Sunday funny
As a wife to a fisherman and mother of two sons, I found this one pretty funny. Click to enlarge:
Happy Father’s Day!
Jun.15, 2008 8:29 am |
Pop Culture |
Commenting Rules
Do's
- “Criticize ideas, not people.”
- Create one original moniker and stick with it.
- Please use a unique name.
- Be civil and considerate.
- Read fully and consider carefully before responding.
Do Not's
- Blasphemy will not be tolerated.
- No swearing or slandering of others.
- No deliberate inflammatory comments.
- Do not violate another’s privacy.
- Do not threaten fellow commenters or anyone else.
- No personal, racial, ethnic or gender-based insults/slurs.
- Do not post private personal information about yourself or others.(ie addresses, phone #s)
Violations will be deleted and you may be banned.
Threats will be immediately reported to authorities.
Following these rules will make everyone's experience visiting JillStanek.com better.
Our volunteer moderators make prudent judgment calls to provide an open forum to discuss these issues. They reserve the right to remove any comment for any reason. Jill's decisions on such moderations are final.
Go to gravatar.com to create your avatar.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Jill, I grew up with two brothers and my dad was an AVID fisherman. He was fishing up until he was 83 and took ill.
He always took me fishing with him, taught me how to use a rod and reel and bait the hook, what lures and spinners to use etc. I could sit for hours in a boat fishing – it’s got to be one of the most relaxing pastimes ever!
My younger brother hated fishing. My older brother was a complete priss. He would use PLIERS to cut the worms in half because he was so squeamish. My dad would tease him unmercifully!
Isn’t that too funny?!!!
Patricia, I had a similar experience growing up on a lake, Cedar Lake, IN. Found my own worms, baited my own hooks… just never got good at taking fish off the hook. Catfish in particular freaked me out!
Ah, memories… :)
I would like to give a shout out my Dad for being just wonderful and doing great in the Fathers Day Road Race (we ran together as a team : ) )
Ewwww Catfish. Betcha catfish in the US are much bigger than the ones up here.
I remember being in Houston and them there Texans trying to get me to eat crawfish. Ugh!
We use to play with crayfish here as kids, but eat ’em, no way!
Happy fathers day to all the father’s on this board.
Patricia, will your children be able to see their father today?
yes, absolutely. In fact they are with him this weekend so I get some time to myself!
Glad you were able to be with your dad and do that race Jess!
I always did lots of things with my dad and I was very lucky to have such a great dad. He’s 88 this year!
Jill:
I liked the fishing story, however, the Sunday quote was awesome.
Happy Father’s Day to all of you fathers out there! :)
Anyone who thinks GW Bush is a conservative, look at this.
http://perotcharts.com/category/challenges-charts/page/5/
Also from Andrew Sullivan: “”Why should fewer academics believe in God than the general population? I believe it is simply a matter of the IQ. Academics have higher IQs than the general population. Several Gallup poll studies of the general population have shown that those with higher IQs tend not to believe in God,” – Professor Richard Lynn, emeritus professor of psychology at Ulster University.”
“I think that gay marriage is something that should be between a man and a woman.” –Arnold Schwarzenegger.
According to my daughters I am an awesome Dad :
truthseeker:well that’s great! I’m glad they think so highly of their dad!
SoMG: yes that’s what 3 centuries of brilliant Jesuit scholars have proven. Wherever do you get the crap you post on this board? (exuse my language, there’s just no OTHER way to express it) You must spend a great deal of time in self-affirmation.
Happy Belated Fathers’Day to all you Dads!
SoMG: 11:46: Also from Andrew Sullivan: “”Why should fewer academics believe in God than the general population? I believe it is simply a matter of the IQ. Academics have higher IQs than the general population. Several Gallup poll studies of the general population have shown that those with higher IQs tend not to believe in God,” – Professor Richard Lynn, emeritus professor of psychology at Ulster University.”
Humility is the greatest of virtues. The value of a high IQ is greatly overrated, IMO.
Doug,
Since this thread isn’t really about anything, I’m going to start a conversation with you on it.
Let’s pretend…
A mad scientist creates a chemical that will cause everyone in the world to have the exact same desires. Every one will wake up and desire to go to sleep at the same time. To get married. To have boatloads of kids. To work 9-5. Whatever. The point is, especially on moral issues, everyone agrees, 100% across the board.
Now it’s peaceful, and we’re all getting along, but it has been induced artificially. We have no free will, and these desires were accomplished by messing with our brains, our consciousness, our wills.
Do you have a problem with that? Even the mad scientist is influenced. No one escapes.
mk, that doesn’t sound like a very interesting world to live in. Good question, though, and it makes us, perhaps, more tolerent of our different opinions.
MK, I do think we have free will, (which argues against an all-knowing god).
If we all had the chemical, then nobody would have a problem with it. As of now, I don’t want to give up free will, so yeah, I have a problem with it. Does anybody want to give up free will? I’d say no, on a straight yes/no basis, but do think there are degrees of it that are attractive to some.
Janet: also how do you measure IQ? What does it mean anyway? And WHO cares!
I’m sure Mother Theresa of Calcutta didn’t have an IQ of 140, but she easily put to shame Bill and Hillary Clinton. She demonstrated that their rhetoric of “choice” was silly, useless and shameful. Here she was picking up rotted, dying people and babies from the gutters (not even on the streets) of Calcutta and giving them their dignity back.
Does abortion give anyone dignity? Not men. Certainly not women. And most definitely not the unborn baby.
Hal,
It is interesting, isn’t it?
