Ihedinobi:

You're seriously telling me that you need to repeat the whole post to answer those two questions? Incredible!

Why don't you just say that you are incapable of answering my questions? I'll understand.

Smh

striktlymi: Good afternoon wiegraf,

Are you saying that when something is not a 'core requirement' then it becomes false? Now let's put under the 'knife' what you consider to be the core requirement(s)...

No no. This is the bit of your post I quote.

striktlymi:
For God to determine your future, he would need to make your choices for you and this he does not do.

This implies a core prerequisite is that god makes choices for you, and it is not. The only prerequisite, like I stated already, is that the universe be capable of being determined. To be able to do that there must be only 1 possible future. Or is the omniscient going to say either x or y will happen? That's in now way infallibly omniscient, or is it?

This is regardless of what anyone says, does, or thinks, even the omniscient himself. For instance, assuming you somehow had this knowledge of the future and did all you could to change it, you would fail. So would the omniscient as well actually, else he'd be wrong.

Put in another way, if there's only one possible future, where exactly is the choice? Choice would imply more than one possible outcome, no? If one had free will, when the time comes, he should be able to take option A or option B. But, so long as the future is set in stone, there is no option B. There is just the illusion of an option B as the person cannot take it without voiding omniscience by veering of the already determined path.

That one future must occur, it is already set. This does not require a conscious agent pulling the strings. It is a basic requirement.

striktlymi:
Well wieg, you still arrived at the same conclusion you tagged 'not a core requirement'...and that is not making your own decisions as regards choices. When someone gives you no option that your response is already determined by the individual then it suffices to say that the individual makes your decisions for you.

Again, you're missing the point. The bold is not necessary, he just needs to know the response that will be taken, he need not influence it.

striktlymi:
Now, the truth is that God does not determine our future...having knowledge of the future is not the same as determining ones future.

I never said this.

striktlymi:
You can only accuse me of the bold if you can demonstrate that I hold the view that our futures are determined by a supreme being. My argument is that God does not determine our future...this is done by us through our actions.

You'd be illogical for other reasons, stated above.

Also, exactly how was knowledge about the future obtained? Hypothetically, of course.

striktlymi:
It's just an example I expect everyone to fill in the gaps...

Oh, okay. But you do get my point with that as well, yes?

Ihedinobi: @op

Two questions:

1. When is this "long ago" that God knew things that would happen?

2. Based on what do you make your arguments?

1. before each event took place, before the wold began according to the bible.

2. Based on the fact that freewill and omniscience are mutually exclusive.

@ooman
U knw u r very smart & ur write-up is deep but can I ask a question? Based on ur analyses & since ur concept of no-God is foreign to me, can I say dt d concept dt u hv is brain is a fraud? I say this because I cannot understand wht u hv to offer.

Bobbysworld28: @ooman
U knw u r very smart & ur write-up is deep but can I ask a question? Based on ur analyses & since ur concept of no-God is foreign to me, can I say dt d concept dt u hv is brain is a fraud? I say this because I cannot understand wht u hv to offer.

rephrase the question pls!

Can u say dt d idea dt u hv a brain is a fraud because I don't understand u? If I don't believe u hv a brain does it mean dt u really don't?

Bobbysworld28: Can u say dt d idea dt u hv a brain is a fraud because I don't understand u? If I don't believe u hv a brain does it mean dt u really don't?

that is simple. all I have to do for you is a CT scan of my brain.

ooman:

1. before each event took place, before the wold began according to the bible.

Ok. But if God exists outside of time, what does "before the world began" mean to Him?

The flow of time means that there is a past, a present and a future. God, being of eternity, just is, so what does "before such-and-such event" mean to Him?

2. Based on the fact that freewill and omniscience are mutually exclusive.

How do you know this?

Ihedinobi:

Ok. But if God exists outside of time, what does "before the world began" mean to Him?

The flow of time means that there is a past, a present and a future. God, being of eternity, just is, so what does "before such-and-such event" mean to Him?



