Discuss this quote

[JustFetus 1]

Atheists, stop trying to disprove God. Find something better to do.

[Guest Fohacidal]

I think you guys are missing the logic in my posts. Even though you are making a choice, it is the illusion of choice. I don't know how much clearer I can make it. You might think you are making a choice but you are not. To have a truly omnipotent god, this god would have to know all which would include decisions you have yet to make. Therefore, if god knows in some way what you are going to choose even before an occasion where a choice arises, then in fact it is predestined. To have a truly omnipotent god, this would have to be true.

Now if free will were true, you couldn't have an omnipotent god. Do a little bit of reading outside of the bible.

Most of it is biased, and is based on only empirical data

[Polis 0]

Weedross: It was supposed to say "because judaism became christianity" I was on the phone when I wrote it and I probably said the word "because" and my subconscious prompted me to write that instead of became...Sorry about the confusion.

I never said it was the same religion, but who did Abraham worhsip? The same God christians worship today? The fact that the pentateuch is included in the bible says that christianity was built on the same beliefs, save one...christians aren't waiting for a redeemer. Christians can trace their BELIEFS back before any hindi can, its not a point to brag about, but you wanted me to dispute your claim...And I'm doing it. And isn't that what this thread was about? Belief?

Polis: I forgot to quote you, but I'm sure you'll scan over my reply to weed...How does knowing what someone will do change the fact that they still have to make a choice? Are you telling me that everytime you decide to sleep in, or pick a fight, or take a piss...at the exact moment you do it you have no choice? I decide when I want to piss, if I'm going to beat the shit out of some guy, or whether or not I feel like getting out of bed. It makes no difference if God knows what I'm going to do...it just implies that he is aware of the choices I will make in the future...that in no way says that he has control over what I do. You are confusing predestination with free will...and nowhere in the christian faith is predestination prescribed. Christ said (Damn, I'm really not trying to get really religious, my bad if it comes off that way) when he was about to be handed over to the Romas "My father, if it is possible, let this cup pass over me" Jesus had a choice, he could've gone on his merry way, but he chose to give those who act out their faith redemption. I hope that works a little for you

You honestly do not see the flaw in this argument? If god is aware of the choices you are going to be making in the future, then these so called choices are not really choices. You just think you are making choices when you are in fact following a set path. God I am having a rough time explaining this, but damn its basic logic.....

Lets put this in something you guys might understand. Did God know that if he sent his son or whatever to us, that he would eventually die on the cross? If god knew this, then in fact Jesus did not have a choice. The only way for Free Will to ring true in this "story" is if god sent Jesus down to earth not knowing that he was going to be martyred. Do you honestly not see the logic in this?

Theological determinism is the thesis that there is a God who determines all that humans will do, either by knowing their actions in advance, via some form of omniscience or by decreeing their actions in advance. The problem of free will, in this context, is the problem of how our actions can be free, if there is a being who has determined them for us ahead of time

[UltimateOreo 145]

Well, I do believe in God, and I believe that he has a plan for everything, even if we do not know it. I also want you to think about this qoute-

If there is a God, then Christains will go to Heaven, and Atheists to hell. If there isn't a God, we all rot in the ground. I'll take my chances...

[Madmartigan 0]

Something tells me this thread will get nowhere, the atheists will argue their points...The christians theirs. You can't tell me what you're saying is "basic" simply because its the way you feel. Do you seriously think you can make what I know to be true, untrue by querying into a no win arguement? Its varying opinions, thats all. I happen to believe that just because someone knows what I will do doesn't mean I have no control over what I do. Foreknowledge has NOTHING to do with free will...and your view of omnipotence is so misinterpreted by the way you think God and Free will can't coexist.

[Polis 0]

Something tells me this thread will get nowhere, the atheists will argue their points...The christians theirs. You can't tell me what you're saying is "basic" simply because its the way you feel. Do you seriously think you can make what I know to be true, untrue by querying into a no win arguement? Its varying opinions, thats all. I happen to believe that just because someone knows what I will do doesn't mean I have no control over what I do. Foreknowledge has NOTHING to do with free will...and your view of omnipotence is so misinterpreted by the way you think God and Free will can't coexist.

