Conquer Club

haggispittjr wrote:i get your point, i just think its rediculas.

Why?

Timminz wrote:

haggispittjr wrote:i get your point, i just think its rediculas.

Why?

To be honest Tim I also think it's rediculas.

jesterhawk wrote:

MeDeFe wrote:God knowing what will happen if a person chooses option A and what will happen if the person chooses option B (or C, or D, or Z-243) is compatible with free will as long as god does not know which one the person will choose before the person chooses. But then you give up his perfect omniscience.

Ok, lets say that I acquiesced to your supposition. Following that line of thought then, what would you have to say to the fact that God sees you as a Christian before you die? Does that mean that you would just accept that because in reality you have no free will?

I'm not sure what you're aiming for, what you quoted was my reply to daddy1gringo's post that preceded my post immediately. But let's see...

If god knows I will be a christian before I die I will be a christian before I die. However that comes about. BUT, I don't know if god knows that, all I have is your assertion, and frankly, you claiming that god knows something that particular about my future does not perturb me. Me not immediately accepting Jesus as my saviour due to your claim is not a sign of free will though.

If god knows that there is a (or several) path(s) of choices I can make that will lead to me being a christian... well, as long as god does not know which path I will take I can only say: So what? There are also paths that will keep me atheist, paths that will make me buddhist, islamic, new age, wicca or whatever.

' Free will ' is used as a catch all to explain away the inconvenient, the supposed scriptual proofs are nothing more than crude marketing.
' God gives you a choice to follow him or burn in hell for eternity ' has a nice ring to it but so does ' Use Persil biological washing powder or your clothes will be foul and disgusting '
Both statements infer that there is no alternative, oddly enough though it is illegal to advertise Persil as ones only salvation but not to promote Christianity as such

+1 point for Joe, My thoughts exactly.

joecoolfrog wrote:' Free will ' is used as a catch all to explain away the inconvenient, the supposed scriptual proofs are nothing more than crude marketing.
' God gives you a choice to follow him or burn in hell for eternity ' has a nice ring to it but so does ' Use Persil biological washing powder or your clothes will be foul and disgusting '
Both statements infer that there is no alternative, oddly enough though it is illegal to advertise Persil as ones only salvation but not to promote Christianity as such

There are alternatives... as inferred by the commandment: "Thou shalt have no other Gods but me". It is understood that man has made idols and "gods" of several things that are not "God himself".

When Jesus claimed to be the son of God and the only way to heaven there was no confusion of: "Maybe my God is the same as this person's God and that person's God. Maybe we just call him several different names." This is broken down by: "There is no other name by which man can be saved than the name of Jesus".

KristenAmazon wrote:

joecoolfrog wrote:' Free will ' is used as a catch all to explain away the inconvenient, the supposed scriptual proofs are nothing more than crude marketing.
' God gives you a choice to follow him or burn in hell for eternity ' has a nice ring to it but so does ' Use Persil biological washing powder or your clothes will be foul and disgusting '
Both statements infer that there is no alternative, oddly enough though it is illegal to advertise Persil as ones only salvation but not to promote Christianity as such

There are alternatives... as inferred by the commandment: "Thou shalt have no other Gods but me". It is understood that man has made idols and "gods" of several things that are not "God himself".

When Jesus claimed to be the son of God and the only way to heaven there was no confusion of: "Maybe my God is the same as this person's God and that person's God. Maybe we just call him several different names." This is broken down by: "There is no other name by which man can be saved than the name of Jesus".

Exactly his point???

KristenAmazon wrote:

joecoolfrog wrote:' Free will ' is used as a catch all to explain away the inconvenient, the supposed scriptual proofs are nothing more than crude marketing.
' God gives you a choice to follow him or burn in hell for eternity ' has a nice ring to it but so does ' Use Persil biological washing powder or your clothes will be foul and disgusting '
Both statements infer that there is no alternative, oddly enough though it is illegal to advertise Persil as ones only salvation but not to promote Christianity as such

There are alternatives... as inferred by the commandment: "Thou shalt have no other Gods but me". It is understood that man has made idols and "gods" of several things that are not "God himself".

When Jesus claimed to be the son of God and the only way to heaven there was no confusion of: "Maybe my God is the same as this person's God and that person's God. Maybe we just call him several different names." This is broken down by: "There is no other name by which man can be saved than the name of Jesus".

