Einstein, sent from above?

page: 4
2
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 8 2012 @ 01:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by DelayedChristmas
But if you disagree that not everyone follows God's will, doesn't that make Him not omnipotent or omniscient ?


Well, one could view it from the standpoint that, in granting free will, God lets the omnipotence bit slide, but omniscience is irrelevant, as whether he knows that people would defy or affirm his will has no bearing on whether they will or not.

Personally, I view "God's Will" as an over-arcing thing -- his overall goal for this reality. In that sense, people who are disobedient to God could still be doing his will, as we have connections and impacts that we can never comprehend.

For example, let us say that "Joe" is an ardent atheist, arguing against God at every turn. Joe meets up with "Jane", who is a believer, but after debating with Joe, starts to question her faith, and through study, prayer and more debates, becomes a stronger Christian and brings more people to the faith than she would have without Joe's atheistic intervention. Jane is clearly obeying God and doing his will, while Joe is disobeying God, but, ultimately, is doing his will, indirectly, through Jane.

I don't think that's always the case, and most disobedience would result in NOT being in harmony with God's will, but I think it's a more reasonable approach than saying anyone who disobeys doesn't further God's kingdom in any way.




posted on Jul, 8 2012 @ 01:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by DelayedChristmas
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


So heres another question, NuT: Do you think that everyone is technically following God's will, willingly or unwillingly? I think so.

But if you disagree that not everyone follows God's will, doesn't that make Him not omnipotent or omniscient ?


God has an active and passive will. He doesn't desire for any to be lost (passive will) but yet wont violate the sovereignty he gave man in the form of free will. Or like my example with Judas, he was prophesied to betray Jesus but yet he is fully responsible for that act. He can't say on Judgment Day " look I was just following destiny, you prophesied I would betray your Son."



posted on Jul, 8 2012 @ 01:40 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 

If we have free will then why can't we murder, rape and pillage without consequences?



posted on Jul, 8 2012 @ 01:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by aaaiii
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 

If we have free will then why can't we murder, rape and pillage without consequences?


How does that even make sense?

Free will doesn't mean you can do what you want and nothing comes of it -- we're all held responsible for our actions.



posted on Jul, 8 2012 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by aaaiii
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 

If we have free will then why can't we murder, rape and pillage without consequences?


That's still free will. You can choose to do those things or not to do them. Free will doesn't mean there are not consequences for the actions we choose. God is not mocked, for whatever a man sows so shall he reap. The Law of Reciprocity is always in effect. Its like the Law of Gravity.



posted on Jul, 8 2012 @ 01:50 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Judas did feel utter guilt and remorse when he did betray Jesus though and I don't think Judas will cop out like that... I think he will hold himself fully responsible for his actions ( When Job referenced the worms entering his body in the land of the dead, i think he was referring the worms as his past misdeeds and how he would have to think about his actions ) I think Judas will beg for forgiveness, and Father would grant it, because it had to be done.

The last sentence touches upon Free Will. What if "Free Will" is merely an illusion?

What if God knows you better than you know yourself?

With that in mind, what if God knows all the infinite possibilities that lie within each step and every turn, and knows which door you will open, and what leads after that subsequent decision and knows how you will react/think in every step?



posted on Jul, 8 2012 @ 01:56 PM
link   
reply to post by DelayedChristmas
 



It really boils down to the nature of time. God exists outside time, or in "Omega". He can tell the end from the beginning because He alone is not bound by the restrictions of the time domain. Judas is fully responsible for his actions yes, even though they were prophesied long beforehand right down to the 30 pieces of silver.



posted on Jul, 8 2012 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by DelayedChristmas
With that in mind, what if God knows all the infinite possibilities that lie within each step and every turn, and knows which door you will open, and what leads after that subsequent decision and knows how you will react/think in every step?


What if?

That's pretty much what Christians believe. God is outside of time, and all knowing, so if I'm going to wake up tomorrow, steal a car and go rob a bank, he's already well aware of that fact. But it is my decision to do these dastardly deeds, not his, and the fact that he knew ahead of time (from my perspective) doesn't mean that I was forced to do it, just that that's what I would decide to.



posted on Jul, 8 2012 @ 02:01 PM
link   
reply to post by DelayedChristmas
 




What if God knows you better than you know yourself? With that in mind, what if God knows all the infinite possibilities that lie within each step and every turn, and knows which door you will open, and what leads after that subsequent decision and knows how you will react/think in every step?


Yes, he knows. But, the person will still be responsible. God is just knowing the outcome, but stands back and lets it play out. Many times, he will perform direct intervention if needed. But, man won't be privy to all the ins and outs that is done to change the course of action, even sometimes he doesn't even tell above, just gives orders to do certain things.



posted on Jul, 8 2012 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by jhill76
 


Could God have sent Einstein down here to advance man, in an indirect way? Unlike Jesus, who he sent to help man in a very direct way.