Doug,
Okay, so far, you’re okay with the idea that if everyone had their mind altered, then no one would know any better, and every one would be satisfied because their desires would be being met, even if those desires were being created artificially. Have I got that right. (Forget about you knowing ahead of time, you had no knowledge, you just woke up and it was a done deal)
As for an all knowing God (You keep bringing up God, not me) there is no contradiction between an all knowing God and free will, if you understand the concepts. There is no time to God, as there is for us. But that’s a conversation for another day…
As for an all knowing God (You keep bringing up God, not me) there is no contradiction between an all knowing God and free will, if you understand the concepts. There is no time to God, as there is for us. But that’s a conversation for another day…
MK, I realize it’s tangential, but there indeed is a contradiction, because “there is no time to God” wouldn’t matter anyway. There is that which we consider the future, and if it’s known to any entity (in what we consider the present or past), regardless of the nature of that entity, then we are predestined and don’t have free will.
…..
Okay, so far, you’re okay with the idea that if everyone had their mind altered, then no one would know any better, and every one would be satisfied because their desires would be being met, even if those desires were being created artificially. Have I got that right. (Forget about you knowing ahead of time, you had no knowledge, you just woke up and it was a done deal)
Yeah, I think it’s really a premise, per what you said in the first place; a given.
Doug,
There is that which we consider the future, and if it’s known to any entity (in what we consider the present or past), regardless of the nature of that entity, then we are predestined and don’t have free will.
You’re wrong Doug. Knowing what is going to happen is not the same as causing it to happen.
Catholics don’t believe in predestination the way some protestants do. But we do believe in free will, and we believe that God is omniscient. Predestination and omniscience are two very different things…
Okay, I have no idea what your last sentence meant. I assume, that you agree with what I said. Am I correct? That neither you nor anyone else is complaining, because everyone desires what they have been programmed to desire, and everyone has what they desire?
“There is that which we consider the future, and if it’s known to any entity (in what we consider the present or past), regardless of the nature of that entity, then we are predestined and don’t have free will.”
You’re wrong Doug. Knowing what is going to happen is not the same as causing it to happen.
Doesn’t matter, MK. Just having it be known is enough for us to be predestined. If it is known then we can’t change it.
…..
Catholics don’t believe in predestination the way some protestants do. But we do believe in free will, and we believe that God is omniscient. Predestination and omniscience are two very different things…
Sure, they’re different, but the presence of an omniscient being means that our future is known and thus we’re predestined.
….
Okay, I have no idea what your last sentence meant. I assume, that you agree with what I said. Am I correct? That neither you nor anyone else is complaining, because everyone desires what they have been programmed to desire, and everyone has what they desire?
Yep – we’ve all had the chemical, and we all then have the same desires. How does this work, by the way? Does it alter our brain chemistry?
mk: I wonder if any of the Doctors of the Church have discussed this idea of omniscience and free will in length.
I can see where it would be difficult for someone who doesn’t believe in free will. It’s a bit confusing to me as well. I understand how you’ve talked about time, God is outside of time…but it’s still hard to grasp.
Are you sure free will and omniscience are both related to our actual behavior, or does omniscience maybe refer to something else? Thanks.
I don’t mean to butt in here, but MK, you struck a weird chord with me when you said this: Knowing what is going to happen is not the same as causing it to happen.
If God created the universe and people and sin and so forth, didn’t he cause it to happen by the mere act of creating it?
If I built a bomb, and I know it’s going to go off in 10 minutes but I don’t force it to go off, I just sit by and let the bomb decide for itself whether it goes off or not, then I have caused it to explode since I created it. Even if the bomb had the ability to stop itself from detonating, I was still responsible for its actions (good or bad) because I created it that way.
Edyt,
I am no physicist, so I certainly cannot lucidly discuss time theory, but my understanding is that if you remove the constraints of time and space, then God can indeed be everywhere at everytime all at the same time…
He created us, yes, and gave us the choice to choose Him or not. The fact that He knows ahead of time what we chose (or will choose depending on whose eyes you are looking out of) is more of a time/space problem than a free will problem. We can’t think outside of time. If we could, I imagine we would better understand how it is possible to be everywhere all at once.
Even when we try to imagine this, we end up having God time travel…but He doesn’t need to travel as there is no time.
I just saw a special on the History Channel(?) last night called the Naked Archeologist. He was talking to a scientist who has a theory (that I couldn’t even begin to understand mathematically) where he says that if you allow for the difference in time space as we move on it time (sort of how the clock gains a minute or two each year I think)
His point was that when there was no space and no time, at the big bang, (which is how he says God created the world) how we view the passage of time was different. He had some long mathematical equation but it was something like a year took x billions of our years to take place because time moved differently in the beginning as it is relative and there wasn’t anything. So it was compared to simply space and the spreading of it…I’m not saying this very well, but when you divided the length it took for a year to take place back then and divided it by how many years it’s been since time began (xxbillion years) you came up with 1.5 which equals 6 days by our modern reckoning…which is why the bible claims the world was created in 6 days. The whole show was about astrology/astronomy in the pre christian world and how there is evidence that much more astrology was used than first thought.
I’m not talking about time and space, or the supposed omnipotence.
I’m talking about actions and consequences.
Compare:
If you have sex, you might get pregnant or you might not. But if you do get pregnant you are responsible for the creation of a child.
If God created people, they may have been bad or they may have been good. But if he did create them, he is responsible for the creation of good/bad people.
This free will argument makes God void of all the responsibility, which makes no sense to me. No one would blame sperm and an egg for forming a baby, would they? So why blame people for God creating sin?
Ahhhh, I get you now.
