Following the Pope's recent revelations about information given to the children at Fatima helping to save him from assassination, I thought it might make a good topic for discussion.

I'm not sure if everybody here is aware of all the facts behind the world famous 'Miracle at Fatima' but, if you're not, it's well worth checking it out. Which ever way you look at it, this is one of the strangest incidente ever to take place in the 20th Century. Many people suggest that it would have had a far greater impact worldwide if it had not taken place during the First World War.

Interestingly, there is no doubt that what 70,000 people said they witnessed at Fatima in Potugal during 1917 does bear striking similarities with modern UFO sightings. For example, extremely odd clouds which hovered, buzzing sounds, flashes in the sky, not to mention the blast of heat which allegedly dried the clothes of the vast crowd.

I would be interested to hear what the religious/non religious and pro UFO/UFO sceptics on the board think about this incident.

Was it a geniune visitation by the Virgin Mary? Was it decidedly alien in origin or was it simply a mass hallucination?

Anybody who wants to check up on the basic facts behind the incident can check out this web site below.
http://www.angelfire.com/id/fatimaonline/Apparition1.html



[This message has been edited by Spadge (edited June 09, 2000).]

Miracle.

First, their was three specific prohphecies that all came to pass.

Second, these were children. Not some wacked-out religious freak like me, but children. What would be their motivation to lie? They were threatened to stop lying or daydreamaing about this lady, yet they persisted.

As far as a "heat blast", well, I'm not a scientist, nor do I play one on TV, but I think that something of that magnitude would kill the people as well as dry their clothes, given the amount of heat needed, in the given time frame.

Marian visitations are very intresting.

------------------
"Know Jesus, know peace; no Jesus, no peace."
-Patrick Ashley

Pashley

Hmmm...so you're coming down on the geniune miracle side.

The trouble is how could we possibly know the difference beween a genuine religious experience or dem pesky aliens pretending to be God? All throughout history they could have been shaping religion for their own purpose. This is assuming aliens exist of course.......

Incidently, I find it hard not to find the 'heat blast' a bit unbelievable myself.


[This message has been edited by Spadge (edited June 15, 2000).]

Hello Spadge,


The trouble is how could we possibly know the difference beween a geniune religious experience or dem pesky aliens pretending to be God? All throughout history they could have been shaping religion for their own purpose. This is assuming aliens exist of course.......

That is a very good point you have there Spadge, if you think it through a little further then you should realise something else : there is no obvious difference between an invisible god doing his stuff and invisible aliens doing theirs. This means that the alien subculture that has been florishing since the Roswell case is beginning to show more and more signs of a religion.
Looking at it from an antropological point of view, I'd say the alien subculture is a newly emerging religian with its very own believes, dogma's and rites.
Very interesting indeed to see how something like this grows...

------------------
I err, therefore I exist !

Hi Plato

I certainly would not disagree with you here. Unfortunately, both 'faiths' have their fanatics and I have to admit that I'm not very keen on extremists whatever they're involved in.

Getting back to the original theme of the thread, I am keen to know what your view of the Fatima event is given your views on religion and aliens? What do you personally think is the most logical explanation? After all we simply can't ignore an event of this magnitude and pretend it never happened. Something obviously happened at Fatima, but what?



[This message has been edited by Spadge (edited June 15, 2000).]

I'm afraid you won't like my explanation. It revolves around the fascinating and sometimes simply unbelievable complexity of the human mind.
There are different aspects of course, first of all you have the cultural aspect of a long tradition of miracles and apperishions. This was needed to provide the general acceptence by the surroundings of the subject that experienced the 'miracle' but also as a trigger for the subject itself to interpret what really happened.
Second you have all kinds of different stimuli that can get very strange effects, lets call them halocinations in the broadest sense.
Third you have the individuals personality and psychology since that ultimatly molds facts into ideas.

These three aspects were needed in order to get the miracle, something definitly happened there namely the convergence of these three aspects. What went on afterward is an ever more complex reinterpretation of the so called facts in a continuously broadening set of ideas. Resulting in some kind of mass psychoses.

Mind you I'm not just talking about the Fatima miracle but in a very general sense about para-physical experiences.
However, I'm not saying "this is all bullshit and there is no such thing", I'm saying that we don't understand the human mind enough to provide sufficient answers. I'm saying we don't understand the universe enough to know all its secrets. But I am saying the universe is much, much trickier then we suspect...

------------------
I err, therefore I exist !

Describing it in a very simplistic way, what I think you're saying is that these things are all in the mind right? As I said, that's probably far too simplistic a way to describe your theory but I think I get the gist of it.

I'm sure you are aware that two of the children were told that they would die soon, which in fact they did. Was this a coincidence?

It is interesting that you've tended to go for the more down to earth answer, although it's certainly not a conventional one. Now to me, each of these two things sound believable. To be honest, even if I was pushed, I really would not like to say what I think happened at Fatima, although the alien idea does appear reasonable to me.

Good topic Spadge. As for my two cents, I would have to say that I have no idea. I do believe in miracles, and in prophecy, and in revelation from Christ. But I also am very aware first hand that not everything we'd like to believe is from God, is really from God. See, I don't believe that aliens are aliens as we attempt to define them in the first place. I think that the aliens that we are all too familiar with are demonic. There are 2 forces at work on this earth. One is Satan, the other is Jesus Christ. There is a spirit of deceipt and a spirit of truth. It seems to me, from what I've seen, read about, and experienced myself, that the spirit of deceipt is just that. Crafty, crafty, crafty. I've referred to the alien phenomenon before as the "Antichrist laser light show" and I like that description, cause it's kinda funny, but not too far from the truth. I also know personally that the Holy Spirit of truth doesn't usually involve some fantastic laser light show. God speaks to people's hearts, and is much more subtle in presentation. At least as of recent times it seems.

What it always, always, always, boils down to is the message that is conveyed. If the message matches the word, then it is from God. If the message doesn't match the word, then it is from Satan. It's really that simple. Now, Satan is one sly mother-f&$ker ok? He'll bend and stretch the message, and take bits and pieces of it, and leave other parts out when it's convenient, just to try to fool you. He'll get really close to the truth, and present some truth, but not the whole truth. Hey, they don't call him the master of deceipt for nothing. If we humans could tell when we were being deceived, then we wouldn't be being deceived, now would we? The test of the spirits is as follows....if the spirit confesses that Jesus is the Son of God come in the flesh, then the spirit is of God. If the spirit confesses that Jesus is not the Son of God come in the flesh, then the spirit is of deceipt. Pretty simple huh? Hey, but try not to get blinded by the laser light show....it's really beautiful. Satan is beautiful in an asthetic kind of way, but as we all know, what is beautiful on the outside, can be very deadly on the inside.

------------------
You may think I'm a nut, but I'm fastened to the strongest bolt in the universe.



[This message has been edited by Lori (edited June 15, 2000).]

You see,

Lori illustrates very much my point that the alien subculture is becoming a religion. It is possible to exchange all mysteries by aliens doing their thing but as Lori states. One might as well assume that the aliens are nothing but manifestations of the devil. Thus encorporating the alien story in the existing paradigm of christian religion.

I think this phenomenon must also have been at work when for example christianity tore itself lose of Judeism and further more of the state religion of the Roman Empire. There is some kind of cross fertilisation at work that actually changes and molds both religions. Sometimes one of the two simply gets devored by the other one. However I don't think this will be the case with the alien subculture. Although Lori's idea is a pretty good attempt to recuperate the lost sheep it rests on a side of christianity that has been a bit neglegted the last couple of centuries. The 'workings of the devil' as a concept is on its way back. It used to be very big, especially during the religious wars of the sixteenth and seventeenth century when the unity of christianity was at stake. However ever since the eighteenth century it become more and more associated with superstition. This doesn't mean that 'the devil' has lost his place as ultimate evil but it does mean that one came to accept that man himself was pretty much capable of doing evil without any help of a supernatural being.

An other way to encorporate the aliens into christian religion would be to see them as messengers from god, angels sort of speak. This would be the other side of the spectrum but just as valid. However it seems the angels have suffered from the same illness as the evildoer himself since they also aren't as prominent in mainstream christian religion as they used to be.

------------------
I err, therefore I exist !

Plato, Lori

Very interesting postings from two totally different viewpoints. I just hope that Lori's concept isn't the right one.

Personally, although I've certainly considered this idea, I wouldn't say I agree with it. However, none of us really know the answers to this and this is just one idea about the whole subject that does give me a sense of unease.

Ufology has been an interest of mine since I was six years old and, although I've always found it hugely facinating, I'd be very happy if this phenomena simply didn't exist.

I don't know if either of you have read Operation Trojan Horse by John Keel (frequently quoted as one of the best books on the subject ever written) but some of the things it contained scared the hell outta me. Lori, you in particular would probably find it interesting. That's assuming you haven't already read it of course.

I'd prefer my aliens/devils to only exist in the movies thanks.



[This message has been edited by Spadge (edited June 16, 2000).]

Spadge,

as a cultural phenomenon, aliens certainly exist. Just take a glance at the Aliens & Extraterrestrials.
It is however up to us how much we let them become real for ourselves. For some people aliens are as real as you and me, they have totally immersed themselves in this culture. This is the reason why they can see and talk with them and we can't.

You have probably heard of imaginary sickness, this shows how much power the mind has over the body. The same thing can be said for cultures and perceived reality of people who adhere these cultures. A culture can bend reality in such a way that its claims become as real as you getting stinged by a musquito.
The trick is to get away from the musquito ;)

------------------
I err, therefore I exist !

Plato

Ah! I find that there is a slight problem with this explanation. As I explained before, I have been into this stuff since I was six. How is it then that I'm still not sure that aliens actually exist? Also, does this mean you are saying that alien abductions only happen to people that have immersed themselves into the culture?

I'm sure that your aware that this is not the case at all.


[This message has been edited by Spadge (edited June 16, 2000).]

First of all, there are several degrees of being an adept of a certain culture.


? Also, does this mean you are saying that alien abductions only happen to people that have immersed themselves into the culture?

I'm sure that your aware that this is not the case at all.


You see, it doesn't matter that they are, it is just part of the culture that it makes you think they are not !

You see it is far more elusive then a simple dillusion. It isn't just an illusion or imagination of a single or a few human beings. It is something that resides in the human collective mind. There it can create stories and effects who for example turn believers into non believers, make seas part, make dead walk, abduct entire populations of towns, you name it.

------------------
I err, therefore I exist !

You quite rightly point out that as a cultural phenomenon, aliens certainly exist. The thing I find interesting is where all this came from in the first place?

Is the phenomena that has caused many people since the 1940s to the present day to believe in the existence of ETs the very same one that centuries ago helped in the evolvement of organised religion? Is that what we are saying here?

This would mean that the UFO issue is the most profoundly important question that faces mankind today.

I can certainly see how due to a 'collective mind' events can be forced into fitting into a predetermined religious or ET framework.
However, If your mind theory is true, how did this all start in the first place assuming there was no 'collective consiouness' to hang strange events on. What was the initial metaphorical pebble that was thrown into the pond that caused ripples that are still gathering momentum thousands of years later.

Surely we are talking cause and effect here in that order. Something that causes genuine events to happen must be behind this whole thing to trigger such a wave of belief in the first place.

Another point! Taking your 'collective mind' theory a step further, would you ascribe all paranormal events to be somehow linked with this. For example, how do sightings of Bigfoot fit this idea. Are you saying that people only see large hairy men in the woods because thousands of others have seen them?

If I'm getting out of my depth here, it's because I am. lol......

[This message has been edited by Spadge (edited June 16, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by Spadge (edited June 16, 2000).]

