Did Adam and eve really have a choice?

This is that part that I agree with you on.
God's foreknowledge of mans choice does not in any way influence the choice that man makes. However the fact that God knows it beforehand means that to him the choice is already made. No matter what man thinks he is freely choosing, he can only really go one way. God knows exactly which choice man will make and that is all that is necessary to use Modulus's computer analogy. To him all variables are known just as the programmer knows exactly which sequence will come out of his pseudo-random number generator. (Granted that in practice the programmer doesn't actually know this in most cases. The information is available though if he digs deeply enough and after all, programmers are human and are not all knowing) But god already knows who is going to be condemned and who isn't. It doesn't matter what I do personally. I am utterly bound to do what God already knows I am going to do even though I percieve it as free choice. The one thing I can never do to an all-knowing God is to surprise him. My sins were pre-ordained at the moment of creation. I may have thought I had the choice to commit them or not but in reality God set me up with inevitable failure as the only possible outcome.
In other words, his forgiveness is meaningless since the fault was his in the first place. I refuse to take responsibility for what is beyond my control. Now that is just a typical copout made by those who can't defend their position logically. I thought you were better than that.
Pathetic one liners like this are the MAIN reason I became an Atheist.
Push too hard and the Vicar, Priest, Pastor, Rabbi or (insert your religious advisor here) inevitably comes down to a response like this.
"We can't possibly ever fathom God" or
"We aren't supposed to ask those kind of questions." or
"Thou shalt not question the word of our Lord"
Keep pushing and you just get kicked out of the congregation.Bunch of %^$#* the lot of it Thanks for the offer Iano but I stand by what I said. This is actually a very toned down version of what I might have said. I honestly believe that if there IS a God and he IS Omnipotent, Omniscient etc. then he absolutely fits my definition of EVIL. I would actually rather suffer for eternity than to voluntarily serve such a being.
If he either IS NOT omnipotent or he IS NOT omniscient then I can probably bring myself to forgive HIM for his monumental cock up in creating us the way he did. Perhaps he didn't really mean to screw us all over. Perhaps he really doesn't know what we are all going to do and is just watching us to find out.I could accept that.

Precisely... the analogy describes the situation as layed out by you, and backed up by Genesis, which makes no sense... yet you still keep arguing for it? Hang on... Why may we suppose this? who gave you the divine knowledge to interpret this? Genesis says they didn't "know Death" (sorry... can't find the actual quote) and how could they? Nope... I am assuming (for the sake of argument) that a) God Exists in an all knowing and all loving Form, and b) Genesis is truth, then using the 'truth' in genesis to show why I believe the God as described by his actions in genesis could not be all knowing and all loving. I am showing that while the bible supposes god is Love, Genesis shows him not to be Love.
I am putting myself in your position (as a believer) in order to witness the contradiction from the inside, as it were. I am trying to get you to see my point of view, I can only do that if i work within your framework because you dismiss anything outside of that.
I believe I have shown that God (as you describe him) is not a loving god, because he is punishing the whole of mankind for a choice made by someone who was not in any position to make that choice, hence he knew which choice would be made. therefore... I don't believe there ws any real choice at all. IT WAS A FOREGONE CONCLUSION. I believe I and others (Purpleyouko) have adressed that point and questioned whether or not it was a sacrifice at all So you ignore rational argument and just pick the answer that backs you up? the whole point of my argument is that tere was no real choice, thus making a nonsense of the bible. Your rebuttal is to say "well that view is rubbish because it makes the bible look silly" Is that all you got? I'd say I'm surprised but I'm not. Is that the basis for your belief system? simply choosing what fits best? (what am I saying... of course it is.)
seems to me you're ignoreing what's written in the bible. I would say this equates to the illusion of free will. there will, after all, only be one outcome. there is no other possibility. therefore there is no choice. and I've said a few times earlier... it's not so much that foreknowledge 'influences' the choice, but the creation of the environment, the situation, the person making the choice. God created all these so he had total influence on the choice. The mere fact that the choice is foreknown, to me, indicates that there is only one outcome, that there is no alternative, i.e. that there is no choice.

