Free Will?

Originally posted by Agerg
[b]The opposite is true . you and scotty try to make this into an all or nothing argument and deliberately ignore the subtle aspects of power and the exercising of power. If you want to dumb down the argument then fair enough but if you want theology for kindergartens....?

No KM, it is you that propogates kindergarden theism...your position is flawed. your refutation of our counters is of the form X ^ ¬X a contradiction.[/b]

What's with this stupid maths symbols stuff? Talk accessible plain english not idiosyncratic mumbo jumbo.

Originally posted by knightmeister
What's with this stupid maths symbols stuff? Talk accessible plain english not idiosyncratic mumbo jumbo.

Sorry...I forgot you have a problem with logic...those strange and enigmatic symbols mean X and NOT X are both true at the same time. where X could be a statement such as: god is omniscient

Originally posted by scottishinnz
No. The analogy doesn't make sense whatsoever.

An omnipotent, or omniscient being wouldn't be able to limit themselves, otherwise they wouldn't be omni-whatever. As I pointed out though - there'd be no point anyway, since they'd already know what was going to happen.

Indeed, omniscience rules out omnipotence, since an omniscient God can't ch ...[text shortened]... re going to do, if they did, they'd destroy their own omni, whichever way you look at it.

So you think God can predcit his own future? But I have stated before that he is not on a timeline like you. In any case if he is omnipotent then everything he does is perfect anyway . there would be no reason to try and change what he was "going to do".

Originally posted by Agerg
Sorry...I forgot you have a problem with logic...those strange and enigmatic symbols mean X and NOT X are both true at the same time.

Ahhh....so the USA is either x (a superpower) or not x . There is no way that the USA can be a superpower but not always act like one by choice. That would be confusing though wouldn't it? You might need to start thinking about what power really means etc and why it might not be exercised. But hey ho. Don't trouble your mind with such paradoxes though , just keep it simple eh? It's x or not X

Originally posted by knightmeister
Ahhh....so the USA is either x (a superpower) or not x . There is no way that the USA can be a superpower but not always act like one by choice. That would be confusing though wouldn't it? You might need to start thinking about what power really means etc and why it might not be exercised. But hey ho. Don't trouble your mind with such paradoxes though , just keep it simple eh? It's x or not X

sorry KM, I make the mistake sometimes of assuming that my opponent isn't an idiot.

oh and that would be x or not x (as opposed to: x or not X)! applying this to your god we have either he is omniscient or he isn't omniscient...not both!

Originally posted by knightmeister
So you think God can predcit his own future? But I have stated before that he is not on a timeline like you. In any case if he is omnipotent then everything he does is perfect anyway . there would be no reason to try and change what he was "going to do".

So you think God can predcit his own future?

If he's omniscient, yes. If not, then he's not omniscient.

But I have stated before that he is not on a timeline like you

Your evidence for this? It's sounding a lot like pink, flying unicorns at the moment.

In any case if he is omnipotent then everything he does is perfect anyway

No. That's not the definition of omnipotent.

there would be no reason to try and change what he was "going to do".

But if he can't, shock horror, he's not omnipotent.

Originally posted by knightmeister
Surely an omnipotent God WOULD be able to limit himself .

Then he wouldn't be omnipotent.

Originally posted by knightmeister
The opposite is true . you and scotty try to make this into an all or nothing argument and deliberately ignore the subtle aspects of power and the exercising of power. If you want to dumb down the argument then fair enough but if you want theology for kindergartens....?

Whenever anyone puts an omni into the argument, it becomes an "all or nothing" argument.

Originally posted by knightmeister
Ahhh....so the USA is either x (a superpower) or not x . There is no way that the USA can be a superpower but not always act like one by choice. That would be confusing though wouldn't it? You might need to start thinking about what power really means etc and why it might not be exercised. But hey ho. Don't trouble your mind with such paradoxes though , just keep it simple eh? It's x or not X

You can change from being x to ¬x as a matter of cause and effect. But the two are not held at the same time. It is not possible to be a superpower and not be a superpower at the same time, it's just logically invalid.

Originally posted by Agerg
Basically my position is this: I cannot find a shred of credibility in any of the religions or deities defined thus far...I have no reason or desire to believe in any form of deity at all and even if there was such an entity I hold that there is no justification for assuming:
a) That such an entity would really focus its attention on just one of the vast numb ...[text shortened]... *any* of such creatures that it would create.
d) that we could possibly define or understand it

Would you be suprised if I told you that there are elements of truth in a few of your objections. For example, the Biblical view of God is that there are limitaions as to what he can do based upon his nature. For example, it is impossible for God to sin and he is a God of love. In fact, sin is simply a violation of the love nature of God. Therefore, as I have said before one of the tenants of love is to include free will. Therefore, can God make us do anything he desires us to do such as serving him? In such a scenerio the answer would be no.

As far as understanding God, you are right in that we can never fully understand him. Then again is it possible to even fully understand a member of the opposite sex or even our own heart? I say just because something is beyond our full comprehension in no way means that we cannot relate to such a thing or learn about such a thing.

In terms of an afterlife or God being concerned with the smallest aspect of his creation I would say that it all has to do with the ability to focus ones attention all the myriad of creatures out there as well as the value such a diety places on such creatures. If, for example, God places little value on our existence then more than likely we will perish when we die without a trace. However, if he places a high value on our existence then it stands to reason that he would not want us to perish without a trace. In essence, from the Christian perspective I am placing greater value on your existence than you place on your own existence when I tell you that God himself gave his best which was his Son to save us from nonexistence when we die.

Originally posted by whodey
Would you be suprised if I told you that there are elements of truth in a few of your objections. For example, the Biblical view of God is that there are limitaions as to what he can do based upon his nature. For example, it is impossible for God to sin and he is a God of love. In fact, sin is simply a violation of the love nature of God. Therefore, as I ...[text shortened]... l you that God himself gave his best which was his Son to save us from nonexistence when we die.

Again, why would a 3 O God place ANY value on your or any human's existence?

Originally posted by no1marauder
Again, why would a 3 O God place ANY value on your or any human's existence?

I think a better question is why there are those who do not place a value on my life or your life or anyones life for that matter.

If God went to the trouble of creating us, it stands to reason that he placed value upon our lives.

Originally posted by knightmeister
Perhaps you can give a Scriptural reference where it says God can be surprised about what actions Man (or any man) can take.

jesus and the centurion's faith , jesus is amazed by the centurion's faith

That's just more proof that the whole Trinitarian concept is nonsense. Jesus certainly wasn't omniscient (there are other passages which show him unable to know certain things) but then again he wasn't God.

Originally posted by whodey
I think a better question is why there are those who do not place a value on my life or your life or anyones life for that matter.

If God went to the trouble of creating us, it stands to reason that he placed value upon our lives.

That is a circular argument.

Why don't you answer the question?

Originally posted by no1marauder
That is a circular argument.

Why don't you answer the question?

God places value on ones existence because God is a God of love.