God?

Originally posted by doodinthemood
What a queer theory. You seem to have an insanely egotistical god.

egotistical no... but with many things in life, suffering usually unearths the true nature of mankind, the best and the worst... Unfortunate that it has to be through suffering and pain.

Anyway, Everybody's Got One, consider the acronym. And if you were the Lord of all creation...

You don't consider making billions of creatures, then hiding your existance, then rewarding those who still believe in you even when the evidence suggests otherwise egotistical?

There's no reasonable reason why a perfect being should care what creatures significantly worse off than him think.

If I go around making sure everybody knows me, that's egotism. If I go around making sure every ant knows me, that's the queerest form of egotism going.

Originally posted by doodinthemood
You don't consider making billions of creatures, then hiding your existance, then rewarding those who still believe in you even when the evidence suggests otherwise egotistical?

There's no reasonable reason why a perfect being should care what creatures significantly worse off than him think.

If I go around making sure everybody knows me, that's ...[text shortened]... m. If I go around making sure every ant knows me, that's the queerest form of egotism going.

your applying a term (ego) to a being from a human perspective i think.

For people who believe in a God/Supreme being/Allah the relationship is quite straightforward, master and servant in simplistic form. God doesnt require anything from us... whether we pray or dont, whether we do good deeds or dont.. nothing will directly affect God.

We do these thing for our benefit and to hopefully get some reward at the end of it.

That is the difference. Most people pray when they need or want something. very few pray just for the glory of God and to please him if you will. Ego, therfore does not come into it.

What "eidence to the contrary" are you wittering on about?

Well. I make a load of people, make sure they can never know for certain whether I exist, make it seem like I don't by allowing evil to happen despite the fact I'm omniscient and benevolent, and then only reward those who still believe afterwards.

This is one of two things:
1) a lack of benevolence, letting humans suffer.

2) wanting them to believe in me despite suffering, which is egotism.

I can't see how anyone in their right mind can consider number two anything other than egotism? I'm god, why should I care if people believe in me or not, yet instead, I make it seem like I don't by letting millions of people die in agony, then only reward those who don't let logic get in the way of their thoughts?

That is egotism.

Originally posted by doodinthemood
If I am omniscient, then free will is not a possibility, as I would know any future choices. You don't seem to have appreciated that point.

Essentially, you're questioning my omnipotence to deny omniscience. Which is correct to realise as a paradox in omnipotence. You're asking little more than "Can God create a cheeseburger so big even he couldn't k like he avoided a point, when it was actually my fault for wording it incorrectly.

So your saying that an all powerful and all knowing being could not afford us free will to rebel against him? Essentially you are implying that if there be an all powerful and all knowing God that free will to rebel against such a God is an impossibility and I simply disagree. Conversly, what you have said is that you would give us free will if you were an all knowing and all powerful God yet only let those you know beforehand who would serve your desires enterance into creation. However, the problem with this scenerio is that, in effect, no free will has really been given at all. You have simply manipulated creation to serve you in the process. It would be no different that programming a computer to serve you 24/7.

Think about this, if you were an all knowing and all powerful God, what joy would you get out of knowing everything and having direct control over everything? Would you not be bored out of your mind? Would it not be like playing solitare with yourself only you know beforehand that you have no chance of losing? However, just relinquish a little power via your own power and that element of your creation would be your sole focus no matter how tiny in comparison to the rest of creation and even though you may know the results of what path your creation will take in the process.

Originally posted by doodinthemood
I can't see how anyone in their right mind can consider number two anything other than egotism? I'm god, why should I care if people believe in me or not, yet instead, I make it seem like I don't by letting millions of people die in agony, then only reward those who don't let logic get in the way of their thoughts?

That is egotism.[/b]

This is an interesting debate in and of itself. Can an all knowing and all powerful being be egotistical?

Here is a definition of egotism. "Frequent use of the word "I". The habit of thinking, talking, or writing too much about oneself; conceit; selfishness."

So I ask you, if there be a God who started everything and is the source of everything, what else is there to focus on other than himself? Would he be justified in doing so? Would you be justified in reminding us of this fact? However, he has chosen to "share" his existence with himself via his creation, no? So in doing so, does this make him selfish or just the opposite? Is creating beings seperate from yourself who have the capacity to openly defy you a selfish act? Is a God who humbles himself by coming to earth and dying on a cross indicitive of one who is preoccupied only with himself by pursuing only those things that give him pleasure? Yet on the other hand, he is our source of live and will either continue to be or not be. Therefore, are we deluding ourselves by not giving such a one thanks and glory that is deserved? For example, I am sure you have met unthankful children who have no reverance for their parents for bringing them into the world and then caring for them. Are they not deluding themselves as well? In fact, Biblically we are told to respect our parents if nothing more than to acknowledge their contribution for us being here. How much more then should we acknowledge the God who gave us our parents, if in fact, he exists?