God didn’t “create” sin. He created man and gave them the choice to love Him or not.
His creatures created sin. Because He gave them the ability to. By allowing them to choose their own paths.
He created that tree of life and death, and he created death. But it was the choice of his creatures to eat of that tree. Once they did, the whole thing changed.
Kids are born and their parents can provide them with every thing they need to become amazing people, but ultimately, it is up to the kids, no?
Okay Doug,
Now what if that same mad scientist created something that altered our brain chemistry and we woke up the next all believing the same things…only this time, we desired to kill each other randomly. And to be killed randomly. Just walkin’ down the street and *BANG* you’re dead. Kind of like paint ball, except deadly.
And rape was the status quo. Women wanted to be raped and men wanted to rape.
And theft, and adultery and lies. We all desired to live in a world where this was the way it was.
I’m realize that eventually we would all be dead, and I’m not asking you to predict the outcome. I just want to know if you think this would be objectively bad. Or good. Or neither.
Would you say that if that is what the people desired then that is just the way it is…
Also, is suffering neutral as long as the party suffering doesn’t object?
Janet: God is outside of time…but it’s still hard to grasp.
Wouldn’t matter, Janet, not as long as that God would be all-knowing.
There is that which we consider the future, and if our future is known to that God, in what we consider as the present or past, regardless of the nature of that God, then we are predestined and do not have free will.
Now what if that same mad scientist created something that altered our brain chemistry and we woke up the next all believing the same things…only this time, we desired to kill each other randomly. And to be killed randomly. Just walkin’ down the street and *BANG* you’re dead. Kind of like paint ball, except deadly. And rape was the status quo. Women wanted to be raped and men wanted to rape. And theft, and adultery and lies. We all desired to live in a world where this was the way it was.
MK, how did you know I’m going to New Jersey next? ; )
….
I’m realize that eventually we would all be dead, and I’m not asking you to predict the outcome. I just want to know if you think this would be objectively bad. Or good. Or neither.
Neither. That perceived “good” or “bad” has to be in “somebody’s” opinion.
……
Would you say that if that is what the people desired then that is just the way it is…
Well, per your example, that would be just the way it was.
…..
Also, is suffering neutral as long as the party suffering doesn’t object?
Not sure I know what you mean. I would say that suffering implies objection in lieu of greater desires.
Example, you’d suffer for the sake of your kids. I imagine you have, a couple of times (heh heh). Your greater desire is the outcome of the suffering – you perceive a greater good, there, or else you wouldn’t do it.
People routinely “suffer” in physical workouts, etc., and there too the greater desire is fitness, etc.
Doug: 12:59: There is that which we consider the future, and if our future is known to that God, in what we consider as the present or past, regardless of the nature of that God, then we are predestined and do not have free will.
We CANNOT see the future, so WE still have to LIVE OUR LIVES BY THE CHOICES WE MAKE. (I’m not angry, that’s just for emphasis.)
God’s omniscience has NO BEARING on what choices WE make, hence WE HAVE FREE WILL.
THAT MEANS WE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR OUR ACTIONS, GOD IS NOT.
Good/Evil, Heaven/Hell, Abortion/No abortion. It’s all up to us.
GOD will judge us in the end on how well we lived our lives by the choices WE made.
Doug,
Well, per your example, that would be just the way it was.
But I’m asking you to make a value judgment. Of course, physically, that is just the way it is. I’m asking if it is a good or bad thing.
Let’s call the world sado masochistic. Suffering that is enjoyable, as long as the suffering is real.
You’re saying, if that’s what every one wants, then that’s fine.
Now what if 50% of the people woke up feeling one way and 50% woke up feeling the other way.
50% thought it was perfectly acceptable, even desirable to live by the sado/masochistic view, and 50% were abhorred by it.
How would you propose which side gets their way? Whose desires win?
Doug,
By definition predetermination is determining ahead of time what a person must do. Laying it out and the person has no choice. He must follow the path that is chosen for him.
This is NOT what God does. God lets you choose your own path, but He knows your choices. At no point does He interfere without your consent.
This does NOT infringe on your free will. Either you don’t understand predestination, (or you would realize that it has nothing to do with omniscience) or you are just being difficult.
If you could explain what you mean better, we might be able to determine where your error is. But saying the same thing over and over is not really helping.
Knowing what is going to happen is NOT the same as causing it to happen. Predestination CAUSES something to happen. Omniscience simply KNOWS that it is going to happen, or that it has happened.
We CANNOT see the future, so WE still have to LIVE OUR LIVES BY THE CHOICES WE MAKE. (I’m not angry, that’s just for emphasis.)
Janet, I do think we have free will, i.e. no all-knowing God, so I agree there.
….
God’s omniscience has NO BEARING on what choices WE make, hence WE HAVE FREE WILL.
That’s self-contradictory. *If* there was an all-knowing entity (of any type) then our future is already known to that entity, and if it’s knowable then we cannot change it and don’t have free will.
“Well, per your example, that would be just the way it was.”
But I’m asking you to make a value judgment. Of course, physically, that is just the way it is. I’m asking if it is a good or bad thing.
I don’t want it to be like that. Personally I am glad we have our wills and the freedom of thought we do. For all the sadness and suffering in the world, I’ll still take our differences.
…..
Let’s call the world sado masochistic. Suffering that is enjoyable, as long as the suffering is real.
You’re saying, if that’s what everyone wants, then that’s fine.
It’d be fine in the opinion of that “everyone” you mention.
……
Now what if 50% of the people woke up feeling one way and 50% woke up feeling the other way.
Then you’d hear Michael Buffer yelling, Let’s get ready to rummmmbllle really loud, same as if everybody wanted to fight.