Very interesting questions you are asking there Spadge !
Actually they very much resemble questions about evolution or creation. Or the chicken and the egg problem.
You see what goes for the biological aspect of our being also goes for the cultural aspect of what makes us humans. What mostly seems to be the case is that nor the chicken, nor the egg was first but something totally diffrent.


This would mean that the UFO issue is the most profoundly important question that faces mankind today.

You could call it like that but you could also say that the UFO issue is simply the latest variant of a process that has been going on since we first uttered coherent thoughts. I'm talking hundreds of thousands of years ago !

We have a theory describing biological evolution, although there is still much controversy about the precise mechanisms of this evolution. What we need now is something analogical but about cultural evolution. There are some steps in that direction via archeology and antropology but this science is still very young. I think a lot of help could come from the area of psychology.

------------------
I err, therefore I exist !

Ok, Plato... I've only been reading this thread and have held back as much as I can stand...

as a cultural phenomenon, aliens certainly exist. Just take a glance at the Aliens & Extraterrestrials.
It is however up to us how much we let them become real for ourselves. For some people aliens are as real as you and me, they have totally immersed themselves in this culture. This is the reason why they can see and talk with them and we can't.

Ok, to be fair..yes, the above can be true...HOWEVER, it is not true in ALL cases, Plato. Have you ever read the book called Communion??? Read it..then come back and say all alien abduction takes place in the mind. I for one was taught that there is ALWAYS a logical explanation for everything. I was never taught to open my arms up to such things as aliens or even ghosts. Point blank...was told they didn't exist. Now there have been somethings that I have experienced that I cannot DENY. I'd like to give a short example..something I'd like you to ponder for a bit. I was at a dinner party one night. Now, yes, it was known that the couple giving the party had a lot of activity going on in their home. There was a big group of us that didn't really think much about it..and kind of wrote it off...even though this couple was not the type to really buy into such things. During this party the younger crowd, which I was a part of, was sitting in the dining area. We were all talking about different things..as the lady happened to walk into the room..some of the people I had heard say "shhhhh shhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!" Everyone got quiet. I had my back toward the phone... I heard a man's voice speaking...I thought to myself...ohhhhh Lloyd must be on the phone and that is why some of the people said "shhhhhhh". I turned around...NO ONE was on the phone..nor was there a man standing back there. Only the lady that lived there. She was similing as she KNEW what was going on. Afterwards we all started talking about what happened... EVERYONE heard a MAN'S voice. Now, how could we ALL have imagined the very same thing??????????????? I mean everyone there started saying at the SAME time, "did you hear that guys voice?????". Do you see what I'm trying to say? To sit there and say that all this stuff is in the mind it's just not so.
Oh, and just and FYI...the only time before this event where a voice was heard...it happened to be a woman's voice..but, it had a body with it that time.

Flash,

I think you underestimate the power of the mind and certainly the power of a culture.


HOWEVER, it is not true in ALL cases, Plato. Have you ever read the book called Communion??? Read it..then come back and say all alien abduction takes place in the mind.

This book about abductions and your experience with ghosts is not something that can be easily explained. Therefor you can't just say it is all in the mind.
What actually takes place is a fairly complex interaction between something that did happen, your memory of it and the thoughts and talks you had with people about it. Al together make the experience that what you described.
You see reality remembered isn't the same as reality as it actually was. Each moment you think about a specific remembrence, it becomes ever so slightly different without you noticing it.
It doesn't really matter actually because every time you remember the situation for your it retains its original reality because you were there, right ? Besides the illogical explanations are mostly much more pleasant and exiting then the logical ones, so if you can choose take the fascinating one.

------------------
I err, therefore I exist !

Plato!!!!!?????? Give me a break, will ya????? Come on! I'm telling you that I heard they guys voice..turned my back and there was NOT a man that was there. At the SAME time...when the voice STOPPED everyone responded the same way saying, "did you hear that guys voice" I have not added to this story nor have I taken anything away.
Question: How is it that when the voice stopped that exactly at that time..everyone knew it stopped????????
Question: How is it everyone confirmed it was a mans voice that was heard..at the SAME time???????

Flash,

come on. You didn't seriously believe that I was going to make you doubt one second about your experience ?
You obviously have been thinking about these things for several years so what could a little post like mine do ?
I am not going to change your mind, that is all up to you if you want that. If you don't that is fine by me, I have no problem with this. I hope you also have no problem with the fact that I have some trouble with your interpretation of what you saw.

Peace !

------------------
I err, therefore I exist !

Plato,

Paradigm, huh? LOL! Well, can't argue with that. But my paradigm is based upon some pretty solid evidence. No, don't ask me to share, it's not mine to share. You just need something really, really weird to happen to you. I'd like to see how fast you changed your tune.

Operation Trojan Horse? Sounds good. I'm on it dude, thanks.

------------------
You may think I'm a nut, but I'm fastened to the strongest bolt in the universe.

You know Lori, I almost beg for something weird to happen to me, but the sad thing is it never does.
Why is that do you think ?

Am I not open enough ? Am I somehow avoided by weirdness because I don't believe in it ? Pleas weirdness, have pity on me ! Show yourself so that an unbeliever might be cured of his erring ways !

Flash,

What you saw can be explained with an infinite amount of explanesions. For example it could have been aliens that with some kind of weird technology projected this voice and image to you and the other people with you.
Or it could have been an elf, one of the last of his kind that put a magic spell on you so you were able to see it.
It could have been a manifestation of a god or of a demon. It could have been a dimensional bridge to an other dimension.

What I'm saying is the appearent illogicalness of what you experienced provided a link for the world of fantasy to get a hold on the real world. You simply choose that explantion of the dominant culture that you adhere. In this case : a ghost.
In fact if you are true with yourself you should simply say : I don't have enough information about what I saw or heard to draw valid conclusions. That is just it. Of course people don't like loose ends in their life and rather then letting them hang there they fantasise something that can explain the loose end. This fantasy gets more valor if it is in the context of an already existing paradigm. That is how cultures keep their connections with reality and how they survive.

------------------
I err, therefore I exist !

Plato,

That's a good question. I think that it probably has to do with your existing set of beliefs. You are not a seeker. You're an atheist, a humanist, a scientist, whatever. And that is good enough for Satan. He doesn't have to put the moves on you with some laser light show, because he got to you in a more discrete way. Actually, if something like that did happen to you right now, he would probably lose the battle, because then, you may become a seeker, and he would risk you finding Christ, and finding the truth. Does that make sense? Also, be careful what you wish for.

------------------
You may think I'm a nut, but I'm fastened to the strongest bolt in the universe.

What you saw can be explained with an infinite amount of explanesions. For example it could have been aliens that with some kind of weird technology projected this voice and image to you and the other people with you.
Or it could have been an elf, one of the last of his kind that put a magic spell on you so you were able to see it.
It could have been a manifestation of a god or of a demon. It could have been a dimensional bridge to an other dimension.

And it could have been the neighbor's voice coming through the heat register - this happens in my house sometimes, although I can't explain the reason for it. Although I am in my house, and he is in his, apparently if he is in just the right place, his voice will come through the register in our bedroom as if he was in the crawl space above our bedroom! Kind of makes me blush to think of what he might have heard when we talk in our bedroom!

But this is not to say that weird things don't happen - they do! For quite some time we seemed to have a ghost that lived in our home, and "he" did things that had no other explanation. For example, how do you explain a light switch being turned back on, with an audible click, after you just turned it off - right in front of you and no one else is there? How do you explain a motorcycle key disappearing from its hook for a period of 2 weeks, and no one in the household knows anything about it, and everyone in the household takes part in a very thorough search. Then one day you take the only other key that hung on that hook (leaving an empty space there) so you can go wash the car. Then, when you come back half an hour later, and go to hang the car key up - there is the motorcycle key hanging exactly where it was supposed to have been all along? How do you explain a bowl of leftover rice disappearing from the refrigerator for a period of 24 hours, with the entire household again taking part in the search (just in case you had done something really harebrained, like put it in one of the cupboards, or something)? Then the next day it reappears exactly where you knew you had put it the day before? Of course, I threw it out at that point. How do you explain a door that you had just closed and locked not 10 minutes before suddenly standing open, and you are the only one in the house at the time? And how about the time my youngest son was home alone after school, and saw an apparition of a man floating into his bedroom? He waited outside for us to come home and, of course, there was no one there. Also, during the period of time when these things were happening, I would often sense a presence - very strongly, usually just behind my left shoulder, although there was no one there.

Then, how do you explain my friend I knew in my junior year of high school who could literally read minds? Word for word? I had heard about this ability of his from several friends we had in common, but I was very skeptical to say the least. So I tested this for myself one day. I sat next to him in English class, and I decided I would send him a mental message to see if he could pick it up (we were supposed to be reading something quite dull from our textbooks at the time). I hadn't told anyone I was going to do this - it just occured to me while we were there in class. I sent him the following mental message: "Belinda likes you". I just kept repeating that thought for a minute or two, when he finally looked over at me and asked me what I was doing. I played innocent and asked him what he meant. He said, "You're trying to tell me something". I asked him what he thought I was trying to tell him, and he said, "Something about Belinda". "Yes?", I prodded him. "That she likes me?" It was kind of cool, in a freaky sort of way, but you really had to watch your thoughts around this guy.

In my personal life, I always look for the logical explanations for things first, and if they aren't there - then I consider the paranormal explanations. I think this is perfectly reasonable.


------------------
www.indigenousrocks.com (http://www.indigenousrocks.com)

The test of the spirits is as follows....if the spirit confesses that Jesus is the Son of God come in the flesh, then the spirit is of God. If the spirit confesses that Jesus is not the Son of God come in the flesh, then the spirit is of deceipt. Pretty simple huh?

Lori,

Yeah - a bit too simple, if you ask me. So, what you're saying is that any spirit who proclaims that Jesus is the Son of God is a spirit God, and therefore everything that spirit says is true? Then have I got just the religion for you! Check it out, Lori:

http://www.lds.org/site_main_menu/frameset-global-bas_bel.html

------------------
www.indigenousrocks.com (http://www.indigenousrocks.com)

Lori,

but of course I am mislead by Satan. In fact, every one that has a deviant belief then you have is actually mislead by the evil one, isn't that right ? You certainly made it secure for yourself, why do you need sutch a bedrock of security ? What kind of earth shattering event happened in your life that you lost all trust in humanity ?
You are truly fastened to the strongest bold in the universe Lori : yourself !

Searcher,


And it could have been the neighbor's voice coming through the heat register - this happens in my house sometimes,

Nice one although I think Flash won't agree with that. Any way she was still young so more susceptible to illogical explanations.

About your poltergheist, could it be that you are actually interpreting a bit to much. You see, taken separatly each and every one of those stories can be easily explained by simply forgetting or misplacing or imagination of the kid (especially if he already heard stories about a possible ghost in the house) and then down right a sense of paranoia when you start to add all these things up.

The problem with going to the paranormal explanation when you don't find a logical one is actually a desparate attempt to still try and make some sens of things. It is some sort of an intellectual defeat without really admitting it. This is very understandable and human also, but it leads to pure fantasy I'm afraid.

------------------
I err, therefore I exist !

Nice one although I think Flash won't agree with that. Any way she was still young so more susceptible to illogical explanations.

Flash knows better about what she experienced than I do, as I wasn't there. I was only offering what I consider to be a reasonable and logical explanation for what was occuring, taken from my own experience.

As for the things that were happening in my home, the floating man could very well have materialized directly from my son's imagination - I'll give you that. But the other things I cannot explain so easily. Those items disappeared from where they had been placed, and then just as mysteriously reappeared exactly where they were supposed to have been all along. Where had those items been during the time everyone in the household was looking for them? You also haven't provided an explanation for the light switch being turned back on after I had stepped 2 feet away from it, nor have you explained my high school friend's mind-reading abilities.

