PDA

View Full Version : Christians, riddle me this?



bastiun
09-09-2008, 10:40 PM
How can you so easily shrug off ridiculous ideas of a Muslim god or Greek gods or Pagan gods, but it is so easy for you to believe in a Christian god? What makes the Bible more valid than the Koran or the Illiad? Why was it sacred when Moses talked to god on Mount Sinai, but its silly to you that Muslims believe Muhammed talked to god in a cave in the desert?

Cliffs: Religious people are irrational

ThatDarnDavidKi11111
09-09-2008, 10:42 PM
How can you so easily shrug off ridiculous ideas of a Muslim god or Greek gods or Pagan gods, but it is so easy for you to believe in a Christian god? What makes the Bible more valid than the Koran or the Illiad? Why was it sacred when Moses talked to god on Mount Sinai, but its silly to you that Muslims believe Muhammed talked to god in a cave in the desert?

Cliffs: Religious people are irrational

in before negs and people say religious/politics section.

Wheyhem.
09-09-2008, 10:42 PM
beacuse when i was at this motel when i was little there was this preist shooting the place up, the only thing that saved me was the bible i was reading, he kicked in the door screaming thug life n'**** then saw me reading the bible and gave me a head bop and walked out

JohnLx
09-09-2008, 10:42 PM
pissing into the wind

really_nice_guy
09-09-2008, 10:43 PM
**** you live in Tennessee, you could probably go outside and ask 100 Christians right now instead of posting this here

ej25i
09-09-2008, 10:44 PM
How can you so easily shrug off ridiculous ideas of a Muslim god or Greek gods or Pagan gods, but it is so easy for you to believe in a Christian god? What makes the Bible more valid than the Koran or the Illiad? Why was it sacred when Moses talked to god on Mount Sinai, but its silly to you that Muslims believe Muhammed talked to god in a cave in the desert?

Cliffs: Religious people are irrational

Looks like you answered your own question.
I can't stand religious fanatics, of ANY belief or god.

FreakNsty
09-09-2008, 10:44 PM
yes

dogmcby
09-09-2008, 10:44 PM
beacuse when i was at this motel when i was little there was this preist shooting the place up, the only thing that saved me was the bible i was reading, he kicked in the door screaming thug life n'**** then saw me reading the bible and gave me a head bop and walked out

So that was you???? I read about that on the news.

bastiun
09-09-2008, 10:44 PM
**** you live in Tennessee, you could probably go outside and ask 100 Christians right now instead of posting this here

Yeah its a bummer

MindZiper
09-09-2008, 10:45 PM
How can you so easily shrug off ridiculous ideas of a Muslim god or Greek gods or Pagan gods, but it is so easy for you to believe in a Christian god? What makes the Bible more valid than the Koran or the Illiad? Why was it sacred when Moses talked to god on Mount Sinai, but its silly to you that Muslims believe Muhammed talked to god in a cave in the desert?

Cliffs: Religious people are irrational

http://img129.imageshack.us/img129/6233/allwrongvs9.jpg

lunchbox12
09-09-2008, 10:45 PM
its called faith, dik

Thy_Kingdom
09-09-2008, 10:45 PM
How can you so easily shrug off ridiculous ideas of a Muslim god or Greek gods or Pagan gods, but it is so easy for you to believe in a Christian god? What makes the Bible more valid than the Koran or the Illiad? Why was it sacred when Moses talked to god on Mount Sinai, but its silly to you that Muslims believe Muhammed talked to god in a cave in the desert?

Cliffs: Religious people are irrational
Reported.

JACKIECHANFAN
09-09-2008, 10:45 PM
How can you so easily shrug off ridiculous ideas of a Muslim god or Greek gods or Pagan gods, but it is so easy for you to believe in a Christian god? What makes the Bible more valid than the Koran or the Illiad? Why was it sacred when Moses talked to god on Mount Sinai, but its silly to you that Muslims believe Muhammed talked to god in a cave in the desert?

Cliffs: Religious people are irrational

Yep.

Harrowlled
09-09-2008, 10:46 PM
Yup, good thing Christians and Muslims don't believe the same God. There'd probably be alot of fighting over the course of history about who got the right message. And especially over the area of land called most sacred.













Oh, wait.

Lunatic
09-09-2008, 10:46 PM
That's why I = Deist.

bigfor15
09-09-2008, 10:46 PM
Because the Christian idealization of 'God' is the one I see best suits my culture and way of life. Read Life of Pi, although it's fiction, Yann Martel raises some excellent points about religion.

sucka free
09-09-2008, 10:47 PM
people that are into religion are fricking crazy serious, its scary when they try and recruit you...bunch of gangsters

bastiun
09-09-2008, 10:51 PM
Because the Christian idealization of 'God' is the one I see best suits my culture and way of life. Read Life of Pi, although it's fiction, Yann Martel raises some excellent points about religion.

Why do you have to affiliate yourself with a specific religious group? Why can't you just admit you are ignorant of the unknown? It's acceptable that there MAY be a higher power, and if you believe in "a" God, then more power to you, but why do you have to form a group and set specific rules to which your faith must adhere? I don't understand how anyone who has any education at all can claim to be anything other than agnostic.

Thy_Kingdom
09-09-2008, 10:53 PM
Why do you have to affiliate yourself with a specific religious group? Why can't you just admit you are ignorant of the unknown? It's acceptable that there MAY be a higher power, and if you believe in "a" God, then more power to you, but why do you have to form a group and set specific rules to which your faith must adhere? I don't understand how anyone who has any education at all can claim to be anything other than agnostic.
When I go to confession I know full well that Christ is there and hears my sorrow for my sins. Most certainly it is he that forgives the sins. That forgiveness is articulated through his minister, the preist. It is an amazing feeling to walk out KNOWING that God has forgiven me. It's a shame you can't do the same, instead miscers here choose to bash Christ and his followers.

Fozzy13
09-09-2008, 10:53 PM
Why do you have to affiliate yourself with a specific religious group? Why can't you just admit you are ignorant of the unknown? It's acceptable that there MAY be a higher power, and if you believe in "a" God, then more power to you, but why do you have to form a group and set specific rules to which your faith must adhere? I don't understand how anyone who has any education at all can claim to be anything other than agnostic.

why do you post liek you know anythign about religion. There are 2 things religions and relationships.

bigfor15
09-09-2008, 10:57 PM
Why do you have to affiliate yourself with a specific religious group? Why can't you just admit you are ignorant of the unknown? It's acceptable that there MAY be a higher power, and if you believe in "a" God, then more power to you, but why do you have to form a group and set specific rules to which your faith must adhere? I don't understand how anyone who has any education at all can claim to be anything other than agnostic.

Specific religions are based more on ethnic and cultural values, most of which we all adhere to. That is like me asking you why you don't bow when in the middle of a business meeting or perform fellatio on tribal elders to 'gain knowledge' of manhood. It's all cultural relevance, really.

Becker51
09-09-2008, 10:58 PM
Why do you have to affiliate yourself with a specific religious group? Why can't you just admit you are ignorant of the unknown? It's acceptable that there MAY be a higher power, and if you believe in "a" God, then more power to you, but why do you have to form a group and set specific rules to which your faith must adhere? I don't understand how anyone who has any education at all can claim to be anything other than agnostic.

Im with this....minus-Why can't you just admit you are ignorant of the unknown?-that. To each his own I guess...dont try to recruit me though.

farmerlee
09-10-2008, 11:39 AM
How can you so easily shrug off ridiculous ideas of a Muslim god or Greek gods or Pagan gods, but it is so easy for you to believe in a Christian god? What makes the Bible more valid than the Koran or the Illiad? Why was it sacred when Moses talked to god on Mount Sinai, but its silly to you that Muslims believe Muhammed talked to god in a cave in the desert?

