How can God hold me responsible for my actions if I'm not in control of them?
The determinism meme needs to stop.
>>71488418
God is cruel. Boo hoo. Deal with it.
>>71488418
Because he's the universe's best meme manufacturer.
If you're not in control of your actions how can there be good and evil.
>>71488418
Some people are born to lose.
>13:24-43
>Jesus told them another parable: “The kingdom of heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field. 25 But while everyone was sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat, and went away. 26 When the wheat sprouted and formed heads, then the weeds also appeared.
The, "everyone can be saved meme" has to stop.
>>71488418
Free will. Only you are responsible for your actions. Like hopefully wiping your butt after a #2. You have free will not to.
>>71488976
>13:24-43
What book and version is that from?
>>71488606
In a system with a creator who possesses the attributes ascribed the Christian god(omnipotence, omniscience, etc) good and evil can not meaningfully be said to exist. In such a situation everything would be generally neutral, in the grand scheme. Everything is according to plan. Even things described as bad are only as He prepared them to be.
>>71488418
You think you're not but you are.
>>71488418
he doesn't, cause he doesn't exist
>>71489402
In the Christian Bible God clearly outlines what is good and evil. There are no grey areas
>>71489556
>tips fedora
>>71488491
Offer a compelling alternative and I'll stop
>>71488606
Maybe there isn't good and evil after all.
>>71489122
>You have free will not to
Do you really though? Of course it feels like you have the choice to do otherwise, but couldn't that feeling just be an illusion? This straw feels like it's bent, but of course we know it's not.
>>71489556
>tips fedora
>teleports behind
>pats shoulder
>>71489294
Matthew 13:24-43New International Version (NIV)
>>71489686
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+13%3A24-43&version=KJV
>not posting the full parable
WEW
>>71489608
>In the Christian Bible God clearly outlines what is good and evil
How can there be evil if he's totally good and all-powerful?
>>71490192
Free will. He gives you the choice to obey Him, or to disobey Him and perish
>>71490192
Read the catechism.
http://orthodoxwiki.org/Orthodox_Catechisms_in_English
Check:
" Catechisms available online "
But I bet 100% you're not genuinely curious and going to study to be able to have normal arguments - you're just a low troll.
>>71489608
Yes, things can be said to be good or bad but since everything is part of the plan how does it mean anything to label things as "good" or "evil"?
>>71489646
>Offer a compelling alternative and I'll stop
There is none. Unless you say that god doesn't have one of the attributes it's normally said he possesses.
>>71490548
>muh circular reasoning
>>71488418
God made you that
way so he could blame you for it later
imagine you made a robot. And all this robot does is jerk off to anime, wear unfashionable hats, and spout bullshit. Would you not be justified in destroying said robot?
>>71490788
Do you know God?
>>71490322
Free will can't exist if God created everything and knows everything and can control everything. How can you make any choices when the creator of everything knew everything you would do since the beginning?
>>71490687
What circular reasoning? You agree that god created everything and knows everything, right? Then everything must just be part of his plan and therefore fairly neutral, or good since he's also all good.
>i'm not in control
what isn't in our control?
>>71490335
The catechism is not based on modern scientific evidence. Actually, there's probably a lot of stuff in the catechism that defies principles of modern science. It seems like a waste of time to read through material that's contradictory to our best understanding of the universe.
>>71491125
Nothing wrong with destroying it. Making it suffer eternal damnation seems pretty unfair especially considering that I'm the one that fucked up in building it.
>>71491630
Most likely you haven't read it and you just proceeded to shitpost.
I think it's a waste of time for you to even engage in discussions with a Christian following your logic line - but you are not honoring your own logic... bye. Going to sleep.
>>71491561
The particles in my brain are not in my control. Actually, they control me.
>>71491876
>I think it's a waste of time for you to even engage in discussions with a Christian following your logic line
Not really. Understanding the other side of a discussion is a pretty worthy endeavor desu
>>71488418
Because of Free Will. Regardless of influences, you are responsible for every action you make, but ultimately God is judge.
