Of COURSE he wanted us to eat the apple. If all we ever did was frolick in Eden all day long, there'd have been no fun in watching us. If we hadn't touched that apple, he'd have declared us a failed experiment, done away with us and started over. It's really that simple. In other words, that apple is the only thing that saved us from extinction. I still like to bring it up from time to time though, in a joke that NEVER EVER EVER gets old!
"Without us women, where would you men be?" "Still in the garden of Eden, damn you!"
<!--QuoteBegin-Nadagast+Apr 11 2005, 10:02 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Nadagast @ Apr 11 2005, 10:02 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> attempting to make Christians admit there is a problem here won't work Grendel <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
It can be easily explained away with bs like "you have the choice, God just knows what you will choose"
blind faith for the lose
ps. Can I be omnileet? <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Faith is by definition blind, good sir. If you believe only because you see, it is no longer faith, but truth.
Please remove you foot from your mouth and have respect for other's views.
-edit now for some substance
To expand on Pepe's point in a more scientific direction, it's generally accepted that atomic theory could produce accurate predictions of the future by tracking and solving all sub-atomic particle collisions from now until the end of time. Now, this is quite impossible not only because there an infinite number of particles (as far as we're concerned) and collisions, oddly enough, happen fairly rarely, but also, by the final nail in the coffin, the uncertainty principle maintains that as you zero in on the position of such a particle, it's velocity becomes obscure and vice-versa.
However, if God had such capabilities, which He obviously should, it would be a simple matter for him to know everything about everything forever.
NolSinklerOn the ClorfJoin Date: 2004-02-15Member: 26560Members, Constellation
edited April 2005
Meh, my church (though protestant) claims that God predetermines our fate before we are put into existance. So, we don't have any free will at all. In fact, not only are we just following a story, we're following a story that God chose for us.
/edit: Been mentioned...sorry though
Also, I've realized that the Bible is flawed in many ways (it seems). For example, why the hell did God send his son? If he can do anything, couldn't he have just said "BOOM SIN BE GONE" and it disappears?
Exactly.
Oh, and just wondering...is AvengerX banned or something? I havn't seen him in this thread yet.
<!--QuoteBegin-NolSinkler+Apr 11 2005, 08:38 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (NolSinkler @ Apr 11 2005, 08:38 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Meh, my church (though protestant) claims that God predetermines our fate before we are put into existance. So, we don't have any free will at all. In fact, not only are we just following a story, we're following a story that God chose for us.
Also, I've realized that the Bible is flawed in many ways (it seems). For example, why the hell did God send his son? If he can do anything, couldn't he have just said "BOOM SIN BE GONE" and it disappears?
Exactly.
Oh, and just wondering...is AvengerX banned or something? I havn't seen him in this thread yet. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Some Christians excuse some perceived flaws by saying that you can't presume to know why God does something, but I've never found that to be a convincing argument. I find it more likely that the people who wrote those stories were flawed and didn't come up with logically consistent stores (i.e. the Bible isn't true).
About AvengerX, he's banned. I presume that he was using a different nick (Ninja of the Night) under the same IP and was banned for it (he was temporarily suspended and then put on restricted access, presumably he was restricted from posting in the Discussions forum).
NolSinklerOn the ClorfJoin Date: 2004-02-15Member: 26560Members, Constellation
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I find it more likely that the people who wrote those stories were flawed and didn't come up with logically consistent stores (i.e. the Bible isn't true).<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes, that's true. The stories could be easily false. But then we'd all be doomed to a firey damnation in hell (assuming that God does exist).
I wish that there were solid proof of God existing or not though. Life would be easier.
Anyway, God can do anything...but he chose one of the dumbest ways to do it (you have to admit it's dumb. It's like using carpet cleaner to clean a red stain, when you have an unlimited amount of of money, and can make the stain disappear instantaneously).
I don't understand. <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
I'm not even arguing here, just talking out my feelings, feel free to respond though <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
As Grendel initially pointed out, Libertarianism (humans have free will) does contradict the notion of an "all knowing God," for how can good know the future if humans can make free choices, choosing from an infinite number of futures?
What some people are arguing here is that God allows humans to make free choices, but occasionally intervenes and determines what the future will be. Another answer is that God knows all of the possible futures that result from the free choices of humans.
On the other hand, determinism creates problems with the idea of an "all good God," since if God knew what would happen from the very beginning time to end, why would he allow the misery and suffering in the world to occur? Why does he allow evil to exist? etc
One answer is that God has chosen a future which we do not understand, so what we view as unecessary suffering might actually be good in a way we do not understand.
Personally, I don't hold a traditionall all knowing, all powerful view of God, so my beliefs in free will don't contradict my religious beliefs. All in all, I find the discussion of God and free will to be somewhat academic, similar to attempting to prove if God exists or some other similar debate. Still, it can be fun to see what other people think. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-theclam+Apr 11 2005, 03:28 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (theclam @ Apr 11 2005, 03:28 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Legionnaired+Apr 11 2005, 03:12 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Legionnaired @ Apr 11 2005, 03:12 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Genesis 3:15+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Genesis 3:15)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. 16 And the LORD God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die."<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sounds like a damned good reason to me. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> The serpent told them that they wouldn't die. <!--QuoteBegin-Genesis 3:4+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Genesis 3:4)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Without a knowledge that the serpent is evil and God is good, how would they know not to eat it. Would they even have concern over their own safety if they hadn't eaten the fruit yet?
Also, the "you will surely die" part reminds me that Adam and Eve were immortal. Thus, if God endowed Adam and Eve with even a single iota of curiosity, then they would have eventually eaten the fruit, because they were given infinite time.
For an event, if P1 is the probability of it happening, T is the amount of time during which it can happen, then P2 is the probability that it will eventually happen.
P1 * T = P2
Even if P1 is an almost infinitesimally small number, T would still be infinity, therefore it would happen. That's mathematics; I would think God would understand it. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Probability implies randomness. Randomness implies lack of choice.
There is nothing random about free will. Either you choose to believe the message you're presented with, be it the Gospel from a Christian, or 'God's invisible qualities evident in the world from it's creation.'(Romans 1:23?) or you don't. There is no rolling of dice, no external variables that matter enough to affect the outcome, only us and God, and the decision of what we want to do with that relationship.
God knows what is going to happen. He is all-knowing and all-mighty. He is today and tomorrow, this hour and the next, he is infinite, outside of time. Time is his slave, he rules over it, he created it.
Knowing and doing are two separate concepts, agreed?
God knows, he does not do. You do your "doing" and God will do his. God has a plan. He has a perfect will for mankind and everything. Does God intervene? Sure. Does he bend the concept of free-will in doing so? No! God doesn't twist anyone's arm and he never will. It is, honestly, up to you.
On a less-religious thought. Consider the Matrix. "You've already made your decision, now you must understand it." I agree with this statement, ultimately, you HAVE already made a decision but that's in the future and this is the present, you do the "deciding", right now.
Make sense? (Because if it doesn't I don't know what to tell you but I can always try.)
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->There is nothing random about free will. Either you choose to believe the message you're presented with, be it the Gospel from a Christian, or 'God's invisible qualities evident in the world from it's creation.'(Romans 1:23?) or you don't. There is no rolling of dice, no external variables that matter enough to affect the outcome, only us and God, and the decision of what we want to do with that relationship.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Alright, lets assume that you're correct in this. The fall is STILL a setup. Why? Because humans are flawed, they make mistakes. They can be manipulated. God knows this, yet he creates an entity with the ability to decieve and manipulate them (the serpent), and flawed beings suseptable to such manipulation (humans), and an infinite amount of time in which the one being is freely allowed to manipulate the other. Besides which there is theclam's argument:
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Why would they listen to God and not the serpent, since they don't understand that God is good and the serpent is evil? You may understand, but they didn't have the capability to understand something like that. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
----
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->God knows what is going to happen. He is all-knowing and all-mighty. He is today and tomorrow, this hour and the next, he is infinite, outside of time. Time is his slave, he rules over it, he created it.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> If we're going to talk about time being meaningless to God because he is extra-universal, then there is no point in trying to apply logic to God in any wy whatsoever, since logic is a component of this universe.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Knowing and doing are two separate concepts, agreed?
God knows, he does not do. You do your "doing" and God will do his. God has a plan. He has a perfect will for mankind and everything. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Those ar contradictory statements. If God has a plan, that means that he has set things into motion to be the way they are, therefore your choices are part of his devine plan (which he setup to be the way they are) and so you really have no choice at all.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Does God intervene? Sure. Does he bend the concept of free-will in doing so? No! God doesn't twist anyone's arm and he never will. It is, honestly, up to you.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Except that by having a "plan" and enforcing it he is creating each human such that they will do certain things (in order to further his plan), they have no choice, they just think they do.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Make sense?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> No, not at all.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Probability implies randomness. Randomness implies lack of choice.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> What does this have to do with my point? Adam and Eve have curiosity. Adam and Eve have unlimited free time. If there is something to explore in their limited world, then they will eventually explore it.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->There is nothing random about free will.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> People act randomly all the time. I flip coins, both metaphorically and literally. If there wasn't any randomness, probability, or chance, then people wouldn't act with any free will, but they would have their actions predetermined from the beginning of time.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Either you choose to believe the message you're presented with, be it the Gospel from a Christian, or 'God's invisible qualities evident in the world from it's creation.'(Romans 1:23?) or you don't. There is no rolling of dice, no external variables that matter enough to affect the outcome, only us and God, and the decision of what we want to do with that relationship.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Ok, so there's only one right answer that you can derive from our current evidence and you can choose to believe it, or not. That's your point, right? I'm sure Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Jainists, and Zoroastrians will tell me the exact same thing, with minor variations depending on their choice of deity and holy book.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->God's invisible qualities evident in the world from it's creation<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Can you list some of them for me? They're not evident (<a href='http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=evident' target='_blank'>"Easily seen or understood; obvious"</a>) at all.
