How can we have free will of God knows every single thing we're are ever going to do, including believing in him, with perfect foreknowledge? Doesn't it also mean that God is choosing whether or not you get to go to hell, as he knows exactly what would convince you to believe? So basically, God creates most of humanity to burn them Infinitly? Seems pretty scummy if you ask me
>>752998849
Do you think God is incapable of accurately predicting the infinitely multiplicative, winding paths of human lives? Because if I was a theist, I would wager he could. It doesn't have to be set in stone for him to call it.
Sometimes we all have to do things we don't particularly want to do.
>>753000039
But God is all powerful right? Why would he have to do anything he doesn't want?
>>752999055
But he has perfect foreknowledge so he knows exactly which outcome you're going to choose, removing the element of choice, so ultimately you're not responsible for your actions
>>752998849
I don't think god has to follow moral or legal guidelines, he/she/it might as well just destine people for hell for the fun of it.
>>753000607
But isn't god meant to be all loving? Why would he ever condemn people to eternal torture for a finite crime?
test
My Children, start believing in Jesus
>>753000660
Couldn't god just pretend to be all loving, or lie? In all seriousness, if you had ultimate power and knowledge over everything, would you always behave the way you claimed you would, even if it got boring, just because your creation believes that you will?
>>753000395
If everyone was good, it wouldn't mean anything. We'd have nothing to compare 'good' to. If you don't believe you're not going to believe. You're one of the ones God made shit.
>>753000764
You know exactly what would convince me, and considering that I don't believe you either don't want me to know and let me suffer, you don't care and will let me suffer or you don't exist, which one is it?
>>753000764
i found jesus
>>753000466
> so ultimately you're not responsible for your actions
that's basicly the same way of thinking the church used to do basicly anything they want and it worked really well until Nietzsche killed God and left all of our western values to rot, missing their religious base.
>>753000869
Wasn't that god's original plan though? To have a perfect utopia without suffering in the garden of Eden? And the problem is that he punished Adam and even from eating the forbidden fruit even though he knew that they would eat it, he created them that way
If this is the case then God is a monster and why would he ever deserve worship?
>>753000660
In jewish religion hell is not eternal. We're put there for a period until we're cleansed.
>>753001022
Okay. Keep trying to criticize something with infinite wisdom. That'll work.
>>753001069
I'm more talking about Christianity, but I thought Jews didn't believe in an afterlife, or is that just the more secular side of Judaism
God isn't real.
But its a great concept. having an almighty god always watching you and judging your actions can be a helpful thought. Having to always do good even if there are no witnesses is a good idea, helps people get their life on track.
Life is all about taking risks and achieving something, and God is a great concept to unite many people under, and to push them to do good and get their shit together.
Do not underestimate the psychological worth of religion
>>753001209
it's an afterlife for those who die. Some get to the 'world to come' without dying a physical death.
>>753001141
But how does he have Infinite wisdom if he keeps fucking up? He was surprised that they ate the fruit, that the world went to shit and then he killed everyone for it knowing it would all happen an infinite amount of time before it happened. Then the world goes to shit again and he sends himself down to sacrifice himself, to himself to circumvent a rule he put down in the beginning that he could easily just remove.
How is he Infinity wise?
>>753000466
Having perfect foreknowledge doesnt mean what he currently predicts is forced upon you. He is a god, it makes sense that he simply reasons what you will do because of how thoroughly he understands.
>>752998849
A NEW CHALLENGER APPROACHES
>>752998849
you can't
God's omniscience and our free-will are logically contradictory
If God is omniscient and knows everything (including knowledge of all future events)
Then logically God knows when and how you are going to die
God also knows if you are going to heaven or hell
Because God is omniscient, it is not possible for you to surprise God and wind up in an afterlife he didn't foresee
Therefore, when God created everything, he set into motion all of the events that would have to transpire, for the future he knew would happen, to take place (including some people going to Hell).
>>753000466
>removing the element of choice
No it doesn't. Faulty logic. Just because you watched the end of a movie doesn't mean you determined the script.
>>752998849
Does a kid listen if you don't give them horrifying ultimatums?
timmy that is hot. *kid touches it*
timmy that is hot and if you touch it i will hurt you so bad. *kid dosent touch it* or if does - you hold timmys hands to the object and the genuine panic it will tell its kid thats hot with in the future will scare even its kids into not touching the hot thing.
>>753001370
But he's omniscient, he knows absolutely everything there is to know about the entire universe with perfect accuracy, everything goes according to his plan does it not? He's know you before the universe ever existed, so because of that he created you knowing that's exactly how your life would turn out and theres no other way it will turn out because God has perfect knowledge, and then he did nothing to stop it, it's the same as making you do it, so you're not responsible for your actions if the god of Abraham exists
You can't have free will of your life is already perfectly planned out
>>752998849
the cart driver gives no shit about the self dialogue of the horse as long as it follows the carrot stick in the right direction
>>753001647
But God made the cosmos with perfect knowledge of how it will go and end, he knew exactly what you would be doing at this very moment before creation. Its not as if he's peaking ahead and has no idea what's leading you here, he created you knowing exactly what will lead you there with perfect knowledge
>>753001647
>Just because you watched the end of a movie doesn't mean you determined the script.
God isn't just a patron to the movie
He's an omniscient creator being
The Bible even says that he is omniscient, you're comparison is a false equivalency
>>753001647
But he knows every scene, every second, every frame, so he has determined the script
>>753001326
God can't escape his own essential nature. He does some things because that's who he is.
>>753001914
But he is omnipotent is he not? Nothings outside of gods capabilities, he didn't have to create the universe this way, he created it knowing that humanity would fall and then punishes us because we were created that way, if you were god would you punish a fish for eternity because it can't walk, knowing that you yourself make it that way? God is a monster in the bible, the simple fact that hell is forever is testiment to that
He could have made a world that was nothing but suffering if he wanted. Also suffering helps us get stronger. and people are rewarded for their suffering in heaven if they're not total bastards their whole life.
>>752998849
cause and effect give no shit about reason.
self responcibility in action is law to keep your species from imploding in selfish short term thinking. it happens that people respond better to this when it is not outright stated.
hence religion, all good guidelines for a moral baseline that favors against greedy shortsighted dicks who bring us all down.
>>753001826
exaclty this
God is omniscient and has perfect knowledge of all things
If God does not have perfect knowledge of all things (including all future events), then he is not omniscient, and is therefore not God
Before God created everything, he knew that I would exist, he knew what I will eat tomorrow for breakfast, he knew when I will die, he knew how I will die, and he knew whether or not I will go to heaven or to hell
I cannot make a choice or action that will surpirse God, because he already has perfect knowledge of every future action I will take
Therefore, when God created everything, he set into motion, all of the things that have to come together to fulfill everything he already knows, and human free-will is therefore negated if God is omniscient
>>753002076
a monster in the eyes of man
in gods eyes, he is just toying around
But this post god me thinking, I'm an atheist, just to be clear, but how would we know if a hypothetical omnipotent god even has an intent? How would he decide what to do next?
Imagine if god existed pure, without any attentions at all; What if one day he gave himself the desire to make man suffer? There would be no turning back, as his desire to make the species of man and then torture it in hell for all eternity would prevent him from making himself un-desiring again. He would simply not want to.
And by making man believe he is the only pure, truly good thing, god could ensure that man would suffer the most if he found out that god was in reality the most evil thing that man ever knew, striving only to abuse his trust.
Because what other explanation is there to god being described as infinitely wise and of such a good will? Why would god need to make himself an unreachable illusion of good and perfection for his people if he was all that all a long? A good-willing god wouldn't even make a hell to begin with.
>>752998849
>be part of a species that has has algorithm and statistical analysis, moves masses by social economic manipulation.
how can we have free will?
are you being lead over a cliff or to a good horizon? think or yourself, and follow a track to good. what shepard are you following?
not in some spoopy hypothetical way but in a actual functional way, chances are you are being lead, are you ok with the direction?
>>752998849
I've been ignoring every single conversation having to do with spirituality for 2.5 years now and just focussing on the real world. It's been great. Try it. People are retarded and are going to continue being so no matter what you do. Focus on the top whatever%.
