Post: #126

Honestly Dash, I can say out of literally thousands of people I have debated in various formats over the years you have less a grasp of basic Christian theology than almost anyone I have ever met. Your ignorance is truly astonishing. And I really do not mean that as an insult, just as an observation. I've listed some resources above (The Yale University Courses) that I think would sincerely help you gain a grasp of the true, historical foundation of your religion and the basic tenants of Christian and Jewish theology.

Oldnemesis, I think you would be well advised to leave this one alone. Unless, of course, you enjoy pissing in the wind. I know some people like that sort of thing.

But I'm not wasting any more time. Anyone who wants to understand some basic Christian theological concepts can read my last post or check out the links to the (free!) online courses Yale University offers on this very subject. I have taken both and they are fantastic:

Yale University Introduction to the Old Testament: http://oyc.yale.edu/religious-studies/in...rew-bible/

Yale University Introduction to New Testament History and Literature: http://oyc.yale.edu/religious-studies/in...testament/

Here is the master list of all of Yale's Free Online University: http://oyc.yale.edu/

Post: #127

Quote:IM NOT DEBATING WHETHER THE BIBLE IS TRUE OR NOT.

Dash,

Then what the f*** have you been arguing about the whole thread?!

Post: #128

(10-26-2011 01:00 AM)blurb Wrote:  

Quote:IM NOT DEBATING WHETHER THE BIBLE IS TRUE OR NOT.

Dash,

Then what the f*** have you been arguing about the whole thread?!

Solely the bible and the Christian faith.

Not whether or not it is true or not.

Debating whether God is real is a waste of time as there is no way for anyone to prove that there is or isnt a God.

But debating the contents of the bible itself is an entirely different matter.

Post: #129

Quote:But debating the contents of the bible itself is an entirely different matter.

Considering the two are entirely intertwined, that makes no sense.

Post: #130

(10-26-2011 07:50 PM)Gmac Wrote:  

Quote:But debating the contents of the bible itself is an entirely different matter.

Considering the two are entirely intertwined, that makes no sense.

Your confused.

To give an example.

Bible contains passages of pertaining to people and hell.

Person 1: Says the bible claims "x" action will send you to hell.

Person 2: Says the bible claims "y" action will send you to hell.

Neither person 1 or 2 is debating if hell is real, or if action "x" or "y" will ACTUALLY send you to hell.

They are debating what the Bible said / means with has nothing to do if the Bible or God is actually real.

Two different debates.

Sure two people can debate whether the Bible or God is real or fake using passages, but I havent entertained that debate because it is pointless.

Post: #131

(10-25-2011 07:15 PM)Dash Global Wrote:  Bullshit. God does not have control over our actions. He turn over that power with the creation of free-will. Since he does not have control over our actions he desires that we obey him. Him knowing or not is redundant.

1. Him knowing it is the CENTRAL TOPIC we're discussing here. I'm not discussing the fact that a human being can decide whether to do something or not. I'm discussing the fact that the god knew when he created the Universe what a specific human being would do.

2. He does not have to have the control because he's programmed the whole chain during the creation, and because of omniscience he KNEW how everyone would behave.

Quote:Im not ignoring anything. Im addressing EVERY comment you make.
Read my response to the other poster in regards to the "God knows all outcomes so freewill does not matter.

You're commenting different things, and not those I'm talking about.
For example, every time I mention omniscience you start talking about how free will works for HUMANS, and completely avoid the topics of omniscience.

Quote:God created people to obey him. There is people obeying God till this day. You seem to be missing this simple logic.

This isn't relevant as you drifted from the discussion. The main question was: since the god's direct creation Adam disobeyed him, and the god knew in advance that it would, and did nothing to fix it, how the god can be good?

The question which comes out of it is the following: why it is Adam's fault? You said the god created Adam desiring that he'd obey god - but he created Adam in a way that he'd disobey him! And christians say this is somehow Adam's fault? This is clearly the creator's issue.

Quote:Your still repeating your same misguided logic (aka assuming knowing =/ choosing, deciding, forcing) for the sixth time. I address every new issue you bring up.

With this logic you need to further explain yourself. Basically the god programmed everything when he created the Universe; he programmed the Earth to spin around Sun, he programmed bees to generate honey and he programmed humans to be skeptical to the advice they receive. So he basically forced everything to work the way he decided from the beginning. That's how you program the computer. So creating = choosing, and deciding. Forcing? Is a bee forced to collect nectar from flowers? Yes and no. It may decide to die and not to, but if it wants to live then apparently yes.

(10-23-2011 02:52 AM)Dash Global Wrote:  Actually if you want to be technical, the curiosity was brought about by the devil.

Then the obvious question is that if god did not want his creatures to be influenced by devil, why he created the devil first? Why didn't he make them invulnerable to devil's words?

Quote:You already admitted Adam could have skipped out on the apple. Thus you admitted God created Adam with the capacity to CHOOSE another alternative. lol That simple fact alone negates your argument.

No it didn't. See, here you are again. You're looking at the situation from Adam's position, but this is not what we are discussing. We're discussing god, so what Adam could do doesn't matter. What Adam has done matters. It matters that he ate the apple, and it matters that the god knew he'd ate the apple at the moment he created him. And it matters the god did nothing to fix it.

Quote:Wrong. He was created to obey God. That is the SOLE PURPOSE of humanity. To follow and obey God.

Then your god is indeed a faulty creator, because even his first creature disobeyed him directly!

Quote:Already explained how desire and knowing are not dependent upon one another.

And as usual you failed on that.

Quote:I love how you say they dont match but dont explain how they dont match. More side stepping.

It has been explained before.

