Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Sign in to follow this  
ShiaMan14

Predestination Vs Free Will

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Yuo are doing it again: Define, wash, rinse, re-define, wash, rinse, define again....
 
Explain to me the first line of your PHILOSOPHICAL INSTRUCTION conclusion:
 
Finally, the conclusion is obtained that the highest levels of freedom are restricted to God, the Exalted, for He is not only free from the influence of external factors, but is also free of opposing internal inclinations. 

 

 

Exactly what does it mean for God to have free will? He can change His mind?  
 
As far as I can see when people say that God has free will, they must also mean that God is imperfect.
 
If God is not perfect then it becomes possible for God to choose a less-than-perfect action.
If God is not imperfect, then, it is impossible for God to perform imperfect actions. 
 
Therefore God has no free will.
 
wslm.
*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Yuo are doing it again: Define, wash, rinse, re-define, wash, rinse, define again....
 
Explain to me the first line of your PHILOSOPHICAL INSTRUCTION conclusion:
 

 

Exactly what does it mean for God to have free will? He can change His mind?  
 
As far as I can see when people say that God has free will, they must also mean that God is imperfect.
 
If God is not perfect then it becomes possible for God to choose a less-than-perfect action.
If God is not imperfect, then, it is impossible for God to perform imperfect actions. 
 
Therefore God has no free will.
 
wslm.
*

 

if god is perfect, then he is bound by his perfection, absolutely. not only can he not do what is imperfect, but he cannot even desire/want/will what is imperfect.

 

humans are bound by many things, also absolutely. the difference is that god has no one above him to influence, pressure, or force him into anything.

 

again, the only way to "solve" the problem is to redefine certain concepts, which isn't always helpful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

where was our awareness before birth?  

"Our" Awareness doesn't have a "before" in time. If you mean by "before" in an ontological sense (and not in time), then I will answer that our awareness before is the same awareness which is right Here and Now. "Our" true awareness is His Awareness.

 

you're redefining freedom, just like what  philosophers attempt to do. you concede that god is restricted by himself, necessarily (not by choice).

At the end of the day, we can call it what we want. It doesn't really matter to me as long as what I am saying comes across. The bottom line is that I don't believe free will is arbitrary. If you think I am redefining freewill because I don't accept free will to be arbitrary then no problem. If you like, we can say, God is determined by His own nature. And that's perfectly valid for me too. :).

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Our" Awareness doesn't have a "before" in time. If you mean by "before" in an ontological sense (and not in time), then I will answer that our awareness before is the same awareness which is right Here and Now. "Our" true awareness is His Awareness.

 

why doesn't it have a 'before' in time? clearly there was a time when you and i didn't exist, while others did. the same is true for those who existed before us, there was a time when they didn't exist. the universe itself didn't exist 14 billion years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why doesn't it have a 'before' in time? clearly there was a time when you and i didn't exist, while others did. the same is true for those who existed before us, there was a time when they didn't exist. the universe itself didn't exist 14 billion years ago.

 

A little meditation is required.  

 

Firstly awareness is not distinguishable as a thing (It is neither a thought, idea, or actual entity).  It isn't something you can distinguish from something else.  Why?  Because anything you can distiguish becomes an object of awareness, but not awareness itself.  

 

Secondly awareness itself is always present and it is always now.  It is never in a past or a future.  the past or the future, is something we are aware of (as objects of awareness) and they are only past or future in the now.  Unlike the ever present now, the past or the future are not awareness itself but objcts of awareness (the past and future are contained in awareness or in the now).  This makes awareness itself eternal.  

 

Thirdly, this awareness is not your's or mine, or his or hers.  It is not "you" as an individual.  Like we said above, awareness cannot be distinguished and therefore cannot be any individual.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A little meditation is required.  

 

Firstly awareness is not distinguishable as a thing (It is neither a thought, idea, or actual entity).  It isn't something you can distinguish from something else.  Why?  Because anything you can distiguish becomes an object of awareness, but not awareness itself.  

 

Secondly awareness itself is always present and it is always now.  It is never in a past or a future.  the past or the future, is something we are aware of (as objects of awareness) and they are only past or future in the now.  Unlike the ever present now, the past or the future are not awareness itself but objcts of awareness (the past and future are contained in awareness or in the now).  This makes awareness itself eternal.  

 

Thirdly, this awareness is not your's or mine, or his or hers.  It is not "you" as an individual.  Like we said above, awareness cannot be distinguished and therefore cannot be any individual.  

 

i wasn't just talking about awareness; i meant everything. why can't things be preceded by their nonexistence?

 

as to awareness, it may just be in the "now" in some sense, but that could be considered different states of awareness. i am aware now, of now, and i was aware yesterday, of yesterday. the past was "the now" at the time, and the future will be "the now" when we reach it.