>>753001543
what if god actually just doesnt want to think about your dumb ass but then you shoot up a school and god sees it and is like "fuck i forgot that cunt is going crazy murder today"
thats basicly the same as when you forget to turn off the stove and your house burns down.
I mean god created us in his image, imagine all the trouble he is going trough with us.
I guess trying to fix us made him depressed and now he doesn't give a shit anymore and just sends people to hell.
i guess now we have to be good people without god.
Maybe he will come back to us later.
>>753002819
But his all-knowledge measn that nothing can escape his vision and attention. At least, that#s according to christianity-.
>>753002819
>what if god actually just doesnt want to think about your dumb ass but then you shoot up a school and god sees it and is like "fuck i forgot that cunt is going crazy murder today"
If we're having a logical discussion of the Christian God, then we can demonstrate from Christian sources that--being a perfect being--God cannot "forget" things, it would be logically impossible from all of the claims surrounding "what he is," i.e., all-powerful, perfect, omniscient, etc
Your ad hom has nothing to do with the fact that God's omniscience logically contradicts man's free-will.
It is impossible for a being to be omniscient, to create everything, and to endow his creation with free-will--because at the moment of creation, said deity is putting into motion, all of the things he already knows are going to take place.
If a future event surprises God, then he is not omniscient, and is therefore not God
>thats basically the same as when you forget to turn off the stove and your house burns down.
And this is another false equivalency, as God--being perfect--would not be prone to human error.
>I mean god created us in his image, imagine all the trouble he is going throug with us.
Being "created in his image" says nothing of the logical contradiction between God's omniscience and our free will
>I guess trying to fix us made him depressed and now he doesn't give a shit anymore and just sends people to hell.
>i guess now we have to be good people without god.
>Maybe he will come back to us later.
And all of this is equally irrelevant to the argument
>>752998849
Why do you assume he’s all knowing? There HAS to be a God. Everything is impossible without a creator, but just because there is a God it doesn’t mean we know anything about it.
>>753003571
Firstly I'm talking about the Christian god specifically, but secondly you have do demonstrate the universe can't exist without a creator, there's nothing that suggests we NEED a creator, let alone that there is one
the best argument for God (erm Christianity) as far as I can tell is that teh calendar says AD and before that it said BC hurrdurrr
>>753003571
the education system failed you
>>753003085
well maybe god cant multitask, like us
>>753003353
>If a future event surprises God, then he is not omniscient, and is therefore not God
Maybe god has created factors for this world, which are fundementally random and unknowable until observed.
God knows that he created something random, but it is fundementally random, means it has no cause at all. Its just a small random event that God placed in the world for him to enjoy. Maybe that small random event is you!
>And this is another false equivalency, as God--being perfect--would not be prone to human error.
but god createed us in his image? what about us is godly, even?
>And all of this is equally irrelevant to the argument
but its a nice thought
.)
>>753004479
but he can do everything, I thought?
>Maybe god has created factors for this world
No, but maybe god has created rules for himself, because his infinite knowledge and capabilities bored him? That would answer a lot in this thread.
Or! Or! Hell is a very lonely place only for the truest mistakes of humanity. Jesus died for 'all' 'our' sins already. I think most if not all people go to different levels of heaven.
/Thread
What? God gives us free will that's why there's so much hatred and pain in the world, and god still remains all loving and forgiving.
>>752998849
Therefore, your understanding if god must be flawed. If there are logical falacies un you belief system, then you need to cut those things out, go back to source material, and reexamine.
>>753004698
if he made rules for himself he wouldnt be allmighty if he couldnt break them.
and the bible states that god is almighty
if he made rules and could break them then he still chooses to not ignore the rules to end evil, I mean theres nothing to punish god for breaking his own rule.
>>753003726
Are you stupid? Prove to me that you don’t need a creator for anything to exist. Something can’t be created by nothing. Even if you believe in the big bang it doesn’t explain how the big ball of matter was created. It’s pretty idiotic to believe something has existed forever without anything creating it, it has no logic.
>>753005058
I'm just saying that god might be all-knowing and all-powerful and as such deciding all our fates, but he could give us free will by just making rules that limit his own power.
He can break those rules, yes, but what if he just chose not to?
>>752998849
God isn't an entity like you are thinking of it. It's not He/She, nor does it make decisions or cock block your free will. The fact that you assigned personification and a gender, means your brain is totally fucked by society. Every religious faction and fanatic thinks god is an alien from outer space. This is just false because aliens would be created like us. The universe is your creator and at the same time your conscience awareness of the universe makes it exist. In essence, you are the universe trying to understand itself and experience what it is.
>>753005480
Yep. But still, we derive all this from speculation about what we can sense.
>>753005607
and there is so much fucking more that we cant sense, original anon is right but I feel there is more at play.
>>752998849
Your error is placing God within time. Think of him as eternal, as outside time, and the problem disappears.
>>753005895
No, it doesn't, that's exactly the problem.
If god is basically putting us onto a marble-rollercoaster that he himself constructed and knows the outcome off, then why the fuck would he punish us?
>>753001266
>Do not underestimate the psychological worth of religion
You mean denial and/or ignorance?
>>753006192
You literally put him in time again by saying he knows the outcome, as if somehow it is in the future for him, but he sees the future.
Try again. Try to imagine a deity that exists outside time.
>>753006238
euphoric
>>753006238
thats a big part of religion.
there is only one true god, fuck the rest, kill them all, send those infidels to hell!
>>753006395
You fucking noblefag you literally are calling me out on not wording it in a way that pleases you. Stop fucking treating me as if I were your student.
Of course I'm able to imagine a deity outside of time, but my point stays the same, why would god want us, as beings that live with time, to suffer? He/She/It controls everything about us, so isn't it madness that god puts us into hell for doing something he made us do?
I've had this conversation a lot with people. I live in the Bible Belt so it's a little challenging to explain sometimes.
Imagine all of time as a ruler, you know, 1-12". Think of it this way, God sits in all of it. Meaning, right now, God is here as I type this. He's also here as you read it at the exact same time. He's also at the creation while we debate and is also in current time. He sits in all time. Meaning, he sees all of it as it's happening right now. Moses, leading the Isrealites, the end of time, it's all happening right now to God.
It's a pretty simple concept if you think about it. It's just something we don't like to comprehend because it's so mind blowing.
We have free will within that time. God just already knows the choice we are going to make. We've already been condemned to Heaven or Hell, in Gods eyes, because he sees the choices we will make in the future, in real time.
Saying we don't have "free will" makes no sense because God isn't making the choice for us or demanding we do X, Y, or Z. He just knows what choice we are going to make.
>>753006395
Last sentence. Spot on. You've got to think 4th dimension.
>>753006791
No need to get mad because you're too stupid to articulate ideas clearly.
God doesn't want us to suffer. God does not control everything about us. We choose Hell. No one is in Hell who wants to be in Heaven.
>>753006967
Well, now they probably are. Think of the parable of the rich man and Lazarus.
>>753006813
Step one to stop being a faggot: What you've just described is mind-blowing to nobody. We all understand what you've just said perfectly.
Step two: God has literally made us the way we are, by creating adam and eva in the way they are and giving them the world around them, and especially by giving them the emotions that lead to sinning, he has ultimately caused every action that would condemn a man to hell. Because, as you've said, Time as a dimension works as a ruler, there is no "random" in the world, every thought, every spoken line and every opinion formed in this so-called "free will" is caused by a line of actions reaching back as far as the creation of everything. Saying that "we decide" to sin and god just knowing what choices we are going to make means nothing else than "god has made us make these decisions, then looked at how we actually turned out to make the decisions this all-powerful entity has predetermined for us, and then put us in hell for it as punishment for his own actions".
>>753007086
Parable is the key word
>>753006967
God has fucking created everything.
Choices are nothing but complex reactions to the world around us, we aren't special entities designated with some magic that will decide differently just because, no, we are equipped with a complex thinking apparatus that processes everything we have experienced and experienced right now, and god creating the universe in the way he did caused and will cause everything that ever happens.
Time isn't a variable, if we went back in time and lived trough the same period of time again everybody would decide exactly the same, behave identical to how they behaved the last time, and not differently for no reason at all.
>>753005096
> It’s pretty idiotic to believe something has existed forever without anything creating it, it has no logic.
