A Good God would not send a decent Atheist to hell.

Exploring the details of Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
marketandchurch
Scholar
Posts: 358
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2013 12:51 am
Location: The People's Republic Of Portland

A Good God would not send a decent Atheist to hell.

Post #1

Post by marketandchurch »

This was the post that got me banned on Christian Chat:
Then God doesn't care about the goodness and decency of an atheist, a buddhist, etc. And if that is the message you are telling me, then there is no point to being a good person. There is no point of fighting on behalf of the oppressed, as America did, in WWII. The only purpose of fighting the Japanese, and beating back the Nazi's should have been so that we could bring more people to christ...is that what your saying? Should America be sending food and aid to heathens in Haiti? Should America be helping out muslims in disaster relief fallowing a natural disaster, unless it is to bring them to Christ? Is a person's only value to you, there potential to become a convert? They have no humanity beyond that?

You have an old testament my_adonai, and you are to be as obsessed with its obsessions, as you are with the new testament's. And the Old Testament's preoccupation is fighting evil, championing the good, and making a more ethical existence, during this lifetime.

And unless you think Christians alone can make this lifetime a little better, a little less genocidal, with a little less starvation, a little less torture, etc, it is an unethical message to peddle, that a good God would demand goodness, unless one doesn't believe in his son. Then one's goodness is pointless. One might as well not care about not gossiping behind other people's back, destroying someone's dignity in public, sleeping with a coworker's wife, extorting an elderly couple that one was hired to help, raping a pre-pubcescent child, killing another human being because of their skin color, etc, etc, etc.

Apparently, I was challenging people's faith, and was just there to be anti-christian, in saying that a Good God would not send to hell decent people, simply because they do not believe in his Son. I got all sorts of less then appetizing replies, saying I'm screwed for eternity, if I don't accept Jesus. I feel that I am not alone, even within the Christian community, in thinking this as I've heard many catholic priests, and mainstream protestant pastors, while I was growing up, distancing themselves from such a belief. I don't know where people on this forum stand, but I'll put it up for debate:

  • Topic of Debate: A Good God would not send to hell a decent person, simply for not believing in his son.


If you agree with me, and are a Christian, please square your response with the rest of the New Testament. What I'm looking for is scriptural consistency to back up your position, and more importantly, how one will then re-read the entire message of the New Testament, if one wants to hold that position. I say this because I don't want you to drop scripture, simply because it doesn't conform to your own personal beliefs, but I am looking for how one can reinterpret the New testament, if one drops that central tenant, & for the rest of us, impediment, to everlasting life. Is there room for this? Or is the New Testament rigidly in the affirmative about Christ being the only way to heaven? Which is fine. That's their theology, but let's see where this goes.

JohnA
Banned
Banned
Posts: 752
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 5:11 am

Re: A Good God would not send a decent Atheist to hell.

Post #541

Post by JohnA »

ttruscott wrote:
JohnA wrote:
...

Can you explain this?
I have to make a choice between 3 options: A, B, C.
I decide and pick pick B.
1) Are you saying that your god did not know if I would pick A, B, or C?
2) Or are you saying that your god KNEW in advance that I would pick B, therefore A and C was never really an option since I could never pick them?

If you say Point 1, then it means your god is not all knowing, but I have free will.
If you say Point 2, then it means your god is all knowing, but I have no free will.

Thank you.
Sure. POINT 1. HE did not know because HE did not decree what you should pick. What verses tell us HE is all knowing in the sense that you are using the words? Acts 15:18 'Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.' HE knows 1. HIS works 2. from the creation of the physical universe.

Using this verse which says HE knows all HIS works, as our guide, here are ten more verses about HIS all knowing:

Job 37:16 Do you know the balancings of the clouds,
the wondrous works of him who is perfect in knowledge.
Perfect in knowledge about HIS works...NOT the works HE let us do.

Psalm 147:5 Great is our Lord and mighty in power;
his understanding has no limit.
Understanding is not the same as knowledge...