You have an insanely bad habit of just ignoring the points I make and instead asking further questions in the hopes you'll find a flaw in my logic, rather than actually considering the points I've already made and arguing against them directly.

1) You say you disagree when I say free will is impossible when omniscience is present, but don't say why? Please do say why. If I, an omniscient god, know exactly what choices will be made in the future, how is there any room at all for free will?

2) You say the rather juvenile point of "wouldn't it be boring to know everything?" Well no. I'm god, I decide what's boring, and if I do not invent the emotion of boredom, then it doesn't exist. As an omnipotent and benevolent god, it would be against logic for me to even consider creating boredom. In perfection, there is not boredom, thus I wouldn't be bored.

3) Straw man against my egotism bit. I didn't say anything about whether or not worship is justified if God exists.

Originally posted by doodinthemood

1) You say you disagree when I say free will is impossible when omniscience is present, but don't say why? Please do say why. If I, an omniscient god, know exactly what choices will be made in the future, how is there any room at all for free will?

2) You say the rather juvenile point of "wouldn't it be boring to know everything?" Well no. I'm god, I ism bit. I didn't say anything about whether or not worship is justified if God exists.[/b]

The reason that free will is possible when omniscience is present is that just because one knows a result in no way inhibits them from producing a result. Therefore, the question really is, why would a perfect God knowingly set into motion a result that would knowingly result in imperfection?

The anwser is love.

It is said that God is love. It is not a question of whether love is good or bad or whether he decides to love because God makes no decisions, rather, he simply does what "is". In other words, God is simply what "is" rather than what might have been, therefore, he makes no decision as we do. In fact, why should he if he knows everything? It is not like you or I trying to ascertain what path to follow in life because if we knew, there would be no deciding, rather, we would simply follow the best path. Therefore, it is my contention that love is the best path for creation to adhere to because it simply "is". Now you may disagree but take our own existence, for example, What would your life be without love? It would be 100% meaningless no? Therefore, we can either say that God was definded as love in the minds of men because as human beings our actions revolve around who and what we love or you can say that we were simply created in the image of a God who is love. Nonetheless, love is what makes us tick, therefore, it simply "is", and one of the characteristics of love is that to have a mutually loving relationship one must have the choice to love the other back. Could you imagine controlling other people to love you back? Would it be love or would it be tantamount to you programing a computer to say, "I love you"? Would it have any meaning for you whatsoever, yet, God must be different than ourselves, no? Heaven forbid that he also desires us to desire him the same way that we desire others to love us. Therefore, I ask you, what other route is there to take if God desires us to desire him? What other route is there to take for a God of love?

Edit: Love is a messy business, no? It seems that pain and suffering are lurking right around the corner when love is mentioned. However, that in no way means that we should not love or that it impeedes us, rather, it makes us who we are. Love simply "is".

Originally posted by whodey
The reason that free will is possible when omniscience is present is that just because one knows a result in no way inhibits them from producing a result.
You're missing the point. If I know what the result is going to be, then the person hasn't really made any "choice" at all because it would be impossible for them to go down any other point.

Say a person can choose between eating an apple or eating an orange, and I'm omniscient, so I know they're going to eat the apple.

Have they still got free will? Well no, because they can't pick the orange. If they pick the orange, then I'm not omniscient, because I didn't know they were going to pick the orange. They have to pick the apple because I know everything and I know that's what they're going to do.

So, the person has free will to do one thing. This is not free will.

Thus, free will is impossible if anything has omniscience.

(paraphrasing here, you seemed to drift)
Originally posted by whodey
why would a perfect God knowingly set into motion a result that would knowingly result in imperfection? Because of love. If somebody loves you, but were forced to do so, wouldn't you consider it meaningless?
Firstly, there isn't any choice anyway. If somebody finds you attractive, and comes to love your personality to, and they start to love you, have they had any choice at all? Assuming you've been in love before, can you say it was possible to suddenly choose not to be in love? No, loving someone isn't a choice anyway.

Secondly, you're suggesting that God wants us to choose to love him (hence the imperfection). So he has desire, thus there cannot have been perfection without creation. If I type now "I wish I was eating a donut" the one thing that you can be sure of is that I'm not currently eating a donut, else that desire would have been sufficed. If I go out and buy a donut, likewise. I would understand a deity being imperfect, but if that imperfection is that he's without the acceptance of significantly lesser beings, then that's laughable.

