point is that if there is an actuality of God, which is usually described as outside of time, unlimited, undivided, not bound by space and time, then it cannot be touched by thought which has the nature of all these things. If the nature of the brain become limited by thought (even though thought is extraordinary and seem limitless), what is the nature of the brain that is absent of thought? How is one to find out when any pursuit or intent is the activity of thought? Is being aware of something, the same as thinking about something? Is not being aware much quicker? Does being aware take effort? Does hearing sound take effort? What is a brain absent of thought, is it still? Without thought, which is the result of accumulated experience over time, is there 'time'? Thought fills the space of the brain when it is active, but what is the space of the brain when thought is not active? Would one know if thought was not active, for there would be no accumulation of that experience? These are some question I feel need to be gone into if one is going to touch that thing that is outside of time and thus outside of the physical, that thing that is referred to as spiritual. One can take the word God and use it at will, but has the mind truly touch that which the word symbolizes. To argue if there is or is not God, to me is irrelevant. To me what is relevant is what is the truth of the current, what is the nature of 'me' and 'you'. There can be space in mind, but for there to be space thought must only act when appropriate (to resolve physical problems or understand physical reality) and otherwise rest.

Enonesoch

deacon's picture

does the brain

actually rest? what are dreams if not another part of the brain taking over
when the body sleeps?
ome sat,dreams are for sorting out the days activities that go unanswered,or the brain hasn't had time to process what it has "seen".
My dreams give me answers that were not forthcoming during waking hours
not only that,it hardly ever rests(if it does at all)
While I haven't looked into this yet...I was told all answers to life are written into our dna.If this is remotely true,than doesn't mean,we already know all the answers handed down through time? Could this also man,if true
that maybe,just maybe our dream state(when listened to),will give us the answers?
What does the pineal gland do,of not "see" the unseen? that spiritual side that in not bound to the laws we are bound to.
What does it mean to just know something,without even looked into it yet?
Are we in human form really bound to the laws that are told of nature?
or is yet another lie,to keep us bound and not thinking about real things?
Does our mind/thought process really need a body to live on?..seems to me,the brain is energy,energy does not die (so I am told)
if this is true,then we do not need our bodies,and we should be able to have out of body experiences

If we deny truth before your very eyes,then the rest of what we have to say,is of little consequence

Nice!

