Einstein's historic 'God Letter' written shortly before death up for auction — opening bid

[Sola_Fide]

It shows that God defies his own laws of physics. If these stories are true then tell me what is the use of science at all if God can just discard his "rules".

The same God who governs the rules of the universe governs the deviations of those rules. God is sovereign over everything. No contradiction.

This is along the lines of Euthyphro's Dilemma, are morally good acts willed by God because they are morally good, or are they morally good because they are willed by God?

God is the standard of goodness. What He does defines goodness.

When we murder it's wrong by our standards but God allegedly sends an angel to kill 185,000 people and you call it "his plan". So essentially God is tentative and can do whatever he wants because he is God and this God does not stick by any certain principles this is very problematic.

That God judges men who have sinned against Him is not a moral dilemma whatsoever. Also, that God shows mercy to some of His enemies (although however amazing it seems) is not a moral dilemma. He is the Potter and we are the clay. He is the Creator and we are the creatures. Whatever God does is right, and we don't have the right to question Him.

 

[BlackTerrel]

Thank GOD that our extreme uber religious right members have bailed on this forum, or there would be a spectacular fireworks show this afternoon.

And I'm all out of popcorn!

-t

Why? He has a right to his views and I don't begrudge him.

Though my sense is that his views have likely changed by now

 

[Sola_Fide]

I'm just pointing out a common hypocritcal argument made by religious people. In the real world things have to follow certain laws according to them, but with God, no logic is needed. Just accept that God is magic.

But I'm not saying anything about magic and I'm not saying anything that is not logical. I'm merely pointing out the difference between infinitude and eternity. Infinitude does not equal eternality. Infinity is a category of time (a progression or regression of events that has no end). Eternality is state of timeless-ness. There is a difference.

There is no progression or regression of events in eternity....that is a feature of time. In eternity, everything is present. There is no past or future. And this is amazing to think about because God placed the sin of His elect people on the cross at Calvary, and Jesus suffered God's wrath for every sin--past, present, and future--for His elect. Jesus said "It is finished", and He could have only said that if God is a timeless being.

 

[Muwahid]

to scoot this back to topic- einstein's problem was that the god of the bible lived in the heavens.(the sky) the "childish" stories of mythology is what einstein objected to.

the common idea of god in today's america is evolved to the point of it possibly being an entity in a dimension outside our own, which is what you'd have to say after humans found there are no bearded men or winged angels in the clouds. there is no rabbit on the moon. but there could be a mystical rabbit in another dimension. see how that works?

Indeed for many people who were not enlightened, the concept of God evolved into something more rational sounding after discoveries were made -- some would think there was actually a 'man' looking at them from the skies, then we send people into space, then they need to compromise. I get what you're saying.

I can't comment very much about the biblical version of God, in the Qur'an there was never this concept nor was there ever this idea of a physical being up there, in the Quran it is written (فان الله غني عن العالمين : Verily God is independent of the universe), and we've always believed it to be this way.

On the flipside I don't think biblicaly there's much difference, I never saw in the bible the idea that God existed among his creation (i.e. somewhere in space!) except for their beliefs about Jesus.

I feel the very idea of God contradicts the belief that he could be spoken of in the context of our universe because he is the creator of everything -- including star dust -- meaning he is outside everything we know to exist, hence untouchable.

I would agree, if we look at just the apparent, it wouldn't appear necessary for there to be a God for this universe to be in motion. That doesn't contradict my belief personally. Anthropomorphism really makes religion look silly, unfortunately it's human tendency to put a face to the unknown.

 

[torchbearer]

I would agree, if we look at just the apparent, it wouldn't appear necessary for there to be a God for this universe to be in motion. That doesn't contradict my belief personally. Anthropomorphism really makes religion look silly, unfortunately it's human tendency to put a face to the unknown.

what books/scrolls does the quran have in common with the old testament in christian bibles?

 

[Sola_Fide]

Indeed for many people who were not enlightened, the concept of God evolved into something more rational sounding after discoveries were made -- some would think there was actually a 'man' looking at them from the skies, then we send people into space, then they need to compromise. I get what you're saying.

I can't comment very much about the biblical version of God, in the Qur'an there was never this concept nor was there ever this idea of a physical being up there, in the Quran it is written (فان الله غني عن العالمين : Verily God is independent of the universe), and we've always believed it to be this way.

On the flipside I don't think biblicaly there's much difference, I never saw in the bible the idea that God existed among his creation (i.e. somewhere in space!) except for their beliefs about Jesus.

I feel the very idea of God contradicts the belief that he could be spoken of in the context of our universe because he is the creator of everything -- including star dust -- meaning he is outside everything we know to exist, hence untouchable.

I would agree, if we look at just the apparent, it wouldn't appear necessary for there to be a God for this universe to be in motion. That doesn't contradict my belief personally. Anthropomorphism really makes religion look silly, unfortunately it's human tendency to put a face to the unknown.

Anthropomorphisms are not wrong. There are many anthropomorphisms in Scripture, where God condescends to human understanding and describes Himself in human language. God is not a man, but He describes Himself in human language that man can understand.

And also, God put on flesh, and in Jesus, He gave a perfect revelation of the Father (the gospel of John says Jesus "exegeted" the Father).

 

[torchbearer]

Jesus, the avatar?

 

[Sola_Fide]

Jesus, the avatar?