Cliffs: Religious people are irrational

Fulfilled prophecy is one piece of evidence that makes the bible more valid than the others.

XiZBiT
09-10-2008, 11:45 AM
When I go to confession I know full well that Christ is there and hears my sorrow for my sins. Most certainly it is he that forgives the sins. That forgiveness is articulated through his minister, the preist. It is an amazing feeling to walk out KNOWING that God has forgiven me. It's a shame you can't do the same, instead miscers here choose to bash Christ and his followers.

All so you can go sin again.... Stupid. Hey next time tell Jesus I said Hai!

SeizeTheWeight
09-10-2008, 11:46 AM
Fulfilled prophecy is one piece of evidence that makes the bible more valid than the others.

Too vague. Specific reference please

Tsudo
09-10-2008, 11:57 AM
How can you so easily shrug off ridiculous ideas of a Muslim god or Greek gods or Pagan gods, but it is so easy for you to believe in a Christian god? What makes the Bible more valid than the Koran or the Illiad? Why was it sacred when Moses talked to god on Mount Sinai, but its silly to you that Muslims believe Muhammed talked to god in a cave in the desert?

Cliffs: Religious people are irrational

As far as some of the Pagan Gods/Goddesses go:

A few of the Gods mentioned were in control of certain things like, lightning, morning, night, volcanoes, etc. Things of nature. We now know why volcanoes erupt, why night happens, why lightning happens, etc.

ripper6
09-10-2008, 12:03 PM
How can you so easily shrug off ridiculous ideas of a Muslim god or Greek gods or Pagan gods, but it is so easy for you to believe in a Christian god? What makes the Bible more valid than the Koran or the Illiad? Why was it sacred when Moses talked to god on Mount Sinai, but its silly to you that Muslims believe Muhammed talked to god in a cave in the desert?

Cliffs: Religious people are irrational

The Pagan Gods don't have the attributes of God as God. They didn't have a doctrinal revelation and no subsequent scriptural testimonies. The pagan gods were simply percieved and human-like powers and immortal. Knowledge of them was purely mythical and superstitious.

The Quran comes 600 years after Christianity and thousands after Judaism. It is really Muhammadanism, a religion created by Muhammad where he adopts scraps of Christianity and Judaism, and inserts his own "utterances" after he had falling-down fits in a cave, and thought he was possessed by the devil.

Jesus was the final prophet and the Incarnation of God among us. (Notice in the last 2,000 years since Jesus there have been no further prophets to appear among the Jews). Muhammad tried to make himself a "prophet" but he basically utters scraps of teachings that can be found already in Christianity and Judaism. So, Islam is an heretical derivation of Christianity and Judaism by and self-appointed "prophet".

The Quranic utterances of Muhammad saying that wife beating, polygamy, violence, slavery, beheading, torture, bodily mutilation/amputation, etc., etc., all indicate the projection of his own barbarity onto the image of God, are easily rejected by Christians as a false revelation and a false characterization of the God who is Love exemplified in Christianity.

There are no miracles attributed to Muhammad. There are many cases of barbarity attributed to him. Muhammad preached cutting off heads, hands, feet, while Jesus performed many many miracles - particularly miracles of healing.

Christians can easily, historically, logically, and morally, reject Muhammadanism/Islam.

neekz0r
09-10-2008, 12:18 PM
Reported.

Why? The definition of irrational:

Irrationality is talking or acting without regard of rationality. Usually pejorative, the term is used to describe thinking and actions which are, or appear to be, less useful or logical than the rational alternatives. There is a clear tendency to view our own thoughts, words, and actions as rational and to see those who disagree as irrational. -- source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irrationality)

Just two examples of illogical traits (and thus irrational) of the Christian religion:

Is omnipotent (an illogical concept, IE: making a rock so heavy he can't lift)
Free WIll/Omniscient god (If omniscience exists, free will can not, as everything is pre-determined)

You can be faithful and believe in whatever you choose, however, that doesn't make it rational.

Tsudo
09-10-2008, 12:28 PM
Why? The definition of irrational:

Irrationality is talking or acting without regard of rationality. Usually pejorative, the term is used to describe thinking and actions which are, or appear to be, less useful or logical than the rational alternatives. There is a clear tendency to view our own thoughts, words, and actions as rational and to see those who disagree as irrational. -- source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irrationality)

Just two examples of illogical traits (and thus irrational) of the Christian religion:

Is omnipotent (an illogical concept, IE: making a rock so heavy he can't lift)
Free WIll/Omniscient god (If omniscience exists, free will can not, as everything is pre-determined)

You can be faithful and believe in whatever you choose, however, that doesn't make it rational.
The Bible never says that God is omniscient. And His ability to see the future is based off His choice to see it. Free will can still exist. It's like this: Superman can fly. But he can choose to walk.

Omnipotent being the illogical concept, is like asking, "what does a round square look like?" or, "what does the color red smell like?" It's combining two things that differ and can not be mixed. You're asking God to be limited and unlimited at the same time. How? Because no matter how big you make the rock, it will always have a fixed position. It's size is always fixed in the realm of limits. While God's power is limitless.

XiZBiT
09-10-2008, 12:36 PM
The Bible never says that God is omniscient. And His ability to see the future is based off His choice to see it. Free will can still exist. It's like this: Superman can fly. But he can choose to walk.

Omnipotent being the illogical concept, is like asking, "what does a round square look like?" or, "what does the color red smell like?" It's combining two things that differ and can not be mixed. You're asking God to be limited and unlimited at the same time. How? Because no matter how big you make the rock, it will always have a fixed position. It's size is always fixed in the realm of limits. While God's power is limitless.

WOW STRONG RATIONALIZING... Not a g0d if not omniscient!

Tsudo
09-10-2008, 12:39 PM
WOW STRONG RATIONALIZING... Not a g0d if not omniscient!

I simply said that the Bible does not specifically SAY He is omniscient. Meaning, the words are NEVER written.

powerman2000
09-10-2008, 12:39 PM
Cliffs: Religious people are irrational

Negged

http://img392.imageshack.us/img392/8474/hankscorpiolu7.png

tenthirtytwo
09-10-2008, 12:41 PM
I simply said that the Bible does not specifically SAY He is omniscient. Meaning, the words are NEVER written.

Are you saying that because the word "omniscient" isn't used, it doesn't say that? Or are you saying there isn't anything in the Bible that points to an all-knowing God?

JamesGatz83
09-10-2008, 12:43 PM
When I go to confession I know full well that Christ is there and hears my sorrow for my sins. Most certainly it is he that forgives the sins. That forgiveness is articulated through his minister, the preist. It is an amazing feeling to walk out KNOWING that God has forgiven me. It's a shame you can't do the same, instead miscers here choose to bash Christ and his followers.

And you know he's forgiven you based on what? A warm, fuzzy feeling?

neekz0r
09-10-2008, 12:43 PM
The Bible never says that God is omniscient. And His ability to see the future is based off His choice to see it. Free will can still exist. It's like this: Superman can fly. But he can choose to walk.

Then why do you believe he is, if the bible doesn't say so?


Omnipotent being the illogical concept, is like asking, "what does a round square look like?" or, "what does the color red smell like?" It's combining two things that differ and can not be mixed. You're asking God to be limited and unlimited at the same time. How? Because no matter how big you make the rock, it will always have a fixed position. It's size is always fixed in the realm of limits. While God's power is limitless.

Exactly. You nailed it on the head on why the concept of omnipotent is illogical. If god is all powerful, then he can do anything. If he can do anything, then he can make something so heavy that he can't lift it. If he can't make that, then he is NOT all powerful. It's a paradox, and it's because the concept is illogical. In addition, if god is all powerful, he could make red smell. And make a round square. Do you see the point I'm trying to make here?

XiZBiT
09-10-2008, 12:45 PM
Then why do you believe he is, if the bible doesn't say so?