I'm beginning to think that arguing with the religious is futile. Then I realize that I enjoy it. It makes me feel superior, which I guess is stereotypical for an atheist.
<!--QuoteBegin-DarkATi+Apr 11 2005, 11:13 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (DarkATi @ Apr 11 2005, 11:13 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I'll try to put an end to this.
God knows what is going to happen. He is all-knowing and all-mighty. He is today and tomorrow, this hour and the next, he is infinite, outside of time. Time is his slave, he rules over it, he created it.
Knowing and doing are two separate concepts, agreed?
God knows, he does not do. You do your "doing" and God will do his. God has a plan. He has a perfect will for mankind and everything. Does God intervene? Sure. Does he bend the concept of free-will in doing so? No! God doesn't twist anyone's arm and he never will. It is, honestly, up to you.
On a less-religious thought. Consider the Matrix. "You've already made your decision, now you must understand it." I agree with this statement, ultimately, you HAVE already made a decision but that's in the future and this is the present, you do the "deciding", right now.
Make sense? (Because if it doesn't I don't know what to tell you but I can always try.)
~ DarkATi <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> It doesn't make sense. It's a non-sensical argument.
God creates an initial state. He knows exactly what will happen in the future, because of this state. He knew what actions we were going to take, when he created that initial state. He could have modified those actions, by changing that initial state.
Thus, in a world with an omnipotent, omniscient creator, humanity has no free will.
Well, on a scientific level, free will is impossible anyway. Thoughts are just interactions between electricity and chemicals, and those interractions are shaped by electrical and chemical inputs from your senses.
Ideally, this is the point when I ride in on a big chariot and give an answer that, not only being 100% correct, satisfies everybody. That's not going to happen. Mainly because I don't actually have a chariot, let alone know how to ride one, but also because there is not an answer that is going to satisfy everybody. In fact, thinking about it, I'm not even sure if this answer will satisfy anyone, but hey.
"How does God knowing everything not contradict with our free will?"
To put it bluntly (and here you guys are gonna get really annoyed) it just doesn't. That's where faith comes in. Sorry guys. When Joseph was sent to Egypt by his brothers, after he meets them again, he explains to them: "you intended to harm me, but God intended if for good" Notice that it wasn't Joseph's brothers taking the initiative, with God interrupting to change the course of events (humans do not have complete free will), nor was it that the brother's ill treatment of joseph replaced God's plan of getting him to Egypt (God does not have complete control). "You intended ... but God intended..." shows that the brothers were completely responsible for their actions, yet God was actively and intentionally at work at every point. Every single evil action happens inside God's control, it doesn't happen without him knowing about it, yet he is not responsible for it.
I dunno if thats cleared anything up or made things worse. You tell me.
"Why couldn't God just create us with free will, but unable to do evil?"
Another simple one. No-one can do that, not even God. A person who is free and yet cannot choose wrongly is a person who is both free and not free. <i>Not even God could create such a "round square"</i>. Free will isn't free will without choice. No matter how omnipotent you are, you cannot carry out two mutually exclusive alternatives <i>not because your power hits an obstacle, but because nonsense remains nonsense, even when we talk it about God.</i>
Let me just give another example here.
Let say, somehow, you know if your friend is going to be going to the cinema tonight. Now, let say you keep your mouth shut, and lets say your friend ends up going to the cinema. You knew he would do that, and nothing that would have happened was going to stop him going. If you asked your friend why he came to the cinema, the reason would be one such like "I wanted to" or "there was a good film on" or "My mum wanted someone to go with my young sister, so i volunteered". Either way, if you ask your friend if he had the choice whether or not he went to the cinema, he would say yes, he did have a choice. But, hang on, you knew what was going to happen, so he didn't have a choice? Who is resposible for his actions? Is it you? Because you knew what was going to happen? How can it be your responsibility? You know that if A is pointing a loaded gun at B's head, and if A pulls the trigger, that B is gonna get shot. It's not your fault. Therefore, the resposibility for the action must lie with A, the person who pulled the trigger.
Well, I hope that's cleared things up. Or thrown a spanner in the works. One or the other. Maybe both.
GrendelAll that is fear...Join Date: 2002-07-19Member: 970Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, NS2 Playtester
<!--QuoteBegin-Bogglesteinsky+Apr 12 2005, 07:34 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Bogglesteinsky @ Apr 12 2005, 07:34 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> You know that if A is pointing a loaded gun at B's head, and if A pulls the trigger, that B is gonna get shot. It's not your fault. Therefore, the resposibility for the action must lie with A, the person who pulled the trigger. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> If you created the gun, created A, created B and created the entire environment in which they live, then I'd say that <b>you</b> were responsible.
<!--QuoteBegin-Bogglesteinsky+Apr 12 2005, 01:34 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Bogglesteinsky @ Apr 12 2005, 01:34 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> "Why couldn't God just create us with free will, but unable to do evil?"
Another simple one. No-one can do that, not even God. A person who is free and yet cannot choose wrongly is a person who is both free and not free. <i>Not even God could create such a "round square"</i>. Free will isn't free will without choice. No matter how omnipotent you are, you cannot carry out two mutually exclusive alternatives <i>not because your power hits an obstacle, but because nonsense remains nonsense, even when we talk it about God.</i> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> It may be nonsense to us, but we aren't God. God created the rules. He shouldn't be constrained by logic any more than He is by science.
<!--QuoteBegin-Grendel+Apr 12 2005, 04:23 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Grendel @ Apr 12 2005, 04:23 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Bogglesteinsky+Apr 12 2005, 07:34 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Bogglesteinsky @ Apr 12 2005, 07:34 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> You know that if A is pointing a loaded gun at B's head, and if A pulls the trigger, that B is gonna get shot. It's not your fault. Therefore, the resposibility for the action must lie with A, the person who pulled the trigger. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> If you created the gun, created A, created B and created the entire environment in which they live, then I'd say that <b>you</b> were responsible. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> You, as well as theclam, still assert that there are deterministic factors at work in any person's free choice.
A free choice is one that is made <i>independant</i> of these chemical, biological, or environmental variables. The thing you attack is simply determinism-by-another-name, a nice and convenient strawman argument.
In the example above, imagine there is no environmental factor that forces A to shoot B. There is no chemical influence in A's mind that alters his judgement. There is no predisposition to either course of action for A. Then, it would be free will: a choice made, by it's very definition, free from any other deterministic factors. A could stoicly, lucidly pull the trigger, or he could put the gun down and buy B a happy meal, it doesn't matter.
Christianity claims that ultimately, our surroundings <i>do not matter</i> when responding to this fundamental question. Since God is a personal being, and since we are personal beings, the choice we must make is a purely personal one between us and God, with no other factors. We can hate God because of something or other that happened to us early in life, but these are secondary arguments made after the thought to justify our actions to ourselves, much like Christian testimonies and the like.
theclam, I realize that I exclude other religions when I make my points. I'm not concerned with that, as if I tried to defend every religion equally, I'd contradict myself constantly; the religions of the world are talking at cross-purposes.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I'm beginning to think that arguing with the religious is futile. Then I realize that I enjoy it. It makes me feel superior, which I guess is stereotypical for an atheist.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
GrendelAll that is fear...Join Date: 2002-07-19Member: 970Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, NS2 Playtester
So essentially what you are saying is that free will operates independently of physical laws?
I think you should probably tell the entirety of the sociological and psychological professions to pack up and go home then. If the above were true, then neither field would be able to exist.
Yet they do. Not only that, but they produce data which is consistent and provable. To suggest that behaviour is not determined by physical laws pretty much denies the existance of mental illness. I find that hard to swallow.
<!--QuoteBegin-Snidely+Apr 12 2005, 04:26 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Snidely @ Apr 12 2005, 04:26 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Bogglesteinsky+Apr 12 2005, 01:34 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Bogglesteinsky @ Apr 12 2005, 01:34 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> "Why couldn't God just create us with free will, but unable to do evil?"
Another simple one. No-one can do that, not even God. A person who is free and yet cannot choose wrongly is a person who is both free and not free. <i>Not even God could create such a "round square"</i>. Free will isn't free will without choice. No matter how omnipotent you are, you cannot carry out two mutually exclusive alternatives <i>not because your power hits an obstacle, but because nonsense remains nonsense, even when we talk it about God.</i> <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> It may be nonsense to us, but we aren't God. God created the rules. He shouldn't be constrained by logic any more than He is by science. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> If God is not restrained by logic, then there is no point in attempting to discuss God in any fasion. How could a perfect God both commit genocide and denounce killing? Well, logic doesn't apply to God, so he can. Its the perfect cop-out, congradulations.
--- <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> You, as well as theclam, still assert that there are deterministic factors at work in any person's free choice.