What I am saying is that while there may be logical explanations for most things, there is still quite a bit that happens in this world which we cannot explain given our current level of understanding. It may be kind of unsettling, but there it is.

------------------
www.indigenousrocks.com (http://www.indigenousrocks.com)

Hey Plato,

If you don't want an answer, then don't ask the question. And quit being so offensive. Just because you don't agree with me doesn't mean I'm wrong, and it certainly doesn't mean that you have to get pissy. The answer that I gave you is the truth. If you look at the stats regarding weirdo phenonmenon like alien abductions, paranormal activity, paganism, witchcraft and the like, you would find that these people were seekers when introduced to the phenomenon. You are NOT a seeker, right? Don't diss my paradigm buddy. Yours is no better, and makes much less logical sense.

------------------
You may think I'm a nut, but I'm fastened to the strongest bolt in the universe.

If you look at the stats regarding weirdo phenonmenon like alien abductions, paranormal activity, paganism, witchcraft and the like, you would find that these people were seekers when introduced to the phenomenon.

Uh, thanks Lori. By the way, why didn't you include Christianity right alongside Witchcraft and Paganism as "weirdo phenomena"? I mean, didn't the founder of Christianity do some pretty weird stuff like, walking on water, faith healing, raising the dead (including himself), etc.? Would you consider any of this "normal"? And for what reason do you even include Paganism in the category of "weirdo phenomena"?

------------------
www.indigenousrocks.com (http://www.indigenousrocks.com)

Searcher,

I'm sorry. Dag, I didn't mean that to come out as some personal slam or something. Not at all. Just try to keep in mind that even though I think you are a great person as far as I can tell, and it seems you've got a good heart, intelligent, the whole nine yards....you dance with godesses and shit ok? I mean, you are aware that I think that the spirits from which you seek enlightenment from are demonic right? It's not a personal attack. It's just what I believe to be true based upon what I know to be true. Honestly it scares me to death and saddens me greatly that you're cohorting with these spirits. I try to keep that to myself, because I know that all it does is offend. I don't want to offend. I like you. That probably sounds mixed up to you doesn't it? I'm concerned for you, and I guess if I didn't love ya, I wouldn't be...how's that? I know that you're not a mean or bad or evil person....NO WAY MAN! But I do think that you're being led by spirits who are deceptive, and do not have your best interest in mind. Forgive me?

------------------
You may think I'm a nut, but I'm fastened to the strongest bolt in the universe.

Lori,

Okay, okay - you're forgiven already! :)

It's pretty much a given that we will never see eye to eye on this subject, but it is always interesting to get another person's point of view on things, regardless of agreement. I'm just happy that I'm not being burned at the stake for my beliefs and you're not being fed to the lions for yours, and we can discuss our differences at least somewhat civilly in a public forum such as this one. There are still places in this world where such a discussion between opposing factions would not be possible. Sad, huh?

------------------
www.indigenousrocks.com (http://www.indigenousrocks.com)

Lori,

was I being offensive ? Then I'm sorry.


you would find that these people were seekers when introduced to the phenomenon. You are NOT a seeker, right?

Hmm, this is actually a very interesting point. What is a seeker, if I might ask ?
What does it mean to be a seeker ?

Searcher,

You must think pretty high of me if you think I can solve all those weird things from my home in Belgium and after some quick thinking. Besides, I don't think solving these mysteries would change your mind about the existence of ghosts or other paranormal activities. You see the mysteries will always outway the solutions because it is much harder to find a satisfying answer then to experience something you can't explain.
What is more important here is your other satement you did :

In my personal life, I always look for the logical explanations for things first, and if they aren't there - then I consider the paranormal explanations. I think this is perfectly reasonable.
Why do you think this is perfectly reasonable ? Because what you are saying is : if I don't find a logical explanation I will simply take an illogical one. Do you think this is still a valid explanation ?
Or let me ask it in an other way, do you think the statement : 'I can't explain what happened' and the statement : 'A ghost came and did it' hold as much value ?
What is a ghost in the last statement ? It would be something that you can't see (most of the time that is), you can't observe with any of your senses actually but still would be able to play the occasional hide-and-seek game. This something can actually be anything it could be an invisible and undetectible gnome that holds your home for his dwelling place. So you see by picking a ghost you simply choose something at of an infinite amount of possiblities. So how do you know it is a ghost ? Actually you still don't know what it is so you still should say : 'I don't know what caused it, it could be a ghost.'

------------------
I err, therefore I exist !

Hmmmm....a seeker is someone who knows that they don't have the answers and is looking for them. Someone who realizes that there is something much greater than anything we see, hear, and touch out there, they just don't quite know what it is. Someone who knows that they don't know the truth but are looking to find it. Someone who believes in God or a god, but doesn't know Him, or which him, or excuse me Searcher, her. ;) Or something like that.

------------------
You may think I'm a nut, but I'm fastened to the strongest bolt in the universe.

Searcher,


And it could have been the neighbor's voice coming through the heat register - this happens in my house sometimes, although I can't explain the reason for it. Although I am in my house, and he is in his, apparently if he is in just the right place, his voice will come through the register in our bedroom as if he was in the crawl space above our bedroom! Kind of makes me blush to think of what he might have heard when we talk in our bedroom!

ROFLOL!!!!!!!!!! My face would be red too if such a thing happened to me! Yikes! :)

Hey, I do not have a problem with what seems "logical"...I really do not. That sounds like a good and logical expanation...however, the closest neighbor that they have lives 10 miles away.

They have had many many things happen in their home. The story that I shared is light in comparison to the others. I'd LOVE it if Plato could make it one week staying there and hear what "logical"
explanations he comes up with. :D



[This message has been edited by Flash (edited June 18, 2000).]

Plato,


Nice one although I think Flash won't agree with that. Any way she was still young so more susceptible to illogical explanations.

I was still young??? It happened all of five years ago...

Ohhhhhh...I went back and read my original post... "younger crowd" means 35 yrs down to 25.



[This message has been edited by Flash (edited June 18, 2000).]

So you see by picking a ghost you simply choose something at of an infinite amount of possiblities. So how do you know it is a ghost ? Actually you still don't know what it is so you still should say : 'I don't know what caused it, it could be a ghost.'

Plato,

That's pretty much what I was saying, although I guess I wasn't all that clear about it. If you'll go back to my original statement, you will see that I said that we seemed to have a ghost living with us, and for convenience, I referred to it as a "he". Whether it was a ghost, alien, angel, demon, poltergeist, effects of electromagnetic pollution - I have no idea. But it certainly wasn't what I would consider "normal".

------------------
www.indigenousrocks.com (http://www.indigenousrocks.com)

Hey, I do not have a problem with what seems "logical"...I really do not. That sounds like a good and logical expanation...however, the closest neighbor that they have lives 10 miles away.

Flash,

Freaky! :eek:

Do you remember what the voice was saying, or could you make it out? Was it in English, or could you tell? Did there seem to be any kind of message, or was it just conversational kind of talk?

By the way, did this lady live close to anything that might introduce electromagnetic pollution into the surrounding environment, such as telecommunication towers, power lines, a radio ham, mobile phone relay, substation, etc.?

------------------
www.indigenousrocks.com (http://www.indigenousrocks.com)

Searcher,
Yes, it is freaky, huh? But if that freaks you out then you should hear about some other things that have happened in that home.


By the way, did this lady live close to anything that might introduce electromagnetic pollution into the surrounding environment, such as telecommunication towers, power lines, a radio ham, mobile phone relay, substation, etc.?
No... not at all. That's what so wild about it.


Do you remember what the voice was saying, or could you make it out? Was it in English, or could you tell? Did there seem to be any kind of message, or was it just conversational kind of talk?

No, I couldn't make it out. It was like if you had a tv on but the volume was turned down really low. No, their tv was off LOL
I could make out that it was a man's voice. He spoke for like 30 seconds or so. That's pretty much it.

Lori,

You know, apart from believing in god(s) I think I can qualify for being a searcher. That is why I went to study physics in the first place. And you know what ? The more answers I get from the universe, the more questions arise and the more beautiful the picture of it becomes !
Why are you so insisting on the god part ?

Flash,

goodness, 25 I must have interpreted your words a bit to much !
It seems that house really would be a tricky enigma and actually it makes me more and more curious.
However let me just tell you why even if I would see plates floating in thin air I would still not believe in ghosts. Because by definition ghosts are immaterial, right ? As in not made of the same stuff we are, correct ?
So if it isn't matter then it can't interact with it. Fine if that means that ghosts can walk through walls but not fine if it means they can pick up material things or make soundwaves (which is move airmolecules) or actually become visible (which is produce or reflect photon's). Something can't be at the same time material (as in visible or hearable) and immaterial (as in go though walls and be otherwise invisible).
Let's assume for a moment that they found a way to make the switch between material and immaterial. Then what is to prevent them to appear all the time ? Or to return to the voice that you heard become a loud and perfectly understandable voice with a solid visible person pronouncing the words ? Why this half visible, half solid, very silent and not understandable bullshit ? What are they trying to pull on us ? You see this makes absolutely no sense ! That is quite normal because you are starting from an illogical premise therefor nothing logical follows.

If there is one thing that I believe (call it an irrational believe ;) ) that is that the universe ultimatly makes sense. That it follows some kind of logic and that it is internally consistent. On these grounds I must decline the existence of ghosts, gods, paranormal activities, aliens who are visiting us and the Germans winning the European soccor cup (although I don't think most of the people on this board is following it)

------------------
I err, therefore I exist !

Plato,

I love physics. Never studied it past high school though. You'll end up answering the question of how, but you'll never be able to answer the question of why. Do you know what I mean? I say you're not a seeker because you've already ruled out the concept of God. Can you answer the question of why using physics?

------------------
You may think I'm a nut, but I'm fastened to the strongest bolt in the universe.

Lori,


Can you answer the question of why using physics?

The question is not why use physics, the question should be way use logic or why do I insist on a self consistent universe.
Because in a universe that isn't self consistent anything can happen. This means that it could rain elephants one day and air could become jelly the other day. This however doesn't seem to be the case, everything keeps pretty much within a certain set of bounderies. Thus the universe must be logical somehow.
Anything self contradictory is therefor ruled out as not belonging to the universe and therefor not true.
So this is why I use logic (and physics is just a form of logic applied to some specific questions).

------------------
I err, therefore I exist !

Plato,

Ok, I'm not sure if I totally understand what you're saying but....when I look at this world, and the universe, and all of the logical, beautiful, and perfect laws that operate within it, I see God. How is it that you can look at all of the order and wonder and perfection and see the opposite? Don't you try to answer the question why am I here? Why are there laws that are so perfect? What is the meaning of life? How did all of this perfection and order come from some chaotic blob? When you look at the human condition, what kind of laws do you think govern it? Why is it that everything else in the universe seems to know it's place and abide by it's own law, in a perfect way, except for us? Where does pain and sufferring come from? Is there even such a thing, or do you think we just make it all up, cause you know, everything's relative? I just don't understand how in the world you can study something like physics and NOT wonder about God. Who do you think came up with these astounding laws anyway? The scientists who discovered them? No, they just discover what God has already created. You're not delving deep enough. You think that God has to make it rain elephants. And I'm saying, God made the rain.

------------------
You may think I'm a nut, but I'm fastened to the strongest bolt in the universe.

[This message has been edited by Lori (edited June 19, 2000).]