1 Samuel 2:3
Talk no more so very proudly,
let not arrogance come from your mouth;
for the LORD is a God of knowledge,
and by him actions are weighed.
Not quite a GOD of ALL knowledge.

Isaiah 55:9
For as the heavens are higher than the earth,
so are my ways higher than your ways
and my thoughts than your thoughts.
Well above our thoughts ≠ orthodox omniscience.

Job 28:24 For he looks to the ends of the earth
and sees everything under the heavens.
Again referring to what HE has made and HIS awareness, not HIS knowledge...

1 John 3:19-20
By this we shall know that we are of the truth and reassure our heart before him; for whenever our heart condemns us, God is greater than our heart, and he knows everything.
Close, but this everything refers to all our secrets not the everything of everything...

Hebrews 4:13 And no creature is hidden from his sight, but all are naked and exposed to the eyes of him to whom we must give account. HE is aware of us and all our secrets again...

Isaiah 46:9
I am God, and there is none like me,
declaring the end from the beginning
and from ancient times things not yet done.
HE has a full knowledge of what will happen on earth - a ramification of predestination, not showing ALL knowledge...

Psalm 139:4
Even before a word is on my tongue,
behold, O LORD, you know it altogether.
This could refer to our choices but since HIS all knowing is about HIS works after the creation of the physical universe, it is about our predestinated lives here on earth.

Nowhere does the scripture come close to what you describe as omniscience. I know the churches teach it that way and I disagree with them too. HE is all knowing about what HE has decreed to be reality and to happen but if HE did not decree it, and so does not know it, it does not impinge on HIS GODly character as expressed in any of these verses...it only offends the minds of the orthodox who love their doctrine more than the Spirit.

Of course if you have a verse that says straight out GOD knows everything about everything, even our true free will choices....

You see, there are two definitions of omniscience of old. One, the current favourite, is that GOD is omniscient by nature. HE is that which knows all about all. The other is omniscience by decree, that is, HE knows all about what HE decreed to be reality and all the possibilities of what HE has decreed into reality. Both of these are very old doctrines but the Catholic Church won out with the current favourite and the other was condemned to heterodoxy.

So you have your definitions and I have mine and it surprises me not that yours conveniently hangs orthodox Christian doctrine out to dry because orthodox Christian doctrine is all wet and a foolishness. I would not convert until I knew what was really going on and when I found out, I gave it all my faith, and it was not orthodoxy.

Neither do I plan to change my doctrine because a non-believer accepts a false doctrine from a false church and thinks my definitions of all knowing impugn HIS divinity when I know it does not.

Peace, Ted
Can you show me the verse that says your god does not have foreknowledge about your options and choices?

Also, if your god has no foreknowledge of your free will (options and choices) then you can not claim any prophecies in your bible either because your god can not make any predictions of future events since it involves humans to make choices on options to have / result in any human events.
Additionally, seems to me that your god is not a good planner, since his plan does not include anything about his beloved creatures and their options/choices. No wonder Adam .Eve disobeyed him, he did not know they will, yet he still created them. Darn, your god must have something wrong with his production line as your god clearly made defects when the made Adam.Eve. Oh, according to you he did not make them, they were not his works::
This is your own new god that you invented; a god that did not know anything about his beloved humans, he did not even create them as they are not part of his works (according to your (Acts 15:18 'Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.' ' HE knows 1. HIS works 2. from the creation of the physical universe. ))

These verses refer to the Christian god's omniscience:
http://www.openbible.info/topics/omniscience
http://www.openbible.info/topics/gods_omniscience
http://thoughtfulfaith.wordpress.com/20 ... mniscient/

e.g. 1 John 3:20 says he knows everything. Jeremiah 29:11 speaks of plans for an individual. Psalm 147:5 says his understanding has no limit. Etc.