Err Yes and the marketing for Persil follows the same lines, glad you agree with me

joecoolfrog wrote:' Free will ' is used as a catch all to explain away the inconvenient, the supposed scriptual proofs are nothing more than crude marketing.
' God gives you a choice to follow him or burn in hell for eternity ' has a nice ring to it but so does ' Use Persil biological washing powder or your clothes will be foul and disgusting '
Both statements infer that there is no alternative, oddly enough though it is illegal to advertise Persil as ones only salvation but not to promote Christianity as such

Of course, no one on Earth can prove you wrong.

However, it could also be something else. Up until the whole Chaos mathematics thing and then Quantum physics, most people more or less thought everything operated on linear math, Euclidian Geometry, etc. We now know differently. In fact, some of the most advanced physics theories bear striking resemblences to things religious people describe as "the spirit world" (not generally a Christian term, but easier to explain/understand in this context).

In fact, if you go back much further, there are many, many things that even very smart people used to think "had" to be true, but we now know are not. Just because we are more advanced in our understanding does not mean our understanding is complete. I believe religion will always be there to answer the "other" -- the things no science can absolutely answer.

Also, that some people confuse or get misguided notions about their religion does not mean the fundamental concepts put forward in a religion are wrong. Except that knowing exactly which notions are misguided is a lot easier after we already have proofs in hand.

Then again, I suppose a straight answer is no where near as fun to debate as the obviously insane ones

KristenAmazon wrote:

joecoolfrog wrote:' Free will ' is used as a catch all to explain away the inconvenient, the supposed scriptual proofs are nothing more than crude marketing.
' God gives you a choice to follow him or burn in hell for eternity ' has a nice ring to it but so does ' Use Persil biological washing powder or your clothes will be foul and disgusting '
Both statements infer that there is no alternative, oddly enough though it is illegal to advertise Persil as ones only salvation but not to promote Christianity as such

There are alternatives... as inferred by the commandment: "Thou shalt have no other Gods but me". It is understood that man has made idols and "gods" of several things that are not "God himself".

When Jesus claimed to be the son of God and the only way to heaven there was no confusion of: "Maybe my God is the same as this person's God and that person's God. Maybe we just call him several different names." This is broken down by: "There is no other name by which man can be saved than the name of Jesus".

Er.. sorry, but this is not entirely correct. Among other issues, while God and Christ are seperate, they are also one and therefore share the same names.

PLAYER57832 wrote:Er.. sorry, but this is not entirely correct. Among other issues, while God and Christ are seperate, they are also one and therefore share the same names.

Err sorry, but this is not entirely correct. Among other issues: Jesus Christ may be an Egyptian God named Horus?


Thus by the Christian law you go would go to hell for worshiping Christ - the Christian God?

In the words of Brian..."I'm not the messiah, now piss off!"

Juan_Bottom wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:Er.. sorry, but this is not entirely correct. Among other issues, while God and Christ are seperate, they are also one and therefore share the same names.

Err sorry, but th

hey Juan, I'm really happy for you and I'mma let you finish but Bruce Lee is one of the greatest martial artists of all time.

MeDeFe wrote:

jesterhawk wrote:

MeDeFe wrote:God knowing what will happen if a person chooses option A and what will happen if the person chooses option B (or C, or D, or Z-243) is compatible with free will as long as god does not know which one the person will choose before the person chooses. But then you give up his perfect omniscience.

Ok, lets say that I acquiesced to your supposition. Following that line of thought then, what would you have to say to the fact that God sees you as a Christian before you die? Does that mean that you would just accept that because in reality you have no free will?

I'm not sure what you're aiming for, what you quoted was my reply to daddy1gringo's post that preceded my post immediately. But let's see...

If god knows I will be a christian before I die I will be a christian before I die. However that comes about. BUT, I don't know if god knows that, all I have is your assertion, and frankly, you claiming that god knows something that particular about my future does not perturb me. Me not immediately accepting Jesus as my saviour due to your claim is not a sign of free will though.

If god knows that there is a (or several) path(s) of choices I can make that will lead to me being a christian... well, as long as god does not know which path I will take I can only say: So what? There are also paths that will keep me atheist, paths that will make me buddhist, islamic, new age, wicca or whatever.

I have been thinking about this and I have something to add.

