Sin before sin?

Two_Sandals
Posts: 8
Joined: 2008-03-28
User is offlineOffline
Sin before sin?

Now the entire concept of christianity is based on the how god needed a blood sacrifice of his son in order to subside his wrath against us for eating the forbidden fruit. By sinning and disobeying him, god caused sin to enter the world, as to say the world was without sin prior to that event. How could adam and eve sin, if sin was not yet in the world? This can't be said to be a metaphor, because as i stated christianity is based on this concept.

"What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed with no evidence." Christopher Hitchens


jcgadfly
Superfan
Posts: 6791
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
j_day wrote:jcgadfly

j_day wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

Proper Gander wrote:

j_day wrote:

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

I see in your other posts how you jump to Jesus to include the spiritual aspects. Jesus did not exist in Genesis chapters 1-3. Start only with the knowledge you have in Genesis and do not jump forward to future unwritten at the time books in the Bible.

Jesus did exist in Genesis 1-3. "Let us make man in our image." Have you read the book of John where it states that Jesus has always existed? That would mean including before Genesis.

So Mary existed before Genesis too? But I thought she was a human born long after Genesis? Or did Jesus just crawl up her vagina, camp out in her stomach for 9 months before finally deciding to come out? If he already existed, why bother with all that instead of just coming down to earth plain and simple? Sounds like very strange behaviour to me.

Sure, let's open up that can of worms...

"Jesus is God too"

"Really, Was Jesus crucified?"

"Yes. He died for our sins"

"So God died"

"No, Jesus died and God raised him"

"So Jesus isn't God?"

"Yes he is"

<continue ad nauseum>

Since this is a different topic, I'm not going to address it in full except to say that God didn't raise Jesus from the dead. Jesus raised Himself.

Now I remember why I stopped paying attention to you. You don't know your Bible well enough to defend it properly. In other words, you're a typical defender of your God.

Suffice it to say that your position has no basis in Scripture.

 

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


j_day (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote:j_day

jcgadfly wrote:

j_day wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

Proper Gander wrote:

j_day wrote:

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

I see in your other posts how you jump to Jesus to include the spiritual aspects. Jesus did not exist in Genesis chapters 1-3. Start only with the knowledge you have in Genesis and do not jump forward to future unwritten at the time books in the Bible.

Jesus did exist in Genesis 1-3. "Let us make man in our image." Have you read the book of John where it states that Jesus has always existed? That would mean including before Genesis.

So Mary existed before Genesis too? But I thought she was a human born long after Genesis? Or did Jesus just crawl up her vagina, camp out in her stomach for 9 months before finally deciding to come out? If he already existed, why bother with all that instead of just coming down to earth plain and simple? Sounds like very strange behaviour to me.

Sure, let's open up that can of worms...

"Jesus is God too"

"Really, Was Jesus crucified?"

"Yes. He died for our sins"

"So God died"

"No, Jesus died and God raised him"

"So Jesus isn't God?"

"Yes he is"

<continue ad nauseum>

Since this is a different topic, I'm not going to address it in full except to say that God didn't raise Jesus from the dead. Jesus raised Himself.

Now I remember why I stopped paying attention to you. You don't know your Bible well enough to defend it properly. In other words, you're a typical defender of your God.

Suffice it to say that your position has no basis in Scripture.

 

Are you kidding me? Jesus raised Himself. That's what makes His resurrection unique over any other resurrection. Jesus raised Himself, therefore conquering death. Being raised by someone else wouldn't do anything. Then He wouldn't have conquered death. How can you say that my position has no basis in Scripture when you clearly have no clue what the Bible says?


j_day (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
Two_Sandals wrote:Now the

Two_Sandals wrote:
Now the entire concept of christianity is based on the how god needed a blood sacrifice of his son in order to subside his wrath against us for eating the forbidden fruit. By sinning and disobeying him, god caused sin to enter the world, as to say the world was without sin prior to that event. How could adam and eve sin, if sin was not yet in the world? This can't be said to be a metaphor, because as i stated christianity is based on this concept.

The definition of sin is "to go beyond a set boundary or limit" or "to miss the mark". Sin is going against God. If He says "don't murder" and you murder, that's sin. If He says "don't eat the fruit" and you eat the fruit, that's sin. The potential to sin was there because God gave them free will. They could choose to follow Him or choose to not follow Him. They went beyond the set boundary by eating the fruit, they went against God (they sinned).

"as to say the world was without sin prior to that event."

The world had yet to sin, it wasn't without the opportunity.


sandwiches
sandwiches's picture
Posts: 75
Joined: 2008-03-13
User is offlineOffline
j_day wrote:sandwiches

j_day wrote:

sandwiches wrote:
Well, if my father was God and God is the creator of all things, then yes my father would've created evil. Again, either evil happened without God's intervention and he allowed it to exist or he created it.

Which one is it?

He allowed it to exist. If He didn't, people would be robots and could only follow God. They wouldn't be following Him out of choice.

 

So, is God unable to give us free will without evil existing?


j_day (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
sandwiches wrote:j_day

sandwiches wrote:

j_day wrote:

sandwiches wrote:
Well, if my father was God and God is the creator of all things, then yes my father would've created evil. Again, either evil happened without God's intervention and he allowed it to exist or he created it.

Which one is it?

He allowed it to exist. If He didn't, people would be robots and could only follow God. They wouldn't be following Him out of choice.

 

So, is God unable to give us free will without evil existing?

The opportunity to do evil comes from free will. If everybody followed God, there would be no evil. God didn't make evil. He gave people a choice. To follow Him or to not follow Him. Evil is a byproduct of not following God. People choosing not to follow Him and engage in evil activity is not His fault.

God gives us free will. What we choose to do with that is on us, not on Him.


j_day (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote:j_day

jcgadfly wrote:

j_day wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

Proper Gander wrote:

j_day wrote:

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

I see in your other posts how you jump to Jesus to include the spiritual aspects. Jesus did not exist in Genesis chapters 1-3. Start only with the knowledge you have in Genesis and do not jump forward to future unwritten at the time books in the Bible.

Jesus did exist in Genesis 1-3. "Let us make man in our image." Have you read the book of John where it states that Jesus has always existed? That would mean including before Genesis.

So Mary existed before Genesis too? But I thought she was a human born long after Genesis? Or did Jesus just crawl up her vagina, camp out in her stomach for 9 months before finally deciding to come out? If he already existed, why bother with all that instead of just coming down to earth plain and simple? Sounds like very strange behaviour to me.

Sure, let's open up that can of worms...

"Jesus is God too"

"Really, Was Jesus crucified?"

"Yes. He died for our sins"

"So God died"

"No, Jesus died and God raised him"

"So Jesus isn't God?"

"Yes he is"

<continue ad nauseum>

Since this is a different topic, I'm not going to address it in full except to say that God didn't raise Jesus from the dead. Jesus raised Himself.

Now I remember why I stopped paying attention to you. You don't know your Bible well enough to defend it properly. In other words, you're a typical defender of your God.

Suffice it to say that your position has no basis in Scripture.

 

You think I don't have a Scriptural position because you don't understand it. Jesus raised Himself from the dead. That's how He conquered death. That's what makes His resurrection unique.


aiia
Superfan
aiia's picture
Posts: 1923
Joined: 2006-09-12
User is offlineOffline
j_dayYou had plenty of time

j_day

You had plenty of time to set up an account so that you can post here

Set one up now if you want to continue with this discussion.

 

EDIT: I didnt mean to sound as if you cant post.

I meant that because you are not registered your posts have to be approved and moderators have to read and post your comments "manually" so please setup a password account

People who think there is something they refer to as god don't ask enough questions.


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2517
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
j_day wrote:Your lack of

j_day wrote:

Your lack of seeing a snake talk does not make it impossible. If you back up your views with "I've never seen it", then you are using personal experience as evidence. Are you omniscient? Are you omnipresent? If the answer to both of those questions is "No", then you can't decisively say "This has never happened." Just like you can't say with 100% certainty that God doesn't exist. You weren't there when the universe was created, and you haven't been here since then, so you don't know that God doesn't exist. You believe God doesn't exist.

The only reference to a talking snake is in Genesis. No one else has documented a talking snake. No one currently living has claimed they have heard a snake talk except perhaps individuals in mental facilities. I'll go with the overwhelming evidence that snakes do not talk.

j_day wrote:

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:
Oh it's in another dimension of reality not ours. Would that be in the fantasy dimension?

No, it would be the spiritual dimension. I'll prove to you it exists when you prove that it doesn't.

Of course you will. As it is unseen, unknown, and generally experienced by those in intense meditation I'll go with the fantasy dimension until you actually prove it's not.

 

j_day wrote:

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:
In Genesis 2:11-12 the writer points out the gold and precious stones to impress his readers. However gold was not useful to Adam as there was no one to trade with at the time. It is useless trivia included only to show Adam also lost much riches in precious metal.

Except there eventually would have been people. Hence the "fill the earth". The word "replenish" used to mean fill.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v18/i2/replenish.asp

Nice try. A simple I don't know would have worked. As you are either using NIV or a Catholic Bible I choose to disagree. Words are sometimes used in a different connotation than general use. Prove the original writer did not do so please. Your web link only suggests the general use, provide evidence that the writer did not use the word to mean replace. Note your choice to see this as fill is an interpretation. My interpretation is replace based on the Hebrew writing.