In all, I think you created a weak god for yourself. He did not even create you (you are not his works), nor can he know what you will do next, has a half backed plan for the universe which includes no foreknowledge of any prophecies.

Why on earth would you worship such a weak god?

User avatar
Danmark
Site Supporter
Posts: 12697
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 2:58 am
Location: Seattle
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: A Good God would not send a decent Atheist to hell.

Post #542

Post by Danmark »

JohnA wrote: Maybe I should be more clear:

I have to make a choice between 3 options: A, B, C.
I decide and pick pick B.
1) Are you saying that your god did not know if I would pick A, B, or C?
2) Or are you saying that your god KNEW in advance that I would pick B, therefore A and C was still options, but not options that I could pick - Option A and C existed, but I could never pick them since god already "decided and approved" me picking B due to his omniscience.

If you say Point 1, then it means your god is not all knowing, but I have free will.
If you say Point 2, then it means your god is all knowing, but I have no free will.

Is that better?

God either knows what I will eat for lunch tomorrow or not; a true dichotomy.

It is a well know issue this human free will vs god's foreknowledge; they being mutually exclusive.
I don't believe you've changed anything substantive in this restatement. I agree that free will and god's omniscience present an issue; however, I don't believe they are incompatible. You are suggesting one argument, the classic 'argument from free will' that results in predeterminism/predestination which the Calvinists believe.

Others, suggest the ideas are compatible; that mere foreknowledge of the decision you will make tomorrow does not deny you the ability to make the choice between two things you are physically capable of choosing between, such as whether to order pastrami or roast beef. As long as there is no external coercion, you are free to choose. This construct of an omniscient god simply watches you choose, he does not compel your choice. He simply sees it happen from a point in time you do not have access to.

User avatar
ttruscott
Site Supporter
Posts: 11064
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 5:09 pm
Location: West Coast of Canada
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: A Good God would not send a decent Atheist to hell.

Post #543

Post by ttruscott »

[Replying to post 538 by JohnA]

My argument does not try to intercede between HIS omniscience and our free will but to belay the blasphemy that GOD by being all knowing, knowingly created those who would go to hell. Even if he was omniscient as you claim, it would not impugn our free will unless HE forced us to choose a certain way;

The FREE of FREE WILL refers to the will not being forced or constrained by any power outside themselves to choose in any particular way.


I love the irony of arguments by non-believers in defence of a (false) definition of GOD they do not believe in so they can keep their argument against that false definition and not have to give it up.

Peace, Ted
PCE Theology as I see it...

We had an existence with a free will in Sheol before the creation of the physical universe. Here we chose to be able to become holy or to be eternally evil in YHWH's sight. Then the physical universe was created and all sinners were sent to earth.

This theology debunks the need to base Christianity upon the blasphemy of creating us in Adam's sin.

JohnA
Banned
Banned
Posts: 752
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 5:11 am

Re: A Good God would not send a decent Atheist to hell.

Post #544

Post by JohnA »

Danmark wrote:
JohnA wrote: Maybe I should be more clear:

I have to make a choice between 3 options: A, B, C.
I decide and pick pick B.
1) Are you saying that your god did not know if I would pick A, B, or C?
2) Or are you saying that your god KNEW in advance that I would pick B, therefore A and C was still options, but not options that I could pick - Option A and C existed, but I could never pick them since god already "decided and approved" me picking B due to his omniscience.

If you say Point 1, then it means your god is not all knowing, but I have free will.
If you say Point 2, then it means your god is all knowing, but I have no free will.

Is that better?

God either knows what I will eat for lunch tomorrow or not; a true dichotomy.

It is a well know issue this human free will vs god's foreknowledge; they being mutually exclusive.
I don't believe you've changed anything substantive in this restatement. I agree that free will and god's omniscience present an issue; however, I don't believe they are incompatible. You are suggesting one argument, the classic 'argument from free will' that results in predeterminism/predestination which the Calvinists believe.