You contradict yourself throughout this entire post. My opinion isn't an opinion, its a fact. To have Free Will would mean god could not know what you do before you do it....its that simple. Really the only intelligent recourse to this argument would be that I am holding god to mortal capacities and natural laws, but instead you just argue that your opinion is justified because it is just that..your opinion. Thanks for responding just like any bible thumping idiot would.

If god has foreknowledge of an event, then it is already preordained that this event WILL HAPPEN, HENCE WE HE/SHE HAS FOREKNOWLEDGE OF SAID EVENT. So you can't really have your omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscience god and Free Will. By your statement Madmartigan it would seem that you believe making a decision is Free Will. This is not Free Will my friend.

"As a truly omnipotent and good being, God could create beings with true freedom over God. Furthermore, God would voluntarily do so because "the greatest good ... which can be done for a being, greater than anything else that one can do for it, is to be truly free."

Please address this quote.

[UltimateOreo 145]

I actually am somewhat of a bigot when it comes to religion, I believe in Darwins Theory, and I believe in God. God created, the creations evolved, I don't see what the problem is...

[w33D.Ross 2]

Christians can trace their BELIEFS back before any hindi can, its not a point to brag about, but you wanted me to dispute your claim.

What does that even mean? you cant trace beliefs. they are in you, as an individual. but if you mean as a religion, Hinduism traces back before Judaism. So again your point is flawed and biased.

Most of it is biased, and is based on only empirical data

And the bible isn't biased?

Atheists, stop trying to disprove God. Find something better to do.

Theist, stop trying to prove there is a god. Find something better to do.

[Polis 0]

LOLZ, POLYTHEISTIC BELIEFS EXISTED LONG BEFORE ANY MONOTHEISTIC BELIEF. Sorry Martigan.

[Guest Fohacidal]

And the bible isn't biased?

The Bible is a historical retelling, whether facts may have been substituted with clever metaphors it doesn't degrade the quality of the bible. You guys however are judging religion on opinions and basic logic which doesnt surpass that of most middle schoolers. God is almighty, but god is wise.

[Madmartigan 0]

I'm just going to quit on this...weed, according to you hinduism started in 400 bc...I said christianity started in 800bc, please, please tell me how my point is flawed? And besides, the point wasn't that christianity was the first religion, its that the recorded history christians possess does indeed surpass that of all other religions. The arrogance of atheists like yourself is why you dont accept a single bit of truth...its all skepticism and doubt and trying to disprove something that there is no way in hell you can prove or disprove. Seriously, just kill this thread, its going to waste peoples time

[Guest Fohacidal]

I'm just going to quit on this...weed, according to you hinduism started in 400 bc...I said christianity started in 800bc, please, please tell me how my point is flawed? And besides, the point wasn't that christianity was the first religion, its that the recorded history christians possess does indeed surpass that of all other religions. The arrogance of atheists like yourself is why you dont accept a single bit of truth...its all skepticism and doubt and trying to disprove something that there is no way in hell you can prove or disprove. Seriously, just kill this thread, its going to waste peoples time

Thats exactly what ross wants you to do, dont fall into it, keep on truckin

[w33D.Ross 2]

i said Buddha was born around 400BCE.

Hinduism dates back to 5500BCE. with classical Hinduism starting around 1800 BCE

Christianity, was founded in 33CE was based as a Jewish cult. Christians didn't divide them selves from Judaism until around 110CE.

and using theology scholars and rabbinical text, Christians believe the word was created as late as 3760 BCE.

while some other Rabbis conclude that it was 4000BCE, so how is it that we have evidence of people living well before 4000BCE but the world was created then? perplexing.