 

j_day wrote:

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:
It actually says they all eat plants in Genesis 1:28-29. (JPS Hebrew Bible)

 

Quote:
29 And God said: 'Behold, I have given you every herb yielding seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed--to you it shall be for food; 30 and to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is a living soul, [I have given] every green herb for food.' And it was so.

It says that plants were edible. It doesn't say that animals didn't eat animals.

Note - you have again decided to interpret these verses. The wording suggests strongly that they ate herbs for food. As in many things that are not said to occur in Genesis then I suppose since other people aren't excluded the rest of the world could have been filled with creations of Anu & Ki from Sumerian religions prove that is not true.

j_day wrote:

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:
Exactly who were the gods whose likeness was used for the image of man? Yahweh, El, Ba'al, his female part Asherah. It says us not mine or I.

I thought you said you used to be a Christian. God is triune. It's not three separate Gods.

I am an Ex-Christian. As sufficient proof exists in the Bible for multiple gods as well as in ancient myths of the Canaanites it is a fair question. As the Jews do not concur with your view God is triune in fact they see such belief as idolatry it should be interesting to see you find Jewish writing supporting God is a triune. If you can't find such writing by Jewish non-Christian writers you have to explain the "us" in Genesis another way. Making the claim of the trinity here is not supported by the religion from which Christianity was derived. It is a major difference between your belief and that of Judaism. You can't make the claim of a trinity until you show how the Jews were in error and why after thousands of years of Jewish teaching monotheism the Christian Trinity is correct.

 

j_day wrote:

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:
As I said - Smoke and Mirrors.
 

That's not smoke and mirrors. God creates something and then He creates something to do something for Him. Or do you just say "smoke and mirrors" when you can't refute my answer? Or it makes sense, but that would bring a possibility that God exists so you have to deny whatever I say. Saying "I don't think that's possible", doesn't make it impossible. Since you're not all-knowing, I don't think you can claim what is impossible or what doesn't make sense.

The Bible says plants on day 3 and Sun on day 4. I said this is problematic.  You said The Sun is a product of God and not more powerful than him. You also said God can make the plants live as he breathed life into man.

Smoke and mirrors is my version of saying BS as it all is unsubstantiated. Please prove all of this please, not with Bible references either. Try using our dimension of reality for a change.

j_day wrote:

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:
Basic overlooked detail here is in Genesis 2:6 the whole Earth was watered by a mist and in Genesis 2:10 it says a river watered the garden. Rain does not occur so where did the water for the river come from and why have 2 methods to water the garden.

Do rivers provide water for vegetation now? Yes. Does rain provide water for vegetation now? Yes. I don't see the problem. Two different sources. Mist is replaced by rain.

Of course you don't see a problem its that tunnel vision you have.

So there are a lot of things different in today's real world compared to the Land of Never Was in the Garden. My point was it had redundant watering. Note - You have again interpreted that mist watering and water being supplied for a river means the same.

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


jcgadfly
Superfan
Posts: 6791
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
j_day wrote:jcgadfly

j_day wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

j_day wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

Proper Gander wrote:

j_day wrote:

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

I see in your other posts how you jump to Jesus to include the spiritual aspects. Jesus did not exist in Genesis chapters 1-3. Start only with the knowledge you have in Genesis and do not jump forward to future unwritten at the time books in the Bible.

Jesus did exist in Genesis 1-3. "Let us make man in our image." Have you read the book of John where it states that Jesus has always existed? That would mean including before Genesis.

So Mary existed before Genesis too? But I thought she was a human born long after Genesis? Or did Jesus just crawl up her vagina, camp out in her stomach for 9 months before finally deciding to come out? If he already existed, why bother with all that instead of just coming down to earth plain and simple? Sounds like very strange behaviour to me.

Sure, let's open up that can of worms...

"Jesus is God too"

"Really, Was Jesus crucified?"

"Yes. He died for our sins"

"So God died"

"No, Jesus died and God raised him"

"So Jesus isn't God?"

"Yes he is"

<continue ad nauseum>

Since this is a different topic, I'm not going to address it in full except to say that God didn't raise Jesus from the dead. Jesus raised Himself.

Now I remember why I stopped paying attention to you. You don't know your Bible well enough to defend it properly. In other words, you're a typical defender of your God.

Suffice it to say that your position has no basis in Scripture.

 

You think I don't have a Scriptural position because you don't understand it. Jesus raised Himself from the dead. That's how He conquered death. That's what makes His resurrection unique.

I'm going to enjoy this...

Acts 2:32
This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.

Acts 3:26
Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.

Acts 4:10
Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole.

Acts 5:30
The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.

Acts 13:23
Of this man's seed hath God according to his promise raised unto Israel a Saviour, Jesus:

Acts 13:33
God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.

Romans 10:9
That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

Galatians 1:1
Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead)

I don't see anything about Jesus raising himself in any of these verses.

Somebody's off on their position and their Bible here and I don't think it's me.

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


carx
carx's picture
Posts: 247
Joined: 2008-01-02
User is offlineOffline
Thank you for not answering

Thank you for not answering me again man . This shows your knowledge and how my arguments are not a challenge to you ( end of sarcasm )

carx wrote:
j_day wrote:
Just so you know, free will is not a Biblical term. It's in the dictionary. The definition of free will is a choice, a voluntary decision. Anytime you have two options and you have a choice which one it is, that's a voluntary decision aka free will. As far as you gravity example goes, yes you can choose to not obey gravity. Doesn't mean you're going to. Free will is not a wish. It's not making something come true. It's a decision. Whether or not to go to school, where to work, what to eat are all examples where free will is exhibited. Anytime you have two options you have a choice. Having a choice means you make a decision. That's called free will.

OK man if something is in the dictionary its not automatically true AND NOW LETS PROVE IT WITH EVIDANCE

Aliens , unicorns , The FSM and alien abductions are in the dictionary however this doesn’t make them real or true.

However in your own words you have defined free will for a “theoretical state” so here you go please stop using this term and substitute this in your posts since they are basically the same.
The sun can hypothetically don’t exist or start dancing samba (translation the sun haze free will) , god wants humans to love him and he gave us a hypothetical state so we can hypothetically be in a state of loving him. Dose this make any sense to you ? Its completely meaningless and pointless in your model you get the same free will like a rock or hot air (free will = 0 ) are you happy ? And what is it that god wants from me to have again to love him ? Air molecules are performing deterministic reactions so yes they have free will (In your model) however they are brainless robots and you are according to your explanation so how about this .

Well thanks for your response your move man .

Warning I’m not a native English speaker.

http://downloads.khinsider.com/?u=281515 DDR and game sound track download


sandwiches
sandwiches's picture
Posts: 75
Joined: 2008-03-13
User is offlineOffline
j_day wrote:sandwiches

j_day wrote:

sandwiches wrote:

j_day wrote:

sandwiches wrote:
Well, if my father was God and God is the creator of all things, then yes my father would've created evil. Again, either evil happened without God's intervention and he allowed it to exist or he created it.

Which one is it?

He allowed it to exist. If He didn't, people would be robots and could only follow God. They wouldn't be following Him out of choice.

 

So, is God unable to give us free will without evil existing?

The opportunity to do evil comes from free will. If everybody followed God, there would be no evil. God didn't make evil. He gave people a choice. To follow Him or to not follow Him. Evil is a byproduct of not following God. People choosing not to follow Him and engage in evil activity is not His fault.

God gives us free will. What we choose to do with that is on us, not on Him.

I think you misunderstood the question.

It's a 'yes' or 'no' question.

 

So, again, is God unable to give us free will without evil existing, yes or no?


jcgadfly
Superfan
Posts: 6791
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
sandwiches wrote:j_day

sandwiches wrote:

j_day wrote:

sandwiches wrote:

j_day wrote:

sandwiches wrote:
Well, if my father was God and God is the creator of all things, then yes my father would've created evil. Again, either evil happened without God's intervention and he allowed it to exist or he created it.

Which one is it?

He allowed it to exist. If He didn't, people would be robots and could only follow God. They wouldn't be following Him out of choice.

 

So, is God unable to give us free will without evil existing?

The opportunity to do evil comes from free will. If everybody followed God, there would be no evil. God didn't make evil. He gave people a choice. To follow Him or to not follow Him. Evil is a byproduct of not following God. People choosing not to follow Him and engage in evil activity is not His fault.

God gives us free will. What we choose to do with that is on us, not on Him.

I think you misunderstood the question.

It's a 'yes' or 'no' question.

 

So, again, is God unable to give us free will without evil existing, yes or no?

He likes to dodge questions, this one.

<apologies for the thread jacking - I just had to show that this guy doesn't know what he's talking about.>

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


sandwiches
sandwiches's picture
Posts: 75
Joined: 2008-03-13
User is offlineOffline
Something that always warms

Something that always warms my heart is seeing fundamentalist Christians so vehemently defend their beliefs and then seeing how they can't even agree with one another. The funniest part is when each one of them tells me that "Well, then that other so-called 'Christian' is wrong."