 

another problem is that it can be distinguished very easily. each person has their own awareness, which isn't shared with others. so there are many different awarenesses, not just one central awareness shared by everyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi. I would like to state my opinion here and I am in no way a learned scholar on these topics. Please feel free to reject or correct me. When I read the Quran, it frequently brings arguments to make us see the reality and then choose the right path. In it, God tells the prophet (pbuh) not to worry if they don't believe him and that if God had willed he would bring down a sign for them that they would completely submit. So I think free will is the basic tenet of creation otherwise we would all go to heaven given that God is just and good. So we are completely and totally responsible for our own actions GIVEN OUR CURRENT CONDITIONS. We are are born under certain condition and we all have different talents, etc but what we do with what we have is our free will and the thing that ultimately counts and the thing that we are responsible for. So I think what we are given in terms of where we were born and whether we are male of female or wether we have a certain gene are all predetermined however what we do given and in spite of all this is our free will.

Regarding the future one way I think about it is that there are laws that govern everything. Some of these laws are physical like gravity and some are metaphysical like the soul. These laws are laid down for us and are predetermined. However we have the freedom to choose what to do given and considering these laws. For example it is a law that if I wrong someone, my soul will suffer in the long and short term. There is no way around this. This is a predetermined law. You cannot possibly wrong someone without hurting your own soul. However whether I choose to wrong someone or not is up to me.

Please let me know what you think about this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i wasn't just talking about awareness; i meant everything. why can't things be preceded by their nonexistence?

Things are preceded by nonexistence. But they are manifestations of how they exist in eternity. The waves of the ocean are manifestations of the ocean which have a beginning and end point, but each wave doesn't come from non-ocean or nonexistence, it comes from the way it has always been in the non-manifest ocean. Just like how only the waves become manifest, so also only what comes from eternity and goes back into eternity becomes manifest. But the ocean itself and eternity in itself remain non-manifest. The analogy is not perfect, I know, but then again, no analogy is perfect, and no analogy is meant to be perfect.

 

as to awareness, it may just be in the "now" in some sense, but that could be considered different states of awareness. i am aware now, of now, and i was aware yesterday, of yesterday. the past was "the now" at the time, and the future will be "the now" when we reach it.

As for your supposition that "we had an awareness of a now that has already passed," I say that is not really awareness. Awareness cannot be an object of awareness. It is impossible to have "had awareness" lest you make it into something you are actually aware of right now! Also, can a now be passed? Sure, we talk about because language grammar allows it. But can a now really be past? I would say no, because the only now is now! A now cannot be in a past! And to speak of a now which has passed is contradictory. Yes, we are tempted to say that now can be "replaced" by another now. But the reason why the untrained mind is tempted to do that is because it mistakes objects of the now, for the now itself. And so when those objects no longer appear, then we say, mistakenly, that the now has passed.

 

another problem is that it can be distinguished very easily. each person has their own awareness, which isn't shared with others. so there are many different awarenesses, not just one central awareness shared by everyone.

So what I am arguing for is that awareness cannot be distinguished. How do I argue for this? I argue for this by saying that if awareness becomes distinguished it is no longer awareness itself but an object of awareness! So that is how I can argue that awareness doesn't belong to any individual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi. I would like to state my opinion here and I am in no way a learned scholar on these topics. Please feel free to reject or correct me. When I read the Quran, it frequently brings arguments to make us see the reality and then choose the right path. In it, God tells the prophet (pbuh) not to worry if they don't believe him and that if God had willed he would bring down a sign for them that they would completely submit. So I think free will is the basic tenet of creation otherwise we would all go to heaven given that God is just and good. So we are completely and totally responsible for our own actions GIVEN OUR CURRENT CONDITIONS. We are are born under certain condition and we all have different talents, etc but what we do with what we have is our free will and the thing that ultimately counts and the thing that we are responsible for. So I think what we are given in terms of where we were born and whether we are male of female or wether we have a certain gene are all predetermined however what we do given and in spite of all this is our free will.

Regarding the future one way I think about it is that there are laws that govern everything. Some of these laws are physical like gravity and some are metaphysical like the soul. These laws are laid down for us and are predetermined. However we have the freedom to choose what to do given and considering these laws. For example it is a law that if I wrong someone, my soul will suffer in the long and short term. There is no way around this. This is a predetermined law. You cannot possibly wrong someone without hurting your own soul. However whether I choose to wrong someone or not is up to me.

Please let me know what you think about this.

 

salam, arash, and welcome.

 

unfortunately, the principle of sufficient reason leaves no room for any freeness in existence. it's a logical principle, and as such must be accepted as an absolute law, so no exceptions can be made, not even for god.

