Neoteny wrote:That's just playing with words. If he doesn't know which of all those possible futures is going to happen, that doesn't make him very godlike...
If he knows which of all those possible possible futures is going to happen (assuming that the future is static) then he's a jerk? If he doesn't he's not godlike? Knowing every possible outcome, of every possible choice, that every being in the universe can make certainly sounds all-knowing and godlike to me. It also doesn't make predestination necessary and allows for free will.
Everything's going very well for me. I've been hunting for another thread to contribute real discussion to rather than just one-liners. I'm not afraid to say that one of my favorite conversations on here was the suffering discussion we had. It just seems that most of those kinds of discussions have slid away. Where the hell did Nappy go anyhow? Anyone know?
It is a bit of a catch-22 for god. If he already knows I'm going to hell, then he's a dick. If he doesn't, he's not god. It doesn't matter how many futures are possible, only one is going to happen. If he doesn't know which one, at least he isn't a dick.
Napoleon Ier wrote:You people need to grow up to be honest.
Neoteny wrote:It is a bit of a catch-22 for god. If he already knows I'm going to hell, then he's a dick. If he doesn't, he's not god. It doesn't matter how many futures are possible, only one is going to happen. If he doesn't know which one, at least he isn't a dick.
Well there's a start at least
I do wonder who gave you the impression that omniscient means perfectly precognitive? The catch-22 seems to be only in your definition of God, upon what do you base it? Biblically there is no definition for all-knowing (that I'm aware of). It's a title given to God not a yardstick designed to define him. For instance people are assumed to have free-will, in the Bible, it isn't as if this paradox would be a new concept.
---EDIT---
I could probably be more clear about it. Essentially, what you are arguing against is predestination. It's a conundrum that, if you choose to get into it, can lead you down exactly the path you seem to be on. The problem is that it's based on an interpretation of omniscience that isn't embraced by all Christians (I'd even venture most Christians). To say that he isn't God or that he isn't "All knowing" merely because he allows us to choose the courses we'll follow doesn't make a lot of sense to me. The very people who began to call him all-knowing would have been aware of this, and it would not have been beyond their grasp. So, I would conclude that the definition you propose isn't the one intially intended.
Last edited by CrazyAnglican on Sun Jun 29, 2008 9:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Neoteny wrote:It is a bit of a catch-22 for god. If he already knows I'm going to hell, then he's a dick. If he doesn't, he's not god. It doesn't matter how many futures are possible, only one is going to happen. If he doesn't know which one, at least he isn't a dick.
Well there's a start at least
I do wonder who gave you the impression that omniscient means perfectly precognitive? The catch-22 seems to be only in your definition of God, upon what do you base it? Biblically there is no definition for all-knowing (that I'm aware of). It's a title given to God not a yardstick designed to define him. For instance people are assumed to have free-will, in the Bible, it isn't as if this paradox would be a new concept.
Well, whether you think so or not, most people that I've encountered do believe that this all-encompassing omniscience is a characteristic of their god. Historically, gods have not always been precognitive, but the Christian god tends to lead us on in that matter. Are there not any verses to this effect (it's been awhile since I've checked...)? Anyhow, it's a bit ridiculous to think that the creator of all things (time, energy, matter, etc) doesn't know what's going to happen... I smell omnipotence coming...
Napoleon Ier wrote:You people need to grow up to be honest.
Neoteny wrote:Well, whether you think so or not, most people that I've encountered do believe that this all-encompassing omniscience is a characteristic of their god. Historically, gods have not always been precognitive, but the Christian god tends to lead us on in that matter. Are there not any verses to this effect (it's been awhile since I've checked...)? Anyhow, it's a bit ridiculous to think that the creator of all things (time, energy, matter, etc) doesn't know what's going to happen... I smell omnipotence coming...
I'll certainly conceed that there are folks who believe in predestination. Obviously I'm not one of them so I can't really defend there position very well. The question, I'd say, remains with your own definition of omniscient and how it relates to God. As far as I can see we've come up with three possible conclusions:
1) God creates us with the foreknowledge that we'll go to heaven or not. (He's omniscient) 2) God doesn't know what will happen after we're created (He's not omniscient) 3) God creates us knowing full well our characteristics and our likely choices, but leaves the choosing up to us. (He's omniscient and allows free-will).
I'd say put forth the choices like that and see what your Christian friends say. I'm sure you'll get a few other options that we haven't thought of as well.
I liked the discussion on suffering too. That was a good one.
Neoteny wrote:Well, whether you think so or not, most people that I've encountered do believe that this all-encompassing omniscience is a characteristic of their god. Historically, gods have not always been precognitive, but the Christian god tends to lead us on in that matter. Are there not any verses to this effect (it's been awhile since I've checked...)? Anyhow, it's a bit ridiculous to think that the creator of all things (time, energy, matter, etc) doesn't know what's going to happen... I smell omnipotence coming...
