A Way to Think About Free Will and God: Open Theism

I sense a rebellious spirit in you. Perhaps it is an evil one. Then again, you could say the same about me since I ignored the guy wanting spare change on Christmas. he has stolen from our store before. Forgive me, father, for I have sinned.In all seriousness, though...I think you overinflate your own common sense and reject too many people whom you disagree with...calling them stupid and misguided.How was your relationship with your earthly father? Did you argue with him? Was he around when you were younger? You are an interesting scientific study...
a true thorn in the flesh of those of us who have spent years studying things that you challenge.

Adults don't know everything. Who are you to tell me that my belief is imaginary? I would never step on anyone's toes and tell them that their belief was false or illogical unless I knew that it would be harmful to them to continue to think that way. I'll continue to pray for you and ringo. My imaginary friend will meet you both someday. Lest I sound arrogant, I'm open to correction, but not insults. Both of you need a good whipping for disrespecting Pastor ICANT. Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

That's what the message tells us. Why are you picking and choosing which parts of the message you accept?

I have told you my theory. It gets personal, however...so I hesitate bringing it up here in public. I question your motives for being a rebel. I feel as if you at some point in your life have had issues with authority. It has made you the way you are.You are really something else! I really like our discussions. Iron sharpens iron, they say. Most Pastors would tell me to avoid you. They would say that people such as Richard Carrier and ringo can destroy someone's faith. I was watching Carrier this morning. Why Invent the Jesus? Richard Carrier Ph.D. I had previously watched the videos that I shared with ICANT in our debate. So Carrier and the apologists strongly disagree. Were I to judge Dr.Carrier at all, it would be the observation that he comes across as smug and self-assured in his theory. And I note that he gets paid to do what he does, so I won't attack the apologists on that reason. Why do you dismiss the apologists? Why is their argument less persuasive to you than Dr.Carrier?

So are all of them knowing liars? (in your opinion)
Or do you see them as ignorant?In order to dismiss what they say, I would have to either believe that they were either liars or hucksters. I see no reason for either...at least no more than I see in Dr.Carrier. So it boils down to the information. Again the question...why are the arguments of the apologists dismissed and why are the arguments of the myth busters acceptable? Matthew 25 says so, but not the Gospel of John. What makes you think that God is a fictional character in a book? In our hypothetical Bible Study, why would you even attend? What would be your motive?

Here we go again! Good morning, by the way. Is it cold up North? Because in real life, the builder cannot be present at each project at the same time and in diverse places. The real question is whether the builder is willing to include human development in each project which he completes. The next question, as we have gone over before, is whether the builder feels a need to hang out with the human occupants and be an advisor or whether He simply leaves instructions and messages for the occupants to complete themselves. I believe that te relationship is more of a communion than a master/servant relationship. To me, it seems more plausible to believe in One Builder than it does a pantheon of various builders and various landlords or Bosses for differing projects within the human experience. Are you serious? What makes little sense is jars idea of a bumbling fumbling Deity learning on the job whom humans have to correct...unless such a story supports the idea of humans creating and imagining various Deities, Imps, Fairies, and Spaghetti Monsters within the human imaginative experience. I do not believe that way. We pay honor and respect to human kings and dignitaries. Its not about them being petty or needy. Its about honoring them and giving them a place of honor at the head of the table rather than hanging out with the workers in the kitchen. Note, furthermore, that Jesus willingly did the latter. Again, evidence removes the need for belief or free willed choice. We really don't have free will in regards to gravity, unless we build a plane. Even then our freedom is temporary. Since when are we insisting that God conform to our standards? There has to be compromise at the very least between His standards and ours. Nobody will ever know everything. And yet I have noticed that you have low regard...contempt even...for belief. Note your quote: And you will claim that you are awaiting evidence and that the God of the Bible cannot be trusted. Silly rabbit! Its because you limit Him to the book and have such contempt for belief in the first place.

Did you ever consider that messages get disrespected because whoever sent the messenger was never respected in the first place? Note tangles reaction to my even talking with ICANT rather than insulting and belittling him as others do:

quote:

---

Your groveling to that hopeless fake is demeaning. You know I said you couldn't offend me? Well, your kowtowing to that charlatan comes very close.

