Let's face it...

quote:

---

Originally posted by redstang281:
Do you think there is one person who has ever lived on this earth who hasn't made a mistake?

---

No...Doesn`t mean it is theoreticaly impossible though....

quote:

---

Originally posted by redstang281:
If you could show me someone who has nev
er made a mistake than maybe you would have something there.

​

I think you're just trying your hardest not to see my point.

---

Dont actually need to pal...See if for every choice a human faces there is a choice that avoids sin it is at least theoretically possible that a human can live without sin... Therefore no original sin...If that sinless option is not present at each decision then the plenum of solutions has been constricted to a state where he cannot avoid sin... Ergo no free will....your turn...

quote:

---

Originally posted by redstang281:
The bible has so many rules it is impossible for man to follow all of them all the time.

​

Don't lie, Don't be greedy, Don't hate people, don't take Vengence... etc..

​

Some sins are easier for some people to avoid, but the people is that no one can avoid committing any sins.

​

Besides which, just because God has the ability to know the future of a person doesn't mean he controls their will.

---

If you are going to use the reply quote feature then actually address the argument you quote instead of dogmatically repeating your stock answer....Once again.."See if for every choice a human faces there is a choice that avoids sin it is at least theoretically possible that a human can live without sin... Therefore no original sin...If that sinless option is not present at each decision then the plenum of solutions has been constricted to a state where he cannot avoid sin... Ergo no free will...."You cannot just dogmatically state that it is impossible for people to avoid sinning you must justify it with something other than..."name one person who has never made a mistake..." This only shows that such an occurrence is improbable NOT impossible...The only way you can do this is to show a case where all the options open to an individual lead to sin...If you do that you disallow free will in any meaningful sense of the words....Your go bud....

[QUOTE]Originally posted by redstang281:
[b] You don't understand the concept of the sin.

​

In your oppinion it is improbably that a man can never make a mistake, but not impossible.

​

However, God knows better.

​

Besides Jesus, Adam was the best chance at living a life without sin, but he failed. The bible says Jesus was the only one who did not sin.
[/QUOTE]No I dont mean mistakes....(an explanation is in order I am not aware of any part of the bible that says getting a math problem incorrect is a sin... So I dont mean mistakes I mean sinning)....Secondly you only attempted to address one side of my argument. Please address the argument in its complete form....

​

[This message has been edited by joz, 12-17-2001]

quote:

---

Originally posted by redstang281:
A mistake is accidently doing something you didn't mean to do. God has a very long, very complicated list of laws. So if you try your whole life not to break one of the laws you are bond to make a mistake.

​

greed, pride, lust, etc... all sins.

​

There's really nothing to argue here. If you really want to understand the bible maybe you should start by reading it and going to church.

---

I disagree, You claim that while we do have free will it is also impossible not to sin...I argued that either it is not impossible but improbable not to sin OR we have no free will in the theologically important area of committing sin or not...Answer the argument please....

quote:

---

Originally posted by schrafinator:
God DOES control evil and bring evil upon people, according to the Bible, sometimes just to win a bet with Satan, as in the story of Job. What a nice guy, that God, torturing and bringing misery upon his best servant, Job, just to win a bet! What a user! God really IS male, isn't He?

---

Hey, as a male I resent that!!!

[QUOTE]Originally posted by redstang281:
[b] I have answered it many, many, many times, and very understandibly.[/QUOTE]No you claimed that improbable was the same as impossible (it isn't take a basic course in statistics sometime). you have yet to show that a human has no option but to sin (and you must do this to support your assertion that it is impossible not to sin) if you succeed here you must then explain how this is not mutually exclusive with free will (the concept that we choose to sin or not) you have addressed neither point in any way but to spout a priori that it is impossible and yet we do possess free will....

quote:

---

But if you want to look at it another way the Lord can see into the future so he knows what we're going to do in our life. However, because he knows what we're going to do, doesn't mean he makes us do it.

---

To use a concept from quantum mechanics the very act of God observing the future collapses the wave function and predetermines the outcome will be that which was observed... Hence no free will as our actions are predetermined....

​

[This message has been edited by joz, 12-19-2001]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cobra_snake:
2. The baby would of sinned. God knows what will happen but does not make it happen. This is not a contradiction. God IS all-powerful, but that does not mean he has to excercis his limitless power all the time. Just because God knows what we will (or would) do does not mean he forces us to do it, obviously.

---

Seems you missed the earlier part of this thread:"a)Is there a set of internally consistent rules to follow in order to avoid sinning?b)If there is I suggest it is possible to follow the rules and not sin.c)If this is the case I stipulate that if there is free will we are not sinners until we ourselves have sinned.d)In which case an unborn child is not a sinner or there is no free will.So which is it to be original sin or free will? One of them needs to be voted off the island....""To use a concept from quantum mechanics the very act of God observing the future collapses the wave function and predetermines the outcome will be that which was observed... Hence no free will as our actions are predetermined...."Would you like to address these points? All I got from Red was a dogmatic insistence that free will and original sin are not mutually exclusive....

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cobra_snake:
a)i)Most likely. However, this could of been destroyed when Adam first sinned, which then caused man to know right from wrong. Since the first sin, God's perfect Creation was destroyed and men were no longer able to be perfect (even though they WERE created with the free will to be able to do so.)