 

the principle of sufficient reason is accepted by all shia scholars. it is also accepted that logical principles cannot be confined. a third principle states that god "does not" (it's their polite way of saying "cannot") do what is logically impossible (like making 1+1=26). when you add all these together, the result is crystal clear; not even god can create freewill, because it's simply impossible for anything "free" to exist. everything is bound by an uninterrupted causal chain that goes all the way back to god. so god is calling all the shots, no matter what. what you think, what you feel, what you desire, what you hate, what you fear, what you love, what you "decide/choose", etc.. all caused. nothing can be causeless.

 

as to what quran and narrations say... well, they simply can't oppose logical principles, period. logic takes precedence to everything. if god says 100 times in the quran that 1+1=3, we can't accept such verses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi. I would like to state my opinion here and I am in no way a learned scholar on these topics. Please feel free to reject or correct me. When I read the Quran, it frequently brings arguments to make us see the reality and then choose the right path. In it, God tells the prophet (pbuh) not to worry if they don't believe him and that if God had willed he would bring down a sign for them that they would completely submit. So I think free will is the basic tenet of creation otherwise we would all go to heaven given that God is just and good. So we are completely and totally responsible for our own actions GIVEN OUR CURRENT CONDITIONS. We are are born under certain condition and we all have different talents, etc but what we do with what we have is our free will and the thing that ultimately counts and the thing that we are responsible for. So I think what we are given in terms of where we were born and whether we are male of female or wether we have a certain gene are all predetermined however what we do given and in spite of all this is our free will.

Regarding the future one way I think about it is that there are laws that govern everything. Some of these laws are physical like gravity and some are metaphysical like the soul. These laws are laid down for us and are predetermined. However we have the freedom to choose what to do given and considering these laws. For example it is a law that if I wrong someone, my soul will suffer in the long and short term. There is no way around this. This is a predetermined law. You cannot possibly wrong someone without hurting your own soul. However whether I choose to wrong someone or not is up to me.

Please let me know what you think about this.

I would say that every single iota is predetermined by God and yet we are responsible for our own selves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does everyone here agree with these two principles? I think the following are so important for anyone who calls themselves a believer in God. Many modernists who claim to believe in God probably don't know the following:

1) That which is eternal* (in the true sense of the term) could not have been otherwise (it is necessary in and of itself).

* by eternal! I do not mean something which has an infinite past and an infinite future. Eternity has no past or future. Eternity has no before or after! Eternity is like the truth that 1+1= 2. This is an example of something being eternally and therefore necessarily true because it could not have possibly been otherwise. So let us not confuse "Eternity" with an "everlastingness of Infinite time".

2) God's will is eternal! If His will is not eternal, then He Himself is not eternal!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does everyone here agree with these two principles? I think the following are so important for anyone who calls themselves a believer in God. Many modernists who claim to believe in God probably don't know the following:

1) That which is eternal* (in the true sense of the term) could not have been otherwise (it is necessary in and of itself).

* by eternal! I do not mean something which has an infinite past and an infinite future. Eternity has no past or future. Eternity has no before or after! Eternity is like the truth that 1+1= 2. This is an example of something being eternally and therefore necessarily true because it could not have possibly been otherwise. So let us not confuse "Eternity" with an "everlastingness of Infinite time".

2) God's will is eternal! If His will is not eternal, then He Himself is not eternal!

 

 

If God's will is eternal it means that God lives in the past, present, and future simultaneously,
 then the past, present, and future must be as eternal as God is. 
 
If Time is simultaneous with eternity and God is eternal then God has always known that time exists.
Therefore, unless God was wrong, Time has always existed. It wasn't created.
 
Similarly If God is eternally aware that the universe exists then the universe must exist eternally.
Therefore the universe couldn't have been created. 
 
wslm.
*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say that every single iota is predetermined by God and yet we are responsible for our own selves.

 

how can we be responsible for anything? we're not really accountable for anything; no one is.

 

 

Does everyone here agree with these two principles? I think the following are so important for anyone who calls themselves a believer in God. Many modernists who claim to believe in God probably don't know the following:

1) That which is eternal* (in the true sense of the term) could not have been otherwise (it is necessary in and of itself).

* by eternal! I do not mean something which has an infinite past and an infinite future. Eternity has no past or future. Eternity has no before or after! Eternity is like the truth that 1+1= 2. This is an example of something being eternally and therefore necessarily true because it could not have possibly been otherwise. So let us not confuse "Eternity" with an "everlastingness of Infinite time".

2) God's will is eternal! If His will is not eternal, then He Himself is not eternal!

 

i might agree with these, reluctantly lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how can we be responsible for anything? we're not really accountable for anything; no one is.

I disagree. I think apart from choosing where/when we are born, everything is a choice. For example, I am writing this out of my free will and not out of compulsion.