Quote:Come on Oldnem. Your better than this.

Well, honestly you don't deserve better than this. You're changing your position all the time. At some time god is omnipotent and omniscient. Then someone gets a free will, and then the god is not omnipotent and omniscient anymore, but lowered down to a mere mortal who'd WANT Joe Doe would stop beating his wife but would do nothing to do it.

Quote:So im lying when I said "Plenty of people follow / obey God?" lol

We're talking about his first creation. You're weaseling.

Quote:How can you understand something and in the next sentence say it doesnt make sense at all?

Easy.
"God is a black dude".
"God is a white female"

Do you understand every sentence from the above? I assume you do. But does it make any sense? No, because those two are contradicting.

Quote:Denominations are a JOKE! Anyone that believes in the bible and puts their faith in anything BUT the bible is FOOLISH.

Most christians, apparently including you, have never read the bible themselves.

Quote:30% (2 billion people) of world would disagree with you....

Did you understand that you just said that 70% of the world would agree with me?
This is just ridiculous.

Quote:ps You need to go back and properly address half of my comments. The side stepping one word "bullshit" rebuttal without ANY explanation will not cut it.

You never properly addressed most of my comments, you're always weaseling out and side-stepping. I'm getting to conclusion that Christians just miss that bit in their brain which is responsible for the logical thinking. It is very obvious that "free will" is completely non-existent for the omnipotent omniscient creator who created everything. Yet you're busting it again and again for the last several weeks.

Post: #132

(10-25-2011 10:58 PM)Farmageddon Wrote:  Honestly Dash, I can say out of literally thousands of people I have debated in various formats over the years you have less a grasp of basic Christian theology than almost anyone I have ever met. Your ignorance is truly astonishing. And I really do not mean that as an insult, just as an observation.

And I will second that statement.

Quote:Oldnemesis, I think you would be well advised to leave this one alone. Unless, of course, you enjoy pissing in the wind. I know some people like that sort of thing.

I'll give it one more round, but it looks like we're just running in circles as he's kind of person who never admits being wrong even when he's directly wrong.

Honestly I expected it to be on a much higher level, maybe not as high as in "Challenging the Verdict" (this one was quite high bar even for me), but at least well above the very basic philosophical questions like problem of evil, which we studied in high school. From all the discussions I had in the last three years this one is probably the most infant one, and I sometime feel ashamed explaining such basic things which a 8oy should be able to understand to a grown up adult.

Quote:Yale University Introduction to the Old Testament: http://oyc.yale.edu/religious-studies/in...rew-bible/
Yale University Introduction to New Testament History and Literature: http://oyc.yale.edu/religious-studies/in...testament/

Thank you for the link, those are interesting courses. They even have the transcript, which is perfect. Now I have something to read during my flight to Philippines.

Post: #133

(10-26-2011 07:11 PM)Dash Global Wrote:  Solely the bible and the Christian faith.
Not whether or not it is true or not.

You actually fail at the basic logic level. Do you have mandatory philosophy classes in a school? Not being a dick, but you seem to lack some very basic knowledge.

For example, did you actually read the Wiki article about the Problem of Evil? I had to wrote an essay on that topic in school, and there were no Wiki so my knowledge is dated, but from what I remember the Wiki seems to describe it fairly complete.

Think of it - the "assume the bible is true" presumption makes it MUCH more difficult for me to discuss things - as the field is much more leveled in your favor in this case - but even there you really cannot prove your points. Again, me and you were discussing at the very basic levels - in fact I know several rebuttals on all my arguments which looks valid at the surface. If you read the "Problem of Evil" and followed some links you'd find some of them as well. The problem then is that the discussion quickly moves up to the "Challenging the Verdict" level which makes it cryptic to anyone who hasn't read a lot on the subject.

Quote:Debating whether God is real is a waste of time as there is no way for anyone to prove that there is or isnt a God.

This is true if we're talking about some abstract concept of God.
However the Judo-Christian concept of God contains so many self-contradictions that it is possible to prove that a being cannot have all the described features at the same time.

I suggest you to read the "God - The Failed Hypothesis" by Victor Stenger. This is VERY basic book (in fact I was quite disappointed after I finished it, even the latest Skeptic magazine article contained more advanced information), but at least you can get an idea what kind of issues are you dealing with if you try to prove that the Judo-Christian god exists.

Post: #134

(10-27-2011 12:11 AM)oldnemesis Wrote:  1. Him knowing it is the CENTRAL TOPIC we're discussing here. I'm not discussing the fact that a human being can decide whether to do something or not. I'm discussing the fact that the god knew when he created the Universe what a specific human being would do.

Yes our debate is centered around whether knowing equals or doesnt equal controlling, choosing, deciding, forcing ect. And ovcourse God knew what every person would do. He knows everything.

Quote:2. He does not have to have the control because he's programmed the whole chain during the creation, and because of omniscience he KNEW how everyone would behave.

Thats correct, he doesnt HAVE to have control. Notice you just agreed with me that God doesnt have control, but yet he he knew how everyone would behave. What is your point as I agree with the above?

Quote:You're commenting different things, and not those I'm talking about.
For example, every time I mention omniscience you start talking about how free will works for HUMANS, and completely avoid the topics of omniscience.

I already went over omniscience from the first time you mentioned it in the "Problem with Evil". Maybe you should revisit that post.

Quote:This isn't relevant as you drifted from the discussion. The main question was: since the god's direct creation Adam disobeyed him, and the god knew in advance that it would, and did nothing to fix it, how the god can be good?

Isnt relevant? Most certainly is. And I DIRECTLY addressed each and everyone of your comments so im certainly not drifting.