……
50% thought it was perfectly acceptable, even desirable to live by the sado/masochistic view, and 50% were abhorred by it.
How would you propose which side gets their way? Whose desires win?
If I’m the arbiter, then I’m going to try for what leads to the least suffering, and I’d tell the fighters that they gotta stand down, since their way impacts everybody, while the peaceniks being peaceful doesn’t as directly affect the fighters. If they still gotta fight, then let it be among themselves.
By definition predetermination is determining ahead of time what a person must do. Laying it out and the person has no choice. He must follow the path that is chosen for him. This is NOT what God does. God lets you choose your own path, but He knows your choices. At no point does He interfere without your consent. This does NOT infringe on your free will. Either you don’t understand predestination, (or you would realize that it has nothing to do with omniscience) or you are just being difficult.
MK, I don’t think it’s difficult at all. “Control” or “actively determining our fate” isn’t required. Just knowing is enough. If our future is knowable, ahead of time as we see it (the all-knowing entity wouldn’t have to) then it’s fixed.
…..
If you could explain what you mean better, we might be able to determine where your error is. But saying the same thing over and over is not really helping. Knowing what is going to happen is NOT the same as causing it to happen. Predestination CAUSES something to happen. Omniscience simply KNOWS that it is going to happen, or that it has happened.
I think the error is thinking that “cause” has to be there. It doesn’t. That “just knowing it is going to happen is sufficient.” Either we determine our future or we do not. If we do, then they are not fixed and not knowable.
I’ve wondered about that – if there is a God, perhaps he just set the system up and sat back and said, “Let’s see what happens…”
Doug: Personally, I think it’s more important to acknowledge God exists than to acknowledge he is an all knowing God. I get the impression, you don’t want to believe in God, period.
If that’s the case, I don’t see any argument left.
– – – – – –
mk said:Also, is suffering neutral as long as the party suffering doesn’t object?
Doug said: Not sure I know what you mean. I would say that suffering implies objection in lieu of greater desires.
Example, you’d suffer for the sake of your kids. I imagine you have, a couple of times (heh heh). Your greater desire is the outcome of the suffering – you perceive a greater good, there, or else you wouldn’t do it.
With your logic that good/bad depends completely on desire, then your idea of “greater good” should be called “a more desirable outcome” to be consistent.
I get the impression, you don’t want to believe in God, period. If that’s the case, I don’t see any argument left.
Janet, it’s not that I “don’t want” to believe in anything, it’s that either there’s proof or not (and certainly that is also a matter of opinion, there).
– – – – – –
With your logic that good/bad depends completely on desire, then your idea of “greater good” should be called “a more desirable outcome” to be consistent.
I guess so……? : )
Often, there will be conflicting desires, so it comes up many times – the best choice among the available options or the least distasteful, etc.
Doug,
Will you never learn????
You’re saying, if that’s what everyone wants, then that’s fine.
*
It’d be fine in the opinion of that “everyone” you mention.
……
I created the scenario. I’m well aware that it’s fine because it’s what everyone wants.
I’m asking what YOU think about it? Do you seriously think that this scenario would not be “wrong”…objectively? Or “Bad”, objectively?
If I’m the arbiter, then I’m going to try for what leads to the least suffering, and I’d tell the fighters that they gotta stand down, since their way impacts everybody, while the peaceniks being peaceful doesn’t as directly affect the fighters. If they still gotta fight, then let it be among themselves.
There is no arbiter. 50% are against sado/masochism. 50% are for it. It affects the sado masochists just as much as the “peaceniks”…both desire different things. If the peaceniks use your argument that less people suffer their way, that will only upset the s/m side, because they think suffering is GOOD…
How does it get settled?
Doug,
MK, I don’t think it’s difficult at all. “Control” or “actively determining our fate” isn’t required. Just knowing is enough. If our future is knowable, ahead of time as we see it (the all-knowing entity wouldn’t have to) then it’s fixed.
Fixed is a word that has no meaning if there isn’t any time. That’s what I’m trying to tell you. THere is no “FUTURE DATE” there just is. Now is all there is to God. But now encompasses the past and the future.
There is no fixed.
If a human person, constrained to time, were to see the future, it might be different. But God is not constrained by the same laws…
Fixed simply does not exist.
Doug,
I’ve wondered about that – if there is a God, perhaps he just set the system up and sat back and said, “Let’s see what happens…”
You’re getting closer now…
Except that at the same time he was creating everything, everything was also happening, and has finished happening.
He knew you before He even formed you in the womb.
You’re still trying to work in human terms.
Doug,
Janet, it’s not that I “don’t want” to believe in anything, it’s that either there’s proof or not (and certainly that is also a matter of opinion, there).
Faith is believing without proof. If you have proof there is no need to believe. Just accept. Your statement contradicts itself.
– – – – – –
I’m asking what YOU think about it? Do you seriously think that this scenario would not be “wrong”…objectively? Or “Bad”, objectively?
No, MK.
……
There is no arbiter. 50% are against sado/masochism. 50% are for it. It affects the sado masochists just as much as the “peaceniks”…both desire different things. If the peaceniks use your argument that less people suffer their way, that will only upset the s/m side, because they think suffering is GOOD…
How does it get settled?
I think the two sides are incompatible. It’s not going to get settled\, because sounds to me like your example has the SMers not backing down.
“MK, I don’t think it’s difficult at all. “Control” or “actively determining our fate” isn’t required. Just knowing is enough. If our future is knowable, ahead of time as we see it (the all-knowing entity wouldn’t have to) then it’s fixed.”