Exactly. You nailed it on the head on why the concept of omnipotent is illogical. If god is all powerful, then he can do anything. If he can do anything, then he can make something so heavy that he can't lift it. If he can't make that, then he is NOT all powerful. It's a paradox, and it's because the concept is illogical. In addition, if god is all powerful, he could make red smell. And make a round square. Do you see the point I'm trying to make here?

Nicely done

Tsudo
09-10-2008, 12:50 PM
Are you saying that because the word "omniscient" isn't used, it doesn't say that? Or are you saying there isn't anything in the Bible that points to an all-knowing God?

the Bible says the word 'omnipotent' in reference to God.

the word 'omniscient' is never used. It is deduced, which does not point to that being false.

God has the ability to know all. In reference to free will, he said that it can not exist if He is omniscient. God gave us free will. This we know. So how can He be omniscient? By using his ability to see all and know all, WHEN HE CHOOSES. This can only mean that He can choose not to be omniscient. So in fact, He can be both.

I found some good/better explanations in another thread, but I can't for the life of me remember the keywords for google. Hate that ****...

powerman2000
09-10-2008, 12:50 PM
1 John 3:20

Tsudo
09-10-2008, 12:53 PM
Then why do you believe he is, if the bible doesn't say so?


Exactly. You nailed it on the head on why the concept of omnipotent is illogical. If god is all powerful, then he can do anything. If he can do anything, then he can make something so heavy that he can't lift it. If he can't make that, then he is NOT all powerful. It's a paradox, and it's because the concept is illogical. In addition, if god is all powerful, he could make red smell. And make a round square. Do you see the point I'm trying to make here?
You are also asking God to be illogical. Which He can not do. It goes against His very nature. It's like asking to be tall and short at the same time, or for it to be day and night at the same time.

tenthirtytwo
09-10-2008, 12:55 PM
the Bible says the word 'omnipotent' in reference to God.

the word 'omniscient' is never used. It is deduced, which does not point to that being false.

The word omnipotent is used exactly once according to Strong's, in Revelation. My first question to you is, do you feel that nothing else in the Bible points to God's omnipotence besides that verse?

The word 'omniscient' isn't used, but there are verses which point to the knowledge of God. Do you deny that these verses exist, or have you simply not seen them? Or have you seen them and disagree with them?


God has the ability to know all. In reference to free will, he said that it can not exist if He is omniscient. God gave us free will. This we know. So how can He be omniscient? By using his ability to see all and know all, WHEN HE CHOOSES. This can only mean that He can choose not to be omniscient. So in fact, He can be both.

That's all well and good, but do you have any verses that support this sort of "lightswitch omniscience" that God supposedly possesses? It sounds very much like an ad hoc created to avoid the problems associated with omniscience.

neekz0r
09-10-2008, 12:57 PM
the Bible says the word 'omnipotent' in reference to God.

the word 'omniscient' is never used. It is deduced, which does not point to that being false.

God has the ability to know all. In reference to free will, he said that it can not exist if He is omniscient. God gave us free will. This we know. So how can He be omniscient? By using his ability to see all and know all, WHEN HE CHOOSES. This can only mean that He can choose not to be omniscient. So in fact, He can be both.

I found some good/better explanations in another thread, but I can't for the life of me remember the keywords for google. Hate that ****...

It doesn't matter if he chooses to see it or not. It's not relational to him. If free-will exists, omniscience can't exist. They are mutually exclusive. Either the future and all our choices are predictive and can known, or they are not. If you are only deducing that god is omniscient, I would encourage you to cease and stick with what the bible says as it is incompatible with free-will. Or cease to believe in free-will. Whichever you choose. :)

neekz0r
09-10-2008, 12:59 PM
You are also asking God to be illogical. Which He can not do. It goes against His very nature. It's like asking to be tall and short at the same time, or for it to be day and night at the same time.

If he can not be illogical, then he can not be omnipotent.

powerman2000
09-10-2008, 01:02 PM
If he can not be illogical, then he can not be omnipotent.

Wow, that's a really small box ya got there.

You sure you're gonna be able to cram God into it? :rolleyes:

tenthirtytwo
09-10-2008, 01:07 PM
It doesn't matter if he chooses to see it or not. It's not relational to him. If free-will exists, omniscience can't exist. They are mutually exclusive. Either the future and all our choices are predictive and can known, or they are not. If you are only deducing that god is omniscient, I would encourage you to cease and stick with what the bible says as it is incompatible with free-will. Or cease to believe in free-will. Whichever you choose. :)

Off topic, but likely more interesting, how do you feel about the idea of (I think this is the right term) super-determinism in relation to free will? That is the idea that regardless of future possibilities, there is exactly one outcome, so the possibilities are essentially useless before they happen.

In other words, before I made this post I had the option of not making this post. But, since I made this post, was that really ever an option?

Weird, wild stuff. To me the idea of possibilities is the foundation of free will, but it's tough to say if they really exist when you look at it from the other end of the scope.

bmy-
09-10-2008, 01:12 PM
Nicely done

You make an assumption (as does everyone) of what omnipotence is. Your definition is different than my definition. The Being we are discussing could have a completely different definition. Specifically in these paradox situations.. the word omnipotence is selectively used (which is why it's a straw-man).

Moving on.. it's a straw-man argument anyways. This is said better than I could say it.


Power is not ability, nor knowledge, they are separate categories, and not mutually exclusive if [power] were unlimited. Therefore for a being to be omnipotent would not logically mean that this being would need to also have unlimited abilities, like the ones proposed above in regard to lifting immovable heavy stones that were just created by the same being. These argument do not affect the position of an omnipotent being because the falsely linked "unlimited ability" is a straw man, and has been inserted to alter the meaning of omnipotence, to then give a false argument for dismissal, as if the omnipotent being is logically untenable due to its omnipotence being in conflict. It is important to be aware of logical fallacies inserted like we see with the false assumption that a being or God that is omnipotent must also somehow be unlimited in abilities. This is not logical, nor rational, and is a straw man argument.

So more or less.. just because your definition of an omnipotent God is illogical and contradictory.. it doesn't necessarily mean that mine is.

neekz0r
09-10-2008, 01:13 PM
Wow, that's a really small box ya got there.

You sure you're gonna be able to cram God into it? :rolleyes:

It's not my box, it's what omnipotence means. It means all powerful, as in, can do anything. If there is anything that God can't do, such as be illogical or be against his nature, then he is, by definition, NOT omnipotent.

Hence, why the concept of omnipotence is illogical and therefor irrational.

tenthirtytwo
09-10-2008, 01:14 PM
Except it wasn't..

First off -- you make an assumption (as does everyone) of what omnipotence is. You should define the word before you use it.

Moving on.. it's a straw-man argument anyways. This is said better than I could say it.

What is omnipotence, then?

neekz0r
09-10-2008, 01:17 PM
Except it wasn't..

You make an assumption (as does everyone) of what omnipotence is. Your definition is different than my definition. The Being we are discussing could have a completely different definition. Specifically in these paradox situations.. the word omnipotence is selectively used (which is why it's a straw-man).

Moving on.. it's a straw-man argument anyways. This is said better than I could say it.



So more or less.. just because your definition of an omnipotent God is illogical and contradictory.. it doesn't necessarily mean that mine is.

Then you are saying that your God is limited, as per the quote.

Tsudo
09-10-2008, 01:20 PM
The word omnipotent is used exactly once according to Strong's, in Revelation. My first question to you is, do you feel that nothing else in the Bible points to God's omnipotence besides that verse?

But...it does say it :) With that, nothing else has to be said.


The word 'omniscient' isn't used, but there are verses which point to the knowledge of God. Do you deny that these verses exist, or have you simply not seen them? Or have you seen them and disagree with them?