Don't be silly. Of course there was a choice. Just like there would be if a car manufacturer made a model in only one color."You can choose any color you like as long as it's black"

I doubt anyone can measure that. Can we keep to what we do know of choice in relation to independance from instruction/law.Adam and Eve weren't kids. We don't know what exact level of understanding they had, they could communicate in adult language with God. Presumably then, they knew the meaning of words and what words meant. Otherwise they would be talking gobbeldygook. If God gave them concepts for "eat" " surely" "God" why not a sufficient defintion of "die"? Biblically, death means being separated from God. Either in this life or the next. God walked with Adam in the cool of the garden. After the fall came separation. You might not accept using the biblical 'theme' of death but how you interpret apart from the bible is... [qs]We are talking about one story as written and not themes.If you want to speak English you use the definitions of English. If you want to talk bible you use the bible definitions of bible. It can't be helped. The bible is defined by itself - as is English

---

"Jesus wept" John 11:35. It's the shortest verse in the Bible. What caused him to weep? Anothers death....

Maybe the answer lies in the idea of relationship. Jesus is all about relationships. Jesus is also all about humans each being unique and equally loved. As for Him thinking that His sacrifice was no big deal, He substituted Himself for the other option. Humanity itself would have had to be the sacrifice. Now...from Gods point of view, we are but one massive lump of clay. From our point of view, however, our lives matter. if there is any point to life beyond our time here on earth, we either should get to know God..(If that is possible) or get to know ourselves..(which we are doing increasingly) We can blame God for all suffering, or we can respond to the suffering as we have the power to do, God or no God. Some of us choose to trust Jesus and some do not. Lets at least begin by trusting each other, if possible.

How about "You can be any spirit you want as long as it is mine?"Did He ever say that? He did have a book of Life..and there were names in the book that were blotted out. Why would God need an eraser? He never makes mistakes...He knows and foreknows everything, right? Unless perhaps choices were being made after He wrote the book. So what it boils down to in my view is this: Jesus: The only other option. This is the inclusiveness of the Gospel that annoys so many.

Maybe we do agree so as per usual lets thrash it out. What you choose to wear tomorrow is completely and utterly you own free choice. God hasn't predetermined your choice. That he knows what your going to wear doesn't limit you choice in the sense that you will freely choose (within whatever bounds your choice is your own). But God knowing what it will be means it is sure to happen. Not because he influences it but simply because he can see into the future. IOW there is a difference between the analogy with Modulous programme where particular actions of the programmed ensure the result happens when it happens (eg: initial conditions) God (in eternity) does indeed know who will chose for him and who won't. What he knows will happen for sure. But the choice is still ours (in time) and when we make it we won't have surprised him - because he already knew (though didn't influence) what it was going to be. Pre-ordained means you had no choice. But you haven't shown how pre-ordained = pre-knowledge. Until you do, you sin remains yours. Unless of course you chose to have them forgiven. It wouldn't get you pushed out of my congregation. Take creating something out of nothing. No man can do such a thing. No man could understand how it could be done. Why is it unreasonable to say there are aspects of God which can't be explained? Surely to be able to explain God completely would need us to be God ourselves. Enlighten me will ya? Your definition ABOVE Gods definition. PY, you are the the Bible in a nutshell. Man hating the idea of bowing to God on Gods terms. He could let us run free and then force us to bow if he chose. Instead he makes us willing to bow. He makes us enjoy it and want it and be thankful for it. By revealing himself to us. Once he does that (if you want him to) on your face ( just like all who to who he revealed himself in the bible) you will fall. And you won't mind in the least. God 'makes' us bow in the best possible way. He showers us (who choose freely for him) with love. You know that weak-kneed feeling you get with earthly love - well it's kind of like that - but better....Mind/heart blowing

---

"Jesus wept" John 11:35. It's the shortest verse in the Bible. What caused him to weep? Anothers death....

