God botherers - are you insane?

Originally posted by knightmeister
So if you had your free will and autonomy taken away from you so that you could never truely love and know what it is to be loved...and be reduced to an automaton would you be happy? If not then why ask this question? Do you not value these things?

It's not my bother that I asked why for, it's why would god bother?
To be clearer : Why would god create something to love , if he was already complete?

Originally posted by frogstomp
It's not my bother that I asked why for, it's why would god bother?
To be clearer : Why would god create something to love , if he was already complete?

It wasn't for him but for you. To know love is the gift he gives us , the gift of his very nature. You think he did this because he 'needs' love from his creatures??!!?

Originally posted by knightmeister
It wasn't for him but for you. To know love is the gift he gives us , the gift of his very nature. You think he did this because he 'needs' love from his creatures??!!?

I wasn't around when I was created so I needed nothing then, did I?

Originally posted by frogstomp
I wasn't around when I was created so I needed nothing then, did I?

So it was a plain old gift then, born out of God's abundance in love.

Originally posted by knightmeister
I had a feeling you would find some way not to answer my question. De-valuing the worth of the question is a classic defence against going down a road you don't want to go down.

For all you know this question maybe very practical in a future just round the corner. Even if it wasn't it's still worth pondering and you know it.

Try another one if y ...[text shortened]... L freedom of will implies at least some risk of something unexpected or undesired happening.

Do you enjoy going down roads that are marked "DEAD END"? The theist can easily escape such a question by claiming that God's omnipotence does not grant him the ability to do things that are logically impossible. Ironically, usually only amateurish atheists are interested in even bringing this tired question up.

You still can't grasp the simple truth that an omniscient, omnipotent God cannot risk anything. Imagine God at the casino, placing a bet on the roulette wheel. He's already there in the future; he can see where the wheel will stop. Since he's not constrained by time, he can use that knowledge in the present, and bet accordingly.

It's also ironic that you burden me with coming up with an adequate free will system. In your system of belief, free will is impossible. Nothing is unexpected to an omniscient being, and nothing undesired by an omnipotent being can happen.

Originally posted by knightmeister
You need to show through logical argument that because God leaves parts of his creation open to the actions of free men that therefore he does not know what they are doing or what they will do.

Congratulations on getting my position completely wrong.

Originally posted by knightmeister
Biblical prophesy is about God saying "I'm going to do this ...this is a bit where I will take control" . In any case it's not something he foresees , from God's perspective the end of the world has already happened , he's just letting us in on the final act as it were. You need to really , really think harder about this word 'foresee' . It would make no sense to God. He's eternal remember.

How much biblical prophesy have you actually read? Some of it concerns the actions of humans, you know. And, as we all know, God can't control those actions, or else said humans don't have free will. 🙄

Originally posted by knightmeister
It is true that Jesus had a strong unshakeable faith or knowledge of his ressurection so it is not a true comparison with what you or I would go through. But then you or I would not be facing the prospect of having the entire sin of the world placed on our shoulders either. The accounts of sweating blood in the garden of gethsemane suggest an anguish ...[text shortened]... ted anyhow...pass me a paper while I'm up there I'll do a crossword while I am waiting.."

Meh, what's a day or two of suffering compared to some of the lingering painful terminal illnesses we know today? It's no problem at all for someone with God's strength of mind.

A divine Jesus can't be truly human. Humans make mistakes. We don't know the future.

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
[b]Do you enjoy going down roads that are marked "DEAD END"? The theist can easily escape such a question by claiming that God's omnipotence does not grant him the ability to do things that are logically impossible. Ironically, usually only amateurish atheists are interested in even bringing this tired question up.

So once again you choose not to answer my question , interesting. You claim that it should easily be possible for God to create real free will without there being any possiblility of anything going wrong at all . If this is the case then at least partially answering my question shouldn't be too tricky. You should at least be able to give me a hint as to how he might be able to do this or how you might be able to do it if you were in a similar situation with your robot creation.