No, they do exist. I agree with them...However the argument was that omniscience can not exist with free will. Because He would know what you do before you do it...correct? Well, we can think of it like this: If I hand you a soda, and leave the room, you'll drink it. You don't have to say, "I'm going to drink it" and I don't have to write it down on a piece of paper that states you will for it to happen. Nor does it take away your choice to drink it. A bad example, yes, but it can illustrate the point.


That's all well and good, but do you have any verses that support this sort of "lightswitch omniscience" that God supposedly possesses? It sounds very much like an ad hoc created to avoid the problems associated with omniscience.
I'll have to edit this post with what I found and posted in a different thread. I can't find it...again.

It doesn't matter if he chooses to see it or not. It's not relational to him. If free-will exists, omniscience can't exist. They are mutually exclusive. Either the future and all our choices are predictive and can known, or they are not. If you are only deducing that god is omniscient, I would encourage you to cease and stick with what the bible says as it is incompatible with free-will. Or cease to believe in free-will. Whichever you choose. :)
I will choose both :)

If he can not be illogical, then he can not be omnipotent.
You may as well ask Him to not be God. Like I said, you can not ask Him to do things that go against His nature. He can not sin, nor lie, etc., nor can He be illogical. That does not mean He is not omnipotent.

Here is a different link to the information about omnipotence.

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/rock.html

bmy-
09-10-2008, 01:21 PM
What is omnipotence, then?

I edited my post. It wasn't clear the way I stated it before.


Then you are saying that your God is limited, as per the quote.

Yes. As far as my understanding goes. He operates under the same parameters as we can. He organizes.. not creates ex nihilo.

Operating under self-existing parameters or not -- He is no less God.

powerman2000
09-10-2008, 01:21 PM
It's not my box, it's what omnipotence means. It means all powerful, as in, can do anything. If there is anything that God can't do, such as be illogical or be against his nature, then he is, by definition, NOT omnipotent.

Hence, why the concept of omnipotence is illogical and therefor irrational.

His omnipotence isn't something that's independent of his nature.

You'd better get a much bigger box.

tenthirtytwo
09-10-2008, 01:28 PM
However the argument was that omniscience can not exist with free will. Because He would know what you do before you do it...correct?

Well, as neekz0r said, the problem isn't really that he knows it, it is that there is knowledge of future events. If that knowledge exists, regardless of whether it can be accessed, then free will does not exist.

Now, if there are no consequences to this, then there isn't really a problem. It would appear to us that free will does exist, even though it doesn't, and who really cares. The idea of salvation through a choice, though, does present a problem, because it implies that we are able through free will to make a choice in order to accept some premise to save ourselves from eternal damnation.

This is the well from whence the free will argument springs forth. Some people avoid it entirely and accept predestination.


Well, we can think of it like this: If I hand you a soda, and leave the room, you'll drink it. You don't have to say, "I'm going to drink it" and I don't have to write it down on a piece of paper that states you will for it to happen. Nor does it take away your choice to drink it. A bad example, yes, but it can illustrate the point.

I'm not sure what that has to do with omniscience. If you know (100% sure) that I'm going to drink the soda when you leave, then I will drink the soda when you leave. If you have a good feeling about it (not 100% sure), then I might drink the soda or I might not. We aren't dealing with probabilities (i.e. God is fairly sure of the future) whenever we talk about omniscience.

neekz0r
09-10-2008, 01:31 PM
I edited my post. It wasn't clear the way I stated it before.



Yes. As far as my understanding goes. He operates under the same parameters as we can. He organizes.. not creates ex nihilo.

Operating under self-existing parameters or not -- He is no less God.

A deity doesn't need to be omnipotent to be a deity. Again, if you believe that your God is limited in what he can do (IE: can not go against his own nature or make illogical things) then that is logically consistent, but not omnipotent (as the definition literally means 'unlimited power' . So we are in agreement.

Now what's your take on omniscience and free-will? :)

neekz0r
09-10-2008, 01:34 PM
His omnipotence isn't something that's independent of his nature.
Please elaborate?


You'd better get a much bigger box.
.. and stop with the insults.

powerman2000
09-10-2008, 01:35 PM
.. and stop with the insults.

In what way is that a personal insult to you?

Are you a chick or something?

bmy-
09-10-2008, 01:38 PM
A deity doesn't need to be omnipotent to be a deity. Again, if you believe that your God is limited in what he can do (IE: can not go against his own nature or make illogical things) then that is logically consistent, but not omnipotent (as the definition literally means 'unlimited power' . So we are in agreement.

Now what's your take on omniscience and free-will? :)

True omniscience (in the sense of literally knowing everything) .. doesn't exist. I look at it like..

A tree chart. 'God knows you' thus he knows the decision you will make. It's not predetermined.. but he won't be caught off guard.

Decision A --> Decision(A)(B) --> Decision(C)(D)(E)(F) and so on.

He can 'know' you and know your future decisions. I watched my dog grow up.. I know that regardless of the situation if I put the food down my dog WILL eat it.

Imagine that kind of knowledge.. yet apply it to every circumstance. It's a difficult concept to describe. I hope i'm making sense. I personally don't buy the omniscience trait of God.. that's just how I would defend it.

William McC
09-10-2008, 01:40 PM
How can you so easily shrug off ridiculous ideas of a Muslim god or Greek gods or Pagan gods, but it is so easy for you to believe in a Christian god? What makes the Bible more valid than the Koran or the Illiad? Why was it sacred when Moses talked to god on Mount Sinai, but its silly to you that Muslims believe Muhammed talked to god in a cave in the desert?

Cliffs: Religious people are irrational

First of all, the Iliad is not a religious text. It's the story about the battle of troy. Second of all, the Christian God is unique to all others because in all other religions there is something you have to do to "find God". In Christianity, Gods' come to find you.


Cliffs

You're a moron
read the Iliad.

neekz0r
09-10-2008, 01:44 PM
In what way is that a personal insult to you?

Are you a chick or something?

Calling me close minded is insulting to me. Could you please elaborate your stance?

neekz0r
09-10-2008, 01:46 PM
True omniscience (in the sense of literally knowing everything) .. doesn't exist. I look at it like..

A tree chart. 'God knows you' thus he knows the decision you will make. It's not predetermined.. but he won't be caught off guard.

Decision A --> Decision(A)(B) --> Decision(C)(D)(E)(F) and so on.

He can 'know' you and know your future decisions. I watched my dog grow up.. I know that regardless of the situation if I put the food down my dog WILL eat it.

Imagine that kind of knowledge.. yet apply it to every circumstance. It's a difficult concept to describe. I hope i'm making sense. I personally don't buy the omniscience trait of God.. that's just how I would defend it.

No, that makes sense. IE: If you put two pieces of the same food down, you wouldn't know which one he would choose, just that he would choose to eat one then the other. However, as you noted, that wouldn't be omniscience.

powerman2000
09-10-2008, 01:47 PM
Calling me close minded is insulting to me. Could you please elaborate your stance?
I didn't call you closed minded.

You twist everything, don't you.

Figure it out for yourself.

William McC
09-10-2008, 01:51 PM
Exactly. You nailed it on the head on why the concept of omnipotent is illogical. If god is all powerful, then he can do anything. If he can do anything, then he can make something so heavy that he can't lift it. If he can't make that, then he is NOT all powerful. It's a paradox, and it's because the concept is illogical. In addition, if god is all powerful, he could make red smell. And make a round square. Do you see the point I'm trying to make here?

Thats a fallacious argument. First of all you are pining God to the very laws he made. Gravity, geometry, ex. If God made, can he not unmake? What if a square can be round, just not in the nature we exists in? You're sitting in your own little sand box and you are saying that any castle outside of OUR box can not exist.

neekz0r
09-10-2008, 01:58 PM
Thats a fallacious argument. First of all you are pining God to the very laws he made. Gravity, geometry, ex. If God made, can he not unmake? What if a square can be round, just not in the nature we exists in? You're sitting in your own little sand box and you are saying that any castle outside of OUR box can not exist.