 

 

Does everyone here agree with these two principles? I think the following are so important for anyone who calls themselves a believer in God. Many modernists who claim to believe in God probably don't know the following:

1) That which is eternal* (in the true sense of the term) could not have been otherwise (it is necessary in and of itself).

* by eternal! I do not mean something which has an infinite past and an infinite future. Eternity has no past or future. Eternity has no before or after! Eternity is like the truth that 1+1= 2. This is an example of something being eternally and therefore necessarily true because it could not have possibly been otherwise. So let us not confuse "Eternity" with an "everlastingness of Infinite time".

2) God's will is eternal! If His will is not eternal, then He Himself is not eternal!

Agreed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If God's will is eternal it means that God lives in the past, present, and future simultaneously,
 then the past, present, and future must be as eternal as God is. 

Salam,

 

If God's Will is eternal, it means that His Will cannot but be ever presently NOW.  It has to be nothing but a pure NOW.  not a now that "can be" in a "past", or a now that "can be" in the future.  No!  A now that is nothing but NOW and cannot not be now.  There is no past, therefore is no future!  there is just now and nothing but now.    

 

If Time is simultaneous with eternity and God is eternal then God has always known that time exists.
Therefore, unless God was wrong, Time has always existed. It wasn't created.

 

Maybe what yo umean to say is that....the temporal events (what we call creation in time) have always existed from eternity in God's knowledge. If so, I agree.  

 

Now, do the temporal events begin somehwere in time?  No. tey have no beginning and no end.  And yet, this beginningless and endless temporal flow IS NOT eternity itself but simply its "image" or manifestation!  As Plato says:  Time is the MOVING image of Eternity!

 

Similarly If God  is eternally aware that the universe exists then the universe must exist eternally. Therefore the universe couldn't have been created

 

Yes, it does exist eternally in His unmanifested knowledge.  But it is exists in flux in His manifested knowledge.  His manifested and unmanifested knowledge are no two different realities but are rather two sides of the same coin, or two viewpoints of the same reality.  One viewpoint is God's viewpoint of His own reality.  The other viewpoint is our viewpoint of God's reality.   it is the same identical reality but it has two different views points

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how can we be responsible for anything? we're not really accountable for anything; no one is.

 

With the modern, Kantian, and most prevelant notion of free will, as "autonomous" and "independnet" agents, it would make more sense to deny our responsibility because such a will is arbitrary and is not based on an intrinsic desire for either goodness or badness.  Such a will is said to be free because it is not intentioned, directed according to an immutable, and non-random intelligence or ever present awareness.  So in this Kantian notion of free will, intelligence and will have no intrinsic connection (there is in fact a dualism involved).  According to this Kantian and modern notion of free will, the will (in itself) is only free if is blind and haphhazard due to its divorce from awareness and intelligence!  A true and proper understanding of free will, i have argued for, is intimately conneced to the function of intelligence and awareness.  We are accountable for how intelligent we are.  Because the degree to which we are intelligent (and therefore free), or the degree to which we lack intelligence (and are therefore contrained), is what defines our essence.  Our essence is not made by God anymore than an apple, or an apricot was made by God.  God simply gave the apply and apricot existence, but He did not make them into what they are!  In the same way, our essences are not made into what they are.  God simply gave our essences existence.               

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

With the modern, Kantian, and most prevelant notion of free will, as "autonomous" and "independnet" agents, it would make more sense to deny our responsibility because such a will is arbitrary and is not based on an intrinsic desire for either goodness or badness.  Such a will is said to be free because it is not intentioned, directed according to an immutable, and non-random intelligence or ever present awareness.  So in this Kantian notion of free will, intelligence and will have no intrinsic connection (there is in fact a dualism involved).  According to this Kantian and modern notion of free will, the will (in itself) is only free if is blind and haphhazard due to its divorce from awareness and intelligence!  A true and proper understanding of free will, i have argued for, is intimately conneced to the function of intelligence and awareness.  We are accountable for how intelligent we are.  Because the degree to which we are intelligent (and therefore free), or the degree to which we lack intelligence (and are therefore contrained), is what defines our essence.  Our essence is not made by God anymore than an apple, or an apricot was made by God.  God simply gave the apply and apricot existence, but He did not make them into what they are!  In the same way, our essences are not made into what they are.  God simply gave our essences existence.

 

i disagree with this inexplicably!!! what you say means one of two things; either:

 

1- we chose everything, that means we chose our parents, relatives, time in history in which we are born, our race, environment, genes, circumstances, etc.. nothing is exempt. we chose every aspect of our lives. this is beyond ludicrous.

 

or:

 

2- we didn't choose any of those involuntary things, but they have no bearing on anything. they play no role. this is also beyond absurd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For example, I am writing this out of my free will and not out of compulsion.