[Øpiate 30]

I don't really think the quote disproves God. I thought that mankind's freewill was the one exception God made to his own omnipotence so that his greatest creations' reverence would be genuine. I am an atheist, but I wouldn't necessarily say that there is no God, if only even in the form of a non-sentient omnipresent will for life to happen. I don't believe in any religion because even if it were the words of a prophet, it has been in the hands of man an is therefore polluted and corrupted from its original form and intent.

Hinduism originated more like 3000 years ago during the Vedic period in India, btw.

[w33D.Ross 2]

it was practiced somewhat in the neolithic age. it wasnt untill the 18-1700's BCE when it was uniform

[Øpiate 30]

it was practiced somewhat in the neolithic age. it wasnt untill the 18-1700's BCE when it was uniform

Meh, the documentation ma have gotten better during that time period but Hinduism is hardly uniform, even today. It is as diverse in it's denominations as Christianity and as open to the believer's interpretation as Buddhism. My Hindu friend Kavya even is some type Hindu that are allowed to eat beef. That's another problem I have with religion. Most religions change to suit their believers, or single leader's reinterpretation of the prophecy. After a couple thousand years, you get so many denominations within a religion that many are direclty contradict the teachings of another. You can't believe them all, so you have to pick and choose your beliefs. If you can pick and choose what you believe about a religion then you aren't really following it. And if you want to be part of a religion that has not changed in thousands of years, hell, the only one I can really think of off the top of my head are the Hassids, .

[Waylon 2]

Atheists, stop trying to disprove God. Find something better to do.

lawl, if your referring to me I say go fuck yourself. See this is America dick lick where my first Amendment will allow me to tell you to fuck off ya cunt. I've never heard you say anything positive ever. You don't play anymore why are you even on the forums? To annoy people with your cockiness? I've discussed my opinion on god, but most people only use god as hope. Its like you use him only to try and benefit for yourself especially when death is near, and to reply to Polis. I think God is neither of those choices.

[projectmayhem9 8]

Wow, personally, I believe science is bullshit, like most things we are fed, christians and other religions are mocked about their god, yet the people mocking believe that the earth was just instantly created? ha, I laugh, and that we evolved from monkeys?

Hahaha.

I think you are forgetting that the bible is made up of 2 books, the old testament and the new testament. New was written after the death of christ. The old testament, more specificially, the pentateuch...the first 5 books of the bible are found in the hebrew torah, which is from the time of 800BC...Hinduism may be the oldest practiced religion, but only because judaism because christianity, the jews just didn't acknowledge christ as the savior they were waiting for.

In the pentateuch you find genesis, exodus, leviticus something and deuturonomy...They outline free will, the laws of moses (10 commandments), the ancestory of christ, etc... So back to my original post, I think my point still stands as valid...

Yes but since it does encompass 2 books, what Ross said was correct.

BTW, I'm not an atheist, I just don't believe everything I'm fed.

[Polis 0]

I don't really think the quote disproves God. I thought that mankind's freewill was the one exception God made to his own omnipotence so that his greatest creations' reverence would be genuine. I am an atheist, but I wouldn't necessarily say that there is no God, if only even in the form of a non-sentient omnipresent will for life to happen. I don't believe in any religion because even if it were the words of a prophet, it has been in the hands of man an is therefore polluted and corrupted from its original form and intent.

Hinduism originated more like 3000 years ago during the Vedic period in India, btw.

See thats where it comes down to the whole omnipotence thing. Could god create a rock that was so heavy, he himself could not lift it? Basically if god can create the rock but not lift it, he is not omnipotent. If he can create the rock but still lift it, then he is still not omnipotent. That is basically what it comes down to with what you said Opiate. If god can create something and then not have further knowledge of its doings, then he is not all powerful and all knowing.

[Polis 0]

The Bible is a historical retelling, whether facts may have been substituted with clever metaphors it doesn't degrade the quality of the bible. You guys however are judging religion on opinions and basic logic which doesnt surpass that of most middle schoolers. God is almighty, but god is wise.

Lol, this is quite hilarious! Foh, you do realize the the greatest philosophers throughout history have pondered this same question and came up with the same answers I am telling to you? These are all quotes and ideas from great minds, not middle schoolers. You're an idiot my friend and you have really contributed nothing to this thread. I suggest you stay out of it lest you be crushed by people who can actually argue a point.

