Here we go again… I answered you; you just don’t accept my answer. My belief that God created our universe isn’t a lacking in humility. Holding this belief doesn’t breed arrogance in me. To the contrary I am humbled that there is a God that had enough love to create us. But since you say you don’t know how all of this got here; why do you dismiss that is could possibly be God? Even if you do conclude it is an evil God aimed at inflicting pain and agony on us; being that you don’t know leaves the possibility open that this God does exist.
No, you didn't answer all my questions in post 195. Because I don't know how or why the earth and life were created doesn't mean I have to accept the possibility of YOUR idea of a god. There could be other explanations. which you dismiss . YOU don't know and are not humble enough to admit it.
I think I might have mentioned to you before that I tend to stay away from replying to imbedded comments. I hate extracting them out. If you can’t take the time to quote each one, then I’m not taking the time to extract each one out. You can make whatever assumptions about me you want if it makes you feel better. But you know me and my state of mind. It’s sad you equate a philosophical disagreement on something as lacking in humility.
Ya, clicking the keyboard is so time consuming... but you keep posting, just as long as you don't have to answer those uncomfortable questions
I am HUMBLED that you rely so heavily on my answers and seem so disappointed when I don't answer. Sorry to let you down. Free will allows me to make some of my own rules.
No worse than some of the rationalizations used by non-theists. - - - Updated - - - Only if you believe in God.
So you admit you're no worse than non-theists....guess that theist stuff doesn't work so well. And, yes, the poster I was responding to does believe in god so It really should be, coming from them, "my life, god's rules"
No! In this instant case, I would say that you have a faulty interpreter working within you. I said nothing about me. I like the manner in which you have been obligated to rationalize your former comment and make corrections. In the new context (after changing the goal posts) I will also amend my comment to read: "Only because I believe in God".
The no, is, you will drop something to the ground. It will always hit the ground. You can never change it. So how is it free will to think it will one day not hit the ground. Or, every decision ever made could not be any different. Any decision going forward, can not be any different. It has to be the known choice.
Who is to do the accomplishing? Man? We are to know the difference of good and evil? We supposedly were created without the knowledge and the fall made us aware. Then when in eternal paradise, we will lose that knowledge again? I agree. And many likely things are outside the biblical teachings. IMO, the bible is not the defacto book.
Are we talking about God pre-ordaining something or free will? I am trying to say that just because God knows something is going to happen doesn’t mean he made it happened. Just because I knew gravity would pull an object to the ground doesn’t mean I made it fall. I only enabled the action by dropping the object. God enables us to do things by giving us free will. Your ability to predict something is not making it happen; it only means that you have enough knowledge about it to come to that conclusion.
Did you even read what I posted? I wrote that when we go to this place called ‘paradise’ we will still retain the knowledge of things – evil is one of those things. It is for Christians.
Omniscience inherently assumes that time is something real and that something can exist independent of time. Has anyone in the history of the world ever experienced anything existing at a different time?
Interesting thought. Does your question and use of the term 'experienced' make allowance for the force of the imagination? Imagination is the foundation of all inventions of modern man, so in my opinion the force of the imagination should be allowed. If in fact it is allowed by your interpretation, then I would venture a guess that almost all people have had such an experience. Especially when considering the other abstract "different time". Different time could be yesterday or even tomorrow.... at the instant of the Big Bang or even the final future of planet Earth. Who was the author of that sci-fi novel "rocket ship to the moon"? I don't recall his name... however,,, his imagination at the time of writing that novel allowed him to mentally experience something that later became a "scientific fact"(?) for others.
Correction: The name of that book was actually "From the Earth to the Moon", written by Jules Vernes. See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/From_the_Earth_to_the_Moon Written in 1867 Too many years since I read that one... the accurate name got confused with so many other novels that I have read.
confronting the idea of children dying of starvation as part of god's plan to give the lives of well fed folk meaning, is inane? you're on some dark, dark ride there, buddy.
Are you suggesting that when someone imagines something that later comes to pass, that they are somehow "experiencing" the future? How would you test such a theory? Regardless of what I might imagine, I'm still experiencing that imagination now, not in the past or future. While human imagination is limitless, given the size of the universe and enough time, wouldn't chance alone account for a significant portion of what we imagine happening?