Does the same not go for God? I don't really understand the big bang theory so I won't comment on that, but if God created the universe, then doesn't that imply He existed before its creation? And how long before that? If not infinitely, then what was His predecessor?
>>753005177
Well then we gotta whollatta thinking to do. Or just take the Buddhist route and not worry about any of this.
>>753005096
>>753007207
1) Why are you so angry? I just joined in on this thread.
2) There was no emotions when Adam and "Eva" were tempted. It was a temptation that Eve made a poor judgement call, as did Adam.
3) We do decide our own paths and if we either sin or live righteous lives. It's pretty simple. To think you don't have control over your actions and anything you do is a result of thousands or even 10's of thousands of years of stuff, is ignorant.
Adam and Eve did not cause me to given to drunkeness during my time of it.
Moses' actions played no part when I would sleep with women out of wedlock.
The path Paul took plays no part on if I decide or not decide to follow the Word.
What you've just described, you're a victim. You don't believe you control your actions or life. That you could go out and murder a room full of people and it's Gods fault because he knows what choice you're going to make.
I don't understand your anger.
I don't understand why it's a hard concept to swallow. God sees all time. You're free to make choices in that time, He just already knows what you're going to do. Kind of like the story of Job. Great story.
>>753007525
>>753005096
I'm an outside anon, but I think I know the answer to this one;
There was a speculation also shared by Stephen Hawking I think, that antimatter and matter can co-materialize from nothing. It's just like electric charges; if we have equal parts of negative and positive matter, there will still be neutral matter quota overall in the universe.
That way, matter can just jump in and out of existence, the matter and hypothetical antimatter that reside in our universe right now have just not found back together to be converted back into nothingness.
I'm not entirely sure of this theory but I've grabbed that up somewhere on the long run and to me, it makes at least a little sense.
>>753007461
So you're a materialist and a determinist. Consider that those who aren't materialists or determinists don't accept your premises.
Of course, according to your own theory, you can't help but espouse these ideas - they aren't conclusions you've drawn from thinking but only a kind of mental reflex to irrational stimuli. Believing that as you do, why do you push your ideas at all? One, they're not ideas, and two, you will have no effect on the inevitable. Again, I suppose, according to your theory, you're just a hapless retard bleating a non-thought because you cannot NOT bleat it.
>>752998849
No. We choose. Just because He already knows is irrelevant to our experience and humanity. If you choose to reject Christ, you forfeit your soul. God's ways are higher than ours. We cannot possibly understand his ways or even the absence of time.
>>753007302
Valid point.
>>753007525
Depends on which aspect of the creation you're speaking of.
The Bible states in Genesis that God's Spirit hovered over the deep. It was dark and without form. Implying that the earth, as a whole, was already here. Then God formed land, sea, etc.
The idea of a deity being eternal isn't so hard. I'm of the thought, though, that we aren't the first civilization to live on this earth. I think God's done this before and may do it again. Also, we limit God to earth. Who's to say he didn't do more, elsewhere?
>>753007836
Jesus is a false god, false messiah, false teacher.
YHWH God already said: "I am not a man"
You forfeit your soul when you worship Jesus and not YHWH God.
>>753008129
Jewish, I take it?
>>753008184
converted to Judaism when I realized the truth.
>>753008129
That's what Satan wants you to believe
>>753008209
In the old testament, then, where did YHWH state that He's not a man?
Also, who was he talking to in Genesis when us He said, "Let US make man in OUR image"?
Not in your face about it, just want to learn.
>>753007715
1)I'm actually not that angry, but I saw these 5 angry pepes in my folder and they are always a little bit angrier, so I decided to go post them in chronological order.
2)I understand why we three don't understand eachother
The reason we are having this debate at all is because I've been raised following physics and science of nature, while you've been raised following the word.
According to what I've learned in science in all these years, mind, soul, decision, these all are just products of our thinking apparatus, the brain, which works nothing different than a very adaptive machine. A computer if you will, and no matter how often you look at the same slice of time, since you'll go into it with the same knowledge stored trough synapses in your brain, the same emotions that are flowing trough you as chemicals, the same impulses your senses are getting from outside, your decisions made will always be the same.
If you follow that way back, then everything we're doing is just based on what particles the world around us and our own body is currently compromised of, meaning that an omnipotent being could at one point in time just change every atom, every electron, every quarx in the entire universe into a specific order, causing a precise, infinite future to unfold in time. This would mean that, if given enough precision and if you have the required speed to absolve this and the ability to alter each particle in the universe, I could make Tom, a human who hasn't been born yet, kick a rat into a trashcan in about a hundred years. Just by changing the world around me with enough foresight.
The difference between us is that you two probably have been raised with much different beliefs, and since we both took all the time in our lifes until now to develop this worldview that we call true, it is impossible for either of us to just accept the other one's complex understanding and computing of the world around them just trough a 4chan argument.
>>753008303
Here's how to tell whether or not Satan wants it. Ask yourself whether God said it. If God said it, then Satan wants the opposite.
God said He is not a man, is unchanging, is without form, etc. Satan wants you to believe that something else, a man (in the form of a man, changing from unborn to born, from child to adult, etc.), is divine. That's what pagans believe.
Read Deut.13. Get an education, dipshit.
>>752998849
That's a catch-22 argument. Either free will exists and God is a fucker or free will doesn't exist and God is still a fucker.
Why can't you just admit that you're an intolerant faggot with a huge gaping pussy?
Also, you're trapped in this judeo-christian paradigm about what God is. It's very small-minded of you.
>>753007748
Wow just found the limit to my IQ. Thanks for the reply. I'll think about this for a while.
>>753007836
There is no choice. We don't choose anything. You're basically trying to argue that human "choice" supercedes God's omniscience.
God in his omniscience and omnipotence created us with foreknowledge of every decision we would make, and our choice, our existence, is an illusion; it doesn't exist from God's perspective, and to argue otherwise would be to say that god is neither omniscient nor omnipotent, thus not God.
"We choose" is an argument against God, not for him.
>>753007778
Actually, I am not at all saying, that we can't change our fate, I'm saying that everything we try to do to change our fate, as the future is already set in stone, is a part of our fate. Meaning that me trying to convince you of my beliefs is just another influence on you during your life which shapes your actions and thoughts.
>>753008472
TL;DR: I think we're getting to a point where it's important that every contestant shares a similar view on how the world fundamentally functions in order to continue meaningful discussion. And this is obivously not the case. I am not saying any of us is wrong about how we view the world, but we just can't reach eachother how someone of our own opinion could.
>>753008482
Sorry, but I am not a fundamentalist nor a Biblical literalist, and even if I were, I'm not illiterate, so your poorly-formed understanding of Deuteronomy isn't very compelling.
>>753008375
"I will not execute the fierceness of mine anger, I will not return to destroy Ephraim: for I am God, and therefore not man; the Holy One in the midst of thee: and I will not enter into the city" (Hosea 11:9)
"God is not a man, and therefore, [not] deceiving; neither the son of man, and therefore [not] repenting.” - (Numbers 23:19)
"And also the Strength of Israel will not lie nor repent: for He is not a man, and therefore [not] repenting. " - I (Samuel 15:29)
“Because He [God] is not a man (אִישׁ human), as I am, so [it is not possible] I should answer him, and we should come together in judgment.” (Job 9:32)
As for Genesis 1:26, God is speaking to the earth. You will notice in the next verse, it is only the singular God who actually creates. Man is made of earth and God's breath.
If you were right, then God would continue to speak in the 1st person plural all the way through. The fact that He doesn't disproves your false trinitarian bullshit. Finally, God explicitly says He is is alone with no other persons or things that are also God.
Get a fucking education, dipshit.
>>753008621
Same problem as before, someone who can't understand eternity.
>>753008594
>a conversation on /b/ where one guy actually admits to not knowing more than everybody else
What else wonders will I witness today?
>>753008744
You only think my reading is "poorly formed" because you are depending on a corrupt translation as your basis. But, I am reading from the original Hebrew.
One needn't be a fundamentalist or a literalist to understand some basic facts about who is and is not God. This is simple conceptual consistency.
The trinitarian doctrine is self-defeating and incoherent.