Btw, I am not atheist either. I am agnostic! I just can't bring myself to believe in a completely good god that creates the mechanisms for evil as well as wants us to worship him or ask for forgiveness.

"As a truly omnipotent and good being, God could create beings with true freedom over God. Furthermore, God would voluntarily do so because "the greatest good ... which can be done for a being, greater than anything else that one can do for it, is to be truly free."

Address this quote please. I believe it is win.

I'm not going to lie, I don't think any of you have even really come close to contesting the information and opinions I have put forth. Please keep trying though....I really want to be proven wrong. I want to be swayed...seriously.

[Øpiate 30]

See thats where it comes down to the whole omnipotence thing. Could god create a rock that was so heavy, he himself could not lift it? Basically if god can create the rock but not lift it, he is not omnipotent. If he can create the rock but still lift it, then he is still not omnipotent. That is basically what it comes down to with what you said Opiate. If god can create something and then not have further knowledge of its doings, then he is not all powerful and all knowing.

A physical property such as weight would not have any consequence to a non physical being. God's omnipotence is not from physical strength, but from will. It is more like a switch in a circuit, a command in a program or a 1 or 0 in binary code. God wills it, it happens. There is no struggle to overcome for him. Besides, for ones' omnipotence to be a challenge to itself is a contradiction in terms. It implies a limitation - in this case how much God can lift - on a being that by definition has none.

[w33D.Ross 2]

if god was really omnipotent, could he theoretically create another god? but you can not create something that is at an equal or greater than the maker. so technically he couldn't create another god, so he is not omnipotent.

[Guest Fohacidal]

Lol, this is quite hilarious! Foh, you do realize the the greatest philosophers throughout history have pondered this same question and came up with the same answers I am telling to you? These are all quotes and ideas from great minds, not middle schoolers. You're an idiot my friend and you have really contributed nothing to this thread. I suggest you stay out of it lest you be crushed by people who can actually argue a point.

Btw, I am not atheist either. I am agnostic! I just can't bring myself to believe in a completely good god that creates the mechanisms for evil as well as wants us to worship him or ask for forgiveness.

"As a truly omnipotent and good being, God could create beings with true freedom over God. Furthermore, God would voluntarily do so because "the greatest good ... which can be done for a being, greater than anything else that one can do for it, is to be truly free."

Address this quote please. I believe it is win.

I'm not going to lie, I don't think any of you have even really come close to contesting the information and opinions I have put forth. Please keep trying though....I really want to be proven wrong. I want to be swayed...seriously.

Your not arguing any points, you just keep spewing out paradoxes in the hopes that it will justify your reasoning, which it can't, so please don't insult my intelligence, just because nobody is around to hear a tree falling doesn't mean it doesn't make a sound.

And stop bringing up that quote, who said it btw?

[Polis 0]

It doesn't make a sound. You would have to be around to percieve the vibrations in the air caused from the falling of the tree. If no one is around then the vibrations in the air do not translate into sound. Sound is a perception.

Of course you want me to stop bringing up this quote:"As a truly omnipotent and good being, God could create beings with true freedom over God. Furthermore, God would voluntarily do so because "the greatest good ... which can be done for a being, greater than anything else that one can do for it, is to be truly free." -Søren Kierkegaard. I am sure your bible and sunday school have not equipped you well enough to deal with it.

[Polis 0]

A physical property such as weight would not have any consequence to a non physical being. God's omnipotence is not from physical strength, but from will. It is more like a switch in a circuit, a command in a program or a 1 or 0 in binary code. God wills it, it happens. There is no struggle to overcome for him. Besides, for ones' omnipotence to be a challenge to itself is a contradiction in terms. It implies a limitation - in this case how much God can lift - on a being that by definition has none.

You are contradicting yourself here as you already previously implied that you believe god set a limitation on himself when he created Free Will for man-kind.