God is infinite and we are finite. To be able to express God in our terms would be to express the infinite in finite terms. In other words, imagine that you are trying to explain the concept of infinity (as a number, sort of, in math) to someone who is in finite only terms. You discussion would go something like:

Person One : Then we take the limit as time goes to infinity.
Person two : What is infinity?
Person One : It is that point at which the function grows so large that it is essential so big that we can approximate the answer.
Person Two : How large?
Person One : As large as possible and bigger, because we don't really measure infinity as a single number.
Person Two : You mean like 100 billion.
Person One : No, bigger then that.
Person Two : Then like 100 trillion.
Person One : No, you misunderstand infinity is not a single number but the concept that we would grow to the largest number possible.
Person Two : Hmmmm, so you mean like a googol.
Person One : No bigger then that.
Person Two : There is nothing bigger then that.
Person One : Well, you see there is no limit to how big a number can be and that is what infinity is all about.
Person Two : No that doesn't make any sense. If you want me to use a number then give it to me or else your concepts are not valid.

Now, before someone goes off on this little talk, I am not a mathmatician, but an engineer and well past college. So, my rendering of the concept of infinity may be a bit off, but that is not the point of what I am trying to say.

What I am saying is that you want to define God (infinity) in our terms (finite) and it is just not possible to grasp the completeness of who, what and how God is and acts. To add to this, take a look at the following:

27But He said, "The things that are impossible with people are possible with God."
- Luke 18:27

Given our previous discussion about the all knowing God versus Free Will, we could say that you are right that it is impossible for men (humanity, us) to see how this is possible, but with God it is possible because he is infinite and outside of ability to fully comprehend him or the way in which he can interact with us. Even the Bible mentions predestination as you have mentioned.

28 And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose.
29 For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren;
30 and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified.
- Romans 8:28-30

3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ,
4 just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him In love
5 He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will,
6 to the praise of the glory of His grace, which He freely bestowed on us in the Beloved.
7 In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of His grace
8 which He lavished on us. In all wisdom and insight
9 He made known to us the mystery of His will, according to His kind intention which He purposed in Him
10 with a view to an administration suitable to the fullness of the times, that is, the summing up of all things in Christ, things in the heavens and things on the earth. In Him
11 also we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will,
12 to the end that we who were the first to hope in Christ would be to the praise of His glory.
- Ephesians 1:3-12

And yet, there are also these verses.

17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty {freedom}.
- 1 Corinthians 3:17

36 "So if the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed.
- John 8:36

And I could go on. So, either the Bible or God is a lie or not real and a fake, as some of you suppose. Or it is alive and real and both of these are possible with the understanding of how this can be perhaps out of our grasp. Perhaps not because God does say this as well:

6 Yet we do speak wisdom among those who are mature; a wisdom, however, not of this age nor of the rulers of this age, who are passing away;
7 but we speak God's wisdom in a mystery, the hidden wisdom which God predestined before the ages to our glory;
8 the wisdom which none of the rulers of this age has understood; for if they had understood it they would not have crucified the Lord of glory;
9 but just as it is written, "THINGS WHICH EYE HAS NOT SEEN AND EAR HAS NOT HEARD, AND which HAVE NOT ENTERED THE HEART OF MAN, ALL THAT GOD HAS PREPARED FOR THOSE WHO LOVE HIM."
10 For to us God revealed them through the Spirit; for the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God.
11 For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so the thoughts of God no one knows except the Spirit of God.
12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may know the things freely given to us by God,
13 which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words.
14 But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised.
15 But he who is spiritual appraises all things, yet he himself is appraised by no one.
16 For WHO HAS KNOWN THE MIND OF THE LORD, THAT HE WILL INSTRUCT HIM? But we have the mind of Christ.
- 1 Corinthians 2:6-16

This set of verses speaks directly about the mysteries of God and the hidden wisdom contained within the mystery of God that can be found to those who have the mind of Christ which is those who have called upon his name for redemption. So, you see, God knew you would have these thoughts to contest his divine being and he even spoke directly to it in his word. Up until now, I admit to falling into the trap of trying to use my (mans) wisdom (no matter how mature) to refute your arguments when I should have been using God's Word which God spoke out ages ago to handle this specific issue and many others. And that is just the beginning of how cool God is.

Love in Christ,
JH

jesterhawk wrote:God is infinite and we are finite. To be able to express God in our terms would be to express the infinite in finite terms. In other words, imagine that you are trying to explain the concept of infinity (as a number, sort of, in math) to someone who is in finite only terms. You discussion would go something like:

Person One : Then we take the limit as time goes to infinity.

We're not talking about infinity as if it's finite, we're talking about infinity as if it's infinity. The fact that God's knowledge is supposedly boundless is the reasoning behind our argument. What we are saying is that there are three possibilities:

An infinitely knowledgeable creator and no free will

A lack of an infinitely knowledgeable creator and no free will

A lack of an infinitely knowledgeable creator and free will.