As for your question, what in the sentence makes God bad? God gave Adam the freewill to obey him or disobey him. God did not trick Adam or lie and said the fruit was good. Why would you expect him to fix something that cant be fixed if God wanted to maintain his sole purpose for creating humans? ie Freewill with the power to obey/follow or disobey/sin. Had God "fixed" Adam and choose for him to not eat the apple than Adam would cease to have freewill.

Quote:The question which comes out of it is the following: why it is Adam's fault? You said the god created Adam desiring that he'd obey god - but he created Adam in a way that he'd disobey him! And christians say this is somehow Adam's fault? This is clearly the creator's issue.

It is Adams fault because he could have chosen to obey God and not eat of the fruit. Which you have already claimed yourself. Humans have a desire to sin. If we didnt have this desire than no one would sin and everyone would go to heaven, thus negating the freewill in regards to salvation. The desire of sin is in place to ensure only a small select few are strong enough to fight off the temptations / desires of sin and the devil and CHOOSE to obey God.

Did I explain that clearly enough for you?

Quote:With this logic you need to further explain yourself. Basically the god programmed everything when he created the Universe; he programmed the Earth to spin around Sun, he programmed bees to generate honey and he programmed humans to be skeptical to the advice they receive. So he basically forced everything to work the way he decided from the beginning. That's how you program the computer. So creating = choosing, and deciding. Forcing? Is a bee forced to collect nectar from flowers? Yes and no. It may decide to die and not to, but if it wants to live then apparently yes.

Just so you know everything is working just the way he decided it from the beginning ie People with freewill to obey/follow God or disobey him and with their actions comes rewards and punishments both in this life and the next. Nothing has changed.

Quote:Then the obvious question is that if god did not want his creatures to be influenced by devil, why he created the devil first? Why didn't he make them invulnerable to devil's words?

The correct way of putting this is simple.

God wanted us to be influenced by evil/devil.

God wanted us to be strong and turn away from those "sinful" influences and choose to obey/follow him.

You just seemed to of missed that last part. Wont hold it against you.

Quote:No it didn't. See, here you are again. You're looking at the situation from Adam's position, but this is not what we are discussing. We're discussing god, so what Adam could do doesn't matter. What Adam has done matters. It matters that he ate the apple, and it matters that the god knew he'd ate the apple at the moment he created him. And it matters the god did nothing to fix it.

Already explained the God "fixing" it issue. Scroll up if you wanna read again.

Quote:Then your god is indeed a faulty creator, because even his first creature disobeyed him directly!

Wrong. Love how you project opinion as fact in this one.

Already explained God's purpose for the world.(And it wasnt for Adam to not eat of the tree) And last I check people are still choosing to obey or disobey God.

Quote:And as usual you failed on that.

No actual rebuttal, just fluff.

Quote:It has been explained before.

I must have missed it. Please elaborate.

Quote:Well, honestly you don't deserve better than this. You're changing your position all the time. At some time god is omnipotent and omniscient. Then someone gets a free will, and then the god is not omnipotent and omniscient anymore, but lowered down to a mere mortal who'd WANT Joe Doe would stop beating his wife but would do nothing to do it.

I havent once changed my position. Your just making stuff up or twisting my words and trying to assume what I mean.

Quote:We're talking about his first creation. You're weaseling.

And? Fist creation, 22nd creation, . All the same. People with freewill with the power to choose/obey/follow God and the power to disobey and reject. Just so happen Adam the first human choose to disobey God. Nothing new or extraordinary here, as people choose to disobey all the time. Past present and future.

Quote:Easy.
"God is a black dude".
"God is a white female"

Do you understand every sentence from the above? I assume you do. But does it make any sense? No, because those two are contradicting.

Please enlighten me on the "contradictions".

Quote:Did you understand that you just said that 70% of the world would agree with me?
This is just ridiculous.

Doesnt matter is 99% of the world agreed with you. The only thing that matters is who is actually in fact right.

Quote:You never properly addressed most of my comments, you're always weaseling out and side-stepping. I'm getting to conclusion that Christians just miss that bit in their brain which is responsible for the logical thinking. It is very obvious that "free will" is completely non-existent for the omnipotent omniscient creator who created everything. Yet you're busting it again and again for the last several weeks.

I bet you cant find one comment where I didnt address your post with actual sentences and not just the word"bullshit". Which you did ALOT in that last post. Which leaves me nothing to comment on.

Already explained the omniscience and omnipotent issue several times.

Post: #135

(10-27-2011 10:42 AM)Dash Global Wrote:  

(10-27-2011 12:11 AM)oldnemesis Wrote:  2. He does not have to have the control because he's programmed the whole chain during the creation, and because of omniscience he KNEW how everyone would behave.

Thats correct, he doesnt HAVE to have control. Notice you just agreed with me that God doesnt have control, but yet he he knew how everyone would behave. What is your point as I agree with the above?

My point was written right above - apparently you only read the first part of the sentence. I highlighted the part you missed, which explains it. Not surprisingly, the part you skipped was the critical part of my point.

Quote:Isnt relevant? Most certainly is. And I DIRECTLY addressed each and everyone of your comments so im certainly not drifting.

Yes, like the one above. You may think you addressed it, but you certainly did not.

Quote:As for your question, what in the sentence makes God bad? God gave Adam the freewill to obey him or disobey him.

And you're yet again continuing with that "freewill" bullshit.

There are only two ways the god could create Adam. One way, Adam would not eat the apple. Another way, Adam would eat the apple. And the god had to decide which way to create Adam when he created it - because, as I said above, our actions as humans are based on the information stored in our brain, and your god had to fill up Adam's brain with something.