Others, suggest the ideas are compatible; that mere foreknowledge of the decision you will make tomorrow does not deny you the ability to make the choice between two things you are physically capable of choosing between, such as whether to order pastrami or roast beef. As long as there is no external coercion, you are free to choose. This construct of an omniscient god simply watches you choose, he does not compel your choice. He simply sees it happen from a point in time you do not have access to.
I am not convinced you understand human free will or god's foreknowledge or the absence of co-existence. It seems to me ttruscott get's it, but not you.

When you say do not not believe that I have anything substantive in this restatement, you are merely saying you have not sure if there are evidence that supports your point or not.


I never argued that the decision you will make tomorrow deny you the ability to make the choice between options. That is your straw man.
You can still make the choice/select the option (regardless if you know the god exists or not). The options are still valid, so is the choice. The point is that either this omniscient god knew beforehand which option you will choose/pick or not. The omniscient god simply watches you choose, he does not compel your choice, but (s)he either KNEW beforehand which option you will go for or not. It is that simple.

Now, have a read at this again, and tell me exactly which line you do not accept. Also tell me exactly what the line should be:

I have to make a choice between 3 options: A, B, C.
I decide and pick B.
1) Are you saying that the god did not know if I would pick A, B, or C?
2) Or are you saying that the god KNEW in advance that I would pick B, therefore A and C was still options, but not options that I could pick - Option A and C existed, but I could never pick them since the god already "decided and approved in advanced" me picking B. The god decided because (s)he has a plan. (S)he approved it because her/his plan is firm and can not change. (S)he has foreknowledge because of his/her omniscience.

If you say Point 1, then it means the god is not all knowing, but I have free will.
If you say Point 2, then it means the god is all knowing, but I have no free will.

Pay attention this time.
Last edited by JohnA on Wed Oct 23, 2013 5:19 pm, edited 2 times in total.

JohnA
Banned
Banned
Posts: 752
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 5:11 am

Re: A Good God would not send a decent Atheist to hell.

Post #545

Post by JohnA »

ttruscott wrote: [Replying to post 538 by JohnA]

My argument does not try to intercede between HIS omniscience and our free will but to belay the blasphemy that GOD by being all knowing, knowingly created those who would go to hell. Even if he was omniscient as you claim, it would not impugn our free will unless HE forced us to choose a certain way;

The FREE of FREE WILL refers to the will not being forced or constrained by any power outside themselves to choose in any particular way.


I love the irony of arguments by non-believers in defence of a (false) definition of GOD they do not believe in so they can keep their argument against that false definition and not have to give it up.

Peace, Ted

You are still arguing that your god has reduced (not full) omniscience to work around your issue of the Bible contradicts itself with human free will con-existing with the Bible god's foreknowledge.

I have given you the bible verses for his omniscience (incl foreknowledge). You have given me no verse(s) that says your god does not have foreknowledge about your options and choices.

Your god either knows what I will have for lunch tomorrow or not. If he does not know, then his plan for the universe is faulty/incomplete, you can not claim any prophecies, and he made a mistake in his/her production line when he created Adam.Eve (that is if (s)he created them at all since you argue that humans are not part of his/her works). Actually, you can not trust any predictions your god makes at all about humans, according to your argument!

This, for me, is just more evidence why there are so many Christian Denominations, AND that people invent their own gods.

Thanks for playing.

User avatar
Danmark
Site Supporter
Posts: 12697
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 2:58 am
Location: Seattle
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: A Good God would not send a decent Atheist to hell.

Post #546

Post by Danmark »

JohnA wrote:
Danmark wrote:
JohnA wrote: Maybe I should be more clear:

I have to make a choice between 3 options: A, B, C.
I decide and pick pick B.
1) Are you saying that your god did not know if I would pick A, B, or C?
2) Or are you saying that your god KNEW in advance that I would pick B, therefore A and C was still options, but not options that I could pick - Option A and C existed, but I could never pick them since god already "decided and approved" me picking B due to his omniscience.

