From: zazen@hwperform.austin.ibm.com (East Coker)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: A Jealous God (was Re: Fundamentalism)
Date: 7 Apr 92 19:27:23 GMT
Organization: Is God a Taoist?

In article <1992Apr6.131444.5219@infonode.ingr.com> stevenst@iaserv.b1.ingr.com (Todd Stevens) writes:
>East Coker writes:
 >
>>Please support the statement: "entities who were created by God to minister
>>to mankind" It is my understanding that Lucifer was booted out of the club
>>because [Lucifer] want[ed] to be like (or greater than, I don't recall) god.
 
>I didn't mean "exclusive" to mankind.  To be more accurate to Bible accounts,
>I probably should have stated that angels were created by God to assist in 
>carrying out his will in both heaven and earth.  Satan is associated with 
>angels in Job, and in Revelation he is cast out of heaven by the archangel 
>Michael.

So was Lucifer created to torment both humanity and otherwise from the start,
as a matter of design? Or did Lucifer become the tormentor as an act of free
will and not by design? No matter what perspective you take the results
are at best odd.
 
>>Yes, the quantum state vector can be reduced by concious observation, but how
>>this occurs is not understood, there are many theories. also, let us not
>>forget that quantum theory is verified only for objects that are suitably
>>small (i.e. photons, not flying bricks).  In any event I don't see this as an
>>explanation. 

>>You might also try JS Bell's book "The Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics" as
>>well.  In this work, Bell attempts to debunk much of the nonsense that has
>>been said to be consequential of quantum theory (e.g. god gives us free will
>>and god retains gods omniscience via our reduction of the universes
>>state vector).

>To rephrase your own words, if collapsing the quantum wave function "is not
>understood", how can you "debunk" the theory of God giving us free will while
>still retaining omniscience via this observable and verifiable direct 
>interaction we have with all possible futures?

Quite simply, conscious is not known to be the only method of reduction
of the state vector. Furthermore Quantum theory does not mesh well with 
relativity on the large scale. The current thought is that both theories
are limiting cases of a more general theory that is the forefront of
current research.

If you want to know more about this you could read "The Emperors New Mind"
by Roger Penrose. Penrose thinks that intelligence can be explained by
physical theory, but not QT in its current form. Nor does Penrose appear
to be content with the notion that intelligence or free will are due to
state vector reduction.

Take great care to note that I said "Bell attempts", I did not "Bell does".  
It is seems questionable at best to apply the QT to objects that are not 
known to exhibit Q level behaviour. Let me hasten to add that Bell's book is
NOT solely devoted to "debunking". It does at times, address dificulties in 
understanding the ramifications, if any of QT.

Bell, one of the great researchers in QT does not appear to believe that one
can attribute free will to QT. I again suggest that you read this book,
it might help you sort out the evidence.

Finally, I restate my position, free will on our part rules out either 
omniscience or omnipotence on gods part. The more predictable the 
future is the less free will we have. I don't have any particular
problem in not having free will however except that without free
will I am not accountable for my actions.

>Todd Stevens
-- 
East Coker
"In my beginning is my end .... In my end is my beginning" --- T S Eliot
(my opinions alone)