Not only is that god egotistical, he's now emotionally insecure as well.

Originally posted by whodey
Therefore, I ask you, what other route is there to take if God desires us to desire him?
If that is true, the only route, fairly obviously, is to desire him. It's the same as if a man holds a gun to your head and asks for money. The only option, really, is to give him your money. To say this man is so loving that he's giving you a choice is absurd. To go around scattering your money in case there's a man with a gun somewhere even moreso.

Originally posted by doodinthemood
[b]Originally posted by whodey
You're missing the point. If I know what the result is going to be, then the person hasn't really made any "choice" at all because it would be impossible for them to go down any other point.

Say a person can choose between eating an apple or eating an orange, and I'm omniscient, so I know they're going to eat the apple.

Have they still got free will?

Yes they can still have free will. Essentially you are saying that an all powerful God who can do anything, can do anything except.......

This is blatantly contradictory.

If I put you in a room with an apple and and an orange and knew without a shadow of a doubt that you would pick the apple because I knew you liked them, did you have had free will to choose the orange? Of coarse you did.

But I can't pick the orange. If I pick the orange, then that proves you wrong. But you're an omniscient god who thus knows everything and cannot be wrong.

Either the omniscience cannot exist, or the free will cannot exist, because it is impossible for me to choose to do something you don't know about.


And the first bit will always be contradictory, because the very nature of omnipotence is contradiction. You've gone in a huge circle then settled for an unnecessarily complicated version of asking "can god make a cheeseburger so big even he couldn't eat it?" then using that as a point against me, when I'm the one who realises the validity of this argument and has seen the absurdity in claims of an omnipresent and omniscient god.

Originally posted by doodinthemood
Firstly, there isn't any choice anyway. If somebody finds you attractive, and comes to love your personality to, and they start to love you, have they had any choice at all? Assuming you've been in love before, can you say it was possible to suddenly choose not to be in love? No, loving someone isn't a choice anyway.

Secondly, you're suggesting that Go round scattering your money in case there's a man with a gun somewhere even moreso.[/b]

I think you are getting the notion of physical attraction mixed up with the concept of love. For example, the Greek language refers to love between the sexes as "eros" and the Godly kind of love mentioned in the Bible as "agape", and yes, agape is a choice. Nevertheless, in the type of love you mention which is "eros" you still have a choice. For example, I choose to pursue a relationship with someone I am attracted to. I may not choose to be attracted, but I certainly have the choice to have a mutually loving relationship with them. The reason I may choose to do so may involve a variaty of reasons. For example, what if I am already married? Granted, some use the, "I could'nt help myself" excuse despite this truth and many continue to do so.

Lets take the eros relationship a bit further. Have you ever seen a man or a woman try to control the other? I have, and I can tell you that love is for the most part absent in such relationships. You can beat me, drug me, threaten me, manipulate me, but when it comes down to it, you can't force me to continue to love you back.

Originally posted by Ou Lei
I don't believe in god because there probably isn't a god. Think about it... all the wars and catastrophe... there can't be a god.

No. There can't be. There are MANY gods. That's right folks... I'm here today to tell you the truth. There are many gods fighting with one another for dominance and this is the answer we should understand to be the truth. ...[text shortened]... uption. So that we will know the truth. And the truth, my friends, will set you right.

There are wars and catastrophe because the world fails to acknowledge God.

The correct one that is!

To whodey,

I think you're being deliberately deceptive there. That's a very immoral stance. Once again, you ignored my points completely. I don't think you've looked at a single one of my points for the whole of this thread. Here's what I wrote:

Originally posted by doodinthemood
there isn't any choice anyway. If somebody finds you attractive, and comes to love your personality to, and they start to love you, have they had any choice at all? Assuming you've been in love before, can you say it was possible to suddenly choose not to be in love? No, loving someone isn't a choice.

Originally posted by doodinthemood
But I can't pick the orange. If I pick the orange, then that proves you wrong. But you're an omniscient god who thus knows everything and cannot be wrong.

Either the omniscience cannot exist, or the free will cannot exist, because it is impossible for me to choose to do something you don't know about.


And the first bit will always be contradict ...[text shortened]... this argument and has seen the absurdity in claims of an omnipresent and omniscient god.

I will admit one thing and that is the concept of ommipotence is just that, it is an abstract concept that we pretend to know everything about much like the concept of gravity. Therefore, we can go around in circles all day, but at the end of the day there remains the circle. 😉