I think what Gran Moff Gav means is that time is a human based theory. Exactly like mathematics. Do numbers really exists, or is it just a way for humans to simplify and understand things easier. When you think about it, it makes sense.
Another example, consider nature's laws. Us humans can only perceive a part of it, which cannot be put into simplification. We then created sciences (chemistry ad physics, as two of them) in order to comprehend with our created formulas, which, in the end, are nothing more than a human creation that cannot possibly hope to understand everything we want.
So, if we go back two paragraphs earlier, no doubt there is something we don't fully understand that allows us to move forward and not stay in the same moment. But is it really a force? Is it really a field? Is it time, a human created concept to understand what we cannot? Maybe, maybe not.
Originally posted by Mandos
I think what Gran Moff Gav means is that time is a human based theory. Exactly like mathematics. Do numbers really exists, or is it just a way for humans to simplify and understand things easier. When you think about it, it makes sense.Another example, consider nature's laws. Us humans can only perceive a part of it, which cannot be put into simplification. We then created sciences (chemistry ad physics, as two of them) in order to comprehend with our created formulas, which, in the end, are nothing more than a human creation that cannot possibly hope to understand everything we want.
So, if we go back two paragraphs earlier, no doubt there is something we don't fully understand that allows us to move forward and not stay in the same moment. But is it really a force? Is it really a field? Is it time, a human created concept to understand what we cannot? Maybe, maybe not.
However, it maybe true that the idea of time is a human invention, but time exists as something real that we are trying to describe.
God is also something that we cannot understand, and seems to not be real. It is more likely that just like time, God is something we don't understand. You may agree with what I have said, but not understand what it means. To be blunt, all religions are equally wrong. But do not despair, for they are all equally right.
Imagine a chair in the middle of the room, and a circle of people standing around the chair. Each person can see the chair in the middle of the room, but if they cannot leave the spot they are in, then they can only see the chair from one point of view. Now let us pretend that we don't know what a chair is. If each person in the room were to describe what the chair looked like to then, it might seem to an outside observer ,that cannot see the chair, that the information being said was contradictory.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
However, it maybe true that the idea of time is a human invention, but time exists as something real that we are trying to describe.God is also something that we cannot understand, and seems to not be real. It is more likely that just like time, God is something we don't understand. You may agree with what I have said, but not understand what it means. To be blunt, all religions are equally wrong. But do not despair, for they are all equally right.
Imagine a chair in the middle of the room, and a circle of people standing around the chair. Each person can see the chair in the middle of the room, but if they cannot leave the spot they are in, then they can only see the chair from one point of view. Now let us pretend that we don't know what a chair is. If each person in the room were to describe what the chair looked like to then, it might seem to an outside observer ,that cannot see the chair, that the information being said was contradictory.
That's probably the best way you've described the essence of your beliefs...at least it was for me, lol. Thank you. Not many people can have such complex thoughts and still be able to express them so everyone can understand.
You've stated multiple times that no one can really assume to know God's will or nature. I'll stay with your chair analogy. Is it too far outside the realm of reality to you that this chair may make contact with one or more persons encircling it? If it is a higher being (and most religions at least agree on the fact that God is on a higher level than humans are), would it be that impossible for the chair to say, "I am a chair and this is my story?"
Originally posted by ShakyamunisonYou'd think a chair would be easier than an elephant. 😛
Imagine a chair in the middle of the room, and a circle of people standing around the chair. Each person can see the chair in the middle of the room, but if they cannot leave the spot they are in, then they can only see the chair from one point of view. Now let us pretend that we don't know what a chair is. If each person in the room were to describe what the chair looked like to then, it might seem to an outside observer ,that cannot see the chair, that the information being said was contradictory.
Originally posted by ragesRemorseLeaving the definition of "God" open for the moment, such is "God's" nature that discussion always leads to paradox, because--like it or not--the finite box of language simply cannot adequately describe the unimaginable infinity of "God."
I do believe we have free will and choose our own path in the end, but lately i have been struggling with the idea that God is infallible. We may have free will, but does God not know which path we will ultimately choose? Maybe, God creates each one of us with two separate fates. One leads to salvation and the other leads to damnation and it is up to us to choose. God still has to know which we will choose before we do. If he doesn't, does this make him fallible? If it doesn't make him fallible then what? If he does know which path we will choose in the end. He creates certain people knowing that they will choose damnation over salvation.
My sense is, questions such as this are best meditated upon rather than thought/talked about (though the former, of course, is not possible in a forum). At least with meditation, the finite box of language opens up to a somewhat larger box where concepts and possibilities can be envisioned by the conscious mind and unconscious mind working together (if I may borrow from Shak's metaphor: this would be akin to two or more chair observers able to unify what they see into a single vision).
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
However, it maybe true that the idea of time is a human invention, but time exists as something real that we are trying to describe.God is also something that we cannot understand, and seems to not be real. It is more likely that just like time, God is something we don't understand. You may agree with what I have said, but not understand what it means. To be blunt, all religions are equally wrong. But do not despair, for they are all equally right.
Imagine a chair in the middle of the room, and a circle of people standing around the chair. Each person can see the chair in the middle of the room, but if they cannot leave the spot they are in, then they can only see the chair from one point of view. Now let us pretend that we don't know what a chair is. If each person in the room were to describe what the chair looked like to then, it might seem to an outside observer ,that cannot see the chair, that the information being said was contradictory.
What you say is thet truth, but you are therefore putting strenght to my argument.
Suppose there is something we don't understand in the middle. One person out of the many that are arround says it's time. It is, for one's point of view, but not for all the rest.
Originally posted by Mandos
What you say is thet truth, but you are therefore putting strenght to my argument.Suppose there is something we don't understand in the middle. One person out of the many that are arround says it's time. It is, for one's point of view, but not for all the rest.