If God is all powerful then why did he need a sacrifice at all? he could have just snapped his fingers and made it al right again without going through some pointless ritual murder.
And let's face it the vast majority of the human race is being sacrificed anyway so again, what was the point?
Anyway, why does God demand any sacrifice whatsoever?The whole thing is just meaningless to me.God makes the rules.
God creates a flawed human knowing full well that he will fail to keep the law.
God punishes him for a failure not his fault.
God sends his son to pay for mans failure (more like his own failure IMO) but to what end?
God resurrects his son.
God has sacrificed NOTHING!Did all those poor God fearing farmers get their sheep resurrected?
That is far more of a sacrifice. They needed those sheep and cows to survive yet they willingly gave them to God.Seems a bit like me sending my son down the shop to get a newspaper really. He is away from me for a few minutes then he comes back. end of story.
Death is NOTHING to someone with the certainty of resurrection. Even less to someone to whom a human lifetime is but the blink of an eye. There was a time when I felt I knew God very well. I just didn't like him. I like to think I do my part to alleviate the suffering of those around me. i can't be expected to sort out ALL of God's messes though. That I will agree with wholeheartedly. Until someone betrays my trust they will get it.

quote:

---

I doubt anyone can measure that. Can we keep to what we do know of choice in relation to independance from instruction/law.

---

Sure I can, I've been a child and the relationship presented in the story of A&E is between a creator and his created, not a people and their government. So it is a parent to child relationship. They are not presented as adult minded regardless of age.Not all disobedience is intentional or rebellious.A&E had to start using their reasoning sometime after they were created. Eve made a reasoned decision. The story does not demonstrate a desire for independence from God and you have yet to show that it does.

quote:

---

If you want to speak English you use the definitions of English. If you want to talk bible you use the bible definitions of bible. It can't be helped. The bible is defined by itself - as is English.

---

The Bible is defined by man. Language is defined by man. They are both products of man and change accordingly.Where in the Bible does it state that Adam and Eve's disobedience was because they desired independence from God?

quote:

---

Biblically, death means being separated from God.

---

Where is this demonstrated in the Bible? Where does the Bible support the idea that when the word "death" is used it means something other than a physical death?

---

"The average man does not know what to do with this life, yet wants another one which lasts forever." --Anatole France

If choices were made after he wrote the book and he had to modify it by erasing names then that means that he CANNOT BE all knowing or else he would have written the book right the first time.
I have already said that I could forgive such a God for screwing us all over because he didn't know any better. Just so long as he didn't KNOW that he was screwing us over.

Modulous' analogy you mean? Modulous analogy demonstrated pre-determinism is all that man can do when he creates. But Modulous, though smart, ain't God. The link "Gods pre-knowledge = God pre-ordained" has not been made by the analogy. It can't be made at all Man knew the meaning of words. Where else did he get to know the meaning of words but from God? If God gave him understanding of the meaning of words, why latch onto "die" as the only one that God didn't give Adam any understanding of? Note die means something different to us than in the bible. Death in the bible means separation from God and separation there surely was. Your actions are, as I said, reasonable. If we were talking mechanical engineering we'd use mech eng terms, science, science terms etc. So bible means bible terms. And there is more to mech eng than nuts and bolts, more to science than E=MC2, more to the bible that Genesis. If we're talking choice then choice would have to something implied throughout. And choice IS a major theme of the bible.Man's pre-knowledge = pre=ordained can be easily shown. God's pre-knowledge = pre-ordained hasn't been. As you try to formulate how the two are linked you are trying to pull God down to the limits of man. But that can't by definition work. Can you understand how God created something out of nothing. That you can't show it doesn't mean that God can't.He's big Crevo. Very, very BIG Would you put a child of yours through the physical torture of flogging, hate, beating and the excruciating pain of crucifixtion to save Hitler. Didn't think so. And God's relationship with his son ranks a little higher that the best parent/child relationship But you haven't made a rational argument. You say you've presumed the Bible to be Gods account in order to set terms of reference but don't debate within it. You take a fraction of it and extrapolate unfoundedly to reach extra biblical conclusions. Pre-knowledge = pre-ordination. Show this to be the case. Not with worldy, man-centred analogy but with one that takes into account who God is. Cut and paste from a previous post where you made it if you feel you have. Let there not be one presumptive statement in it. Put in a "this must mean" or "it stands to (extra-biblical) reason that"...and your rational argument isn't one. It's speculative and open to be shown to be so if subject to wider biblical examination.

