|
Post by samsara15 on May 9, 2014 18:14:23 GMT -6
You have your beliefs and opinions, and I have mine. Perhaps they are not so far apart as they appear, at first glance.
What will live forever, and even that is not certain, is the information created by our actions in our lifetime. We are like characters in a play, as Shakespeare once said.
Perhaps, next time, some other actor will play our role. How will we know? How could we? Is it the role, the actor, or both?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2014 18:33:02 GMT -6
I read some where a long time ago a persons voice never dies. Your words go on and on. If that were true and if we had the right equipment could hear things spoken hundreds of years in the past. So words are alive in a sense.
I believe God's word in alive, never changes, never dies.
|
|
|
Post by samsara15 on May 9, 2014 18:55:25 GMT -6
Words are alive, and concepts are alive, or so I believe. The person we create by our actions in our lifetime is, IMO, our soul. It is something continually being created.
If you want to be materialistic, you could create a computer model of that person, including all of its recorded actions. Who would say that doing so was beyond the capacity of any even a moderately infinite God? I say moderately, because there are degrees of infinite.
What even God could not see, based on this scenario, is what thoughts had been inside that person's mind at the time each of those actions were taken - is that your 'Free Will', skylar? Could be. I'll withhold judgement on that issue, until I understand the issue better!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2014 20:58:26 GMT -6
Words are alive, and concepts are alive, or so I believe. The person we create by our actions in our lifetime is, IMO, our soul. It is something continually being created. If you want to be materialistic, you could create a computer model of that person, including all of its recorded actions. Who would say that doing so was beyond the capacity of any even a moderately infinite God? I say moderately, because there are degrees of infinite. What even God could not see, based on this scenario, is what thoughts had been inside that person's mind at the time each of those actions were taken - is that your 'Free Will', skylar? Could be. I'll withhold judgement on that issue, until I understand the issue better! IMO, God is all seeing, all knowing.. and since we are all human, flesh and blood ,created in His image, nothing is beyond God's capacity. None of your above scenarios even remotely resemble 'free will'. Free will is a human condition, having nothing to do with computer models, robots or the like. Computers are only as good as the info input by humans. At each point in which information was entered into the computer model, the human had 'free will if it was a matter concerning belief. . Now if you want to take this matter further, we can go to the 'Technology' or 'Science board'. A computer alone is nothing except a machine made of inanimate matter. You can sit and watch a computer all day long, but don't expect much results without human programing. Now that the word human has been reinserted, we come full circle back to 'free will' if it's a matter of faith or belief in God. Comparing computer models to human 'free will' is like comparing an animated film to a Broadway play. At any rate, we have gone far afield from 'free will' as referred to in a spiritual, belief system. Once again: very simple: FREE WILL...It is yours and only yours to make. Believe in God's plan for salvation as outlined in the Bible.. or not. You chose. This is not to say that you can't change your mind. You can change your mind up until the moment you take your last breath.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2014 22:14:31 GMT -6
( samsara15 said : The person we create by our actions in our lifetime is, IMO, our soul. It is something continually being created." ) Sorry, that is something else we disagree on. We are born with a soul just as we are born with a conscience. God created souls and conscience at conception. They further develop when we reach an age at which we are able to know what each means, how each functions. It is our soul that carries our spirituality our sense of being, our soul lives on after our mortal death. It is our conscience that tells us right from wrong. Needless to say that everyone's conscience does not function the same "
|
|
|
Post by samsara15 on May 10, 2014 4:51:31 GMT -6
I disagree with you in all ways, skylar, and about Free Will as well. In my opinion, matter is not necessarily inanimate. Have you ever heard of Panpsychism or Panentheism? I stated my opinions, and I stand by them. I'm not impressed by debating, either, one way or the other. Too much depends on how well one can debate, so truth can get lost in the shuffle. I am, however, impressed by what I read...at least, until I read something later that sounds better. What I read indicate computer models can be made quite sophisticated, if the program(s) was/were written by a sufficiently complex being. We are programmed to try to survive, reproduce, and to serve our own perceived self-interest. If you think you can cite a source that proves Free Will exists, do so. I am sure I can find a source or two that challenges that assertion, or if I can't, will encounter one in subsequent reading. We both can play the source game. I forget a lot of what I read, but I have read abundant sources in both directions. www.psychologytoday.com/blog/proceed-your-own-risk/201311/do-we-have-free-willblogs.scientificamerican.com/bering-in-mind/2010/04/06/scientists-say-free-will-probably-doesnt-exist-but-urge-dont-stop-believing/
|
|
|
Post by samsara15 on May 10, 2014 5:38:19 GMT -6
( samsara15 said : The person we create by our actions in our lifetime is, IMO, our soul. It is something continually being created." ) Sorry, that is something else we disagree on. We are born with a soul just as we are born with a conscience. God created souls and conscience at conception. They further develop when we reach an age at which we are able to know what each means, how each functions. It is our soul that carries our spirituality our sense of being, our soul lives on after our mortal death. It is our conscience that tells us right from wrong. Needless to say that everyone's conscience does not function the same " Then, I presume, you would say that some of our ancestors, such as Homo Erectus, did not have souls. That God gives us souls at birth? If so, that might mean that some living people now might not have souls as well, would it not? Interesting questions arise from that POV.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2014 7:43:05 GMT -6
Every person and every animal has a soul. Which is the intellectual qualities of the being. Gen 2:7 Then the Lord formed man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath or spirit of life, and man became a living being. Gateway Bible. The man became a spirit being who lived in a body. Homo Erectus came along way before Adam....God did not breath spirit into his nostrils, so no he did not have a spirit or soul as you call it.