I'll certainly conceed that there are folks who believe in predestination. Obviously I'm not one of them so I can't really defend there position very well. The question, I'd say, remains with your own definition of omniscient and how it relates to God. As far as I can see we've come up with three possible conclusions:
1) God creates us with the foreknowledge that we'll go to heaven or not. (He's omniscient) 2) God doesn't know what will happen after we're created (He's not omniscient) 3) God creates us knowing full well our characteristics and our likely choices, but leaves the choosing up to us. (He's omniscient and allows free-will).
I'd say put forth the choices like that and see what your Christian friends say. I'm sure you'll get a few other options that we haven't thought of as well.
I liked the discussion on suffering too. That was a good one.
I'm off to bed now though. cyal8tr
Fair enough, I suppose. I refuse to call your god omniscient, however. Though he probably already knew that.
Napoleon Ier wrote:You people need to grow up to be honest.
CrazyAnglican wrote: This seems a little too general to be useful doesn't it? One can't sum up two entire lives in one sentence like this. You seem to be inviting us to see the virtuous unreligious person and the repentant, evil convert. If the murderer truly repented and was a great guy afterward, why shouldn't he have salvation? If this didn't happen he won't be there anyway.
Is charity work alone sufficient for entrance into heaven? What if your charity worker beat his wife and kids? The charity worker and the murderer had equal opportunity. Do you suggest that murderers not being allowed to repent is more fair than only admitting those who outwardly look virtuous?
If a charity worker beat his wife and kids it means he was a fucking asshole - who said anything about wife beaters derserving heaven? - you're an idiot
God IS the universe- our universal source of energy. When we need energy for something we pray- what most don't know is we find the answer in ourselves, not the sky or wherever else you are pointing your hands As a parent, we try to teach our children what is right from wrong and hopefully once they leave 'the nest' their conscience tells them the right thing to do when they need answers.
The Bible in my opinion, as well as the Koran and other testaments including heiroglyphics of the Egyptians, are guidelines of how to behave and interact with one another to create a less confused and chaotic society - (sounds like a justice system doesn't it). Religion has value because it teaches our future generations about morals and values and to treat one another right- ie: don't kill, don't commit adultery ect... More and more of us (including myself) are abandonning religion for atheism - for me the thought of a guy in teh sky telling me if I don't do something his way I will be condemmed is not something I take seriously - I do however work hard at becoming a better person - 'be kind, rewind' type thing - be considerate towards others ect..which I don't need religion for, I already have strong morals and values without having to believe in God to be that way. I like, like Fabled, was raised Roman Catholic and in my adulthood have researched other religions trying to find 'the truth' in one of them, but really found it in myself- it was there all along.
To add to the first article of the thread by fabled - Religeon and its concepts are always changing based on the ideals of the society around it. - For the first time in ages women now have a place and a voice being heard - story of Mary Magdalene being the grail and Jesus's wife and so on... this would have been considered absurd a few hundred years ago, and today with the measures of equality happening in the world, a woman made it to the last supper!!
Rock on Sisters...hahaha
Thanks for starting this topic Fabled, a very interesting read!
" Do not bite at the bait of pleasure until you know there is no hook beneath it." -Thomas Jefferson xiGames member
radiojake wrote: If a charity worker beat his wife and kids it means he was a fucking asshole - who said anything about wife beaters derserving heaven? - you're an idiot
Interesting assessment, My statement was there to show that a person can't be defined (judged) by one aspect of their character or one deed, and then you immediately try to assign the label "idiot" based on that? I do have to commend you on consisitency.
CA I think what Jake ,and certainly myself, feel frustrated by is that a fairly straight forward question gets suddenly compounded and made 'difficult', nothing that has been said has directly answered the core question of whether God is just . He may well be omnipotent,perfect, compassionate,loving and yes way above the scrutiny of mere mortals but this apparent path to heaven is simply not just in any accepted sense, God cant be wrong so perhaps mans interpretation is.
joecoolfrog wrote:CA I think what Jake ,and certainly myself, feel frustrated by is that a fairly straight forward question gets suddenly compounded and made 'difficult', nothing that has been said has directly answered the core question of whether God is just . He may well be omnipotent,perfect, compassionate,loving and yes way above the scrutiny of mere mortals but this apparent path to heaven is simply not just in any accepted sense, God cant be wrong so perhaps mans interpretation is.
joecoolfrog wrote:CA I think what Jake ,and certainly myself, feel frustrated by is that a fairly straight forward question gets suddenly compounded and made 'difficult', nothing that has been said has directly answered the core question of whether God is just .
