Free will vs Omniscience

Phat writes: Dont call me stupid. I'll take you on in an IQ test anytime, old man.

My opening bid is $10 on jar, any takers? I am willing to go quite higher.

No Phat, you know that is not true and has absolutely nothing to do with anything I have said.

I actually have no idea what my IQ is but I did go to school with some really really smart folk and in our junior or senior year they snuck into the office at night and pulled the IQ files for all the kids in our class.

They have told me that my IQ was "scary" but whether it was scary high or scary low is unknown.

jar writes: Is there a time before something is created and after something is created?

yes, of course. Even if God was "in time" as a past, present, and future type of a Deity, the very universe that we all live in has a beginning and an ending, as do all life that we currently know. It would make little sense for God to foreknow everything about everyone's destinies that have not even occurred yet.

So if you now were to ask me the questions you did earlier in this topic, my answers will have changed. Let me bring them up.

jar writes: Do you even know what "all that is, seen and unseen" includes? All that is. Good, bad, sad, happy. All that is.

OK, I get that. Even if it were true that we could blame satan rather than GOD,(assuming that rabbit trail of dogma to be plausible) GOD would still have foreknown that one of His arch angels would rebel and that a war would break out in Heaven, and that Lucifer the light bearer would become satan the tester. (let me work out my thought process through what i'm saying)

One could argue (if they wished to argue) that Lucifer was given the freedom to choose to rebel, but IF GOD created Lucifer with the ability to rebel and GOD foreknew that Lucifer would become satan, GOD is still responsible.

You once argued that GOD is complete. Not merely Good, as I thought I believed. I never liked your theories, because I couldnt blame satan and I couldnt blame GOD for how my life turned out. Thus, you proved to have a good argument against Divine Foreknowledge. My only objection is that it puts limits on the God I was sold. Comments?

Phat writes: Who put the tree in the Garden? Who planted it?

What has that got to do with it? The point is that Adam and Eve did have the knowledge of good and evil and they supposedly passed it down to us - so we are well qualified to judge whether God is good or evil.

You are still refusing to actually address the argument Phat.

Satan is irrelevant.

Lucifer is irrelevant.

Judgement is irrelevant.

The issue is "the creation".

If God has foreknowledge and creates a critter that is going to hell then that God is evil.

Period.

Full stop.

It is impossible to have a God that has foreknowledge and is the creator of all that is, seen and unseen, if anything is ever condemned to hell.

But remember, there is absolutely no reason that God should not be evil.

I just get mad when he continually calls me stupid and unwilling to learn.

For the sake of this argument, I will "throw God (as marketed to me) away", but it does take practice.

dwise1 brought up the observation that many of the Biblical Creationists believed in a magical and thoroughly supernatural God and would abandon all rational thought in order to shoehorn their belief into education.

In fact, as I browse the archives of our recent topics I see some comments that I never saw before.

Percy writes: The only things worth saying to Lennox and 90% of the world are all dismissive, like that they're all wrong, mostly for sheer silliness, including that they can't all be right. They often respond that the differences are minor, but classical physics crumbled due to small anomalies like black body radiation. Upon such tiny points is true reality built. There's no reconciliation between Mormonism, Moonies, Heaven's Gate, Jonesboro (to mention a couple cults), Hinduism, Islam, Buddhism, Christianity and all the rest. They all prove only one thing: most human beings have a need to believe in a power greater than ourselves. What can you really say to people like Mike the Whiz and RobertLeva and Phat, especially Phat whose intensity of belief and inarticulation only increase with increased torture at the hands of his savior? Mike the Whiz does hit and runs (he posted to his There are easy creationist answers to problems evolutionists pose thread six times the day he started it and not once in the month since), so you can't even have a discussion with him. RobertLeva was unsubstantive over five days and then did the "insult everyone and leave" dance we've seen so many times. If believers said only "I believe" and nothing more they would be far more credible.

That makes sense,Percy. The reason that I say more is that I think out loud in essence by debating and discussing my beliefs with others. And about my in articulation. RE:

quote:

---

whose intensity of belief and in articulation only increase with increased torture at the hands of his savior?

---

I just get mad when my points are so easily dismissed. dwise1 is much kinder to me.

And i agree with Percy in that God uses all of you to challenge and sharpen my beliefs. (Or at the very least to force me to proofread my thoughts before repeating them a thousand times)

Now...as to why I disagree with jar.
{* I disagree with the notion that humans make God up. Granted we all parrot off of each other to a degree and those with the original thoughts can be questioned also. But whats so wrong with believing that GOD desires a relationship with humans? After all, we DO have a brain and an inquisitive mind.

I believe that in some of our discussions I am "working out my own salvation with fear and trembling"...not to mention an occasional bit of arrogance and hubris.

But I honestly believe that Jesus was (and is) more than a man. I like the belief that God can be supernatural at times. If I were simply stuck with other humans and an uncertain future, I would feel vulnerable. My belief in God(or at least the God I "market") gives me a feeling of safety. Bernie Sanders, green new deals, and global consensus make me feel vulnerable and mortal.

Edited by Phat, : fixed broken link

ringo writes: The point is that Adam and Eve did have the knowledge of good and evil and they supposedly passed it down to us - so we are well qualified to judge whether God is good or evil.

So if the snake were simply a plot device and all evil is within us and God is complete rather than just "good", The only real charge that we have from Him is to choose this day whom we will serve.

Right?

Phat writes: So if the snake were simply a plot device and all evil is within us and God is complete rather than just "good", The only real charge that we have from Him is to choose this day whom we will serve.

No Phat. Whom we will serve is irrelevant, immaterial, unimportant, silly, divisive, counter productive and worthless.

The charge is "what will we do!"

Phat writes: So if the snake were simply a plot device and all evil is within us and God is complete rather than just "good", The only real charge that we have from Him is to choose this day whom we will serve. Right?

I don't know what any of that has to do with what I said but you're missing the biggest "if" of all - if He even exists.

But again, you're missing the real point: It doesn't matter whether God is good or evil. We can't do anything about that. What matters is the good and/or evil that WE do.

Of course, obeying evil commands from God would be evil.

It all goes to show the scriptures weren't written by philosophers or logicians or scientists, they were written by people who just liked a good story.

“An artist is someone who can hold two opposing viewpoints and still remain fully functional.”