First cause

Originally posted by whodey
So God can do anything EXCEPT choose to give us free will? Granted, it is a mystery but an all powerfull God can do ANYTHING he chooses to do no matter how impossible it may seem to us. As for natural disasters, what can I say? Man was kicked out of paridise.

Free will alongside an omnipotent, omniscient creator god is a contradiction. Most people would accept that even an omnipotent god cannot create logical contradictions. You seem to have a rather cavalier attitude about natural disasters. Their incompatibility with an all-loving god doesn't cause you any problems?

Originally posted by rwingett
Plate tectonics is an ongoing thing. Plates are moving all the time all around the world. How often does it result in a tsunami? Especially one big enough to kill tens of thousands of people? Not very often. Obviously just the fact that plates move does not cause tsunamis in and of itself. They only occur when the plates move in a very specific way. Any god ...[text shortened]... didn't see that one coming. Let me just intervene a little here. Hope nobody saw that."

Obviously just the fact that plates move does not cause tsunamis in and of itself. They only occur when the plates move in a very specific way.

Yes.

Any god with omnipotence in his portfolio could cause plates to move in ways which do not cause tsunamis if he cared enough to do so.

Omnipotence is irrelevant here. What we are discussing is whether a First Cause God could create humans as they are now, without tsunamis occuring. It is a very big claim to say that the tectonic plates could have been arranged in such a way that a tsunami would never ever happen. Do you have scientific evidence to support your claim?

From the very beginning he knew the exact time, he knew the names of every victim, and he could have caused it all to come out differently.

True, but all moral responsibility is obviated if these disasters were simply the indirect result of a good act (making the world so that mankind could evolve into existence.) For example, volcanoes replenish supplies of carbon into the atmosphere, and distribute phosphates which increase bio-activity. Perhaps God needed unstable tectonic plate movement to activate such volcanoes - and tsunamis were just a consequence of such instability.

Originally posted by Conrau K
Omnipotence is irrelevant here. What we are discussing is whether a First Cause God could create humans as they are now, without tsunamis occuring. It is a very big claim to say that the tectonic plates could have been arranged in such a way that a tsunami would never ever happen. Do you have scientific evidence to support your claim?

Omnipotence is only irrelevant if you don't understand the meaning of the word.

An omnipotent God, by very definition, can do ANYTHING.

Thus, they would be certainly able to make tectonic plates that don't cause undersea earthquakes.

Originally posted by Conrau K
[b]Obviously just the fact that plates move does not cause tsunamis in and of itself. They only occur when the plates move in a very specific way.

Yes.

Any god with omnipotence in his portfolio could cause plates to move in ways which do not cause tsunamis if he cared enough to do so.

Omnipotence is irrelevant here. What we are discussi ...[text shortened]... movement to activate such volcanoes - and tsunamis were just a consequence of such instability.[/b]

Scottishinnz is right. You obviously do not understand this whole omnipotence thing. I do not need scientific evidence of plate tectonics to back up my position. I only need to know what it means for a god to be omnipotent to know that such a being could cause plate tectonics without causing fatal tsunamis. Go do some research and quit wasting my time.

Originally posted by whodey
So God can do anything EXCEPT choose to give us free will? Granted, it is a mystery but an all powerfull God can do ANYTHING he chooses to do no matter how impossible it may seem to us. As for natural disasters, what can I say? Man was kicked out of paridise.

Lets look at things like in a different way, shall we:

At the beginning of time, just before god creates the universe, he is confronted with an infinite number of choices as to exactly how he will set things in motion. The thing is is that he can see clearly the entire causal chain of events that will eventually proceed from his initial input. If he opts for plan 1, then he clearly sees that events b, c, d, and e will inevitably follow. If he opts for plan 2, then he clearly sees that events f, g, h, and i will inevitably follow. The same is true for plans 3, 4, 5, and so on into infinity.

God has an infinite variety of beginning options to choose from and he can clearly foresee the entire causal chain of events that will proceed from that input, all the way to the very end. In some of his possible plans Whodey becomes a christian. In some, Whodey becomes an atheist. In others, Whodey turns out to be a murderer. In yet others, Whodey is never even born. Such a god can clearly see all the possible actions that Whodey will ever take, and all the possible thoughts that Whodey will ever think, in every possible universe that he is about to set up. In the end he opts for plan 2,574,379 (for the sake of argument) and sets the universe into motion. That particular choice by god has therefore determined every action Whodey will ever take and every thought Whodey will ever think.