 

no one feels "compelled". there always "seems" to be a "choice", but that doesn't solve the problem of sufficient reason. something can't come out of nothing. a choice can't just happen uncaused. if it's uncaused then it's random and coincidence, which eliminates the need for god or first mover. if it is caused, then it's not a free choice.

 

you tend to over-simplify things, such as:

 

I think apart from choosing where/when we are born, everything is a choice.

 

what you don't realize is that nothing is truly in our control. of course, one must first abandon their simplistic views and philosophies in order to realize this.

 

if you have a more compelling argument, then by all means....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i disagree with this inexplicably!!! what you say means one of two things; either:

1- we chose everything, that means we chose our parents, relatives, time in history in which we are born, our race, environment, genes, circumstances, etc.. nothing is exempt. we chose every aspect of our lives. this is beyond ludicrous.

or:

2- we didn't choose any of those involuntary things, but they have no bearing on anything. they play no role. this is also beyond absurd.

I think you have misunderstood me. I don't see how you could have arrived at those two options. You might need to explain how those two options are entailed by what I said.

What I am saying is this: Our choice is based on our nature. Our nature is eternally known to God. Our nature is not other than what is eternally known to God. We are our nature. God didn't make us into who we are. We are who we are from eternity. If anything this implies that we are eternally responsible for who we are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you have misunderstood me. I don't see how you could have arrived at those two options. You might need to explain how those two options are entailed by what I said.

What I am saying is this: Our choice is based on our nature. Our nature is eternally known to God. Our nature is not other than what is eternally known to God. We are our nature. God didn't make us into who we are. We are who we are from eternity. If anything this implies that we are eternally responsible for who we are.

 

i'm sorry, but this is utter [edited out]. god can't know anything about anything that he doesn't cause to be a certain way. he can only know what he will cause and create. he could make me the greatest saint in history and say i've eternally known you were gonna be the greatest saint in history, and therefor eternally responsible as such. or he could make me the worst monster in history, and say i've eternally known that you'd be the worst monster in history, and as such, you are eternally responsible for being so.

 

i would say to god: no, my friend, it is you who decided i should be this way or that, and you are the only one who's responsible for anything. you didn't even have to create me, anyone else, or anything; so why did you? perhaps it was for self gratification? i know i never asked to be created.

 

god's eternal knowledge has nothing in it but what he will do/create, period. he is the only one/thing who's truly eternal, so nothing else even had an  "eternal nature", until god gave it a nature, so he should man up and accept responsibility for this hellish world that he created (exactly as it is). he should just accept that he screwed up big time, and stop making us feel guilty for his humongous and eternal screwup.

 

sorry if i was harsh, ethereal.

Edited by Jaafar Al-Shibli
Inappropriate language.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i just wanted to add that an apple isn't responsible for being an apple, nor is a rock, for being a rock, nor a fly for being a fly, nor a virus for being a virus, nor honey for being honey, etc..

 

Your statement is meaningless if by "responsible" you mean "morally accountable."  The essence of a rock does not have morality as part of its essence.  So to say "the rock is not morally accountable for being a rock" is meaningless.  You might as well say, "the bachelor's wife never got married to him".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i'm sorry, but this is utter [edited out]. god can't know anything about anything that he doesn't cause to be a certain way.

 

If you insist that God makes an apple into an apple, rather than just causing it to exist, then yes.  But that would mean that God has made His own knowledge into what it eternally was.  And that, my friend, is utterly absurd.      

 

he can only know what he will cause and create.

 

I dont think you said what you wanted to say correctly.  If God only knows what He "will cause", then He knows only after creating.  Is this what you wanted to say?

 

he could make me the greatest saint in history and say i've eternally known you were gonna be the greatest saint in history, and therefor eternally responsible as such. or he could make me the worst monster in history, and say i've eternally known that you'd be the worst monster in history, and as such, you are eternally responsible for being so.

 

You are insisting again, that God makes the apple into what it is.  And it is absurd to think that!

 

i would say to god: no, my friend, it is you who decided i should be this way or that, and you are the only one who's responsible for anything.

 

You are insisting again, that God makes the apple into what it is.  And it is absurd to think that!

 

you didn't even have to create me, anyone else, or anything; so why did you? perhaps it was for self gratification? i know i never asked to be created.

 

No, He created in keeping with His own eternal nature (Kataba ala Nafsihi Rahma).  If you say, this is not free will, then I will say that your notion of freewill doesn't make any sense.  

 

god's eternal knowledge has nothing in it but what he will do/create, period.

 

I am not sure if what you want to say is coming out right.  But either you mean by what you said that He only knows His creature when He creates it (in which case God does not have eternal knowledge of it), or you mean that Everthing He knows from eternity must come into existence.  I agree with the latter (it is what I am saying as well).  But this doesnt mean He makes whatever He knows into what it is.  He cannot make His own knowledge!