What fallacy? And secondly, if he can do anything, then that would include doing something that even he can't do. If he can't do that, then he can't do anything.

Tsudo
09-10-2008, 02:10 PM
Well, as neekz0r said, the problem isn't really that he knows it, it is that there is knowledge of future events. If that knowledge exists, regardless of whether it can be accessed, then free will does not exist.

Now, if there are no consequences to this, then there isn't really a problem. It would appear to us that free will does exist, even though it doesn't, and who really cares. The idea of salvation through a choice, though, does present a problem, because it implies that we are able through free will to make a choice in order to accept some premise to save ourselves from eternal damnation.

This is the well from whence the free will argument springs forth. Some people avoid it entirely and accept predestination.

Ok, sorry, I took a h-while, I found what I was looking for: http://www.carm.org/questions/free_will.htm

Oh, and the light switch of Him choosing to know: Psalms 14:2: it says God looked down from heaven to see if any seek after Him and after righteousness. In this case, He chose not to see the future, which would have already given Him His answer, yes?



I'm not sure what that has to do with omniscience. If you know (100% sure) that I'm going to drink the soda when you leave, then I will drink the soda when you leave. If you have a good feeling about it (not 100% sure), then I might drink the soda or I might not. We aren't dealing with probabilities (i.e. God is fairly sure of the future) whenever we talk about omniscience.

Yes it was a bad example, I know.

Tsudo
09-10-2008, 02:26 PM
What fallacy? And secondly, if he can do anything, then that would include doing something that even he can't do. If he can't do that, then he can't do anything.

There is a small issue with that, though. The Bible states that there are things He CAN NOT do, as they DO conflict with His nature. It is possible that the term "omnipotent" may be a mistranslation from the original Hebrew text.

the Bible makes a point that there are things that God cannot do. The Bible says that God cannot commit sin.2 God cannot lie.3 Therefore, biblical omnipotence does not mean that God can do all things. God cannot do anything that is contrary to His holy character. However, God can do anything that He determines to do. This is a true meaning of omnipotence - the ability to do anything that one sets out to do.

...

Can God create a rock He cannot lift? Since an all-powerful being will always be able to accomplish whatever He sets out to do, it is impossible for an all-powerful being to fail. The above atheistic argument is arguing that since God is all-powerful He can do anything - even fail. This is like saying that since God is all-powerful He can be not all-powerful. Obviously, this is absurd. An all-powerful being cannot fail. Therefore, God can create a rock of tremendous size, but, since He is all-powerful, He will always be able to lift it. The ability to fail is not a part of omnipotence.

Could God think of a time when He was not omnipotent? If He can't think of it, He isn't omnipotent, but if He does think of it then there was a time when He wasn't omnipotent? This question is quite similar to the rock question above. The answer, of course, is that God can never think of a time when He wasn't omnipotent. God has always been omnipotent. His inability to contradict His divine character does not mean that He isn't omnipotent.

tenthirtytwo
09-10-2008, 02:34 PM
Oh, and the light switch of Him choosing to know: Psalms 14:2: it says God looked down from heaven to see if any seek after Him and after righteousness. In this case, He chose not to see the future, which would have already given Him His answer, yes?

Well in this case you can use virtually anything. Look at Adam and Eve. God "chose" not to see the future, otherwise he wouldn't have seemingly made a mistake and punished humanity for it. Or he would have seen ahead to the flood and solved the problem from the get-go.

The problem is that God doesn't choose to know things as you state. In your passage, instead of enacting his omniscience, he looks for people on earth. Why would a being who can enact omniscience bother looking down from heaven for people?

These passages may indicate that God is not omniscient, but I don't see how they lend credence to your lightswitch omniscience theory.


Ok, sorry, I took a h-while, I found what I was looking for: http://www.carm.org/questions/free_will.htm

I personally would advise you to avoid carm.org, as Matt Slick is one of the worst Christian apologists I have had the displeasure of speaking with. Also, it seems that this page disagrees with your "lightswitch omniscience" theory as well. At any rate, my comments below:


For example, I know that my child will choose to eat chocolate cake over a bowl full of stinking dead mice.

This is a strawman whenever we are talking about free will. We are not interested in whether you "know" that your child will choose a Nintendo Wii over being shot repeatedly with a rifle.

First, it implies that we are very certain of all decisions, which we are not. You might know that your child would take chocolate cake over a bowl full of stinking dead mice, but how about a slice of chocolate cake on the left vs a slice of chocolate cake on the right?

Second, it implies that omniscience is just a really good feeling. The truth is, you don't KNOW your child won't pick the bowl of stinking dead mice. Maybe he is full, or he is sick of chocolate cake. Maybe he wants to use the dead mice to play a prank on his sister. You have a really good feeling about it, but you don't KNOW (100%) what your child will do. This is not omniscience.


Furthermore, if God knows all things and knows what we are going to choose, then by definition, we are still making the choice; after all, the argument says that God knows what "we are going to choose."

That's a really strong argument, don't you think? Picking out one word and declaring victory based on it?


The father, however, is not omniscient where God is. But does this difference negate the analogy? Not at all. Knowing what a person will do still does not force them or limit them to doing what is known.

He continues with a bunch of double speak. The truth is, knowing what a person will do infallibly does limit them to doing what is known. Because for another option to exist, the knowledge cannot be infallible.

So the question is, does God know the future (or can God know the future)? Is God infallible? If the answer to both of these questions is yes, then that knowledge is indeed a limitation. There are no other possibilities than what God knows (or can know) will happen.


[God's omniscience] is simply an advance recording of what you will do based on the choices you will freely make.

That is nonsensical. It's like watching a play and thinking that while there is a script, the actors on stage are freely doing whatever they feel like. It just happens that their actions and words coincide with the script.

Future knowledge is necessarily a limitation on free will. There is no way around this fact, no matter how much double speak Matt Slick can put together.

neekz0r
09-10-2008, 02:35 PM
There is a small issue with that, though. The Bible states that there are things He CAN NOT do, as they DO conflict with His nature. It is possible that the term "omnipotent" may be a mistranslation from the original Hebrew text.

the Bible makes a point that there are things that God cannot do. The Bible says that God cannot commit sin.2 God cannot lie.3 Therefore, biblical omnipotence does not mean that God can do all things. God cannot do anything that is contrary to His holy character. However, God can do anything that He determines to do. This is a true meaning of omnipotence - the ability to do anything that one sets out to do.

...

Can God create a rock He cannot lift? Since an all-powerful being will always be able to accomplish whatever He sets out to do, it is impossible for an all-powerful being to fail. The above atheistic argument is arguing that since God is all-powerful He can do anything - even fail. This is like saying that since God is all-powerful He can be not all-powerful. Obviously, this is absurd. An all-powerful being cannot fail. Therefore, God can create a rock of tremendous size, but, since He is all-powerful, He will always be able to lift it. The ability to fail is not a part of omnipotence.

Could God think of a time when He was not omnipotent? If He can't think of it, He isn't omnipotent, but if He does think of it then there was a time when He wasn't omnipotent? This question is quite similar to the rock question above. The answer, of course, is that God can never think of a time when He wasn't omnipotent. God has always been omnipotent. His inability to contradict His divine character does not mean that He isn't omnipotent.

Okay, can God create a more powerful God then himself?

badfish51581
09-10-2008, 02:41 PM
How can you so easily shrug off ridiculous ideas of a Muslim god or Greek gods or Pagan gods, but it is so easy for you to believe in a Christian god? What makes the Bible more valid than the Koran or the Illiad? Why was it sacred when Moses talked to god on Mount Sinai, but its silly to you that Muslims believe Muhammed talked to god in a cave in the desert?

