I knew a guy in high school who said that people were so predictable. He was a manipulative psychopath.

Looks like a contradiction in terms to me. How can an event occur outside of time? How can causation happen from outside of time? — S

Didn't time start at the Big Bang (as a relationship among objects moving in relative motion to one another)? So, as a matter of argument, couldn't God cause the Big Bang and start the clock "ticking" so to speak?

Do you have further questions? — Bitter Crank

How did you get so funny? You’re a character. :)

”Jewish" self-identification is even less correlated with religion. — SophistiCat

I have known a few Jewish atheists, in fact.

“Value” has a normative or qualitative connotation. Although what you said is true, I was talking about meaning.

I’m not sure we understand each other, and we should just leave it be. The thread is about the Trinity after all.

One’s own mind is certain. Other minds need to be posited. And conceiving what the universe was like before minds assumes a hypothetical viewpoint/mind if not your own.

Okay. It’s good that you are willing to try to understand my point, but I think we have gone far afield of the OP’s intent. I really don’t wish to convert anyone to my way of thinking, as you may have a point that it has no practical value. But, then again, most philosophy doesn’t have any practical value.

Redundant nonsense? Of course there is an independent reality. We just can’t say anything meaningful about it without assuming the existence of a mind. Perhaps that is why there is a need for God.

What it was in reality independent of minds is something that cannot be conceived. If reality at the Planck length is uniform, and if we can posit that as a viewpoint (which would be positing a mind anyway), then we could say that nothing is the same as something. So, what would it even mean to say that the Big Bang is a mind independent fact?

do you believe there is any such things as facts? Is the cat really on the chair? Can we trust our senses to tell us anything of meaning? Are we all minds in a vat? Or plugged into the matrix? Or or or ..... — Rank Amateur

I don’t mean to derail the thread, but I will say my piece about this and leave it alone.

Physical reality independent of minds doesn’t distinguish between the cat and the chair (never mind that the cat has a mind as well). Reality without minds is an incoherent idea. You have to posit a mind to even talk about reality. If there were no minds, reality would be amorphous. It is our minds that divide up reality. Facts are articles of knowledge, an epistemic issue, not a metaphysical issue independent of minds.

I think DiegoT and I would agree on this. Now back to philosophy of religion, please. :)

You can’t hear your own voice?

Okay

Is it true that only a few people are capable of reason, as Plato says? Are there really philosopher kings? — ernestm

i went to law school for a little over a semester (couldn't stand it, started getting deeply disturbed by the education and the people it attracted), but my Property Law professor said that judges are the closest beings to philosopher kings in our society. I would argue that that is only the case in the Supreme Court and maybe the respective state Supreme Courts. What do you think?

Thank you for sharing! I’ve felt for a long time that it is within all of us, provided we are given God’s grace or are willing to accept it.

lol

nerd.

No problem. You didn’t know my mind. I don’t adhere to any given church’s dogma.

I don’t give a fuck about Church fathers.

considered heretical by whom?

I’ll try. So, a person can be a father, a spouse, and a sibling. They are different orientations, but of one person. The essence of God is One. God the Creator (The Father) is how that essence manifested in Genesis. Jesus is how that essence manifested when He gave His Grace to all humanity in the New Testament, and the Holy Spirit is the essence of God manifesting in individual people when they are “filled with the Spirit”.

They are Each fully God but in different forms. At least that’s my take.

They are distinct in that they manifest Themselves differently, but They all share the same essence.

I just posted something on that in the other thread about the Trinity. Please read that, and you can address your questions there.

To me, the Father is what people usually mean when they think of the omniscient, omnipotent, Creator God. Jesus is his instantiation in human form. The Holy Spirit is the Father’s Spirit that dwells in people’s souls when they are in harmony with God’s will. They are all different manifestations of the One God. What’s the problem?

Is it immoral to lie if you feel like what you are lying about is morally permissible or neutral but the person you are lying to disapproves, in order to avoid putting stress on the relationship? In other words, you feel like the issue that the other party disapproves of doesn’t harm anyone, so you lie about it to avoid strife. Is that immoral?

You sound like a true saint. I’m glad there are people like you in the world. :)

-

What I mean is, our urges may sometimes compel us to act in certain specific ways, but we may have certain boundaries in which we can act freely.

Determinism seems to be proposing a tautology. — Jamesk

I am now of the opinion that we are predetermined in some respects, but we may also have some free will; but how is determinism proposing a tautology?

Theologically, this is seen as an argument for the need of a resurrection. — Dfpolis

Do you mean Christ specifically, or do you mean like in the book of Revelation, or both? I find your position intriguing and also relevant to my current New Testament studies. Furthermore, I would be interested in a new thread discussing the survival of the rational soul from brain death if you would be interested in leading it.

You’re not related to Greg Handel of Wisconsin, are you?

I was lucky and unlucky. I’m a white man. Plus one (or maybe a thousand). I grew up in a middlish class family (my parents were correctional officers with public pensions and good benefits). Plus another one. My parents instilled in me the need of a good education. ( I graduated as my high school class valedictorian and earned a college scholarship.) Plus one more.

However, my father was an angry alcoholic and was often abusive. Minus one. I was depressed ever since I was fourteen. Minus. I developed schizoaffective disorder (partly schizophrenic, partly bipolar) at 19 or 20. Big minus. But, my student loans were canceled due to disability. I have no debt now, and have a little money in a Roth IRA. Plus. When my dad died in August, I got a decent inheritance. Plus another. But my dad died, and we had a complicated relationship. It got much better towards the end. Neutral but still sad.

I am blessed to have a loving wife who is a great stepmother to my two teenage boys. Huge plus! I recently discovered God’s grace, and I am actively working to be more humble and grateful. Another huge plus!

So, it’s been a mixed bag for me, but I still can’t help but feel privileged. I know if I were black or brown I wouldn’t have had the same fair treatment, which is something i feel guilt about. It’s really not fair.

I often bitch and moan as you do, and I really can’t justify it most of the time.

For what it’s worth, you seem like a very humble guy, and I find that admirable. God bless you and yours!

You should. I think you would like it.

Have you read Slaughterhouse 5?

We are all programmed through public education or private religious education to follow the social norms of our society. The judge would consider limiting liability in the sentencing, but the guilt of the person is considered by an objective viewpoint or standard of whether a sane person should have known better.

I tend to think that we all have certain urges that compel us toward some action. Personally, I don’t get urges to run marathons, write esoteric equations on the walls, go bungee jumping, or learn Swahili. However, I do get the urge to philosophize. So, I do philosophy.

That said, I think the whole free will debate is pretty unnecessary unless we are discussing culpability or morality. Most people are garden variety sinners. It’s the heinous acts that make us wonder about free will. Would you have disavowed the Nazis if you were a German of military enlistment age in 1930s Nazi Germany? Most of us would like to think so, but most of them probably didn’t have much real choice. That’s not an argument for the permissibility of genocide, but I think it is something to think about regarding free will. The more you know about someone, their nature and nurture, the less culpable you tend to find them. I think that’s why we tend to defend our loved ones more so than strangers. We know their histories.

Or maybe I’m just speaking for myself.

-

Though I don’t think most proponents of LFW would call our choices “uncaused causes”, but rather “self-caused causes”. However, this just pushes the problem back to God.

I agree with you.