Hi Joe,
I'm certainly not trying to frustrate anyone or make things complicated. I do maintain simply this. At any given time anyone is capable of confessing their sins and accepting Christ. Everyone has equal access. Those who do not know about Christianity (a minority that's growing smaller) are not required to accept him, but be moral. Surely you could agree that this is a pretty straightforward answer that speaks to God's justice (it isn't denied anyone) and mercy (even the lowliest are admitted).
joecoolfrog wrote:He may well be omnipotent,perfect, compassionate,loving and yes way above the scrutiny of mere mortals but this apparent path to heaven is simply not just in any accepted sense, God cant be wrong so perhaps mans interpretation is.
I'm certainly not saying that my interpretations are the only ones or more correct than anyone else's. The only reason that I engage in these debates is to try my ideas in the face of opposition. RJ's argument, however, was open to the criticisms that he was using stereotypes to create an impression of injustice, and the core of his argument is an attack on deathbed conversions not God's justice. I merely pointed out the Christian perspective that both of the people he used as an example were imperfect and both were allowed the same chance at salvation. Thereby asserting God's justice.
Last edited by CrazyAnglican on Mon Jun 30, 2008 10:51 am, edited 2 times in total.
saxitoxin wrote:Your position is more complex than the federal tax code. As soon as I think I understand it, I find another index of cross-references, exceptions and amendments I have to apply.
Timminz wrote:Yo mama is so classless, she could be a Marxist utopia.
MR. Nate wrote:So, you're OK as long as God damns everyone to hell? God has this other attribute, besides justice, and it's called love, which I think we've mentioned before. God loves us and doesn't want to damn us to hell, so Christs death provided a payment for our sin.
I didn't mean that, but it's an entirely different discussion, and not one for a "Is God really Just" thread. If you like, though, I'll argue my viewpoint in a "Is God really Nice" thread, should you care to set one up.
MR. Nate wrote:Try Sartre, Heidegger. Both will make you want to commit suicide. Or Lyotard maybe Derrida. Those guys will convince you that nothing even exists. For a perhaps more positive, God aware philosopher, read Schaeffer, he's my personal favorite at the moment.
A wonderful endorsement I'll try and check them out.
Interestingly, there was a show about Christianity in communist China that I saw the other day. One point impressed on me that really what you had in the covenant of the monotheistic God (i.e., God of Abraham) and the covenant of the foregiving, loving God (i.e., Jesus Christ) are, in fact, people you would like to do business with.
Allow me to explain. Try doing business with Mega-corp. XYZ. You talk to Vice-president A, who refers you to Vice-president B, who sends you to in-house counsel, who sends you to out-house counsel, who tells you they do such and such, but you need to do such and such, and the such and such keeps changing every time you talk to someone else. In this society, you need something more than a contract dealing with social and anti-social conduct. You need a uniform system of procedures and protocols. You need one guy who can make the call. That guy is YHWY.
Now, this works because YHWY only has a few people in his organization at the beginning. They are Abraham's clan. They are "outcasts" or better yet, "expatriates", and, of course, they need a social contract, so they write one down, along with some history, some literature, some performing arts, etc. And the company grows, and YHWY seems to be a good head of state, and the rules of the social contract seem to be working pretty good until some other king destroys his headquarters and enslaves his employees. But of course, the company keeps functioning because it was never really anything by an infrastructure for adjudication of disputes. Written law and case law.
But, just as now we have so much case law in the legal system, and so many statutes, that often you can find something that says X, and something that says Y... leading to lack of clarrity... and people crave clarrity... and also parts of the social contract that worked pretty well when you were chugging along with reasonably vibrant community didn't work so well when you were under the thumb or oppression, forced to be part of the vast Roman Empire with its plastic laws and deities appropriated from other cultures.
So a new court was formed.. the court of salvation. And those who followed Christ could trust that they were going to follow a social contract with reasonably good rules, there was one guy in charge, and that was that. If you have 12 Christians and one doesn't play by the rules, the other 11 are going to find out real quick and, guess what, he's going to be shut out faster than a tax man chasing after a purse of silver coins.
The court of the benevolent Christian God worked pretty well under one church, until it got too big, and then we had the protestant reformation. Etc, etc. etc.
Does it matter who made who? Does it matter where you go when you die? Does it matter whether you are good or bad? Really what matters is that you have people you can do business with and realize expectations. So whether you think man created God or that God created Man, the bottom line is simple - God, any God - really just wants some business partners to take over the world with... Having built an empire in this fashion, it become unmanageable to the people that comprise it, and either of two things happen (1) God, having gotten himself a nice golden parachute built into the deal, stays on with some residual portion of the company and the new CEO comes in and becomes the next God for the "growth" part of the company, or (2) God, who decides he's not quite ready to give up the board room corner office, sucessfully restructures the company by making changes to the social contract.