 

Here's a completely opposite take to free will from another ultra Christian:

Quote:
Let me be straight with you and dont be offended. I am going to tell you the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Ok? First, lets talk about freewill? Show me in the Scriptures where man is free from God and cannot be touched by God unless man gives the ok?  A person cannot be outside of the will of God! End of argument. Everything you do is guided by the Lord. Like it or not, God is a "in your face" God. He does not ask permission to do what He does. He has no counselor and He does not seek the permission of a man to do whatever it is he desires to do. He creates the wicked for a reason and He does not have to give man an accounting or reason why. Let me give you Christianity for the tough minded to make my point.

Pro 16:4 The LORD has made everything for its purpose, even the wicked for the day of trouble.
 
He has told us that He does this throughout the Scriptures.

 

So, is God responsible for every action of every human being? According to j_day, no. According to this guy, yes.

So, does God make people do evil things? According to j_day, no. According to this guy, yes.

So, does God create evil people? According to j_day, no. According to this guy, yes.

He even has Biblical 'proof.'


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
In the beginning the

In the beginning the universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move. ~ Douglas Adams 


 


shikko
Posts: 448
Joined: 2007-05-23
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote:j_day

jcgadfly wrote:
j_day wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

Now I remember why I stopped paying attention to you. You don't know your Bible well enough to defend it properly. In other words, you're a typical defender of your God.

Suffice it to say that your position has no basis in Scripture.

 

You think I don't have a Scriptural position because you don't understand it. Jesus raised Himself from the dead. That's how He conquered death. That's what makes His resurrection unique.

I'm going to enjoy this...

(snip savage beating)

I don't see anything about Jesus raising himself in any of these verses. Somebody's off on their position and their Bible here and I don't think it's me.

Ouch.

So, j_day, how does it feel to get a spanking as an adult?

So my first guess is that you'll go on about the triune nature of the Christian god and say that just because the bible specifically mentions Jesus and god separately here doesn't mean they're to be considered separate entities, and that therefore through the power and mystery of your god, Jesus raised himself from the dead, in spite of the specific wording of those passages to the contrary.

My second guess is that you just won't come back.  You'll brew up some personally acceptable excuse like "they just don't want to understand" or "forget it, I've got more important things to do".  After all, it'd be too much for us to expect someone to admit that they made a mistake about something, right?  I mean, that would only be the honest thing to do.

I hope my guess is wrong and he DOES come back.  I'm distinctly curious about how s/he'll respond.

--
maybe if this sig is witty, someone will love me.


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
How does it feel to get a

How does it feel to get a spanking as an adult?

It's wonderful if it's an attractive woman doing it.


Anonymous(j_day) (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
aiia wrote:j_dayYou had

aiia wrote:

j_day

You had plenty of time to set up an account so that you can post here

Set one up now if you want to continue with this discussion.

 

EDIT: I didnt mean to sound as if you cant post.

I meant that because you are not registered your posts have to be approved and moderators have to read and post your comments "manually" so please setup a password account

It says "further information and a password have been sent to your e-mail", but I haven't received any e-mail from this site.


j_day* (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote:j_day

jcgadfly wrote:
j_day wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

j_day wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

Proper Gander wrote:

j_day wrote:

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

I see in your other posts how you jump to Jesus to include the spiritual aspects. Jesus did not exist in Genesis chapters 1-3. Start only with the knowledge you have in Genesis and do not jump forward to future unwritten at the time books in the Bible.

Jesus did exist in Genesis 1-3. "Let us make man in our image." Have you read the book of John where it states that Jesus has always existed? That would mean including before Genesis.

So Mary existed before Genesis too? But I thought she was a human born long after Genesis? Or did Jesus just crawl up her vagina, camp out in her stomach for 9 months before finally deciding to come out? If he already existed, why bother with all that instead of just coming down to earth plain and simple? Sounds like very strange behaviour to me.

Sure, let's open up that can of worms...

"Jesus is God too"

"Really, Was Jesus crucified?"

"Yes. He died for our sins"

"So God died"

"No, Jesus died and God raised him"

"So Jesus isn't God?"

"Yes he is"

<continue ad nauseum>

Since this is a different topic, I'm not going to address it in full except to say that God didn't raise Jesus from the dead. Jesus raised Himself.

Now I remember why I stopped paying attention to you. You don't know your Bible well enough to defend it properly. In other words, you're a typical defender of your God.

Suffice it to say that your position has no basis in Scripture.

 

You think I don't have a Scriptural position because you don't understand it. Jesus raised Himself from the dead. That's how He conquered death. That's what makes His resurrection unique.

I'm going to enjoy this... Acts 2:32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses. Acts 3:26 Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities. Acts 4:10 Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole. Acts 5:30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree. Acts 13:23 Of this man's seed hath God according to his promise raised unto Israel a Saviour, Jesus: Acts 13:33 God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. Romans 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. Galatians 1:1 Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead) I don't see anything about Jesus raising himself in any of these verses. Somebody's off on their position and their Bible here and I don't think it's me.

 You're right. It was a misunderstanding on my part. Awhile ago I was talking with my brother-in-law about something loosely related and he mentioned Jesus raising Himself. What he meant was God raising Himself, and I took it as Jesus raising Jesus, not God the Father raising Jesus.


j_day* (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
carx wrote:Thank you for not

carx wrote:
Thank you for not answering me again man . This shows your knowledge and how my arguments are not a challenge to you ( end of sarcasm )
carx wrote:
j_day wrote:
Just so you know, free will is not a Biblical term. It's in the dictionary. The definition of free will is a choice, a voluntary decision. Anytime you have two options and you have a choice which one it is, that's a voluntary decision aka free will. As far as you gravity example goes, yes you can choose to not obey gravity. Doesn't mean you're going to. Free will is not a wish. It's not making something come true. It's a decision. Whether or not to go to school, where to work, what to eat are all examples where free will is exhibited. Anytime you have two options you have a choice. Having a choice means you make a decision. That's called free will.

 

OK man if something is in the dictionary its not automatically true AND NOW LETS PROVE IT WITH EVIDANCE Aliens , unicorns , The FSM and alien abductions are in the dictionary however this doesn’t make them real or true. However in your own words you have defined free will for a “theoretical state” so here you go please stop using this term and substitute this in your posts since they are basically the same. The sun can hypothetically don’t exist or start dancing samba (translation the sun haze free will) , god wants humans to love him and he gave us a hypothetical state so we can hypothetically be in a state of loving him. Dose this make any sense to you ? Its completely meaningless and pointless in your model you get the same free will like a rock or hot air (free will = 0 ) are you happy ? And what is it that god wants from me to have again to love him ? Air molecules are performing deterministic reactions so yes they have free will (In your model) however they are brainless robots and you are according to your explanation so how about this . Well thanks for your response your move man .

I guess I need to explain this slower. Free will is a voluntary decision. If you are chained up in a basement, only fed one thing and forced to type on this website, then I see why you don't understand what it is. If you have EVER made a choice on what to eat, what to wear or what internet site to go to, you exercised free will. You made a choice. Free will is making a choice. If you have more than one pair of clothes, you have made a voluntary decision on what to wear that day. You exercised free will. If you have ever bought anything from the store, you exercised free will. If you know how to walk, run and drive, you use free will when you decide how to get from one place to another. To say free will doesn't exist is to say that you have never ever made any type of decision in your entire life. If that's true, it's awesome that this is the only website that you can go to.


j_day* (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
sandwiches wrote:j_day

sandwiches wrote:

j_day wrote:

sandwiches wrote:

j_day wrote:

sandwiches wrote:
Well, if my father was God and God is the creator of all things, then yes my father would've created evil. Again, either evil happened without God's intervention and he allowed it to exist or he created it.

Which one is it?

He allowed it to exist. If He didn't, people would be robots and could only follow God. They wouldn't be following Him out of choice.

 

So, is God unable to give us free will without evil existing?

The opportunity to do evil comes from free will. If everybody followed God, there would be no evil. God didn't make evil. He gave people a choice. To follow Him or to not follow Him. Evil is a byproduct of not following God. People choosing not to follow Him and engage in evil activity is not His fault.

God gives us free will. What we choose to do with that is on us, not on Him.

I think you misunderstood the question.

It's a 'yes' or 'no' question.

 

So, again, is God unable to give us free will without evil existing, yes or no?

You couldn't tell from my answer? For evil not to exist, everyone would have to follow God. Since He gives free will to not follow Him, people have the opportunity to engage in evil behavior.

So the answer would be yes.


aiia
Superfan
aiia's picture
Posts: 1923
Joined: 2006-09-12
User is offlineOffline
Anonymous(j_day) wrote:It

Anonymous(j_day) wrote:

It says "further information and a password have been sent to your e-mail", but I haven't received any e-mail from this site.

Is it being blocked as spam, perhaps?

People who think there is something they refer to as god don't ask enough questions.


jday* (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
aiia wrote:Anonymous(j_day)

aiia wrote:

Anonymous(j_day) wrote:

It says "further information and a password have been sent to your e-mail", but I haven't received any e-mail from this site.