Well Lori, the reason why I can do this is actually quite simple : I don't presuppose a god exists.
This is the difference between you and me I think, you first say 'God exists and created everything' then you look at the universe and marvel at how wonderfull everything was made by him. I presuppose 'Everything must follow some kind of logic' and I start from myself because I am the only thing I'm absolutly sure of. Sadly through logical dedection and empirical experiments I don't come to the conclusion that something as a God MUST exist. He could exist but I don't see any signs of him so therefor I must conclude that if he exists he has no influence on our universe at all or he simply doesn't exist. I have chosen for the last part.

Why don't I see any signs ? Because nothing points toward creation of any kind and also nothing points toward direct or indirect intervention of some superbeing. Everything I say can be explained by the things themselves.


Why is it that everything else in the universe seems to know it's place and abide by it's own law, in a perfect way, except for us? Where does pain and sufferring come from? Is there even such a thing, or do you think we just make it all up, cause you know, everything's relative?

This is just the point, Lori. There is no such thing as perfect laws and that everything else would abide by it's own law. This is a misinterpretation that was very popular amongst scientist during the eighteenth and nineteenth century. In this century we began to notice that 'laws' aren't exaclty 'laws' but rather settlements that were 'chosen' during the first instances of the big bang. This choice was something that came about quite naturally just like a pencil on its point 'chooses' finally a direction in which to fall. You will probably object here and claim that the pencil falls into a certain direction because of small air currents or imperfections at the point. This is true of course but these are merly restrictions on an otherwise totally free choise. The choise will be limited but you get the general idea.

Now, we must make a distinction between the several layers of reality. The first layer is the ground on which everything is build : matter as in the basic particles. These particles interact through serveral different forces and in doing this they exchange information about themselves. The complexity of this information grows when the particles combine to larger structures like molecules. Given the right circumstances the information interactions reach a critical fase in which information is actually stored and can be copied with sufficient accuracy that we can begin to speak of something called life. This is the second layer. Life in its basic form is a very complex molecule that can replicate itself with a minimum on error but just enough to be able to evolve and become even more complex. Why is this nescesarry ? Because the more complex a molecule is, the more unstable it is, it needs a constant influx of energy in order to sustain itself. If however it succeeds in making copies of itself, it has a much bigger chance of preserving its information then when it is alone.

When does pain and suffering come in the picture ? Well, you first need a nervous system in order to feel pain so we are well into the second layer (past multi cellular life) before we reach this point. By that time something else has evolved to keep track of all the activity of the cells and make sure the cooperation goes as it should : the brain. In this brain a new form of information retention is reached which brings us to the third level : a consciousness of some form. This consciousness can make the difference between pain and no pain because otherwise it would not survive at all. However this is not the end of the story at all when our species came about we pushed the way of information storage and interaction to a fourth level : culture ! This culture actually exists in many brains at the same time and has a consciousness that is far greater then of the indiviuals. It provides patterns through which the individuals think and look upon the world. It is in this layer that pain and suffering gets its meaning that you are talking about.
The four layers exist next to each other but also dependent on each other. In this fourth layer several different 'organisms' have formed. One of them is christianity, it has emerged as a means to provide an explanation and a meaning to existence of the individuals on which it resides, to defend itself against other 'organisms' it has provided a book in which its antecends are copied (same reason as why the first complex molecules made copies of themself). Other, more aggressive defence mechanisms are the notion of an evil planner which tries to undermine itself. This creation of an enemy works as a binding mechanism to keep the cohesion of the 'organism'. Same thing we saw and still see in the foreign policy of for example the US where first communism was the big enemy and now China is being put forward or the so called 'rogue nations'.

Now I see I have still not provided a sufficent answer why these things happen. Why is it that structures tend to become more and more complex ? Instability is the key word here. You see, we live in a universe that is far from equilibrium, it strives to become stable just like the pencil that strives to a more stable position : horizontal on the table. Where does this instability come from ?
Paradoxically enough from the nothing itself ! Strangely enough the nothing : the total absense of anything is the most unstable state possible this means that the Big Bang was simply bound to happen sooner or later. It seems that us being here is far more stable then us not being here.
One other way of looking at it is this : if nothing existed prior to the big bang, there was also nothing that could prevent the big bang from happening. If something is possible to happen and there is nothing preventing it from happening then that something happens. This is why we and everything else is here, it was inevitable !
Mind you I'm not saying everything was predesposed the same condition could have lead to a very different outcome but the fact that it would lead to some kind of outcome, this I claim to be inevitable.

------------------
I err, therefore I exist !

Plato

It amused me that in one of your earlier posts you said that weirdness seems to avoid you. Obviously, as you are one of the board's arch sceptics, this has had a strong effect on shaping your own personal views of paranormal phenomena. At least I would suppose it has.....

It seems to me that you're saying that weird things simply do not happen to you due to your sceptical nature. I will agree that some people do seem to avoid weirdness. However, it does not always follow that they are sceptical by nature. Some people totally believe in the existance of the paranormal but simply never get to experience it firsthand. One the other hand, many comfirmed sceptics have truly life changing experiences. How can we explain this effect?

Personally,I have tried to come up with the most logical explanations to some of the things I've witnessed and I've ended up reaching the conclusion that some of them certainly seem to be beyond our current understanding.

Sometimes, I just think we're all wasting our time on this board as the sceptics are never gonna convince the believers and vice versa. It's still a lot of fun though.

Anyway, I truly hope that one day soon it will be your turn to encounter something so weird that it at least proves to you that these things do happen. Second hand stories are so much easier to explain away. It would certainly be interesting for me (and the other board members I'm sure) to see if your standpoint would change. lol.......

Come to think of it. What is the most strange thing you've ever encountered? Is there anything at all you've witnessed that has totally baffled you, or made you really struggle to reach an answer that you're not entirely comfortable with?





[This message has been edited by Spadge (edited June 22, 2000).]

What is the most strange thing you've ever encountered? Is there anything at all you've witnessed that has totally baffled you, or made you really struggle to reach an answer that you're not entirely comfortable with?

Ok, let's see.
I must say I hade a rather spiritual experience this april when I was walking around in the Hoh Rainforest with my wife. The Hoh Rainforest is a temparate rainforest that is situated on the west coast along the Olympic Maintains in Washinton State.
Suddenly we came eye to eye with a Raven. Big deal, right ? Except if you know that the Raven is a very special bird for the Salish people (these are the indigenous people of the West Coast). It is the spirit that stole the light from the gods, a veritable Prometus. It was also the first time I saw a Raven this close in the wild. Raven are very intelligent birds and it was as if this one was trying to tell me something.
Now comes the best part : a few weeks later we learned we were pregnant and this must have happened a few days before the encounter with the Raven.
Was this the manifestation of the Spirit of the Raven that told me the happy news ?

------------------
I err, therefore I exist !

Nice one Plato

Quite an unusual incident.

It's always easier to put such things down to pure coincidence, but sometimes events like this certainly make you think.

Oh and congratulations on your happy news by the way.....

Plato,

No, that's not right. I look at the universe, and then say, there must be a God. That is not presupposing anything. And your whole point, after all of the physics lessons, your big complicated reason for why this universe is so magnificent and complex and delicate, and all of the laws that we marvel at exist, and all of the complexity of the human condition is........no reason, it's just random. Well, Bravo! I'm so impressed. ;)

Tell me Plato, how do you solve a moral paradox using physics? Here's a paradox for you....something that you find to be disgusting and revolting also turns you on sexually. There, now give me the right answer to solve that puzzle.

------------------
You may think I'm a nut, but I'm fastened to the strongest bolt in the universe.

Spadge,

thanks, I wonder if my wife and I were brought up as Salish, we would probably name our future child after the Raven. Perhaps it was even a sign that the Raven would be some kind of gardian spirit of our child.
You see, nine years ago I spend a year in Washinton State as an exchange student and this was my first time I came back. I never really got to know the indigenous culture on my first stay so I wanted to correct that situation. I went to musea, invocations of their legends and songs, spoke with them and tried to learn as much as possible in the short period of my stay. It showed me a whole different side of America...

Lori,

Did I ever say I could solve anything with physics ? I must have been drunk or out of my mind. Any how I don't think I made myself clear.
First of all I would like to make a distinction between the human race as a specification of the generalised term intelligent life.
So, what I'm saying is that intelligent life in general is an inevitable product of the universe. This is not a random event at all ! Nor is life, nor is matter. These however are all general terms.
One could compare it with being hungry, it is inevitable that you will eat somehow but as long as you haven't made up your mind it is not certain what you will eat.
The same holds for mankind, it is a specific of intelligent life and therefor not certain.
Do you believe that, when your god created man, he had something specific in mind or did man find his final feature as god was in the process of creating ?

About your paradox : on the edge of being rude, this couldn't in any way be related to your recent divorce now could it ?
Any way, what you are saying only appears to be a paradox if you don't make a distinction between feelings of hate/love and sex as a primal instinct. In regard to my previous theory sex would be of the third layer, it is the urge to breed like hunger is the urge to eat. Love and hate however are features of the fourth layer. In most of the situations the lower layers are much more powerful then the higher ones. For example if you lose an arm (this would be something of the second layer, the basic life layer or even the matter layer) there is nothing you can do about that, you can't go around pretending you still have it because you will get severely hurt.
Same goes for sex and love, the two can exist without the other resulting in platonic love (pun intended :D ) or plane sex. I think your paradox has to do with the last category but in a more severe way.

------------------
I err, therefore I exist !

Same goes for sex and love, the two can exist without the other resulting in platonic love (pun intended ) or plane sex.

Plato,

Plane sex? What does the Mile High Club have to do with this? ;)

------------------
www.indigenousrocks.com (http://www.indigenousrocks.com)

Is it just me? I didn't get most of what you just said. It kind of sounds circle-ish to me. So why are we here? Why are we like we are? Why is the universe like it is? Are you saying that it's a result of a chain of random events, like which way a pencil falls? Inevitable and random are not the same things right? And we're just really complex animals that have evolved, by chance, under the exact right conditions? I don't see how people can live and think that. I don't understand how people would be able to decide what's right and wrong if they thought that. This is where the paradoxes start showing. Like why do you think it is that our "natural" inclinations and desires, and our "natural" emotional reactions are usually detrimental to our own lives? Like they're usually based upon something that's been deemed sinful, so you find that you have to actually go against your own "natural" will, to be a better person? Don't cha think that's a little weird?

And yea, I think that God knows exactly what He's going to end up with. God knows everything. Everything that's happened and why, and everything that will happen and why, and He's known it all along, and it is His will, whether you or anyone else likes it or not, or cooperates or not. Cool, huh? I think that what He's going for is a group of beings, angels and humans, that have voluntarily chosen to be with Him, and to love Him, and to live the right way, His way, of their own free will. So this is how it all had to go down.

------------------
You may think I'm a nut, but I'm fastened to the strongest bolt in the universe.

[This message has been edited by Lori (edited June 24, 2000).]

Searcher,

LOL ! :D :D good one !
But you know, a plane can still be pretty plain actually...

Lori,

about the pencil, you do agree that it is inevitable that it will fall ? Only the direction where it will fall is not known before it falls.
This is what I mean when I use the words random and inevitable.

You use the phrase "...exact right conditions..." I can see where you are going but take the pencil again. After it fell it assumed a certain position, it has done this because the conditions were just right to fall this way. Does this matter ? Does it matter what final position it took ?
At first glance (if we go back to the original problem) for us humans, it does other wise we would not be here. But suppose for example the meterorite, the famous dinosaure killer, did not hit the earth. Things would have been very different now. Mammels would still be small, pityfull creatures and some dinosaure species could have ascended the ladder towards intelligence (if we can speak of such a thing of course). This is all speculation of course but I think this scenario carries some weight. One could even wonder if they also would have a religion similar to christianity.
If there is a god as it says in the bible the dinosaure sapience would have been his creature as much as we are, right ?

