Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 107 (8805 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 12-13-2017 9:08 PM
346 online now:
DrJones*, Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus), NoNukes, Percy (Admin) (4 members, 342 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: jaufre
Post Volume:
Total: 824,105 Year: 28,711/21,208 Month: 777/1,847 Week: 152/475 Day: 45/17 Hour: 0/1

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
34353637
38
39Next
Author Topic:   Free will vs Omniscience
jar
Member
Posts: 29763
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 1.6


Message 556 of 571 (795218)
12-08-2016 7:44 PM
Reply to: Message 555 by Phat
12-08-2016 7:00 PM


Re: Foreknowledge and Free Will
Phat writes:

When I ask him about some of what we discuss, his response is that the people whom i talk with are not believers.

LOL

And you do not just laugh when he says that?

Sheesh. He just flat admits his position is baseless and you do not challenge it?

Phat writes:

Thus, one major difference I see between you and the others is that you have not accepted the "new religion" that you claim Paul and the redactors teach and have spread.

Thank God!


My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 555 by Phat, posted 12-08-2016 7:00 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 5235
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 557 of 571 (795229)
12-09-2016 3:20 AM
Reply to: Message 555 by Phat
12-08-2016 7:00 PM


Re: Foreknowledge and Free Will
Phat writes:

When I ask him about some of what we discuss, his response is that the people whom i talk with are not believers.

You understand that this is tautology? 'You have to be a believer of the things I believe to believe them'. It's the 'no true Scotsman' error. He's just asserting that he knows and others don't.

He's a charlatan. You're twisting yourself into knots trying to explain the inexplicable, simply because what you want to say doesn't make objective sense. As an outsider, it sounds like preachy gobbledegook.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 555 by Phat, posted 12-08-2016 7:00 PM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 558 by Phat, posted 12-09-2016 6:51 PM Tangle has responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 10230
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.3


Message 558 of 571 (795260)
12-09-2016 6:51 PM
Reply to: Message 557 by Tangle
12-09-2016 3:20 AM


Re: Foreknowledge and Free Will
How rude! None of you know my Pastor. I assure you he helps people more than most Christians do. He feeds the hungry, shelters,encourages, etc etc...all the works gospel of Matthew 25. He does it for free, too. The man is not paid much except in his secular job. You attack him based only on the idea that he accepts belief over evidence. I too go with belief because i reject the wisdom of this world. You go with evidence because you basically believe in human wisdom more than belief. I have seen enough subjective evidence myself.

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
Whoever trusts in his own mind is a fool, but he who walks in wisdom will be delivered.~Proverbs 28:26

This message is a reply to:
 Message 557 by Tangle, posted 12-09-2016 3:20 AM Tangle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 559 by Tangle, posted 12-10-2016 3:32 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 5235
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 559 of 571 (795271)
12-10-2016 3:32 AM
Reply to: Message 558 by Phat
12-09-2016 6:51 PM


Re: Foreknowledge and Free Will
Phat writes:

None of you know my Pastor. I assure you he helps people more than most Christians do. He feeds the hungry, shelters,encourages, etc etc...all the works gospel of Matthew 25. He does it for free, too. The man is not paid much except in his secular job.


Well good for him. No doubt he's a really nice guy. He's still wrong.
You attack him based only on the idea that he accepts belief over evidence. I too go with belief because i reject the wisdom of this world.

We attack him because he apparently made a really stupid remark.
You go with evidence because you basically believe in human wisdom more than belief. I have seen enough subjective evidence myself.

I go with evidence because it works. Belief is useless as a way of establishing what is correct. For example, you know that Muslims and Jews are incorrect despite their beliefs and because of yours.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 558 by Phat, posted 12-09-2016 6:51 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 10230
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.3


Message 560 of 571 (814480)
07-10-2017 11:38 AM
Reply to: Message 118 by jar
07-21-2015 10:59 AM


** FOREknowledge** Remix.
This old topic deserves some more attention. The arguments presented are still unclear to me as I grasp the implications of the God I market.

We were discussing Free Will vs Omniscience.

jar writes:

The God created the human and if that God had foreknowledge that that creation would be damned regardless of whether or not the creation had freewill, then that God is vile and evil.

What the person does and whether or not it is done through freewill is totally irrelevant.

It is only the acts of the God that are relevant.

My first question today is this: How could GOD conceivably not have foreknowledge?

You once commented the following:

jar writes:

GOD sent us the message that we all start out saved. Atheist, Agnostic, Christian, Jew, Muslim, Taoist, Satanist, Wiccan, Buddhist, or Anamist, all start even. When you die though you will be judged. And you will be judged individually, uniquely, against yourself. Did you try to do what is right and not do what is wrong?