God gave us Free Will so that we may know Love, for without Free Will one cannot know Love.
>>71491858
What if the robot actually decided to live that way itself by flipping a switch in its chest that only it could reach that overrode its programming and allowed it to do whatever it wanted?
What if it was an indestructible robot, built to last forever, and the closest you could get to destroying it was throwing it in the ocean where it would be trapped forever? Also,
>implying robot feelings matter
>>71492148
>God gave us Free Will
How do you know this? The Bible also says he created the universe 6000 years ago, yet we all know that isn't true. Modern science also tells us that we don't have free will.
>>71492835
Old Testament said that.
>>71492835
>implying modern science doesn't tell us determinism is bullshit
Ok. Troll thread. I'm out.
>>71488418
The universe is probabilistic, not deterministic, but barring some major scientific discovery there is still no free will, in that there is no way to observe and influence the universe outside of its influence.
The only difference is that now it's impossible to be 100% certain of the future state of something, assuming you had all pertinent data, as was possible under determinism.
TL;DR: It really doesn't matter if we have free will or not; if you become nihilistic and lazy because of the knowledge that we have no free will, you were going to do so regardless.
>>71492813
>What if the robot actually decided to live that way itself by flipping a switch in its chest that only it could reach that overrode its programming and allowed it to do whatever it wanted?
The robot would only flip that switch if I wrote in its programming to do so. If I don't code the robot to flip the switch, it won't. Again, I'm the one that caused the robot to either flip or not flip the switch.
>>71492937
The Old Testament also says he created the universe 6000 years ago. We don't believe that. Why believe it on free will?
>>71493025
>implying modern science tells us determinism isn't bullshit
Seriously faggot, there's no way we have free will. Cite me a single contradictory example.
>>71488418
Well, it's his world his rules...no? You might not just not get it. I sure don't.
>>71488418
Because god can do whatever the fuck the preisthood says he can do. Don't you understand religion?
>>71493357
>if you become lazy
Why does everyone assume this is the implication of telling everyone they don't have free will? It's the same line of thinking as "atheists can't act morally."
>>71492835
We as humans know we have free will because we know only free will. In other words, we have no controlling mechanism, literally nothing can control us. Instead, we have to be manipulated, and manipulation requires free will. While manipulation is an extreme form of influence, it recognizes by definition it's inability to control us out right and thus requires tactics to appeal to our sensibilities.
>>71488606
>good and evil
>>71493736
By consequence of their view, atheists literally cannot act morally. But, that depends on how you define morality. You see, right and wrong is a black and white issue that merely acts on "grey" situations. However, to an atheist there is no right and wrong since the atheist has no power or authority to define right and wrong. Therefore, how an atheist defines morals are fluid and fleeting, requiring an appeasement to emotion and manipulation to establish axioms of truth that would otherwise have been decreed by an all knowing, all powerful God.
>>71491259
God is able to perceive the 4th dimension (time) as, say, we are able to perceive the second. Just because he is able to do this doesn't mean you weren't able to make the choice.
Good and evil aren't really two different things; good is just the presence of God and evil is the absence of God, Heaven and Hell. Earth lies somewhere inbetween. He gave us the gift of free will so we could ultimately decide where we end up, either closer to God or in the complete absence of Him.
>>71494177
>we have no controlling mechanism
What about the particles in our brains? They control how we act, yet we don't control them.
>>71494529
>since the atheist has no power or authority to define right and wrong
This isn't true. Kant outlined reason as an authority for morals. John Rawls said the veil of ignorance tells us right from wrong. An atheist can easily adopt these outlooks.
>>71494706
>good is just the presence of God and evil is the absence of God
If God is omnipotent how is he absent anywhere?
>>71493736
Atheists can't act morally.
>>71495108
Kant outlined reason as an authority for morals. John Rawls said the veil of ignorance tells us right from wrong. An atheist can easily adopt these outlooks.