Fixed is a word that has no meaning if there isn’t any time. That’s what I’m trying to tell you. THere is no “FUTURE DATE” there just is. Now is all there is to God. But now encompasses the past and the future.
That’s wrong, since there is time for us. Again, the nature of the all-knowing being wouldn’t matter. There is what we consider “the future,” and we do experience it. Even if the all-knowing entity doesn’t experience it the same way, what matters is if it knows our future in what we consider the present or past.
…..
There is no fixed. If a human person, constrained to time, were to see the future, it might be different. But God is not constrained by the same laws… Fixed simply does not exist.
Wouldn’t matter if the all-knowing entity is or isn’t. If our future is known, in our consideration prior to that which we consider our future, then we are predestined. The all-knowing entity’s knowledge, again regardless of how it experiences time, defines our destiny as fixed.
Janet, it’s not that I “don’t want” to believe in anything, it’s that either there’s proof or not (and certainly that is also a matter of opinion, there).
MK: Faith is believing without proof. If you have proof there is no need to believe. Just accept. Your statement contradicts itself.
No, because not everybody has the emotional need to believe in stuff without proof.
“I’ve wondered about that – if there is a God, perhaps he just set the system up and sat back and said, “Let’s see what happens…”
You’re getting closer now…
Have to laugh, MK – it could be like a great big old ant farm, with us as the ants. God wouldn’t need to know the future, and wouldn’t necessarily want to do so. What fun would that be?
……
Except that at the same time he was creating everything, everything was also happening, and has finished happening.
Well, that’s one theory, too.
……
He knew you before He even formed you in the womb. You’re still trying to work in human terms.
I’d say you more than me, there. You’re going with a very human construct of God, one with “magic” to fill in any gaps.
He knew you before He even formed you in the womb. You’re still trying to work in human terms.
I’d say you more than me, there. You’re going with a very human construct of God, one with “magic” to fill in any gaps.
Posted by: Doug at June 17, 2008 10:22 PM
Human? How? Who said anything about magic? If there is magic, there must be someone doing it. Fill in gaps?
General question: Life would be so boring without God. How can you stand it? What is your motivation every day?
Janet: God’s omniscience has NO BEARING on what choices WE make, hence WE HAVE FREE WILL.
Doug: 3:01: That’s self-contradictory. *If* there was an all-knowing entity (of any type) then our future is already known to that entity, and if it’s knowable then we cannot change it and don’t have free will.
How do you know? Are you God? Are you omniscient? (HINT:no.) So you have no way of knowing this is true for sure!!
Human? How? Who said anything about magic? If there is magic, there must be someone doing it. Fill in gaps?
Janet, the human construct of God. The “magic” is stuff like God being “outside of time,” etc. The gaps are usually “we don’t know” or “we can’t know” or having to forego relying on logic or evidence.
……
General question: Life would be so boring without God. How can you stand it? What is your motivation every day?
:: laughing :: What’s going to be be necessariily boring about not believing in a supreme being?
I’m not trying to be insulting here, but not everybody needs the beliefs you hold. Everyday existence is enough for me.
My motivation is my wife, my family, friends, my job, my pursuits like arguing my head off on message boards, travel, etc.
“*If* there was an all-knowing entity (of any type) then our future is already known to that entity, and if it’s knowable then we cannot change it and don’t have free will.”
How do you know?
Because it’s logic, Janet.
…..
Are you God?
Not that you or I know of.
…..
Are you omniscient? (HINT:no.) So you have no way of knowing this is true for sure!!
I’m not omniscient but that’s not required. We can still correctly say, with respect to logic, “If A then B,” in many instances.
Doug,
No, because not everybody has the emotional need to believe in stuff without proof.
I never said they did. What I said was, if you have proof then belief becomes a non issue. You don’t believe the sun is in the sky. You know it. You don’t believe you are Doug, you know it.
You say it’s not that you don’t want to believe, it’s that there is no proof. I say if there was proof then it wouldn’t be a matter of belief, but rather a matter of knowing.
So Janet’s statement is true. You DON’T want to BELIEVE. You want to KNOW.
Doug,
Except that at the same time he was creating everything, everything was also happening, and has finished happening.
Well, that’s one theory, too.
It’s not one theory Doug, it’s THE theory that we are discussing. It’s why I keep trying to tell you that there is not “fixed” from God’s point of view.
Even if our futures are fixed from OUR point of view, we still CHOSE them, so there is no predestination.
Predestination is all about CAUSE. Even if we use it the way you are using it, we still CHOSE those “predetermined” futures…As long as we have the choice, then we have free will.
I understand what you’re saying. That it’s written in stone. But WE wrote it. No contradiction with free will there…
Doug,
I’d say you more than me, there. You’re going with a very human construct of God, one with “magic” to fill in any gaps.
This conversation isn’t about whether or not you believe in God…at least it isn’t to me. It’s about suspending your disbelief and debating whether IF there IS a God, His omniscience opposed free will.
It is EXTREMELY insulting to me when you refer to my beliefs as magic, or pretending. I’ve said this to you before, and yet you persist. I BELIEVE that there is a God. So do millions of others. I do NOT pretend that there is a God. There is a difference, and I wish you’d show me some respect.
Do you know everything there is to know about everything??? When you can’t explain something, but use the phrase “it could be like this” are you pretending? Are you believing in Magic?
Just because we don’t know or claim to know EVERYTHING there is to know about God, does not mean that we fill it in with magic. When we don’t know something, we say it is a mystery. Because it is. To us. We don’t know. Our ignorance, however, does NOT disprove that God exists.