You won't be able to say that "The world is filled with sin" or "We are all Fallen" or "The Sins of Adam" or even "I'm a Christian". None of those will carry any weight. The judgment will be on what you did and what you might have done, and the Judge will have perfect knowledge of both.

How is it that God has perfect knowledge of what we did and what we might have done yet not be evil in one case yet not in the other case?

Edited by Phat, : spell


Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
"as long as chance rules, God is an anachronism."~Arthur Koestler

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by jar, posted 07-21-2015 10:59 AM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 561 by jar, posted 07-10-2017 11:58 AM Phat has not yet responded
 Message 562 by Stile, posted 07-10-2017 12:00 PM Phat has responded
 Message 563 by ringo, posted 07-10-2017 12:23 PM Phat has responded
 Message 570 by New Cat's Eye, posted 08-22-2017 11:20 AM Phat has not yet responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 29763
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 1.6


Message 561 of 571 (814484)
07-10-2017 11:58 AM
Reply to: Message 560 by Phat
07-10-2017 11:38 AM


Re: ** FOREknowledge** Remix.
Phat writes:

My first question today is this: How could GOD conceivably not have foreknowledge?

Many of the God characters in the Bible do not have foreknowledge beginning with the God in Genesis 1 and right on through most of the Old Testament.

the Genesis 1 God character writes:

31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

Notice the god is looking at what she created and only then sees that it was good.

the not all that bright Gen 2 god writes:

18 And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.

19 And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.

Note this god makes all the animals and then brings them to Adam to try out. A God that had foreknowledge would have known the while the sheep were okay they just wouldn't really do. Adam and Baaa just sounds wrong.

As you should know by now I can keep up bringing Biblical examples for as long as you like.

Phat writes:

How is it that God has perfect knowledge of what we did and what we might have done yet not be evil in one case yet not in the other case?

Stop and think Phat. The evil God is evil for CREATING the person knowing that the person will be condemned. Judging after the fact based on the evidence is entirely different.


My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 560 by Phat, posted 07-10-2017 11:38 AM Phat has not yet responded

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 3044
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 562 of 571 (814485)
07-10-2017 12:00 PM
Reply to: Message 560 by Phat
07-10-2017 11:38 AM


Re: ** FOREknowledge** Remix.
Phat writes:

How could GOD conceivably not have foreknowledge?

Any God who is not "all powerful" or "omni-everything" can quite easily not have foreknowledge.

For additional evidence of God not being omni-everything, see The Problem of Evil.

How is it that God has perfect knowledge of what we did and what we might have done yet not be evil in one case yet not in the other case?

In the first quote, jar seems to reference an evil God who has perfect knowledge of the future.
In the second quote, jar seems to only reference a God who has perfect knowledge of the past.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 560 by Phat, posted 07-10-2017 11:38 AM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 567 by Phat, posted 07-11-2017 2:56 PM Stile has responded

    
ringo
Member
Posts: 13968
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.7


Message 563 of 571 (814500)
07-10-2017 12:23 PM
Reply to: Message 560 by Phat
07-10-2017 11:38 AM


Re: ** FOREknowledge** Remix.
Phat writes:

How could GOD conceivably not have foreknowledge?


Omniscience and omnipotence are made-up qualities, like Rumpelstiltskin's ability to spin straw into gold. It has no connection with reality.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 560 by Phat, posted 07-10-2017 11:38 AM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 564 by Phat, posted 07-10-2017 12:33 PM ringo has responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 10230
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.3


Message 564 of 571 (814501)
07-10-2017 12:33 PM
Reply to: Message 563 by ringo
07-10-2017 12:23 PM


Re: ** FOREknowledge** Remix.
It seems that we all approach this topic differently.

jar sticks with God as described in the Bible and never attempts to define or market God. Its because he focuses on our charge rather than on His involvement.

ringo, you stand by your atheism and simply point out the illogic of any attempt at
speculating as to Gods nature. Its also because you by-and-large agree with jar. I wish you would hypothesize with me now and then.

Tangle is more militant about evidence over belief and suggests that belief has outlived its usefulness.

I will be forming a line of thought shortly. This morning i'm taking a nap before work. This sort of stuff stresses me out.


Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
"as long as chance rules, God is an anachronism."~Arthur Koestler

This message is a reply to:
 Message 563 by ringo, posted 07-10-2017 12:23 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 565 by ringo, posted 07-10-2017 12:45 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply
 Message 566 by Stile, posted 07-10-2017 1:49 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 13968
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.7


Message 565 of 571 (814505)
07-10-2017 12:45 PM
Reply to: Message 564 by Phat
07-10-2017 12:33 PM


Re: ** FOREknowledge** Remix.
Phat writes:

I wish you would hypothesize with me now and then.


