Or never jumped into a vat of acid, or never went to Binini Atoll for any of the hydrogen bomb tests that where thousands of times more powerful than the ones dropped on Hioshima and Nagasaki. . . .
I'm sorry the Coen brothers don't direct the porn I watch. They're hard to get ahold of, okay?
Ueah, that might have caused some discomfort while he reconstituted. I wouldn't want to put myself through that. Also how do you know he didn't try some of that once or twice.
When God curses you you stay cursed. He's a petty son of a bitch. He leaves no easy outs.
I'm like a rabbit suddenly trapped
In the blinding headlights of vacuous crap.
Kane's punishment is that he can never die. He always regenerates his body.
shareGod is not omniscient, or would not ask Cain what he had done, or test the faith of Abraham, or lack the foreknowledge that the Israelites would become unfaithful. Thus, God would not have the foreknowledge of the hydrogen bomb tests on Bikini Atoll or their effects.
I'm sorry the Coen brothers don't direct the porn I watch. They're hard to get ahold of, okay?
The conversation with Cain wasn't for God's edification, but mankind's. God is fair. He gives everyone the chance to confess, even when He knows if they will or won't.
"Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government."
-Dennis
If he knows what people will do, then he hasn't given them a real chance. But the logic doesn't need to make sense because he doesn't exist. He's just a tyrannical father-figure substitute concocted from reports of collective hallucinations of illiterate bronze-age zealots.
shareThat is flawed logic. There are many situations that arise where I know exactly what my wife will choose to do or say in response to said situation. That doesn't make her choices any less her own.
That's only true to the extent that she has the ability to go either way. If that's impossible, then it's not a choice, it's an inevitability.
shareActually, it is possible for God to be omniscient and for us to have free will. First a disclaimer: I don't have any more insight into the mind of God than any other person... but I can point out flawed logic when I see it.
Just an analogy: an ironsmith takes ore out of the mountain, smelts it, throws out the dregs, hammers it and produces what he set out to make--a plow for example. He knows what the end result will be. But that doesn't stop him from having to take each of the steps that need to be done to make the end result happen.
Likewise, God being omniscient would know what the universe ends up to be... and, if you believe the writings, it's exactly his plan.
However, *we* are not infinite beings. So despite the fact that *God* knows how it all ends--and that it ends in what He set out to do--*we* have to behave like we don't know where our next coin flip will take us, e.g. the so-called "free will." God knows what we'll do. He'll pose the dillemas.... but nothing we can do or say would surprise Him, even though ever human being in range could be scratching their heads.
If there's an omniscient god, and if he knows exactly how the world will play out, and if nothing we can do will surprise him, then we have no free will. Perhaps what you're suggesting is that we have the illusion of free will and should behave as if we have it regardless of whether that's true? If so, then I agree with you, but that's a psychological question and not a philosophical or cosmological one.
shareI think you're only technically correct in using the word "illusion". To God, of course, what we believe is "free will" is only an illusion. To us it isn't. You, for example, may have chose to believe that the predestination/free will is silly and therefore God is silly--and therefore you (if you believe the writings/God really does exist) would be judged accordingly. *You* chose this path with no outside spiritual intervention (unless you have a hotline into God's mind no one knows about).
Please don't take this as me pushing God on you. I believe that the belief of what comes after this mortal coil is a personal one and no one has the right to try to force their religion (or lack thereof) onto another person--after all, your belief may be the correct one. Discussing it rationally, of course, should always be allowed.
If your view of god is right and we have no free will, then I don't think your god is silly, I think he's a sadist for punishing his creations for doing the only thing they could possibly ever do once he set them in motion. But that's not why I don't believe in him. I don't believe because it's perfectly obvious that people created thousands of gods for their own purposes. Mainly to comfort themselves about death, but also as a means of controlling others and as an excuse for doing things they know are wrong. In the end the question of free will is only academic because it just makes sense to behave as if we have it even if we don't.
shareYour lack of a belief in a god is perfectly your choice (Qu'ran 18:29)
I do want to address "sadist" thought. I think Christians got this mixed up too with the idea that God wants happiness for his people. I think, for whatever reason (and this is supported by Biblical writings) God's purposes are his own--basically for his "glory"--part of it will come from the happiness of "his people" (defined as those who follow God's law, which to us seems to change over time e.g. Old Testament to New Testament).