If you say Point 1, then it means your god is not all knowing, but I have free will.
If you say Point 2, then it means your god is all knowing, but I have no free will.

Is that better?

God either knows what I will eat for lunch tomorrow or not; a true dichotomy.

It is a well know issue this human free will vs god's foreknowledge; they being mutually exclusive.
I don't believe you've changed anything substantive in this restatement. I agree that free will and god's omniscience present an issue; however, I don't believe they are incompatible. You are suggesting one argument, the classic 'argument from free will' that results in predeterminism/predestination which the Calvinists believe.

Others, suggest the ideas are compatible; that mere foreknowledge of the decision you will make tomorrow does not deny you the ability to make the choice between two things you are physically capable of choosing between, such as whether to order pastrami or roast beef. As long as there is no external coercion, you are free to choose. This construct of an omniscient god simply watches you choose, he does not compel your choice. He simply sees it happen from a point in time you do not have access to.
I am not convinced you understand human free will or god's foreknowledge or the absence of co-existence. It seems to me ttruscott get's it, but not you.

When you say do not not believe that I have anything substantive in this restatement, you are merely saying you have not sure if there are evidence that supports your point or not.


I never argued that the decision you will make tomorrow deny you the ability to make the choice between options. That is your straw man.
You can still make the choice/select the option (regardless if you know the god exists or not). The options are still valid, so is the choice. The point is that either this omniscient god knew beforehand which option you will choose/pick or not. The omniscient god simply watches you choose, he does not compel your choice, but (s)he either KNEW beforehand which option you will go for or not. It is that simple.

Now, have a read at this again, and tell me exactly which line you do not accept. Also tell me exactly what the line should be:

I have to make a choice between 3 options: A, B, C.
I decide and pick B.
1) Are you saying that the god did not know if I would pick A, B, or C?
2) Or are you saying that the god KNEW in advance that I would pick B, therefore A and C was still options, but not options that I could pick - Option A and C existed, but I could never pick them since the god already "decided and approved in advanced" me picking B. The god decided because (s)he has a plan. (S)he approved it because her/his plan is firm and can not change. (S)he has foreknowledge because of his/her omniscience.

If you say Point 1, then it means the god is not all knowing, but I have free will.
If you say Point 2, then it means the god is all knowing, but I have no free will.

Pay attention this time.
Your error, or one of them, is in assuming I'm not 'paying attention.'

You've said the same thing 3 times, but in slightly different ways. The issue is more complex than you think. Take a look at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_free_will
and for even more complexity:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_will

I understand you think that if god knows the future, that humans are robbed of free will because they must do what god knows they will do.

More learned men than you and I have struggled with this and come to different, reasonable conclusions. Reasonable men can differ. I've stated my take on it. I don't think there is a theistic god, but my lack of belief is not based on this argument from free will. It is based on a lack of competent evidence.

JohnA
Banned
Banned
Posts: 752
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 5:11 am

Re: A Good God would not send a decent Atheist to hell.

Post #547

Post by JohnA »

Danmark wrote:
JohnA wrote:
Danmark wrote:
JohnA wrote: Maybe I should be more clear:

I have to make a choice between 3 options: A, B, C.
I decide and pick pick B.
1) Are you saying that your god did not know if I would pick A, B, or C?
2) Or are you saying that your god KNEW in advance that I would pick B, therefore A and C was still options, but not options that I could pick - Option A and C existed, but I could never pick them since god already "decided and approved" me picking B due to his omniscience.

If you say Point 1, then it means your god is not all knowing, but I have free will.
If you say Point 2, then it means your god is all knowing, but I have no free will.

Is that better?

God either knows what I will eat for lunch tomorrow or not; a true dichotomy.

It is a well know issue this human free will vs god's foreknowledge; they being mutually exclusive.
I don't believe you've changed anything substantive in this restatement. I agree that free will and god's omniscience present an issue; however, I don't believe they are incompatible. You are suggesting one argument, the classic 'argument from free will' that results in predeterminism/predestination which the Calvinists believe.