I have no idea how a television works. That doesn’t mean it doesn’t work. I use faith every time I turn it on, but if my kids asked me to explain it technically, I’d have to to say “I don’t know, it’s a mystery to me” Does that mean I’m employing magical thought?
We know that if God exists, He existed before time. He created time. We don’t understand time, therefore all of it’s nuances and technicalities are a mystery to us. Just like they are to you. No magic about it.
Doug said: “*If* there was an all-knowing entity (of any type) then our future is already known to that entity, and if it’s knowable then we cannot change it and don’t have free will.”
Janet said: How do you know?
Doug said: Because it’s logic, Janet.
*But God is omnipotent (all powerful) as well. He can do much more than our simple human mind can fathom.
++++++++++++
Janet said: Are you God?
Doug said:Not that you or I know of.
Nope, I know that you are not.
+++++++++++++
Janet said: Are you omniscient? (HINT:no.) So you have no way of knowing this is true for sure!!
Doug said:I’m not omniscient but that’s not required. We can still correctly say, with respect to logic, “If A then B,” in many instances.
“In MANY instances????? If you are omniscient, you would know in ALL cases.
Janet said: General question: Life would be so boring without God. How can you stand it? What is your motivation every day?
Doug said:11:16: :: laughing :: What’s going to be be necessariily boring about not believing in a supreme being?
I’m not trying to be insulting here, but not everybody needs the beliefs you hold. Everyday existence is enough for me.
My motivation is my wife, my family, friends, my job, my pursuits like arguing my head off on message boards, travel, etc.
I’m not insulted at all. I just wanted to hear your response. How many message boards do you blog on?
“Janet, it’s not that I “don’t want” to believe in anything, it’s that either there’s proof or not (and certainly that is also a matter of opinion, there).”
MK: Faith is believing without proof. If you have proof there is no need to believe. Just accept. Your statement contradicts itself.
“No, because not everybody has the emotional need to believe in stuff without proof.”
I never said they did. What I said was, if you have proof then belief becomes a non issue. You don’t believe the sun is in the sky. You know it. You don’t believe you are Doug, you know it.
Other than an aware entity realizing its own consciousness, it’s all assumptions, rather than real “knowing.” We all believe in many things without proof, and some are included in our positions on abortion. It’s silly to say that sommebody “doesn’t want to believe in anything.” There are things we all don’t want to believe in, without proof – that could be stated.
……
You say it’s not that you don’t want to believe, it’s that there is no proof. I say if there was proof then it wouldn’t be a matter of belief, but rather a matter of knowing. So Janet’s statement is true. You DON’T want to BELIEVE. You want to KNOW.
No, at the most it could be said that I don’t want to believe that without proof.
How many message boards do you blog on?
Janet, really just this one, now. I do check in once in a while on some gardening boards I used to frequent, and posted there today, but not much goes on there anymore. For the other abortion boards, there is really nothing new, and I did them since 1996 or roughly when they began.
MK: Except that at the same time he was creating everything, everything was also happening, and has finished happening.
“Well, that’s one theory, too.”
It’s not one theory Doug, it’s THE theory that we are discussing. It’s why I keep trying to tell you that there is not “fixed” from God’s point of view.
God’s point of view wouldn’t change it. If our future is known during what we view as the present or past, then indeed our future is fixed from our point of view.
…..
Even if our futures are fixed from OUR point of view, we still CHOSE them, so there is no predestination.
Far out – you certainly anticipated things well, there. That’s a contradiction, though. If our futures are fixed from our point of view, then we have no choice, can’t change things, etc.
…..
Predestination is all about CAUSE. Even if we use it the way you are using it, we still CHOSE those “predetermined” futures…As long as we have the choice, then we have free will.
No, it’s not all about cause. If “somebody else” knows your future, then it’s fixed. If someone else or God, etc., knows what position the roulette ball is going to land on, then the future is fixed, there, regardless of what others may think.
…..
I understand what you’re saying. That it’s written in stone. But WE wrote it. No contradiction with free will there…
It’d have to be that all our choices were then in the past and that’s impossible.
“I’d say you more than me, there. You’re going with a very human construct of God, one with “magic” to fill in any gaps.”
MK: This conversation isn’t about whether or not you believe in God…at least it isn’t to me. It’s about suspending your disbelief and debating whether IF there IS a God, His omniscience opposed free will.
MK, you said, “work in human terms.” The construct of God you are going with is a human deal.
……
It is EXTREMELY insulting to me when you refer to my beliefs as magic, or pretending. I’ve said this to you before, and yet you persist. I BELIEVE that there is a God. So do millions of others. I do NOT pretend that there is a God. There is a difference, and I wish you’d show me some respect.
Hang on here – I haven’t said “pretend” in this thread until this post. I realize you are not pretending to believe. There is an element of “magic” in your beliefs about God, however – the “being outside of time” etc. I mean no disrespect there, MK. “Magic” as in supernatural, etc.
…..
Do you know everything there is to know about everything??? When you can’t explain something, but use the phrase “it could be like this” are you pretending? Are you believing in Magic?
Of course I don’t know everything. Saying “it could be like this” is speculating, and I’ve done that about God, gods, other “higher beings,” etc. I don’t say, “it IS like this,” there.
……
Just because we don’t know or claim to know EVERYTHING there is to know about God, does not mean that we fill it in with magic. When we don’t know something, we say it is a mystery. Because it is. To us. We don’t know. Our ignorance, however, does NOT disprove that God exists.
I guess I shouldn’t have said “magic.”