Your god programmed Adam to eat that apple, and he KNEW that he would do it despite anything. It doesn't matter that Adam didn't have to do it, your god KNEW he would. All that matters that god created Adam the way that he was SURE Adam would eat the apple.

Quote:It is Adams fault because he could have chosen to obey God and not eat of the fruit.

No, then this wasn't his fault. The god who created him KNEW he wouldn't choose to obey him - and the god actually created Adam this way intentionally.

The rest of your explanation makes no sense, as you - as usual - start drifting away from the subject with the speed of light. Do you see that my whole post basically covers a single specific topic, which is that the god created Adam with a known failure he instituted into Adam himself, and he knew about this failure in advance, and therefore the god and not Adam is responsible for that? This is what matters. Please stay on a topic. We'll talk about original sin after we are clear on that one.

Quote:Just so you know everything is working just the way he decided it from the beginning ie People with freewill to obey/follow God or disobey him and with their actions comes rewards and punishments both in this life and the next. Nothing has changed.

Does this mean that you agree with my position that god created Adam, knowing that Adam would disobey him and eat the apple, and that's how the god decided it from the beginning? This comes directly from your statement. This also addresses the next "sinful" comment.

Quote:I havent once changed my position. Your just making stuff up or twisting my words and trying to assume what I mean.

You do it all the time, by avoiding different elements in the following logical chain:

1. The god created the whole Universe and therefore programmed each and every being to behave in a specific way.
2. The god knew how each being created would behave, and he liked the way he created the things.
3. Some of beings, however, behaved not how the god would like them to behave. And god knew they would behave exactly that way.
4. There is a contradiction between 3 and 4 which you never explained. You only tried to weasel it out by invoking the "freewill" bullshit every time.
5. Freewill, however, is not even an explanation unless you assume one of the following:

5a. The god just created the initial state of the universe and let the things go, and did not know how everything would behave. This contradicts with the omniscience feature of Christian god.
5b. The god knew he created a faulty model (which is defined as it would behave NOT the way he would like it to behave), but cannot change it. Then the god is not omnipotent.
5c. The god knew he created a faulty model, but still decided to keep it like that. In this case the failure of creations is set up by the god itself and definitely is not Adam's fault. This also means god is not "good" at lease in human interpretation of "good".

Every time you mention freewill, you fail to address which element of the chain it applies to.

Quote:And? Fist creation, 22nd creation, . All the same. People with freewill with the power to choose/obey/follow God and the power to disobey and reject.

You're doing it right here. How does this explains the logical chain I specified above?

Quote:

Quote:Easy.
"God is a black dude".
"God is a white female"

Do you understand every sentence from the above? I assume you do. But does it make any sense? No, because those two are contradicting.

Please enlighten me on the "contradictions".

If you don't see the contradictions in two sentences above, I have to say that your brain misses the part responsible for the logic. In this case the discussion with you makes no sense at all. It is like explaining the atomic reaction to a four year old. Your brain is just not capable to understand what I'm saying. In this case you better stuck with the bible, at least it was written for peasants.

Post: #136

(10-28-2011 08:08 PM)oldnemesis Wrote:  My point was written right above - apparently you only read the first part of the sentence. I highlighted the part you missed, which explains it. Not surprisingly, the part you skipped was the critical part of my point.

I agree and I explained the "programming" aspect of humans. We are all programmed the same way. With a PROPENSITY to sin.

Quote:There are only two ways the god could create Adam. One way, Adam would not eat the apple. Another way, Adam would eat the apple. And the god had to decide which way to create Adam when he created it - because, as I said above, our actions as humans are based on the information stored in our brain, and your god had to fill up Adam's brain with something.

This is the part you seem alittle confused about. God creates us ALL the same way. With a propensity to sin. He doesnt program us to ACTUALLY sin. That we do on our own accord through freewill.

Only way for your rebuttal to hold any substance would be for you to claim God programs each persons ACTIONS. Thus there would in fact be no freewill.

Is this what your saying?

Quote:Your god programmed Adam to eat that apple, and he KNEW that he would do it despite anything. It doesn't matter that Adam didn't have to do it, your god KNEW he would. All that matters that god created Adam the way that he was SURE Adam would eat the apple.

No he didnt program Adam to directly eat the apple. He programmed Adam to WANT to eat the apple. In Christianity people are taught to put their earthly desires aside and obey Gods commands.

Adam simply lack the faith, strength, desire to obey in that one instance.

Quote:No, then this wasn't his fault. The god who created him KNEW he wouldn't choose to obey him - and the god actually created Adam this way intentionally.

God created Adam with freewill to choose to obey or disobey. God knew what Adam would decide. What people choose to do is irrelevant in God's creating of people as there will be some people that will obey and some that will disobey.

Quote:Does this mean that you agree with my position that god created Adam, knowing that Adam would disobey him and eat the apple, and that's how the god decided it from the beginning? This comes directly from your statement. This also addresses the next "sinful" comment.

Yes I have never said God didnt know Adam would disobey him.

Quote:1. The god created the whole Universe and therefore programmed each and every being to behave in a specific way.

Not a specific way. He programs humans with a propensity and desire to sin. This is broad and is just a WANTED behavior. Not a specific ACTION.

Quote:
2. The god knew how each being created would behave, and he liked the way he created the things.

Your twisting words and meanings with the last part of your sentence. When God said he liked how he created things that was in reference to the PERFECT WORLD without sin, death, suffering, ect and the overall image of Adam and Eve.