Cliffs: Religious people are irrational

Relevant quote...

"I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen Roberts

Tsudo
09-10-2008, 02:50 PM
Well in this case you can use virtually anything. Look at Adam and Eve. God "chose" not to see the future, otherwise he wouldn't have seemingly made a mistake and punished humanity for it. Or he would have seen ahead to the flood and solved the problem from the get-go.

The problem is that God doesn't choose to know things as you state. In your passage, instead of enacting his omniscience, he looks for people on earth. Why would a being who can enact omniscience bother looking down from heaven for people?
You'd have to ask Him. I can't speak for Him on why things are or why He would do something. I'm not going to presume to be able to convey what He wants/means/does.

These passages may indicate that God is not omniscient, but I don't see how they lend credence to your lightswitch omniscience theory.

"Lightswitch" omniscience simply means He can choose to use it or not. Him being omnipotent means He has to be able to have "choice", correct?

I personally would advise you to avoid carm.org, as Matt Slick is one of the worst Christian apologists I have had the displeasure of speaking with. Also, it seems that this page disagrees with your "lightswitch omniscience" theory as well. At any rate, my comments below:

This is a strawman whenever we are talking about free will. We are not interested in whether you "know" that your child will choose a Nintendo Wii over being shot repeatedly with a rifle.

true the example he gives is extreme, however I mainly quoted it for the purpose of the information at the bottom.

First, it implies that we are very certain of all decisions, which we are not. You might know that your child would take chocolate cake over a bowl full of stinking dead mice, but how about a slice of chocolate cake on the left vs a slice of chocolate cake on the right?

Second, it implies that omniscience is just a really good feeling. The truth is, you don't KNOW your child won't pick the bowl of stinking dead mice. Maybe he is full, or he is sick of chocolate cake. Maybe he wants to use the dead mice to play a prank on his sister. You have a really good feeling about it, but you don't KNOW (100%) what your child will do. This is not omniscience.



That's a really strong argument, don't you think? Picking out one word and declaring victory based on it?



He continues with a bunch of double speak. The truth is, knowing what a person will do infallibly does limit them to doing what is known. Because for another option to exist, the knowledge cannot be infallible.

So the question is, does God know the future (or can God know the future)? Is God infallible? If the answer to both of these questions is yes, then that knowledge is indeed a limitation. There are no other possibilities than what God knows (or can know) will happen.



That is nonsensical. It's like watching a play and thinking that while there is a script, the actors on stage are freely doing whatever they feel like. It just happens that their actions and words coincide with the script.

Future knowledge is necessarily a limitation on free will. There is no way around this fact, no matter how much double speak Matt Slick can put together.
http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/44154


Okay, can God create a more powerful God then himself?
Lol, again, that would go against His nature. He can not cease being God. These limitations do not mean He is not omnipotent/all-powerful. It simply means that He can not do things that contradict Himself, first.

tenthirtytwo
09-10-2008, 03:01 PM
"Lightswitch" omniscience simply means He can choose to use it or not. Him being omnipotent means He has to be able to have "choice", correct?

Would you agree that God has the ability to do unspeakably evil deeds? That is in the nature of God to do wicked deeds and sin? He has the ability, he just chooses not to do it? Or do you believe that evil is outside the nature of God? That God is 100% good and incapable of wrongdoing?

This again really seems like an ad hoc. It also doesn't really solve any problems with free will regarding salvation, because as I've already said it doesn't matter that God can choose not to know it, it just matters that he can know it.


http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/44154

I read that, but did not come to the "clearly" conclusion that was stated. It seems as if the author is seeing what he wants to see in those verses.

Again, I would say that this does not address the free will problem. Whether God chooses to know or not know the future still implies that a future can be known, which destroys free will.

bmy-
09-10-2008, 03:07 PM
No, that makes sense. IE: If you put two pieces of the same food down, you wouldn't know which one he would choose, just that he would choose to eat one then the other. However, as you noted, that wouldn't be omniscience.

I think we need to allow God room to be superior compared to us. God could 'know' which piece of meat would be chosen... he would know both desires and instinctual tendencies. Although that does mean that God 'could' be mistaken. (I hate posting via PSP)

Tsudo
09-10-2008, 03:16 PM
Would you agree that God has the ability to do unspeakably evil deeds? That is in the nature of God to do wicked deeds and sin? He has the ability, he just chooses not to do it? Or do you believe that evil is outside the nature of God? That God is 100% good and incapable of wrongdoing?

This again really seems like an ad hoc. It also doesn't really solve any problems with free will regarding salvation, because as I've already said it doesn't matter that God can choose not to know it, it just matters that he can know it.

Having the ability does not detract from your or my choice. If omniscience and free will can not exist simultaneously, then the inverse must be true, yes? Meaning, free will can exist in the absence of omniscience. IF God says to Himself, "Self, I don't think I'm going to be omniscient right now..." how is that in any way different from "free will existing, because omniscience is absent"? That's really what this is about. It's like saying, "I want the power to have free will and control my life according to my nature, but God can not." When that would clearly limit God and in fact, in a sense, lower Him beneath us.

I read that, but did not come to the "clearly" conclusion that was stated. It seems as if the author is seeing what he wants to see in those verses.

Again, I would say that this does not address the free will problem. Whether God chooses to know or not know the future still implies that a future can be known, which destroys free will.

Not so. Knowing the future, is different from not knowing the future, but being able to know if one wanted. He could be sitting up there right now just playing the piano, not doing a damn thing.

Thoughts in black.

tenthirtytwo
09-10-2008, 03:23 PM
Having the ability does not detract from your or my choice. If omniscience and free will can not exist simultaneously, then the inverse must be true, yes? Meaning, free will can exist in the absence of omniscience. IF God says to Himself, "Self, I don't think I'm going to be omniscient right now..." how is that in any way different from "free will existing, because omniscience is absent"? That's really what this is about. It's like saying, "I want the power to have free will and control my life according to my nature, but God can not." When that would clearly limit God and in fact, in a sense, lower Him beneath us.

You seem to be again missing the problem, maybe I'm not being clear enough. The problem doesn't arise from God knowing the future. The problem arises from the existence of the knowledge of the future.

Omniscience and free will are mutually exclusive, but they are not mutually exclusive in and of themselves. Omniscience implies that there is knowledge of future events that is infallible, and THAT is what is mutually exclusive with free will.



Not so. Knowing the future, is different from not knowing the future, but being able to know if one wanted. He could be sitting up there right now just playing the piano, not doing a damn thing.

He could be, but it is irrelevant. If knowledge of the future exists, then free will does not exist. Whether God is at the moment peering into it doesn't matter.

Actors in a play aren't exerting any more freedom whether they are being watched by someone that has read the script vs someone who hasn't read it. The existence of a script that is being followed is what hinders their freedom, not the audience who is watching them go through it.

Tsudo
09-10-2008, 03:30 PM
You seem to be again missing the problem, maybe I'm not being clear enough. The problem doesn't arise from God knowing the future. The problem arises from the existence of the knowledge of the future.

Omniscience and free will are mutually exclusive, but they are not mutually exclusive in and of themselves. Omniscience implies that there is knowledge of future events that is infallible, and THAT is what is mutually exclusive with free will.



He could be, but it is irrelevant. If knowledge of the future exists, then free will does not exist. Whether God is at the moment peering into it doesn't matter.

Actors in a play aren't exerting any more freedom whether they are being watched by someone that has read the script vs someone who hasn't read it. The existence of a script that is being followed is what hinders their freedom, not the audience who is watching them go through it.