 

he is the only one/thing who's truly eternal, so nothing else even had an  "eternal nature",

 

Your are confusing things.  No thing has eternal existence! But all things are known eternally by God.  Are you saying God's knowledge is not eternal?    

 

until god gave it a nature, so he should man up and accept responsibility for this hellish world that he created (exactly as it is). he should just accept that he screwed up big time, and stop making us feel guilty for his humongous and eternal screwup.

 

So, God doesn't know His creatures from eternity, but only when He created them?

 

 

I dont mind you being harsh.. I am more concenred what you don't understand....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your statement is meaningless if by "responsible" you mean "morally accountable."  The essence of a rock does not have morality as part of its essence.  So to say "the rock is not morally accountable for being a rock" is meaningless.  You might as well say, "the bachelor's wife never got married to him".

 

this is what you said:

 

... God didn't make us into who we are. We are who we are from eternity. If anything this implies that we are eternally responsible for who we are.

 

you are saying that we (humans, animals, rocks, etc.) are responsible for who/what we are. so you are actually saying "the bachelor's wife did marry him". unless you wanna say that we were eternally in god's knowledge, but not rocks, apples, etc., which would not only invalidate your whole argument, but also contradict previous statements you've made (about apples and such).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Salam,

 

If God's Will is eternal, it means that His Will cannot but be ever presently NOW.  It has to be nothing but a pure NOW.  not a now that "can be" in a "past", or a now that "can be" in the future.  No!  A now that is nothing but NOW and cannot not be now.  There is no past, therefore is no future!  there is just now and nothing but now.    

 

 

 

Maybe what yo umean to say is that....the temporal events (what we call creation in time) have always existed from eternity in God's knowledge. If so, I agree.  

 

Now, do the temporal events begin somehwere in time?  No. tey have no beginning and no end.  And yet, this beginningless and endless temporal flow IS NOT eternity itself but simply its "image" or manifestation!  As Plato says:  Time is the MOVING image of Eternity!

 

Similarly If God  is eternally aware that the universe exists then the universe must exist eternally. Therefore the universe couldn't have been created

 

Yes, it does exist eternally in His unmanifested knowledge.  But it is exists in flux in His manifested knowledge.  His manifested and unmanifested knowledge are no two different realities but are rather two sides of the same coin, or two viewpoints of the same reality.  One viewpoint is God's viewpoint of His own reality.  The other viewpoint is our viewpoint of God's reality.   it is the same identical reality but it has two different views points

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
I hope your "arguments"  are not going to consist entirely of stuff you have dreamed of in one of your mystical trances.
That would be most disappointing. Any evidence? For anything you say?  
 
Classical arguments ex culo.
 
All the best.
*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your statement is meaningless if by "responsible" you mean "morally accountable."  The essence of a rock does not have morality as part of its essence.  So to say "the rock is not morally accountable for being a rock" is meaningless.  You might as well say, "the bachelor's wife never got married to him".

 

He meant the apply had no role in it becoming an apple in the material world (arc of descent). Nothing to do with morality. Neither can it chose to be a green sour apple or a red sweet apple, etc. 

 

A human being does not chose his parents, where he is born, his physical appearance, some genetic aspects he has inherited etc

 

However, what makes us human, is that we can shape who we become IN THE ARC OF ASCENT.

 

ws

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you insist that God makes an apple into an apple, rather than just causing it to exist, then yes.  But that would mean that God has made His own knowledge into what it eternally was.  And that, my friend, is utterly absurd.      

let me put it another way; god is eternal. i don't know whether he has eternal and absolute knowledge (omniscience) or not. if he does, then it is eternal, but the nature of the things in that knowledge (such as apples) is not itself eternal.

I dont think you said what you wanted to say correctly.  If God only knows what He "will cause", then He knows only after creating.  Is this what you wanted to say?

no, but same as above answer.

 

You are insisting again, that God makes the apple into what it is.  And it is absurd to think that!

yes, i insist, and what you're saying (which is that the apple's nature is eternal) is more absurd.

 

No, He created in keeping with His own eternal nature (Kataba ala Nafsihi Rahma).  If you say, this is not free will, then I will say that your notion of freewill doesn't make any sense.  

why should his eternal nature be my problem or my fault?

 

I am not sure if what you want to say is coming out right.  But either you mean by what you said that He only knows His creature when He creates it (in which case God does not have eternal knowledge of it), or you mean that Everthing He knows from eternity must come into existence.  I agree with the latter (it is what I am saying as well).  But this doesnt mean He makes whatever He knows into what it is.  He cannot make His own knowledge!

he acts on his preconceived notions (assuming he has such notions). i could argue that god has no eternal knowledge, but simply has an "imagination" of sorts, and so creates what he "imagines", essentially realizing what he imagined (turning what he imagined into reality). he then calls this "eternal and absolute knowledge" or "omniscience", because, guess what, only he has the power to turn what he imagines (or what is eternally in his "mind") into reality.