>>71494899
Omnipotence has nothing to do with omnipresence. Second, sin separates us from God. The only way to be made right with God is by accepting His gift of salvation through the new covenant affirmed with Jesus's blood.
>>71494802
Particles in our brain act is influences act as influences, not dictates. Also, such particles are not sentient, thus control cannot exist without purpose. Influence does exist without purpose, this is what distinguishes between influences and control. It is important to be able to understand that influences can vary greatly in their effectiveness and intimacy, and though may give the impression of control, never actually exercise it due to the lack of sentient motive.
Reason is not an axiom, but merely a method of utilizing axioms. The same goes for critical thinking, which is a requirement for advanced morals. You see, in order to reason, we must rationalize what we perceive in the world. Our ability to perceive our surroundings though is limited, so Truth can never be obtained as long as we are fallible. Remember that Truth and Facts are separate and distinct concepts. Neither require the other, nor are either dependent on each other.
>>71494899
>If God is omnipotent how is he absent anywhere?
It is not an issue of God being absent, but rather God being rejected, which is what they mean. By rejecting God, we create evil. You see, evil is not an entity like satan that exists to tempt us. Rather, evil is merely the condition of rejecting God.
>>71491259
>muh fairy tale characters
*Sigh.*
There is no such thing as free will, good, or evil.
Life is one big physics problem, already set into motion. People are just cogs in that. They have been created and molded by outside forces and only have one path to follow, based on the laws of the universe.
>>71497709
>They have been created and molded by outside forces
Even you see God where you don't believe. There is a danger to rejecting free will. By assuming free will does not exist, than responsibility and accountability can be rationalized away. We could do things and claim we didn't do it. And without good or evil, there is only evil, since what is right will never be upheld.
>>71491959
>Muh particles made me do it!
And then John was a niggers
>>71488418
just admit you are a faggot sick psychopath who dont want to be responsible and want to live like the other animals.
We can put you in a zoo if you want or release you to the wild and forbid you living with mankind.
>>71491959
Wrong. They *are* you.
>>71488418
Because he was predetermined to hold you responsible.
>>71497709
edge-e
>>71494177
This post is nonsense.
>We as humans know we have free will because we know only free will.
What does this even mean?
>In other words, we have no controlling mechanism, literally nothing can control us.
This is incorrect. Your body is controlled by the laws of physics, which determine its behavior.
>Instead, we have to be manipulated, and manipulation requires free will.
This is incorrect as well, you can program a robot to manipulate.
>While manipulation is an extreme form of influence, it recognizes by definition it's inability to control us out right and thus requires tactics to appeal to our sensibilities.
We manipulate because it's impolite to cut someone's head open and mess with things directly. Just like how you knock when you want to come inside a house, instead of kicking down the door.
>>71489402
Sin is a corruption of Will, as Free Will is granted to angel and man but sin should be impossible by theological precedent, it shouldn't conceptually exist but it does through the influence of Satan. So people cannot choose to sin of their own volition initially. It is also why grace and forgiveness are always available at any time - its not entirely your fault, Lucifer has his hand in it.
There is some debate depending on the words of saints, theological studies, etc. if grace can be found even in Hell, so that in all of infinity all may one day find God.
>>71488418
Because god is a sadistic asshole. Burn hell, faggot.
>>71498972
Stop pretending to be an intellectual when you're essentially talking about fairies and magic.
>>71488418
Most of man are driven by Karma, past action or uncontrollable events drive a person a specific direction without much agency... But, the realization of this? Well, once you realize your fate is being determined not by your own agency, then you are suddenly liberated from it's chains.
Take eating healthy or otherwise. Growing up, you probably ate what ever you could and wanted to, no realization of consequence... But, the moment you become self aware of this consequence? Then you are presented with choice, as you can see, you know the consequence of your own actions, and you can avoid them.
Agency is real, but outside influence is uncontrollable. You have the choice to do anything at any time, but material barriers will of course stop you. You are absolutely in control, you are the center of all mindful function from your perspective, you just need to be aware of it and the Karma which controls you. The external can change you, but it's up to you to change yourself internally.