And at bottom that's all the pissing in the wind that goes on here in the forum is about. Some people - include you Mr. I'm a declared athiest OP - are trying to redefine the social contract, while the widow and orphan shareholders say, "No, you can't cut our dividend! We need that dividend to keep the lights on!" All in the context of a changing operating environment and a burgeoning scale that continue to diminish the efficacy of the current hegemonic God regime, which happens at the moment in the US to be Christianity. You will recall that at one point, it used to be a set of business partners who were able to happily transact their business in the shared belief that Man originated when God blew his nose.
My ever constant two last games seem to have no end in sight!
joecoolfrog wrote:CA I think what Jake ,and certainly myself, feel frustrated by is that a fairly straight forward question gets suddenly compounded and made 'difficult', nothing that has been said has directly answered the core question of whether God is just .
Hi Joe,
I'm certainly not trying to frustrate anyone or make things complicated. I do maintain simply this. At any given time anyone is capable of confessing their sins and accepting Christ. Everyone has equal access. Those who do not know about Christianity (a minority that's growing smaller) are not required to accept him, but be moral. Surely you could agree that this is a pretty straightforward answer that speaks to God's justice (it isn't denied anyone) and mercy (even the lowliest are admitted).
joecoolfrog wrote:He may well be omnipotent,perfect, compassionate,loving and yes way above the scrutiny of mere mortals but this apparent path to heaven is simply not just in any accepted sense, God cant be wrong so perhaps mans interpretation is.
I'm certainly not saying that my interpretations are the only ones or more correct than anyone else's. The only reason that I engage in these debates is to try my ideas in the face of opposition. RJ's argument, however, was open to the criticisms that he was using stereotypes to create an impression of injustice, and the core of his argument is an attack on deathbed conversions not God's justice. I merely pointed out the Christian perspective that both of the people he used as an example were imperfect and both were allowed the same chance at salvation. Thereby asserting God's justice.
Fair enough though I have a sneaky suspion that you privately agree that its not a perfect system, understand though that you cant let the side down If you ever want to become a Frog then let me know coz I get to be the numero uno next year and my salvation policy is going to be watertight
joecoolfrog wrote:I think what Jake ,and certainly myself, feel frustrated by is that a fairly straight forward question gets suddenly compounded and made 'difficult', nothing that has been said has directly answered the core question of whether God is just .
The problem is there are too many varied definitions of "justice".
But, for most Christians ... and I would warrant most Jews and Moslems as well, God is just.
Only God's justice and our justice don't necessarily cooincide
True. For example, I don't believe it is "just" to let millions pf people to live in squalor and poverty. God obviously thinks it is cool, cos he's done bugger all to fix that. Maybe he's just warming up, maybe his plan is mysterious, after all , whats a few more millions of deaths -as long as its God's jutice, then it must be ok.
suggs wrote:True. For example, I don't believe it is "just" to let millions pf people to live in squalor and poverty. God obviously thinks it is cool, cos he's done bugger all to fix that. Maybe he's just warming up, maybe his plan is mysterious, after all , whats a few more millions of deaths -as long as its God's jutice, then it must be ok.
No, it means that he thinks the steps necessary to prevent it are worse than letting these things happen.
Remember the old stories of the wish? Someone asks for "peace on earth" ... and gets a world devoid of people. Someone asks for their son to come back to life ... and he comes back, exactly as he was just prior to actual death after a motorcycle crash.
We humans are notorious for wanting things that seem perfectly reasonable at the time, but are not. Sometimes , even our idea of "justice" can be arbitrary. Take that recent theme where a guy has to do all kinds of criminal stuff if he wants his son alive. Would most folks consider a gaurd wrong to shoot a bank robber? Would he shoot if he knew the guy was robbing only to save his son? What really is justice in this instance? Ask a hundred people and you will get close to 100 different answers.
Our ideas of justice are limited to what we can see and know. God's justice includes all. It can seem cruel to us, just as it seems cruel to my son when I tell him he cannot have a sucker right now, that he has to eat first. Of course, my son will learn before long. WE as humans, will almost certainly never fully understand why God does what he does. We can only believe that there ARE reasons.
OR, as you say, reject him. But ... make no mistake, the decisions are made with or without our consent. Religion just helps some people deal with them.
Neoteny wrote:That's just playing with words. If he doesn't know which of all those possible futures is going to happen, that doesn't make him very godlike...
I'm not afraid to say that one of my favorite conversations on here was the suffering discussion we had. It just seems that most of those kinds of discussions have slid away. Where the hell did Nappy go anyhow? Anyone know?
As a parent, we try to teach our children what is right from wrong and hopefully once they leave 'the nest' their conscience tells them the right thing to do when they need answers. 
are registered trademarks of Backglass Heavy Industries.
If you ever want to become a Frog then let me know coz I get to be the numero uno next year and my salvation policy is going to be watertight 