……
I have no idea how a television works. That doesn’t mean it doesn’t work. I use faith every time I turn it on, but if my kids asked me to explain it technically, I’d have to to say “I don’t know, it’s a mystery to me” Does that mean I’m employing magical thought? We know that if God exists, He existed before time. He created time. We don’t understand time, therefore all of it’s nuances and technicalities are a mystery to us. Just like they are to you. No magic about it.
There I disagree. Way back when, people came up with the construct of gods to explain thunder, lightning, etc. Some believed that just as strongly as you believe. Yet how could it be said that they really “knew”?
I don’t think you can say that “if God exists, he existed before time.” How does that necessarily follow? What prevents there from having been other entities like what you believe God to be? Even if we go with the idea of just one supreme being, there’s nothing preventing there having been others in the “past” as we see it or in how they experience it. Even if the story was passed to people by “divine” means, as with the Bible (again, going with the premise here), what is there to say there aren’t other stories?
Doug said: “*If* there was an all-knowing entity (of any type) then our future is already known to that entity, and if it’s knowable then we cannot change it and don’t have free will.”
Janet said: How do you know?
Doug said: Because it’s logic, Janet.
But God is omnipotent (all powerful) as well. He can do much more than our simple human mind can fathom.
Accepting that as the premise, that still doesn’t mean that we cannot prove things by logic and evidence. If you or God truly knows my future, then it’s fixed and I don’t have free will to change it. The nature of you and God doesn’t alter anything there.
++++++++++++
Janet said: Are you God?
Doug said: “Not that you or I know of.”
Nope, I know that you are not.
Nope, you believe that.
+++++++++++++
Janet said: Are you omniscient? (HINT:no.) So you have no way of knowing this is true for sure!!
Doug said:”I’m not omniscient but that’s not required. We can still correctly say, with respect to logic, “If A then B,” in many instances.”
“In MANY instances????? If you are omniscient, you would know in ALL cases.
Well, nobody claimed to be omniscient. The point is that in many instances we indeed can logically say “If A then B,” since we know enough about A and B. I said “many” because there are also instances where we don’t know enough. That’s true whether or not God Exists.
Dougly: 8:21: I don’t think you can say that “if God exists, he existed before time.” How does that necessarily follow? What prevents there from having been other entities like what you believe God to be? Even if we go with the idea of just one supreme being, there’s nothing preventing there having been others in the “past” as we see it or in how they experience it. Even if the story was passed to people by “divine” means, as with the Bible (again, going with the premise here), what is there to say there aren’t other stories?
God said “I am the Alpha and the Omega”. The ONE TRUE GOD. We are God’s people, the flock of the Lord. That’s how we know.
Dougly (Do right):
You really should read the book about G.K. Chesterton I recommended. But be careful, you may never think the same way again.
“Common Sense 101” by Dale Ahlquist
Doug,
MK, you said, “work in human terms.” The construct of God you are going with is a human deal.
Try to keep up…If you want to discuss whether there is a God, then fine. Let’s have that discussion. Then we can work in “human terms”…but the conversation we were having had moved beyond that for the sake of argument…into the realm of “accepting for a moment that there is a God, then free will and omniscience don’t jive”…you can’t have it both ways. Either we are discussing free will or we are discussing the existence of God.
As for our choices being fixed…what does that have to do with predestination? The choices I made yesterday are fixed. But they were still my choices. No one predetermined them. Being fixed does not mean being predetermined.
Everything is predetermined by your reckoning, with or without a God. Every choice I make, will eventually be known by someone, and then it will become “fixed”. Does that mean that none of us have free will?
I make a choice. God knows the choice I have made, not because He can see into the future, but because He can see the past, present and future all at once. No matter how many times you tell me that if it’s known it’s predestined, it still won’t be true.
What does my making a choice and then it being known that I made that choice have to do with free will?
I read what you wrote 5 hours ago. Was what you wrote predestined? You are about to write something else. Then I will know what you wrote. Does that mean that you didn’t write it of your own free will?
If I could see into the future and know what you are about to write, but not tell you what that is, how would that affect you decision to write it?
God knowing everything, does not require cause, you are right. But that doesn’t affect your free will. And affecting your free will DOES require an influence.
This is where you’re getting it wrong. In order to effect my free will, God would HAVE to have some influence on me.
Doug,
I mean no disrespect there, MK. “Magic” as in supernatural, etc.
…..
I understand that you didn’t mean to be disrespectful, but you were, nonetheless. Supernatural can mean magic but for us, it doesn’t. I am very sensitive to the difference, even if you are not. My entire faith is anti-magic. Magic is all illusion. It comes from a different source. And when you accuse me of magical thinking, it is like saying that I follow a magician. I do not.
*If* there was an all-knowing entity (of any type) then our future is already known to that entity, and if it’s knowable then we cannot change it and don’t have free will.”
Again, I can’t change the past either. But I still have free will. Just because I can’t change my choices, doesn’t mean I didn’t make those choices freely.
I freely chose certain things, and then they became known. Why aren’t you getting this? Free will means I can decide for myself what I am going to do. Nothing is stopping me from doing that. The fact that my choices can be known, in no way, interferes with my ability to make those choices.
You can say that those choices are fixed, sure, but that has nothing to do with the fact that they were MY choices to begin with!
Doug,
If we use the term postdetermined to describe events that happened in the past, does that affect my free will? Does postdetermination mean that I didn’t make my choices freely? After all, they are now known, and there is no going back. Did I lose my free will?
predetermination
Main Entry:
pre
You really should read the book about G.K. Chesterton I recommended. But be careful, you may never think the same way again.
“Common Sense 101” by Dale Ahlquist
Okay, Janet, I put it in my shopping cart at Amazon.