I'm sure if you had any kind of answer at all you would not resist the opportunity to score a goal against me. Instead , you realise that there is an inherent logical impossibility in your position. You then go on to say that there is no requirement on your request of God to be logical possible for him in any way because he is omnipotent and can do anything.

The weak link here is your understanding of the word omnipotent. As far as I understand it Christianity does not claim that God's omnipotence translates into God being able to do something that logically contradicts itself. I know of no Christian who has ever claimed this for God and I know of no writings on Theology that claim this and I don't think the Bible claims this either. I certainly haven't.

So I am left to conclude that rather than show Christianity to be self contraditory , what is actually happening is you are applying a deliberately over rigid and playful concept of ominipotence that is something you came up with yourself. This is just wordplay . Why not wrestle with the deeper issues of freedom/control rather than make catagorical statements. If you think Christianity claims something that it does not then you are entitled to your opinion.

Here's another question (may you might actually like to try and answer this one). Let's say I decide to create a new board game with a certain set of rules and I decided to play in this game I created . I then set a task for myself to create a thing called free will but within the rules that I have set for myself. I set myself these self imposed rules for a particular purpose , because I want the game to be played a certain way. I could throw over the board at any time and play a different game if I so chose , but because this game is so important to me I place self imposed rules upon myself for it to be a certain type of free will. Now...because I have limited myself in this way does this mean that I do not have complete power and control if I need to. Am I not still omnipotent as far as the board game is concerned? Am I limited in anyway except by the rules I have prescribed for myself. It's errant nonsense to suggest that just because I have placed artificial limits on my own game that I am somehow less omnipotent.

As in everything in Christianity God's power shows itself in his vulnerability. He plays the game of free will because he is choosing to do so and he is vulnerable to his own game. The kind of free will he had in mind for us had certain potential and logical consequences. If he had made you a robot you would presumably be here arguing that there couldn't possibly be a God because if there was he would have given us the freedom to disobey him instead of us being mind slaves. But then you wouldn't be arguing against God on this forum, he would just control you and make sure you didn't fall out of line.

So unless you are expecting me to accept something that I find incomprehensibly illogical , ie the idea that God can create freedom without creating freedom (and I assume you too find this incomprehensible otherwise you would have answered my questions) I suggest you re-think this.

In short you say that because God is omnipotent (based on your definition) then he should be able to do something logically impossible (like create truely free creatures whilst maintaining 100% control simultaneously), and yet you are not able back up this argument in anyway at all nor are you even able to make a stab at answering the robot question. You have absolutely no idea how God could possibly achieve this even if he was omnipotent , you just say he should because he should. So are you expecting me or others just to accept your definition of omnipotence because that's your definition? Your argument is essentially circular.

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
How much biblical prophesy have you actually read? Some of it concerns the actions of humans, you know. And, as we all know, God can't control those actions, or else said humans don't have free will. 🙄

God can control the actions of some humans some of the time if they freely grant him control of their lives. Free will means that we are also free to hand back control (to a lesser or greater degree) of our lives to God at ceratin times. It's called surrendering to the will of God , you may have read about it in your long years of Bible study.

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
Meh, what's a day or two of suffering compared to some of the lingering painful terminal illnesses we know today? It's no problem at all for someone with God's strength of mind.

A divine Jesus can't be truly human. Humans make mistakes. We don't know the future.

Some of the questions you are asking are brilliant. They are exactly the kind of questions you should be asking , but you do need to realise that it may lead you to some answers.

The person with the lingering terminal illness is indwelt by God himself in the form of the Holy Spirit. Your argument depends on the idea that God visits our planet suffers for two days and then swoons off to eternity to a life of detached bliss. Christian doctrine says this is not the case. When we weep Jesus weeps inside of us too. He knows every minute of our suffering and suffers alongside us , even suffers when we are numb and cold to our own suffering and the suffering of others. This has to be so anyway otherwise how can God have the right to judge anyone fairly unless he knows all our pains and joys inside out , back to front.