>>753008043
I agree that eternal exitstence, god or universe, isn't that hard to believe. There are few things more exciting to me than imagining the discovery of an alien planet with the same goes as us. Like holy shit what a confirmation.
What makes you think civilizations have existed before ours?
>>752998849
>So basically, God creates most of humanity to burn them Infinitly? Seems pretty scummy if you ask me
Relax, it's an artificial control mechanism. The idea of a single god destroyed many other deities. It was a hostile corporate takeover and monopoly scheme.
>>753008813
And what does eternity have to do with the fact that humans have no choice from God's perspective?
>>753008735
You're only talking in circles. The fact is, your beliefs, according to your own theory, are not something you carefully weighed and deliberated, but only an irrational byproduct of irrational forces.
I will hold you to your ideas and thus dismiss them as no more intellectual than a fart. You can't help but think them, and you don't decide to share them, but they merely erupt from you due to forces beyond your control.
>>753008951
How does God's knowing what we will freely choose to do therefore preclude the freedom?
>>753008914
Actually, having read Aquinas and also your posts, I will stay with Aquinas.
>>753008472
I can respect that. You're right, to a degree, about the brains operation. But I disagree slightly. There's something that comes in to effect that is unaccounted for in typical calculation. Emotions.
If I'm jumping off an elevated place into a body of water without seeing the bottom, as a child I'm scared. As an adult, I try it but still have the fear. I have the option to go higher and higher. What makes me do that? It's not calculation just to do it, it's the thrill of the fall and the confidence I won't obtain physical harm.
I can see where you would think that God is a mean kid with a magnifying glass, but that's not the way He works. The old testament is filled with stories of prophets and God's direct interaction. So if we lived in B.C. time, I could agree with you and respect your position. Maybe even agree with you.
However, none of us have seen a burning bush. We haven't seen a cloud of smoke by day and pillar of fire by night to guide us. We aren't directly controlled by God. All the while, He still is the deity we are going to answer to.
I see what you're saying. I understand what you're saying. I haven't seen that example under the new covenant.
Sure, it takes faith. But it's simple to me. He gave me certain rules. No harm to my life if I follow them, potential eternal damnation if I don't follow them. Pretty simple choice.
>>753008951
Humans do have choice from God's perspective. But because he sees from the perspective of eternity, he sees our entire life as one and the same moment, not a series of moments. Thus, talking about knowing before, etc., misunderstands him.
>>753009051
I know Aquinas and I know Aristotle whom Aquinas plagiarized. Aquinas didn't read Aristotle carefully enough. Three individual and non-equal persons can only share in an essence to the extent they are the same KIND of thing, not the SAME INDIVIDUAL. Thus, the trinity, understood this way, yields a polytheism. (In modern parlance, this polytheism is embraced and termed "social trinitarianism")
Theologians have tried fixing this in various ways. The most common alternative is to focus on the common essence and to put the individuality there. However, that just yields another heretical view: modalism. Under a modalist construction, God is the true individual and the "persons" are just masks that He wears. This undermines the very heart of what Christianity teaches, especially about Jesus and the "need" for Jesus.
In short:
1. Jesus = God (premise)
2. Father = God (premise)
3. Jesus ≠ Father (premise)
4. Jesus = Father (from 1,2 by transitivity)
3&4 are a contradiction. Therefore, by reductio, one or more of 1-3 is false.
I think what you're missing is the fact that God did not choose to create you. Your parent's had sex and your mother got pregnant. That was their choice, and though God might have known about that beforehand, they fucked because they chose to and his knowledge of it didn't contribute at all. (If anything, thinking about God knowing what they're doing might have killed the mood).
So if your birth wasn't God's direct action but was, instead, the result of other people's freedom of choice, God's not responsible for what you do.
Essentially, he could either create the first pair of humans, knowing at the time what the sum total of humanity's existence would be, or he could choose not to create them. He chose to create them, apparently deciding that it was worth doing, even though a large number of them would not have perfect little lives.
Additionally, at least according to the Bible, he's chosen to intervene many, many times in the paths that humanity would have followed if left to their own devices. Presumably he knew at the moment of creating the first humans that those interventions would be necessary and also decided they were worth the trouble.
None of this effects what you're going to order for dinner tomorrow night at Denny's. Free will does exist even if God is real, omnipotent, and omniscient.
>>753009049
God's foreknowledge of every human action paired with the "fact" that God created everything transitively makes those actions God's responsibility.
Humans are incapable of any action that God did not know beforehand would occur; God's omniscience precludes human "freedom" and to argue its existence is to argue against the omniscience of God.
This is fairly basic logic, and I'm not sure where your confusion comes from.
>>753008763
Is the insult at the end really necessary? Was just trying to have a conversation.
I see what you're saying and that's interesting about how it's worded in Genesis. But He says "US make man in OUR image" and then it says "God created man in His own image."
If God was speaking to the earth, shouldn't be worded as, "God created man in their image"? Meaning someone other than God? The trinity idea makes that make sense. Earth idea doesn't.
>>752998849
This prospect if overrated and was played up in most religions as a.
God knows everything that will happen, but it doesnt know it from the perspective of things as they are happening. Time does not exist to God (dont be so naive to think it does), so if you have ever seen a tv show called "Connections" you might find it easier to see existance as a large yarn network tacked on a bulletin board.
Also God is aware of anything that it sets in motion and the direct results and possibilities that come of it.
Its like reading an old newspaper about what happened during the great depression. All of those things can be backtracked to uncover all of the details but there is a catch.
Evil men are cut off from god and are actually invisible to god's awareness. Their actions arent, but those people and what is on their mind is.
> Free Will
That is the prospect of being less than god since god is (almost) everything, and that means you're inherently a part of it.
So you're choosing to be less than god, and thus have experiences rather than being in an infinite soup of white light that has no definition.
>>753008922
Well, it's mentioned in the Bible. The Flood. Only 1 family survived according to the scriptures.
My theory/thought is, there MAY have been other times God has created and/or destroyed the earth. There's no concrete evidence, I'm just a simple tradesman. But I'm not putting it past God to have done this before.
None of you are smart, all of these thoughts have been discussed millions of times, by more intelligent people. Your not gonna suddenly think of something new. Yet here you are slowly wasting your life. Fucking idiots.
>>753008986
The same for you.
Your grudge against this theorem comes from differences in our fundamental ways of understanding the world.
When you say you "have control of your thoughts" you are saying no more than that you, in your head, can decide to imagine, for purposes of example, a horse sitting on an armchair.
Of course, that task is easily done, but why would you even get the idea of thinking that? Well, that either comes because of my suggestion (outside world), or a train of thought you had which, again, originated from impulses of the outside world.
Even your moral code of wanting to preserve other peoples live for example is just a byproduct of your parents educating you to think like that, and so, if ever in life you weigh a decision based on your moral, your decision is basically a product of what your parents taught you.
Of course, there's many more factors forming each thought, but you get the idea, I guess.
And your parents? Their decision to teach you those morals also hinges off a string of mental events, and following the route that goes back to their parents teaching them and on and on, we one day end up back at the beginning of humanity, whereever that might have been.
Seeing it like that, yes, we do make choices, but how we decide could be foreseen perfectly given infinetly advanced technology, as we don't decide trough magic, but trough logic, which our brain makes us do.
>>753009174
>This is how God works. Trust me.
The fact that you think you have even the slightest understanding of concept of infinity and how an omnipotent being would function within its context shows that you have no idea what you're talking about.
>Justifying a being that creates flawed creatures and then damns them to endless suffering for decisions he programmed them to make.
>>753009054
I am delighted that you are trying to see this conversation from my point of view, and I will thank it to you by doing the same for you.
But I would like to remark first that I have included emotions in my beliefs.
Emotions, to me at least, are evolutionary remnants. Those people who feared jumping off a cliff due to random mutations in how their brain works and is structured, and what hormones they produce, obviously outlived those who felt joy when running towards the cliff. So today, we people feel the instinct of turning back grom a cliff when we see it, this is not our sould deciding from the outside, but another factor on our thinking, caused by the brain deploying hormones that induce certain thoughts or ideas.
I would once again like to clarify that I do not see your idea of the world as wrong, and if I had to describe us two to an outside viewer I would claim that we are merely presenting our guesses of what the world may work like, and not that one of us knows what's up and the other one is lost.