I would like to point you to a contradiction, in an attempt not to quote you out of context you say :


I think that God knows exactly what He's going to end up with. God knows everything. Everything that's happened and why, and everything that will happen and why, and He's known it all along, and it is His will, whether you or anyone else likes it or not, or cooperates or not. Cool, huh?

Very cool indeed ! It also sounds very deterministic to me, you and Boris would come along just fine on this one. However you also say :


I think that what He's going for is a group of beings, angels and humans, that have voluntarily chosen to be with Him, and to love Him, and to live the right way, His way, of their own free will. So this is how it all had to go down.

But how can they have free will, Lori, if god already knows everything that will happen, whether we like it or not ?
So I see only two possible ways out and none of them you will like I think :
1. God knows perfectly what will happen and who will choose what but the ones that do the choosing don't know that. They actually believe that they are doing this in their own free will although what they are doing has long been ordained by god.
2. God has a general plan like you say, he wants to have a bunch of good guys on his side at the end but he doesn't have the faintest idea who that will be. May be he has a bold part figure in his head (for he is god after all) but that is as far it goes, he doesn't know everything that will happen.

Take your pick...

------------------
I err, therefore I exist !

Plato,

First, it is not inevitable that the pencil falls. That's dependent upon gravitational pull. I know that's irrelevant, but. So the pencil falls randomly, but what does that mean? What about the possibility that it's path was affected by the inertia of a foreign object? What about a strong wind? That's still irrelevant. The fact is that the pencil falls exactly where God wants it to fall. All you see when you study physical laws, is how God made the pencil fall the way He wanted it to.

And I'm not sure if you understand what I'm saying about God's omnipotence. Ok, He knows what's going to happen before it happens, but He doesn't interfere with your free will. You get to choose what you do, He just knows what you will do before you do it, and why and when and where and how as well. See what I mean? We both know that if we screw around with natural and physical laws that the consequences can be unforseen and devastating right? Doesn't it stand to reason that if we screwed around with the spiritual ones, that the consequences would be as deadly? Yea, it does. It's just the way the universe works. Why? Because that's the way God made it to work. Why? Because that is the BEST way. The PERFECT way. Not for Him, BUT FOR US.

So he has made spiritual laws that have effects and consequences. We can see them and feel them if we pay attention. It's fixed; it's given...like physics laws. That's just how it is. So you have choices...everyone has choices all the time. He doesn't direct your choices, but He knows what you will choose before you do. The effects of your decisions are YOURS, not His. He just set up the system that determines the effects. And the system is perfect, it is we humans that are screwing it all up! It's like this...you don't really have a choice as to whether or not you have to deal with the effects of gravity everyday right? Well, the same is true for the effects of spiritual laws as well. If you decide to ignore the law of gravity, and jump off a 30 story building, well, are you going to blame God for creating gravity? Well, you won't get a chance to, you'll be dead. Do you get the analogy?

------------------
You may think I'm a nut, but I'm fastened to the strongest bolt in the universe.



[This message has been edited by Lori (edited June 25, 2000).]

Lori,

I notice you managed to round the cape of 1000 posts, congratulations ! ;)

I was wondering if we are talking about the same thing if we use the term 'free will'. What do you understand about it ?
For me free will means that if you have for example a 50/50 chance for something to choose, then this choise is not know until it is made. Not known by anything and anyone.
Suppose somebody is walking along a road and arrives at a fork, the guy chooses after some consideration the left fork. He thinks he made a free decision if however this choise was somehow known beforehand then he could not have made a free descision because the right fork was actually an impossibility. He didn't know it but it was impossible for him to choose the right fork because it was already known he would choose the left one. According to my previous definition the man has no free will.

------------------
I err, therefore I exist !

[This message has been edited by Plato (edited June 26, 2000).]

wow, I like the direction this discussion has turned. If we had persisted to directly debate a happening back in 1917 which has no bearing on much whatsoever, it doesn't interest me in the least. Sorry. However, I do enjoy the good ol' free will discussions, they are great, an excellent topic to discuss. OK here is my scoop on free will. I think that it is an illusion, for all practical purposes real, but when closely examined, found to not exist. This is why:

The way it is seen by myself, if the universe has any order in it whatsoever, regardless of how much of how little, to assume anything but that such order is the result of a plan set in motion is unnatural. Disorder is always natural, and it takes barely any time at all to turn a perfectly (respectively) ordered system into a cluttered and utterly disorganized one (2nd Law of Thermodynamics). Therefore, since disorder is the ultimate and usually quick-working product of natural phenomenon, order (I stand to reason) is a product of a causal force which stands apart from either the disorder itself (which if the thing is made of any kind of matter or energy is not possible) or stands apart from time-which is the driving force behind the disorder. Such would define the causal force as being super-natural, or above the laws of nature. I see no way around this. Either the universe is eternal (which it can be readily proven not to be) and has not a scrap of ordered process in it whatsoever (which we can obviously see that it does), or it is finite both in age and in size (resulting in the current obedience of various equations of state-or the existence order) and was created by sometihng which stands apart from the powers of entropy (I stand to reason that "God" is an appropriate name for this force).

So we can reason (very reasonably, har-har) that the order created by "God" was intentionally created, so He knows what is was He created, and He did it on purpose. If God created this universe, we can assume it to be planned for two reasons. First, the very fact that order does not happen accidentally, but rather the opposite. Entropy is the result of accidents. We see order, and so we can assume it was planned that way. Secondly, if God operates outside of time, as He must if He is able to create anything, He has an eternal quality about Him. Eternal in age means that He has quite the potential (if not the inevitable trait) of being all-knowing. Eternity is a much long-enough time to learn about a finite universe I think! If God is omniscient, then we can assume He knows what He created, He knew it before He created, He did nothing by accident-no suprizes to God. To suggest anything but that He planned it all would be to say He does not know everything, to say He is not eternal in age (and that He does not stand apart from the processes of time), and eventually to say that the universe has no current operating state of order (which is just not true; one begats the next).

The concept that God created everything, knows everything, and planned everything (which all walk intrinsically hand-in-hand) implies a state of absolute truth, or inerrance. If the plan God set forth is absolute truth, then it will not deviate. We will do exactly what we were meant to do, regardless of what decisions we make. They are all part of the plan.

The illusionary facade of free will comes into play because we live in a uni-directional continuum called time. We cannot go back, we cannot jump the tracks and leap foreward, we are stuck with facing one direction and moving at one relitive speed. Two woods diverged in a wood and I, I took the one on the right or the left...lets just say to the right, but wait, I kinda think the left is less traveled by so I'll go thataway. To me, I just made a decision based on free will. To an omniscient creator, I did just what He knew I would do before the universe was even created. If God is apart from time, He can doubtless see things we cannot, such as the universe and time spread like a mural. Of course the mural is not a literal analogy, how should I know what it is like to be apart from time? But the point is, if He knows everything, He knows that I will go left. If He knows everything, He planned everything. And if He planned everything, He planned for me to go left. It only feels like I decided to go that way, and for all practical purposes I did, for I can see no differently. But through logical analysis and reasoning I can detect the truth of destiny, not what it is but that it merely exists.

A second and much colder reason that free will is not more than an illusion lies in Newton's Third Law of motion. "Every action has an equal and reciprocal reaction." If this is the case, then everything HAS to be explainable by a near infinitly complex mathematical equation, taking into account precise measurements of forces released during the big bang, the exact rate of increasing entropy, the interaction of all states of matter and energy with other matter and energy, and the list goes on and on into trillions of variables. If I knew all of this stuff I could tell you precisely what you great-great-great grandson would look like, who he would marry, and what color his kid's hair would be. If I knew all the variables surrounding the exact moment of creation, I would know all there is to know about this finite universe. That would be pretty weird! Anyhow, I have dragged this out long enough, I have to go to work now, I hope to interact with you folks later on this!

micah

I knew you were gonne say that Micah, if you presuppose an omniscient god, predestination is the only logical solution.

However you do are someone who, confronted with evidence can accept a different viewpoint. What we have come to understand in this century is that the universe isn't deterministic at all, I invite you to take a look at Determinism or Indeterminism (http://www.exosci.com/ubb/Forum10/HTML/000053.html)
there I had a rather heavy discussion about this very thing.
The problem is that the third law of Newton is to strict, it implies a one to one relationship between cause and effect. This however is not the case.
Further more I would like to challenge your notion of disorder as being the natural thing. Actually it is impossible for order to arise out of disorder for real disorder would mean no interaction, no bounderies, just chaos. These things however were the first to be created in the big bang process : interactions (the forces) and bounderies (spacetime).
Therefor the universe was initialised and ordered from the beginning. What we percieve as disorder are simply flat distribution functions of matter and energy. One should more correctly speak in this case of a lesser amount of order but still ordered via its obeisance to the interaction and boundery laws.

This, is my fundamental reason of why no omniscient god can exist. However I do admit that if this was proven wrong or if there was still a way that a god could exist even with fundamental uncertainty I would have to find a new way to disprove god... ;)

------------------
I err, therefore I exist !

well it might seem (it does to me anyway) that you have agreed with one of the most basic foudations of my argument: the fact that order cannot rise from disorder. You said that the universe was ordered from the beginning. There are two fundamental concepts here, the first being that order exists as disorder always increases. The second being that there was a beginning. If the universe was eternal, there would be no interaction whatsoever because the amount of disorder would have reached a peak long ago (well-an eternity ago, but all the same quite awhile). A present state of order, mixed with the fact that disorder increases brings us to the second fundamental: that there was a beginning. A beginning of time and space (as outlined even in Hawking and Penrose's Theorem of General Relativity) would in my opinion require some force outside of time to initiate the creation of the universe via the big bang. Also, any level of order lasting any length of time can well be taken to be part of a plan designed by an intelligent force, to suggest any other means is to defy gargantuan amounts of statistical impossibility. So it is precisely that there is order in the universe, and (inherant from the reality of ordered operations) a beginning to it all that proves that there is a trancendant creator who intentionally created.

The 3rd law thing I will be the first to admit is a very unprecise explanation to why free will is not real. However, it does not as you suggest apply only to interactions between two singular objects. The 3rd law of motion helps to govern all of classical physics and much of quantum mechanics. I am convinced that where we see it not applying in the strictest of terms it is because we do not understand enough of the variables (as we are not intelligent or observant enough, there are too many, or both) to make a perfect equation. I stand to reason that if we eliminated the uncertainty of near-infinite variables in the processes of interaction, we could predict outcomes which would be 100% accurate 100% of the time.

Yes, I agree there was a beginning, everything seems to point into that direction but suppose that only space was created in the big bang and that the big bang itself was an event imbedded in time, not a sigularity. This would not require an outside force to act.
Suppose further that the nothing : meaning absence of space is actually an unstable medium (if we can speak of medium in this case) then it follows that given long enough time, the nothing would give rise to something : space in our case. No creator needed !

Further about what you are saying about the third law is actually repeated in the determinism against indeterminism thread but rests on a fallacy.
Key concept here are time-irreversible interactions like living organisms. If the third law holds true then every interaction should be fundamentally time symmetric. We see however that this is not the case, time symmetry is broken according to the second law of thermodynamics.
What we want to know boils down to a conservation of information. A one to one cause and effect would conserve information in a perfect way, like you said given the knowledge of all variables of the universe at a certain instant, one can calculate all other moments of past and present (we would know the mind of god sort of speak)
Is there however a broken time symmetry then this would mean that one could not calculate the other states of the universe given all knowledge of the present. This would result in an information leak or scramble
So we must ask ourselves, which law is more fundamental the one of Newton or the one of thermodynamics?
The anwser is given by quantum mechanics : take for example the decay of a single nucleus. There is absolutly no difference between a nucleus that is about to decay and one that will decay in an other year or so. This means that the information content of the two systems is exactly the same. However a second later one of the nucleae has emitted an alfa particle and the other hasn't changed. Thus the universe of a second later has a different information content then the one before, we now have three bodies that can interact.
This leads me to conclude that the second law of thermodynamics is more fundamental and the Newtonian law is in need of revision.