Others, suggest the ideas are compatible; that mere foreknowledge of the decision you will make tomorrow does not deny you the ability to make the choice between two things you are physically capable of choosing between, such as whether to order pastrami or roast beef. As long as there is no external coercion, you are free to choose. This construct of an omniscient god simply watches you choose, he does not compel your choice. He simply sees it happen from a point in time you do not have access to.
I am not convinced you understand human free will or god's foreknowledge or the absence of co-existence. It seems to me ttruscott get's it, but not you.

When you say do not not believe that I have anything substantive in this restatement, you are merely saying you have not sure if there are evidence that supports your point or not.


I never argued that the decision you will make tomorrow deny you the ability to make the choice between options. That is your straw man.
You can still make the choice/select the option (regardless if you know the god exists or not). The options are still valid, so is the choice. The point is that either this omniscient god knew beforehand which option you will choose/pick or not. The omniscient god simply watches you choose, he does not compel your choice, but (s)he either KNEW beforehand which option you will go for or not. It is that simple.

Now, have a read at this again, and tell me exactly which line you do not accept. Also tell me exactly what the line should be:

I have to make a choice between 3 options: A, B, C.
I decide and pick B.
1) Are you saying that the god did not know if I would pick A, B, or C?
2) Or are you saying that the god KNEW in advance that I would pick B, therefore A and C was still options, but not options that I could pick - Option A and C existed, but I could never pick them since the god already "decided and approved in advanced" me picking B. The god decided because (s)he has a plan. (S)he approved it because her/his plan is firm and can not change. (S)he has foreknowledge because of his/her omniscience.

If you say Point 1, then it means the god is not all knowing, but I have free will.
If you say Point 2, then it means the god is all knowing, but I have no free will.

Pay attention this time.
Your error, or one of them, is in assuming I'm not 'paying attention.'

You've said the same thing 3 times, but in slightly different ways. The issue is more complex than you think. Take a look at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_free_will
and for even more complexity:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_will

I understand you think that if god knows the future, that humans are robbed of free will because they must do what god knows they will do.

More learned men than you and I have struggled with this and come to different, reasonable conclusions. Reasonable men can differ. I've stated my take on it. I don't think there is a theistic god, but my lack of belief is not based on this argument from free will. It is based on a lack of competent evidence.
As expected, you could not tell me where my points were wrong.

Offering more leaned men than me is:'
sexist
an argument from authority
an argument from population.
Since there is no evidence for a god or any gods existence, your leaned men reasonable conclusions can be concluded as rubbish.

And I based my position that you are not paying attention of your own word use of "believe that". Maybe that was just a bad choice of words by you, but your last post grounded my suspicion into fact.

But it you understand what I mean, then why can't you formulate your OWN response about why you believe that I am wrong? Why offer links and no rebuttal other than "leaned men says I am wrong"? You are wrongly assuming that I am not familiar with these arguments, or have not read the material about this or are not a learned man/woman myself or that my lack of belief is based on this argument from free will. You also say that more learned men that you and I, but then you go and assume it is only me that is misinterpreting the information/data and somehow excuse yourself from misinterpreting the data/information. That tells me: I do not believe, but rather now I know for sure you are not paying attention.

Anything goes for with imaginary gods, surely? But you reject the fact that I am pointing out obvious contradictions. You are most welcome to offer these "leaned men reasonable conclusions" and we can discuss why they are flawed. Just remember, you are at a disadvantage since we both know there are no evidence for any god to exist.