Is it being blocked as spam, perhaps?

No, I always scan through spam before I delete it. Also, a reason I would find that doubtful is because I've never had a message from a site that I signed up for be marked as spam.


sandwiches
sandwiches's picture
Posts: 75
Joined: 2008-03-13
User is offlineOffline
j_day* wrote:sandwiches

j_day* wrote:

sandwiches wrote:

I think you misunderstood the question.

It's a 'yes' or 'no' question.

 

So, again, is God unable to give us free will without evil existing, yes or no?

You couldn't tell from my answer? For evil not to exist, everyone would have to follow God. Since He gives free will to not follow Him, people have the opportunity to engage in evil behavior.

So the answer would be yes.

So, he is UNABLE to give us free will without evil existing.

Is he not all-powerful?


carx
carx's picture
Posts: 247
Joined: 2008-01-02
User is offlineOffline
j_day* wrote:I guess I need

j_day* wrote:
I guess I need to explain this slower. Free will is a voluntary decision. If you are chained up in a basement, only fed one thing and forced to type on this website, then I see why you don't understand what it is. If you have EVER made a choice on what to eat, what to wear or what internet site to go to, you exercised free will. You made a choice. Free will is making a choice. If you have more than one pair of clothes, you have made a voluntary decision on what to wear that day. You exercised free will. If you have ever bought anything from the store, you exercised free will. If you know how to walk, run and drive, you use free will when you decide how to get from one place to another. To say free will doesn't exist is to say that you have never ever made any type of decision in your entire life. If that's true, it's awesome that this is the only website that you can go to.

Awesome I love adhomingen attacks XD.

Maybe I need to give you some experimental evidence to make you ticking instead of playing semantics with you my friend .

1) Do you think bots have free will ? They are pretty smart and can make decisions however they are programmed and they for are unable to make real voluntary decisions (despite it looking like they are ) because the programmers programmed them .

2) Ling-Bots if you got into a discussion with one of them do you think they have free will since they are able to have a decent conversation with you like a human ?

3) The best prove ever is to see this free will you again have defined for a reaction or result not a actual concept so lets see , if something is following patterns and is predictable then it is deterministic if something isn’t its random .
Lets test this can you abandon god for no apparent reason ?

IF YES (you are random)

IF NO ( you are a deterministic robot )

Where is this voluntary decision since both answers are decisions/actions/reactions just like a reaction of a hydrogen atom.

Warning I’m not a native English speaker.

http://downloads.khinsider.com/?u=281515 DDR and game sound track download


jcgadfly
Superfan
Posts: 6791
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
j_day* wrote:jcgadfly

j_day* wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:
j_day wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

j_day wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

Proper Gander wrote:

j_day wrote:

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

I see in your other posts how you jump to Jesus to include the spiritual aspects. Jesus did not exist in Genesis chapters 1-3. Start only with the knowledge you have in Genesis and do not jump forward to future unwritten at the time books in the Bible.

Jesus did exist in Genesis 1-3. "Let us make man in our image." Have you read the book of John where it states that Jesus has always existed? That would mean including before Genesis.

So Mary existed before Genesis too? But I thought she was a human born long after Genesis? Or did Jesus just crawl up her vagina, camp out in her stomach for 9 months before finally deciding to come out? If he already existed, why bother with all that instead of just coming down to earth plain and simple? Sounds like very strange behaviour to me.

Sure, let's open up that can of worms...

"Jesus is God too"

"Really, Was Jesus crucified?"

"Yes. He died for our sins"

"So God died"

"No, Jesus died and God raised him"

"So Jesus isn't God?"

"Yes he is"

<continue ad nauseum>

Since this is a different topic, I'm not going to address it in full except to say that God didn't raise Jesus from the dead. Jesus raised Himself.

Now I remember why I stopped paying attention to you. You don't know your Bible well enough to defend it properly. In other words, you're a typical defender of your God.

Suffice it to say that your position has no basis in Scripture.

 

You think I don't have a Scriptural position because you don't understand it. Jesus raised Himself from the dead. That's how He conquered death. That's what makes His resurrection unique.

I'm going to enjoy this... Acts 2:32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses. Acts 3:26 Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities. Acts 4:10 Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole. Acts 5:30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree. Acts 13:23 Of this man's seed hath God according to his promise raised unto Israel a Saviour, Jesus: Acts 13:33 God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. Romans 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. Galatians 1:1 Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead) I don't see anything about Jesus raising himself in any of these verses. Somebody's off on their position and their Bible here and I don't think it's me.

 You're right. It was a misunderstanding on my part. Awhile ago I was talking with my brother-in-law about something loosely related and he mentioned Jesus raising Himself. What he meant was God raising Himself, and I took it as Jesus raising Jesus, not God the Father raising Jesus.

I figured it was something like that - unfortunately it was after the Scripture bombing.

You still have the problem of a dead God raising himself (if you believe Jesus was God also).

If you don't think of Jesus as God but simply as his son, you're a polytheist but like to hide it behind the term "trinitarianism"

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


shikko
Posts: 448
Joined: 2007-05-23
User is offlineOffline
j_day* wrote:jcgadfly

j_day* wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

j_day wrote:

You think I don't have a Scriptural position because you don't understand it. Jesus raised Himself from the dead. That's how He conquered death. That's what makes His resurrection unique.

I'm going to enjoy this...

(snip)

I don't see anything about Jesus raising himself in any of these verses. Somebody's off on their position and their Bible here and I don't think it's me.

 You're right. It was a misunderstanding on my part. Awhile ago I was talking with my brother-in-law about something loosely related and he mentioned Jesus raising Himself. What he meant was God raising Himself, and I took it as Jesus raising Jesus, not God the Father raising Jesus.

Well, colour me pleasantly surprised.  You beat my expectations.  Well done!

--
maybe if this sig is witty, someone will love me.


jcgadfly
Superfan
Posts: 6791
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
j_day* wrote:carx

j_day* wrote:

carx wrote:
Thank you for not answering me again man . This shows your knowledge and how my arguments are not a challenge to you ( end of sarcasm )
carx wrote:
j_day wrote:
Just so you know, free will is not a Biblical term. It's in the dictionary. The definition of free will is a choice, a voluntary decision. Anytime you have two options and you have a choice which one it is, that's a voluntary decision aka free will. As far as you gravity example goes, yes you can choose to not obey gravity. Doesn't mean you're going to. Free will is not a wish. It's not making something come true. It's a decision. Whether or not to go to school, where to work, what to eat are all examples where free will is exhibited. Anytime you have two options you have a choice. Having a choice means you make a decision. That's called free will.

 

OK man if something is in the dictionary its not automatically true AND NOW LETS PROVE IT WITH EVIDANCE Aliens , unicorns , The FSM and alien abductions are in the dictionary however this doesn’t make them real or true. However in your own words you have defined free will for a “theoretical state” so here you go please stop using this term and substitute this in your posts since they are basically the same. The sun can hypothetically don’t exist or start dancing samba (translation the sun haze free will) , god wants humans to love him and he gave us a hypothetical state so we can hypothetically be in a state of loving him. Dose this make any sense to you ? Its completely meaningless and pointless in your model you get the same free will like a rock or hot air (free will = 0 ) are you happy ? And what is it that god wants from me to have again to love him ? Air molecules are performing deterministic reactions so yes they have free will (In your model) however they are brainless robots and you are according to your explanation so how about this . Well thanks for your response your move man .

I guess I need to explain this slower. Free will is a voluntary decision. If you are chained up in a basement, only fed one thing and forced to type on this website, then I see why you don't understand what it is. If you have EVER made a choice on what to eat, what to wear or what internet site to go to, you exercised free will. You made a choice. Free will is making a choice. If you have more than one pair of clothes, you have made a voluntary decision on what to wear that day. You exercised free will. If you have ever bought anything from the store, you exercised free will. If you know how to walk, run and drive, you use free will when you decide how to get from one place to another. To say free will doesn't exist is to say that you have never ever made any type of decision in your entire life. If that's true, it's awesome that this is the only website that you can go to.

To say that free will exists also denies the existence of an omniscient God. do you wish to do that.

Can one have free will if God has planned every step of your life (as many Christians claim)? You may not claim this so I'm not really sure where you stand.

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


j_day* (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
carx wrote:j_day* wrote:I

carx wrote:
j_day* wrote:
I guess I need to explain this slower. Free will is a voluntary decision. If you are chained up in a basement, only fed one thing and forced to type on this website, then I see why you don't understand what it is. If you have EVER made a choice on what to eat, what to wear or what internet site to go to, you exercised free will. You made a choice. Free will is making a choice. If you have more than one pair of clothes, you have made a voluntary decision on what to wear that day. You exercised free will. If you have ever bought anything from the store, you exercised free will. If you know how to walk, run and drive, you use free will when you decide how to get from one place to another. To say free will doesn't exist is to say that you have never ever made any type of decision in your entire life. If that's true, it's awesome that this is the only website that you can go to.

