|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Omniscience, Omnipotence, the Fall & Logical Contradictions. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1941 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
It still seems particularly harsh to me to damn everyone who ever has lived, does live and will live on the basis of the actions of two idiots. Talk about stereotyping!!! Try looking at it this way. Lets assume that Adam had free choice (Jesus, "the second Adam" had too but lets leave that). Adam chose against God and instead ate an apple infected with a disease (he was told of this beforehand.."On the day you eat..) So Adam is infected through his own choice - God is not implicated. Now Adam transfers this infection to all his offspring. Every gets the disease and Adam is to blame for giving it to them. This disease means that mans nature is geared to sin - just as a cats nature is to kill mice. Its called a sinful nature. As soon as a person is able they will act according to their nature. They will do things that God finds objectionable - just as my cat leaving a half eaten bird on my bed is objectionable to me. In that sense it is not their fault that they act so - even if objectionable. They didn't give themselves this nature - Adam did. And it would be as unjust to punish people in Hell forever for doing that which they did by a nature as it would be for me to punish my cat for half eaten birds. When they die God would have to simply let that be that - we would cease to exist. We wouldn't exist anymore and would be back to the place before we did exist. Nothing lost, nothing gained. But men are not left completely alone by God. They, unlike cats killing mice have this thing called conscience. Conscience is God operating on a person with a sinful nature calling them away from that nature and empowering them to do so. If a person sins in this instance it was because they chose to ignore the call of conscience which convinced them not to sin. And for this they can justly be punished. Not because they were born with this nature but because they chose to sin when they didn't have to. Sin only becomes sin if a choice is made to do so. It is different than simply acting according to animal nature. There is a fine balance to be struck by God. Yes, attempt to restore things to the way intended in the beginning. But not push so far as to compel a person who does not want to be restored, to be restored. By chosing to call people through conscience God is making it possible for them to sin - instead of them just acting with animal nature. He is taking the risk that they will refuse in which case he risks them not being able to avail of simple non-existance but puts eternal damnation as a possibility for them. To balance that negative risk he places a positive - eternal bliss - in there too. Gods options: a) objectionable animals who cease to exist after they die b) the risky business of objectionable persons who might go one or other way. He chose the latter. It is his right to do so. He's God. Edited by iano, : No reason given. Edited by iano, : No reason given. Edited by iano, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined:
|
But surely your anology falls down because if I could cure people of an infectious disease that would affect them and all their offspring forever more I would.
God can but does not. According to your analogy God is guilty of medical negligence. Where can I sue?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1941 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
But surely your anology falls down because if I could cure people of an infectious disease that would affect them and all their offspring forever more I would. That is what salvation is. A cure for this deadly disease. But if a person doesn't want it then what is God to do? Force them to be cured?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined:
|
That is what salvation is. A cure for this deadly disease. But if a person doesn't want it then what is God to do? Force them to be cured? But why did he let ME get this deadly disease in the first place? I had done nothing wrong and had not had not even had the opportunity to do anything wrong. In Gods eyes we are all guilty until proven innocent. Why? Preventative medicine is the name of the game and medical negligence would still be the verdict. I might need a lawyer.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1941 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
But why did he let ME get this deadly disease in the first place? I had done nothing wrong and had not had not even had the opportunity to do anything wrong. It was a consequence of Adams choice. For God to prevent the consequences of a persons choice is to remove choice.
In Gods eyes we are all guilty until proven innocent. Why? We're all guilty full stop. The Day of Judgement won't be a trial - it will be a pronouncment of a guilty verdict on all who are found in possession of sin. All the evidence will be available so there is no further case to make. Life is your day in court and if you take an honest look at yourself you can see that you are presenting all the evidence needed for a guilty verdict to be a just one. You have a conscience don't you. You don't listen to it at times I'm sure. I know I don't Unless you can be declared innocent then guilty you most certainly will be. There is only one way to be declared innocent. To have no sin in your possession.
