Lambert

  • **
  • 916 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: Does free will exist in William Lane Craig's universe?
« Reply #120 on: February 28, 2014, 11:46:23 pm »
Interesting... I am curious to hear your take on Ephesians 2:9, Better yet 2:8 through 2:10. If our conciseness is the intellect of our soul, how much iniquity would raise in the self-"I", if for eternity we knew that we produced enough to be allowed eternity? This is a issue on more than one level. The "I" of ourselves is granted existence eternal through "grace" nothing the "I" can produce.

Good question, that needs explaining in the long answer.

First let me identify "I" as different from "self" wherein I is our ego awareness, or persona, and the self is the being called man. So we can now say that the I is the mask of the being, but is also the achiever who put the stripes on our shoulders, and that actually leads us further removed from the self to [finally] prompt the question with regard to the meaning of life (in my "ask and you will receive").

Then I identified the difference between synousia and parousia as the final insight or vision in answer to the question re the meaning of file.

For Plato this was when the prior insights had lost their charm and became mere images, and mere qualities in life that did not answer the question he was looking for, and so the contradiction remained (because only the I was decorated at the expense of the self).

Then, as he was pondering his own insights from every which way to see to why they did not make him happy, etc, not yet another glow was seen but instead the glow came to rest on him, and for this Plato held that an emergence is needed by faith from our very own being and that was the self as the naked animal man = from beneath the I.

We call this born again by faith from the heart. Significant for Plato is that he was looking at his own insights wondering what was wrong with them as if they were his shepherds taking turns herding their own sheep in the middle of a midwinter night, and that is when parousia put the glow on himself.

Paul called this faith in the heart that prompts the confession that there was something wrong with him and not is insights, and that so is when the "I" had reached the end of his world and the glow (that we call salvation) was a free gift to him, almost despite his own I.

Plato, more than Aristotle, emphasized the quality of these insights as if they had lots of sheep to evaluate that were emergent to him from natural learning as craftsman and not just handyman who is nice to have around. 

This difference is not ours to call, and that became the basis for the difference between parousia and synousia, that John called the difference between 'from God' and "from carnal desire" in John.1:13, that leads to re-emergence to know the difference between.


1

Ocean

  • *
  • 2 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: Does free will exist in William Lane Craig's universe?
« Reply #121 on: March 13, 2014, 06:03:01 pm »
Human experience and common sense is useless when talking about cutting edge science.

No, I fully disagree, they are very relevant. How could we possibly correspond our lives to and our understanding of the universe without experience and relying on our common sense 'reason' abilities?

Quote
Relativity (with time dilation and length contraction) does not make sense. Quantum physics definitely does not make sens. But they are both true.

By 'true' do you mean 'faithful to their own construct'? This statement is a 'self refuting' statement. If they 'don't make sense' then they would not be 'true' in any sense. Do you mean "they don't make sense to you"? In a subjective manner? That certain principled concepts (hypothesis and theories) are difficult to grasp doesn't reflect either way on their veracity.

Quote
However the "mechanism" that gave rise to the Universe works, I can almost certainly promise you that it will not adhere to "common sense" or "human experience, knowledge, wisdom, empiricism and discovery" anno 2013. If it is ever discovered it will be weird. People will say that "now science has lost its marbles" and call the theory crazy.

Why on earth (pun intended) would a 'weird mechanism' 'give rise' to a universe that is ordered, logical, rational, knowable, reasonable, consistent, linear, and predictable? How and why would 'human beings' spring up from such 'weirdness' and develop into highly intelligent moral beings? Displaying character traits such as virtue, dignity, honor, humility, compassion, love, joy, justice, anger, wrath, etc..??? Able to reason, distinguish, define, discern, perform mathematics, create art, music and literature forms of expression etc...???

There is absolutely no reason at all for anyone to 'believe' the 'weird mechanism' origins. Why would you 'create' such a coping mechanism that is obviously so far removed from what we can observe and conclude from evidences we do have access to?

Quote
And what's then the odds of bronze-age peasants by luck getting everything right about the aspects of a being that caused the Universe?
what? Can you rephrase this 'point' or is this just an attempt at sarcasm?

2

Lambert

  • **
  • 916 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: Does free will exist in William Lane Craig's universe?
« Reply #122 on: March 13, 2014, 08:14:00 pm »
I think what Ruffen forgets is that the universe does not exist but we exist in it, and because it is not real there is room for all of us.

Then, he forgets that science extracts from omniscience in that each and every primary (major premise) of our inquiry is prior by nature in us. The scientist may not realize this, but that is what 'aha' moments are about and then he goes to work and prove himself right.

So the ancients would call this the ambition for, of, and by dummies as people who really do not know themself, or their 'own self' perhaps, and that kind of makes them mentally handicapped as outsider to their own self. We call that fallen nature, and if that is true is also means that our original nature is part of us . . . that Ocean here calls common sense because is prior by nature in us that Ruffen here denies as a stranger to his own self.

Aristotle held that the axiom of non-contradiction is subliminally within each and every intelligent effort, that already begins with the "inquisitive child" and here now is assigned to the universe itself as if with a mind of its own that we can never understand: 

 
Quote
However the "mechanism" that gave rise to the Universe works, I can almost certainly promise you that it will not adhere to "common sense" or "human experience, knowledge, wisdom, empiricism and discovery" anno 2013. If it is ever discovered it will be weird. People will say that "now science has lost its marbles" and call the theory crazy.

To make a long story short, science is ambition of Cave dwellers who see a ray of light shining in their own darkness, while the ancients wrote their stuff 'outside' the Cave in the fullness of the celestial light from where they actualize their condition neologically = being what they write and skip the scientific method as a detour that we have to make inside the Cave. This is where Jesus said: "I am Logos" to say the same.


« Last Edit: March 13, 2014, 08:20:24 pm by Lambert »