I am strengthening your argument if you agree that you don't know any absolute truth. Your view of the chair is just as true as mine, even though mine is different then yours.
Originally posted by willofthewisp
That's probably the best way you've described the essence of your beliefs...at least it was for me, lol. Thank you. Not many people can have such complex thoughts and still be able to express them so everyone can understand.You've stated multiple times that no one can really assume to know God's will or nature. I'll stay with your chair analogy. Is it too far outside the realm of reality to you that this chair may make contact with one or more persons encircling it? If it is a higher being (and most religions at least agree on the fact that God is on a higher level than humans are), would it be that impossible for the chair to say, "I am a chair and this is my story?"
Maybe the "chair" has contacted all of us in ways that we, being different, can understand. The difference is in us, not in God. I basically do not like any argument that leads to "my god is better then your god". Too many people have died over that argument.
Originally posted by Mandos
What you say is thet truth, but you are therefore putting strenght to my argument.Suppose there is something we don't understand in the middle. One person out of the many that are arround says it's time. It is, for one's point of view, but not for all the rest.
😛 Read carfully, I never said my point of view is superior than you. Even someone who has a larger view of the chair than the other, that knows more about it, can't say that someone with a smaller limited vision of the chair is wrong.
All opinions are different, I merely pointed out that time, as we know it, is just a perception of humanity of something we don't understand, henseforth to concrete Moff Gav's argument.
Originally posted by willofthewispPersonally, I don't see this as being necessarily impossible. However, the chair's story would still be filtered, so to speak, through the medium of human perception and thus "colored" by whatever particular characteristics (eg, social and psychological factors) are operating around or within that person at that time.
Is it too far outside the realm of reality to you that this chair may make contact with one or more persons encircling it? If it is a higher being (and most religions at least agree on the fact that God is on a higher level than humans are), would it be that impossible for the chair to say, "I am a chair and this is my story?"
Even in higher meditative states, a person's mindset would still shape/influence the appearance of divine form. The only exception to this is when the meditator reaches Godhead. Here, regardless of the meditator's belief system, "God" always manifests the same: as the unknowable Void, or formlessness, from which all form arises.
Originally posted by Mindship
Personally, I don't see this as being necessarily impossible. However, the chair's story would still be filtered, so to speak, through the medium of human perception and thus "colored" by whatever particular characteristics (eg, social and psychological factors) are operating around or within that person at that time.Even in higher meditative states, a person's mindset would still shape/influence the appearance of divine form. The only exception to this is when the meditator reaches Godhead. Here, regardless of the meditator's belief system, "God" always manifests the same: as the unknowable Void, or formlessness, from which all form arises.
Beautiful.
Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
Well the problem with that argument is Original Sin...God creates everyone in the full knowledge that they are going to be sinners...so what.
That doesn't mean they can't choose to live pious lives as best as possible.
So essentially, noone is born with the ability to choose to be a sinner or not...they just are. End of. Thus, your problem with homosexuality is rendered void.
Of FYI being homosexual is not a sin...committing the act of sodomy is a sin.
See, that's my problem. If God knows that we will all be sinners and even knows if we will do things that will definitely send us to Hell, then why create us at all? I would like to think that if there is a God, he/she/it, doesn't know your every choice. It would make things a little more acceptable for why there is so many bad things going on the world. It's not as easy to write off when it's said that God knew all these bad things happen but did nothing to stop them.
Well I'm assuming that if your homosexual, sooner or later, sodomy will come in to play, thus sinning and damnation are pretty much inevitable.
I always thought that God was outside of this time concept.
It's really hard to put this into words...
Well, you see, God is aware of all potential realities for each of his children. However, he is NOT aware of which realities are explored by his children because of free will. So, yes, he is omniscient, but he isn't, depending on the perspective. Free will is just another tool used to grow to become more like our Father. Everyone single one of his children has just a few paths that lead back to Him. However, there are many paths that lead away from Him. God is aware of all of those...but doesn't know which we'll choose.
But since he's outside of time, that makes no sense to me. We were never born on Earth but we were born on Earth. We have always existed and we have never existed. It is really really really confusing and hard to understand how exactly this works without time.
Originally posted by socool8520
Well I'm assuming that if your homosexual, sooner or later, sodomy will come in to play, thus sinning and damnation are pretty much inevitable.
Originally posted by inimalist
omg the psychobabble is going to make me vomit oligodendrocytes out of my nose
Kinda my own thought.
And can we please stop with the "only a theory" bullsh*t. If you can't differentiate the colloquial usage of the word and the scientific one, and not use them interchangably when it suits your argument, then you really shouldn't be discussing science in the first place.
Originally posted by Mandos
I think what Gran Moff Gav means is that time is a human based theory. Exactly like mathematics. Do numbers really exists, or is it just a way for humans to simplify and understand things easier. When you think about it, it makes sense.Another example, consider nature's laws. Us humans can only perceive a part of it, which cannot be put into simplification. We then created sciences (chemistry ad physics, as two of them) in order to comprehend with our created formulas, which, in the end, are nothing more than a human creation that cannot possibly hope to understand everything we want.
So, if we go back two paragraphs earlier, no doubt there is something we don't fully understand that allows us to move forward and not stay in the same moment. But is it really a force? Is it really a field? Is it time, a human created concept to understand what we cannot? Maybe, maybe not.
So we can't know anything for sure, and so your opinion is the correct one? beautiful. Subjectivity as an escape clause ftw.
Also, you quoted yourself and then responded to it. I can't decide if it's just tacky, an oversight, or a deliberate, though ineffective, debating tactic.
...
No one has shown why we aren't determined in our choices, btw. I'm still waiting for a coherent defense of Christianity's definition of free will.