---

Which seems a bit out of proportion to the offense. First off, I grovel to nobody except God. Pastor ICANT is no more respected by me than you or Tangle. Yet something about him sure seems to set you off. Even if he was ignorant in regards to science is hardly a reason to insult him. But it strengthens the case why human nature selectively villifies and attacks certain arguments or people and ignores others.

You need to broaden your metaphor. God is more than simply a builder or a landlord. Thus we have no mere builder. No autocratic landlord. We have a counselor, a father figure, and a peacemaker. Human society can use those. Your problem is that you don't trust the God of the book, and are afraid to dare imagine One Who exists outside the book.
In addition, you guys conflate simple fantasy and imagination...making things up...with an internal impression, communion, and conscience. Of course, you will argue that there is no evidence of such a presence apart from our own mental thoughts. Thus we are again at a stalemate. I know your position, however. You will argue that the message specifies that we are to do it ourselves. Be our own counselors. Fathers. Peacemakers. What you likely scoff at is the idea that we are becoming our own gods. But its true. Did you watch the Michio Kaku video? The Universe in a Nutshell (Full Presentation)It's a good video and I respect Dr.Kaku. But note the attitude. It's an unbridled optimism that humans will become like gods.
To his credit, Dr.Kaku is honest about his beliefs.

We all do. We just find ever more creative ways of repeating it. The dispensationalists disagree with you. (surprise, surprise) Stam has a lot to say, and makes a well thought out argument. Things That Differ But you and perhaps ZTangle will simply argue that it is at best a new book seeking to explain the reasoning behind the older book and that in the end it is all human opinion anyway. There is no convincing you...you already concluded that your grasp of logic, reason, and reality negated any truths found in Christianity apart from your favored socialist message to go feed the poor and ignore a God in a book. Cant argue with you there. I will keep trying, however.

Just a note, GDR. He also does not claim to be an atheist...I think he calls himself a Deist with a bent towards logic, reason, and reality. Note how he insists that the Bible be strictly read as written, however. I believe ringo wants either arguments based on scripture or based on already written facts or philosophies rather than us simply making them up on the fly. Comments, ringo?

I have done no such thing. You jump to conclusions.

You claim I reject what Jesus said in the book. I do not. I only reject the idea that Jesus and God are confined to the book.

I only mention that its not realistic. The evidence seems to show that nobody does it. One could thus argue that everyone rejects that message. Was He talking to me? I only question the passage and am mystified why you and jar fawn over it as the central message in the Bible when so few apologists do. I question you more than I do the message. I question why you think its silly for there to be a resurrection yet not silly to hang your hat on Matthew 25. I won't try and wiggle out of this one. I need to help the poor more than I do.

First of all, this is a generalization. It is like telling you that "Doctors want to keep you sick". Not all of them do. If in fact, the apologists all wanted to tell me what I wanted to hear, the question would then be:

Are they all lying?

Are they all willfully ignorant?

Why should we trust your one mind in regards to the truth and reject an entire culture that you claim has it wrong?

​

Happy Gnu Year!

​

Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

---

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

​

You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo

​

Subjectivism may very well undermine Christianity.
In the same way that "allowing people to choose what they want to be when they grow up" undermines communism.~Stile

You need to allow yourself the luxury of being metaphorical and idealistic rather than so stiff and starchy collared in regards to evidence. Resurrection can be symbolic. It is, in essence, a new birth. Turning over a new leaf. Wholesale repentance and repudiation of an old lifestyle and embracing a new one. Whether or not God raised Jesus in physical actuality, He was raised metaphorically and (unlike any human before Him) completely. Death and imperfection lost their sting. We visualized crossing the Pacific Ocean long before we even knew if there was a destination. (we thought we may fall off the edge). We visualized going to the moon long before we could even fly. Stop thinking of the resurrection as a necessary objective fact and start looking at it as a metaphorical ideal. Until one man accomplishes anything, that thing is impossible to accomplish.