sol740 Posted July 21, 2011 Report Share Posted July 21, 2011 not logical. Just because something can control does not indicate that the something does control. It can have restraint on an agreement one has made to give humans free will, though has the ability to control, but restrains from controlling... I would argue that it's perfectly logical if one takes the stance that the god in question is infallible, absolutely cannot be wrong. If that's one stance, and said god knows every decision you will make, without the possibility of error, then true free will cannot exist. Free will is the same argument as what many call "mysterious ways", it simply allows for humans to conceptualize an all-powerful god that would still allow "evil"(subjective) to exist. Thus the blame is shifted from the one being that could actually do something about *whatever* to humans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Hal Posted July 21, 2011 Report Share Posted July 21, 2011 I would argue that it's perfectly logical if one takes the stance that the god in question is infallible, absolutely cannot be wrong. If that's one stance, and said god knows every decision you will make, without the possibility of error, then true free will cannot exist. I don't think that's true. SmokinHawk is arguing about God existing outside of the bounds of time, meaning that every happens simultaneously. If this were true, God would know everything you would ever do, but still would not influence your decisions. That means free will exists, our understanding of it is just different. The real question in this case, as relating to God's omniscience, is what we define as eternal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Hal Posted July 21, 2011 Report Share Posted July 21, 2011 Free will is the same argument as what many call "mysterious ways", it simply allows for humans to conceptualize an all-powerful god that would still allow "evil"(subjective) to exist. Thus the blame is shifted from the one being that could actually do something about *whatever* to humans. That's a fairly weak argument that some theists have used. There are a lot better arguments to be used about the logical problem of evil. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sol740 Posted July 21, 2011 Report Share Posted July 21, 2011 I don't think that's true. SmokinHawk is arguing about God existing outside of the bounds of time, meaning that every happens simultaneously. If this were true, God would know everything you would ever do, but still would not influence your decisions. That means free will exists, our understanding of it is just different. The real question in this case, as relating to God's omniscience, is what we define as eternal. A god that sees all time at once would have no control over it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sol740 Posted July 21, 2011 Report Share Posted July 21, 2011 The time argument has become ... lol ... irreducible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Hal Posted July 21, 2011 Report Share Posted July 21, 2011 A god that sees all time at once would have no control over it. I would disagree. God could insert himself into any point in the timeline to make a modification. Just because something already happened, does not mean an omnipotent being cannot change it. The change to us would likely be imperceptible as it would simply change everything in a moment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sol740 Posted July 21, 2011 Report Share Posted July 21, 2011 I would disagree. God could insert himself into any point in the timeline to make a modification. Just because something already happened, does not mean an omnipotent being cannot change it. The change to us would likely be imperceptible as it would simply change everything in a moment. An infallible being would not need to make a modification. It would already know. So the argument again would fall back to how much power this deity has. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2pointslow Posted July 21, 2011 Report Share Posted July 21, 2011 That would make sense if I hadn't given him multiple specific examples and explained why he was wrong. Honestly, he seems incapable of having any sort of intelligent discussion without getting defensive. Not to mention, arguing with him is like arguing with a dog. Me: Here's why your wrong. Slowbalt: No, I'm going to repeat the same argument. Me: Here's why you're still wrong. Slowbalt: That's not a reason, you're playing linguistic tricks. Me: No, here's why you're wrong. Slowbalt: I want another example. Me: Ok, here's another example. Slowbalt: No, I'm going to repeat the same argument. You called me arrogant even though you were only referring to human arrogance the whole time. Me: Fuck this. Slowbalt: No, I want to start a new argument! Me: No, that's dumb. I'm done with you. Slowbalt: No you're not, I'm going to keep going. Me:... lol, hal you are right. I didn’t take the time, nor will I ever take the time to read this thread. The bits and pieces I have picked up here and there make him seem like a 17 year old kid who was just introduced to wed night church. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2pointslow Posted July 21, 2011 Report Share Posted July 21, 2011 This thread should die and be stuck in purgatory for all eternity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokinHawk1647545499 Posted July 21, 2011 Report Share Posted July 21, 2011 take for instance Christ when he was crucified, he had the power to stop it, heck he could have even talked his way out or supposedly had the power to send angels to rescue Himself from the cross, but He did not interfere, he allowed humanity to crucify him, in order to save humanity. He had the power but let humanity exercise their free will because he knew what was going to happen and the ultimate outcome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Hal Posted July 21, 2011 Report Share Posted July 21, 2011 An infallible being would not need to make a modification. It would already know. So the argument again would fall back to how much power this deity has. I would disagree here as well. The being does not have to be fixing anything. What is we are just an experiment, or God is one of many creators. Maybe as a part of the experiment, the being just changes things because it can. If God is one of many, maybe he is young and wants to "play" with our world/universe. For a more theistic approach, God could make modifications for those who "deserve" it as an answer to their prayers. An omniscient being can see all ends and can answer a prayer (as part of free will) if it will be more good than bad. I don't think there needs to be an assumption that God would be fixing a mistake by making changes, God could just simply be making changes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheHaze Posted July 21, 2011 Report Share Posted July 21, 2011 What is we are just an experiment, or God is one of many creators. Maybe as a part of the experiment, the being just changes things because it can. If God is one of many, maybe he is young and wants to "play" with our world/universe. Seemingly then, this God is not omnibenevolent as he is deceiving and he is not omnipresent, as he is experimenting. Certainly sounds like no God. