Originally posted by DoctorScribblesDoes it matter?
That why it's an illusion. That's just what an illusion is - something that is perceived differently than how it actually exists due to one's perspective. The magician's assistant isn't actually sawed in half - the magician sees this and the audience doesn't. The audience failing to perceive this doesn't mean that the assistant is actually sawed ...[text shortened]... ve free will does not mean that we do. It's an illusion, according to your world view.
4 edits
Originally posted by no1marauderWell, yes. Under LH's world view, God knows that LH will either be nourished or not be nourished. Under LH's world view, he could just kick back and watch TV all day, every day, reasoning that if God knew he would be nourished, he would somehow provide the food; and if God knew he wouldn't be nourished, no amount of work to earn money to buy food would nourish him.
Does it matter?
Under mine, I cannot simply do nothing all day, for I know that if I do that, I will eventually starve to death.
I'd say it matters. I'm willing to do the experiment. I'll take the affirmative position for my world view. Anybody who thinks it doesn't matter can take the negative and get comfortable on the couch.
Originally posted by no1marauderFor the same reason that, unless you understand what he is doing, a nuclear scientist's actions in turning some knobs and pressing some buttons are going to appear "arbitrary and absurd" to you.
Why? I don't directly experience anyone else's thoughts, but I can logically try to figure out why they have done things. I can't fly, but I can figure out how something does. I've never been inside a star, but I understand (kinda) nuclear fusion.
Some why can't I use my natural reason to judge whether the actions of some entity are arbitrary and absurd?
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesThat our perspective of reality differs from God's does not make ours any less real - any more than the fact that I see a woman and my wife sees a man when we're looking at each other makes one perspective less "real" than the other's.
That why it's an illusion. That's just what an illusion is - something that is perceived differently than how it actually exists due to one's perspective. The magician's assistant isn't actually sawed in half - the magician sees this and the audience doesn't. The audience failing to perceive this doesn't mean that the assistant is actually sawed ...[text shortened]... ve free will does not mean that we do. It's an illusion, according to your world view.
From our perspective, we are not constrained to choosing a particular course of action, hence we have free will. From God's perspective, knowing that we will choose one alternative over others does not mean we could not have chosen otherwise - simply that we wouldn't/didn't.
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesWhat if God knows I will be nourished because I work to earn money to buy food?
Well, yes. Under LH's world view, God knows that LH will either be nourished or not be nourished. Under LH's world view, he could just kick back and watch TV all day, every day, reasoning that if God knew he would be nourished, he would somehow provide the food; and if God knew he wouldn't be nourished, no amount of work to earn money to buy food would nourish him.
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesBecause what we consider injustice need not necessarily be so in the eyes of God, and the converse.
So, some people suffered without deserving to.
But you said that God does nothing without consideration of justice.
How can this be, unless mere acknowledment of injustice constitutes consideration of justice?
As I told no1 - you cannot judge an all-knowing all-powerful being without at least being all-knowing yourself.
1 edit
Originally posted by lucifershammerYou asserted it, but you gave no reason why that should be so. Judges in boxing can't fight as well as the boxers but they can, and do judge, the matches.
Because what we consider injustice need not necessarily be so in the eyes of God, and the converse.
As I told no1 - you cannot judge an all-knowing all-powerful being without at least being all-knowing yourself.
Originally posted by no1marauderJudges in boxing need to know both the rules of boxing, as well as the facts involved in the bout itself (i.e. who punched whom where and how many times). In terms of knowledge, they would need to know at least as much, if not more, than the boxers themselves.
You asserted it, but you gave no reason why that should be so. Judges in boxing can't fight as well as the boxers but they can, and do judge, the matches.
That's why I said you'd need to be at least all-knowing to judge God.
Originally posted by lucifershammerI'm not asking if you think the effects were just.
Because what we consider injustice need not necessarily be so in the eyes of God, and the converse.
As I told no1 - you cannot judge an all-knowing all-powerful being without at least being all-knowing yourself.
I'm not asserting that I think they were unjust, or that what I think is relevant.
I'm asking if God found them to be just.
Originally posted by lucifershammerYet you seem to understand his reasons - you claim that everything is just.
Because you are none of those things - you would need to be all-knowing at the very least to be in a position to know God's reasons.
Then again, you are spouting nonsense as usual:
"you would need to be all-knowing at the very least"
At the least? - how can you possibly know more than everything?