Quote:3. Some of beings, however, behaved not how the god would like them to behave. And god knew they would behave exactly that way.
4. There is a contradiction between 3 and 4 which you never explained. You only tried to weasel it out by invoking the "freewill" bullshit every time.

You mean between 2 and 3? I already clarified number 2 for you and there is no contradiction.

Quote:5. Freewill, however, is not even an explanation unless you assume one of the following:

5a. The god just created the initial state of the universe and let the things go, and did not know how everything would behave. This contradicts with the omniscience feature of Christian god.
5b. The god knew he created a faulty model (which is defined as it would behave NOT the way he would like it to behave), but cannot change it. Then the god is not omnipotent.
5c. The god knew he created a faulty model, but still decided to keep it like that. In this case the failure of creations is set up by the god itself and definitely is not Adam's fault. This also means god is not "good" at lease in human interpretation of "good".

Every time you mention freewill, you fail to address which element of the chain it applies to.

5a is invalid and not even possible with the Christian God.

5b If by faulty model you mean people choosing through freewill to disobey God than yes. Why are you adding on "but cannot change it"? He can change it just chooses not to.

5c The model you should be looking at is the overall model of Life / Humans in regards to how God created people. The model is still working fine till this day. And in case you dont know what that model is I will explain as its real simple.

God created a earth where people have the freewill to choose to obey him or disobey him. He wants and desires people to choose to obey him. People all through time have obeyed God and people still to this day are obeying God.

Quote:If you don't see the contradictions in two sentences above, I have to say that your brain misses the part responsible for the logic. In this case the discussion with you makes no sense at all. It is like explaining the atomic reaction to a four year old. Your brain is just not capable to understand what I'm saying. In this case you better stuck with the bible, at least it was written for peasants.

I was talking about specifically the contradictions in the Bible not from the text / example you wrote. ie What are some scripture is BLATANTLY obvious contradictions like the one you tried to use an example?

Post: #137

(10-28-2011 09:29 PM)Dash Global Wrote:  I agree and I explained the "programming" aspect of humans. We are all programmed the same way. With a PROPENSITY to sin.

So let's get a short summary.
You say that the god wanted Adam not to sin.
But right here you agree that the god created Adam with a propensity to sin.
And not only that, you agreed several times the god KNEW Adam would sin.
Then I do not see at all how any sane person would blame that sin on Adam. It is clearly the creator's fault.

Quote:Only way for your rebuttal to hold any substance would be for you to claim God programs each persons ACTIONS. Thus there would in fact be no freewill.
Is this what your saying?

That's what I claim in case of Adam - that your god programmed Adam to eat the apple.
And he knew he programmed Adam this way, and Adam would eat the apple.
Since he knew it, there couldn't be any "free will" excuse. Yes, Adam could have not eaten the apple. But it is irrelevant, since the god KNEW he would eat it!

Quote:No he didnt program Adam to directly eat the apple. He programmed Adam to WANT to eat the apple.

[bGod is omniscient[/b]. Your god KNEW the result of his programming would be Adam eating this apple.

Quote:Adam simply lack the faith, strength, desire to obey in that one instance.

This is so ridiculous. Sometime you sound like you believe Adam came from some monkey who passed some features on him, without any god's knowledge.

What you are saying here is that Adam was intentionally created without the necessary faith and strength. And the god knew the end result of such lacking.

Quote:God created Adam with freewill to choose to obey or disobey. God knew what Adam would decide.

This is enough. Basically you agreed that this "First Sin" was preplanned and actored by your god. Correct?

Quote:
Your twisting words and meanings with the last part of your sentence. When God said he liked how he created things that was in reference to the PERFECT WORLD without sin, death, suffering, ect and the overall image of Adam and Eve.

Genesis 1:31 - "God saw all that he had made, and it was very good"
So are you saying those things (sin, death, etc) weren't made by your god?
Then who made them? Please provide the relevant quote.

Quote:God created a earth where people have the freewill to choose to obey him or disobey him.

And you're still repeating the same "freewill" crap you did above.
You know what? I'm done with you. You obviously lack the brain capabilities necessary to understand the philosophy, and further discussion makes no sense. I'm tired repeating the same things again and again just to get back the same "freewill" bullshit.

Post: #138

(10-29-2011 08:55 PM)oldnemesis Wrote:  So let's get a short summary.
You say that the god wanted Adam not to sin.
But right here you agree that the god created Adam with a propensity to sin.
And not only that, you agreed several times the god KNEW Adam would sin.
Then I do not see at all how any sane person would blame that sin on Adam. It is clearly the creator's fault.

Without the propensity to sin it would be EASY to obey God and not sin. Heaven / salvation is only for the STRONG that can overcome their sinful NATURE and meant to be HARD.

Quote:That's what I claim in case of Adam - that your god programmed Adam to eat the apple.
And he knew he programmed Adam this way, and Adam would eat the apple.
Since he knew it, there couldn't be any "free will" excuse. Yes, Adam could have not eaten the apple. But it is irrelevant, since the god KNEW he would eat it!

Your using programmed vaguely. The programming i'm referring to(none specific action/only a propensity to sin/nature) is different from the programming your referring to(specific actions).

Quote:What you are saying here is that Adam was intentionally created without the necessary faith and strength. And the god knew the end result of such lacking.

This is incorrect.

The proper explanation is God created Adam like he does everyone with the necessary faith and strength. Adam just didnt WANT to obey God in that very instance.

People have the ability to do A LOT of stuff but that doesnt mean they will do or will want to do said action.

Quote:This is enough. Basically you agreed that this "First Sin" was preplanned and actored by your god. Correct?

No, I have never said God "planned" first sin. God doesnt plan any ACTIONS. Good or bad. People through freewill CREATE good and bad. Notice that God knows about these actions but that doesnt mean he is planning them.