A free choice is one that is made independant of these chemical, biological, or environmental variables. The thing you attack is simply determinism-by-another-name, a nice and convenient strawman argument.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> It would be, if the christian God didn't take external factors into account, but he quite obviously does. Again we go back to the fall, where a serpent (who is known for his deceptiveness) convinces humans (who at the time have no knowledge of good and evil) to eat an apple, violating God commandment (and condemning all of humanity in the process, because for some reason God punishes all the future generations of humanity because the first two **** up, thanks oh merciful almighty asshat!).
I noticed you still don't have an explaination for the whole "How could man know that disobeying God was bad when he didn't know good from evil at all?".
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->In my experience? Unquestionably.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> And unquestionably, the reverse is also true.
---
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I believe in free will...because I choose to.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> That doesn't make it true, or even possible. I wouldn't care what you believe, except that I know for a fact these beliefes affect your decision making process when it comes to determining what laws will be instituted, who will lead the country, ect. And that affects me, and I'd rather not have crazy notions being aplied to me IN SPITE OF evidence that they are, in fact, crazy notions.
<!--QuoteBegin-Grendel+Apr 12 2005, 08:16 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Grendel @ Apr 12 2005, 08:16 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->So essentially what you are saying is that free will operates independently of physical laws?
I think you should probably tell the entirety of the sociological and psychological professions to pack up and go home then. If the above were true, then neither field would be able to exist.
Yet they do. Not only that, but they produce data which is consistent and provable. To suggest that behaviour is not determined by physical laws pretty much denies the existance of mental illness. I find that hard to swallow.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> What "free will" actually means is another classic philosophical debate that goes back to the ancient Greeks... some summaries of classic viewpoints:
Rutledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy: <a href='http://www.rep.routledge.com/article/V014' target='_blank'>http://www.rep.routledge.com/article/V014</a> Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: <a href='http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/freewill/' target='_blank'>http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/freewill/</a>
A few answers to "what is free will?" from different perspectives (I haven't verified the sites actually represent the groups they use in their labels):
Catholic Encyclopedia: <a href='http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06259a.htm' target='_blank'>http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06259a.htm</a> The Objectivist Center: <a href='http://www.objectivistcenter.org/objectivism/faqs/wthomas_faq-free-will.asp' target='_blank'>http://www.objectivistcenter.org/objectivi...q-free-will.asp</a> (philosophies of Ayn Rand)
I'm going to remain out of the debate proper, but thought it would be a good idea to quickly lay some groundwork so the thread doesn't have to reinvent over 2000 years of argument and background discussion <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->.
<!--QuoteBegin-Grendel+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Grendel)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> If you created the gun, created A, created B and created the entire environment in which they live, then I'd say that <b>you</b> were responsible. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> If I didn't create the gun, A wouldn't have the choice not to shoot B. Therefore, regretably, I have got to create the gun, knowing full well that sometime, A will shoot B, yet, also knowing that the times when A doesn't B are because he chose not to, not because he couldn't.
----
<!--QuoteBegin-Snidely+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Snidely)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> It may be nonsense to us, but we aren't God. God created the rules. He shouldn't be constrained by logic any more than He is by science.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
God is bound by himself. God has shown himself to be a logical being, (having created logic) so he must also be bound by logic. God is not bound by science because it was man who created science to explain away God.
<!--QuoteBegin-SkulkBait+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SkulkBait)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->If God is not restrained by logic, then there is no point in attempting to discuss God in any fasion. How could a perfect God both commit genocide and denounce killing? Well, logic doesn't apply to God, so he can. Its the perfect cop-out, congradulations.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Exactly. So God is bound by logic.
----
<!--QuoteBegin-SkulkBait+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SkulkBait)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Again we go back to the fall, where a serpent (who is known for his deceptiveness) convinces humans (who at the time have no knowledge of good and evil) to eat an apple, violating God commandment .<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thats the fall alright. Whats the problem?
<!--QuoteBegin-SkulkBait+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SkulkBait)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->(and condemning all of humanity in the process, because for some reason God punishes all the future generations of humanity because the first two **** up, thanks oh merciful almighty asshat!)<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Romans 5+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Romans 5)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->12 Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sin entered the world through one man (Adam). Adam sinned and he brought death into the world upon himself. His children sinned and they brought death upon themselves. God doesn't condemn the whole human race because of Adam's sins, he condemns the whole human race because of the whole human race's sins.
<!--QuoteBegin-1 Corinthians 15+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (1 Corinthians 15)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
----
<!--QuoteBegin-SkulkBait+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SkulkBait)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I noticed you still don't have an explaination for the whole "How could man know that disobeying God was bad when he didn't know good from evil at all?".<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Genesis 2+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Genesis 2)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, "You may freely eat of every tree of the garden; 17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall die." <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It was a direct commandment. Don't do this, or else this will happen. You don't need any knowledge of good or evil to be able to obey or disobey a command. Look at dogs. They don't have any knowledge of good or evil, yet they still sit when their master tells them to.
<!--QuoteBegin-Bogglesteinsky+Apr 12 2005, 12:30 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Bogglesteinsky @ Apr 12 2005, 12:30 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Grendel+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Grendel)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> If you created the gun, created A, created B and created the entire environment in which they live, then I'd say that <b>you</b> were responsible. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> If I didn't create the gun, A wouldn't have the choice not to shoot B. Therefore, regretably, I have got to create the gun, knowing full well that sometime, A will shoot B, yet, also knowing that the times when A doesn't B are because he chose not to, not because he couldn't.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why even give the choice? Do you give a gun to your children, to give them a choice not to shoot each other?
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-Snidely+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Snidely)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> It may be nonsense to us, but we aren't God. God created the rules. He shouldn't be constrained by logic any more than He is by science.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
God is bound by himself. God has shown himself to be a logical being, (having created logic) so he must also be bound by logic. God is not bound by science because it was man who created science to explain away God.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Science is derived from logic. Thus, if God is bound by logic, then God is bound by some of science (Mathematics, for instance).
Also, if you think God is bound by logic, then he put us in the garden of Eden in order to make us fall from grace. That's interesting to me, because it suggests a not purely altruistic God.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-SkulkBait+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SkulkBait)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->(and condemning all of humanity in the process, because for some reason God punishes all the future generations of humanity because the first two **** up, thanks oh merciful almighty asshat!)<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Romans 5+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Romans 5)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->12 Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sin entered the world through one man (Adam). Adam sinned and he brought death into the world upon himself. His children sinned and they brought death upon themselves. God doesn't condemn the whole human race because of Adam's sins, he condemns the whole human race because of the whole human race's sins.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Another thing that I find interesting about God is that he rewards or punishes the human race for not living up to his ideals.
Also, I find the concept of Hell (the eternal punishment for unrepentant sinners) to be contradictory with a good, just God. If the actions of unrepentant sinners are so bad, then why not force us to live with our actions, by allowing us to build a society upon our sins. That would be a more fitting punishment than eternal damnation to the greatest torments a human body can face (no crime deserves this punishment). This is somewhat peripheral to our main course of discussion, however.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-SkulkBait+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SkulkBait)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I noticed you still don't have an explaination for the whole "How could man know that disobeying God was bad when he didn't know good from evil at all?".<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Genesis 2+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Genesis 2)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, "You may freely eat of every tree of the garden; 17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall die." <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It was a direct commandment. Don't do this, or else this will happen. You don't need any knowledge of good or evil to be able to obey or disobey a command. Look at dogs. They don't have any knowledge of good or evil, yet they still sit when their master tells them to.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Some dogs sit. Some don't. All dogs that sit upon hearing a master's commands are trained that way. Dogs aren't sentient, however, and don't have the kind of curiosity that humans have.
Plus, God knew that they would disobey his order, because he is omniscient. Adam and Eve had curiosity and immortality, so they would eventually eat the apple.
<!--QuoteBegin-theclam+Apr 12 2005, 05:46 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (theclam @ Apr 12 2005, 05:46 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Why even give the choice? Do you give a gun to your children, to give them a choice not to shoot each other?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> No, because they are children and incapable of making a decision that they are fully responsible for. Notice how the law treats minors differently? Same thing.
<!--QuoteBegin-theclam+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (theclam)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Science is derived from logic. Thus, if God is bound by logic, then God is bound by some of science (Mathematics, for instance).<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Science is derived from logic, yes. Yes, God is also bound by some aspects of science (those that derive directly from logic, such as areas of mathematics).
<!--QuoteBegin-theclam+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (theclam)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Also, if you think God is bound by logic, then he put us in the garden of Eden in order to make us fall from grace. That's interesting to me, because it suggests a not purely altruistic God.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No. I "think" (read believe) that God put humans in the garden to chose to love him. The idea of a not purely altruistic God no longer holds.
<!--QuoteBegin-theclam+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (theclam)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Another thing that I find interesting about God is that he rewards or punishes the human race for not living up to his ideals.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why shouldn't he? If your children disobey you, you would be a bad parent not to punish them
<!--QuoteBegin-theclam+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (theclam)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Also, I find the concept of Hell (the eternal punishment for unrepentant sinners) to be contradictory with a good, just God. If the actions of unrepentant sinners are so bad, then why not force us to live with our actions, by allowing us to build a society upon our sins. That would be a more fitting punishment than eternal damnation to the greatest torments a human body can face (no crime deserves this punishment). This is somewhat peripheral to our main course of discussion, however. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Hell is not a punishment, it is a consequence.
<!--QuoteBegin-Romans 6+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Romans 6)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->23 For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-theclam+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (theclam)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Some dogs sit. Some don't. All dogs that sit upon hearing a master's commands are trained that way. Dogs aren't sentient, however, and don't have the kind of curiosity that humans have.
