It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Free Will and Asking God for Help

page: 1
4
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 28 2011 @ 03:36 AM
link   
I had an epiphany yesterday.

I've been reading a lot of NDE accounts recently and I saw a connection between two commonly mentioned spiritual laws.

The first is that we have complete free will, and God or spirits, are not allowed to influence this. Though they can push us into certain situations so we will come to certain realizations, but it is still always our choice what to do (just not what happens to us.)

The second is that we will always be given help if we ask for it (i.e. prayer), as long as this doesn't interfere with free will.

We on here on Earth to learn, but we can't be forced to learn. So the affect of this is that we are put into situations where we are likely to learn. E.g. if you want to smoke then you can do so, but if it's important that you stop then you may be given a health problem which will likely make you decide to quit.

What I realized is that there is a cheat! OK, it's not really a cheat - in fact I think this is likely what we are eventually meant to realize. It is that we can give up our free will with our free will. We can combine these two and ask for help and ask to be lead into whatever we are supposed to be doing, or whatever is the right thing, to receive help in all circumstances regardless of whether we want it or not. We can use our free will to ask for a certain amount of free will to be taken away, in order that we will be better directed by God.

I said something along these lines to God yesterday:
"I'm using my free will to gratefully but firmly request, according to the concept you said where you will always help if I ask, that you always put push me into doing what I am supposed to be doing according to your plan. I renounce my free will in this respect, which I am allowed to do because that is my free will choice. Please continuously remind me of this, keep me always aware, and make me follow the exact right thing to do. That is my choice, and that is what I am asking of you to help me with. Thank you very much, looking forward to being back home as soon as I'm done here."




posted on May, 28 2011 @ 03:42 AM
link   
reply to post by sign00
 


That's actually an interesting idea, but I doubt God would follow through with that, because it still goes against His nature; however, I would imagine simply asking God to take full control over your life, in the sense that He is the -only- one influencing you and your actions would be a similar concept to go about doing, and more realistic



posted on May, 28 2011 @ 03:44 AM
link   
Is your concept just a way out of thinking or making decisions yourself because i could really go for that.How do you define a sign from God ? funny shapes in your toast? Confused yet interested.



posted on May, 28 2011 @ 03:50 AM
link   
reply to post by sign00
 


I think you have a very good point here.
There is Gods will and there is mans will. The man though, is really an illusion.
Everything that happens, happens by and of Gods will, yet we imagine (think) that we can control it.
Everything that is sent is a present (it has been pre-sent) from God.
The man in us looks at it in a judging way, judging if it will help us or impede us.
But it is a gift. We should be grateful and give thanks to and for each moment.
And trust that God knows what he is doing. This is faith.



posted on May, 28 2011 @ 03:54 AM
link   
How could it be possible for little old me to control this universe?
I am no more than a tiny droplet of water in an immense ocean!!
The ocean is God and I flow with it.



posted on May, 28 2011 @ 03:56 AM
link   
reply to post by sign00
 


According to religion, your life and your future is already decided.
The Bible for instance has a beginning and a End, or a new beginning.

God already knows what choices you/we will make. If the Bible is correct.
The only one's who dosent know yet; are you/we.

You can not change your future, you can only wonder about it and live it.



posted on May, 28 2011 @ 04:06 AM
link   
There is no way we can prove we have free will. We might think about a decision that needs to be made for days, yet when we do decide what is it that made us decide the final decision?
Try not making decisions until the moment it is needed instead of wasting all that brain power and worry. The 'choice' is true in the moment. It is Gods way.
It always is anyway but you get a rest from the mind.



posted on May, 28 2011 @ 04:39 AM
link   
The truth is we have our own individual free will and we can change our future. We can do everything we want to do with our free will choice and God is balancing everything. Unity is all there is, all else than Unity are illusions or thought forms.



posted on May, 28 2011 @ 03:15 PM
link   
reply to post by sign00
 



The second is that we will always be given help if we ask for it (i.e. prayer), as long as this doesn't interfere with free will.


What about the aids ridden children or starving citizens of under-developed countries? What do you think they pray for each day?

What about the daughter of Joseph Fritzl?

What do you think these people are praying for!?

This is what offends most people about this wish dispensary system that works on a scale beyond our imagination, on a universal scale.

Do you think if we we pray for the Andromeda Gallaxy to turn around that it might not collide into our Gallaxy? Let's all pray for the temporary suspension of the natural order, in the hope that it will save us from gettin off our knees and doing something about this.

Ironically, we have free will because we have no other choice.