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Hal Posted July 21, 2011 Report Share Posted July 21, 2011 Seemingly then, this God is not omnibenevolent as he is deceiving and he is not omnipresent, as he is experimenting. Certainly sounds like no God. That description is not for the theistic God. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sol740 Posted July 21, 2011 Report Share Posted July 21, 2011 take for instance Christ when he was crucified, he had the power to stop it, heck he could have even talked his way out or supposedly had the power to send angels to rescue Himself from the cross, but He did not interfere, he allowed humanity to crucify him, in order to save humanity. He had the power but let humanity exercise their free will because he knew what was going to happen and the ultimate outcome. If you are taking the standard judeo-christian view of Jesus, he is part of the holy trinity(which is basically quantum polytheism), along with the Father, and the Holy Spirit. As such "God's" plan is really *his* plan, and the Holy Spirit's plan. Therefore as they are infallible entities that form a sort of Voltron supergod, and they know what all decisions have or ever will be, they do not "allow" anything. It was God's plan. Do you suppose Jesus(who is god), or Pontius, or whomever, deny gods will to sacrifice his son(really him), to absolve man of the sin he invented, to save them from going to a hell he created. Why not just snap his cosmic fingers and be done with it. No blood sacrifice necessary. For a more theistic approach, God could make modifications for those who "deserve" it as an answer to their prayers. An omniscient being can see all ends and can answer a prayer (as part of free will) if it will be more good than bad. I don't think there needs to be an assumption that God would be fixing a mistake by making changes, God could just simply be making changes. You quoted me, but nowhere in that quote did I mention "fixing", just the word 'modification' which would encompass both fixes, and changes, neither of which would be compatible with the god I described previously(the theist, infallible). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Hal Posted July 21, 2011 Report Share Posted July 21, 2011 You quoted me, but nowhere in that quote did I mention "fixing", just the word 'modification' which would encompass both fixes, and changes, neither of which would be compatible with the god I described previously(the theist, infallible). I was referencing what you implied by suggesting that a God who changes things cannot be infallible. There is no reason to suggest that a change makes God infallible. Frankly, that runs counter to most of Christianity. God allowing free will would account for his needing to change things. He may know all ends, but we may go in a direction he doesn't like. I'm assuming you are working under an assumption that once God created everything, it was perfect. He then should have nothing more to do because nothing will need changed. Am I correct in that assumption? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sol740 Posted July 21, 2011 Report Share Posted July 21, 2011 I'm assuming you are working under an assumption that once God created everything, it was perfect. He then should have nothing more to do because nothing will need changed. Am I correct in that assumption? If we are referencing a being outside of time, yes. There would be no need to adjust, the beginning is the end is now. No change is required, as what is, has been, will be. These conversations become difficult because we all have our own idea as to what defines terms like god. They're better in person, with beers, and mature participants. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Hal Posted July 21, 2011 Report Share Posted July 21, 2011 If we are referencing a being outside of time, yes. There would be no need to adjust, the beginning is the end is now. No change is required, as what is, has been, will be. These conversations become difficult because we all have our own idea as to what defines terms like god. They're better in person, with beers, and mature participants. I agree. We need beer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheHaze Posted August 1, 2011 Report Share Posted August 1, 2011 That description is not for the theistic God. What I described is exactly a theistic God. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OGRE Posted August 1, 2011 Report Share Posted August 1, 2011 Indeed God does exist, if i believe it or not. Just because we cannot see the wind we still see it's power and results. Our minds cannot comprehend the infinite, if the universe has no end, we can't understand that, if the universe does end, what does it turn into? God willed the earth into creation, without God there is no life. dispite all the theories we create, as smart as we think we are, we cannot put a ball of elements together, hook up a pair of electodes and make the smallest of living creatures. The fact that life exists is proof of God's existence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Hal Posted August 2, 2011 Report Share Posted August 2, 2011 What I described is exactly a theistic God. I know that, I wasn't. :dumb: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KillJoy Posted August 2, 2011 Report Share Posted August 2, 2011 This Thread has ran it's course. :fuckyeah: KillJoy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Hal Posted August 2, 2011 Report Share Posted August 2, 2011 This Thread has ran it's course. :fuckyeah: KillJoy It's true, let it die with dignity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KillJoy Posted August 2, 2011 Report Share Posted August 2, 2011 It's true, let it die with dignity. Stop replying and it will.... :gabe: KillJoy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Hal Posted August 2, 2011 Report Share Posted August 2, 2011 Stop replying and it will.... :gabe: KillJoy But, I can't stop replying. I must have the last word. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KillJoy Posted August 2, 2011 Report Share Posted August 2, 2011 But, I can't stop replying. I must have the last word. Obviously..... :masturboy: KillJoy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.