Plus, God knew that they would disobey his order, because he is omniscient. Adam and Eve had curiosity and immortality, so they would eventually eat the apple.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Is it just me, or are we arguing round in circles? Whether they would eventually eat the apple is irrelevant. At every step along the way, they had the choice to not eat the apple. Therefore, when they did eat the apple, they chose to eat it. Yes, God knew they would eat the apple. But, being a logical being, bound by logic, he had to put it there to give them the choice not to.
<!--QuoteBegin-SkulkBait+Apr 12 2005, 11:50 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SkulkBait @ Apr 12 2005, 11:50 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Snidely+Apr 12 2005, 04:26 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Snidely @ Apr 12 2005, 04:26 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->It may be nonsense to us, but we aren't God. God created the rules. He shouldn't be constrained by logic any more than He is by science. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> If God is not restrained by logic, then there is no point in attempting to discuss God in any fasion. How could a perfect God both commit genocide and denounce killing? Well, logic doesn't apply to God, so he can. Its the perfect cop-out, congratulations. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> The fact that God didn't use his logic-defying powers to make the perfect world suggests to me that He isn't perfect. ___ <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->God is bound by himself. God has shown himself to be a logical being, (having created logic) so he must also be bound by logic. God is not bound by science because it was man who created science to explain away God.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree with theclam here. God clearly wanted us to eat the fruit. If He didn't, He wouldn't have created the fruit in the first place - or at least not make it appetising.
On a side note, I hope you're joking about science being "created" to explain away God. (:
Actually, not yet anyway... I have to finish some consulting work, and then I've got church tonight, but things are going out of whack as is, and as Cagey said, we don't want to drag this thread through 2300 years of philisophical muck.
I'll only respond to one point for now:
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Also, I find the concept of Hell (the eternal punishment for unrepentant sinners) to be contradictory with a good, just God. If the actions of unrepentant sinners are so bad, then why not force us to live with our actions, by allowing us to build a society upon our sins. That would be a more fitting punishment than eternal damnation to the greatest torments a human body can face (no crime deserves this punishment). This is somewhat peripheral to our main course of discussion, however.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The biblical idea is that mankind is to be separated from God for their actions, the fire and brimstone part comes from a verse in Revelations that talks about Satan, and all those who stand with him being thrown into fire. However, a few things are true:
1) Nothing can physically burn forever. 2) Revelations tells of those people being physically ressurected for their judgement (IIRC, been a while since I've done an inductive study of it...). 3) Numerous places, it's written that the "wages of sin is death." This is supposedly the cause of physical death, and also that of spiritual death and separation from God.
So, if nothing can physically burn forever, and the people destroyed in this manner have physical components, and those who sin can expect death, then the logical conclusion holds that hell is merely total obliteration.
This is true, at least for those who actively oppose God and knowingly ally themselves with Satan. For those that do it unknowingly, it's possible that they might simply, as you suggested, live out their lives without God in them. C.S. Lewis paints a picture of a world like this in <u>The Great Divorce.</u>
Either way, the picture of eternally being physically tortured is probably conjecture and was invented somewhere along the way. I personally hold the first view, but if I found the second (eternal separation) was true, I'd not be much suprised.
Speaking of suffering and gnashing of teeth, back to work....
<!--QuoteBegin-Bogglesteinsky+Apr 12 2005, 12:30 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Bogglesteinsky @ Apr 12 2005, 12:30 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-SkulkBait+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SkulkBait)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Again we go back to the fall, where a serpent (who is known for his deceptiveness) convinces humans (who at the time have no knowledge of good and evil) to eat an apple, violating God commandment .<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thats the fall alright. Whats the problem? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Maybe you missed it. God creates man, flawed and suceptable to manipulation. God also creates serpent (satan I guess) who rebels against him and has quite a knack for being deceptive and manipulative. God creates tree of knowledge, for no readily aparent purpose. God commands Adam and Eve not to eat from the tree of knowledge, knowing that the serpent will attempt to manipulate them, and knowing that they are very much capable of being decieved. Also, since they don't have a concept of good and evil, why should they trust God over the serpent? Serpent, given all of eternity to do so, convinces humans to eat from the tree. God then throws man out of eden. Now if this doesn't look like a setup to you then you're blind. Thats the problem.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-SkulkBait+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SkulkBait)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->(and condemning all of humanity in the process, because for some reason God punishes all the future generations of humanity because the first two **** up, thanks oh merciful almighty asshat!)<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Romans 5+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Romans 5)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->12 Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sin entered the world through one man (Adam). Adam sinned and he brought death into the world upon himself. His children sinned and they brought death upon themselves. God doesn't condemn the whole human race because of Adam's sins, he condemns the whole human race because of the whole human race's sins.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> STOP! Hold it right there. Let me get this straight: Adam sins, gets punished. Adam's children are born into sin because they aren't in eden, and thanks to adam they know good and evil. God punishes Adam's children. So God is punishing Adam's children for Adam's mistake. There is no other way to interpret this that I can see.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-SkulkBait+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SkulkBait)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I noticed you still don't have an explaination for the whole "How could man know that disobeying God was bad when he didn't know good from evil at all?".<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It was a direct commandment. Don't do this, or else this will happen. You don't need any knowledge of good or evil to be able to obey or disobey a command.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> How were they supposed to know that God's command is to be followed and the serpent's command isn't? They don't know that the serpent is evil any more then they know that God is good, so why not trust the serpent?
---
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> No, because they are children and incapable of making a decision that they are fully responsible for.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> So how can you hold Adam and Eve (who have no reason to trust God over the serpent since they they don't know good and evil), responsible for their decision? One being told them "Don't eat that", the other one said "Go ahead and eat it, its fine", who are they supposed to believe? God didn't give them the capacity to understand that the serpent was not to be trusted!
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Science is derived from logic, yes. Yes, God is also bound by some aspects of science (those that derive directly from logic, such as areas of mathematics).<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> All science is derived from logic, it is a fundamental component, to state otherwise suggests a poor understanding of scientific method.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->No. I "think" (read believe) that God put humans in the garden to chose to love him. The idea of a not purely altruistic God no longer holds.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Thats rediculous. If God didn't want the fall to happen, then why create the tree of knowledge in the first place?
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Why shouldn't he? If your children disobey you, you would be a bad parent not to punish them<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> The difference is that people typically don't punish their children for all of flipping eternity. It is a temporary act, designed to help train their little minds to behave, or not stick things in power sockets, or whatever. It serves a purpose. What possible purpose could be served by eternal punishment?
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Hell is not a punishment, it is a consequence.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Punishments ARE consequences. Semantic games will get you nowhere.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Is it just me, or are we arguing round in circles? Whether they would eventually eat the apple is irrelevant. At every step along the way, they had the choice to not eat the apple. Therefore, when they did eat the apple, they chose to eat it. Yes, God knew they would eat the apple. But, being a logical being, bound by logic, he had to put it there to give them the choice not to.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Even though it is literally impossible for them to make that choice, and continue to make it for all of eternity? God can't be that stupid, though he might be that cruel.
<!--QuoteBegin-Bogglesteinsky+Apr 12 2005, 01:21 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Bogglesteinsky @ Apr 12 2005, 01:21 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-theclam+Apr 12 2005, 05:46 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (theclam @ Apr 12 2005, 05:46 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Why even give the choice? Do you give a gun to your children, to give them a choice not to shoot each other?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> No, because they are children and incapable of making a decision that they are fully responsible for. Notice how the law treats minors differently? Same thing.
<!--QuoteBegin-theclam+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (theclam)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Another thing that I find interesting about God is that he rewards or punishes the human race for not living up to his ideals.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why shouldn't he? If your children disobey you, you would be a bad parent not to punish them<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> It's interesting that I treat humanity like adults in terms of punishment (live with the consequences of your actions; you shouldn't be held responsible to your parents in terms of punishment as an adult) but like a child in terms of responsibilities (don't needlessly tempt your children by giving them a gun; don't needlessly tempt humanity by giving them a fruit). You, however, are the opposite. You treat humanity like children in terms of punishment (children get punished by their parentsif they do something wrong; humanity gets punished by God if it does something wrong), but like an adult in terms of responsibilities (give people the choice to make wrong actions, instead of only presenting the "right" choice to them).
I'm not trying to make a specific point here, but it's an interesting observation that we have exactly opposite views on this. <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-theclam+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (theclam)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Also, if you think God is bound by logic, then he put us in the garden of Eden in order to make us fall from grace. That's interesting to me, because it suggests a not purely altruistic God.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No. I "think" (read believe) that God put humans in the garden to chose to love him. The idea of a not purely altruistic God no longer holds.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It wasn't much of a choice. It was inevitable. See the earlier explanation that I did about the probability of it happening.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-theclam+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (theclam)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Also, I find the concept of Hell (the eternal punishment for unrepentant sinners) to be contradictory with a good, just God. If the actions of unrepentant sinners are so bad, then why not force us to live with our actions, by allowing us to build a society upon our sins. That would be a more fitting punishment than eternal damnation to the greatest torments a human body can face (no crime deserves this punishment). This is somewhat peripheral to our main course of discussion, however. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Hell is not a punishment, it is a consequence.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> It's more of a punishment than a consequence.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->con·se·quence Audio pronunciation of "consequence" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (kns-kwns, -kwns) n.
