9 Reasons Not to Believe the Gospels - Page 14 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

For the discussion of Philosophy. Discuss thought from Socrates to the Enlightenment and beyond!

Moderator: PoFo Agora Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please. Religious topics may be debated in this forum, but those of religious belief who specifically wish to avoid threads being derailed by atheist arguments might prefer to use the Spirituality forum.
#14910747
One Degree wrote:There are simple tricks that can get your primitive brain to select a particular color or other seemingly random choices. Your mind was made up long before you knew it was. I don’t see how God would have much of a problem in determining which numbers you selected.
Your subconscious can shut down or alter your conscious whenever it chooses. What does that say about your freewill?

If your god knew before you did, that is contrary to you having free will. Can't you see that very simple notion that an omniscient god and free will can't coexist?
#14910750
Besoeker wrote:If your god knew before you did, that is contrary to you having free will. Can't you see that very simple notion that an omniscient god and free will can't coexist?


Can you see that you think you are ‘one unified being’ when the evidence does not support that? What if your subconscious knows what you will pick, but your conscious mind believes it is random. You are exercising freewill on the conscious level, but it is controlled by your subconscious. You have free will, but you don’t because you are not a ‘unified being’. You are a bag of microbes and impulses we don’t understand.
#14910763
One Degree wrote:Can you see that you think you are ‘one unified being’ when the evidence does not support that? What if your subconscious knows what you will pick, but your conscious mind believes it is random. You are exercising freewill on the conscious level, but it is controlled by your subconscious. You have free will, but you don’t because you are not a ‘unified being’. You are a bag of microbes and impulses we don’t understand.


Does your god know what you or I will pick? Before we pick it?
That's just yes or no.
#14910768
Besoeker wrote:Does your god know what you or I will pick? Before we pick it?
That's just yes or no.

It is not ‘yes or no’, because I don’t know what God is or if he is. I believe we are all too ignorant to bother trying to destroy the beliefs of others. I don’t really care if you believe in free will or not. I object to the imposition of one ignorant belief as if it were truth.
#14910775
Verv wrote:Everything else has been very eloquently handled by Potemkin.

I could theoretically then fill in all the blanks for Pants of Dog and literally begin arguing against that position, lol, but that would almost be like asking to be accused of strawmanning him because hasn't bothered to outline his position in the very least.

He simply has said "Yes" in regards to something I copied from the Wiki.

So, IDK, Pants, if that is the direction you want things to go, please come and indicate that in more than one word and perhaps expand on your ideas for us?

This wasn't covered:



The act of picking is free will. One's will does not control the result.

And... I guess you could say that God allows these to be random and foresees them, or He even interferes in the proverbial RNG (random number generator) of absolutely everything.

Occasionalism is not an indefensible position by any means... Perhaps God does animate everythign not animated by human will...

It's just not popular at all.


I am not clear on where you are confused.

To be honest, this debate is unimportant to me. I have my religious beliefs. You have yours. They probably disagree. I do not care.

Sivad wrote:Not necessarily, that would all depend on the nature of time and how God relates to it.


In the classical model of the Christian god, god is a transcendent being outside of time and space who can perfectly observe all of time and space at any instant.

So, in that case, @Besoeker would be correct.
#14910804
Pants-of-dog wrote:
In the classical model of the Christian god, god is a transcendent being outside of time and space who can perfectly observe all of time and space at any instant.

So, in that case, @Besoeker would be correct.


Block time isn't necessarily deterministic, so no, he wouldn't be correct. The problem of omniscience only arises on a presentist conception of time.
#14910809
Not as far as I can tell. Presentist notions of time hold that the future does not exist. In that case, god cannot know the future as it does not exist, therefore god is not omniscient.

Anyway, the traditional Christian notion of god is of a being outside of block time who can see it all. If he can see it all and his knowledge is perfect, then the future is already determined.
#14910812
Potemkin wrote:I'm an atheist, but I have to say that there is no necessary contradiction between divine omniscience and a putative human "free will" (which, in its metaphysical form of causeless personal agency, is just as much of a metaphysical flight of fancy as a supernatural deity), for the reasons that I have outlined. We all believe in all sorts of myths and fantasies and delusions, such as God, free will, personal immortality, or the edibility of Pot Noodles. Why defend your own personal delusions by attacking somebody else's personal delusions?


Most pot noodles are pretty shitty but the chicken and mushroom flavour ones are ok.
#14910817
Pants-of-dog wrote:Not as far as I can tell. Presentist notions of time hold that the future does not exist. In that case, god cannot know the future as it does not exist, therefore god is not omniscient.


God would still be omniscient in the sense that that He knows everything that is knowable. That's the open theist conception of omniscience. I can't make sense of Molonism but the Molonists hold that there is no contradiction between libertarian free will and a perfect knowledge of all counterfactuals. It's called "middle knowledge" and its defended by some pretty prominent contemporary theist philosophers like William Lane Craig and Alvin Plantinga.

Anyway, the traditional Christian notion of god is of a being outside of block time who can see it all. If he can see it all and his knowledge is perfect, then the future is already determined.


That doesn't follow. You'd have to show that block time is necessarily deterministic to make that case.
#14910818
Decky wrote:Most pot noodles are pretty shitty but the chicken and mushroom flavour ones are ok.

I don't believe that edible Pot Noodles or any other supernatural entity exists. I can't prove their non-existence. No more than you can prove the existence of your edible Pot Noodles. But I, and many others, can and do look at the probabilities and ask questions that cast serious doubt on the existence of the tasty, supernatural entity you may choose to call 'edible'. :excited:
#14910820
Pants-of-dog wrote:In the classical model of the Christian god, god is a transcendent being outside of time and space

A classical model, yes. This is where the rise of human consciousness comes into play. The classical model sees time as linear and space as dimensional. These assumptions are imposed by our limited perceptions ... But, todays consciousness can see that our perceptive abilities observe, they do not dictate. The nature of Time and space extends far beyond our perception.

Likewise, imposing human comprehension as a limit of "god" being "outside" is primitive foolishness.

Zam :angel:
#14910821
I prefer my noodles without any of the various flavorings, though I enjoy sampling the flavors occasionally just in case I am missing something new.
#14910822
Sivad wrote:God would still be omniscient in the sense that that He knows everything that is knowable. That's the open theist conception of omniscience. I can't make sense of Molonism but the Molonists hold that there is no contradiction between libertarian free will and a perfect knowledge of all counterfactuals. It's called "middle knowledge" and its defended by some pretty prominent contemporary theist philosophers like William Lane Craig and Alvin Plantinga.


Then god’s omniscience is not perfect and the classical model of the Christian god is wrong.

That doesn't follow. You'd have to show that block time is necessarily deterministic to make that case.


No, i just have to assume that god is perfect and omniscient.
#14910825
Sivad wrote:You're confused.


No. You think that it is time’s determinism that decides whether or not the future is determined. I am pointing out that time becomes deterministic if god is perfectly omniscient.
  • 1
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17

There seems to be no counter argument to the clai[…]

Israel-Palestinian War 2023

If Hamas were to have built that tunnel, there wou[…]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

https://twitter.com/KimDotcom/status/1773436787622[…]

PoFo would be a strange place for them to focus o[…]