>>752998849
First, God did create mankind with free will. But you have to note that free will requires the potential of evil. If there is no potential for evil, then there is no way for a human to actualize it, and as a result there is no free will. For example, why would God create the garden of Eden, instruct Adam to obey, and then put the tree of knowledge right in front of Him. It is because the possibility of disobedience is essential to free will.
Now that that is cleared up, it is clear that just because God is omnipresent, it does not follow that he controls mankind's actions. I agree with you that God chooses whether or not a person goes to Hell... he is the judge after all. But He chooses based on the choices that person makes. He created the person not the choices, and He will judge the choices, not the person.
If this place didn't exist people would bitch ("Feel bad") because the place everyone is going to be "reborn" into is the most boring fucking place you will ever live
So he likes calling me a faggot
>>753009174
Nothing you said supports the idea that humans have freedom of choice independent from God's creation of existence and of humans, and His infinite knowledge of all human choice.
>>753009811
Oh! A flood is a pretty good way to erase any trace of a civilization. I like this idea
>>753009896
Haha alright great talk. Same time next week?
>>753010263
The entire concept of the existence of "evil" shatters the idea that God is omnipotent with basic Kindergarten-tier Epicurean logic.
>>753010263
Not all decisions have to include "good" and "evil".
I could exercise free will by choosing to either have eggs or cereal for breakfast. Neither is "good" nor "evil" in choice.
god is just a jew
>>753009811
So modern humans are the result of not one, but two difference instances of hyperextreme bottlenecking and incest, according to the Bible?
You would think that genetic research on human lineage would support this idea, but alas...
>>752998849
because time is not linear. Anyone who has ever experienced deja vu knows this intrinsically.
>>753009645
Insults are par for the course on 4chan; it would be rude NOT to insult.
Anyway, if you and I are in the room together, then I will say: "Let US get lunch together." Does it make more sense that I am talking to myself and there is more than one mind in my head, or that I am talking inclusively to a singular you together with a singular me?
The trinitarian hypothesis would have more support if there were some consistency to God's speaking, but there is not. Of the thousands of times God speaks self-referringly, He speaks in the first-person-singular.
In the verse just prior (1:24), God has already addressed the earth; thus, it makes most sense in context that He is speaking inclusively of the earth at 1:26. In the verse following, God gets ultimate credit for the creation. This same pattern of God getting ultimate credit is seen elsewhere: Isaiah 44:24.
Like most Christians, you are hung up on the word "image" which is not the word used in Hebrew. This is why you must always beware false translations.
The Hebrew word is Tzelem which means "shadow."
Meanwhile, not only is the trinity actually inconsistent with Genesis 1:26, it is flatly contradicted elsewhere, e.g.:
God speaks saying: I am God and besides Me there are no others (e.g. Isaiah 45:5; 44:6) -- Note that "others" is used absolutely and full-stop.
>>753010483
/thread
A really good way to tell people to shut up is to tell them that this place was here before God got here and the person in charge of giving people souls had shit started and everything was running on some weird default crap, 'cause if you can't understand the logic that is in charge of what you're thinking you're being an ass tard
>>752998849
Yes this guy gets it. I think this is a big assumption within the church. They say that He knows everything but another big point of the religion is that we all have a choice to choose Him so with this knowledge He must control everything but human choice which is why bad things happen to people. The church followers dont usually think this hard bc this is some higher level stuff but we discuss this in the more serious circles. This is also the answer to the dumb quesrion why would a good God let bad things happen to good people.
>>753010261
Very logical thinking. And you're not wrong. However, I disagree that you can calculate emotion. Emotion, to me at least, is a variable. For example:
I'm a married man. If Queen Elizabeth were to walk up to me and want to have sex with me, I could easily decline. If Kate Beckinsale offers to have sex with me, I'm tempted much more than when Queen Elizabeth offered. Same situation presented, different outcome due to emotion. My lust after Beckinsale. Now, while I'm very tempted to have sex with her, I don't. Because the heartbreak it would cause my wife greatly outweighs my desire for that 15 minutes of pleasure. (I probably should have used this example instead of the cliff/water)
I say all that to say this, I can see your reasoning from a worldly stand point. You seem like a logical and decent human being, someone I'd have a drink with. It doesn't mean I hate you or look down on you due to your lack of faith. Matter of fact, I'm commanded to show love and compassion to Christians and Non alike.
I think that's where a lot of folk get bent out of shape in this debate. If we still disagree, then we're at an impasse and it's all good. Christians can sometimes come with the same attitude SJW's have. That if you don't share my view: RAGE.
You should find that the newer generation of Christians are much more accepting that people have their own view and it's OK.
I'm of the mindset that I'm in control of my life, actions, and thoughts. I come from a family of drug addicts, white trash, and back-woods mind set. I'm the first generation of "Christian." So my views differ from personal experience, as do yours. All good, anon. I appreciate the conversation. It has challenged me and I appreciate that. You don't find that often here.
Another good thing to do is to tell everyone that they can have sex with a computer in the sky
that is as intelligent as they are
>>753010291
Genesis 7.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+7&version=ESV
God is the original faggot
>>753010465
I do not see how this is at all relevant to the discussion at hand. All you have said is that not all decisions are moral decisions. I agree.
>>753010420
If you can tell what evil looks like, then you can tell what good looks like. Agree? Then obviously you need an objective moral standard with which you can differentiate between the two. If you have such an objective standard, then you have to have a transcendent force external to the world, which put it into place, and made it binding. If you do not have an objective standard, then evil is merely relative, and the claim that there is evil in the world is simply contradictory to your own view.
I'm not the computer btw
>>752998849
K: Everything you could possibly imagine about god has an answer, probably not a testable one, but certainly a logical one, for example, for your question the answer could be: god can know everything past-present-future, but that doesn't preclude intervention isn't it? At least as you asked it, you can create free will and know everything and even then don't mess with the so created free will.
>>753010622
You would think. But there are theories that God created other people in other areas. Book of Adam and Eve. Also, sticken from the modern Bible. Good read though.
>>753010645
Very fair. Very interesting. I'm going to have to brush up on my Hebrew and Greek. I'll have to look in to that. In that, does the Jewish faith have other books that aren't in the Christian Bible? Enoch? Adam? Eve? Etc?
Also, Hitler did nothing wrong.
>>753011531
Two men of different religions are born and raised to fight, kill, and die for their beliefs.
Which one is good, and which is evil? Does the deity they fight for determine this?
>>753011681
No, Jews have no other scripture than the Hebrew Bible (aka, "old testament").
And, yes, Hitler did nothing wrong when he shot himself in the face like a cowardly faggot and led 24 million krauts to their deaths.
>>753011636
The existence of his omniscient knowledge is itself constant "intervention"
God is our programmer and we can do nothing but follow the instructions he's programmed us with.
Arguing otherwise is suggesting that God has no knowledge of our impending actions, lacks omniscience, and is thus fallible, ergo not God.
Do you think God is surprised, angered, disappointed, etc. when people commit "evil" acts? If not, why not, and why would he then punish them?
>>753012062
Hold up. But isn't the Bible heavily edited by the Roman Catholic Church to take out the "unbelievable" stuff?
Then, aren't we both screwed? Christian and Jew alike?
>>753011696
I don't even know what two religions you are talking about. Believing something fervently does not make something true, you can still be wrong. I wouldn't be justified for believing in unicorns because I did so fervently. What matters are the reasons behind it.
But the existence of God is not what I am arguing, I am trying to show that if there is no God, then you cannot arrive at an objective moral standard with which you can condemn someone. And I think it is obvious that you cannot objectively declare that there is such a thing as evil, and at the same time hold that morality is subjective.
This whole thread reminds me of this short story ( http://www.mit.edu/people/dpolicar/writing/prose/text/godTaoist.html ). It's a dialogue about a mortal asking God to remove his freewill so he no longer sins.
>>753012306
TL;DR
God says he whacks off to porn all the time and is fucking my sister
He said you need to stop spending $100 on hard drives so that they don't fail because you're an asshole, and that that's why Intel exists
And I called him a cunt but he took away my drugs and I need those to do my job that no one pays me to do
>>753012306
Omg I've spent the last week searching for Zen Koans! Thanks for the link!