Many great points and questions. Does (may I add CAN) the brain actually rest? If I may come from another direction, is a thinking brain at rest, and if the brain were to stop thinking would it die? In other words, what is the nature of the brain when it is not occupied by thought. Since thinking is a current experience, one can experiment currently. If I close my eyes and think of what I did today, I can activate memory; images in the brain. These images are sometimes laced with a particular feeling, that is, a good memory or bad memory. So memory is part of what we are calling 'thought', the activity of recalling that memory is the activity of 'thinking'. Some view 'thinking' and 'feeling as separate experiences, but is this true, or do we feel about something the way we think about something. Are they separate is it thought/feeling as a unitary activity? The brain/body thinks/feels? If, throughout the day thought is active, than brain is continuously in a state of effort, accumulating experience, making sense of the environment. In the morning when we wake, it begins, then throughout the day, then after work, when it comes time to sleep brain is still in a state of effort. Are not dreams the continuation of the effort to understand ones experiences? Are they not still the activity of thought, with images and ideas? As there is truth to be found during the waking hours, too there is truth to be found in the dream state. The simple fact that we can remember our dreams proves that there is the activity of accumulation even while sleeping, therefore brain is not at rest. But what about 'awareness'? Just being aware of ones environment, both outwardly and also internally, does awareness imply effort? If you are standing right in front of me, do I have to 'try' to see you, or do the eyes see as a natural function? That is, can I not just look at a tree without saying anything about it? Can I not observe without the need to describe that which is observed? If I describe, than I have introduced space between the mind and the thing, that space is filled with the word/description. The word is the symbol for the thing; the idea of the fact. In this way ideas become all important and the fact become secondary. Can one just observe? Can one just be aware of a thing, or an image, or an idea, without the need to describe it to oneself? I think it is possible, although it may be difficult at first, for the brain has been conditioned for thousands of years in a particular way, a technological way. But awareness does occur in the absence of thinking, when one sees a beautiful sunset, or a sleeping child, or a magnificent mountain...it may be for a split second, but when the brain is in awe there is no demand for thought to understand that which is observed. It becomes difficult when one is observing oneself, for unlike the mountain, we think we can change ourselves. Thought has perceived a false division that asserts, 'I' can change 'myself', as if there are two nouns present. Thought has created the Thinker that thinks thoughts, but is this an actuality, or is all a unitary process of thought? Is there a 'Thinker' that is thinking? Is there an 'Actor' that is acting. Can 'I' change 'Myself' psychologically? Or am I always what I am, and there is no other way? Some say, 'No, I can change myself', but that may be an assertion made by thought based on a false perception of its actual nature; being that of a unitary movement absent of a 'Thinker'. If 'I' can change 'Myself', Who is changing what? And if I cannot change myself, what am I to do if I don't like what I see when observing myself? If one sees that there is actually nothing one can do, that there is no Changer and nothing can be changed, then thought may rest. I has no where to go, it can not resolve what is wrong with me. And if it does not turn to entertainment or any other form of occupation, what happens to brain? If thought sees that it cannot act upon itself, that is cannot change itself, it stops trying, it rests. But it must be certain that there is nothing it can do to affect itself, it must come to the fact that it is actually impossible to bring change to itself, it must see that is not divided as the Thinker and the thought. When there is no where to turn, no direction to take, no possible way that any activity of its own can alter its own reality, it stops. And just as the eyes see without effort for that is the nature of sight, the brain becomes aware of itself without effort for that is the nature of the mind. When there is this form of space in the brain, when thought has discovered its own limitations, then change may occur, for something of a different nature has touched the brain. The brain that perceived itself as a Thinker thinking thought, the divided brain, has become undivided in the absence of thought. And all the energy once spent on thinking, with its struggles, demands, pursuits, accumulation of knowledge, recalling of memory, creation of biased interpretations, the bent emotions of jealousy and hatred, the need to better oneself, the activation of anxiety and depression, and so on and so on and so on, all that energy is no longer dissipated. All that energy is there, and there is no movement, for thought is at rest, because it has seen that any and all attempts to change 'what is' are futile. So there is rest, but at the same time an extraordinary alertness, for it is observing that which it cannot change. When thought see the fact of its own limitation, it has seen the truth of its nature, this touching of truth by the brain introduces intelligence. Intelligence cannot exist if brain is moved by the false, the false take the space of intelligence. Seeing the truth that thought is not divided into 'I' and 'Myself', causes a unitary activity. This is the foundation of a true Individual, the root of the word being 'undivided'. Sorry I didn't go into all the other great questions and point in your post. If you'd like to continue, just keep plugging away. There are a lot of 'free-will' posts on here, does that topic interest you as something we could discuss? You pick the topic

Enonesoch

deacon's picture

Love the topic at hand

I believe if we find out what the mind can do,we will find the why's and
whatever created us..
This is more important to me than anything else in life
Never got into worldly nonsense,never had phone until I had a family
Had windup internet,until that proved to slow for my mission
The freewill aspect in the bible seems like a contradiction to me.
Yes we have freewill,but if we use it to our liking,and if it doesn't line up
with the word,then we are doomed. I used have nightmares,it was the same dream
I had as kind,carried into adult life,then one day,I realized,these are my dreams,and I found out I could alter them to my liking.
I have not dreamed since 2002,not one dream!!I am not sure if it was caused by the spinal damage or the drugs I was on.but I have since stopped taking them,but the damage has set in.I do meditate,seemed to take the place of dreams,but yet,not the same.

If we deny truth before your very eyes,then the rest of what we have to say,is of little consequence

.