---

"Jesus wept" John 11:35. It's the shortest verse in the Bible. What caused him to weep? Anothers death....

Yes there are some differences with the computer analogy. I acknowledge that.
I thnk that we actually do agree on this freewill business. Since it is all about the perception of the person making the choice anyway.
So long as you agree that the one path we are all going to take is pre-ordaned in that God knows every choice we will ever make, I will happily agree that we have free choice from our perspective. I don't really see a conflict between the two since we, ourselves, don't know which way we will go. Up to this point I am right with you but this appears to be double-speak.
Yes I have the choice to do good or evil but as God knows which I will choose and has always known since the beginning of time then I am going to do whatever it is that I am going to do. OK so I am going to choose to do it but all that means is that there is no possible way for me to make a different choice than the one that God knows I will make.
Sounds pretty pre-ordained to me. (I don't think pre-ordained means precisely having no choice. More like I will do what I will do, no matte how much I don't want to do it)
If God knows I am going to remain an Atheist until I die then I cannot ever make any kind of choice that will change that. The only thing that lets you off the hook to some degree is that I can never know what God knows. It still makes my choices very illusionary.
(this is making my head hurt ) This kind of goes back to the thread about what is natural and supernatural doesn't it?
You should know my views on this by now. Here I will refresh your memory.
"No man can do such a thing. " YET!
"No man could understand how it could be done." YET!
"Why is it unreasonable to say there are aspects of God which can't be explained?" Because any aspect of God that has any effect on the natural world in which we live, MUST have been done in a NATURAL way. True SUPERNATURAL cannot interact with NATURAL or else it becomes NATURAL. Once it is in the realm of the natural then science can jump all over it, poke it, prod it, disect it, reverse engineer it till we know how it was done. I contend that whenever God interacted with our universe he would have done it according to the physical laws which He put in place.Back to the computer program analogy. If you create a virtual world then want to change something in it, you do so by manipulating the code according to the rules that you have set up. (again not a perfect analogy) No not precisely. More like if God wants to run His universe the way He wants to (which he has a perfect right to do) then just stop at the next bus stop and let me off. I just don't want to play anymore.This message has been edited by PurpleYouko, 09-28-2005 03:57 PM

Save Hitler from WHO. ME? In what possible way could torturing my son make ME any less likely to punish Hitler? Just like with Jesus coming to Earth I cannot fathom the romotest connection between the two events. they appear to be utterly unrelated as far as I can see.How can God be forced to send his son to be tortured in order to be allowed to change the rules so that he no longer has to punish inocent people for his own cock-ups?Can you hear that noise? It is my brain trying to jump out through my ears! How exactly do you know this? God sending you emails again?

Sure. My whole point through was in regards to the OP which is dismissive of God based on acceptance of this mythology. Therefore it seems a bit extreme to discount God due to some section of the populations rigid definition of Him. Well I can't seem to find that claim in the OP. Certainly if you DEFINE God as omnipotent the conclusion is warranted but if that conclusion is ABOUT God then it seems very much like begging the question."Well, if God is omnipotent then he is a big jerk for letting bad things happen.""Mabye God is not omnipotent."

---

No smoking signs by gas stations. No religion in the public square. The government should keep us from being engulfed in flames on earth, and that is pretty much it. -- Jon Stewart, The Daily Show

Agreed on all counts jazz