Originally posted by DoctorScribbles When God sent his son in John 3:16, did he already know who all would believe in him? If he did, then God really sent his son only for those select people. He didn't send any help for those whom he knew would not believe in Jesus - he left them no hope whatsoever, and he knew it. Is this compatible with your notion of God? If not, then you must ...[text shortened]... h great injustice compatible with your notion of God? If not, then you must reject omniscience.
GOD knows all this by knowing the result of the choices we make. All men are offered Salvation. Whether they accept or reject is the result of their choices. GOD knows the end result of those choices.
Originally posted by Nordlys Well, that could have been part of the instructions. But even if he didn't follow instructions, he did something which according to the bible was predicted and necessary. What would have happened if he hadn't done it? Would someone else have stepped in for him? What if nobody would have wanted to do it? If people really have a free will, that would have been a possibility, wouldn't it?
Someone from outside the group would have betrayed HIM. The devil knowing the Scripture could not have stopped the betrayal. only delayed the Crucifixion for another year.
Originally posted by DoctorScribbles Where does it state that he is omniscient? Be careful to apply a simple word-matching algorithm to answer this, instead of applying reason and interpretation as you have admonished me against.
Originally posted by Darfius He didn't test Job to find out the result, He did so to display to Satan that people were capable of loving God for who He was, and not material blessings.
I of course believe God is omniscient.
GOD didnot test Job at all. Satan put job to the test after getting GOD'S permission.
Originally posted by DoctorScribbles This necessitates denying that humans have free will, and accepting that we only experience an illusion of it. You cannot believe both that God is omniscient and that humans have free will. If you accept one as true, you must deny the other.
Is free will incompatible with determinism?
Let's say free-will exists. Wouldn't an individual when faced to the exact same circumstances choose exactly the same way?
Can we say that it is the same individual and the same circumstances if he did not?
Free-will and determinism are incompatible if we assume an omniscient creator, I agree there, at the moment of creation, the omniscient being determines the determinant and there can only be illusionary free-will. There is no escape there.
Originally posted by Palynka Is free will incompatible with determinism?
Let's say free-will exists. Wouldn't an individual when faced to the exact same circumstances choose exactly the same way?
Can we say that it is the same individual and the same circumstances if he did not?
Free-will and determinism are incompatible if we assume an omniscient creator, I agree there, at the ...[text shortened]... illusionary free-will. There is no escape there.
Originally posted by DoctorScribbles Construct an instance of a being exhibiting free will in a deterministic universe.
Under the same circumstances and with the same information at the same point in time, a rational being would always make the same choice, even if he had free-will. Since the outcome can only possibly be one, then it is deterministic.
Originally posted by Palynka Under the same circumstances and with the same information at the same point in time, a rational being would always make the same choice, even if he had free-will. Since the outcome can only possibly be one, then it is deterministic.
What aspect of your example constitutes free will? I only see determinism.
The Word of God was written some 5000 years ago by man to bring order and some belief in an understanding of the world around them. At its core, it is no different than the core of Hinduism, Judaism, Budhism or Taoism or any other religion of this world. The 'good" go to a place llike heaven and the "evil" go to a place like hell, be it the home of a God or gods, be it a dwelling of one's own creation or be it a conceived other plane of existance.
I create a person and because I'm all knowing I know everything this person will do from the moment I switch it on to the moment it ceases to exist.
After I animate the person it goes on to create great works of beauty AND perform horrible acts of evil, all of which I knew about during the creation process.
Who is more responsible for the beauty and the evil, the person I created or me?
I create a person and because I'm all knowing I know everything this person will do from the moment I switch it on to the moment it ceases to exist.
After I animate the person it goes on to create great works of beauty AND perform horrible acts of evil, all of which I knew about during the creation process.
Who is more responsible for the beauty and the evil, the person I created or me?
TheSkipper
Good question...The actions of those around would also be accountable for the created beauty..evil the person takes also...Mabey in the big scheme of things we are also God and the Devil...on a smaller scale in a weird way.Actions with a lack of insight can make people seem evil or good?
Originally posted by DoctorScribbles What aspect of your example constitutes free will? I only see determinism.
If for you free-will is randomness, which implies irrationality, then we cannot agree on this subject because our definitions of free-will are different.
An individual with free-will is given the opportunity to choose between paying 1M USD or receiving 1M USD. He will free-willingly choose always the same thing, hence it is deterministic, but he still can choose to pay (which he won't), due to his free-will. This can be generalized to all moments of time and information levels.
Even stochastic processes can be viewed as inverse functions, of sub-partitions of the set of events. That we cannot know the real function doesn't mean it is not there.
THE WORD OF GOD
06 Dec '05 15:20
Back to Top