In that particular universe Whodey becomes a christian who thinks he has free will. Things have turned out exactly as god planned from the very beginning. After all, it couldn't have happened otherwise.

Originally posted by rwingett
Lets look at things like in a different way, shall we:

At the beginning of time, just before god creates the universe, he is confronted with an infinite number of choices as to exactly how he will set things in motion. The thing is is that he can see clearly the entire causal chain of events that will eventually proceed from his initial input. If he opts ...[text shortened]... exactly as god planned from the very beginning. After all, it couldn't have happened otherwise.

Superb post. Made me laugh!

Originally posted by josephw
The context in which this word "predestinate" occurs is broadly misinterpreted to mean that God caused believers to "become" conformed to the image of His son.

Look deeper. What is meant is that God knew who would believe, so what He did was to give us something to be "conformed" to.

The verse is not saying God forced us to be something, but gave us something to be once we believed.

Originally posted by josephw
[b]The context in which this word "predestinate" occurs is broadly misinterpreted to mean that God caused believers to "become" conformed to the image of His son.

Look deeper. What is meant is that God knew who would believe, so what He did was to give us something to be "conformed" to.

The verse is not saying God forced us to be something, but gave us something to be once we believed.

ringett, are you going to reply to my post?

so fantastic to read such thoughts on the whole god/universe thing, certainly the only place where i can enjoy these concepts without the annoying drone of a person uninterested in the above over hearing your conversation in a bar and repeatedly chants "but how do you know" on trying to convey your thoughts to said person in basic terms, they respond once again "but how do you know" , and enevitably which ever direction your answers embarks , you will always hit the so called "gods safty catch" the singularity, nice getting there though !

Originally posted by rwingett
The free will agent? Is Scott Boros representing free will now?

Even if we accept your gibberish at face value we see the problem still remains:

1. Chaos causes typhoons.
2. Freewill agents cause chaos.
3. God created free will agents.
4. Therefore god is ultimately responsible for causing typhoons.

Tracing the causal chain backwards leads directly to the guilty party, which is god.

As has been stated, your logic fails because you fail to consider all aspects of the equation.

In your world, it is not possible for a perfect God to create anything but perfection. This is true in reality, as well.

In your world, it is not possible for a perfect God to create anyone with free will. This is shown to be false by reality.

The free will agent's choice brought chaos into the perfect universe. That eventuality was considered, foreseen and accounted for prior to beginning; the cost paid for by the Creator. Anything other than the option selected would have compromised the whole, would have resulted in imperfection.

For instance, according to some views, God could have made man to only and always choose His system. This would have been incompatible with free will. God could have made the consequences less than what they were--- again, rendering free will meaningless.

In light of all the obstacles, the playing field that God did create was the only one capable of satisfying all requirements. Logic--- without the enlightenment of the entire revelation--- is impotent in making any right conclusions relative to the subject matter. As you have shown time after time, logic armed with partial revelation is abject silliness.

so why do the believers believe in such, to me its apparent that we need to feel that there is such athing as god just to fill the void, but i like most as i grew and observed came to my own understanding, why dont they ?

Originally posted by josephw
Originally posted by josephw
The context in which this word "predestinate" occurs is broadly misinterpreted to mean that God caused believers to "become" conformed to the image of His son.

Look deeper. What is meant is that God knew who would believe, so what He did was to give us something to be "conformed" to.

The verse is not saying G ve us something to be once we believed.

ringett, are you going to reply to my post?

No. I don't know what you're talking about.

Originally posted by rwingett
Well, well, now we're getting somewhere. Finally, a theist who recognizes that god is responsible for all the suffering in the world. But you say that he took responsibility for that suffering as well, through Christ's sacrifice. So in other words, he created the whole big problem so he could offer himself up as the solution to that very same problem. Why d ...[text shortened]... ddicted so he can be there when they need a fix. With a god like that, who needs Satan?