<b>1. Something that logically or naturally follows from an action or condition. See Synonyms at effect.</b> 2. The relation of a result to its cause. 3. A logical conclusion or inference. 4. Importance in rank or position: scientists of consequence. 5. Significance; importance: an issue of consequence. See Synonyms at importance.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->pun·ish·ment Audio pronunciation of "punishment" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (pnsh-mnt) n.
1. 1. The act or an instance of punishing. 2. The condition of being punished. 2. A penalty imposed for wrongdoing: “The severity of the punishment must... be in keeping with the kind of obligation which has been violated” (Simone Weil). 3. Rough handling; mistreatment: These old skis have taken a lot of punishment over the years.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> What would be the logical or natural consequence to doing bad things? I don't think Hell is the logical or natural consequence at all. There is little to indicate to humanity that they will go to Hell, rather than some holy books, based upon the human interpretation of the opinion of a god, that are unique to one specific religion and that contradict other religions. If we disregard the fact that there isn't any conclusive evidence pointing towards a written order from God about punishment, and just assume that He is real, then I would still come to the conclusion that it is an artificial form of punishment. Why send humanity to Hell (or annihilate them, like Legionnaire indicates) over some other form of punishment?
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-theclam+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (theclam)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Some dogs sit. Some don't. All dogs that sit upon hearing a master's commands are trained that way. Dogs aren't sentient, however, and don't have the kind of curiosity that humans have.
Plus, God knew that they would disobey his order, because he is omniscient. Adam and Eve had curiosity and immortality, so they would eventually eat the apple.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Is it just me, or are we arguing round in circles? Whether they would eventually eat the apple is irrelevant. At every step along the way, they had the choice to not eat the apple. Therefore, when they did eat the apple, they chose to eat it. Yes, God knew they would eat the apple. But, being a logical being, bound by logic, he had to put it there to give them the choice not to.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Why did he have "to put it there to give them the choice not to"? It's not something he <b>had</b> to do, because he is a "logical being, bound by logic", it's something he <b>wanted</b> to do (much like creating humanity, in the first place). God had the <u>choice</u> to do it.
<!--QuoteBegin-SkulkBait+Apr 12 2005, 03:18 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SkulkBait @ Apr 12 2005, 03:18 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Science is derived from logic, yes. Yes, God is also bound by some aspects of science (those that derive directly from logic, such as areas of mathematics).<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> All science is derived from logic, it is a fundamental component, to state otherwise suggests a poor understanding of scientific method. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Science is derived from the scientific method, which is a logical device to expand our knowledge of the universe in a truthful fashion. Some areas of knowledge (Mathematics, Logic, etc) derive directly from plain logic, itself. Other areas of knowledge (Biology, Physics, etc) derive not just from logic and th scientific method, but also from our flawed (by definition, if we had all the information, allowing us to make perfectly informed conclusions, then we wouldn't have any reason to do science int he first place) observations of the universe. Most fields of science don't contain ultimate truths about the universe, but the best truths that we can derive from the data that we have obtained, resulting in conclusions that are approximations of ultimate truths.
Comments
In other words, that apple is the only thing that saved us from extinction. I still like to bring it up from time to time though, in a joke that NEVER EVER EVER gets old!
"Without us women, where would you men be?"
"Still in the garden of Eden, damn you!"
It can be easily explained away with bs like "you have the choice, God just knows what you will choose"
blind faith for the lose
ps. Can I be omnileet? <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Faith is by definition blind, good sir. If you believe only because you see, it is no longer faith, but truth.
Please remove you foot from your mouth and have respect for other's views.
-edit now for some substance
To expand on Pepe's point in a more scientific direction, it's generally accepted that atomic theory could produce accurate predictions of the future by tracking and solving all sub-atomic particle collisions from now until the end of time. Now, this is quite impossible not only because there an infinite number of particles (as far as we're concerned) and collisions, oddly enough, happen fairly rarely, but also, by the final nail in the coffin, the uncertainty principle maintains that as you zero in on the position of such a particle, it's velocity becomes obscure and vice-versa.
However, if God had such capabilities, which He obviously should, it would be a simple matter for him to know everything about everything forever.
Remember that this is all theory, please!
-/edit-
/edit: Been mentioned...sorry though
Also, I've realized that the Bible is flawed in many ways (it seems). For example, why the hell did God send his son? If he can do anything, couldn't he have just said "BOOM SIN BE GONE" and it disappears?
Exactly.
Oh, and just wondering...is AvengerX banned or something? I havn't seen him in this thread yet.
Also, I've realized that the Bible is flawed in many ways (it seems). For example, why the hell did God send his son? If he can do anything, couldn't he have just said "BOOM SIN BE GONE" and it disappears?
Exactly.
Oh, and just wondering...is AvengerX banned or something? I havn't seen him in this thread yet. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Some Christians excuse some perceived flaws by saying that you can't presume to know why God does something, but I've never found that to be a convincing argument. I find it more likely that the people who wrote those stories were flawed and didn't come up with logically consistent stores (i.e. the Bible isn't true).
About AvengerX, he's banned. I presume that he was using a different nick (Ninja of the Night) under the same IP and was banned for it (he was temporarily suspended and then put on restricted access, presumably he was restricted from posting in the Discussions forum).
Yes, that's true. The stories could be easily false. But then we'd all be doomed to a firey damnation in hell (assuming that God does exist).
I wish that there were solid proof of God existing or not though. Life would be easier.
Anyway, God can do anything...but he chose one of the dumbest ways to do it (you have to admit it's dumb. It's like using carpet cleaner to clean a red stain, when you have an unlimited amount of of money, and can make the stain disappear instantaneously).
I don't understand. <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
I'm not even arguing here, just talking out my feelings, feel free to respond though <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
What some people are arguing here is that God allows humans to make free choices, but occasionally intervenes and determines what the future will be. Another answer is that God knows all of the possible futures that result from the free choices of humans.
On the other hand, determinism creates problems with the idea of an "all good God," since if God knew what would happen from the very beginning time to end, why would he allow the misery and suffering in the world to occur? Why does he allow evil to exist? etc
One answer is that God has chosen a future which we do not understand, so what we view as unecessary suffering might actually be good in a way we do not understand.
Personally, I don't hold a traditionall all knowing, all powerful view of God, so my beliefs in free will don't contradict my religious beliefs. All in all, I find the discussion of God and free will to be somewhat academic, similar to attempting to prove if God exists or some other similar debate. Still, it can be fun to see what other people think. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Sounds like a damned good reason to me. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The serpent told them that they wouldn't die.
<!--QuoteBegin-Genesis 3:4+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Genesis 3:4)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Without a knowledge that the serpent is evil and God is good, how would they know not to eat it. Would they even have concern over their own safety if they hadn't eaten the fruit yet?
Also, the "you will surely die" part reminds me that Adam and Eve were immortal. Thus, if God endowed Adam and Eve with even a single iota of curiosity, then they would have eventually eaten the fruit, because they were given infinite time.
For an event, if P1 is the probability of it happening, T is the amount of time during which it can happen, then P2 is the probability that it will eventually happen.
P1 * T = P2
Even if P1 is an almost infinitesimally small number, T would still be infinity, therefore it would happen. That's mathematics; I would think God would understand it. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Probability implies randomness. Randomness implies lack of choice.
There is nothing random about free will. Either you choose to believe the message you're presented with, be it the Gospel from a Christian, or 'God's invisible qualities evident in the world from it's creation.'(Romans 1:23?) or you don't. There is no rolling of dice, no external variables that matter enough to affect the outcome, only us and God, and the decision of what we want to do with that relationship.
God knows what is going to happen. He is all-knowing and all-mighty. He is today and tomorrow, this hour and the next, he is infinite, outside of time. Time is his slave, he rules over it, he created it.
Knowing and doing are two separate concepts, agreed?
God knows, he does not do. You do your "doing" and God will do his. God has a plan. He has a perfect will for mankind and everything. Does God intervene? Sure. Does he bend the concept of free-will in doing so? No! God doesn't twist anyone's arm and he never will. It is, honestly, up to you.
On a less-religious thought. Consider the Matrix. "You've already made your decision, now you must understand it." I agree with this statement, ultimately, you HAVE already made a decision but that's in the future and this is the present, you do the "deciding", right now.
Make sense? (Because if it doesn't I don't know what to tell you but I can always try.)
~ DarkATi
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Um.... what?
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->There is nothing random about free will. Either you choose to believe the message you're presented with, be it the Gospel from a Christian, or 'God's invisible qualities evident in the world from it's creation.'(Romans 1:23?) or you don't. There is no rolling of dice, no external variables that matter enough to affect the outcome, only us and God, and the decision of what we want to do with that relationship.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Alright, lets assume that you're correct in this. The fall is STILL a setup. Why? Because humans are flawed, they make mistakes. They can be manipulated. God knows this, yet he creates an entity with the ability to decieve and manipulate them (the serpent), and flawed beings suseptable to such manipulation (humans), and an infinite amount of time in which the one being is freely allowed to manipulate the other. Besides which there is theclam's argument:
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Why would they listen to God and not the serpent, since they don't understand that God is good and the serpent is evil? You may understand, but they didn't have the capability to understand something like that. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
----
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->God knows what is going to happen. He is all-knowing and all-mighty. He is today and tomorrow, this hour and the next, he is infinite, outside of time. Time is his slave, he rules over it, he created it.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If we're going to talk about time being meaningless to God because he is extra-universal, then there is no point in trying to apply logic to God in any wy whatsoever, since logic is a component of this universe.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
Knowing and doing are two separate concepts, agreed?