"A sadistic God" is not an easy thought for me to cogitate on. The epiphany only occurred to me when I remembered watching a production of silicon wafers decades ago. Intel was stamping out dozens of these wafers with the idea that 90% of them would be flawed in some way (technology was still basically very new). Then it dawned on me that perhaps the universe is made in such a way that whatever it is that "glorifies" God can only be "made" in this way--and that a 67% loss is perfectly acceptable (again, I don't know the mind of God). So, did throwing away 90% of silicon wafers make Intel "sadistic"? Is throwing away 67% of Humanity because they chose differently "sadistic"? Faith, I think, could make Christians give God the benefit of the doubt that he knows what he's doing.
(I'm not even going to try to deal now with the notion that if God is also omnipotent, then why does he have to waste 67% of population? To you Christian readers who are calling "foul!" what do you think the OT Malachi 2:17-3:6 references to "refiner's fire" means?)
I think that it is correct for you to not believe in any gods if you really think that they exist solely to make you do things that you know are wrong (not that atheism is any better, look at the French Enlightenment, or the communist pogroms).
Can I pose a question? On what basis do you define "right" and "wrong"? Are you Rousseau-esc and believe that there is some implied "social contract"?
I call your god a sadist because he tortures people for all eternity for misbehaving. And when I say "your" god, I'm talking directly to you since you claimed that he exists and that we have no free will. Obviously I don't believe he or any gods exist that know and care about us. The reason you're getting yourself twisted into knots trying to make sense of your dogma is because it's very contradictory and written long ago by people with different values and for their own purposes. As for telling right from wrong, I like Kevin Spacey's character's answer in the movie K-PAK in which he says "all beings know right from wrong". That's an over-simplification of course but it goes to the heart of the matter. In practice, morality is always relative and shifts with time and culture. For example, when the bible was written, rape and slavery were not considered immoral, but today they are. At best, rape was just an issue of property damage. You can try to read other interpretations into it but on it's face, the bible clearly doesn't consider those things to be immoral.
Consider for a moment what it would mean if there really were no god. If you believed that, would you suddenly start behaving any differently? If there's someone you really dislike, I doubt that you'd now consider killing them even though you know you won't be punished after you die. You won't kill them because you simply know that it's wrong, same as me. You would also get to stop trying to make sense of nonsense and trying to please some invisible tyrant. You could just get on with your life as a moral, caring person and spend more time trying to make this world a better place. You get to choose your own purpose. How cool is that?
I think daiichi-1 makes some interesting points. You on the other hand melind2001 seem very angry over what is just a movie, to hate (a so called) creator and call him sadistic just because we *beep* up with our own freewill and now the cards having to land wherever to make good again, i would think you would be grateful. And yeah its a movie, yet all this crap cos in the 'Movie' god punishes cain for all eternity, supposedly because cain was the first murder to begat all other murders. WHO CARES !!!!! really melinda you got nothing else to do with yourself but bitch and ball about daiichi-1 's God, (your quote) 'And when I say "your" god, I'm talking directly to you since you claimed that he exists and that we have no free will'. Boo Hoo melinda, you got no free will, oh poor baby, you wouldn't even know if you had it or not or even whether that was a good thing. tell you what if you dont understand it and cant even begin to try without (another of your quotes) 'getting yourself twisted into knots trying' then dont bother !!!! , rather it best you just get on with your life as a moral, caring person and spend more time trying to make this world a better place.. yes this is another one of your quotes ! - see your not all that bad 😉
shareFirst, I don't hate the movie at all and don't know how you got that impression. Second, I didn't bitch about not having free will because I don't think it matters at all. The smart thing is to behave as if you have free will even if you don't. But since this discussion hinges on the question, I only pointed out that daiichi-1's god would have to be sadistic if we have no free will. Punishing us for failures that we literally can't avoid making would be a childish as kicking your bicycle because you fell off.
shareKnowing what someone would do does not remove his free will. Let's assume I invent a time machine. Travel to the future and I find out you are going to kill your mother. I get back in time before you do it. So, now, did you choose to do it or not because I know how something happens? God knows what you will chose to do BUT the choice is yours.
Your argument will have more merit if you go the "why did he create me in the first place if he knows I go to Hell". That is a more tricky question. Thing is its no longer about free will.