I know he was a cool guy, very witty, but what do you think it would change in my thinking?
“MK, you said, “work in human terms.” The construct of God you are going with is a human deal.”
MK: Try to keep up…If you want to discuss whether there is a God, then fine. Let’s have that discussion. Then we can work in “human terms”…but the conversation we were having had moved beyond that for the sake of argument…into the realm of “accepting for a moment that there is a God, then free will and omniscience don’t jive”…you can’t have it both ways. Either we are discussing free will or we are discussing the existence of God.
It’s not “both ways.” It’s just that an all-knowing God isn’t compatible with us having free will. If our future is known (to anybody) then we are predestined and cannot change our future.
……
As for our choices being fixed…what does that have to do with predestination? The choices I made yesterday are fixed. But they were still my choices. No one predetermined them. Being fixed does not mean being predetermined.
I was referring to a contradiction where you said: Even if our futures are fixed from OUR point of view, we still CHOSE them, so there is no predestination.
If we choose, then our futures are not fixed, not from our point of view and not from anybody’s who would be all-knowing.
…..
Everything is predetermined by your reckoning, with or without a God. Every choice I make, will eventually be known by someone, and then it will become “fixed”. Does that mean that none of us have free will?
No, I do think we have free will, in the here are now. If we are speculating about an all-knowing God, however, then that would mean that we don’t have free will, since our future would already be known to that God. If we don’t have free will, then we really wouldn’t choose, in the first place.
…..
I make a choice. God knows the choice I have made, not because He can see into the future, but because He can see the past, present and future all at once. No matter how many times you tell me that if it’s known it’s predestined, it still won’t be true.
It would only be God’s seeing the future that would matter. If, in what we consider as the present or past, God knows our future, then we are predestined. It wouldn’t matter what conception of Time god would have. It would mean that we cannot change our future, because as we see it it’s already known to God.
……
What does my making a choice and then it being known that I made that choice have to do with free will?
Nothing. It’s a given that if we make choices and alter our future, then we have free will. However, if we can alter our future, then it is unknowable to anybody, because it depends on us. If we flip a coin, and prior to that flip, as we see it, God knew the outcome, then it was preordained, and there was no “chance” as we consider it.
……
I read what you wrote 5 hours ago. Was what you wrote predestined? You are about to write something else. Then I will know what you wrote. Does that mean that you didn’t write it of your own free will?
Again, I do think we have free will, thus no predestination and no all-knowing God.
……
If I could see into the future and know what you are about to write, but not tell you what that is, how would that affect you decision to write it?
It wouldn’t. The point is that I wouldn’t have free will to alter it, decide not to do it, etc. Same as the coil flip. If you know it’s going to be “tails” then in reality for that flip there are no odds of 50/50, etc.
……
God knowing everything, does not require cause, you are right. But that doesn’t affect your free will. And affecting your free will DOES require an influence.
We haven’t included control or cause in the premise. We only need all-knowing, not all-powerful nor even the abiliity to influence us. Neither God nor you need to be able to make the coin land on tails or heads. You only need to know what the outcome will be.
……
This is where you’re getting it wrong. In order to effect my free will, God would HAVE to have some influence on me.
I don’t think I’ve said anything about this, but yes, to have “effect” then God would have to be able to influence things. Yet for free will to be ruled out, that’s not required. It’s not that the observer (God, or you, in this case) would have to be able to make the coin land any certain way. Just knowing is enough, for then the outcome would be foretold.
……
“*If* there was an all-knowing entity (of any type) then our future is already known to that entity, and if it’s knowable then we cannot change it and don’t have free will.”
Again, I can’t change the past either. But I still have free will. Just because I can’t change my choices, doesn’t mean I didn’t make those choices freely.
You’re just asserting that there is free will there, though. Changing the past doesn’t matter. If the future – the flip of a coin, the decision of a person, etc., is known (to anybody, God, etc.) then it’s only going to be one thing, and we would not have free will to make it be any other than that one thing.
……
If we use the term postdetermined to describe events that happened in the past, does that affect my free will? Does postdetermination mean that I didn’t make my choices freely? After all, they are now known, and there is no going back. Did I lose my free will?
I don’t think “postdetermined” would “affect” free will, other than to leave the door open for free will, or prove it (if that’s what you mean) while at the same time ruling out an all-knowing God since then it would be unknowable until it was determined.
……
1: the act of predetermining : the state of being predetermined: as a: the ordaining of events beforehand b: a fixing or settling in advance 2: a purpose formed beforehand
Perhaps you are confusing predestination (chosen for you and written in stone…Calvinismm) and predetermination (determined or known beforehand)
No, both are the same here, since “chosen for us” or not by God, etc., wouldn’t change things – all that’s needed is for them to be preordained, foretold, etc.
……
Yes it might be fixed, but it’s only fixed if you chose it to be so. First you choose, then your choice is fixed. With predestination, you don’t choose, it’s chosen for you, and it’s fixed.
Free will is compatible with a God (or “anybody” else) who could choose to affect us, but doesn’t do so. It’s not compatible with a God or anybody else who already knows our future. Whether our future is predetermined by a given observer or just known to that observer, we would not have free will in either case.
…..
Catholics don’t believe in predestination. That most certainly would interfere with choice, because the choice would have been made for you. I believe that Bethany and JLM believe in this.
I don’t think so – I think they feel we do have free will.
……
In predetermination, we choose, then it becomes fixed. No contradiction to free will…
No. If we can choose, then it’s not predetermined, and we have free will. If we can choose, and alter the future, then it’s not knowable to “anybody.”