 

Awesome I love adhomingen attacks XD. Maybe I need to give you some experimental evidence to make you ticking instead of playing semantics with you my friend . 1) Do you think bots have free will ? They are pretty smart and can make decisions however they are programmed and they for are unable to make real voluntary decisions (despite it looking like they are ) because the programmers programmed them . 2) Ling-Bots if you got into a discussion with one of them do you think they have free will since they are able to have a decent conversation with you like a human ? 3) The best prove ever is to see this free will you again have defined for a reaction or result not a actual concept so lets see , if something is following patterns and is predictable then it is deterministic if something isn’t its random . Lets test this can you abandon god for no apparent reason ? IF YES (you are random) IF NO ( you are a deterministic robot ) Where is this voluntary decision since both answers are decisions/actions/reactions just like a reaction of a hydrogen atom.

"IF YES (you are random)". Where do you get that from? "Where is this voluntary decision since both answers are decisions/actions/reactions/ just like a reaction of a hydrogen atom."

The voluntary decision is to follow God or not to follow God. Every person can choose to follow God or not to follow God.

Choice 1- follow God

Choice 2- don't follow God

Every person has two options. Your choice of which one of those is going to represent you is free will.


j_day* (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote:To say that

jcgadfly wrote:
To say that free will exists also denies the existence of an omniscient God. do you wish to do that.

Can one have free will if God has planned every step of your life (as many Christians claim)? You may not claim this so I'm not really sure where you stand.

There's a difference between knowing what someone's going to choose and making them choose it. God knows what I'm going to choose, that doesn't mean He makes me choose it. It's not "God knows I'm going to eat pizza tomorrow, so I have to eat pizza tomorrow" it's "I'm going to eat pizza tomorrow, and God knows that's what I'm going to eat."

I think people confuse the word "plan" with the word "control". (not necessarily you, but a lot of people). God has a plan for everyone. That doesn't mean He controls you to make it come true. For example (and it's not perfect, but it gives a better idea of what I'm saying), let's say you are the coach of the Denver Nuggets and you have decided that your players have free will. Allen Iverson has played shooting guard his whole life. He's offense-oriented and really likes taking 25 shots/night. But as the coach, you think it would be better to move him to point guard. The offense would flow better and it would open up opportunities for his teammates. The coaches plan may be for Iverson to play point guard because he knows that he's their best passer and they would play better if he switched positions, however Iverson has free will and can choose to stay at shooting guard if he likes.

God's plan is the most ideal way your life could play out. Michael Jordan was obviously meant to play basketball. He didn't just get there by work ethic, the man was naturally gifted to put the ball into the basket. Imagine if he had never played basketball and pursued baseball right out of high school. Could he still have been productive if he worked hard at it for that long? Probably. He's a natural athlete and if he pursued it for longer than a couple of years, there's a chance he could have been a decent baseball player. But he was meant to play basketball. That's how it is for every person. You could choose to do whatever you want, and still be successful at it. But you will be more successful if you do what you were made to do.


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
 Follow which god? Ummm But

 Follow which god? Ummm But I AM god, just like Jesus?Buddha said. Ohhhhh, and that goddess last night was yelling "oh god, oh god" ..... Yup that's me .....

  Here's Pat Condell about that devil god of abraham,

"God the psycho"

http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=119389495&blogID=354046291

  Interesting essay below video .....

  


sandwiches
sandwiches's picture
Posts: 75
Joined: 2008-03-13
User is offlineOffline
I will repeat and expand on

I will repeat and expand on my question, in case you missed it.

j_day* wrote:

You couldn't tell from my answer? For evil not to exist, everyone would have to follow God. Since He gives free will to not follow Him, people have the opportunity to engage in evil behavior.

So the answer would be yes.

So, you're saying that God is UNABLE to give humans the ability to choose for ourselves without also creating evil. You might keep saying that evil is an intrinsic and inseparable part of free will but for an omnipotent being, nothing is inseparable.

Or... is he not all-powerful?


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
  Ummm  , Hey j , so there

  Ummm  , Hey j , so there really is a HELL ? Do the naughty aliens go there too ?  Was Jesus there to to save them too ?  Sure why not , Jesus and god can do anything ....


carx
carx's picture
Posts: 247
Joined: 2008-01-02
User is offlineOffline
LOL Man I love the way you

LOL Man I love the way you ignored the test Laughing out loud I made special nice numbers like 1) 2) 3) so you can easy tipe your answers in without quoting like 1) NO 2) NO 3) YES . Whoever you know maybe I need to make a better example because still your magic definition of “Free Will” is just a synonym for result or actions I don’t know if you realize this. Maybe you care to answer the test OK ?

THE TEST :

1) Do you think bots have free will ? They are pretty smart and can make decisions however they are programmed and they for are unable to make real voluntary decisions (despite it looking like they are ) because the programmers programmed them .

2) Ling-Bots if you got into a discussion with one of them do you think they have free will since they are able to have a decent conversation with you like a human ?

3) The best prove ever is to see this free will you again have defined for a reaction or result not a actual concept so lets see , if something is following patterns and is predictable then it is deterministic if something isn’t its random .
Lets test this can you abandon god for no apparent reason ?

IF YES (you are random)

IF NO ( you are a deterministic robot )

j_day* wrote:
"IF YES (you are random)". Where do you get that from? "Where is this voluntary decision since both answers are decisions/actions/reactions/ just like a reaction of a hydrogen atom."

The voluntary decision is to follow God or not to follow God. Every person can choose to follow God or not to follow God.

Choice 1- follow God

Choice 2- don't follow God

Every person has two options. Your choice of which one of those is going to represent you is free will.

Your definition of "Free will " is just a synonym for result , outcome or reaction

Warning I’m not a native English speaker.

http://downloads.khinsider.com/?u=281515 DDR and game sound track download


j_day* (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
carx wrote:LOL Man I love

carx wrote:
LOL Man I love the way you ignored the test Laughing out loud I made special nice numbers like 1) 2) 3) so you can easy tipe your answers in without quoting like 1) NO 2) NO 3) YES . Whoever you know maybe I need to make a better example because still your magic definition of “Free Will” is just a synonym for result or actions I don’t know if you realize this. Maybe you care to answer the test OK ? THE TEST : 1) Do you think bots have free will ? They are pretty smart and can make decisions however they are programmed and they for are unable to make real voluntary decisions (despite it looking like they are ) because the programmers programmed them . 2) Ling-Bots if you got into a discussion with one of them do you think they have free will since they are able to have a decent conversation with you like a human ? 3) The best prove ever is to see this free will you again have defined for a reaction or result not a actual concept so lets see , if something is following patterns and is predictable then it is deterministic if something isn’t its random . Lets test this can you abandon god for no apparent reason ? IF YES (you are random) IF NO ( you are a deterministic robot )
j_day* wrote:
"IF YES (you are random)". Where do you get that from? "Where is this voluntary decision since both answers are decisions/actions/reactions/ just like a reaction of a hydrogen atom."

 

The voluntary decision is to follow God or not to follow God. Every person can choose to follow God or not to follow God.

Choice 1- follow God

Choice 2- don't follow God

Every person has two options. Your choice of which one of those is going to represent you is free will.

Your definition of "Free will " is just a synonym for result , outcome or reaction

Actually, look up "free will" in a thesaurus (http://thesaurus.reference.com/) and there are no synonyms. Free will is the existence of at least two options and freely being able to choose one. Result and Outcome are what option you choose. Reaction is how you feel about the options or the outcomes.

1. You answered your own question. They are programmed, therefore they don't really have a decision. The key word is voluntary.

2. Same thing as number one. The quality level of programming doesn't account for free will.

3. If you have free will to follow God, you have free will to not follow God. So the answer would be yes.

 

This is the last time I explain this, if you don't understand, so be it. Free will is having at least two options and having a voluntary decision to choose one.

Here's an example:

You own a pair of shorts and a pair of pants.

Free will- you get to choose which one you want to wear today

Result/Outcome- you wear pants

Reaction- happy because it's cold outside

 

Your evidence against free will is bots that don't have it. People aren't bots. You want evidence that free will exists? Examine your life and think back to a voluntary decision you have made. If you have never made a decision of any kind, and you have only had one option for every situation, then I guess free will doesn't exist. However I highly doubt that because you have two options right now: understand what I'm saying and don't respond, or think of some outrageous example of non-humans not having free will and respond. No matter what you choose, you will be exercising free will. Since you'll be exercising it no matter what, it's probably not best to say that it doesn't exist.


carx
carx's picture
Posts: 247
Joined: 2008-01-02
User is offlineOffline
I see I’m pushing your

I see I’m pushing your buttons (Were is all the hate coming from the theists ? theism = hate Sticking out tongue ) Laughing out loud and thanks for answering the test cha-ching atheism time. The problem is I’m understanding the apologists for free will and there are self contradictory , meaningless smoke and mirrors like a square circle you can say it however it’s a impossibility.

j_day* wrote:
Every person has two options. Your choice of which one of those is going to represent you is free will.

A rok has some possible states of existence therefore a rok has free will congratulations.

j_day* wrote:

Your definition of "Free will " is just a synonym for result , outcome or reaction

Actually, look up "free will" in a thesaurus (http://thesaurus.reference.com/) and there are no synonyms. Free will is the existence of at least two options

A rok has some possible states of existence therefore a rok has free will congratulations.

j_day* wrote:

and freely being able to choose one.