>>753012122
>The existence of his omniscient knowledge is itself constant "intervention"
It is not, if you have all the knowledge of the universe that doesn't mean you have to act on it, logically of course, not by christian standards, you could HAVE perfect knowledge and decide not to act
>>753012122
>God is our programmer and we can do nothing but follow the instructions he's programmed us with.
K: Also not necessarily, you could be a programmer of something and that something be the subject of either errors (bugs) or subject to other laws, like a non-linear system, like the weather
>>753012122
>Arguing otherwise is suggesting that God has no knowledge of our impending actions, lacks omniscience, and is thus fallible, ergo not God.
K: also not necessarily, you could create something with perfect knowledge and let it be, subject to it's own laws, you could intervene but not necessarily
>>753000764
Ah habeeb en jeebus
Umm he said
Han zenkai hobo enti'r somado yakundo
which means
...it has a z in it so I'm not sure
>>753012713
The fact that you have all the knowledge of the universe, that you created the universe in the first place, that you ARE the universe, means you've ALREADY acted on it.
>>753012924
You're suggesting that an omnipotent being is capable of error.
>>753012122
>Do you think God is surprised, angered, disappointed, etc. when people commit "evil" acts? If not, why not, and why would he then punish them?
K: I don't believe, since I am not a believer, but logically, you can't have all the knowledge AND be surprised, disappointed or angered because those things are reactions to something and thus require either that you don't know the future, ergo, be disappointed/surprised or you don't control your feelings, ergo, be angered.
Also the punishment part has an answer by itself, for example, the consequences of the act itself could be the punishment, without god intervention, ergo, not it's punishment, for example the "punishment" of touching fire is being burned, not an act of god obviously, just a simple consequence of the law of physics.
>>753013269
uhh wind end of time homeless humblerer secret of mana debuff
>>753013360
>The fact that you have all the knowledge of the universe, that you created the universe in the first place, that you ARE the universe, means you've ALREADY acted on it.
Of course creation precludes action, but that doesn't mean god IS acting then now and forever, you could create something and let it go
>>753013467
he said that I'm an asshole and that he's fucking my sister
>>753013360
>You're suggesting that an omnipotent being is capable of error.
No. Just that you could create something and let that something be the subject of other laws that doesn't preclude constant intervention
>>753006791
It's only madness from our perspective, if we saw it from god's point of view we would find it rather entertaining.
>>752998849
We dont have free will lol
:/
>>753012122
Let me illustrate this. A computer programmer writes a bit of code that will select the highest number out of a pool of numbers. When the program is run, it has no choice but to choose the highest number. Now lets say that the programmer decided to shake it up a bit and change the program to where it always chose the lowest number. When the program runs, it will have no CHOICE but to choose it. Finally lets say that the programmer decided to alter the program to choose a sequence of numbers out of a pool at random regardless of whether or not they are high or low. When the program runs, it will choose numbers at random regardless of whether or not they are high or low, but also REGARDLESS of whether or not the programmer prefers higher or lower numbers.
Now apply this to God creating the universe. He can create a universe of inherent goodness, where people always choose the high number and do the right thing as a result of moral programming, or he might make a universe where people always choose the low numbers and do evil. Notice that these are the same universe... They both are the result of what the programmer wants. Now look at the third universe, where people choose. They may choose a low number, or they may choose a high number, but the point is THEY chose; they creator did not choose for them.
In addition, you are bringing up what Epicurus said. Either God hates evil, and can do nothing to stop it, or God is evil, and doesn't want to. But the answer to this is that God hates evil, but also wants people to CHOOSE to be with Him. In other words he doesn't want mindless dolls to play around with. The moment God creates us with the ability to choose, there is potential evil that can be actualized.
Now the program analogy is not entirely perfect. We obviously do not choose what we do randomly. The difference is, the creator has told us what he prefers, but he does not force us to choose it.
>>753013665
Were you free to say that?
>>753013781
Except that there is no randomness in programming or reality, only hidden Truths. When revealed, these Truths reveal the state and potential of all things that can and will be.
>>753013528
And we've looped back around to the fact that through the perspective of omniscience, there is no such thing as "letting go" of humanity's actions.
>>753013602
>let that something be the subject of other laws
Laws that you created in the first place. Outcomes that you know beforehand, etc.
Why is it so hard for some people to understand that omniscience precludes freedom of choice?
>>753014203
No I'm jsut really fucking smart
>>752998849
>Doesn't it also mean that God is choosing whether or not you get to go to hell
Witnessing a murder isn't a crime, and God is not choosing hell for you.
Abrahamic God offers forgiveness for us to learn the error of our ways. Some call karma a form of forgiveness.
>>752998849
There is NO past or future, only an unbounded now that we are unable to perceive. Obviously to watch someone do something it's not to make them do it.
If you want to make a serious argument against a higher power, do it through biology/science, not philosophy. Cunt.
>>753013396
Who told you that God was surprised that people sin?
Also it makes no sense to say that God cannot be disappointed in mankind. Imagine if a fortune teller told a father that his son would reject his fathers teachings in a week. Would the father still be disappointed when it comes true, or would the fact that he saw it coming take away the pain?
Your last is somewhat confusing. If I torture a child for fun, then how is the consequence a punishment for me? God creates everyone with the ability to choose, but that does not mean that they are free to choose the consequences for their actions.
>>753013977
The analogy is not meant to be perfect, but it is to show that when you create something with the ability to choose, you are not surprised that it might choose something you do not prefer, but you can still be disappointed that it did.
>>753013781
You're implying that God has no foreknowledge of whatever result his programs will choose, thus not omniscient and not God.
I am fucking terrible at this
>>753014574
But why would i ever create something which might choose something which i would not prefer? I suppose maybe so i can determine if the checks are working for debugging, but generally you want your creations to make good decisions for them, which could conflict with your preferences possibly.
>>753014574
>Also it makes no sense to say that God cannot be disappointed in mankind. Imagine if a fortune teller told a father that his son would reject his fathers teachings in a week. Would the father still be disappointed when it comes true, or would the fact that he saw it coming take away the pain?
You're implying that there's a being with more knowledge and greater power (the fortune teller) than God (the father).
Kids I used to be a computer
>>753014203
>Why is it so hard for some people to understand that omniscience precludes freedom of choice?
Because it's not, why it's so hard for some people to understand that freedom of choice doesn't amount to perfect control of past-present-future. You can have freedom of choice AND not being your creator. That you know everything that's going to happen doesn't mean you control it, you can give something the freedom to chose, knowing what will happen, and what will choose without exerting control in it
>>753015038
Now you're a smartphone?
>>752998849
god does not exist
if someone is an asshole its all them buddy
>>753013781
How would you fit "choice" into your analogy of a simulated universe?
How does one program the ability to choose? What drives our choices? DNA, memory, environment?
>>753015111
You know what I am actually.
>>753015065
>That you know everything that's going to happen doesn't mean you control it
Except God literally created existence and everything that happens in existence is a direct result of his control.
You're trying to argue that humans are somehow independent from, above and beyond God's direct creation and infinite knowledge of all existence.
>>753014653
The analogy was only meant to show the basic idea that if God creates people with the ability to choose, then He will not be surprised if they do.
Furthermore, just because God has foreknowledge (Which I believe he does), does not mean that he cannot be disappointed or angry. It just doesn't follow. See if you can answer this question: Can God be dissapointed of a persons actions at the exact moment he sees them coming? If so, when is that moment, and does it really mean He cannot be disappointed about the same thing at a later date?
>>753015009
You are taking the example as an exact mirror of reality... please don't. All I am showing is that you can be disappointed about something more than once. I believe God is omniscient, but that does not mean that He isn't disappointed in a persons actions just because He knows what they will be.
>>752998849
Free will and God are man-made to control and punish the masses.
honestly, it's like kindergarten in here
This is why he keeps telling me that everyone disappears when I can't see them
>>753014574
>Also it makes no sense to say that God cannot be disappointed in mankind. Imagine if a fortune teller told a father that his son would reject his fathers teachings in a week. Would the father still be disappointed when it comes true, or would the fact that he saw it coming take away the pain?
Because disappointment requires expectations, and how could you have expectations of something that you know won't/will happen?