​

ii)Another scenario could be that although there still is a potential way to avoid sinning, God knows it will never happen because of his infinite knowledge. In other words, the odds may be something like 1 in 10 to the 10,000. The possibility is there, but surely you would not argue that it would eventually happen. Even if you don't consider the extremely low odds, it could also be argued that God just plain knows that a human who doesn't ever sin in his entire life will never exist.

​

b.) Theoretically, yes. Three possible reasons this will not happen:

​

1. The odds may be so low that to even consider that it would ever happen is not realistic.

​

2. God knows it will never happen even though it is possible.

​

3. Humans were originally created with the ability to not sin, but since then that ability has been destroyed (most likely by Adam's first sin).

​

c.) Although, God not only has the ability to see the future, but also to see the potential future. If God knows that the baby will sin under the condition that he does live, this may be enough to allow punishment. Whether or not that is fair is not for us to decide, as God is always fair and just because we don't think it seems this way does not mean that our viewpoints are true.

---

1)i)If they have the free will to be so then there can be no argument based on the impossibility of escaping sin. If it is impossible to escape sin then I would argue that they have no free will.ii)Not even 1 in 10 to the 10,000? If their is a probability of doing something it is by definition possible however high the odds are stacked against the occurence. So yes you would expect an occurence every 1 in 10 to the 10,000 of the population. The point is if a possibility exsits no matter how remote there can be no knowledge that an event cannot occur.b)1)See above.a)ii)
2)See above.a)ii)
3)If the ability to live free of sin is "destroyed" we no longer make free will choices about whether to sin or not.c)In that case he would see the potential future (1 in 10 to the 10,000) that avoids sin....The see all possible futures only works for you if all possible paths lead to sin.Again if all possible futures lead to sin there is no free will, If only the future that will occur is observed then there is no free will as all events are predetermined.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Percipient:
For all you know God is a rationalist and religion is his test to see who goes to hell.

​

--Percy

---

Just found this little gem made me laugh so I thought I`d repost it....

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cobra_snake:
a)We still have free will. We can decide when to sin and when to avoid sin.

​

b)Your entire point seems illogical anyway. Do you actually think that a man/woman will ever live that does not sin? If you think it will happen then you are fooling yourself. You have probably sinned thousands more times than you are even aware!

​

c)If you want to be so scientific, why argue about an idea which makes no sense. Your arguments (I hope you realize) are completely theological and therefore do not count as scientific evidence against Creation.

​

d)However, I have no problem with debating theological assumptions. You must also realize that these are opinions, and thus someone cannnot be RIGHT.

---

a)But if we can`t decide NOT to sin what is the point of having free will.b)This whole argument hinges on one key point improbable is not the same as impossible if there is any chance of an event occuring it is by definition possible.If it is impossible to live free of sin then original sin holds, BUT there is no free will about whether to sin or not, to paraphrase a certain Danish prince "To sin or to sin that is the question..."If it is possible (even if only in theory) to live free of sin original sin fails, BUT we then have free will about whether to sin or not, "to sin or not to sin..."c)I know this is just something of a side project. Actually my arguments are logical based on theological postulates which I see to be mutualy exclusive.d)Actually my attack is on what I percieve to be contradictory concepts, original sin and free will.If I become convinced that they are not after all contradictory you will, in the context of this argument, be right.If you become convinced that they are after all contradictory I will, in the context of this argument, be right.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cobra_snake:
This is an opinion, in my opinion. Just because God knows what you will do does not mean he controls what you will do.

---

If God only sees one future then it is predetermined that that series of events will, no must, come about.If he sees all possible futures he cannot KNOW which will become actualized UNLESS he predetermines it. If he cannot know he is wrong to assume we will sin because it is improbable, but NOT impossible.So then does God predetermine our actions by the very fact of his observation, or does he see a possible future where we avoid sin and say hey its a 1/10^10000 chance it wil never happen and afflict us before we have the chance to go for that 1/10^10000 chance.On the one hand he predetermines our actions, on the other he prejudges us.....

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cobra_snake:
I don't think he predetermines our actions, I think he knows what we will do. If you predict that your son or daughter will one day disobey you, so you impose restrictions upon them in, would that be evil?

​

If God can see 1000 possible different futures, he will still know which one will be true. In no way would this mean he is causing a certain future to come about, it simply means that is what will happen.

---

The problem with your analogy is it forgets that there are two possible outcomes 1)your offspring disobeys you, 2)they don`t...Your analogy only works if you assume they MUST disobey you....Also have you ever heard of Schrodingers cat? It is a philosopical question, a cat is shut in a box and undergoes a process such that it has a 50% chance of being dead (and 50% chance of being alive) The box is set up in such a way as to kill the cat if you open it, X-ray it or try to observe the cat in any way. The question is, is the cat alive or dead. The solution (mathmaticaly) is both and neither, the cat exsists as a probability wave function. However any attempt to observe the cat and determine its state collapses the wave function and leaves a corpse that used to be called mr snuggles....I would argue that in a similar way the very act of God observing a future as the one that will occur predetermines the occurance of that future. After all he is God, all powerful, all knowing, and can`t be wrong, ergo if he observes a future as the one that will happen it HAS to happen... by definition....