It depends on how you define avatar. The Scripture says that Jesus existed as God in eternity and created the universe. So, if avatar means simply "a representation", and it ONLY means "representation", then that is not Biblical...because the Bible is Trinitarian. It describes the second person of the Trinity as existing eternally. Jesus is God.

 

[torchbearer]

It depends on how you define avatar. The Scripture says that Jesus existed as God in eternity and created the universe. So, if avatar means simply "a representation", and it ONLY means "representation", then that is not Biblical...because the Bible is Trinitarian. It describes the second person of the Trinity as existing eternally. Jesus is God.

when I say avatar- i mean that a god takes human form.

 

[Sola_Fide]

when I say avatar- i mean that a god takes human form. the details concerning if the avatar is just a part of God, or if god leaves his one state and enters our realm is one for fantasy writers to debate.

When you say "takes a human form" you have to be careful not to say that God BECAME a man. God did not become a man, but He revealed Himself in the Old and New Testaments In human form.

And this is not "fantasy land", this is Biblical theology. Either you believe Biblical theology or you don't.

 

[tttppp]

But I'm not saying anything about magic and I'm not saying anything that is not logical. I'm merely pointing out the difference between infinitude and eternity. Infinitude does not equal eternality. Infinity is a category of time (a progression or regression of events that has no end). Eternality is state of timeless-ness. There is a difference.

There is no progression or regression of events in eternity....that is a feature of time. In eternity, everything is present. There is no past or future. And this is amazing to think about because God placed the sin of His elect people on the cross at Calvary, and Jesus suffered God's wrath for every sin--past, present, and future--for His elect. Jesus said "It is finished", and He could have only said that if God is a timeless being.

What you are explaining is infinity. You are allowing infinity to exist for God, but not for us.

 

[Muwahid]

what books/scrolls does the quran have in common with the old testament in christian bibles?

It's a one way street for obvious reasons. We accept the Injeel (gospels) and the Torah as partially acceptable books of revelation. We agree with some of the stuff but not all of it.

Anthropomorphisms are not wrong. There are many anthropomorphisms in Scripture, where God condescends to human understanding and describes Himself in human language. God is not a man, but He describes Himself in human language that man can understand.

And also, God put on flesh, and in Jesus, He gave a perfect revelation of the Father (the gospel of John says Jesus "exegeted" the Father).

Well most of this is just a fundamental disagreement we will have. I don't believe however that God describing himself in human languages is really anthropomorphism, we are just made to understand (although I see your point). I obviously do have a problem with any characterization of God which is like us and I think it enforces the "magic man in the sky" mentality. God is meant to be an incomprehensible force.

 

[Sola_Fide]

What you are explaining is infinity. You are allowing infinity to exist for God, but not for us.

You seriously can't see the difference? One is a state of time where events progress or regress with no end, and the other is a state of timeless-ness where there is no progression or regression of events. You can't see the difference between the two?

 

[torchbearer]

It's a one way street for obvious reasons.

If you don't mind being my personal google, i don't know much about islam. maybe you can answer some questions i have- though i'm sure i could find topics on it through google.
does the division of judaism and islam come down to abraham? (and i don't mean to offend- i am genuinely interested in this division in religions coming from what looks like a common point)

 

[tttppp]

You seriously can't see the difference? One is a state of time where events progress or regress with no end, and the other is a state of timeless-ness where there is no progression or regression of events. You can't see the difference between the two?

I never stated things had to progress or regress in infinity. You did. You're the one who made up that rule.

 

[Sola_Fide]

I never stated things had to progress or regress in infinity. You did. You're the one who made up that rule.

So...we are in infinity right now and time does not progress? Is that what you are saying? That's bizarre and makes no sense.

First, time does progress....look at a watch. Second, the fact that we are in the present proves that there is not a never ending regression of events behind us (because we could have never transversed an infinite number of events in order to arrive at the present event).

 

[tttppp]

So...we are in infinity right now and time does not progress? Is that what you are saying? That's bizarre and makes no sense.

First, time does progress....look at a watch. Second, the fact that we are in the present proves that there is not a never ending regression of events behind us (because we could have never transversed an infinite number of events in order to arrive at the present event).

The fact that we are in "present" is meaningless. All time is present in infinity. Additionally, the concept of time is way more complex than most scientists make it out to be. Your whole argument is we are in present therefore infinity is bs. That's a bs argument. You haven't even fully grasped time or infinity, yet you use time to say infinity doesn't exist.

 

[Sola_Fide]

The fact that we are in "present" is meaningless. All time is present in infinity. Additionally, the concept of time is way more complex than most scientists make it out to be. Your whole argument is we are in present therefore infinity is bs. That's a bs argument. You haven't even fully grasped time or infinity, yet you use time to say infinity doesn't exist.

How is it possible to go from Event A to event B if the time between those two events is infinite? It's completely impossible.

"All time is present" to you right now? So you are simultaneously a newborn baby and the age you are now?

What you are saying makes no sense in a framework of time.

 

[tttppp]

How is it possible to go from Event A to event B if the time between those two events is infinite? It's completely impossible.

"All time is present" to you right now? So you are simultaneously a newborn baby and the age you are now?

What you are saying makes no sense in a framework of time.

In infinity, everything is the center of the universe. In infinite time, every point in time is the present. Its not a hard concept to grasp if you understand infinity.

 

[Sola_Fide]

In infinite time, every point in time is the present.

So, when I posted my last post 5 minutes ago, that event is present? Isn't it past now?