Holy spirit

Originally posted by divegeester
My meaning was that my life is better off because of my faith, not that I live a better (more good) life; if you see the distinction. I am better off, more blessed because God is in my life than I was without him. Albeit a personal viewpoint. I never want to lose objectivity and rationality, although I would undersand why an athest would say I had. ...[text shortened]... eans of course. But the input of faith n christianity without the output of charity, is dead.

With respect to personal and subjective testimony concerning ones justification of their faith I can really only say "fair enough" and move on; for I cannot relate to that sort of mindset or faith.

With respect to charity, it is unfortunate that there are so few outlets for people like me to be charitable in anyway other than giving money to street beggars. Christianity wins here but call me cynical, I suspect an ulterior motive by some (not necessarily all or you)

Originally posted by Agerg
[b]I have to accept you are telling the truth about being an atheist as I have no reason to assume otherwise. I simply don't know how a person can reject that position for any reason other than the warm and fuzzies and supposed assurance that your sentience will live on once your brain ceases to function.

The most devastating moment of my life occured on April ...[text shortened]... ists
The same is true (with respect to death that is) for bluebottles, dogs, goldfish, etc...[/b

Sorry to hear about that agerg. I feel a bit guilty about accusing you of having a chip on your shoulder. Sorry about the piece of leather jibe too.

Originally posted by Agerg
Your Hitler analogy fails.
You are working on the principle that there is some sort of homogeneity between the notion of you (an non-infallible entity who exists [b]after Hitler died) looking at what a dead person did and an infallible god who always existed from my perspective such that he can witness an event happening (from his perspective) on my timel ...[text shortened]... han to do what your God has seen me do. It really is that simple! Your model is double-think.[/b]

If I will choose X (as it was seen by your God) then I cannot choose Y. Furthermore since I haven't done X yet I have no choice other than to do what your God has seen me do.
-------agerg--------------------

Agreed , but this proves that you will do X and that you have not done Y , but it does not prove that Y was never a possibility at that present moment in time.

There is only one timeline for you and God knows it , you will not depart from it because it's there because you are choosing it. Your choices are set and fixed in eternity but even this doesn't exclude the possibility of another timeline that could have been possible if only you had chosen it.

Originally posted by knightmeister
If I will choose X (as it was seen by your God) then I cannot choose Y. Furthermore since I haven't done X yet I have no choice other than to do what your God has seen me do.
-------agerg--------------------

Agreed , but this proves that you will do X and that you have not done Y , but it does not prove that Y was never a possibility at that presen ...[text shortened]... the possibility of another timeline that could have been possible if only you had chosen it.

regarding the other post, no need to feel guilty.

The important point here KM is that from my perspective I haven't chosen to do anything yet, though it is known I will choose X! and so what I will choose must be precisely X so as not to contradict your infalible God's knowlege.

Under your model the only way I could have chosen Y is for god to have known I had chosen Y where from my perspective, again, I haven't yet chosen anything.

This isn't free will or any real form of real choice.

Originally posted by Agerg
regarding the other post, no need to feel guilty.

The important point here KM is that from my perspective I haven't chosen to do anything yet, though it is known I will choose X! and so what I will choose must be precisely X so as not to contradict your infalible God's knowlege.

Under your model the only way I could have chosen Y is for god to hav ...[text shortened]... ain, I haven't yet chosen anything.

This isn't free will or any real form of real choice.

And if you ahd chosen Y God would know that because he's there watching right "now". The fact that you choose Y and therefore are going to choose Y does not logically exclude X as a possibility. From your perspective you haven't chosen yet , from his you have.

Try not to think of your future as something laid out in front of you like a track that you must follow. It's a track that you "will" follow and from God's view have already followed but it doesn't mean that you had to follow it AT THAT POINT IN TIME.

At some point you are making a cognitive jump from "will" do into "must" do. The fact that at some point in time you will choose X does not mean that at that very point in time Y was never available. It may not SEEM available because you feel God already knows what you will do , but remember , free will exists in the present moment where we make those choices , as long as you are free at that point (future or past) then free will is preserved.

Think of it like this. You make choice X right now (for you) in this present moment. It's a free choice. But how long did God have to wait to know it? He knows it in all eternity. He's always been here at this point in your life and alwasy will be. He doesn't have to hang around waiting for you to arrive.

Originally posted by knightmeister
And if you ahd chosen Y God would know that because he's there watching right "now". The fact that you choose Y and therefore are going to choose Y does not logically exclude X as a possibility. From your perspective you haven't chosen yet , from his you have.

Try not to think of your future as something laid out in front of you like a track that y fe and alwasy will be. He doesn't have to hang around waiting for you to arrive.

but you seem to be forgetting that though you claim your God is watching me *now* he is also claimed to have watched me in my future, so any choice I make in my future has already been made from your God's perspective inspite of the fact that from my perspective I have yet to make it. Therefore once that moment in the future arrives, I have to choose what your god watched me do.

No freewill

Originally posted by Agerg
but you seem to be forgetting that though you claim your God is watching me *now* he is also claimed to have watched me in my future, so any choice I make in my future has already been made from your God's perspective inspite of the fact that from my perspective I have yet to make it. Therefore once that moment in the future arrives, I have to choose what your god watched me do.