User avatar
Nickman
Site Supporter
Posts: 5443
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Idaho
Been thanked: 1 time

Post #548

Post by Nickman »

Just because someone can know the future doesn't negate free will. Ive argued for the omniscience = no free will many times. The fact is that being able to see something in a different time doesn't mean that the future has been dictated. A person will ultimately make a decision, God would just be able to see what that decision is. Also, his omniscience could be an amplified version of "counting cards." In black jack, many people can count exactly which card will be next based off of which cards have been played in the past. A deity could employ the same tactic, but to a higher degree. So although it may seem as free will is negated, the deity is just very good at calculation based on behavior. The very free will we call into jeopardy, could be the mechanism with which the deity is able to predict future outcomes.

Even if this is wrong, a deity could still see into the future and not negate free will. If omniscience is even possible to begin with.

User avatar
Danmark
Site Supporter
Posts: 12697
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 2:58 am
Location: Seattle
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: A Good God would not send a decent Atheist to hell.

Post #549

Post by Danmark »

JohnA wrote:
As expected, you could not tell me where my points were wrong.

Offering more leaned men than me is:'
sexist
an argument from authority
an argument from population.
Since there is no evidence for a god or any gods existence, your leaned men reasonable conclusions can be concluded as rubbish.

And I based my position that you are not paying attention of your own word use of "believe that". Maybe that was just a bad choice of words by you, but your last post grounded my suspicion into fact.

But it you understand what I mean, then why can't you formulate your OWN response about why you believe that I am wrong? Why offer links and no rebuttal other than "leaned men says I am wrong"? You are wrongly assuming that I am not familiar with these arguments, or have not read the material about this or are not a learned man/woman myself or that my lack of belief is based on this argument from free will. You also say that more learned men that you and I, but then you go and assume it is only me that is misinterpreting the information/data and somehow excuse yourself from misinterpreting the data/information. That tells me: I do not believe, but rather now I know for sure you are not paying attention.

Anything goes for with imaginary gods, surely? But you reject the fact that I am pointing out obvious contradictions. You are most welcome to offer these "leaned men reasonable conclusions" and we can discuss why they are flawed. Just remember, you are at a disadvantage since we both know there are no evidence for any god to exist.
Dear John:
I confess I am puzzled by this response. I can ferret out some of it, but the 'sexist' claim in particular baffles me.

At any rate, I hope I have acknowledged your opinion is one of several classic arguments. It's not that I claim you are 'wrong;' I simply have a different opinion. I've articulated the basis for my opinion.

Anyway, I'm always eager to learn, so please inform me about how I've been sexist so I can remedy that at least. :chick:

JohnA
Banned
Banned
Posts: 752
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 5:11 am

Post #550

Post by JohnA »

Nickman wrote: Just because someone can know the future doesn't negate free will. Ive argued for the omniscience = no free will many times. The fact is that being able to see something in a different time doesn't mean that the future has been dictated. A person will ultimately make a decision, God would just be able to see what that decision is. Also, his omniscience could be an amplified version of "counting cards." In black jack, many people can count exactly which card will be next based off of which cards have been played in the past. A deity could employ the same tactic, but to a higher degree. So although it may seem as free will is negated, the deity is just very good at calculation based on behavior. The very free will we call into jeopardy, could be the mechanism with which the deity is able to predict future outcomes.

Even if this is wrong, a deity could still see into the future and not negate free will. If omniscience is even possible to begin with.
Does not matter how good you are counting cards, no one person can predict the next card (unless it is the last card in a deck or decks) in black jack. The counter will only know what card is not likely (assuming 2 decks of card) or what card will not be next (assuming 1 deck of card) to be next because the counter knows what was played already.

If the deity has no "control" over the "free will" options / choices then you dismiss all prophecies and have to admit the deity has no plan in mind. The deity is merely paying dice.

Remember, I am not saying the deity is "pulling the strings" making me pick option B. I am saying the deity knew in advance that I would pick B, therefore I could never really pick A or C (even though they were valid options, there were not sound options). Do not confuse the action of picking with the cognitive decision of selecting.
Last edited by JohnA on Wed Oct 23, 2013 8:20 pm, edited 4 times in total.

Post Reply