Preventative medicine is the name of the game and medical negligence would still be the verdict. I might need a lawyer. You need an advocate between you and the Judge alright. His name happens to be Jesus. I'd give him a call if I were you. Prepare the case so to speak Edited by iano, : No reason given. Edited by iano, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Heathen Member (Idle past 1284 days) Posts: 1067 From: Brizzle Joined: |
iano writes:
Arguing based upon 'what might be' is unproductive and does not contribute in any way... we get into the realms of fantasy here, FSM, IPU, all that stuff enters the debating room as soon as you say "we cannot understand".
That isn't my approach. Someone says "Gods omniscience means no free will". But they cannot escape the fact that such comments rely, at their root, on the presumption that God is limited to operating within the confines of our logic. By definition this cannot be the case. We are made like God. We are not God ourselves. So absolutes such as those statements are out. iano writes:
But when you reply with the "god's logic is not ours" you are merely throwing the argument open to any and every wild fantasy or imaginative hallucination, worth nothing other than 'It might be' as back up. not necessarily wrong untill proven so, but uncontructive and distractionary (is that a word?).
In suggesting the age old idea of timeless existance for God I give a possible (not proven) way whereby he could know all choices that will ever be made before they are made (by observation) without determining that they be so. iano writes:
To the reader (well... me anyway) you seem to use these apologetics as if they were truths/proofs. It comes across as being somewhat dishonest and devicive.
Its an apologetic - not a proof. Apologetics is the business of preventing doors shutting/opening doors. I might not do it well but that is what I attempt. So we may conclude... iano writes:
you may well be blind.
I might well be the dumbest sighted man in the world.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined:
|
So god setup a test
That he knew Adam would fail before Adam even existed Then he punished Adam for failing the test And then punished everyone else for ever more No matter that they had no free choice themselves in the test he had set For failing the test that he knew Adam would fail By infecting us all with the disease of death and suffering That he could "cure" at any time But does not Because he wants to judge us Despite knowing the results of the judgements already And then you want me to call in his son as my defence lawyer!!!I'll take my chances
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
xXGEARXx Member (Idle past 5121 days) Posts: 41 Joined: |
God knew with absolute certainty that the forbidden fruit was going to be eaten, he knew with absolute certainty that this would result in the fall, he knew this before he created anything, so why bother with the pre-fall period? Not to labour the point, but free-will is an irrelevance. You can have free-will, or the illusion of it, but the outcome of any decision you make must be known in advance to an omniscient being. It cannot be any other way. It is not therefore impossible (logically speaking) for that being to stop things happening before they do. Although I agree at your angle from your point of view, I can and will also disagree with it. God can choose to simply not "look" into the future at any given time. A being of absolute authority can do anything. Even nerf Hmself for a project. I asked this very same question to a guy that was pretty heavy into scholarship. He told me something similar to what I just typed. The only way to give "true" free will to humans was to make them and not "peer" into the future and know all the events that would take place. It is very possible to not allow yourself to do anything you choose not to do. Maybe that's how it was done. I wasn't there at the time. Sorry. Edited by xXGEARXx, : Crap... I forgot how to quote already, lol... Edited by xXGEARXx, : No reason given. Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Fixed quote code. See "peek".
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 412 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
xXGEARXx writes: God can choose to simply not "look" into the future at any given time. Ah, the Bart Simpson Defense: "I could look into the future, but I don't wanna". An omnipotent being can see without looking, so how can it prevent itself from being omniscient? Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation. Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
tudwell Member (Idle past 5979 days) Posts: 172 From: KCMO Joined: |
Maybe God's a Tralfamadorian and only looks at the things that please him, while ignoring the rest.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1941 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
So god setup a test You can call it that if you like. Its probably a better word than choice
That he knew Adam would fail before Adam even existed That he knew Adam could pass and knew that he would fail
Then he punished Adam for failing the test Yes
And then punished everyone else for ever more He let the consequences follow that came with failing the test. Consequences he had warned would follow. Some test if he had not. Not everyone will be punished for ever more. Only some and they, not because of what Adam did, but because of what they did in the face of conscience.
No matter that they had no free choice themselves in the test he had set The consequences of failing the test mean that all are born sinners and will sin. But you are forgetting conscience.