 

Your are confusing things.  No thing has eternal existence! But all things are known eternally by God.  Are you saying God's knowledge is not eternal?    

i'm saying there's no proof of it. and even if he does have eternal knowledge, it reveals that there can exist no will but his will, so none of us have our own -free- wills. i think you sort of agree with me on this, but then you turn around and say this is what "freewill" is, and anything but, is absurd.

 

So, God doesn't know His creatures from eternity, but only when He created them?

see above.

 

I dont mind you being harsh.. I am more concenred what you don't understand....

i'm concerned with what none of us understand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this is what you said:

 

 

you are saying that we (humans, animals, rocks, etc.) are responsible for who/what we are. so you are actually saying "the bachelor's wife did marry him". unless you wanna say that we were eternally in god's knowledge, but not rocks, apples, etc., which would not only invalidate your whole argument, but also contradict previous statements you've made (about apples and such).

 

You have said that rocks are not responsibile for being rocks.  Define responsibility?   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He meant the apply had no role in it becoming an apple in the material world (arc of descent). Nothing to do with morality. Neither can it chose to be a green sour apple or a red sweet apple, etc. 

 

A human being does not chose his parents, where he is born, his physical appearance, some genetic aspects he has inherited etc

 

However, what makes us human, is that we can shape who we become IN THE ARC OF ASCENT.

 

ws

 

this is the problem; the "arc of descent" determines absolutely what happens in the "arc of ascend". denying that, implies a void somewhere in the causal chain, and this void (even if it's only 0.00000001%) defies the principle of sufficient reason. i know that god and prophets/imams claim (my view is that it is a false claim) that god "created freewill", but claiming that god created something which is logically impossible is like saying that god "created a 1+1 that equals 2". it's simply impossible, and not even god can do what is logically impossible, period.

 

 

You have said that rocks are not responsibile for being rocks.  Define responsibility?   

 

i meant that the apple/rock neither had a say in it becoming an apple/rock, nor is it morally responsible for anything before or after its creation. the same must be said for everything else, including humans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 let me put it another way; god is eternal. i don't know whether he has eternal and absolute knowledge (omniscience) or not. if he does, then it is eternal, but the nature of the things in that knowledge (such as apples) is not itself eternal.

 

So, God can have eternal knowledge of creation without actually knowing creation eternally? Seems like a contradiction.  

 

1- Knowlede is the unity between the knower and the known.  Agree?

2- If God has Knowledge of creation then there must be a unity between Himself qua Knower and Creation qua Known.

3- If God has Eternal Knowledge, then there must be an Eternal Unity between Himself qua Knower and Creation qua Known. 

 

yes, i insist, and what you're saying (which is that the apple's nature is eternal) is more absurd.

 

I am saying that the apple's nature in His knowledge is eternal! You are insisting that God has eternal knowledge of creation without knowing creation eternally.  Sorry, but things can't get more absurd then a contradition.  

 

 

why should his eternal nature be my problem or my fault?  

 

I don't know why you are making His nature your fault???  That is for you to answer.  You shouldn't make it your fault!  Especially since He said "Kataba Ala Nafsihir Rahma".  (That He has obligated, as part of His nature, Mercy)  So I have no clue why you want to make His merciful nature your problem!

 

he acts on his preconceived notions (assuming he has such notions). i could argue that god has no eternal knowledge, but simply has an "imagination" of sorts, and so creates what he "imagines", essentially realizing what he imagined (turning what he imagined into reality). he then calls this "eternal and absolute knowledge" or "omniscience", because, guess what, only he has the power to turn what he imagines (or what is eternally in his "mind") into reality.

LOL!  So, here is a thing... I don't believe in a God who is ignorant.  Because as the Quran says:  “What then does He who created (all), and He who is the knower of the subtleties - the Aware - not know (about His creations?)” In fact you are not only denying He has eternal knowledge but you are also denying He has knowledge at all!  So what you are saying is that He doesn't know of the things that He brings into existence!!!!!  Because He just has an imagination of something which resembles the thing which He will bring into existence.  Notice, what you are saying.  You are not saying that He creates what is in His imagination (something which I can whole heartedly agree with)! You are saying rather that He creates something which resembles His eternal imagination.  Again the Quran says:  It is Allah who has created seven heavens and of the earth, the like of them. [His] command descends among them so you may know that Allah is over all things competent and that Allah has encompassed all things in knowledge.