I AM hypothesising with you when I point out that your hypothesis makes no sense. In fact, it isn't even a real hypothesis at all since you resolutely refuse to test it.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 564 by Phat, posted 07-10-2017 12:33 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 3044
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004
Member Rating: 3.0


(1)
Message 566 of 571 (814513)
07-10-2017 1:49 PM
Reply to: Message 564 by Phat
07-10-2017 12:33 PM


Re: ** FOREknowledge** Remix.
Phat writes:

This morning i'm taking a nap before work. This sort of stuff stresses me out.

Ha ha, rest up

And remember, no one here is posting because they're trying to stress you out.
We just all (for one reason or another) enjoy posting here. Maybe it's a break from work. Maybe it's a way to keep the mind working. Maybe it's a time-waster, maybe it's interesting or just simply enjoying. But whatever it is, I assure you no one's aim is to "stress Phat" (or anyone else, for that matter.)

This is the socially acceptable venue to discuss such topics that are sometimes... less-than-welcomed at the family dinner table or other light-topic, polite social exchange venue (water cooler, lunch room...).

Rest up, relax, and reply when you, as well, will enjoy posting here.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 564 by Phat, posted 07-10-2017 12:33 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

    
Phat
Member
Posts: 10230
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.3


Message 567 of 571 (814659)
07-11-2017 2:56 PM
Reply to: Message 562 by Stile
07-10-2017 12:00 PM


Re: ** FOREknowledge** Remix.
Do you mean this topic? The Problem Of Evil

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
"as long as chance rules, God is an anachronism."~Arthur Koestler

This message is a reply to:
 Message 562 by Stile, posted 07-10-2017 12:00 PM Stile has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 568 by Stile, posted 07-12-2017 12:38 PM Phat has not yet responded

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 3044
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 568 of 571 (814735)
07-12-2017 12:38 PM
Reply to: Message 567 by Phat
07-11-2017 2:56 PM


Re: ** FOREknowledge** Remix.
Phat writes:

Do you mean this topic? The Problem of Evil

That would be a good place to discuss it, if anyone wanted to.
But no, I didn't mean to imply a specific topic here. I meant to imply the issue in it's general sense:

Wiki - The Problem of Evil


This message is a reply to:
 Message 567 by Phat, posted 07-11-2017 2:56 PM Phat has not yet responded

    
Phat
Member
Posts: 10230
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.3


Message 569 of 571 (817952)
08-22-2017 4:42 AM
Reply to: Message 484 by ringo
06-13-2016 12:10 PM


Re: Free Will and determinism from my Christian perspective
I'm trying mightily to figure you out! For now, I'm continuing our Word was Not Jesus argument over here.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to be quite the contrarian in terms of popular definitions of Christianity. jar is, of course, the one at EvC responsible for your enlightened thinking.

Admittedly, he gets me to think also, but I don't like his interpretation of Christianity. The whole Matthew 25 we are responsible schtick, because people don't even have to believe anything anymore. they simply have to do unto the least. This also fits in with your far left political views.

ringo writes:

How could Jesus become something He always was?

What was He? The Nicene Creed says he was made man. That implies that he stepped out of eternity into time and took on a fleshly body.

ringo writes:

I'd start by saying that "in the beginning was the word" has nothing to do with Jesus.

So tell me what you think it means.

ringo,to Faith writes:

I'm still discarding the last vestiges of your so-called "gospel" after being shackled to it for forty years.

So for you God is an unnecessary fiction in our minds and you feel it worthwhile to challenge religious minds with secular common sense.
ringo writes:

We do NOT know whether or not God exists. It is reasonable to deny his existence, given the total lack of evidence that he does exist. Also, given the way he is described by his devotees, it is reasonable to reject him.

So in your opinion, what does the author of john mean? And why should I accept your definition when over 75% of the commentators, (yes, they have read the Bible, jar ) explain it differently?

ringo writes:

The fictional character "Satan" represents our own free will. What "Satan" wants IS what we want. Every time we're tempted to do something that we "shouldn't", we're wanting to be independent of God.

Some of us want to replace God with ourselves.
ringo writes:

How can you learn anything if you don't get a chance to change your behaviour?

What do you mean by chance? I have issues with that word....

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
"as long as chance rules, God is an anachronism."~Arthur Koestler

This message is a reply to:
 Message 484 by ringo, posted 06-13-2016 12:10 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 571 by ringo, posted 08-22-2017 1:14 PM Phat has not yet responded

  
New Cat's Eye
Member
Posts: 11841
From: near St. Louis
Joined: 01-27-2005
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 570 of 571 (817982)
08-22-2017 11:20 AM
Reply to: Message 560 by Phat
07-10-2017 11:38 AM


Re: ** FOREknowledge** Remix.
My first question today is this: How could GOD conceivably not have foreknowledge?

That would be the case if the future was unknowable.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 560 by Phat, posted 07-10-2017 11:38 AM Phat has not yet responded

  
RewPrev1
...
34353637
38
39Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017