Quote:
Genesis 1:31 - "God saw all that he had made, and it was very good"
So are you saying those things (sin, death, etc) weren't made by your god?
Then who made them? Please provide the relevant quote.

No, they came from a result of humans freewill.

And you are assuming in what context God made that quote. Think of it as physical things like the ones I mentioned. Which were the perfect world (tangible physical things) and the IMAGE of man.

Post: #139

"You forget that religious people have to live in a secular society in which 'non-religious' policies are administered upon them. It's a much more difficult position to be in than we think."

This is true, but at the same time they also have the freedom to worship any God they please without persecution. Religion is purely a personal choice, and the government has no obligation otherwise to accomodate beliefs. The religious believe that fact that religion is kept out of government-run schools as a form of persecution. There are parochial schools for that if you they want it. There are churches for religious education if you want that. I think "non-religious" policies would be policies that dictate how religion, or IF religion could be practiced. That isn't the case. Churches/religious organizations are tax-exempt. Oddly, the religious do more persecuting than the non-religious. The non-religious generally don't care what the religious do - they just don't want to hear about it. They don't want to be preached to constantly. I think a huge part of being religious is spreading the word, and non-believers don't want to hear it. Here in NY, the subway is FULL of these preachers that come into a subway car and bellow at the top of their lungs, and tell you you're going to hell if you don't embrace what they do.

Post: #140

As I said above, I'm done with you on this topic. It is quite clear that you're not capable to do any actual thinking on the topic, as you keep repeating the same "freewill" bullshit in every post.

Post: #141

(10-30-2011 06:44 PM)oldnemesis Wrote:  As I said above, I'm done with you on this topic. It is quite clear that you're not capable to do any actual thinking on the topic, as you keep repeating the same "freewill" bullshit in every post.

I brought up much more than saying "freewill" in the above rebuttal.

Ill summarize for you.

1) Salvation in meant to be hard not easy.
2) Programming a propensity/nature rather than programming a specific action.
3) Having the ability to do =/ wanting to do
4) God doesnt plan specific human actions
5) God didnt create death, suffering, ect.
6) Genesis quote you used was taken out of context.

But, im glad your finished. You are a persistent one, just not persistent enough.

Post: #142

That was a great debate .

To Dash: "Free will" does not mean the creator of something or all things do not know what you shall do, since it is written in acts,romans, corinthians , colossians, about those he "foreknew". The greek interpretation of this word "foreknew" is to decree before hand, or to have understanding of events seen before the appointed time. So in this case (Old Nem.) is dead on with what the creator has already understood, and that he is in fact the creator of things he already understood to be good or evil.He also knows what the creature will do , and when it will do it. Example. The adversary which is known to most as "satan", or for the misguided,"lucifer", also had free will, and became the originator/father of what is known as sin, however, this is not to say that the creator didn't know that this "being" had the capacity to do and would do at the appointed time . The question would be why would you allow it, if you know it would wreck such havoc? The mystery is explained very clearly in the book of Job. That dialogue between both entities, is for the understanding of who controls what, and for a given time and purpose. This is the controversy that is distorted in terms of the relationship between creator and creature. If your belief is that God is of love and sent his son to save the world, why create anything that would cause innocent beings/people to suffer in the first place? This is the mystery, and no amount of research would make for a healthy conclusion. Either you believe, or you don't, and this is the equivalent of faith ,for it merely is a thing you hope for, in other words lending credence based upon convictions.

On the other hand, there are tons of evidence that supports that just because the creator is all knowing, and can choose to know before hand, he can also choose not to know, remain neutral, or modify the events to suit a particular end. I don't see why this is so highly debated if one chooses to accept that the creator is all powerful. At the end of the day , if this is not the position you choose to seed your faith in , questions such as who , where , why, and how, will always be replaced with science, as opposed to those who believe in salvation ,which, by itself, doesn't require any of these things to be explained. It's so simple a concept that requires very little explanation , more so, a full reservoir of faith. I was thinking about the so called"golden rule"the other day. So simple a concept, yet, so fucking hard to carry out on a daily basis. So is the mystery.

Post: #143

(10-30-2011 07:23 PM)Dash Global Wrote:  

(10-30-2011 06:44 PM)oldnemesis Wrote:  As I said above, I'm done with you on this topic. It is quite clear that you're not capable to do any actual thinking on the topic, as you keep repeating the same "freewill" bullshit in every post.

I brought up much more than saying "freewill" in the above rebuttal.

Ill summarize for you.

1) Salvation in meant to be hard not easy.
2) Programming a propensity/nature rather than programming a specific action.
3) Having the ability to do =/ wanting to do
4) God doesnt plan specific human actions
5) God didnt create death, suffering, ect.
6) Genesis quote you used was taken out of context.

But, im glad your finished. You are a persistent one, just not persistent enough.

Geez, you're hopeless Dash. It's like talking to a brick wall.

Post: #144

(11-01-2011 09:52 AM)Gmac Wrote:  

(10-30-2011 07:23 PM)Dash Global Wrote:  

(10-30-2011 06:44 PM)oldnemesis Wrote:  As I said above, I'm done with you on this topic. It is quite clear that you're not capable to do any actual thinking on the topic, as you keep repeating the same "freewill" bullshit in every post.

I brought up much more than saying "freewill" in the above rebuttal.

Ill summarize for you.

1) Salvation in meant to be hard not easy.
2) Programming a propensity/nature rather than programming a specific action.
3) Having the ability to do =/ wanting to do
4) God doesnt plan specific human actions
5) God didnt create death, suffering, ect.
6) Genesis quote you used was taken out of context.