------------------
I err, therefore I exist !

Thanks, Plato...I hadn't even noticed the number lately. :)

I don't see your point about free will. You have free will. God gives us free will to choose whatever we choose; it's not predetermined by Him. Just because He knows what choice you will make before you do, doesn't mean He limits your choices, or interferes with the decisions you make, or the consequences of those decisions. All He has done is set up a system, the universe, and all of it's laws, spiritual and otherwise, and thereby determining the consequences for manipulating them or breaking them or whatever. And the coolest thing ever is that the consequences of sin is death. You know, people scream in protest over this, but suffering is the only way that people really learn the difference. YOU choose how much suffering you have in your life, and how much joy as well. YOU choose how it is that you operate under the given laws of this universe. The other road in the fork was not an impossibility just because God knew ahead of time which road you would choose and why. If you had chosen the other, then you would have changed history forever. God just would have known that all along. Triiiiipy!

------------------
You may think I'm a nut, but I'm fastened to the strongest bolt in the universe.

Lori,

that is very fascinating what you come to say there. So you think that even though god knows perfectly well what you are going to choose, you are still making a free choice.
Then this means that "free" actually means "not knowing", this is what micah talks about when he says that free will is just an illusion.
Is that what you are saying or am I not getting something ?
I have the feeling that we are not really communicating here, could you help me out ?

------------------
I err, therefore I exist !

lori, the other road was an impossibility. The impossibility lies in the fact that you can only "choose" one way to go, and you can't undo the choice you made. Time is irreversable, and because of that you can only "choose" to move along that line. As you can only "choose" on such a limited plain and then are stuck with that choice, the idea that fate had it that you did whatever it was you did seems a more logical idea than the fact that you really have any level of control when it comes to what you do. This concept is even biblical. In Romans 8:29 is written "For whom He foreknew He also predestined to conform to the image of His son." Ephesians 1:5 "having predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to himself..." Predestination is not only a logical, reasonable standpoint, but is also biblical. I think the only reason it isn't widely accepted is because it is not a comfortable belief.

micah

Well, yea, given the dimension of time that God gave us, the unchosen road is an impossibility BUT ONLY AFTER THE FACT. Come on now, this isn't that difficult. At the time when the decision is being made though, it is NOT an impossibility. That would imply complete predestination, where we would be completely "programmed" so to speak, and have no will of our own, and make no choices of our own. And that's simply not the way this world works. What would even be the point of a life like that, or a spiritual law like that? The whole point of my faith is that every minute of every day of your life, you have choices. There is an absolute right, and an absolute wrong, like an angel on one shoulder, and a devil on the other, and there's lots of compromise in between so we like to think. In every decision or choice that we make, from the smallest, most seemingly insignificant, to the major live changers, we have opposing influences on our INTENT, on our heart, or what is really our soul. Most times, we are unaware of the truth in our intent. It takes a lot of focus to even pay attention to. And then often, we can't figure out what the right intent should be. We can rationalize and justify things really well, and it's not often easy to tell the difference between right and wrong. That's why the consequences of spiritual law are so cool, because while painful, they allow you to learn alot if you pay attention and try.

The way I see it is that every choice or decision or action, which we all know comes from thought, brings the theoretical possibility of another little parallel universe, different by just that one little action, from another possible universe, but there is really only one, because of time and space. You can't go back and change your mind. I think that it would be astounding though, to see, if you could see, the difference in two parallel universes, with the only variable being your life and your decisions and your actions, being led by your intentions. Then, and only then, would you really understand how important you are. I think that we would all be absolutely amazed. Actually, I think that's what judgement will be like. We will finally know the truth about ourselves and this life and all of the pain and the joy that our actions have brought to others in this world and to this world. It will be the ultimate truth and knowing and understanding. Everything we wished we knew now, but if you really try, you can pay attention now, and try to learn, and see. That's what life's all about.

So finally, God basically just was aware ahead of time which exact parallel universe He would end up with in the end. I guess that explains Revelations, yes? ;) Satan had a choice, and he didn't have to choose what he did, but God knew he would, and yet it was still worth it to Him. We have a choice, lots of them, and we don't have to choose God, and He knew that a lot of us wouldn't, and yet it was still worth it to Him. We do have a choice though...that's the whole point of this life.

------------------
You may think I'm a nut, but I'm fastened to the strongest bolt in the universe.

[This message has been edited by Lori (edited June 29, 2000).]

I still don't agree with you (haha-what a terrible intro!). You say you believe in an absolute right and wrong yes? Does that mean you believe in absolute truth? If truth is absolute does that not mean that it does not change, is not subjective? If God created this truth (as you surely believe that He did-this is a fundamental Christian belief) would it not stand to reason that He planned it, or was it a random crap-shoot with a known beginning and a predictable end? The predictbale end also implies predestination. Does it not make sense to think that if God planned the beginning (obviously) and also planned the end, that He planned everything else so that it would all line up in the prescribed state?

I try to avoid person-bashing like the plague, but this point I cannot make without bringing it into a more personal arena, so I am sorry, I'l try to make p for it in a minute; here goes...I think you believe in free will because it feels good. So far you haven't really offered any good explanation of why it is a premis for life. In a discussion such as this, no real evidence exists for the topic. Of course we don't have a "chunk" of free-will to present as exhibit "A" or a parallel universe to display as a relative picture so that we can understand the implications of our choices. All we can do in this discussion is reason, correlate, and rationalize. That is the only way we can hope to understand a topic so intangible as free-will vs predestination. If A=B and B=C then A=C kind of stuff. That said, I admire your faith and persistence. You seem to have a very strong and open tie with your creator and I think you are a wonderfully civil person. That goes for Plato as well, from his discussions with me, I find that he isn't just doing this as an ego-booster and an "I'll be damned before I change my mind" position, but one where he understands that debate is perhaps the most effective means of learning aside from sheer experience itself. Good going guys!

An interesting thing to note about that whole "multiple universes" thing is that the universe is basically a 3-d object stretched over a 4th spacial dimension (thus we can never find its "edge"). Take a 1-d object: a line. This has an infinite amount of points on it. A 2-d object, say a square drawn on the ground, can be filled with an infinite amount of lines. A 3-d cube can never be filled with 2-d squares, it would take an infinite amount. If it holds that an object from each spacial designation is "made up of" an infinite amount of objects of lower design, it would be reasonable to assume that the universe as a 3-d universe with hints of a 4-d existence would be one of an eternal amount of identical universes filling up an object of a higher dimension. Is that sensible? I dont know how I actually believe on this one, but it interesting.

micah

plato-you spoke of the possibility that time might have been a preexistant phenominon before the big bang, defying the idea of a singularity. First of all, in doing this, you are accusing Hawking and Penrose of being wrong, this is quite a weighty claim considering their predominance in the physics community. Secondly, have you heard of the singularity theorem? It says that if there is a universe which obeys any equation of state and which is or has been expanding, it must have been at one point singular. It was this very fact that led Einstein to accept the reality of a "supernatural reasoning power." I know this is not a terribly powerful argument I am giving here, but it is a point of interest to note that you are saying that the greatest contributers to the fields of physics and big bang cosmology are wrong. You should publish some papers or something.

No offense at all intended here. You are a very wise man and I enjoy hearing what you have to say.

micah

Lori,

I'm afraid I have to agree with Micah again on this one. What you are saying about free will and predestination logically contradicts. Of course if you say, I don't care : this is what I believe then you are abandoning rationality for a dogma.
This is ok I think if you can bring it up to belief firmly in what you say but it also means that you can't fall back to reason to claim anything else about what you believe. You see once you abandone reason you can never come back to it. Are you prepared for this ?

Micah,

thank you for your respect, I think you are a very enjoyable person to discuss and reason with also.
About Hawking and Penrose, I wouldn't dare of countering their argumentation on my own. When I talk about time pre-existing space I am stealing the idea from Prigogine, this is a Belgian Nobel prise winner who did a lot of research on thermodynamics. It was he that remarked (and proved) that the equations of Newton (who are time symmetric) can't give rise to irreversible processes.

Any way one must realise that people like Hawking, Penrose and Prigogine are working on the cutting edge of our understanding of the universe. Agreed, they are specialists and the brightest of minds but they are still experimenting sort of speak with possible explanations.
A very good reason of why the beginning couldn't have been a singularity is that all laws of nature break down in singularities, they are the demons of physics ! Even Hawking proposed a way out of the big bang singularity by lancing the concept of imaginary time. This might seem very artificial but it turned the singularity into something like the north or south pole of a sphere. A smooth point like all others on the sphere but still special because in spherical coordinates it has an infinite amount of coordinates.
I think you would like this idea (or you are possibly already familiar with it) because in doing this he turned time into the same thing (mathematically) as space. This would mean that everything is indeed predistined and we are merly travelling along this path in time doing stuff that actually exists some seconds further down our timepath.
I however don't agree with this and follow Prigogine in his reasoning that time is something all together different from space, since he has been focussing on thermodynamics until now he hasn't given a satisfying explantion of what he things happened during the big bang. However his followers and co-workers are gradually putting his ideas into workable theories.
May be if I direct you to the Ilya Prigogine center in Texas (http://order.ph.utexas.edu/) you can found out more...

------------------
I err, therefore I exist !

Plato,

I am prepared, and I will do my very best, SIR! *salute*

Micah,

Ok, this is bending my brain a little. This is the best way I can explain it. Yes, I believe in an absolute truth. To me, logically, there can only be one truth. No one but God knows what it is, but it does have to exist, otherwise the universe and our lives are all a dream. The truth to me IS the set of spirtual and physical laws that govern the universe and our lives, and yes, it stands to reason that they are "given". Just like physical law is absolute, so is spiritual. Certain actions have certain consequences given certain laws. The laws can be subject to variables and circumstance, but we still do not have anything to do with determining a given outcome. We can manipulate them to obtain a desired outcome, but we did not create the given outsome, we're just discovering and capitalizing on it.

So ok, when God was designing these laws, He knew ahead of time, what the final outcome in all of this will be. He knew what our choices would be and why. And He alone determined the true outcome of our choices. Whoa, head spin. Think about that...creating universal laws at the time of creation with perfect knowledge of the future choices of every living creature and every possible outcome...how many parallel universes is that? Geez. Ok, I think I see what your point is, that since God created the law, and created the consequences of our actions, given perfect knowledge of our choices, then He determines who lives and who dies right? Something like that? It's like He created the rules to the game, but when He was creating them, He already knew which players would win? Ugh, this is hard to think about. The thing is though, that the game is not that hard to win. And His design still does incorporate free will. Free will within a set of given laws. You don't have to follow the rules, but if you don't, you'll lose. This all comes full circle to creationism really, in that what it all boils down to is whether or not you trust God to provide you with the best universe possible for you with your best interest in mind, unconditional love, perfect knowledge, the whole nine yards. He did see, and do you know how you win the game? You realize it, and accept it, and give Him credit for it. It's just an acceptance, a trust, it's called faith. To object to the laws of this universe, to God's design, to His law, is to question Him. Is to question whether or not He is who He says He is, and that He knows all and therefore knows best. So to have a problem with the law and it's consequence is to say that maybe the universe could have been created differently....better....maybe I could have done better....who is He to create MY universe?...who is He to trust with my life?...what if His laws aren't fair?...what if His laws aren't in my best interest? It's called faith. The most fundamental concept in Christianity, which most people, even most christians, including myself, have the most difficult time with. See, that's why I know that Jesus is God. The Bible explains everything about how this universe works, and how our lives work within it.