Sorry for the rant, that prayer nonsense struck a chord with me.



posted on May, 28 2011 @ 03:32 PM
link   
reply to post by sign00
 


Actually you are right...

You can ask for God to guide you in your life and point you in a dirrection if you are lost.

After that its a matter of accepting whatever comes your way regardless of it being "Good or bad"

I was actually at this point a few years ago... I had no dirrection in life, i jumped from job to job unhappy and really saw no decent future for myself.

I did exactly what the OP said just over a year ago... I decided to accept whatever came my way, and let God guide me in my life. Just over a year later i am where i am... Happy with a great carreer in the medical field in my future, helping people. (honestly who knew)

I will give those who believe what im saying some advice on this matter though...

If you decide to give your free will to God and accept his guidence...

You MUST learn to approach every single situation with love...

Good and bad must be treated as equal...

Have love for everyone and everything in your life, and God will show you the way.




posted on May, 29 2011 @ 06:04 AM
link   
Just for the record, this generally being somewhat more like a background, than part of the main-argument:

Quote: ["We on here on Earth to learn, but we can't be forced to learn."]

Doctrinal postulate...in case it should pop up again later.

And then a personal definition, narrowing the optional scopes of 'free will'. 'Free will' does not necessarily imply freedom from consequences. As is clearly demonstrated in the alleged Eden scenario: "You can choose, but if you don't choose, as I want it, you'll have it coming".

I'd prefer to approach the subject of 'free will' by using known/observable information from cosmos, this way hoping I can avoid baseless theist speculations as much as possible.

Cosmos basically means 'order' in a rational scientific/logic context, and it's not a 'suggested' order. It's imperative. From the initial manifestations of the observable part of cosmos (be it Big Bang or quantum foam) to complexity the universe runs on lines of an order superimposed on what theoretically (in scientific terms) is called 'chaos'. Chaos has no intrinsic definition, but means 'no order' (possibly structure), at least as we know order/structure.

Thus 'chaos' can from some perspectives be said to be 'freedom'.

Contemporary theoretical physics not only gives an optional possibility of 'chaos', it actively points in the direction of at least some degree of 'chaos' being a 'reality'. But in physics there is no GUT (grand unfied theory)/TOE (theory of everything). The very small, micro-cosmos appears to run on lines of chaos, while the very big, macro-cosmos, runs on lines of order, and the two models don't really meet completely, but function quite well on each their territory.

Mankind can presently only demonstrably (on objective criteria) relate to cosmos, but disregarding such premature absurdities as the film "What the bleep do we know" and incompetent efforts of 'quantum-religionism', there is an optional possibility of 'experiencing' chaos (no order) level through the use of the alleged concept 'consciousness' (which is supposed to ALSO be non-cosmic in character).

I'm writing 'alleged', because while I personally lean strongly in the direction of a combination chaos/consciousness, the amount of insane and incompetent speculations on the subject has brought this interesting research area into such a disreputation, that it's on par with extremist-religionist fantasies.

Naturally, as a sceptic, I distance myself as much as possible from the religious doctrines presented in OP, but on in overall, ideology-neutral, perspective at least the universe DOES contain options of both order ('law') and chaos ('freedom'). Research (not guesses or speculations) could gives us some information on the possibilities of both options for mankind.

Usually I'm not happy about fabulated science/theist syncretism, but when I cut away the theist terminology and -wrappings of the OP, I see some competent and valid considerations, above the common pro-theist propaganda clichées.

PS The asking 'god' for anything is outside the scope or interest in my life, so I'll leave that to those who want it.



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 06:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 


You wrote:

["There is no way we can prove we have free will."]

Quite right. Presently this is mainly a subject, where agnosticism is most suitable. But there strong indications worth following up FOR free will.

But it's strange to hear such an argument of agnosticism coming from you, who regularly insists on presenting doctrines/absolutes on practically no basis.

Is it the usual theist argumentation method: "It's true, because it's true. And it's not true, because it's not true" you use?



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 06:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 


You wrote:

["I decided to accept whatever came my way,........... and let God guide me in my life."] (my ......insert).

These two things are not identical, as you seem to imply. They are similar concepts.



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 02:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by bogomil
reply to post by Akragon
 


You wrote:

["I decided to accept whatever came my way,........... and let God guide me in my life."] (my ......insert).

These two things are not identical, as you seem to imply. They are similar concepts.