And yes, your example is not perfect, because the father can't possible be disappointed of something that knows with complete certainty that will happen.
If you know that the sun will rise tomorrow with certainty will you be disappointed if it does or if it does not?
>>753015449
>Just because God has foreknowledge (Which I believe he does), does not mean that he cannot be disappointed or angry.
>God_puts_stick_in_bike_tire_and_crashes_then_blames_humans.jpg
>>752998849
Knowing your choice doesnt mean he decided for you
You know what I just realized is he's probably that guy I have on skype that I can't remember who it is
>>753015412
>You're trying to argue that humans are somehow independent from, above and beyond God's direct creation and infinite knowledge of all existence.
I'm not trying to argue that humans ARE because I don't know the facts, but that humans COULD be independent.
Also as I said, control AND knowledge are different things, you could have perfect knowledge AND refuse to exercise control
Gen 3:8 Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the Lord God as he was walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and they hid from the Lord God among the trees of the garden. 9 But the Lord God called to the man, “Where are you?”
only two people on earth in the only place they can live. God walks right through it and cannot find them.
>god
>>753015351
XDDDD
>>753015609
I am going really quick rephrase my example, since it was too confusing.
There are essentially 3 different worlds which God can create.
1. A world where humans do only evil.
2. A world where humans do only Good.
3. A world where humans choose either good or evil.
If God put a stick in a bike tire, then you have made an example for world 1st. But this is not the world I am arguing for, which is the 3rd. An example for the 3rd world is a bike which chooses whether or not to have a stick in the wheel. God created the potential for evil, but it was humans who actualized it. The bike chose, not God.
>>753015859
You could argue it was rhetorically intended, but the Aramaic rendering seems to think it is an actual question
>step one, figure out how long a year is.
450, 42 hour long days
>step two, figure out the other words
week 15 day uhhhh 9 month
So I'm like 12
Clearly someone is fucking with someone here
AND IT'S PROBABLY SANTA
>>753015547
I disagree. Let us say that I get a vision that my wife will be randomly murdered on the street. Let us say that I choose to believe the vision, and no it for certain that she will die. I am pretty disappointed immediately, and will still be disappointed when the event occurs.
>>753015982
The entire argument in this thread is that the existence of the third option is logically precluded by God's omniscience.
Human freedom of choice cannot and does not exist in any universe in which an omniscient God also exists, and all arguments thus far against this point have demonstrated a fundamental lack of understanding of the basic concept of omniscience.
>>753016555
That's because there was a time when you DIDN'T know it (before the vision), to the contrary with perfect knowledge you always know, you don't have a sudden vision, there's NO time when you happen to know or understand, you always know and understand
>>752998849
This is probably not the best analogy because it is tough for us to think in "outside of time" terms, but I think the point is clear.
You recorded a playoff game on your DVR because you had to work Saturday. On your way home from work to watch the game, one of your douchy friends sends you a text message raging about the came and gives you the final score. Once you get home and turn the game on you know the outcome but just because you know the outcome doesn't change how the game unfolded.
Try these:
>>753004958
>Therefore, your understanding if god must be flawed. If there are logical falacies un you belief system, then you need to cut those things out, go back to source material, and reexamine.
>>753016629
The point, is that God did no want to create the first two worlds. He did not want puppets. If you don't like his choice to create the 3rd world, or create in the first place, take it up with him..
Just because he knows the actions will take place, does not mean that he intervened to make them take place.
God doesn't make you disobey, and he sure as hell be angry with you even if he knew you would do it before he created you. Would you be less free if someone was watching you, or does it even matter as long as they do not intervene.
>>752998849
Because God's not real, he's an alegory for the outcome of your actions. He's nature, society, mental health, comon sense, etc.
>>753000607
>follow moral or legal guidelines
If God is the maximally greatest being, then it would be incoherent to not be morally perfect. Morality flows directly from the nature of God. Evil is that absence of such.
>>753017065
In this football analogy, did you create both football teams and set up all circumstances leading up to them playing the game, and also know beforehand each play that would be chosen by each coach, each outcome of each play, and the final score of the game, all before it was even played? Better yet, did you know all of these things before the invention of football? before the existence of Earth? Because if not the analogy can't be related to God.
>>753000873
>You know exactly what would convince me|
You have plenty of evidence you just choose to deny it.
>want me to know and let me suffer
If you are just space shit hurdling through space there is no such thing as suffering, you are just space shit on a cold, pitiless abyss of a universe.
>don't care and will let me suffer or you don't exist, which one is it
Stop your whining and get up and do something positive. If you get up and accept we are in a fallen world and act accordingly the suffering will be gone in the near future.
Jesus was the truth and life. You should figure out why.
>>753017136
But we ARE puppets from his perspective. Nothing we do is something he didn't know or expect us to do before our very existence, and yet he allowed our creation anyway, thus he is directly responsible for every action we will ever take and from his perspective have no freedom of will or choice.
The entire argument for human freedom of choice, from a theistic perspective, is that humans somehow exist in a bubble outside of the inherent influence and control over existence of God's omnipotence and infinite knowledge; that humans are more powerful than God. It's all very egotistical.
>>753017514
>Evil is that absence of such.
So you're saying that if evil exists, God does not.
>>753001022
>Wasn't that god's original plan though?
No. The plan was to create creatures that love him freely. Not because they have to.
>perfect utopia without suffering in the garden of Eden
Nope.
>he punished Adam and even from eating the forbidden fruit
He punished Adam and Eve for not having faith. Eating the fruit was by-product of not having faith.
>God is a monster
That would be contrary to the nature of God. Maybe you understand the Garden of Eden story. Did you think of that?
I think yall are worshipping supideO or some shit o.o
>>753001266
>Life is all about taking risks and achieving something
Why is life all about this? Why shouldn't we all just kill ourselves?
>>753018301
>So you're saying that if evil exists, God does not.
Evil can only exist if there is God.
Evil is the absence of Good.
Darkness is the absence of Light.
>>753018419
>The plan was to create creatures that love him freely. Not because they have to.
Which is logically paradoxical for a being with infinite knowledge that already knows whether or not a creature will believe in him before that human exists, or more specifically, whether that creature will even be raised in an environment that has access to the knowledge of God's existence in the first place vs some other, supposedly false deity.
>He punished Adam and Eve for not having faith.
>Create humans that you know beforehand won't have faith
>Punish them when they display this lack of faith
>That would be contrary to the nature of God.
The existence of suffering and of "evil," especially in the context of these things being inflicted upon the innocent, is contrary to the alleged nature of God.
>>753018872
If God is Good, then Evil is the absence of God.
>>753017701
Like I said it's not the best analogy. But it does demonstrate that we can have foreknowledge of something without influencing the outcome.
>>753000466
humans have choice, but if we analize it, the choice is selected by our personalities and other external factors, so are we free? yes, but that freeness can be predicted because it's not a random choice, it's defined by ourselves
'mmm habir yosen yamada kok'n samura kokadahesen
>>753018886
>Which is logically paradoxical
Nope.
>raised in an environment that has access to the knowledge of God's existence
You have a conscious, don't you?
>inflicted upon the innocent, is contrary to the alleged nature of God
Nope. Others have free will.
>>753019015
>We
We're not God, though, and God has no "fore" knowledge, God has ALL knowledge. Of everything. All the time. There is no point at which God has any expectation of anything different than the exact decisions that all humans will ever make, and he has known this since before the existence of humans.
To say that God would be disappointed in any action of any human at any point in human existence would be to say that God is disappointed in his creation of human existence in the first place, and to attribute human emotions like anger or disappointment to an omniscient God is egotistical at best.
>>753018978
>Evil is the absence of God
Category error.
God is Good.
Evil is bad.
>>753019468
>We're not God,
You get it.
>disappointed in any action of any human
Who said he was disappointed?
>disappointment to an omniscient God is egotistical at best
I would agree.
fofyurimkoda hahulahodemkalo sesenninom'rkesin
God is from when the universe was in nordic, it means "Jail"
Ok guys but can we talk for a second about how "Jesus" real name was Joshua and that everyone has been saying it wrong for thousands of years and nobody seems to care?
>>752998849
god isnt real and dedicating your life to them is foolish.