Oh man, and the head trip about the dimensions. You know, after a few beers one night, I came up with something close to that, but I can't remember exactly what it was. But I thought about it, and all of the possible 3 dimensional parallel universes that could possibly exist within a given set of defined laws IS the absolute truth that we are subject to. Now go one step beyond that, and think about what God is. All of the possible parallel universes that could possibly exist without a set of defined laws is God. Right? *head cocked, confused look* Ouch, too heavy man.

Having a problem with predestination, or considering spiritual law as such, is like contending gravity. It's like "Well, I don't like God because He created the law of gravity and now I can't go around jumping off of tall buildings, but I really, really want to, so God isn't fair to me." So it's almost like you have to go back to creation and second guess God about the law of gravity, so that you can jump off of buildings, without suffering the "God given" consequences. Same thing. Isn't it?


------------------
You may think I'm a nut, but I'm fastened to the strongest bolt in the universe.

[This message has been edited by Lori (edited June 30, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by Lori (edited June 30, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by Lori (edited June 30, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by Lori (edited June 30, 2000).]

Lori,

So you are prepared, then could you answer the following two questions :

Since god has knowledge of the future and what will happen, does this mean that the future is fixed and thus predestinate ?

If it does then who predestinated it, God or Man ?

------------------
I err, therefore I exist !

Lori,

Ok, if you are prepared, could you answer these two questions :

If god knows everything that the future holds, does this mean that the future is fixed and that everything that will happen is predetermined ?

If it does then who predetermined it, god or man ?

------------------
I err, therefore I exist !

Well, no, in the sense that, if you were to be able to look into a crystal ball, and see the future, would that mean that you could determine the future? You would be able to see and know the consequences of many decisions that had been made by others in the future. Does that mean that you predetermined the future? Does it mean that you somehow took away these people's free will in making decisions and choices? Or does it just mean that you knew ahead of time, what decisions they would make? That's not what I consider predestination to be. To me, predestination has to do with a lack of free will, and a lack of decision making. Now, what you may do with that information is use it to limit your own choices, and make your own decisions with it, which would in turn affect other's lives, so in that way, it could affect the future, in a kind of predetermined way, but you're still not taking away free will from anyone else.

Now, the only way I see anything resembling predestination, is when I realize that God had perfect knowledge of the future when creating the universal laws that we live by and are given. But see, God didn't pick and choose who He wanted to save based upon something unfamiliar to us, and then set up the universe to spit that group out as the winners. God made the universe and it's laws in a way that would be to our best interest. We all know just how fragile and complicated, and unlikely, life is...you do much more than I. I don't think that He bent the rules or the law for anyone. He made the universe exactly what it should be, and then He allowed free will. You don't have to follow His law. You can circumvent it easily. You don't have to respect it. You don't have to respect the planet, or other people, or Him. You don't have to even believe in Him if you don't want to. The choice is yours. But in the end, if I'm not mistaken, He will end up with a group of angels, and a group of humans, that voluntarily chose to live in His perfect universe by His laws, because they realize that God is perfect, and has perfect knowledge, and we will trust that His way is best FOR US. His way is for our best benefit. Isn't that a good thing? So the way he set the law is....the wages of sin is death. Just like e=mc(squared). Just like the wages of jumping off of the 30 story building is death. Sin is really bad stuff, we just don't realize the extent of the affect of it. We're short-sighted that way.

So if you want a perfect universe, that is best for it's inhabitants, and you want to give the inhabitants a choice about whether they agree, or want this kind of perfect universe, you know, free will, then isn't the way God set things up the best way to do that?

------------------
You may think I'm a nut, but I'm fastened to the strongest bolt in the universe.

[This message has been edited by Lori (edited July 01, 2000).]

Lori,

I think I am beginning to see where you are going with your parallel universe theory.
Just to be on the safe side, let me run it by here so you can check if I am with you :

1.So you are saying god created everything, the universe and its laws including a free will for everyone.
2.This free will means that we have the choice to follow or ignore these laws.
3.God however knows the consequences of all the choices that we make (this being his all knowing nature)
4.At the end we will get the bill for our choices.

Is this correct ?
If it is I still have a number of new questions :) :
About 1, the way you put it, the laws of god aren't compelling at all, they are guide lines and pretty much comparable with the laws passed by a legistlive body like a parlement. Are these what you call the "spiritual laws" ? Cause the law of gravity is pretty compelling, no way you can choose to ignore it.
3 is a nasty one actually, you see if you put it this way then even god doesn't know the future, he only knows what can happen if we do this and that but he doesn't know what we will choose. I don't know if this is really compatible with being all-knowing...
Besides, every thought about how complex this is ? Let's just look at a single persons life, how many different choices would we make ? Even for writing this text alone I have made hunderds of choices and this only represents a mere 15 minutes of my life. Also the choices weren't just about two things, they could have been about three or more things. If god wants to know the entire future of you he will have to calculate every single choice again and again and this for every person alive that could have an impact on your life. Ok, he is omnipotent but he will end up with so many different possibilities that everything is possible and he actually knows as much from the future as we mere mortals do. So it would mean that the future is as much a mystery for god as it is for us...

------------------
I err, therefore I exist !

Plato,

#1 Yea, that's right. Free will under the confines of given law and our given human traits. Given: we're influenced, wether we like it or not, or realize it or not, by two opposing spiritual forces...one good, one evil. The free will comes in to play in how we choose to respond to the lives we're "given", and what we choose to learn.

#2 Yea, that's right, or to even realize they exist at all, or to even figure out what exactly they are and how they work. And actually, we can't and won't follow them, or have perfect knowledge of them ever in this life. It's impossible. Hence the Biblical concept of the fall of man, and inevitable sin. Humans are born innocent yes, but sinners as well, and with all that to learn. So the choice in this life that is key to salvation is whether or not to believe that God is who He says He is, and that Jesus is His Son, and to be humble enough to admit that there is more to this life than flesh and blood and urges. It's not that easy either, to really believe. It's not just something you can say, and it's not just good enough to really want to believe. You actually have to believe, and when that happens, then you actually do try, and then you know, and if you try hard, you learn.

#3 Yea, he designed the system that creates the consequences; he determined them with our best interest in mind, was aware of those we would experience through our choices ahead of time, and why. And what's extra trippy is that the whole system is based solely (pardon the pun) on what is in your heart (your soul), or your intentions, which no one knows except for God, or has perfect knowledge of them anyway, enough to judge. We, ourselves, aren't even truly aware of our intentions most of the time, and I know that first hand from getting to know Jesus.

#4 Yep.

I don't agree with you about the compelling nature of the law. Perfect knowledge of it is not within our grasp as humans in this life, but a major point in the Bible is how horrible that is for us. And it makes sense to me. It stands to reason that the spiritual law is just as compelling as natural law and physical law. Are you saying those are not compelling? Look how fragile nature is. Look at the devastating effects of our interference and disrespect for what God created, circumventing and exploiting. What are our intentions when we do this? Greed? Power? Sloth? Gluttony? Yea, something like that. See? The effects are always more far reaching and negative than we think they will be, and we come full circle and realize, gee, maybe we should just quit messing with it, we're destroying the planet. Spiritually, we are destroying ourselves in the same way and for the same reasons. The consequence of sin, according to the law, is death. That's pretty major. And along with death is suffering. Fun. I don't know about you, but that stuff is pretty devastating to me, and I certainly could live without it. Do you know how the OT laws and punishments before Jesus came seemed so harsh that no one can understand them, and everyone thinks that God was some big meanie? That says to me that spiritual law is nothing to mess around with. If atonement for sin was accomplished through the methods depicted in the OT, then sin is a big huge deal. And that's why Jesus came, and that's why He's so important to us, which shows us God's mercy and grace, which proves that He's not a big meanie. :) And back to gravity, you may think that you couldn't ignore it, and in a way you're right, in that the effects of it are in your face and influencing you constantly. But what about before they discovered gravity? No one knew what it was, or how it worked, or that they were even being affected by it, cause they didn't realize it was there, even though it had such a strong influence on them their whole lives. Spiritual law is the same way. If humans tackled the realm of spiritual law as thoroughly as we have physical law, who knows what we would accomplish. But reality is that most humans don't really even believe in it enough to pay attention. The physical world is very distracting.

Yes He does know what we will choose, and why, and the consequences, and our intentions. He knows your heart. You can hide things alot easier from yourself than you can from God. And yea, He's known all along, like forever apparently, and He's known every one of us, and so much more. It seems impossible, and yea Plato, that's the point, God is not human. You're mind is trying to place limits on him as if He were human. God is incomprehendable (is that a real word or did I just make that up? LOL!)to man. Says that in the Bible too. I bet you don't like that. ;) But I think that trying to understand Him sure does provide for some serious brain food.

------------------
You may think I'm a nut, but I'm fastened to the strongest bolt in the universe.




[This message has been edited by Lori (edited July 03, 2000).]

hey sorry I've been out of it a few days, oops, I just know you all were in extreme distress without my knowledge to guide you. Just kidding. Anyhow, to jump back into it all- Lori, you said this:
"Certain actions have certain consequences
given certain laws. The laws can be subject to variables and circumstance, but we still do not have
anything to do with determining a given outcome. We can manipulate them to obtain a desired
outcome, but we did not create the given outsome, we're just discovering and capitalizing on it."

I think perhaps you are failing to see that everything we do is based off of a past action or circumstance. Literally, everything is "an outcome." Us bending or manipulating certain circumstances is also an outcome of things previously done. If we were given a scenario apart from the past, as if we were assigned a role altogether new to us (as if life were a giant board game) then you could say that actions were to achieve certain outcomes. However, as it is, we were relatively blind to the future, and all we have is the past to build our knowledge-base from, so it is really hard to point at some particular event and say "that was the cause and that was the outcome" without having to point to that cause as the outcome of this and this cause as the outcome of that. Anytway, now I am trailing off. Everything is based entirely off past happenings-there that is the point. OK, moving on.

You admit to believing in absolute truth. Now, wouldn't truth be non-absolute if we got to change it with our own free-will? Unless I am really missing somethihng, the answer is yes, it would be changeable, and therefore not absolute. Your belief seems paradoxical to me.

Sorry if you guys have already beat the topic to death, I responded to this without reading the whole discussion first, so now I will!

micah

Lori-you said "if you were to be able to look into a crystal ball, and see the future, would
that mean that you could determine the future?"
Does this mean that you think God cannot determine the future, only view it? I think your view of God is not terribly Biblical if this is the case. Well, actually, free-will is not a biblical concept whereas predestination is all over. However, in respect of plato who does not share our faith in the Bible, I am gonna try to limit the discussion to areas of reason and logic alone. So, from what we know of God, He is omnipotent yes? He can do anything? Then why can't He determine the future? Do you really think that things happen on accident or by luck? If so, what is the point of putting faith in anything, if its all just some giant crap-shoot where you pray to some god that cant do anything and count on the odds to save you? Eek, not structured enough to be consistent with reality I say!

micah

dang I should just read it all an spit it all out at once eh? OK, Lori, you speak of a perfect universe dependant on free-will to maintain its divinely alotted perfection. However, it has been my experience that mankind (regardless of the objective reality of free-will or not) is not only capable of, but doomed to screw things up. Hence, God tries to create a perfect universe (which indeed, according to the book of revelations, He is), but can't because man has free will. This is no way to create a perfect universe. This does not hold water.

micah

As far as I can see it (being an atheist) there are two ways a theïst can come to understand his god.
One starting from omnipotence and all knowing and leading strait to predestination and absolute truth.
The other starting from love and justice and leading towards free will and man choosing his own destiny (against or with god).