But, im glad your finished. You are a persistent one, just not persistent enough.

Geez, you're hopeless Dash. It's like talking to a brick wall.

How is it that he is hopeless? Is it because he doesn't articulate his position in a forum filled with perverted minds? This is the wrong forum for what he wishes to defend, so, what appears to be hopeless, in reality, is a state of mind of the prodigal young heir, and at some point , experience will be .....his banker

Post: #145

(11-01-2011 09:04 AM)Pusscrook Wrote:  That was a great debate .

To Dash: "Free will" does not mean the creator of something or all things do not know what you shall do, since it is written in acts,romans, corinthians , colossians, about those he "foreknew". The greek interpretation of this word "foreknew" is to decree before hand, or to have understanding of events seen before the appointed time. So in this case (Old Nem.) is dead on with what the creator has already understood, and that he is in fact the creator of things he already understood to be good or evil.He also knows what the creature will do , and when it will do it. Example. The adversary which is known to most as "satan", or for the misguided,"lucifer", also had free will, and became the originator/father of what is known as sin, however, this is not to say that the creator didn't know that this "being" had the capacity to do and would do at the appointed time . The question would be why would you allow it, if you know it would wreck such havoc? The mystery is explained very clearly in the book of Job. That dialogue between both entities, is for the understanding of who controls what, and for a given time and purpose. This is the controversy that is distorted in terms of the relationship between creator and creature. If your belief is that God is of love and sent his son to save the world, why create anything that would cause innocent beings/people to suffer in the first place? This is the mystery, and no amount of research would make for a healthy conclusion. Either you believe, or you don't, and this is the equivalent of faith ,for it merely is a thing you hope for, in other words lending credence based upon convictions.

I have maintained that he knew/knows/foreknew everything from the time of creation/inception.

Me and Oldnemisis agree that God already knew / understood how the world / events would unfold.

God knew that "Satan" would disobey him and tempt humans to do sinful things.

As I have said numerous times, the real debate is WHY would God allow such things. Not whether we have freewill or not.

As for that question no one s knows for sure, but I have a pretty good hunch that I have mentioned in this thread. There has always been rules set by God for his creations to follow to prosper. For Adam and Eve it was not eat of the fruit. Once they disobeyed God they destroyed the "perfect" world of the Garden of Eden bringing upon death, suffering, ect. Now after this event their was a new set of rules to follow for people to prosper and get to heaven. Being there was no "tree of life" the rules changed to following a more specific path in life. The devil after the fall of the Garden of Eden became the primary tempter for sin feeding off our innate desire to sin. As I have mentioned the path for a Christian is meant to be HARD and narrow where only a few have the strength / desire to choose to obey God and disregard their own selfish humanly endeavors. The devil / sin are a tools in the grand scheme of things to weed out the weak and the strong.

Post: #146

(11-01-2011 07:41 PM)Dash Global Wrote:  

(11-01-2011 09:04 AM)Pusscrook Wrote:  That was a great debate .

To Dash: "Free will" does not mean the creator of something or all things do not know what you shall do, since it is written in acts,romans, corinthians , colossians, about those he "foreknew". The greek interpretation of this word "foreknew" is to decree before hand, or to have understanding of events seen before the appointed time. So in this case (Old Nem.) is dead on with what the creator has already understood, and that he is in fact the creator of things he already understood to be good or evil.He also knows what the creature will do , and when it will do it. Example. The adversary which is known to most as "satan", or for the misguided,"lucifer", also had free will, and became the originator/father of what is known as sin, however, this is not to say that the creator didn't know that this "being" had the capacity to do and would do at the appointed time . The question would be why would you allow it, if you know it would wreck such havoc? The mystery is explained very clearly in the book of Job. That dialogue between both entities, is for the understanding of who controls what, and for a given time and purpose. This is the controversy that is distorted in terms of the relationship between creator and creature. If your belief is that God is of love and sent his son to save the world, why create anything that would cause innocent beings/people to suffer in the first place? This is the mystery, and no amount of research would make for a healthy conclusion. Either you believe, or you don't, and this is the equivalent of faith ,for it merely is a thing you hope for, in other words lending credence based upon convictions.

I have maintained that he knew/knows/foreknew everything from the time of creation/inception.

Me and Oldnemisis agree that God already knew / understood how the world / events would unfold.

God knew that "Satan" would disobey him and tempt humans to do sinful things.

As I have said numerous times, the real debate is WHY would God allow such things. Not whether we have freewill or not.

As for that question no one s knows for sure, but I have a pretty good hunch that I have mentioned in this thread. There has always been rules set by God for his creations to follow to prosper. For Adam and Eve it was not eat of the fruit. Once they disobeyed God they destroyed the "perfect" world of the Garden of Eden bringing upon death, suffering, ect. Now after this event their was a new set of rules to follow for people to prosper and get to heaven. Being there was no "tree of life" the rules changed to following a more specific path in life. The devil after the fall of the Garden of Eden became the primary tempter for sin feeding off our innate desire to sin. As I have mentioned the path for a Christian is meant to be HARD and narrow where only a few have the strength / desire to choose to obey God and disregard their own selfish humanly endeavors. The devil / sin are a tools in the grand scheme of things to weed out the weak and the strong.