It is actually much, much easier to deal with an infinite mind than a finite one. You know exactly the limits of an infinite mind, while you can only speculate about a finite one.

Jh's point here, belaboured though it is is the old one of "We're only human. God is GOD, and thus we can't hope to actually understand everything He does."

I think you are misunderstaing his position - he understands what you are asking, and is attempting to answer you with an analogy.

He has reasonable point, in a way: but (as you say yourself Jh), some people think the whole thing is a lie (which has mutated over time into a different lie). I can see no reason, other than faith, to discount this opinion. And I can see no reason to have faith.

As I said before, the thing is that you and others repeatedly accuse of us of being blind and/or stupid because we think you are wasting your time and effort on a mystery which is manufactured when the real and fascinating conundrum, the universe itself in all its glory, is waiting to be questioned for real , not ready-made with "revealed" answers inspired in a way you can't explain by a being you can't understand.

Imagine for an instant that you have no faith. What , then would re-install it?

I would have liked to write something eloquent but...

Frig nailed the first part, drawing conclusions from the hypothetical existence of an infinite mind is easy, easier than 1/x for x approaching 0 at any rate.
I understand how there are equally many points on any line of any given length, I understand why you will never find a single black ball that has been thrown into a sea of infinitely many white balls and I know how to act if I ever am the manager of a hotel with infinitely many rooms where every room is occupied but someone comes and wants a room for the night. (Have everyone move up one room and put the newcomer in the first)
Drawing conclusions about the implications of something infinite is pretty basic by comparison.


And jones nailed the second, "god is god and humans ain't and can't understand god but the bible says such and such" is not the best of rebuttals.
JH, the only wisdom we have access to is the wisdom of man, the bible also "only" contains the wisdom of man. None of us is god, there's no other wisdom we can use. Invoking wisdom that has to be revealed and is not readily accessible to an inquiring mind does not a tenable defense make.

Funny picture time!

Juan_Bottom wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:Er.. sorry, but this is not entirely correct. Among other issues, while God and Christ are seperate, they are also one and therefore share the same names.

Err sorry, but this is not entirely correct. Among other issues: Jesus Christ may be an Egyptian God named Horus?


Thus by the Christian law you go would go to hell for worshiping Christ - the Christian God?

No. And I think you are smart enough to recognize this is not what I said or implied.

Frigidus wrote:

jesterhawk wrote:God is infinite and we are finite. To be able to express God in our terms would be to express the infinite in finite terms. In other words, imagine that you are trying to explain the concept of infinity (as a number, sort of, in math) to someone who is in finite only terms. You discussion would go something like:

Person One : Then we take the limit as time goes to infinity.

We're not talking about infinity as if it's finite, we're talking about infinity as if it's infinity. The fact that God's knowledge is supposedly boundless is the reasoning behind our argument. What we are saying is that there are three possibilities:

An infinitely knowledgeable creator and no free will

A lack of an infinitely knowledgeable creator and no free will

A lack of an infinitely knowledgeable creator and free will.

It is actually much, much easier to deal with an infinite mind than a finite one. You know exactly the limits of an infinite mind, while you can only speculate about a finite one.

You exclude an all-knowing creator and free will, because you cannot percieve it to be possible. Christians say it is true.. whether we can conceive it or not.

One strong possibility is that time is not actually linear, but co-exists simultaneously. This is not possible in our perception of the universe, but might well be true. Other truths come out when you delve into the nature of energy and matter, etc.

Again, just because you cannot percieve how something could be does not make it untrue. Per the "logic of the universe"... it applies only to our universe. We have no idea of its true limits.

MeDeFe wrote: Invoking wisdom that has to be revealed and is not readily accessible to an inquiring mind does not a tenable defense make.

Actually, this is pretty much what scientists do all the time. The difference is that scientists rely on fancy equations, instruments, tests that many others cannot understand.

Christians rely upon "faith". It is accessible to everyone, but not everyone can understand... just like much scientific data.

You wish to put the two in conflict, but the irony is that few people really and truly understand both worlds. Those who do, may modify one or the other vision, but rarely see true conflict.

This is why science is now under so much attack by many of faith.. because science is not so difficult to understand that for many people it is little different than simple blind faith. And of course, people would rather trust in God than some mere human scientists.

The irony is that some of our greatest truths have come about from a melding of both faith and science. When you try to but them against each other, in attack.. both lose.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

Frigidus wrote:

jesterhawk wrote:God is infinite and we are finite. To be able to express God in our terms would be to express the infinite in finite terms. In other words, imagine that you are trying to explain the concept of infinity (as a number, sort of, in math) to someone who is in finite only terms. You discussion would go something like:

Person One : Then we take the limit as time goes to infinity.