How do you know this?

You have come with your foolish and derailing questions. How do they make the op wrong and god not to be a fraud?

1) God being timeless doesnt make time meaningless to him. He shows love to human beings that are defined by time. He created the earth in six days or periods. Analogy; just because we human beings can move beyond alcohol (alife without alcohol) does that make alcohol meaningless to us?

2) Omniscience can not exits with freewill- this has been debated and many christians recognise this problem. The problem of omniscience and freewill is a proper philosophical problem



but you will dismiss facts and dodge

ooman:

god cannot be proven to exist.

well am better of believing,than not to blive,because it takes nothing out of me,

Logicboy03:


Well for starters why dont you believe in Osiris, the Egyptian god?

well no body told me about dammm osiris

@ooman
U believe u hv a brain because of d ct scan? Beautiful
Before there was ct scan, hw could u hv known?
When u hv dt scan, hw can u be sure dt wht diagnosis gotten from it is read right?
Nonetheless without d ct scan u can't tell for certain u hv a brain right?

Let us go deeper:
Do u hv thoughts? If yes, hw do u know? Ever seen those thoughts of urs? R they quantifiable & measurable?

achina boy:
well no body told me about dammm osiris

lol.....and nobody told millions of people about Jesus.


Shows that religion is mostly what other people tell you.

Bobbysworld28: @ooman
U believe u hv a brain because of d ct scan? Beautiful
Before there was ct scan, hw could u hv known?
When u hv dt scan, hw can u be sure dt wht diagnosis gotten from it is read right?
Nonetheless without d ct scan u can't tell for certain u hv a brain right?

Let us go deeper:
Do u hv thoughts? If yes, hw do u know? Ever seen those thoughts of urs? R they quantifiable & measurable?

Dont people die? Dont you see their brains if their heads are opened? The way some religious people argue is quite annoying. Use some reasoning abeg.

Thoughts are not quantifiable and measurable just like love but we do experience both thoughts and love. There is evidence for them but not your God.

Unlike your thoughts or love, they are universal and tied to physical things....ask any rational person around the world, irrespective or religion or race, to describe a person in love and they will universally tell you that it is in the happy behaviour and looks of a person that is in love. Now, thoughts; everyone thinks, we know this for you o type a response to me, you would have to think - the same process that I will use to type my comment. Ask anyone and they will tell you that they have to think of what to write before writing it. You think with your brain- a physical organ.


God is not physical as he is spaceless, timeless and invisible. Sounds non-existent to me

Sir.Logicboy is back..how was your leave?

all questions already answered by the great LB

achina boy:
well am better of believing,than not to blive,because it takes nothing out of me,

God is a parasite that preys on your time. You certainly will be better off without god.

@logicboy
I c u r ooman's spokesman. Weldone. As u hv resulted to insults b4 replying I'm wondering whether I'm dealing with a rational human being or ...
U mean there is a universal feeling whn ppl r in luv? Dt is so nt true. Pls stop generalizing.
If I must learn I will ask questions, no?
So back 2 ur tots. No matter wht u say, if I say dt I don't believe u hv them despite all ur talk. Won't u call me a fool as u hv done already?
Most times, d simplest explanation is usually d best.
Knowledge is improving rapidly & wht was termed impossible 100 yrs ago is routine now. Where I'm driving at is dis if u a human being who has no control of d air dt he breathes can make such a bold statement dt hv such a sweeping effect, then I am concerned 4 u. Wht if there is proof of him 2morrow, wht will d make u? If u hv issues with ways 2 define d concept of God (religion) then no probs. But 2 call d concept a fraud r bold words for man who knws nt where he was b4 he was born & who cannot see beyond his nose in d grand scale of eternity

Logicboy03:

You have come with your foolish and derailing questions. How do they make the op wrong and god not to be a fraud?

1) God being timeless doesnt make time meaningless to him. He shows love to human beings that are defined by time. He created the earth in six days or periods. Analogy; just because we human beings can move beyond alcohol (alife without alcohol) does that make alcohol meaningless to us?