I am not sure if it is a matter of weak and strong , but more so, it is , that, you seed control to. Adamah knew what evil was, yet, that fucking whore, convinced him otherwise, if you believe the story. This has nothing to do with weak and strong, but a demonstration of faith. No where is it mentioned that the creator knew that this seraphim known as (satan) would wreck havoc thru "sin" as you know it. This is what "free will" is all about,..... to know, not know, to act, not act. This includes the behavior of the creator himself. As far as the fall, the adversary was used as a test only to support the idea of why humans were trusted any more than celestial beings who failed in faith in the very beginning. This is clearly documented as to why the angels were confused as to why humans were even created in the first place. The path to "christianity" is hard for who? They are countless examples of those who are simple, possessed, no education, poor, rich, whores, those who resisted, yet, they accepted, because they had "faith". Salvation, is neither hard, scientific, or even disguised as what you do in the material sense....... it is the understanding of the greatest "gift". When are the ushers taking up an offering, I have bills to pay...

Post: #147

(11-01-2011 08:22 PM)Pusscrook Wrote:  I am not sure if it is a matter of weak and strong , but more so, it is , that, you seed control to. Adamah knew what evil was, yet, that fucking whore, convinced him otherwise, if you believe the story. This has nothing to do with weak and strong, but a demonstration of faith. No where is it mentioned that the creator knew that this seraphim known as (satan) would wreck havoc thru "sin" as you know it. This is what "free will" is all about,..... to know, not know, to act, not act. This includes the behavior of the creator himself. As far as the fall, the adversary was used as a test only to support the idea of why humans were trusted any more than celestial beings who failed in faith in the very beginning. This is clearly documented as to why the angels were confused as to why humans were even created in the first place. The path to "christianity" is hard for who? They are countless examples of those who are simple, possessed, no education, poor, rich, whores, those who resisted, yet, they accepted, because they had "faith". Salvation, is neither hard, scientific, or even disguised as what you do in the material sense....... it is the understanding of the greatest "gift". When are the ushers taking up an offering, I have bills to pay...

Control and Strong go hand in hand imo.

Adam at that moment in time was not strong enough to resist the temptations of Eve. Not sure if this has anything to do with faith as faith wasnt needed at this time as Adam had already seen / knew God. The bible states God knows EVERYTHING / ALL KNOWING ect so it doesnt need to specifically mention God knowing about the devil and his impact on the world as it is already implied / known.

I would change your definition of freewill slightly - to believe, not believe, to do, not to do"

I prob should have been more clear. Salvation / faith isnt hard.

Its the Christian life of following / obeying God that is hard for all.

Post: #148

(11-01-2011 09:16 PM)Dash Global Wrote:  

(11-01-2011 08:22 PM)Pusscrook Wrote:  I am not sure if it is a matter of weak and strong , but more so, it is , that, you seed control to. Adamah knew what evil was, yet, that fucking whore, convinced him otherwise, if you believe the story. This has nothing to do with weak and strong, but a demonstration of faith. No where is it mentioned that the creator knew that this seraphim known as (satan) would wreck havoc thru "sin" as you know it. This is what "free will" is all about,..... to know, not know, to act, not act. This includes the behavior of the creator himself. As far as the fall, the adversary was used as a test only to support the idea of why humans were trusted any more than celestial beings who failed in faith in the very beginning. This is clearly documented as to why the angels were confused as to why humans were even created in the first place. The path to "christianity" is hard for who? They are countless examples of those who are simple, possessed, no education, poor, rich, whores, those who resisted, yet, they accepted, because they had "faith". Salvation, is neither hard, scientific, or even disguised as what you do in the material sense....... it is the understanding of the greatest "gift". When are the ushers taking up an offering, I have bills to pay...

Control and Strong go hand in hand imo.

Adam at that moment in time was not strong enough to resist the temptations of Eve. Not sure if this has anything to do with faith as faith wasnt needed at this time as Adam had already seen / knew God. The bible states God knows EVERYTHING / ALL KNOWING ect so it doesnt need to specifically mention God knowing about the devil and his impact on the world as it is already implied / known.

I would change your definition of freewill slightly - to believe, not believe, to do, not to do"

I prob should have been more clear. Salvation / faith isnt hard.

Its the Christian life of following / obeying God that is hard for all.

shake the dust off of your feet, recognize your environment, and continue in the way that soothes the conscience. I feel where you are coming from.

Post: #149

I used to participate in arguments like these, until I realized they were usually fruitless. People rarely change their minds about this stuff, and my energy is better served on other things. I'm totally fine with people disagreeing with me and living in their own world. IMO, diversity of thought is what makes this world interesting. I say: let it be!

Post: #150

(09-18-2011 09:06 PM)MikeCF Wrote:  

(09-18-2011 08:56 PM)Easy E Wrote:  I think religion is more of a problem than atheism.

Right-wing fundies and Islamists want to impose their religious beliefs on society.

I don't care what imaginary god someone wants to believe in, but I think people tend to draw the line when you try to use violence (Islamists) or the State (right-wing fundies) to impose your religious beliefs on everyone else.

Stalin, Hiter, Mao, Khmer Rouge.....The Ukraine famine killed as many as the Holocaust.

And of course Africans are killing each other over secular tribalism.

What about "ethnic cleansing" in Yugoslavia?

See, your comment illustrates the point of the video. You're so sure that "right-wing fundies" are a threat...And yet atheists have kills hundreds-of-millions of people.

It is ideologues who kill people, ideologues can be theists and they can be atheist but they are ideologues nonetheless, they still have final solutions for the world's problems and grandiose visions for humanity, whether they believe in a god or not. Stalin, Mao, Polpot were atheists but they killed in the name of Communism which is really a pseudoreligion in itself if one were to look at it. Hitler was a believer and a cultural Catholic, though in no way a devout one. His faith and real creed was Nazism and he killed all those people in the name of that ideology.

As for Africa and the Balkans that is really down to ethnic tribalism.