|
|
|
Post by carpathianpeasant on May 10, 2014 8:36:51 GMT -6
Every person and every animal has a soul. Which is the intellectual qualities of the being. Gen 2:7 Then the Lord formed man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath or spirit of life, and man became a living being. Gateway Bible. The man became a spirit being who lived in a body. Homo Erectus came along way before Adam....God did not breath spirit into his nostrils, so no he did not have a spirit or soul as you call it. If, as you have said, every animal has a soul, then Homo Erectus also had a soul.
|
|
|
Post by samsara15 on May 10, 2014 9:39:25 GMT -6
That, sydney is Christian doctrine, and I am closest to being a Pantheist, if anything, and not a Christian.
I concur with CP. If there is a soul, based on my interpretation of a Kabbalistic point of view, a view I have some agreement with, albeit I am not fully a Kabbalist, then I believe that all animals have one. Furthermore, I believe the soul, if there is one, is formed by our life experiences. I don't think there is a soul until we have some life experiences, if three is such a thing at all. If the universe stores information, as some maintain, then it would be possible to retrieve a record of every action that ever took place in it, which would make some sort of afterlife conceivable.
My opinion only, and worth no more than that, just being a personal opinion.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2014 9:55:33 GMT -6
Spirit and soul are two different things.
Animals have souls but they don't have a spirit.
Actually, you are a spirit being you live in a body you communicate through your soul. Man is a 3 part being, spirit, soul and body.
|
|
|
Post by carpathianpeasant on May 10, 2014 12:20:05 GMT -6
Spirit and soul are two different things. Animals have souls but they don't have a spirit. Actually, you are a spirit being you live in a body you communicate through your soul. Man is a 3 part being, spirit, soul and body. So, then, you are making a distinction between soul and spirit. Do you consider either or both the life element? And, if neither, what does your current faith call that?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2014 13:19:51 GMT -6
I can only explain it like this, you are a spirit. It's the real you, your body is where your spirit lives....for now anyway. You contact the nature world through your soul and body, your soul being your intellectual qualities. You contact the spiritual world (God)through your spirit. You cannot contact God through your mind or soul.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2014 13:27:19 GMT -6
I disagree with you in all ways, skylar, and about Free Will as well. In my opinion, matter is not necessarily inanimate. Have you ever heard of Panpsychism or Panentheism? I stated my opinions, and I stand by them. I'm not impressed by debating, either, one way or the other. Too much depends on how well one can debate, so truth can get lost in the shuffle. I am, however, impressed by what I read...at least, until I read something later that sounds better. What I read indicate computer models can be made quite sophisticated, if the program(s) was/were written by a sufficiently complex being. We are programmed to try to survive, reproduce, and to serve our own perceived self-interest. If you think you can cite a source that proves Free Will exists, do so. I am sure I can find a source or two that challenges that assertion, or if I can't, will encounter one in subsequent reading. We both can play the source game. I forget a lot of what I read, but I have read abundant sources in both directions. www.psychologytoday.com/blog/proceed-your-own-risk/201311/do-we-have-free-willblogs.scientificamerican.com/bering-in-mind/2010/04/06/scientists-say-free-will-probably-doesnt-exist-but-urge-dont-stop-believing/ samsara15 said /"I disagree with you in all ways, skylar, and about Free Will as well "That's OK, that's what debate is all about. I never had any expectations that everyone would agree with me. But.. you still haven't explained why you disagree with 'free will' ( in simple terms ) As human beings we have the ability to chose the pathway we want to follow. Having that ability alone is enough reason for me to believe in 'free will' Free will is when you make a decision based on your own beliefs, as you see them, not as others, studies, science or any other platform has tried to override your decision. Think of it as a ballot or a contract. There are two boxes, check one I believe in God's plan for salvation I do NOT believe in Gods plan for salvation. No one is threatening you or putting pressure on you to prefer one over the other. The choice is yours and your alone. That is free will.
|
|
|
Post by samsara15 on May 10, 2014 13:58:00 GMT -6
I think Free Will involves a lot more than just that one question. I think our actions and decisions are based on many factors, both psychological and physical, some of which are out of our control. It is true that no one is forcing you to make that choice, but a person's decision would be predictable, based on those factors.
Philosophers such as John Searle argue that we are no more free than our liver or stomach. I get lost in the complexity of their arguments, and am not solidly on either side, but am wary of endorsing the concept of Free Will in face of so much doubt.
Are our choices random? If not, what determines them, and how we make them?
|
|