I'm not sure it's my question you tried to answer here. Who said anything about meaninglessness? I asked what allusions to lapse of time mean to a being of eternity not whether time means anything to it.

2) Omniscience can not exits with freewill- this has been debated and many christians recognise this problem. The problem of omniscience and freewill is a proper philosophical problem

So you know that omniscience is mutually exclusive with free will because some people including Christians think so.

You won't talk about Christians not thinking for themselves again after saying this, will you?

but you will dismiss facts and dodge

Lol. What are you whining about?

My one issue with Atheism is just dt everything has a maker and if d grandest of things (our lives, d universe) can be ascribed as having none, then I can't quite grasp dt concept.

chukkynwob: Sir.Logicboy is back..how was your leave?

It was cool but I missed you guyz

ooman: all questions already answered by the great LB

So the prodigal son has returned to his rabid father. Lol.

Science has developed complex algorithms and super computers most atimes to mimic nature towards achieving certain ends. Yet u come & say d same nature is a random chance thing & not ascribable 2 anyone.
Does it seem ur dismissal of him will make him less than He/she/it is? The world and everything in it when studied shows intelligence in design & I will always ackmowledge dt

Bobbysworld28: My one issue with Atheism is just dt everything has a maker and if d grandest of things (our lives, d universe) can be ascribed as having none, then I can't quite grasp dt concept.

the problem you fail to understand with this logic is that if everything has a maker, then God too must be made by someone or something. so who created God?

Bobbysworld28: Science has developed complex algorithms and super computers most atimes to mimic nature towards achieving certain ends. Yet u come & say d same nature is a random chance thing & not ascribable 2 anyone.
Does it seem ur dismissal of him will make him less than He/she/it is? The world and everything in it when studied shows intelligence in design & I will always ackmowledge dt

pls state the instances of intelligent design.

Ooman, dt is a concept dt should be explored instead if d blanket statement u issued. I lay no claim to having all d answers but ur topic is too big for a living person in this 3-D world 2 say. UnLike wht ur signature said 'live curious', u seem to hv closed d chapter of curiousity

If u r going to ask questions on intelligent design then u hv no right making spuurious claims.
Btw, do a research on just ur eyeballs & way they operate and see whether u won't marvel

Mans attempt at conceptualizing God might hv failed but it takes nothing away from d fact dt he could exist. D supercomputers of this world cannot light a candle 2 nature yet u come here making bold assertions regarding wht could be ultimately beyond ur comprehension

Bobbysworld28: Mans attempt at conceptualizing God might hv failed but it takes nothing away from d fact dt he could exist. D supercomputers of this world cannot light a candle 2 nature yet u come here making bold assertions regarding wht could be ultimately beyond ur comprehension

do you know that you offered no answers but adhominens?

I make logical assertions. I show the aporia concerning the concept of god. the god concept destroys itself by what it claims.

Wht claims has God ascribed to himself or wht claims hv man ascribed to God?

Bobbysworld28: If u r going to ask questions on intelligent design then u hv no right making spuurious claims.
Btw, do a research on just ur eyeballs & way they operate and see whether u won't marvel

you know the eyeball argument started early in the 18th century when so little was known of the eyes. Now experiments and research have been conducted and we understand that a protein called crystalin distincts the eyeballs during formation and maintains them throughout life. not just that, now we understand how it evolved and we are certain that intelligence or god was not involved in the appearance.

because you lack knowledge of the eyeball is not an excuse that god must exist

Bobbysworld28: Ooman, dt is a concept dt should be explored instead if d blanket statement u issued. I lay no claim to having all d answers but ur topic is too big for a living person in this 3-D world 2 say. UnLike wht ur signature said 'live curious', u seem to hv closed d chapter of curiousity

there is no way you can be religious and live curiously. to live curiously, you have to do away with religion.

god kills all curiosity in you and replaces it god's will and god's design.

to live curiously, the first thing to do is to terminate god off your life.