No freewill

Oh no! I really must not have free will if I am always making the choice I was going to make. Yes, that argument really makes so much sense. Don't condemn me for sarcasm because I knew in advance I would use sarcasm and according to you that means I did not have free will.

Originally posted by Agerg
but you seem to be forgetting that though you claim your God is watching me *now* he is also claimed to have watched me in my future, so any choice I make in my future has already been made from your God's perspective inspite of the fact that from my perspective I have yet to make it. Therefore once that moment in the future arrives, I have to choose what your god watched me do.

No freewill

Therefore once that moment in the future arrives, I have to choose what your god watched me do.
-------agerg--------------------

Why do you say "have to" . You don't "have to" it's just that you WILL choose X. It's a done deal because in that present moment you are freely choosing X and always have been (from eternity).

If you don't choose X but choose Y then God's eternal knowledge of that specific moment will be of Y and not X , then presumably you would then say that you "have to" choose Y and not X.
Your future choice is what YOU choose to do and (eternally) ARE choosing to do at that moment in time. The fact that you ARE choosing it and will choose it means simply that.

You might ask God "can I still refrain from X or choose not to do X?" God would reply "of course you could have done but I'm watching you choose X right now , .....in the end you didn't refrain. My dear son you were free in that very present moment but you made a choice X"

In this sense you might say that we do have a determined future ahead of us , but then again it is being determined by us and nobody else.

Does Hitler for example still have the option of invading finland first and not poland? The answer is that in that moment in time he had that choice and made it. If you could travel back in time (1936) you might wonder whether he could refrain from invading poland. The answer is that he will get that opportunity in 1939 and he will decline it and decide to invade. There would be little point in saying he "had to " do it in order to fulfil your knowledge of it because it was him that made that choice in that moment.

The mere fact that you know what he is about to do does not prove that he had no other options AT THAT POINT IN TIME.

Originally posted by knightmeister
Therefore once that moment in the future arrives, I have to choose what your god watched me do.
-------agerg--------------------

Why do you say "have to" . You don't "have to" it's just that you WILL choose X. It's a done deal because in that present moment you are freely choosing X and always have been (from eternity).

If you don't choose X bu ...[text shortened]... bout to do does not prove that he had no other options AT THAT POINT IN TIME.

You've got spunk. It doesn't even slow you down when your arguments get refuted in other threads. You just make the same arguments to new people. 😛

Originally posted by SwissGambit
You've got spunk. It doesn't even slow you down when your arguments get refuted in other threads. You just make the same arguments to new people. 😛

Here's an even more interesting example of the interaction problem from the other two threads.

It is possible that God could tell me, "In 1 minute, you will move Qd2 and overlook a Knight fork that wins your Queen." Let us assume he is not trying to deceive me. He genuinely believes this will happen. [He is 'eternal' as you say; he has seen this happen.]

Now, do you think that I would still play that move, even armed with the knowledge of the disastrous result? Not likely. And, in only one minute, I will not forget his warning. So, there are only two possible results:

1) I play a different move than Qd2, or even wait longer than a minute without making any move. God was wrong.
2) I play Qd2 for some mysterious reason, even though I am fully aware it loses the game on the spot.

If 1), God is not infallible. If 2), I do not make a free choice.

Originally posted by knightmeister
Therefore once that moment in the future arrives, I have to choose what your god watched me do.
-------agerg--------------------

Why do you say "have to" . You don't "have to" it's just that you WILL choose X. It's a done deal because in that present moment you are freely choosing X and always have been (from eternity).

If you don't choose X bu bout to do does not prove that he had no other options AT THAT POINT IN TIME.

The important bit, again, is that your god has seen what I have done not only as I do it, but after I do it (*long after* infact)
This means that when you consider from my perspective what choices(?) I can make, you have to ask what choice do I have to do anything other than what your (infallible) God has seen me do in my future.

The answer is none.

I haven't chosen what I will do tomorrow, but from your God's perspective, I chose X. Therefore when tomorrow comes I will be compelled to make true that he saw me choose X

Originally posted by Agerg
The important bit, again, is that your god has seen what I have done not only [b]as I do it, but after I do it (*long after* infact)
This means that when you consider from my perspective what choices(?) I can make, you have to ask what choice do I have to do anything other than what your (infallible) God has seen me do in my future.

The answer is none.[/b]

Can't you see that is a ridiculous view? You are saying that mere knowledge of what one will do impinges on free will. So should I know that I will post this response, I cannot be acting of my own free will. Isn't that just stupid?

Originally posted by Conrau K
Can't you see that is a ridiculous view? You are saying that mere knowledge of what one will do impinges on free will. So should I know that I will post this response, I cannot be acting of my own free will. Isn't that just stupid?

But you are not infallible...You *infallibly* know precisely nothing about what you will do in your future.

Originally posted by Agerg
But you are not infallible...You *infallibly* know precisely nothing about what you will do in your future.

would you mind if I claimed infallibility?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
would you mind if I claimed infallibility?

You could claim it...I wouldn't believe it of course! 🙂
Though I would then argue (for the sake of it) that you know the state of all relevent variables that would make it true you infallibly know you shall do X.