 

i'm saying there's no proof of it. and even if he does have eternal knowledge, it reveals that there can exist no will but his will, so none of us have our own -free- wills. i think you sort of agree with me on this, but then you turn around and say this is what "freewill" is, and anything but, is absurd.

There is no proof that He has knowledge?  If God doesn't have knowledge what kind of God do you believe in?  And I can't seriously believe you are finding it problematic that God's Will is Absolute.  I am just thinking "can kufr get any more explicit"!!!

 

 

i'm concerned with what none of us understand.

 

 

I am now interested to see how one can attempt to justify their statements of kufr.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However, what makes us human, is that we can shape who we become IN THE ARC OF ASCENT.

 

What we become is what we already are in God's eternal knowledge (even in the arc of ascent).  What makes the apple different from the human is that, unlike apples, humans, as a species, has no fixed station in His eternal knowledge.  But each individual of the human does have a fixed station in His eternal knowledge.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 
I hope your "arguments"  are not going to consist entirely of stuff you have dreamed of in one of your mystical trances.
That would be most disappointing. Any evidence? For anything you say?  
 
Classical arguments ex culo.
 
All the best.
*

 

I was hoping and expecting my arguments to appear as nonsense to some people.  I am glad someone like yourself sees it that way!  Thank you.  

Edited by magma
Edited language

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i meant that the apple/rock neither had a say in it becoming an apple/rock.

 

 

Does God have a say on whether He can carry a rock so heavy He cannot lift? 
 
,,,,,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, God can have eternal knowledge of creation without actually knowing creation eternally? Seems like a contradiction.

you misunderstand me. i'll explain;

 

1- Knowlede is the unity between the knower and the known.  Agree?

2- If God has Knowledge of creation then there must be a unity between Himself qua Knower and Creation qua Known.

3- If God has Eternal Knowledge, then there must be an Eternal Unity between Himself qua Knower and Creation qua Known.

i agree there must be a unity between the knower and the known (the knowee lol), however, it is my opinion that this can only be the case when the knowledge is based on the known, not when the known is created based on the so called knowledge. in essence, that is cheating, so god gets no points. how can god not have eternal and absolute so called knowledge of everything, when he made everything himself, and made it in exact accordance to what's in his mind. i don't call this knowledge. i'm sorry, brother.

 

I am saying that the apple's nature in His knowledge is eternal! You are insisting that God has eternal knowledge of creation without knowing creation eternally.  Sorry, but things can't get more absurd then a contradition.

again, i only call something knowledge when it is extracted from reality, not when reality is forced to conform to what is in someone's mind.

 

I don't know why you are making His nature your fault???  That is for you to answer.  You shouldn't make it your fault!  Especially since He said "Kataba Ala Nafsihir Rahma".  (That He has obligated, as part of His nature, Mercy)  So I have no clue why you want to make His merciful nature your problem!

first of all, please don't cite quran or narrations, as they mean nothing to me. what i'm trying to say, is that why should what exists in god's mind be my problem/responsibility? why should i suffer because it was in his mind that i should suffer? i don't believe in his mercy or rahma etc.. my experience has been anything but, and i can gather millions of people who've had very unpleasant existences as well. i'm sure you'll just brush it off as "unenlightenment", but that's just your unsubstantiated opinion.

 

LOL!  So, here is a thing... I don't believe in a God who is ignorant.  Because as the Quran says:  “What then does He who created (all), and He who is the knower of the subtleties - the Aware - not know (about His creations?)” In fact you are not only denying He has eternal knowledge but you are also denying He has knowledge at all!  So what you are saying is that He doesn't know of the things that He brings into existence!!!!!  Because He just has an imagination of something which resembles the thing which He will bring into existence.  Notice, what you are saying.  You are not saying that He creates what is in His imagination (something which I can whole heartedly agree with)! You are saying rather that He creates something which resembles His eternal imagination.  Again the Quran says:  It is Allah who has created seven heavens and of the earth, the like of them. [His] command descends among them so you may know that Allah is over all things competent and that Allah has encompassed all things in knowledge.

again, no quran etc.. if you have logical proof, by all means, otherwise texts are nothing more than empty claims.

 

also, what difference would it make if i said "he creates what is in his imagination"? i still don't consider it knowledge.

 

 

There is no proof that He has knowledge?  If God doesn't have knowledge what kind of God do you believe in?

i don't believe in any god or deity, just a first mover or first cause.

 

And I can't seriously believe you are finding it problematic that God's Will is Absolute.

i'm not sure how "absolute" his will is, but i can tell you for sure that our wills are anything but free (in any sense of the word).

 

I am just thinking "can kufr get any more explicit"!!!

brother, i am kafir and proud of it. do you have a problem with that? if you don't want me to call you brother, just say so. ;)

 

I am now interested to see how one can attempt to justify their statements of kufr.

i think i have justified my kufr quite well. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...