We're not talking about infinity as if it's finite, we're talking about infinity as if it's infinity. The fact that God's knowledge is supposedly boundless is the reasoning behind our argument. What we are saying is that there are three possibilities:

An infinitely knowledgeable creator and no free will

A lack of an infinitely knowledgeable creator and no free will

A lack of an infinitely knowledgeable creator and free will.

It is actually much, much easier to deal with an infinite mind than a finite one. You know exactly the limits of an infinite mind, while you can only speculate about a finite one.

You exclude an all-knowing creator and free will, because you cannot percieve it to be possible. Christians say it is true.. whether we can conceive it or not.

I used simple logic to demonstrate that the two (along with his omnibenevolence) can not both exist. I guess that I can adjust my original argument:

Assuming that logic is not flawed:

1. God knows everything about everything

2. God created everything

3. Given the first two points, God knew everything there was to know about everything before he created it

4. Given the third point, God knew Satan was a bad egg

Where am I wrong there?

Either there is a flaw in my argument, or we most abandon Point 1, Point 2, God's omnibenevolence, or logical deduction.

Frigidus wrote:
Either there is a flaw in my argument, or we most abandon Point 1, Point 2, God's omnibenevolence, or logical deduction.

It is the "logical deduction" part, among other issues. What applies logically for humans, here on Earth is not necessarily what applies in the broader universe. Even Einstein approached that question.

You wish to assert that ominiscience implies lack of free will on our part. I say that just is not true. You say it must be true because it is logical. I say that logic has limits and this is likely one. Beyond that, it is just a matter of belief. No argument, no evidence can really prove either way.

Bottom line -- if you wish to believe you are a robot, fine. If you wish to believe you have choices, fine. If you wish to believe God does or does not exist... that is your individual choice. But to claim that anyone who thinks otherwise is "not logical", etc, is just wrong.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

MeDeFe wrote: Invoking wisdom that has to be revealed and is not readily accessible to an inquiring mind does not a tenable defense make.

Actually, this is pretty much what scientists do all the time. The difference is that scientists rely on fancy equations, instruments, tests that many others cannot understand.

Christians rely upon "faith". It is accessible to everyone, but not everyone can understand... just like much scientific data.

You wish to put the two in conflict, but the irony is that few people really and truly understand both worlds. Those who do, may modify one or the other vision, but rarely see true conflict.

This is why science is now under so much attack by many of faith.. because science is not so difficult to understand that for many people it is little different than simple blind faith. And of course, people would rather trust in God than some mere human scientists.

The irony is that some of our greatest truths have come about from a melding of both faith and science. When you try to but them against each other, in attack.. both lose.

There's one crucial difference that you're missing.

Apply your mind to any field of science and you stand at least a chance of understanding the equations and instruments.

The opposite is claimed for god, no matter how we try we cannot understand god. We can only know of god what god reveals.


It's a qualitative difference of "not understanding", the one you don't understand because you haven't studied it, the other you don't understand because it is impossible.

MeDeFe wrote:There's one crucial difference that you're missing.

Apply your mind to any field of science and you stand at least a chance of understanding the equations and instruments.

The opposite is claimed for god, no matter how we try we cannot understand god. We can only know of god what god reveals.

It's a qualitative difference of "not understanding", the one you don't understand because you haven't studied it, the other you don't understand because it is impossible.

No, my point is that there is no difference and I stand by it. The difference is that you don't understand the religious perspective. But, compare that to people who don't understand science as you do. In reality, the only difference is the method of knowing, not the ability to know and understand.

Some things are left open, in both science and in religion. Scientists can be as prone to ignore that as religious individuals. There is the "jury of peers" to keep scientists "honest" (if you will), but folks still hold their own personal opinions, beliefs that go well beyond anything that could be published.

Also, I strongly believe that as long as scientists insist on putting forward this idea that "science is correct, proveable, understandable" as opposed to religion,( which, its asserted, is none of those things), religion will continue to drive more and more wedges between the church and science.

We have just been through a great period of scientific advancement, but to ignore the real role that religion played in allowing people to pursue those ideas and thoughts as well as the very challenges religion presented (for example -- the question how man came about, etc.) is to risk a descent into another dark age. People will not give up religion. Either science continues to meld and work with religion or it will fail. Whether the science is correct or not does not matter so much. If people are made to choose between, many will simply choose religion.