HOW ?????? Howe is this magic step performed ?
HOW ?????? Answer this and you get 2 possibilities randomness or determinism .

j_day* wrote:
Reaction is how you feel about the options or the outcomes.

You fail look up the word reaction in a dictionary professor and realize your failure reaction means the process between a impute and a outcome like in chemical reaction mister “look up in the dictionary”.

j_day* wrote:

1. You answered your own question. They are programmed, therefore they don't really have a decision. The key word is voluntary.

2. Same thing as number one. The quality level of programming doesn't account for free will.

3. If you have free will to follow God, you have free will to not follow God. So the answer would be yes.

 

This is the last time I explain this, if you don't understand, so be it. Free will is having at least two options and having a voluntary decision to choose one.

Here's an example:

You own a pair of shorts and a pair of pants.

Free will- you get to choose which one you want to wear today

Result/Outcome- you wear pants

Reaction- happy because it's cold outside

 

Your evidence against free will is bots that don't have it. People aren't bots. You want evidence that free will exists? Examine your life and think back to a voluntary decision you have made. If you have never made a decision of any kind, and you have only had one option for every situation, then I guess free will doesn't exist. However I highly doubt that because you have two options right now: understand what I'm saying and don't respond, or think of some outrageous example of non-humans not having free will and respond. No matter what you choose, you will be exercising free will. Since you'll be exercising it no matter what, it's probably not best to say that it doesn't exist.

O YES YES YES this is the best result ever I was waiting for it congratulations based on this test you have shown your contradictions . You see the only difference between a human and a bot is the fact that bots are les sophisticated then humans however there are based on similar principals and in the end of the 21 century we will see great AI . In the near future we can model and simulate a human brain and tell reaction X in region A and reaction Z in region B make your decision , where is your “free will” now !?

Actually most Christians can be replaced with bots and no one will notice the difference and in some cases people can swere that the human Christian bechaves like a brainless robot while the ling-bot is the human.

Howe dos it feel knowing that the latest bots can replace you and have the same mental compatibilities like you and would answer even better and smarter then you ? Your inability to get deep into a question is characteristic of a bot , are you a bot ?

Free will like a flat earth is shown in the bible however with the passage of time its going to be only a ridicules memory of the past.

Warning I’m not a native English speaker.

http://downloads.khinsider.com/?u=281515 DDR and game sound track download


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
When you are religious you

When you are religious you don't know your real name is god and people are strangers.

The Doors - People Are Strange

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcb3l_2GLX4

     < religious


shikko
Posts: 448
Joined: 2007-05-23
User is offlineOffline
j_day* wrote:jcgadfly

j_day* wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:
To say that free will exists also denies the existence of an omniscient God. do you wish to do that.

Can one have free will if God has planned every step of your life (as many Christians claim)? You may not claim this so I'm not really sure where you stand.

There's a difference between knowing what someone's going to choose and making them choose it. God knows what I'm going to choose, that doesn't mean He makes me choose it. It's not "God knows I'm going to eat pizza tomorrow, so I have to eat pizza tomorrow" it's "I'm going to eat pizza tomorrow, and God knows that's what I'm going to eat."

Omniscience removes the possibility of free will because the outcome of any choice is preordained by virtue of already being known.  Let me illustrate with your example: let's say god "knows" you're going to eat pizza for lunch tomorrow, and then at crunch time you exercise your free will and have a sandwich instead.  Is this even possible?

If yes, then god just made a mistake.  He is not omniscient, as his "knowing" turned out to be wrong.  So you have free will, but a limited god.

If no, god is now like Henry Ford: "you can have any colour you want, as long as it's black."  You had at best an illusion of choice, which is no choice at all.  So you have an omniscient god,  but no free will.

One precludes the other.  Either humans have free will, or god is omniscient.  There is no middle ground that allows both possibilities since they are mutually exclusive, as illustrated above.  If god knows the outcome to all choices and can never be wrong, we don't have any choices at all; we're puppets, dancing to a tune we can't even hear.

I don't see another way to answer this question than "yes" or "no", but if you do, please tell me.

 

--
maybe if this sig is witty, someone will love me.


carx
carx's picture
Posts: 247
Joined: 2008-01-02
User is offlineOffline
shikko wrote:Omniscience

shikko wrote:
Omniscience removes the possibility of free will because the outcome of any choice is preordained by virtue of already being known.  Let me illustrate with your example: let's say god "knows" you're going to eat pizza for lunch tomorrow, and then at crunch time you exercise your free will and have a sandwich instead.  Is this even possible?

If yes, then god just made a mistake.  He is not omniscient, as his "knowing" turned out to be wrong.  So you have free will, but a limited god.

If no, god is now like Henry Ford: "you can have any colour you want, as long as it's black."  You had at best an illusion of choice, which is no choice at all.  So you have an omniscient god,  but no free will.

One precludes the other.  Either humans have free will, or god is omniscient.  There is no middle ground that allows both possibilities since they are mutually exclusive, as illustrated above.  If god knows the outcome to all choices and can never be wrong, we don't have any choices at all; we're puppets, dancing to a tune we can't even hear.

I don't see another way to answer this question than "yes" or "no", but if you do, please tell me.

 

O Ye the old is god really all knowing problem Laughing out loud if god is all knowing how is free will possible ?

Well I’m tiring to approached this somewhat different since for me this term is completely contradictory if we are determined then we are blameless since we are pipits dancing , if we are random than there is no point in punishing us since we are going to behave randomly so how can god punish blameless beings ? Even if you try to hybridize the concepts of randomness and determinism you get a deterministic creature starting its magic random number generator in determined moments were we ageing have 2 blameless processes or a random creature starting its logical functions in random occasions all the concepts make humans blameless since we are still puppets dancing to the tune of determinism or randomness we may argue the semantics however no possible explanation makes humans responsible then how can god punish creatures he made exactly random/deterministic ?

I’m approaching this from the standpoint god is reasonable and know what he was doing designing us .

Well J_day how can god be all-knowing and free will exist ?

Warning I’m not a native English speaker.

http://downloads.khinsider.com/?u=281515 DDR and game sound track download


j_day* (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
shikko wrote:j_day*

shikko wrote:

j_day* wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:
To say that free will exists also denies the existence of an omniscient God. do you wish to do that.

Can one have free will if God has planned every step of your life (as many Christians claim)? You may not claim this so I'm not really sure where you stand.

There's a difference between knowing what someone's going to choose and making them choose it. God knows what I'm going to choose, that doesn't mean He makes me choose it. It's not "God knows I'm going to eat pizza tomorrow, so I have to eat pizza tomorrow" it's "I'm going to eat pizza tomorrow, and God knows that's what I'm going to eat."

Omniscience removes the possibility of free will because the outcome of any choice is preordained by virtue of already being known.  Let me illustrate with your example: let's say god "knows" you're going to eat pizza for lunch tomorrow, and then at crunch time you exercise your free will and have a sandwich instead.  Is this even possible?

If yes, then god just made a mistake.  He is not omniscient, as his "knowing" turned out to be wrong.  So you have free will, but a limited god.

If no, god is now like Henry Ford: "you can have any colour you want, as long as it's black."  You had at best an illusion of choice, which is no choice at all.  So you have an omniscient god,  but no free will.

One precludes the other.  Either humans have free will, or god is omniscient.  There is no middle ground that allows both possibilities since they are mutually exclusive, as illustrated above.  If god knows the outcome to all choices and can never be wrong, we don't have any choices at all; we're puppets, dancing to a tune we can't even hear.

I don't see another way to answer this question than "yes" or "no", but if you do, please tell me.

 

God knows what I'm going to choose. You have to think about it 3 dimensionally, outside the box etc. The point is, I'm am going to choose to do something tomorrow. God knowing what I'm going to choose doesn't mean I didn't have a choice.

If you have ever seen Matrix Reloaded, they do an example of this. When Neo goes to the Oracle, she offers him a piece of candy and he says something like "but you already know what I'm going to choose" and she says "I wouldn't be much of an Oracle if I didn't" and he responds "how can I make a choice if you already know" and she says something like "my job is to offer the choice." She offered him candy knowing what he was going to choose. Doesn't mean he didn't have a choice. If however, she knew he wasn't going to take the candy so she didn't even bother asking him if he wanted it, then he wouldn't have had free will.

God knows what socks I'm going to put on tomorrow. I don't. Tomorrow I will choose. God knows because He has already seen me make the choice. He knows who I'm going to marry and He knows how many kids I will have. Does that mean I don't have a choice? No. I do and I will make the choices. He knows because He has already seen what choices I have made.


jcgadfly
Superfan
Posts: 6791
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
j_day* wrote:shikko

j_day* wrote:

shikko wrote:

j_day* wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:
To say that free will exists also denies the existence of an omniscient God. do you wish to do that.

Can one have free will if God has planned every step of your life (as many Christians claim)? You may not claim this so I'm not really sure where you stand.