>>71499916
Karma isn't real.
>>71500010
And I suppose you think Karma is that whole "do good, good things happen and do bad things, bad things happen?"
That's not what Karma is, it's a modernist perversion
>>71500153
Whatever you think it is, it probably isn't real.
Explain, though.
>>71500262
I described it in some sense before, here's Watts describing it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JtE3cj8AeQ8
>>71498721
>Your body is controlled by the laws of physics, which determine its behavior.
Incorrect. We are LIMITED by physics in terms of our physical range, but not CONTROLLED by physics in terms of choice or action. For example, involuntary actions such as breathing or say vomiting are not examples of free will being contradicted. Free Will pertains to the exercise of conscious and sentient choice, implying moral relevance.
>you can program a robot to manipulate.
Incorrect. Programming does not imbue choice or sentientness onto a lifeless, electronic device. Instead, Programming is quite literally just electrical on and offs, zeros and ones, that we INTERPRET and give the APPEARANCE of logic. A "robot" acts only as it is built to do, nothing more nothing less.
>We manipulate because it's impolite...
We manipulate to gain a perceived advantage. Regardless of how "impolite" is defined, we do what we think we can get away with.
>>71498972
>people cannot choose to sin of their own volition
This is completely against Scripture and most Christian beliefs. From Adam we were born with Sin, and we are all sinners. Free Will allows us to both seek grace and forgiveness but can also condemn us when we CHOOSE to reject God.
satan is called the deceiver because he tempts us, but he does not choose for us. When Adam and Eve sinned, it was because the used their free will to accept temptation and reject God. Thus, sin entered the world.
>>71500540
That's nice that he doesn't think the past matters, but he's wrong. Just because his name is popular doesn't mean he's always right. In this case, the tail does wag the dog, because causality matters. It seems like he's approaching this from a purely philosophical point of view where the only thing that matters is being intellectually satisfied. In the real world, results matter, and believing in causality (and therefore determinism) allows you to get the best results.
>>71500548
>Incorrect. We are LIMITED by physics in terms of our physical range, but not CONTROLLED by physics in terms of choice or action.
Choice is a physical phenomenon. Anything physical is by definition controlled by the laws of physics. "Free Will" would therefore have to be non-physical/supernatural, and I hope you'll agree with me that such things don't exist.
>>71499916
None of this applies if you're not white
>>71501041
Of course causality is an issue, but we seem to be fundamentally at odds with what we're arguing at the moment.
You seem to argue that things are determined because thinks are not in our control and we become defined by things we don't control. Like catching a bus on your way to work, but dying in a crash as a truck collides with it.
I understand, a multitude of material variables not in your control can end up coming to define your existence, but it only comes to define your existence because you decide it defines your existence. You're the conscious being which decided to catch that bus which ended up killing you, the external isn't in your control, but you are absolutely 100% in control of yourself and how you respond to everything. You can be limited absolutely with huge amounts of handicaps, but still are able to make decisions.
>>71489686
>NIV
Hope your enjoying Satan's dick there anon
So fun watching cultists try to defend their fairy tails. Then they turn around and "muh redpill"
>>71501194
>Choice is a physical phenomenon.
Incorrect. Choice takes place before physical action. But a physical action can take place without choice, hence involuntary actions. The moment a choice is made, and free will exercised, we are then under the physical limitations of acting out within the physical world our choice. But again, physics never had any influence on what choice or free will, only its ability to manifest in a physical realm. Cognitive studies in Psychology, which is a recognized science, is non-physical but not supernatural.
>>71501194
Define free will faggot
>>71488418
I guess you could say the same thing about criminal behavior and jails if you want to take the fedora no free will meme to that far.
Depends on what you mean by god. If by "god" you are referring to a metaphor for the structure of reality, being "held responsible" seems like a sort of peculiar way to think about your place in the world and how your actions relate to the way the world is.
If by god you mean some sort of omnipotent being with particular interests in the actions of humans, then I don't know.