Actually, I think Einstein was a very advanced soul -- who'd been here numerous times, and that he chose to return himself, to help. And as ever with help...it can be used for good or evil by the recipients. Surely not his intention to create a world-destructo-bomb.

How about Mark Twain? I think he was also an advanced soul, here to teach. Have you read his "Letters from the Earth"?
Interesting stuff. The guy was a genius, just like Einstein was in his way. Gifted.

I believe we are here to explore our creativity, and to help one another and learn while we're at it. We each have unique talents and gifts, all of which can better the world if presented and received in the right spirit.



posted on Jul, 8 2012 @ 03:34 PM
link   
Tesla wanted to give everyone free power who sent him?



posted on Jul, 8 2012 @ 03:42 PM
link   
EDIT: Woops...didn't notice you weren't addressing me...just saw your post below mine. But I'll leave my post anyway....

reply to post by Ladysophiaofsandoz
 


Again, another very advanced, gifted soul. I believe we all get to our peak after many go-rounds, and offer the world something extaordinary and meaningful. Eventually.
I don't think I agree with anyone being "sent" more than anyone else. We were all "sent". We all have something to offer, but some have things left to learn before they get to the apex of their soul's growth -- to Divinity.
edit on 8-7-2012 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)
edit on 8-7-2012 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)
edit on 8-7-2012 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 8 2012 @ 03:58 PM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 


Sorry sometimes I just throw stuff out there. I agree completely.

Mr Einstein and Mr Oppenheimer will have had to answer for their choices just like anyone else. Wonder how their justification stood up during questioning. Einstein did seem remorseful at the end though.



posted on Jul, 8 2012 @ 04:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Ladysophiaofsandoz
 

Rutherford discovered the neutron. Einstein wrote a letter. Oppie theorized. Szilard was the first to solve the problem because he was standing at a streetlight. Fermi, Bohr, Bethe, et al, contributed in other ways.

No one man was responsible. None of them realized the consequences.

We made some bad decisions as a country. Let's not second-guess the men who were responsible for ending the war because they were ignorant of where their genius would lead us.

Some resisted, particularly when we went on to develop the H-b*°b under that lunatic Teller.

They only realized their mistake at Trinity. By then it was too late.



posted on Jul, 8 2012 @ 05:01 PM
link   
reply to post by aaaiii
 


Point taken. Such a shame once the monster was let out of the box things went downhill from there.



posted on Jul, 8 2012 @ 07:20 PM
link   
reply to post by jhill76
 


Perhaps if God doesn't "send" you, you aren't here.



posted on Jul, 8 2012 @ 07:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by jhill76

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by jhill76
 




Einstein rejected a personal loving God deity. Are you postulating that Father sent someone who would lie about His character and nature to mankind?


Again, I said I am not saying it happened, or didn't happen. I am trying to see others viewpoints on these things. I used an extreme case here. Like the other poster said, could he have not have come to advance the timetable?
edit on 8-7-2012 by jhill76 because: (no reason given)


All things that occur are part of Gods plan.



posted on Jul, 8 2012 @ 08:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by jhill76
Let's take a look at Father. He knows best right? In his thinking, could he have not sent others down here from above, who have come here to help man in various ways.

Many think, if a person is not showing outside signs of holiness, they could not possibly be of God. People in the church, would say, scientists, they don't believe in God, so no.

Could God have sent Einstein down here to advance man, in an indirect way? Unlike Jesus, who he sent to help man in a very direct way.


If this is true then why did Christians burn people at the stake for doing anything scientific?



posted on Jul, 8 2012 @ 09:00 PM
link   
reply to post by buster2010
 


Catholics did the burning. It was usually Christians being lit on fire. Read Fox's book of martyrs.



posted on Jul, 8 2012 @ 10:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by buster2010
If this is true then why did Christians burn people at the stake for doing anything scientific?


Um... because they didn't?

Not to defend it, but the few people (contrary to popular belief, the number is probably less than 5,000) that the Catholic Church killed during the various Inquisitions were found guilty of heresy, witchcraft and other "crimes". The one usually trotted out as an example of one killed for science was Giordano Bruno, who most likely was found guilty of heresy for some of his non-scientific claims, and neither Galileo nor Kepler had anything good to say about him. One thing is pretty clear about Bruno -- he tended to tick off the people around him, whether friend or foe.

Curiously, the Church didn't technically kill anyone. The Inquisition Panel found them guilty, but they were turned over to the local government for the sentence to be carried out.





new topics
top topics
 
2
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join