There's a difference between knowing what someone's going to choose and making them choose it. God knows what I'm going to choose, that doesn't mean He makes me choose it. It's not "God knows I'm going to eat pizza tomorrow, so I have to eat pizza tomorrow" it's "I'm going to eat pizza tomorrow, and God knows that's what I'm going to eat."

Omniscience removes the possibility of free will because the outcome of any choice is preordained by virtue of already being known.  Let me illustrate with your example: let's say god "knows" you're going to eat pizza for lunch tomorrow, and then at crunch time you exercise your free will and have a sandwich instead.  Is this even possible?

If yes, then god just made a mistake.  He is not omniscient, as his "knowing" turned out to be wrong.  So you have free will, but a limited god.

If no, god is now like Henry Ford: "you can have any colour you want, as long as it's black."  You had at best an illusion of choice, which is no choice at all.  So you have an omniscient god,  but no free will.

One precludes the other.  Either humans have free will, or god is omniscient.  There is no middle ground that allows both possibilities since they are mutually exclusive, as illustrated above.  If god knows the outcome to all choices and can never be wrong, we don't have any choices at all; we're puppets, dancing to a tune we can't even hear.

I don't see another way to answer this question than "yes" or "no", but if you do, please tell me.

 

God knows what I'm going to choose. You have to think about it 3 dimensionally, outside the box etc. The point is, I'm am going to choose to do something tomorrow. God knowing what I'm going to choose doesn't mean I didn't have a choice.

If you have ever seen Matrix Reloaded, they do an example of this. When Neo goes to the Oracle, she offers him a piece of candy and he says something like "but you already know what I'm going to choose" and she says "I wouldn't be much of an Oracle if I didn't" and he responds "how can I make a choice if you already know" and she says something like "my job is to offer the choice." She offered him candy knowing what he was going to choose. Doesn't mean he didn't have a choice. If however, she knew he wasn't going to take the candy so she didn't even bother asking him if he wanted it, then he wouldn't have had free will.

God knows what socks I'm going to put on tomorrow. I don't. Tomorrow I will choose. God knows because He has already seen me make the choice. He knows who I'm going to marry and He knows how many kids I will have. Does that mean I don't have a choice? No. I do and I will make the choices. He knows because He has already seen what choices I have made.

If you have a choice that means there's a chance that you won't do what god knows you're going to do.

But god knows what choice you're going to make because to him, you've already made it.

Do you see the contradiction?

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


carx
carx's picture
Posts: 247
Joined: 2008-01-02
User is offlineOffline
j_day* wrote:The point is,

j_day* wrote:
The point is, I'm am going to choose to do something tomorrow. God knowing what I'm going to choose doesn't mean I didn't have a choice.

If you have ever seen Matrix Reloaded, they do an example of this. When Neo goes to the Oracle, she offers him a piece of candy and he says something like "but you already know what I'm going to choose" and she says "I wouldn't be much of an Oracle if I didn't" and he responds "how can I make a choice if you already know" and she says something like "my job is to offer the choice." She offered him candy knowing what he was going to choose. Doesn't mean he didn't have a choice. If however, she knew he wasn't going to take the candy so she didn't even bother asking him if he wanted it, then he wouldn't have had free will.

God knows what socks I'm going to put on tomorrow. I don't. Tomorrow I will choose. God knows because He has already seen me make the choice. He knows who I'm going to marry and He knows how many kids I will have. Does that mean I don't have a choice? No. I do and I will make the choices. He knows because He has already seen what choices I have made.

A I get it you are a determinist and not even know it Laughing out loud. You see the thing you name “ choice “ is actually something named calculation if all the variables stay the same the future is predictable. Example : you choose your socks according to the impute you get with is determined buy your soundings and temperature , your experience and interactions with other humans , room pressure , comfort levels , … .

Like you can see a being that can simulate the entire universe could see the future (a hipper computer for example ) , since you obey exact lows of physics predicting your behavior reaction and future thinking is not a problem. You being unable to make south a model doesn’t mean any thing you are a single unit playing the game of life ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway's_Game_of_Life ) you create the outcome , however you have no control over it. Do you understand this ?

Warning I’m not a native English speaker.

http://downloads.khinsider.com/?u=281515 DDR and game sound track download


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
Do you understand this

Do you understand this ?

"Condemned to be free" ..... yeah damn it. I want my sky daddy, please please. Wait , it's not funny .....    I said please .....      


shikko
Posts: 448
Joined: 2007-05-23
User is offlineOffline
j_day* wrote:shikko

j_day* wrote:

shikko wrote:

Omniscience removes the possibility of free will because the outcome of any choice is preordained by virtue of already being known.  Let me illustrate with your example: let's say god "knows" you're going to eat pizza for lunch tomorrow, and then at crunch time you exercise your free will and have a sandwich instead.  Is this even possible?

If yes, then god just made a mistake.  He is not omniscient, as his "knowing" turned out to be wrong.  So you have free will, but a limited god.

If no, god is now like Henry Ford: "you can have any colour you want, as long as it's black."  You had at best an illusion of choice, which is no choice at all.  So you have an omniscient god,  but no free will.

One precludes the other.  Either humans have free will, or god is omniscient.  There is no middle ground that allows both possibilities since they are mutually exclusive, as illustrated above.  If god knows the outcome to all choices and can never be wrong, we don't have any choices at all; we're puppets, dancing to a tune we can't even hear.

I don't see another way to answer this question than "yes" or "no", but if you do, please tell me.

 

God knows what I'm going to choose. You have to think about it 3 dimensionally, outside the box etc. The point is, I'm am going to choose to do something tomorrow. God knowing what I'm going to choose doesn't mean I didn't have a choice.

Yes, it does.  Since you neatly avoided answering the question I asked, I'll ask it again: is it even possible for god's knowledge of the choices you have yet to make to be wrong?  If not, you have no free will because that foreknowledge cannot be contravened; your actions are dictated by god's knowledge of the future.  If so, god is not omniscient.

So, no dodging: which is it?  Yes or no?

To put it in your language, would it have been possible for Peter to not have denied Christ? (Matt 26:34 KJV)  If not, Peter's actions were preordained and he had no free will.  If so, god is not omniscient.  Which is it?

Quote:

God knows what socks I'm going to put on tomorrow. I don't. Tomorrow I will choose. God knows because He has already seen me make the choice.

If he's already seen what you're going to do, how can you do anything BUT what god already knows you're going to do?  Can you truly choose to do something other than what god knows you will choose to do?

Quote:

He knows who I'm going to marry and He knows how many kids I will have. Does that mean I don't have a choice? No. I do and I will make the choices. He knows because He has already seen what choices I have made.

If what you say is true, you have only the illusion of choice, because you can never surprise god by making a choice that is NOT one he knows.  Doesn't that sort of scotch the whole idea of salvation being possible for anybody?

--
maybe if this sig is witty, someone will love me.


RhadTheGizmo
Theist
Posts: 1191
Joined: 2007-01-31
User is offlineOffline
 I didn't feel like reading

 I didn't feel like reading all this stuff, but just to help along my theistic colleagues:

Shikko: 

Knowledge does not affect free will.  Even if God knows what you will do, this does not take away from that you choose to do it.

To use a mathematic analogy, if the amount of knowledge I have regarding the choices a stranger will make and that which my brother will make does not affect either's "free will" to choose, than even absolute knowledge regarding what choices they will make does not effect "free will."

e.g., infinity/real number = infinity. freewill/any amount of knowledge = freewill.

Perfect knowledge does not equal preordination.

Now.. the argument might be suggested that perfect knowledge (omniscience) and omnipotence = preordination.  But this is just a broken argument because omnipotence is a broken concept for the purpose of logical constructs.

If God is omnipotent then he could make it so that a creation of his can have freewill (i.e., not be preordained) and still have perfect knowledge as to what they would do at the time of creation.

The fact that this conditional statement seems illogical doesn't matter because omnipotence necessarily entails the power to do what is illogical.

So.. in either case, I don't really see a problem on this level. (I won't even delve into the theological divergences within christendom regarding concepts of sin, death, god/man relationship, etc.)


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
For these and other easons

For these and other easons both omnipotence and omniscience are broken concepts.


RhadTheGizmo
Theist
Posts: 1191
Joined: 2007-01-31
User is offlineOffline
Omnipotence is a broken

Omnipotence is a broken concept because any question that relates to "how" or "why" can be answered with "because he can" and "because he wanted to."

The omnipotence presumption necessarily forestalls argument.

Omniscience, on the other hand, I don't really see why it would necessarily lead to the same results?

"How" is still relevant, because "perfect knowledge" doesn't mean that he can act outside certain logical restraints.  And "why" is still relevant, because there is still the entity is still required to have chosen one path over another within certain restraints.

To put it another way, I may know everything there is to know about the US legal system, but "how" I incorporated a business is still a relevant question and "why" I incorporated the business as opposed to ate some chicken is still relevant as well.

On the other hand, if I was absolute dictator of this world, with absolutely no restraints in either time nor space nor anything else, "how" I did something seems like a much more pointless question.. because the very fact that I can have such power makes any delving into the "how" I did it pointless--you can't do it, nor can you necessarily understand it, and, the fact that I can change all the rules, makes any understanding of anything rather meaningless.