I know what you're saying. To stay with the "theater" analogy, let me just make sure: Irregardless if a script is out there all by itself in some vast area of the world, the fact that a script exists means it's not and can not be improv so long as they recite line for line what the script says, regardless of who reads it to make sure, correct? Since this is not based on "probability" and has to be based on 100% infallibility, they MUST read line for line, or else it would only be 99% or less accurate, which would denote fallibility, yes? So far is that in the ballpark?

tenthirtytwo
09-10-2008, 03:35 PM
I know what you're saying. To stay with the "theater" analogy, let me just make sure: Irregardless if a script is out there all by itself in some vast area of the world, the fact that a script exists means it's not and can not be improv so long as they recite line for line what the script says, regardless of who reads it to make sure, correct? Since this is not based on "probability" and has to be based on 100% infallibility, they MUST read line for line, or else it would only be 99% or less accurate, which would denote fallibility, yes? So far is that in the ballpark?

Yes, that is my contention. Even if nobody knows the script (admittedly nonsensical having actors acting out a script that they don't know), as long as that script exists and is being followed then the people are just acting.

Similarly, if knowledge of the future exists, and it is infallible, then we all seem to be actors as well.

Tsudo
09-10-2008, 03:38 PM
Yes, that is my contention. Even if nobody knows the script (admittedly nonsensical having actors acting out a script that they don't know), as long as that script exists and is being followed then the people are just acting.

Similarly, if knowledge of the future exists, and it is infallible, then we all seem to be actors as well.

Ok, now that we're on the same page. Now, let's turn that acting into improvising, burn the script and just wing it. Throw out a general idea like, "going to the mall" and have the actors go through the scenes just making **** up. Now we have free will yeah?

tenthirtytwo
09-10-2008, 03:55 PM
Ok, now that we're on the same page. Now, let's turn that acting into improvising, burn the script and just wing it. Throw out a general idea like, "going to the mall" and have the actors go through the scenes just making **** up. Now we have free will yeah?

Hmm that's a more complex question, because you are generalizing "free will" which is already a bit of a tough cookie.

The foundation of free will to me is possibility. Any limitation of possibility is a hindrance on free will. So if you told me that you wouldn't let me fly by flapping my arms, I wouldn't consider that a hindrance on my free will because it is impossible for me to flap my arms and fly. However, if you barred my front door shut and told me I couldn't leave, now you are preventing a possibility. Now you are infringing on my free will.

So to answer your question based on my definition I'd say no, because your general idea precludes other possibilities like "not going to the mall" or "watching tv", etc. It doesn't seem so sinister whenever you say "going to the mall", but how about "burning to death in the World Trade Center" or "vacationing in China the day of the tsunami"? If you had no choice tomorrow but to get run over by a car, but you could do everything else you felt like, would you consider that free will?

But, the definition of free will is not set in stone, so what you think is free will may not be what I think is free will. Some people think any limitation is by definition a hindrance on free will, so the fact that you can't, say, jump 1000 meters in the air means that you aren't a free willed being. By this idea, the only free willed being would be an omnipotent god. Maybe you should define what you mean by free will?

I'm not heavily invested in the existence of free will, as the idea I mentioned before of a type of determinism (since out of all possibilities, only one will occur, does that make the other possibilities void?) does tickle a strange part of my brain. But the difference is, I don't feel that I need free will in order to make a choice regarding my eternal salvation.

Malodrax
09-10-2008, 05:44 PM
Why? The definition of irrational:

Irrationality is talking or acting without regard of rationality. Usually pejorative, the term is used to describe thinking and actions which are, or appear to be, less useful or logical than the rational alternatives. There is a clear tendency to view our own thoughts, words, and actions as rational and to see those who disagree as irrational. -- source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irrationality)

Just two examples of illogical traits (and thus irrational) of the Christian religion:

Is omnipotent (an illogical concept, IE: making a rock so heavy he can't lift)
Free WIll/Omniscient god (If omniscience exists, free will can not, as everything is pre-determined)

You can be faithful and believe in whatever you choose, however, that doesn't make it rational.

I can only speak on behalf of islam...

But even though God knows what everyone will do, what test/challenges they will face etc.. he does NOT make people choose one alternative over another.

WE make that decision. So even though he knows what that decision will be made (omiscience) it doesn't mean we don't have the free will to choose for ourselves.


Regarding the all powerful God. The examples you brough up are illogical because they require God to not be God at the same time as he is being God.

Making a rock from nothingness: God
A rock he can't life: Not God.

Since God cannot NOT be God then clearly this situation is not applicable and does not take away from his Omnipotence

thor93
09-10-2008, 06:12 PM
its called faith, dik


and personal evidence signs as well.indications of other worldly forces intermingling/intervening in ones earthly life.

i kept thinking about 911 recently while trying to go back to sleep and i finally did and then i woke up again to use the bathroom and when i walked back into my room to go back to sleep,i looked at the digital clock and it said 9:11.

this happened a couple of days ago.

bastiun
09-16-2008, 07:15 PM
How about this one?

If God were to write a letter to the world it would include everything we need to know about life, correct? Then why does the bible not have a cure for aids/cancer in it? Wouldn't God know how awful cancer would be and how many people would die because of it and give us a cure before we lost countless loved ones? And why isn't there any useful information about mathematics in the bible? The bible INCORRECTLY gives the value for pi. Wouldn't God know what pi was?

I understand why God wouldn't tell us everything because he wants us to come to our own conclusions about life (Free will blah blah blah) but there are some things that just don't stand to reason. Why would God let so many people fight and die in his name? Why would he be so interested in humans 3000 years ago but for some reason he doesnt have anything to say to us anymore? Because our civilization is grown up and we understand that "miracles" from the bible dont happen in modern day life. When people claim to be prophets today and claim that god speaks directly to them, society considers these people insane.

The truth of the matter is that religion is a tool. People use religion to explain things that they cant explain. They use it as a weapon against other people who don't think the same way. People use it to make money. People use it to reassure themselves about death and mortality. People say "think outside you little box", well I challenge YOU to think outside YOUR tiny little religious box and realize that life is whats important now, not living by a specific guidline in order to attain an afterlife of eternal paradise.

thingswentnumb
09-16-2008, 07:16 PM
how bout there is no such think as a god...

mangiventofly
09-16-2008, 07:35 PM
all of these arguments are useless, don't you people understand that?

if God is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent (he IS all three), and we are OBVIOUSLY not, what makes you people think you will ever be able to understand all He does? it is called FAITH people. i would think that people who are so into fitness would understand it more than this. faith is an EXERCISE of the heart and mind. it is difficult. even as a believer, there are so many things i do not understand about God, and do you know what? i don't need to. i trust that He is who He says He is. i have no reason to believe that He is not. i have seen His work directly in my life. that's all i need to know.

Weightaholic
09-16-2008, 07:38 PM
Reported.

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, the prosecution rests....

bigfor15
09-16-2008, 07:46 PM
how bout there is no such think as a god...

If there is then I hope he has mercy on your soul.

powerman2000
09-17-2008, 11:46 AM
How about this one?

If God were to write a letter to the world it would include everything we need to know about life, correct? Then why does the bible not have a cure for aids/cancer in it? Wouldn't God know how awful cancer would be and how many people would die because of it and give us a cure before we lost countless loved ones? And why isn't there any useful information about mathematics in the bible? The bible INCORRECTLY gives the value for pi. Wouldn't God know what pi was?

I understand why God wouldn't tell us everything because he wants us to come to our own conclusions about life (Free will blah blah blah) but there are some things that just don't stand to reason. Why would God let so many people fight and die in his name? Why would he be so interested in humans 3000 years ago but for some reason he doesnt have anything to say to us anymore? Because our civilization is grown up and we understand that "miracles" from the bible dont happen in modern day life. When people claim to be prophets today and claim that god speaks directly to them, society considers these people insane.

The truth of the matter is that religion is a tool. People use religion to explain things that they cant explain. They use it as a weapon against other people who don't think the same way. People use it to make money. People use it to reassure themselves about death and mortality. People say "think outside you little box", well I challenge YOU to think outside YOUR tiny little religious box and realize that life is whats important now, not living by a specific guidline in order to attain an afterlife of eternal paradise.