For failing the test that he knew Adam would fail We don't fail the test that Adam was set. Adam had free choice. We do not. Our test is different. We are offered salvation but can chose to reject it. Our failing the test is to reject the gospel.
By infecting us all with the disease of death and suffering God didn't infect us. Adam did. Your blaming the Ford Motor Co. for a person choosing to drink and drive and kill pedestrians
That he could "cure" at any time. But does not He does cure the disease all the time and has been doing so for years. But he won't cure someone who doesn't want to be cured.
Because he wants to judge us Not want: must. Sin must be punished. Not even God has a choice in that.
Despite knowing the results of the judgements already He knows whether you will chose to reject salvation alright. But you are not forced to reject salvation. You will chose to do so - if you indeed do so.
And then you want me to call in his son as my defence lawyer!!! He wants you to call him - it'd be great if you did: I would be delighted. But I don't want you to do anything that you do not want to do
I'll take my chances A chance the Cosmic Gambler is willing for you to take. Edited by iano, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Legend Member (Idle past 5007 days) Posts: 1226 From: Wales, UK Joined: |
quote: iano writes: God didn't infect us. Adam did. Your blaming the Ford Motor Co. for a person choosing to drink and drive and kill pedestrians The Ford Motor Co. doesn't build cars designed to kill pedestrians. And if one does, the Ford Motor Co, doesn't go and jail all Ford drivers for it.
quote: iano writes: Not want: must. Sin must be punished. Not even God has a choice in that. God must judge us? since when is God forced to do anything ? Who's pressing him ? God creates everything and anything, he alone stretches the heavens, he creates good and evil. The Bible's not there only to take to Sunday school you know. Make the effort to read it sometime. God doesn't have to do anything. "In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Omnivorous Member Posts: 3978 From: Adirondackia Joined: Member Rating: 7.3 |
God must judge us? since when is God forced to do anything ? Who's pressing him ? God creates everything and anything, he alone stretches the heavens, he creates good and evil. The Bible's not there only to take to Sunday school you know. Make the effort to read it sometime. God doesn't have to do anything. He has certain...needs. God gave us the earth. We have dominion over the plants, the animals, the trees. God said, ”Earth is yours. Take it. Rape it. It’s yours.’ --Ann Coulter, Fox-TV: Hannity & Colmes, 20 Jun 01 Save lives! Click here!Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC! ---------------------------------------
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Christian7 Member (Idle past 249 days) Posts: 628 From: n/a Joined: |
There can be no free-will because the outcome is already determined. God is omniscient, right? He knows what's going to happen, therefore there is only the illusion of free-will for the individual making the decision. If god has seen an outcome in advance, it is predestined, if it is predestined, it isn't free-will. Where are you pulling this crap from? That is not logic. That is an assertion. I do not see any connection between omniscience and predestination. You have not demonstrated it. A grand master chess player is able to anticipate his opponents move, almost to the point of absolute forknowledge depending on the level of his opponent, especially if he is a beginer or novice. Does this change the fact that the opponent has free will? Absolutley not. The opponent has the absolute free will to chose. But his choices will simply not add up because the grand master chess player has made far superior ones. So, in essence, the grand master chess player has control of the scene, and is manipulating the future, yet at the same time, his opponent has free will. It is not the grand master's fault that the opponent lost. It is the opponents own fault for not practiceing. Likewise, God is not to blame for our own immorality. If we would just accept Jesus Christ as saviour and try to turn away from our sin, God would help us along. Edited by Guido Arbia, : No reason given. Edited by Guido Arbia, : No reason given. Edited by Guido Arbia, : No reason given. Edited by Guido Arbia, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Christian7 Member (Idle past 249 days) Posts: 628 From: n/a Joined: |
In his new book, Richard Dawkins points out that omniscience and omnipotence are incompatible. Is God able to change his mind in the future? If omnipotence and omniscence are incompatible, then omnipotence is an incompatibility in itself, because omnipotence requires that one is able to be omniscent. Therefore, either omnipotence and omniscence are compatible, or omnipotence is logically impossible. Edited by Guido Arbia, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024