Christ said (rough approximation) "Whatever you do to your brother you do to me also". the Bible says "in him we live and move and have our being" .When Jesus died he entered into every destitute moment of despair in human history. Didn't anyone in your church ever explain this to you? I'm not surprised you found it all to be nonsensical!

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
Congratulations on getting my position completely wrong.

It's difficult to get your position 'right' since you only say "God is omnipotent , he should be able to do this" . In the absence of any constructive debate or speculation about the robot question I am left with no choice but to assume what your argument is that backs this up. Maybe you would like to correct me with something more than a circular argument.

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
Do you enjoy going down roads that are marked "DEAD END"? The theist can easily escape such a question by claiming that God's omnipotence does not grant him the ability to do things that are logically impossible. Ironically, usually only amateurish atheists are interested in even bringing this tired question up.

You still can't grasp the sim ...[text shortened]... expected to an omniscient being, and nothing undesired by an omnipotent being can happen.

I like your casino analogy because within it you have subtley understood that God only knows the outcome of the roulette wheel because he can step outside time into the future and NOT because the roulette wheel is pre-determined in the present to stop wherever it stops.The roulette wheel is still free even though God knows exactly what it will do. He does not predict the future but just watches the outcome.

This anaolgy is also interesting because it suggests that God is not controlling the roulette wheel but is still able to be in the future and know everything about the roulette wheel. The roulette wheel can still be free.

Now to the issue of risk. Your analogy would work if God's task was simply to predict the future and place bets on outcomes and try and get them right. However, this is not the game he is playing. The risk is involved is one of deciding to invent a game called roulette.

Let me put it this way. Imagine God had decided not to create any of us at all and not initiate a creation with free will in it. He would obviously not know the outcome of something he had not yet decided to do because it can't happen until God decides it to happen. Once he sets it all in motion then within an instant it starts happening and God knows immediately what the outcome is. Some of us have chosen him , some of us haven't , but until he decides to go ahead with his plan to try and create real free beings capable of sharing eternity with him then he can't leap into the future to see an outcome because thee is no outcome until he decides to do it.

I know this is an inadequate analogy , but we are all resigned to making strange analogies with this one because eternity makes no sense to us (being trapped in time as we are). We are by definition talking about things that are partly incomprehensible because we have little conception of what it is to not live in time. Therefore , we shouldn't complain when something seems wierd or hard to understand or even paradoxical. I think you maybe tend to kneejerk your way into confusing hard to understand with illogical. Quantum physics can be equally perplexing , it's the nature of the beast I'm afraid. (Dare I say , without meaning offence, "get used to it"😉

Originally posted by knightmeister
So once again you choose not to answer my question , interesting. You claim that it should easily be possible for God to create real free will without there being any possiblility of anything going wrong at all . If this is the case then at least partially answering my question shouldn't be too tricky. You should at least be able to give me a hint as t ...[text shortened]... omnipotence because that's your definition? Your argument is essentially circular.

You claim that it should easily be possible for God to create real free will without there being any possiblility of anything going wrong at all.

No I don't.

I could throw over the board at any time and play a different game if I so chose...

What do you make of the bible's numerous accounts of divine intervention in human affairs? Your game creator is helping certain players prosper at the game, and hindering other players.

Am I limited in anyway except by the rules I have prescribed for myself.

Those rules don't limit you at all, because you can renounce them at any time.

Your argument is essentially circular.

Knightmeister 1, Strawman 0
KO in 1st Round, Haymaker.

Originally posted by howardgee
Here are some symptoms of acute schizophrenia as noted in a religious believer:

"distorted reality, perceptual disturbances, auditory and visual hallucinations and the presence of paranoia"

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/suspect-is-mentally-disturbed/2005/11/15/1132016796593.html

If you think God exists, or have seen or heard him or worry abo ...[text shortened]... s,
then please go to your nearest asylum and ask to be treated as insane.

Because you are.

I guess you need the read the book of Job. Not as is the word Job as in work?

But that book from the Word of God. God lets Satan do work in the world but first he must go to God and ask.

I have one more Chapter in the book 23 minutes in Hell it is a great book.