The two views lead to very different outcomes and are therefor incompatible : an omnipotent, all knowing god cannot be loving and can't judge his creature because he made them just the way they are and he alone is responsible for their "mistakes" (they are of course incabable of making mistakes because these were also preprogrammed and thus part of the whole)
On the other hand a loving and just god can't be omnipotent and all knowing because in order to be able to love one must have the choice to care. If god preprogrammed everything then he can love what he programmed but that would be more like pride in what he has accomplished, this is entirely different of what I feel for my wife for example. Further more in order to be just there must be something to be just about, there must be some way to make a mistake that wasn't preprogrammed, that was made according to free will.

This my friends is why I can't believe in a god, there is no consistency, he is not logical and thus not true.

------------------
I err, therefore I exist !

I've stayed out of this one for awhile, but Plato, I have a question for ya'.

"This my friends is why I can't believe in a god, there is no consistency, he is not logical and thus not true."

I totally see your point, but what about a god other than the Christian God? What about a divine force/creature/being that is coexistant with us, helps us along, but is not considered omnipotent or all-knowing? I know you called yourself an atheist, but I was wondering what your view on "other" Gods/Goddesses are or if it's the Christian view of God in particular that doesn't fit with you.

Just curious. :)

On a semi-side note: Personally, I don't believe in predestination per se, though I do believe there are several things that have happened in my life that were 'fated' for me. My husband & I meeting, for example. Our parents moved from opposite sides of the state into the same area around the same time frame - moved close enough together that hubby & I went to several schools together before we finally actually met in high school. I think we were drawn towards eachother, I've felt that way since the day we first started off as friends and still feel the magick of our relationship today. :)

For our wedding anniversary next year, we are going to be handfasted. Handfasting is a wiccan ceremony that is beyond marriage - instead of "til death do us part" it's more like "no matter how many reincarnations we go through, we will always be together until the end of existance". When I first brought the subject up to hubby & explained it's function & meaning, he simply said "what makes you think we haven't done this before?", and that really struck me. Somewhere in the back of my head I had already come to that same conclusion, and hearing my non-witch husband say those words stopped me in my tracks. I think he's right. So it's going to be not only a wedding vow renewal, but a handfasting vow renewal. :) (insert sappy music here)

Closer to the topic; that's not really predestination though, it's merely a single "fated" factor in my life. I don't think my path to witchcraft was predestined/fated. I don't think my job was predestined/fated. I do believe that things I've done in this life & in past lifes have created lessons I need to learn, promises I need to keep, debts I need to repay; these are the types of things I think are "fated", the rest is up to me.

Make any sense?

Mooncat

here again, just like with many of the arguments for free will, you cannot prove what you are saying even by means of logical explanation. The jist of what you said to us was "I believe this and not this" but you did nothing to explain why such a belief is logical in the least. I challenge that your belief in reencarnation is not reasonable simply because it implies an eternal nature for mankind where none exists. How do you think the universe came to exist? Do you think it is some grand idea in the back of everyone's mind? Do you presume to think that we created it? Do you think the universe is eternal? If so, how do you get around the overwhelming scientific evidence which supports the fact that the universe is as finite as everything else? Secondly, I challenge the belief in Wicca. The belief comes from ancient celtic religions, all of whom based their creation-stories on a "fixed" orginal object that is very much the opposite. The irish said "in the beginning there was ireland" the scots said "in the beginning there was scotland." You really can't justify these to represent any sort of truthful interpretetation of what really happened. Since the Wicca belief has been based on something untrue from day one, I submit that it is an untrue belief.

micah

Geez micah, who put that bee in your bonnet??

So, can I take from your post that you are an atheist? It upsets you that I believe in something there is no "scientific" proof for, so that's the conclusion I'm coming to...

"here again, just like with many of the arguments for free will, you cannot prove what you are saying even by means of logical explanation. The jist of what you said to us was "I believe this and not this" but you did nothing to explain why such a belief is logical in the least. "

You may be right, I cannot base my religion entirely upon "logical argument", and that doesn't bother me a bit. I am not convinced that logic is the end-all-be-all of the universe. I believe there are things beyond our intellectual grasp, and therefore outside the boundaries of logic.

You will also please note that I was not trying to PROVE or DISPROVE anything, I was asking a question of Plato and offered up my own beliefs as an example of MY answer to that question. I didn't make any kind of agument at all, or offer any proof at all, logical or illogical.

"I challenge that your belief in reencarnation is not reasonable simply because it implies an eternal nature for mankind where none exists. "

Okay micah, I could just challenge you to provide me with proof that eternal nature DOESN'T exist for mankind. But, I never said that we existed eternally, just through more than one lifetime. YOU implied eternal nature, not I.

How do I think the universe came into existance? Well, I'm not sure on that one yet, but I currently favor the theory that there were a series of "big bangs" and we are merely riding out the most current one.

You may challenge the belief in Wicca all you like, that is your perrogative. You should know I am not technically a Wiccan. But close enough, I suppose.

"The belief comes from ancient celtic religions, all of whom based their creation-stories on a "fixed" orginal object that is very much the opposite."

This is factually incorrect, or at minimum inaccurate, but I'll bite anyway. Let me continue here:

"The irish said "in the beginning there was ireland" the scots said "in the beginning there was scotland." You really can't justify these to represent any sort of truthful interpretetation of what really happened"

Oh really? "in the beginning" - as in "the beginning of our recorded history? "there was scotland/ireland/whereverland" - well, if we're taking this to be since the beginning of recorded history, this is entirely factual.

Indeed, once you toss the word "interpretation" in there, it cannot be less than true - have you ever seen an interpretive dance, for example? Interpretation means just that - a personalized representation of a fact/idea/thought/whatever.

A myth doesn't have to be factual to be "true". Look at Aesop's fables for example. The "facts" are undoubtably a fabricated story, but aren't the morals the whole reason the story was written, and aren't the morals presented "true"? The difference is between taking things literally and taking them figuratively.

"Since the Wicca belief has been based on something untrue from day one, I submit that it is an untrue belief."

Based on...do you actually know what Wicca is based on? I don't think you do. If you think it's based on the creation of the planet, you are mistaken m'dear.

Hello Mooncat,

Even though the christian omnipotent god seems to point towards a contradiction, can I accept other god views ?

Very good question, to tell you the truth I have always sympatised more towards religions where there is a divine force more like a divine person. Some years ago I had to step away from those to unfortunatly.
For me what those religions are trying to express is the wonder of life and consciousness. They do this by proposing an external force that works inside the universe to make order from disorder.
To me this is the same mistake that Descartes made when he proposed a distinction between spirit and body, the two were distinct but yet inseperable.
All this is not nescessary, the universe is perfectly capable of getting to a state of order all by itself. There is nothing needed to do it for it.

Ever since the ancient greeks turned their minds on how the world works there has been this huge distinction between 'living' matter and 'dead' matter. This idea has popped up in every single theory and philosophy since then. Of course it seems certainly a wise division because what can be more different then a man and a rock ?
If we want to deny this division then what are we doing ? Making man look more like a rock or making a rock look more like a man ?

The trick is of course not to make the division from the beginning. This is what science has teached us in this century. So even though I can't show a logical contradiction for every kind of supernatural force, I also can't find a reason that would find such a force nescessary to explain the universe I live in. This I submit as sufficient reason not to burden my explanations with the supernatural and to cut it away with Occam's Razor.

------------------
I err, therefore I exist !

Plato,

Hm, yeah, I see your point.

"All this is not nescessary, the universe is perfectly capable of getting to a state of order all by itself. There is nothing needed to do it for it."

My personal belief (and this is not a standard wiccan or pagan belief, I don't think) is not so much that a Diety created the universe and put it in order, more like it/they were created along with the universe. Sort of like the universe's soul, if you will.

I percieve the "true" Divine to be not so much a thinking being, but a force somewhat more akin to gravity or light or something. Humans try to understand this force, so we humanize it - give it a male and/or female aspect, a name or two or two thousand, we see wants and desires, but that's OUR perception and I don't think it really reflects true reality. That doesn't mean that the observations themselves are faulty though, it just means they are attributed to something we don't understand.

Like primitive mankind looked at the sun and said, "there's that guy riding his golden chariot again. He does that once a day.". The phenomenon he's observing IS actually happening, but he's attributing it to a guy in a chariot instead of a nuclear reaction a billion + miles away.

I also have a hunch though (and here's where I get all illogical :) ) that the power of thought can and does effect the material world. My own private explanation for how magick works (and I do honestly believe it does, I have seen it in action and I am convinced) is that since most people believe it will work, it simply does. I know, that's not scientific in the least, but I think that's just because we don't understand the mechanism behind it. I think the pagan God and Goddess DO exist, there are enough people pouring mental energy into their forms that they do begin to exist as a sort of being - a being of pure thought and energy. Hm, I can't think of a good analogy for this one. Maybe like a groove worn into an old stone step - enough feet have trodden on that one spot that there is a change made. Same sort of thing, only not in a physical way.

Magick, in my opinion, is just the unsolved sciences. I really see no division, personally. I am perfectly at home in a lab - I adored chemistry & biology, and I am just as home annointing altar candles with lemon & orange oils... Magick is a very mental thing, you use symbols and such to teach your mind what to do, and what it does (if you do it right) is affect that energy that flows through us, around us... I'm starting to sound like a Jedi teacher or something, so I guess I should be quiet before someone comes along & makes fun of me. :)

Am I making any sense, or are you getting a straitjacket ready for me? ;)

sorry mooncat, I was a bit hasty in posting that statement. You have my apologies.

micah

Micah,

That's cool, we all let our opinions run away with us every now and then. :) Thanks for the apology, I appreciate it. Now THAT is rare! LOL!

I was a bit hasty in posting that statement. You have my apologies.


Prove it!

In a completely unneccesary defense of my statement about being "hasty" I submit this: what I said I believe. I disagree with Mooncat's faith. However, my response to it was written in about 6 minutes grand total which would lead me to conclude only one thing-that I wrote before I thought it all out clearly. Tact can make even the most inflammatory of beliefs seem much more attractive or at least much less offensive. As for proof, why ask for proof that I was hasty and that I apologize? Is your request in attempt to prove some sort of point? If so then I think you were a tad off "aaaaaaaaa". There are certainly some things that one cannot prove, but rather must take on faith. Howsomever, even those things must at least line up with some sort of factual base. One could deduct through what I said that I was sincerely apologizing. There is faith placed in my motives, but why not? At least there is written evidence that my claims of apology were true. Faith must be backed by concrete evidence in order to be acceptable. Any faith which goes contradictory to fact suggests very strongly one or both of these-that the faith is misplaced (the more likely), that the fact (which should be already well-tested and proved) is incorrect, or that both are in error. Any faith which does without fact, not against it but not with it, is either a conveniently fabricated lie or a position which cannot even begin to be tested, therefore making it untrustworthy. Faith is the cement which binds the facts together.

micah

Micah,

Don't bother responding to "aaaaaaaaaa...". The only thing this individual was attempting to do was to annoy others, based on the fact he/she posted 50 times and all his/her posts were the same exact thing - a quote from someone else's post, followed by the words "prove it". He/she never actually contributed anything else to a single discussion that I ever saw. I believe Oxygen finally banned him/her, thankfully.

------------------
An ye harm none, do what ye will.