God knows, he does not do. You do your "doing" and God will do his. God has a plan. He has a perfect will for mankind and everything. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Those ar contradictory statements. If God has a plan, that means that he has set things into motion to be the way they are, therefore your choices are part of his devine plan (which he setup to be the way they are) and so you really have no choice at all.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
Does God intervene? Sure. Does he bend the concept of free-will in doing so? No! God doesn't twist anyone's arm and he never will. It is, honestly, up to you.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Except that by having a "plan" and enforcing it he is creating each human such that they will do certain things (in order to further his plan), they have no choice, they just think they do.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Make sense?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, not at all.
What does this have to do with my point? Adam and Eve have curiosity. Adam and Eve have unlimited free time. If there is something to explore in their limited world, then they will eventually explore it.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->There is nothing random about free will.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
People act randomly all the time. I flip coins, both metaphorically and literally. If there wasn't any randomness, probability, or chance, then people wouldn't act with any free will, but they would have their actions predetermined from the beginning of time.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Either you choose to believe the message you're presented with, be it the Gospel from a Christian, or 'God's invisible qualities evident in the world from it's creation.'(Romans 1:23?) or you don't. There is no rolling of dice, no external variables that matter enough to affect the outcome, only us and God, and the decision of what we want to do with that relationship.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ok, so there's only one right answer that you can derive from our current evidence and you can choose to believe it, or not. That's your point, right? I'm sure Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Jainists, and Zoroastrians will tell me the exact same thing, with minor variations depending on their choice of deity and holy book.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->God's invisible qualities evident in the world from it's creation<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Can you list some of them for me? They're not evident (<a href='http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=evident' target='_blank'>"Easily seen or understood; obvious"</a>) at all.
I'm beginning to think that arguing with the religious is futile. Then I realize that I enjoy it. It makes me feel superior, which I guess is stereotypical for an atheist.
God knows what is going to happen. He is all-knowing and all-mighty. He is today and tomorrow, this hour and the next, he is infinite, outside of time. Time is his slave, he rules over it, he created it.
Knowing and doing are two separate concepts, agreed?
God knows, he does not do. You do your "doing" and God will do his. God has a plan. He has a perfect will for mankind and everything. Does God intervene? Sure. Does he bend the concept of free-will in doing so? No! God doesn't twist anyone's arm and he never will. It is, honestly, up to you.
On a less-religious thought. Consider the Matrix. "You've already made your decision, now you must understand it." I agree with this statement, ultimately, you HAVE already made a decision but that's in the future and this is the present, you do the "deciding", right now.
Make sense? (Because if it doesn't I don't know what to tell you but I can always try.)
~ DarkATi <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
It doesn't make sense. It's a non-sensical argument.
God creates an initial state. He knows exactly what will happen in the future, because of this state. He knew what actions we were going to take, when he created that initial state. He could have modified those actions, by changing that initial state.
Thus, in a world with an omnipotent, omniscient creator, humanity has no free will.
"How does God knowing everything not contradict with our free will?"
To put it bluntly (and here you guys are gonna get really annoyed) it just doesn't. That's where faith comes in. Sorry guys. When Joseph was sent to Egypt by his brothers, after he meets them again, he explains to them: "you intended to harm me, but God intended if for good" Notice that it wasn't Joseph's brothers taking the initiative, with God interrupting to change the course of events (humans do not have complete free will), nor was it that the brother's ill treatment of joseph replaced God's plan of getting him to Egypt (God does not have complete control). "You intended ... but God intended..." shows that the brothers were completely responsible for their actions, yet God was actively and intentionally at work at every point. Every single evil action happens inside God's control, it doesn't happen without him knowing about it, yet he is not responsible for it.
I dunno if thats cleared anything up or made things worse. You tell me.
"Why couldn't God just create us with free will, but unable to do evil?"
Another simple one. No-one can do that, not even God. A person who is free and yet cannot choose wrongly is a person who is both free and not free. <i>Not even God could create such a "round square"</i>. Free will isn't free will without choice. No matter how omnipotent you are, you cannot carry out two mutually exclusive alternatives <i>not because your power hits an obstacle, but because nonsense remains nonsense, even when we talk it about God.</i>
Let me just give another example here.
Let say, somehow, you know if your friend is going to be going to the cinema tonight. Now, let say you keep your mouth shut, and lets say your friend ends up going to the cinema. You knew he would do that, and nothing that would have happened was going to stop him going. If you asked your friend why he came to the cinema, the reason would be one such like "I wanted to" or "there was a good film on" or "My mum wanted someone to go with my young sister, so i volunteered". Either way, if you ask your friend if he had the choice whether or not he went to the cinema, he would say yes, he did have a choice. But, hang on, you knew what was going to happen, so he didn't have a choice? Who is resposible for his actions? Is it you? Because you knew what was going to happen? How can it be your responsibility? You know that if A is pointing a loaded gun at B's head, and if A pulls the trigger, that B is gonna get shot. It's not your fault. Therefore, the resposibility for the action must lie with A, the person who pulled the trigger.
Well, I hope that's cleared things up. Or thrown a spanner in the works. One or the other. Maybe both.
If you created the gun, created A, created B and created the entire environment in which they live, then I'd say that <b>you</b> were responsible.
Another simple one. No-one can do that, not even God. A person who is free and yet cannot choose wrongly is a person who is both free and not free. <i>Not even God could create such a "round square"</i>. Free will isn't free will without choice. No matter how omnipotent you are, you cannot carry out two mutually exclusive alternatives <i>not because your power hits an obstacle, but because nonsense remains nonsense, even when we talk it about God.</i> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
It may be nonsense to us, but we aren't God. God created the rules. He shouldn't be constrained by logic any more than He is by science.
If you created the gun, created A, created B and created the entire environment in which they live, then I'd say that <b>you</b> were responsible. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
You, as well as theclam, still assert that there are deterministic factors at work in any person's free choice.
A free choice is one that is made <i>independant</i> of these chemical, biological, or environmental variables. The thing you attack is simply determinism-by-another-name, a nice and convenient strawman argument.
In the example above, imagine there is no environmental factor that forces A to shoot B. There is no chemical influence in A's mind that alters his judgement. There is no predisposition to either course of action for A. Then, it would be free will: a choice made, by it's very definition, free from any other deterministic factors. A could stoicly, lucidly pull the trigger, or he could put the gun down and buy B a happy meal, it doesn't matter.
Christianity claims that ultimately, our surroundings <i>do not matter</i> when responding to this fundamental question. Since God is a personal being, and since we are personal beings, the choice we must make is a purely personal one between us and God, with no other factors. We can hate God because of something or other that happened to us early in life, but these are secondary arguments made after the thought to justify our actions to ourselves, much like Christian testimonies and the like.
theclam, I realize that I exclude other religions when I make my points. I'm not concerned with that, as if I tried to defend every religion equally, I'd contradict myself constantly; the religions of the world are talking at cross-purposes.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I'm beginning to think that arguing with the religious is futile. Then I realize that I enjoy it. It makes me feel superior, which I guess is stereotypical for an atheist.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
In my experience? Unquestionably.
I think you should probably tell the entirety of the sociological and psychological professions to pack up and go home then. If the above were true, then neither field would be able to exist.
Yet they do. Not only that, but they produce data which is consistent and provable. To suggest that behaviour is not determined by physical laws pretty much denies the existance of mental illness. I find that hard to swallow.
Another simple one. No-one can do that, not even God. A person who is free and yet cannot choose wrongly is a person who is both free and not free. <i>Not even God could create such a "round square"</i>. Free will isn't free will without choice. No matter how omnipotent you are, you cannot carry out two mutually exclusive alternatives <i>not because your power hits an obstacle, but because nonsense remains nonsense, even when we talk it about God.</i> <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It may be nonsense to us, but we aren't God. God created the rules. He shouldn't be constrained by logic any more than He is by science. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If God is not restrained by logic, then there is no point in attempting to discuss God in any fasion. How could a perfect God both commit genocide and denounce killing? Well, logic doesn't apply to God, so he can. Its the perfect cop-out, congradulations.
---
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> You, as well as theclam, still assert that there are deterministic factors at work in any person's free choice.
A free choice is one that is made independant of these chemical, biological, or environmental variables. The thing you attack is simply determinism-by-another-name, a nice and convenient strawman argument.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It would be, if the christian God didn't take external factors into account, but he quite obviously does. Again we go back to the fall, where a serpent (who is known for his deceptiveness) convinces humans (who at the time have no knowledge of good and evil) to eat an apple, violating God commandment (and condemning all of humanity in the process, because for some reason God punishes all the future generations of humanity because the first two **** up, thanks oh merciful almighty asshat!).
I noticed you still don't have an explaination for the whole "How could man know that disobeying God was bad when he didn't know good from evil at all?".
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->In my experience? Unquestionably.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And unquestionably, the reverse is also true.
---
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I believe in free will...because I choose to.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That doesn't make it true, or even possible. I wouldn't care what you believe, except that I know for a fact these beliefes affect your decision making process when it comes to determining what laws will be instituted, who will lead the country, ect. And that affects me, and I'd rather not have crazy notions being aplied to me IN SPITE OF evidence that they are, in fact, crazy notions.
I think you should probably tell the entirety of the sociological and psychological professions to pack up and go home then. If the above were true, then neither field would be able to exist.