You are presupposing too many things.

This is not the world according to YOU! :rolleyes:

mangiventofly
09-17-2008, 11:58 AM
How about this one?

If God were to write a letter to the world it would include everything we need to know about life, correct? Then why does the bible not have a cure for aids/cancer in it? Wouldn't God know how awful cancer would be and how many people would die because of it and give us a cure before we lost countless loved ones? And why isn't there any useful information about mathematics in the bible? The bible INCORRECTLY gives the value for pi. Wouldn't God know what pi was?

I understand why God wouldn't tell us everything because he wants us to come to our own conclusions about life (Free will blah blah blah) but there are some things that just don't stand to reason. Why would God let so many people fight and die in his name? Why would he be so interested in humans 3000 years ago but for some reason he doesnt have anything to say to us anymore? Because our civilization is grown up and we understand that "miracles" from the bible dont happen in modern day life. When people claim to be prophets today and claim that god speaks directly to them, society considers these people insane.

The truth of the matter is that religion is a tool. People use religion to explain things that they cant explain. They use it as a weapon against other people who don't think the same way. People use it to make money. People use it to reassure themselves about death and mortality. People say "think outside you little box", well I challenge YOU to think outside YOUR tiny little religious box and realize that life is whats important now, not living by a specific guidline in order to attain an afterlife of eternal paradise.

the MOST important thing to God is your salvation. the reason He does not speak to us now like He once did is because He has revealed to us already all that we need to know to be saved. He asks for your FAITH. faith is belief in that which is unseen. if you need tangible, visible proof, it would not be faith. God has shown us all we need to see already. what we do with that knowledge is up to us.

powerman2000
09-17-2008, 12:01 PM
the MOST important thing to God is your salvation. the reason He does not speak to us now like He once did is because He has revealed to us already all that we need to know to be saved. He asks for your FAITH. faith is belief in that which is unseen. if you need tangible, visible proof, it would not be faith. God has shown us all we need to see already. what we do with that knowledge is up to us.

Pearl casting before swine. :D

user89489489438943
09-17-2008, 12:03 PM
Cliffs: Religious people are irrational

http://www.sayyestovacationhomes.com/KSC/Man%20Lands%20on%20Moon.JPG

joelz54_99
09-17-2008, 12:07 PM
How can you so easily shrug off ridiculous ideas of a Muslim god or Greek gods or Pagan gods, but it is so easy for you to believe in a Christian god? What makes the Bible more valid than the Koran or the Illiad? Why was it sacred when Moses talked to god on Mount Sinai, but its silly to you that Muslims believe Muhammed talked to god in a cave in the desert?

Cliffs: Religious people are irrational

The reason for this is because Christians, as I once was, believe that all religions stem from false teaching and idols. There for if you dont believe in Jehova and Jesus then you are commiting a sin against him because you follow a fake/make believe religion. If you turn it around then they have no answer. :-/

neekz0r
09-17-2008, 12:13 PM
Pearl casting before swine. :D

I'm sure Jesus would approve of your comment. He wasn't exactly known for his loving nature, or his desire to help everyone. Of course, you've got a free ticket to heaven; what reason have you to treat other humans with respect and dignity? It's not like in the bible it says anything like:

But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic. Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. Do to others as you would have them do to you.

So please, do continue to call people who don't share your beliefs swine. It reflects very well how much your religion has imparted it's wisdom, compassion, and love on you and your life.

kj
09-17-2008, 12:26 PM
must spread some reputation before giving it to neekz0r again.

powerman2000
09-17-2008, 12:36 PM
I'm sure Jesus would approve of your comment. He wasn't exactly known for his loving nature, or his desire to help everyone. Of course, you've got a free ticket to heaven; what reason have you to treat other humans with respect and dignity? It's not like in the bible it says anything like:

But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic. Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. Do to others as you would have them do to you.

So please, do continue to call people who don't share your beliefs swine. It reflects very well how much your religion has imparted it's wisdom, compassion, and love on you and your life.
You fool, I was quoting the bible.

Somehow I don't think relating someone on a forum message board to a pig would be the opposite of when I hand out food and clothing to poor families in my community.

Get over yourself already.

paki123
09-17-2008, 12:38 PM
the muslim god and the chiristian is the same thing. just throwing it out there.

J-Bol
09-17-2008, 12:43 PM
the muslim god and the chiristian is the same thing. just throwing it out there.

Hardly.

Muslim = 1 god, Allah
Christian = Trinity (Father, Son, Holy Ghost)

powerman2000
09-17-2008, 12:48 PM
the muslim god and the chiristian is the same thing. just throwing it out there.

Uh, no they're not.

Just sayin ;)

powerman2000
09-17-2008, 12:49 PM
Hardly.

Muslim = 1 god, Allah
Christian = Trinity (Father, Son, Holy Ghost)

Didn't we just do this with EOY recently? :p

neekz0r
09-17-2008, 12:50 PM
You fool, I was quoting the bible.

Somehow I don't think relating someone on a forum message board to a pig would be the opposite of when I hand out food and clothing to poor families in my community.

Get over yourself already.

So if I'm to understand your argument correctly, it's that so long as you do good somewhere, you can sin elsewhere? Is that what the bible teaches?

IE: If I give clothing to poor families (seriously, who doesn't?) then I can go around and insult people and call them names? Or if I give money to charity, then I can steal from a rich person?

Do you really think you are being a good Christian when you call people fools and swine? I'm honestly asking you.

Also, so as to not to appear hypocritical, (even though I'm not a Christian), have I ever insulted you or called you names?

J-Bol
09-17-2008, 12:51 PM
Didn't we just do this with EOY recently? :p

Yeah. I can see where they are coming from as I too once believed it. And if you're a deist or part of a religion that doesn't think Jesus=God, then it could also work out to be the same God.

powerman2000
09-17-2008, 12:54 PM
So if I'm to understand your argument correctly, it's that so long as you do good somewhere, you can sin elsewhere? Is that what the bible teaches?


Duh, noooo

What I did wasn't a sin. Please try and track with me a little better.

These posts don't even deserve a response.

neekz0r
09-17-2008, 01:05 PM
Duh, noooo

What I did wasn't a sin. Please try and track with me a little better.

These posts don't even deserve a response.

Insulting someone is not a sin?

And how is my asking you if I've ever insulted you not even deserving of a response?

I would suggest, sir, that you admit you were wrong to insult me; admit that it wasn't very Christian like of you, ask for my forgiveness, and more importantly for you, ask for forgiveness from Jesus. No one is perfect; but as I understand it, Christians are supposed to hold themselves to a higher standard. As it stands, you've insulted me for no reason other then I (hopefully respectfully) disagree with you on certain issues.

Fuelish
09-17-2008, 02:23 PM
people that are into religion are fricking crazy serious, its scary when they try and recruit you...bunch of gangsters
Depends on the religion ........ mine ain't - people are slowly drawn to us, we don't "recruit." Am Unitarian Universalist, fwiw .... the uncommon denomination ..... all faiths/beliefs/non-beliefs/ "lifestyles" welcome :cool:

mangiventofly
09-17-2008, 05:54 PM
neekzor - the phrase powerman and i used is meant to convey that we should not spend too much time on people who are obviously not ready to receive God's truth. it is in the bible and is as much of an insult as calling someone ignorant. ignorant means someone doesn't know something. ignorant is not an insult. in this situation, swine = ignorant. from our perspective, this holds true with you. not an insult. we were just encouraging each other to talk to someone other than you. maybe someday if you want we can discuss these things further with you, when you are honestly interested and not so sensitive, because right now you're just picking little fights. if you leave me alone, i'll leave you alone. actually, i'll leave you alone anyway. i hope you'll return that kindness.