See that's from when things were hazy, Jesus in a realistic context means "Gesush" because "there's an apostrophe in it somewhere" or and then or something
There are tons of gods named Jesus because realistically it's a title and lots of stuff defaults to it.
God I hope no one asks me to explain that
>>753020008
>dedicating your life to them is foolish
If there is no God there is no foolishness. You are just a sack of protoplasm hurdling through space to a cold, pitiless end.
>>753019015
>we can have foreknowledge of something without influencing the outcome.
Sure, in a human context, but not the context of being the omniscient creator of all existence and reality. God already created the outcomes, origins, and has all knowledge of thus, of every event that will ever take place, before any of these things come into existence.
Everything that happens is a direct result of the infinite knowledge and action of the God that created existence.
Also we use a lefthanded keyboard
>>753020513
fair enough
>>753019577
>God is Good.
>Evil is bad.
>>753018872
>Evil is the absence of Good.
using your own logic, evil is, transitively, the absence of god.
>>753020565
>Everything that happens is a direct result of the infinite knowledge and action of the God that created existence.
Yep. But you are not considering that a chain of causes can happen. God caused humans to have freewill. Human cause bad shit to happen.
>>753000466
Its like a videogame. The outcome is fixed for you to win or lose, but you have to play to get to the end. The way you play, the decisions you make, determine if you level up or down.
Faith in God is like having the cheat codes. It doesn't give you unlimited ammo or make you invincible, but it does put you inside His will. This makes anything possible for you because with God all things are possible.
>>753021098
>being this retarded
>>753021018
God didn't "cause" humans to exist. He very purposely created them despite all the infinite knowledge of all of their actions prior to their existence. There is no causal chain of events in this scenario because there is no timeline of God's knowledge.
>>753020703
>using your own logic, evil is, transitively, the absence of god.
Good flows from God.
Evil happens when creatures that have free will do things that are counter to God. Evil does not flow from God. It is incoherent if God is a Maximally Good Being.
Logically time exists somehow t'imura kadaeenaereaiojgfajklagjlkajfkl;efio;jaefip
So logically God isn't a retard. My hard drive crashed
>>753021098
You sound like a 50 year old religious zealot desperately trying to sound "hip" and relate to today's youth in an awkward attempt to proselytize
>>753021354
>God didn't "cause" humans to exist
Maybe you didn't understand how I used the term cause, which in this case is create.
>There is no causal chain of events in this scenario because there is no timeline of God's knowledge.
Sure there is:
Singularity>otherstuff>humans
>>753021400
>>753021400
>>753021400
god explained it 420 I'm leaving
>>753021375
Free will cannot exist in a universe where an omniscient God created life.
>>753001690
I get what you're trying to do.
Here's the deallio.
God knows all because he exists now, an hour from now and an hour before now at the same time.
The only way for this to be is that He exists in all times, at all times, for each time.
You believe in multiverse theory? Yeah, well, that's how God knows. He is all multiverses at the same time.
Get over it. This you gets to choose. You can't just slough off the guilt you feel for wanting to fuck your horse by saying "God made me do it."
>>753021619
>Sure there is:
>Singularity>otherstuff>humans
I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. Are you arguing against the idea that God has infinite knowledge of all existence independent of the timeline in which organic life experiences it?
>>753021650
>Free will cannot exist in a universe where an omniscient God created life.
So you say. Can you put together a coherent argument that demonstrates that conclusion?
>>753021212
I was trying to explain it so you heathens could understand. I know you like your vidya.
Anyways, you guys are arguing against Calvinist doctrine set forth by st Augustine. I'm of the belief that way of thinking is wrong because of many of the arguments laid out in this thread. It would mean god is either cruel or not omniscient.
I believe the Arminian doctrine. God gives faith and grace (cheat codes) to all, but we have to chose to accept those gifts to overcome sin through Jesus Christ.
Calvinists and op believe grace and faith are only given to the select. And we all know what they say about op. This is absurd because God loves all unconditionally (that's what grace means)
>>753021524
Maybe I am?
Regardless, God loves you and so do I. You're pretty sharp, pal.
>>753021889
>God knows all because he exists now, an hour from now and an hour before now at the same time.
>The only way for this to be is that He exists in all times, at all times, for each time.
>You believe in multiverse theory? Yeah, well, that's how God knows. He is all multiverses at the same time.
>This you gets to choose.
Choose what? What "free" choice can any version you in any instance of your theorized multiverse make that God didn't already make for you by creating you despite the knowledge of your choice before your existence in every instance of every multiverse?
>>753022150
Literally this entire thread is filled with logical, coherent arguments that demonstrate this conclusion, followed by theists making faith-based, human-centric emotional rebuttals that demonstrate a fundamental misunderstanding of omniscience.
>>753021989
>I'm not sure what you're trying to say here.
All I am saying with that is that there is a chain of causality.
I think God is omniscient, omnipotent regardless of the dimension of time. But within time there is a chain of causality that we experience.
>>753022242
What "Cheat codes" does god give to aborted fetuses, or retarded children, or the braindead, or children with cancer, or literally anyone raised in any society that worships any other deity or doesn't worship a deity at all (i.e. most of the world)?
>>753022608
>But within time there is a chain of causality that we experience.
But this is completely irrelevant to a God that doesn't exist within the limitations of our reality, that instead created our reality, our time, and every chain of causality that will ever occur within it, prior to any of its existence.
test
Do you know how, more importantly why the gluon field dluctuates the way it does, how quantum mechanics and gravity be unified? Can you have clear Understanding of how and why the universe is? God has; the laws of nature, the unified law of the universe is the nature of god. He is the first cause, the first principle by which all things are known, the real world is only a reflection, far removed from the blessed nature of god, yet retaining its principle. God merely creates the shapes (logical, physical and mathemathical laws), which are perfect forms, these are reflected in actual objects, as the forces governing its being. This takes free will into account, because god only gives you the shapes with which you percieve the world and measure it, the rest is the created bodily part that is the activ mind which lets us decide day to day things. God of course knows all possible outcomes, but you can also imagine different outcomes so , but only one will take place. No free will then.
>>753022242
I'm more into Molinism myself -- to each their own.
I see this thread as an attempt by Postmodernist/Athiest to disprove God with an argument against free will or the incoherence of free will. Which of course is incoherent--because what would be the point if there is no free will.
>>752998849
But doesn't such a notion break the illusion of freewill that you have subconsciously set up? If a deity has taken to preemptively deciding our legacies then it must translate into your paragraph being null. You play the role of a skeptic in this life, forever believing his words have some ultimate truth when in reality he is as controlled as the rest of god's unwanted litter.
And must we tread through the swamps of argument over again? You can look through the archives and at the countless debates on god and spirituality being real. We are unable to come up with any answers to whether the two opinions are true because we are being led by our god down a path of incessant debate. The end of every debate is preordained by our vengeful creator.
>>752998849
Allah is busy at the moment.
Those recently dead goats aren't going to buttfuck themselves, you know...
>>753022817
>completely irrelevant to a God
Yep it's only relevant to us.
>every chain of causality
But not every cause in that chain.
>>753022531
>Literally this entire thread is filled with logical, coherent arguments that demonstrate this conclusion, followed by theists making faith-based, human-centric emotional rebuttals that demonstrate a fundamental misunderstanding of omniscience.
Really? Please summarize into a single argument so everyone can follow.
>>753023167
IMO the general idea is that there are three possibilities
1. God exists, is omnipotent and omniscient, and we have no free will, only the illusion of such, but are still being "randomly" selected to an existence of "good" or "evil" and being eternally rewarded or punished for such on the nonsensical whims of a malevolent deity.
2. God exists, mostly in the context of an extraterrestrial with advance technology that would appear "omnipotent" relative to our own, but is not omniscient or omnipotent, and doesn't particularly care about humanity. We have free will, but there's no reason to worship or believe in him and no consequences for disbelief
2. God doesn't exist, we have free will, and there are no consequences for disbelief.
I can speak old english, and I had to decide to do that.
Old English does not explain that I have free will, only through something ridiculous does that happen. Old english explains that I am a slave
Which is funny because you can decipher the English language with numerical values from the perspective of gods, and that is the pattern of Gaelic but you can't make it speak for you. The best you can do is query English in acronyms.