On the same grounds, "why" I did it, is also meaningless, because there is no extension of the answer "because I wanted to."  I can do both x and y and z, all in a moment.  While the prior example of the legal system necessarily requires that I make a decision that reflects on my character, e.g., "I choose to use my time that I could've used doing x, to do y, and that is more important to me"--there is no such revelation in the dictator example.

An "omnipotent," "omniscient," God, would seem to necessitate a selfish God.   But even that statement is not true because such a God could make it so that he didn't have to be.

[I question whether I should post this post.. I'm rather tired.. studying jurisdiction.. hoped up on caffeine.. so it may not be entirely clear.. nor right.. but, I'm throwing it out there for the heck of it.]

 


shikko
Posts: 448
Joined: 2007-05-23
User is offlineOffline
RhadTheGizmo wrote: I

RhadTheGizmo wrote:

 I didn't feel like reading all this stuff, but just to help along my theistic colleagues:

Shikko: 

Knowledge does not affect free will.  Even if God knows what you will do, this does not take away from that you choose to do it.

But you didn't choose at all!  If god "knows" what I will do, can I ever do anything BUT what god "knows" I will do?  If god knows Jimmy Smith will wind up in hell, is it possible for Jimmy to do anything to change that outcome?  What could a mortal possibly do to contravene the perfect knowledge of this god?

How is "no matter how you choose to live, you are ending up in hell" giving me a free choice?

Quote:

To use a mathematic analogy, if the amount of knowledge I have regarding the choices a stranger will make and that which my brother will make does not affect either's "free will" to choose, than even absolute knowledge regarding what choices they will make does not effect "free will."

Please note the "if" clause in your statement; you're affirming the consequent.  The amount of "knowledge" (i.e., not educated guesswork; but actual, take-it-to-the-bank, inescabable fact) about a future outcome negates the possibility of any but a set sequence of events happening.  How could it not?  You can't both know the flip of a fair coin and say it's chance; you can't both know someone is going to heaven and say they had free will.

Quote:

e.g., infinity/real number = infinity. freewill/any amount of knowledge = freewill.

Perfect knowledge does not equal preordination.

That is only true in a system devoid of free will, where subjects operate in concordance with laws such as gravitation or friction.  Humans can have "perfect" knowledge of where a ball thrown at a given angle with a given force will hit the ground, or the sum of two numbers; but my knowledge does not cause the ball to fall there or cause the total to be; that is obvious.

However, if I have "perfect" knowledge of every movie you will see for the rest of your life...do you really have a choice about what movies you will see?  After all, I know you're going to see the new Dune adaptation, but give American Pie XIV a miss; given that my knowledge in this example is actually perfect, can you really "choose" to go see it?  At best, you had the illusion of a choice, just like the purchasers of the original Model T.

Quote:

Now.. the argument might be suggested that perfect knowledge (omniscience) and omnipotence = preordination.  But this is just a broken argument because omnipotence is a broken concept for the purpose of logical constructs.

I agree with omnipotence being a broken concept.  So how is the coexistence of free will and an omniscient god not also broken?  If you agree that nothing can gainsay god's perfect knowledge of every choice you will ever make, then you are forced to accept that your "free will" is an illusion; god is (at best) setting up circumstances in which you seem to have a choice, but is really pulling your strings to make you make the decisions he knew you would make before you were born.

So, CAN a human ever go against this perfect knowledge?

 

--
maybe if this sig is witty, someone will love me.


j_day* (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
shikko wrote:j_day*

shikko wrote:

j_day* wrote:

shikko wrote:

Omniscience removes the possibility of free will because the outcome of any choice is preordained by virtue of already being known.  Let me illustrate with your example: let's say god "knows" you're going to eat pizza for lunch tomorrow, and then at crunch time you exercise your free will and have a sandwich instead.  Is this even possible?

If yes, then god just made a mistake.  He is not omniscient, as his "knowing" turned out to be wrong.  So you have free will, but a limited god.

If no, god is now like Henry Ford: "you can have any colour you want, as long as it's black."  You had at best an illusion of choice, which is no choice at all.  So you have an omniscient god,  but no free will.

One precludes the other.  Either humans have free will, or god is omniscient.  There is no middle ground that allows both possibilities since they are mutually exclusive, as illustrated above.  If god knows the outcome to all choices and can never be wrong, we don't have any choices at all; we're puppets, dancing to a tune we can't even hear.

I don't see another way to answer this question than "yes" or "no", but if you do, please tell me.

 

God knows what I'm going to choose. You have to think about it 3 dimensionally, outside the box etc. The point is, I'm am going to choose to do something tomorrow. God knowing what I'm going to choose doesn't mean I didn't have a choice.

Yes, it does.  Since you neatly avoided answering the question I asked, I'll ask it again: is it even possible for god's knowledge of the choices you have yet to make to be wrong?  If not, you have no free will because that foreknowledge cannot be contravened; your actions are dictated by god's knowledge of the future.  If so, god is not omniscient.

So, no dodging: which is it?  Yes or no?

To put it in your language, would it have been possible for Peter to not have denied Christ? (Matt 26:34 KJV)  If not, Peter's actions were preordained and he had no free will.  If so, god is not omniscient.  Which is it?

Quote:

God knows what socks I'm going to put on tomorrow. I don't. Tomorrow I will choose. God knows because He has already seen me make the choice.

If he's already seen what you're going to do, how can you do anything BUT what god already knows you're going to do?  Can you truly choose to do something other than what god knows you will choose to do?

Quote:

He knows who I'm going to marry and He knows how many kids I will have. Does that mean I don't have a choice? No. I do and I will make the choices. He knows because He has already seen what choices I have made.

If what you say is true, you have only the illusion of choice, because you can never surprise god by making a choice that is NOT one he knows.  Doesn't that sort of scotch the whole idea of salvation being possible for anybody?

Peter denied Jesus three times because he was scared. God knew He was going to do that three times because He had already seen Him do it. When God tells the future, He's telling what's going to happen. It's going to happen that way no matter what. But why it happened that way was a series of events of people using free will.

When Jesus told Peter that he would deny Him three times, He was prophesying that future which He had already seen. When you phrase it like "well Peter was told that he was going to deny Jesus so Peter had no choice to do it" that's inaccurate because Jesus was telling him the choice Peter made. It wasn't like Peter had no control over his body at those moments. Did Peter speak those words against his will? No. They didn't come out of his mouth for no reason. It wasn't like his mouth was moving and his brain was going "wait a minute, this isn't what I want to say" or "what's going on, why is my mouth moving."

 

Imagine that time travel is possible. If I went into the future and watched you stand at the refrigerator to pick something to eat and you chose an apple. Then I came back and said, "tomorrow you will eat an apple" that doesn't mean you are "forced" to eat an apple. I had foreknowledge of the choice you made. At the time of the choice, you had free will.


carx
carx's picture
Posts: 247
Joined: 2008-01-02
User is offlineOffline
O hi dude would you care to

O hi dude would you care to answer me ?

carx wrote:

j_day* wrote:

and freely being able to choose one.

HOW ?????? Howe is this magic step performed ?
HOW ??????

J_day I find it ridiculously funny that you are I fact explaining determinism not even knowing it XD the “free will/choice” you are mentioning is nothing else then a reaction in determinism. Its nice to see someone understanding determinism however revising it , maybe you are just programmed to dismiss something saying “determinism” or “no free will” ? It would be nice if you didn’t practice Intelligent Ignoring on me OK?

Warning I’m not a native English speaker.

http://downloads.khinsider.com/?u=281515 DDR and game sound track download


shikko
Posts: 448
Joined: 2007-05-23
User is offlineOffline
shikko wrote:Yes, it does. 

shikko wrote:

Yes, it does.  Since you neatly avoided answering the question I asked, I'll ask it again: is it even possible for god's knowledge of the choices you have yet to make to be wrong?  If not, you have no free will because that foreknowledge cannot be contravened; your actions are dictated by god's knowledge of the future.  If so, god is not omniscient.

So, no dodging: which is it?  Yes or no?

I wanted to draw attention to this question again, which you still haven't answered directly.  Can god's knowledge of your future choices ever be wrong?

j_day* wrote:

Peter denied Jesus three times because he was scared. God knew He was going to do that three times because He had already seen Him do it. When God tells the future, He's telling what's going to happen. It's going to happen that way no matter what. But why it happened that way was a series of events of people using free will.

So if "it's going to happen that way no matter what", no one could have possibly chosen to do anything differently, right?  So that's not really free any more, is it?

Quote:

Imagine that time travel is possible. If I went into the future and watched you stand at the refrigerator to pick something to eat and you chose an apple. Then I came back and said, "tomorrow you will eat an apple" that doesn't mean you are "forced" to eat an apple. I had foreknowledge of the choice you made. At the time of the choice, you had free will.

You are making my point for me.  Seeing the future requires that the series of events leading up to the future is immutable, and impossible to derail.  This implies that the outcome of all choices are determined before they are made; after all, if they weren't someone might make a different choice that would affect the future you saw.  Ergo, you have illusory choices to make, and no free will.

--
maybe if this sig is witty, someone will love me.