Yet they do. Not only that, but they produce data which is consistent and provable. To suggest that behaviour is not determined by physical laws pretty much denies the existance of mental illness. I find that hard to swallow.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What "free will" actually means is another classic philosophical debate that goes back to the ancient Greeks... some summaries of classic viewpoints:
Rutledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy: <a href='http://www.rep.routledge.com/article/V014' target='_blank'>http://www.rep.routledge.com/article/V014</a>
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: <a href='http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/freewill/' target='_blank'>http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/freewill/</a>
A few answers to "what is free will?" from different perspectives (I haven't verified the sites actually represent the groups they use in their labels):
Catholic Encyclopedia: <a href='http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06259a.htm' target='_blank'>http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06259a.htm</a>
The Objectivist Center: <a href='http://www.objectivistcenter.org/objectivism/faqs/wthomas_faq-free-will.asp' target='_blank'>http://www.objectivistcenter.org/objectivi...q-free-will.asp</a> (philosophies of Ayn Rand)
I'm going to remain out of the debate proper, but thought it would be a good idea to quickly lay some groundwork so the thread doesn't have to reinvent over 2000 years of argument and background discussion <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->.
If I didn't create the gun, A wouldn't have the choice not to shoot B. Therefore, regretably, I have got to create the gun, knowing full well that sometime, A will shoot B, yet, also knowing that the times when A doesn't B are because he chose not to, not because he couldn't.
----
<!--QuoteBegin-Snidely+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Snidely)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> It may be nonsense to us, but we aren't God. God created the rules. He shouldn't be constrained by logic any more than He is by science.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
God is bound by himself. God has shown himself to be a logical being, (having created logic) so he must also be bound by logic. God is not bound by science because it was man who created science to explain away God.
<!--QuoteBegin-SkulkBait+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SkulkBait)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->If God is not restrained by logic, then there is no point in attempting to discuss God in any fasion. How could a perfect God both commit genocide and denounce killing? Well, logic doesn't apply to God, so he can. Its the perfect cop-out, congradulations.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Exactly. So God is bound by logic.
----
<!--QuoteBegin-SkulkBait+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SkulkBait)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Again we go back to the fall, where a serpent (who is known for his deceptiveness) convinces humans (who at the time have no knowledge of good and evil) to eat an apple, violating God commandment .<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thats the fall alright. Whats the problem?
<!--QuoteBegin-SkulkBait+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SkulkBait)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->(and condemning all of humanity in the process, because for some reason God punishes all the future generations of humanity because the first two **** up, thanks oh merciful almighty asshat!)<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Romans 5+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Romans 5)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->12 Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sin entered the world through one man (Adam). Adam sinned and he brought death into the world upon himself. His children sinned and they brought death upon themselves. God doesn't condemn the whole human race because of Adam's sins, he condemns the whole human race because of the whole human race's sins.
<!--QuoteBegin-1 Corinthians 15+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (1 Corinthians 15)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
----
<!--QuoteBegin-SkulkBait+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SkulkBait)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I noticed you still don't have an explaination for the whole "How could man know that disobeying God was bad when he didn't know good from evil at all?".<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Genesis 2+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Genesis 2)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, "You may freely eat of every tree of the garden; 17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall die." <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It was a direct commandment. Don't do this, or else this will happen. You don't need any knowledge of good or evil to be able to obey or disobey a command. Look at dogs. They don't have any knowledge of good or evil, yet they still sit when their master tells them to.
If I didn't create the gun, A wouldn't have the choice not to shoot B. Therefore, regretably, I have got to create the gun, knowing full well that sometime, A will shoot B, yet, also knowing that the times when A doesn't B are because he chose not to, not because he couldn't.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why even give the choice? Do you give a gun to your children, to give them a choice not to shoot each other?
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-Snidely+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Snidely)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> It may be nonsense to us, but we aren't God. God created the rules. He shouldn't be constrained by logic any more than He is by science.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
God is bound by himself. God has shown himself to be a logical being, (having created logic) so he must also be bound by logic. God is not bound by science because it was man who created science to explain away God.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Science is derived from logic. Thus, if God is bound by logic, then God is bound by some of science (Mathematics, for instance).
Also, if you think God is bound by logic, then he put us in the garden of Eden in order to make us fall from grace. That's interesting to me, because it suggests a not purely altruistic God.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-SkulkBait+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SkulkBait)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->(and condemning all of humanity in the process, because for some reason God punishes all the future generations of humanity because the first two **** up, thanks oh merciful almighty asshat!)<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Romans 5+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Romans 5)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->12 Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sin entered the world through one man (Adam). Adam sinned and he brought death into the world upon himself. His children sinned and they brought death upon themselves. God doesn't condemn the whole human race because of Adam's sins, he condemns the whole human race because of the whole human race's sins.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Another thing that I find interesting about God is that he rewards or punishes the human race for not living up to his ideals.
Also, I find the concept of Hell (the eternal punishment for unrepentant sinners) to be contradictory with a good, just God. If the actions of unrepentant sinners are so bad, then why not force us to live with our actions, by allowing us to build a society upon our sins. That would be a more fitting punishment than eternal damnation to the greatest torments a human body can face (no crime deserves this punishment). This is somewhat peripheral to our main course of discussion, however.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-SkulkBait+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SkulkBait)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I noticed you still don't have an explaination for the whole "How could man know that disobeying God was bad when he didn't know good from evil at all?".<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Genesis 2+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Genesis 2)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, "You may freely eat of every tree of the garden; 17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall die." <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It was a direct commandment. Don't do this, or else this will happen. You don't need any knowledge of good or evil to be able to obey or disobey a command. Look at dogs. They don't have any knowledge of good or evil, yet they still sit when their master tells them to.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Some dogs sit. Some don't. All dogs that sit upon hearing a master's commands are trained that way. Dogs aren't sentient, however, and don't have the kind of curiosity that humans have.
Plus, God knew that they would disobey his order, because he is omniscient. Adam and Eve had curiosity and immortality, so they would eventually eat the apple.
No, because they are children and incapable of making a decision that they are fully responsible for. Notice how the law treats minors differently? Same thing.
<!--QuoteBegin-theclam+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (theclam)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Science is derived from logic. Thus, if God is bound by logic, then God is bound by some of science (Mathematics, for instance).<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Science is derived from logic, yes. Yes, God is also bound by some aspects of science (those that derive directly from logic, such as areas of mathematics).
<!--QuoteBegin-theclam+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (theclam)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Also, if you think God is bound by logic, then he put us in the garden of Eden in order to make us fall from grace. That's interesting to me, because it suggests a not purely altruistic God.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No. I "think" (read believe) that God put humans in the garden to chose to love him. The idea of a not purely altruistic God no longer holds.
<!--QuoteBegin-theclam+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (theclam)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Another thing that I find interesting about God is that he rewards or punishes the human race for not living up to his ideals.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why shouldn't he? If your children disobey you, you would be a bad parent not to punish them
<!--QuoteBegin-theclam+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (theclam)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Also, I find the concept of Hell (the eternal punishment for unrepentant sinners) to be contradictory with a good, just God. If the actions of unrepentant sinners are so bad, then why not force us to live with our actions, by allowing us to build a society upon our sins. That would be a more fitting punishment than eternal damnation to the greatest torments a human body can face (no crime deserves this punishment). This is somewhat peripheral to our main course of discussion, however.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Hell is not a punishment, it is a consequence.
<!--QuoteBegin-Romans 6+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Romans 6)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->23 For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-theclam+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (theclam)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Some dogs sit. Some don't. All dogs that sit upon hearing a master's commands are trained that way. Dogs aren't sentient, however, and don't have the kind of curiosity that humans have.
Plus, God knew that they would disobey his order, because he is omniscient. Adam and Eve had curiosity and immortality, so they would eventually eat the apple.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Is it just me, or are we arguing round in circles? Whether they would eventually eat the apple is irrelevant. At every step along the way, they had the choice to not eat the apple. Therefore, when they did eat the apple, they chose to eat it. Yes, God knew they would eat the apple. But, being a logical being, bound by logic, he had to put it there to give them the choice not to.
If God is not restrained by logic, then there is no point in attempting to discuss God in any fasion. How could a perfect God both commit genocide and denounce killing? Well, logic doesn't apply to God, so he can. Its the perfect cop-out, congratulations. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The fact that God didn't use his logic-defying powers to make the perfect world suggests to me that He isn't perfect.
___
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->God is bound by himself. God has shown himself to be a logical being, (having created logic) so he must also be bound by logic. God is not bound by science because it was man who created science to explain away God.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree with theclam here. God clearly wanted us to eat the fruit. If He didn't, He wouldn't have created the fruit in the first place - or at least not make it appetising.
On a side note, I hope you're joking about science being "created" to explain away God. (:
Actually, not yet anyway... I have to finish some consulting work, and then I've got church tonight, but things are going out of whack as is, and as Cagey said, we don't want to drag this thread through 2300 years of philisophical muck.
I'll only respond to one point for now:
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
Also, I find the concept of Hell (the eternal punishment for unrepentant sinners) to be contradictory with a good, just God. If the actions of unrepentant sinners are so bad, then why not force us to live with our actions, by allowing us to build a society upon our sins. That would be a more fitting punishment than eternal damnation to the greatest torments a human body can face (no crime deserves this punishment). This is somewhat peripheral to our main course of discussion, however.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The biblical idea is that mankind is to be separated from God for their actions, the fire and brimstone part comes from a verse in Revelations that talks about Satan, and all those who stand with him being thrown into fire. However, a few things are true:
1) Nothing can physically burn forever.
