MeDeFe wrote:PLAYER57832 wrote:I do understand your point, but I disagree. See you haves set up a definition that basically says there is no real and true free will, because God can predict everything and therefore is really controlling the situation.
It is indeed my opinion that an omniscient god is incompatible with any meaningful definition of free will, however,
that has no bearing on this argument.The 4 year old example might seem, superficially to apply, but it really doesn't. It doesn't for several reasons. The most important is that of consequence versus growth. See, that child has way too much potential to cause harm and only a very slight chance of doing good OR of learning from that harm.
If it doesn't apply, I would request you and everyone else to please stop using it. If it doesn't apply in my case it doesn't apply in any of your cases either. Period.
No, because you choose to only see one aspect and won't see any other options.
The bottom line is that you think there are only 2 choices. Either God creates us without evil, and is good, or he creates us with the propensity for evil and, therefore, is (by extention) bad because he, by creating the propensity for evil essentially created evil.
I say there are other options. They are options that do not exist to us as humans, with our children, not really. However, the child-parent analogy is as close as you can get.
In your example, there is no purpose or reason for leaving a child alone in a room with a sharp knife, or a boiling teakettle with funny pictures on it or anything else so hazardous. The child does not yet have the ability to understand the consequences for his actions. The penalty far exceeds any possible gain. On the other hand parents DO leave kids alone with less hazardous things, DO set up rules and DO enforce them with punishment.
You wish to say that God allowing people to do things that lead to, say, Hitler, makes him evil. I say, sure, it might seem so on the surface, but I am not God. Us being angry at God for allowing these things to happen is like the toddler getting angry because we take away the brightly colored tea kettle before it burns the child. OF COURSE, the analogy does not make perfect sense, because the scale is so very different. Yet, I say to you that scale is far more like the ones for God than your previous example.
You wish to set up a condition that God is unreasonable from the outset. I, Christians, do not. We believe that what God made, what is before us, even with all the trials, even with all the evil, is best for humanity. You do not.
There is no way to get beyond that belief with logic or reason. It is not a matter of logic or reason. It is a matter of belief. No amount of convincing will show you we are correct and no amount of convincing on your part will show us you are correct, because the proof lies outside our experience and ability to see.
You see our belief in that as a kind of "failure". Well, truth is, people of faith see the opposite side as a "failure", a failure to look beyond what is absolutely in front of you. But, that is a point upon which we can go around and around forever. There is no solution. The best we can do is say "hey, I don't agree with you, but I accept that you are a reasonable and intelligent human being". More importantly, we all need to accept that since we cannot prove the other wrong, we need to not impede that religion (atheism, Christianity.. Scientology, whatever).
MeDeFe wrote:Maybe it'll be easier if I restate my point:
I understand your point quite well. I just disagree. I will try to explain my position again.
MeDeFe wrote:God gives us free will knowing what we'll do with it. (And screw the contradictions in that.)
With our limited information (when compared to god) we do all kinds of stuff god disapproves of.
This is the part you have wrong. People don't commit evil because they fail to understand, because God withholds information. We make wrong choices because we CHOOSE to make wrong choices.
What makes this very, very complicated to the point its almost impossible for humans to get their mind around is that in amongst those actual choices ARE times when people do things they believe to be "correct", but that are truly evil. Some of this, like the Inquisition, like Nazism, etc. , occur because humans "conveniently" ignore some precepts put forward by God.
Other things happen because they are natural consequences of our actions. You light a match, it starts a pile of leaves on fire. If the wind kicks it up and burns down your house, that is a consequence of actions. You did not intend to burn your house down, but it happened. Could you have avoided that? You did not have to light that match, most likely. You could have paid better attention to the wind, but you did not. You might have taken other steps. You did not. Did you do that because you lacked the knowledge? Probably you knew, but you decided that the consequences just were not going to happen to you. Maybe you had even done it before, without consequence. Yet, this time... it went differently.
And, then there are things that are not the result of any choice or action. Why do earthquakes happen, for example?
I don't know. I do know that many mountains are formed that way, that many things have happened to shape our earth.
Floods provide us a better answer. We know (or at least, historically people have realized) that floods provide needed silt and fertilizer. Floods can cause harm, but they also are necessary. In modern days, we try to pretend they are not, we try to do without them, and we pay for that arrogance.
MeDeFe wrote:God knew we would do all that if he gave us free will, therefore he has no business doing any sort of judging. Not while we're alive, and not after we die.
Then we would be robots and not human. Period.
However, in the end, this is all just opinion. As long as you don't take your opinion to mean a right to condemn and criticize (as opposed to debate.. that is different) others who disagree, there is no problem. However, for anyone to push their belief onto someone else is wrong.