Christians should not be warmongers! http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance87.html

Free Will

We do not wish to enter into a consideration of Free-Will, or Determinism, in this work, for various reasons. Among the many reasons, is the principal one that neither side of the controversy is entirely right — in fact, both sides are partially right, according to the Hermetic Teachings. The Principle of Polarity shows that both are but Half-Truths — the opposing poles of Truth. The Teachings are that a man may be both Free and yet bound by Necessity, depending upon the meaning of the terms, and the height of Truth from which the matter is examined. The ancient writers express the matter thus: "The further the creation is from the Centre, the more it is bound; the nearer the Centre it reaches, the nearer Free is it.

The Kybalion

This is a case of neither/nor . The real issue: Free Will

God has given mankind free will (to a great degree, but not autonomy), and that includes the ability to defame His name by placing buildings above people, and profits (in the case of televangelists) above prayer requests. This means that He is doubly honored when we as believers give to the poor to relieve their suffering, as many truly Christian ministries do. (The most evident may be the Salvation Army and World Vision, but there are others, just google or ix quick it to find them.)

Once again, I have voted you up for a legitimate point. Now will you consider that not all who claim the Name are worthy of it? After all, some claim to follow and support Ron Paul's principles, but are really either ignorant of them, or actively opposing them, so this is a common occurence.

"Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern." ~~C.S. Lewis
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

Free will causes cancer

Just ask any pediatric oncologist, those children made intemperate lifestyle choices and now they're paying the price.

Also, free will causes diabetes and typhoons and earthquakes and mosquitoes.
The solution is clearly more strict mind and morals control.

No more free will, no more problems.

dynamite anthrax supreme court white house tea party jihad
======================================
West of 89
a novel of another america
https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/161155#longdescr

I apologize for the lack of clarity

I should have said: the abuse of free will. I agree, a huge mistake was made here. The problem is free will is abused to a greater or lesser degree by all. Sometimes one is affected by others abusing free will as well.

"Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern." ~~C.S. Lewis
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

You offer two options, is

You offer two options, is there no other? Perhaps something like, "God allows such evils to serve His greater purposes, which will be achieved fully and completely by His manifold wisdom. Until that day, He calls all men to repentance."

I know, I know.... Dogma. But it is no less dogma than the two options offered in the posts title.

God has nothing to do with this

God didn't do cause this. We did!! They did! US!!

WRONG on both counts. God gave us FREE WILL.

And besides, it looks like that poster is in support of Socialism where everyone should be exactly equal with no unbalance of wealth.

The Communists have been trying that for many years - to no avail.

Socialism makes everyone equal alright - equally POOR.

That poster is confused about the difference between charity and forcing people to pay into a (government) pool in a impossible attempt at global economic equality.

They could steal every penny from every person on earth for redistribution and you still would never make everyone economically equal.

I'm nowhere near a rich person, yet I don't advocate for government redistribution of wealth - in any form.

And I don't live my life absorbed in "wealth envy."

"We have allowed our nation to be over-taxed, over-regulated, and overrun by bureaucrats. The founders would be ashamed of us for what we are putting up with."
-Ron Paul

are you a deist? or a theist?

just curios as to terminology. or would vernacular be a better word?

The All is MIND; The Universe is Mental

The All is Mind; The Universe is Mental.

the universe certainly is mental

Just look around at all it's mental children

“With laws shall our land be built up, but with lawlessness laid waste.”
-Njal Thorgeirsson

"The lips of wisdom are

"The lips of wisdom are closed, except to the ears of Understanding"

The All is mind; the universe is mental.

The universe is mental--held in the mind of the All.

"The ALL" is Infinite Living Mind--the Illumined call it SPIRIT. The Kybalion

Did you see this?

The only people more clueless than scientists are people involved in xyz organized religion.

Yes, it's all interesting

Yes, it's all interesting. Thanks

thats some pretty heavy mental...

myself, I prefer heavy metal.
Entropy is my proof for a God.