2) Revelations tells of those people being physically ressurected for their judgement (IIRC, been a while since I've done an inductive study of it...).
3) Numerous places, it's written that the "wages of sin is death." This is supposedly the cause of physical death, and also that of spiritual death and separation from God.
So, if nothing can physically burn forever, and the people destroyed in this manner have physical components, and those who sin can expect death, then the logical conclusion holds that hell is merely total obliteration.
This is true, at least for those who actively oppose God and knowingly ally themselves with Satan. For those that do it unknowingly, it's possible that they might simply, as you suggested, live out their lives without God in them. C.S. Lewis paints a picture of a world like this in <u>The Great Divorce.</u>
Either way, the picture of eternally being physically tortured is probably conjecture and was invented somewhere along the way. I personally hold the first view, but if I found the second (eternal separation) was true, I'd not be much suprised.
Speaking of suffering and gnashing of teeth, back to work....
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But I've got so many spanners left...
Besides, I thought I was doing rather well. Still, I'll wait to hear what you have to say.
Thats the fall alright. Whats the problem? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Maybe you missed it. God creates man, flawed and suceptable to manipulation. God also creates serpent (satan I guess) who rebels against him and has quite a knack for being deceptive and manipulative. God creates tree of knowledge, for no readily aparent purpose. God commands Adam and Eve not to eat from the tree of knowledge, knowing that the serpent will attempt to manipulate them, and knowing that they are very much capable of being decieved. Also, since they don't have a concept of good and evil, why should they trust God over the serpent? Serpent, given all of eternity to do so, convinces humans to eat from the tree. God then throws man out of eden. Now if this doesn't look like a setup to you then you're blind. Thats the problem.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
<!--QuoteBegin-SkulkBait+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SkulkBait)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->(and condemning all of humanity in the process, because for some reason God punishes all the future generations of humanity because the first two **** up, thanks oh merciful almighty asshat!)<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Romans 5+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Romans 5)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->12 Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sin entered the world through one man (Adam). Adam sinned and he brought death into the world upon himself. His children sinned and they brought death upon themselves. God doesn't condemn the whole human race because of Adam's sins, he condemns the whole human race because of the whole human race's sins.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
STOP! Hold it right there. Let me get this straight: Adam sins, gets punished. Adam's children are born into sin because they aren't in eden, and thanks to adam they know good and evil. God punishes Adam's children. So God is punishing Adam's children for Adam's mistake. There is no other way to interpret this that I can see.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
<!--QuoteBegin-SkulkBait+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SkulkBait)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I noticed you still don't have an explaination for the whole "How could man know that disobeying God was bad when he didn't know good from evil at all?".<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It was a direct commandment. Don't do this, or else this will happen. You don't need any knowledge of good or evil to be able to obey or disobey a command.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
How were they supposed to know that God's command is to be followed and the serpent's command isn't? They don't know that the serpent is evil any more then they know that God is good, so why not trust the serpent?
---
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
No, because they are children and incapable of making a decision that they are fully responsible for.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So how can you hold Adam and Eve (who have no reason to trust God over the serpent since they they don't know good and evil), responsible for their decision? One being told them "Don't eat that", the other one said "Go ahead and eat it, its fine", who are they supposed to believe? God didn't give them the capacity to understand that the serpent was not to be trusted!
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Science is derived from logic, yes. Yes, God is also bound by some aspects of science (those that derive directly from logic, such as areas of mathematics).<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
All science is derived from logic, it is a fundamental component, to state otherwise suggests a poor understanding of scientific method.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->No. I "think" (read believe) that God put humans in the garden to chose to love him. The idea of a not purely altruistic God no longer holds.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thats rediculous. If God didn't want the fall to happen, then why create the tree of knowledge in the first place?
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Why shouldn't he? If your children disobey you, you would be a bad parent not to punish them<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The difference is that people typically don't punish their children for all of flipping eternity. It is a temporary act, designed to help train their little minds to behave, or not stick things in power sockets, or whatever. It serves a purpose. What possible purpose could be served by eternal punishment?
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Hell is not a punishment, it is a consequence.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Punishments ARE consequences. Semantic games will get you nowhere.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Is it just me, or are we arguing round in circles? Whether they would eventually eat the apple is irrelevant. At every step along the way, they had the choice to not eat the apple. Therefore, when they did eat the apple, they chose to eat it. Yes, God knew they would eat the apple. But, being a logical being, bound by logic, he had to put it there to give them the choice not to.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Even though it is literally impossible for them to make that choice, and continue to make it for all of eternity? God can't be that stupid, though he might be that cruel.
No, because they are children and incapable of making a decision that they are fully responsible for. Notice how the law treats minors differently? Same thing.
<!--QuoteBegin-theclam+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (theclam)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Another thing that I find interesting about God is that he rewards or punishes the human race for not living up to his ideals.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why shouldn't he? If your children disobey you, you would be a bad parent not to punish them<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's interesting that I treat humanity like adults in terms of punishment (live with the consequences of your actions; you shouldn't be held responsible to your parents in terms of punishment as an adult) but like a child in terms of responsibilities (don't needlessly tempt your children by giving them a gun; don't needlessly tempt humanity by giving them a fruit). You, however, are the opposite. You treat humanity like children in terms of punishment (children get punished by their parentsif they do something wrong; humanity gets punished by God if it does something wrong), but like an adult in terms of responsibilities (give people the choice to make wrong actions, instead of only presenting the "right" choice to them).
I'm not trying to make a specific point here, but it's an interesting observation that we have exactly opposite views on this.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-theclam+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (theclam)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Also, if you think God is bound by logic, then he put us in the garden of Eden in order to make us fall from grace. That's interesting to me, because it suggests a not purely altruistic God.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No. I "think" (read believe) that God put humans in the garden to chose to love him. The idea of a not purely altruistic God no longer holds.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It wasn't much of a choice. It was inevitable. See the earlier explanation that I did about the probability of it happening.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-theclam+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (theclam)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Also, I find the concept of Hell (the eternal punishment for unrepentant sinners) to be contradictory with a good, just God. If the actions of unrepentant sinners are so bad, then why not force us to live with our actions, by allowing us to build a society upon our sins. That would be a more fitting punishment than eternal damnation to the greatest torments a human body can face (no crime deserves this punishment). This is somewhat peripheral to our main course of discussion, however.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Hell is not a punishment, it is a consequence.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's more of a punishment than a consequence.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->con·se·quence Audio pronunciation of "consequence" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (kns-kwns, -kwns)
n.
<b>1. Something that logically or naturally follows from an action or condition. See Synonyms at effect.</b>
2. The relation of a result to its cause.
3. A logical conclusion or inference.
4. Importance in rank or position: scientists of consequence.
5. Significance; importance: an issue of consequence. See Synonyms at importance.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->pun·ish·ment Audio pronunciation of "punishment" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (pnsh-mnt)
n.
1.
1. The act or an instance of punishing.
2. The condition of being punished.
2. A penalty imposed for wrongdoing: “The severity of the punishment must... be in keeping with the kind of obligation which has been violated” (Simone Weil).
3. Rough handling; mistreatment: These old skis have taken a lot of punishment over the years.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What would be the logical or natural consequence to doing bad things? I don't think Hell is the logical or natural consequence at all. There is little to indicate to humanity that they will go to Hell, rather than some holy books, based upon the human interpretation of the opinion of a god, that are unique to one specific religion and that contradict other religions. If we disregard the fact that there isn't any conclusive evidence pointing towards a written order from God about punishment, and just assume that He is real, then I would still come to the conclusion that it is an artificial form of punishment. Why send humanity to Hell (or annihilate them, like Legionnaire indicates) over some other form of punishment?
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-theclam+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (theclam)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Some dogs sit. Some don't. All dogs that sit upon hearing a master's commands are trained that way. Dogs aren't sentient, however, and don't have the kind of curiosity that humans have.
Plus, God knew that they would disobey his order, because he is omniscient. Adam and Eve had curiosity and immortality, so they would eventually eat the apple.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Is it just me, or are we arguing round in circles? Whether they would eventually eat the apple is irrelevant. At every step along the way, they had the choice to not eat the apple. Therefore, when they did eat the apple, they chose to eat it. Yes, God knew they would eat the apple. But, being a logical being, bound by logic, he had to put it there to give them the choice not to.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why did he have "to put it there to give them the choice not to"? It's not something he <b>had</b> to do, because he is a "logical being, bound by logic", it's something he <b>wanted</b> to do (much like creating humanity, in the first place). God had the <u>choice</u> to do it.
All science is derived from logic, it is a fundamental component, to state otherwise suggests a poor understanding of scientific method. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Science is derived from the scientific method, which is a logical device to expand our knowledge of the universe in a truthful fashion. Some areas of knowledge (Mathematics, Logic, etc) derive directly from plain logic, itself. Other areas of knowledge (Biology, Physics, etc) derive not just from logic and th scientific method, but also from our flawed (by definition, if we had all the information, allowing us to make perfectly informed conclusions, then we wouldn't have any reason to do science int he first place) observations of the universe. Most fields of science don't contain ultimate truths about the universe, but the best truths that we can derive from the data that we have obtained, resulting in conclusions that are approximations of ultimate truths.
Sorry, I have to nitpick.