Actually i disagree, but it depends on the point of view. Accepting whatever came my way and letting God guide me are one and the same. Of course one would have to believe that whatever challenge that was placed before me was designed specifically for my own learning on the path i am being guided on. This requires faith in whatever being or entity you're asking for guidence. Which i have complete and total faith in regardless of evidence that proves the existence of said entity or being. Of course as we've discussed before, to myself God is everything without exception, not a specific being or entity. So in other words asking the universe to guide me is the same as asking God.

Of course i don't expect you to agree with me, but there it is.




posted on May, 30 2011 @ 02:31 AM
link   
reply to post by bogomil
 


There is no way that freewill can be proved. Wikipedia has some interesting things to say about freewill, but it has no concrete answers.
This is not an anwser from a person in a box, unless you, yourself has put this person in a box (you put whatever label on the side of the box 'you' choose). Then, of course it is only you that sees the box, for you are the one who has constucted it. This thread is about a subject, not about the people presenting their veiws.
This thread is a discussion, it is not an argument until someone believes they want an argument.


edit on 30-5-2011 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2011 @ 03:36 AM
link   
reply to post by bogomil
 


Chaos does not mean disorder. Chaos is a word used to describe something where the 'order' can not be understood by the human mind. Chaos could then in fact mean divine order. When we put our noses on a tv screen we will see chaos, yet if we take a few steps back we will see the whole picture. I don't see 'chaos' as freedom either, because like the picture on the tv screen it has to be whole.
We can not see the entire universe and until we do we can call it chaotic, but that does not make it true.
It is complete and it knows what it is doing.
It is doing the whole show.
Where is freewill (individual freewill) in that?

Say, the universe was a watch (for instance), a cog may believe he has freewill, the individual hands (second, minute, hour) may believe they have freewill, but if it were true the watch would not work.
The wise cog/hands see and know for sure that it is all taken care of, that everything is being done, that all it needs to do is relax and enjoy the movement. It knows it is moved by the rhythm of the watch and marvels at the complexity.
The cog/hand that has not understood the working of the watch will insist that it is in control and will resist the working of the watch and fight with it. The cog/hand will still be moving in the same direction as it is ordered to be but it is the watch doing it, not the cog/hand.
Let go little cog, be one with the watch.
We do not have to turn the cog.
The watch is.



posted on May, 30 2011 @ 04:02 AM
link   
reply to post by sign00
 


I like this thread. I think I'll try that too. Just ask Him to please take over, cause I've made kind of a mess of things myself. Thanks and blessings to you.



posted on May, 30 2011 @ 06:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 


You wrote:

["Actually i disagree, but it depends on the point of view."]

True. The validity-request is removed a step to the area of 'point-of-view'.

Quote: [" Of course one would have to believe that whatever challenge that was placed before me was designed specifically for my own learning on the path i am being guided on. This requires faith in whatever being or entity you're asking for guidence."]

Again true. But in an objective context this is a circle-argument.

Quote: ["Of course i don't expect you to agree with me, but there it is."]

No, I don't agree, but your abilty of discerning the options is very positive for me. Neither you nor I have said the last word on this, but can potentially delve even deeper. It hinges on the use of the concepts objective and subjective, which for me aren't black/white ultimate positions, but are suitable for different situations (just as micro-cosmic and macro-cosmic science-models are).



posted on May, 30 2011 @ 06:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 


You wrote:

["There is no way that freewill can be proved."]

I have never said it could. The arguments are agnostic, but point presently more in the direction of 'free will' than of trans-cosmic absolutes. As I said before.

Quote: ["This is not an anwser from a person in a box, unless you, yourself has put this person in a box (you put whatever label on the side of the box 'you' choose). Then, of course it is only you that sees the box, for you are the one who has constucted it. This thread is about a subject, not about the people presenting their veiws."]

A 'position' includes both the material and the person presenting it. I find 'position' a useful word, and I'm actually supporting the idea, that all positions should be presented as clearly as possible.

Quote: ["This thread is a discussion, it is not an argument until someone believes they want an argument."]

I'm not quite sure, that I can find an exact border between the two, or if they don't share a big common zone. If this is important for you, please clarify and enlarge.



posted on May, 30 2011 @ 06:33 AM
link   
reply to post by bogomil
 


An argument is where someone feels that there is a chance they might lose, or that there is something to win. Right and wrong. To say 'argument' is to say conflict.
A discussion is a communion, a communication.
Maybe if you understand the difference between these stances you will not use the word argument so much.

Why it is necessary for a person to be pigeonholed?
The madness is knowing that the first two words in answer to my post was: Quite right. Then, it is character assassination time, why???
There are no prizes.
edit on 30-5-2011 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
4
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join