After applauding my honesty you then failed to get down to proper business with this issue but instead chose to allow yourself to vent the chip on your shoulder.

Let me get you back on track with this. It's quite right that you posit that there must be reason why God allows all this suffering. God is indeed responsible for the fact that evil exists and and that suffering exists . Man is not responsible. Christians often forget that the snake was there before Adam and Eve fell (mythically of course).

Where you go wrong is that you don't speculate whether there is another reason why God allows all this to happen. The reason in my opinion is that there is some connection between creating a universe which has free will and beings within that have free will and the existence of evil and suffering. My argument is that the two are linked in such a way that it's an unfortunate consequence of having a universe with free will.

For example , if someone said that I could give my children a pill that would make them into automatons so that I could then control them and keep them from ever making mistakes and coming to harm I would decline. This would mean that I would be responsible for any ensuing suffering in them but I would be doing it for a reason . I would hate the suffering but I would hate them being robots even more.

If you think that God is able to create real free will in us whilst at the same time ensuring that we never suffer or make terrible mistakes then fair play to you. I don't think it can be done because there is a relationship between freedom and danger and risk (as any parent will know) .

I know this doesn't give a full explanation but this is the basic idea. I don't fully understand it myself but on some level it makes sense that God has to "let go" of his creation to give it freedom from himself and in doing so creation is bound to suffer.

Now if you are interested in a real debate instead of your predictable axe grinding then you need to think more deeply about this issue instead of using it as a pawn to further your agenda. Christianity is the only religion that faces suffering head on in christ crucified. The response it gives is very hard and it's message is unpalatable to many.

I have given you a no BS response to the issue you raised. Could you do me (and other thesists) the dignity of at least stopping and think before you once more place your axe to the stone looking for something to knock God with. All you end up finding is exactly what you were looking for , a strawman god who you can set fire to. It's BS and avoids the issue.

Originally posted by knightmeister
After applauding my honesty you then failed to get down to proper business with this issue but instead chose to allow yourself to vent the chip on your shoulder.

Let me get you back on track with this. It's quite right that you posit that there must be reason why God allows all this suffering. God is indeed responsible for the fact that evil exists ...[text shortened]... e looking for , a strawman god who you can set fire to. It's BS and avoids the issue.

It may be that man made evils have some instructive purpose. But natural evils do not. Having 225,000 people killed by a tsunami teaches us nothing except that if there is a god, he must be a psychopathic SOB. The great flood, the Egyptians pursuing Moses, killer tsunamis, your god seems to be quite fond of drowning people en masse, isn't he? So unless you can come up with something more plausible than Freaky's load of nonsense about "free will agents" causing tsunamis, then I will continue on my current tack of investigation.

Originally posted by rwingett
It is true that if god exists, and if he is omniscient, that he knew, in advance, what I would type in this post. I am typing it now because every causal chain that god set in motion at the very beginning has led inexorably to this moment. But the point is that being omnipotent, god could have implemented any number of different starting conditions, which i ...[text shortened]... s foreseen every single thing that would happen and that it is exactly what he wanted to happen.

It is true that if god exists, and if he is omniscient, that he knew, in advance, what I would type in this post. ---ringwett---


No he did not know "in advance" in the way you think it means . He knows BOTH that you will type what you type AND that you HAVE typed it. He does not look ALONG the timeline he is outside it. Therefore he sees you future actions and past events just as you see JFK's future as a past event.

You compeletly miss the point that God is not trapped in time like you are. The only way you can know future events is by them being pre-determined. The same is not true for God.

Originally posted by rwingett
It may be that man made evils have some instructive purpose. But natural evils do not. Having 225,000 people killed by a tsunami teaches us nothing except that if there is a god, he must be a psychopathic SOB. The great flood, the Egyptians pursuing Moses, killer tsunamis, your god seems to be quite fond of drowning people en masse, isn't he? So unless you ree will agents" causing tsunamis, then I will continue on my current tack of investigation.

I never said that the purpose of suffering was instruction by necessity , only that suffering is a by product of or linked inextricably with freedom and free will. A universe that is partly free of God and his perfection is going to be imperfect and unless God let's his creation off it's lease free will will never emerge.