Knowing what someone will do does not "remove" their free will but it definitely proves that they don't have any. Traveling backwards in time may be literally impossible, so a thought experiment like yours that requires it proves nothing. The same reasoning puts limits on the possible powers of any god. If they create you with complete foreknowledge of your only possible future, then punishing you for those choices would make them sadistic. And although I might fear such a god I would certainly have no respect for them, let alone love.
shareTraveling back in time is impossible? Going by who? You have evidence of this?
Even assuming it would be impossible and the example would still hold. Just ignore the fact that its impossible.
Also you failed to explain how it proves they don't have any of someone knows your future.
For one thing, time travel would violate the most basic laws of physics such as conservation of energy and I won't just ignore facts just because they are inconvenient. That's what religion is for. But if you want to make an argument that requires time travel then it's up to you to give evidence that it's possible, not for me to prove that it isn't.
shareYou have yet to provide evidence that time travel is impossible. You are not ignoring facts, that is obvious since you provided none, so what is there to ignore? Well aside for your say so and that is something irrelevant as you said.
Now for you to ask evidence of time travel from me because of that example is hilarious. I was not arguing with you or claiming time travel is possible bud. I was giving a example of someone knowing the future and asking you how knowing the future invalidates your free will. It was a hypothesis that assumed time travel is possible and not trying to claim its real and fact. You are the one who claimed its not possible so the burden of proof is on your side. So again, how would I knowing the future by any means (magic globe if you wish) invalidate your free will. You keep ignoring this point for some posts now. You can also replace time travel or magic globe with some other way of seeing the future, like trough tachyons or whatever. it was good enough for Doctor Manhattan right?
Now I hope your next posts is not going to be "provide evidence that a magical globe exists". Now stop diverting the discussion mr strawman and explain how knowing the future means your free will is an illusion.
If you know for a fact what will happen, then there is only one possible future. That means you have no freedom to choose any other future. If you can make no other choices, then you have no free will.
shareOne future that WE build trough our choices. That is what you know. He who knows the future knows the choices I MADE. He did not MADE me do it by knowing what I will do.
I seriously don't see how knowing for a fact what I am going to choose to do means I did not choose what I did? Its not like knowing a action before its performed means someone forced you into it. This goes back to the same time travel example. Someone knowing the future, a regular human, be it trough time travel or somehow seeing the future does not mean all the people who made the choices that made the future where not made by them, like someone forced them on them.
My question is, again. How does knowing what I am going to choose to do means I did not choose to do that? You said I can make no other choices but I already made them. Since I made the one that build the future God has seen.
I even found an article on this, first thing I found when I google this:
https://carm.org/if-god-knows-our-free-will-choices-do-we-still-have-free-will
Well you do get credit for research and citation. The arguments there are the same as ours so it doesn't shed new light but it at least shows we have company. I really only have two points to make see if you can put a dent in either one.
First, let's make the thought experiment personal rather than about others. Imagine your iron-clad foreknowledge is about some choices YOU are about to make such as whether to wear your blue shirt or red shirt today. In fact you learn that you WILL "choose" your blue shirt. As you go to put it on you think "What's to stop me from changing my mind and breaking the prediction? Seems like that should be impossible, but then it's your free will to choose as you like, so you do it. But wait, you knew for certain that that wouldn't occur, so what happened? To me it looked like free will alright but it violated the promise that you knew for certain that you were going to wear the blue shirt. So it looks like you were wrong and you did NOT have certain knowledge of the future after all. What went wrong?
The second thing involves God who will punish you for an action that he knows that you will choose. You probably don't want to be punished or to anger your god, but luckily God tells you that you have free will, so why not exercise that free will and don't do the thing that will get you punished. Simple, right? But that means that God really didn't know what you were going to do, so he's a liar at best.
So maybe there's free will but NOT with personal foreknowledge, like you and that article described, but there's clearly no free will WITH personal foreknowledge. Without personal foreknowledge you might feel like you have free will but if God knows what you'll choose and will punish you for it, then he's a sadist because he knew that you were not free to make a better choice. I'd have no respect for a god like that.
Your example does not really apply that well. What you argue is for us to have information about what we will be doing and changing said outcome. This applies great (your example that is) with my time travel example. Someone can return from the future and tell you that choice X is going to get you killed and you make choice Y that will save your life. Choice X was made because that would be your choice made based on your information at that time.
Direct intervention from God (as he knows your future) can change your future and your choices but that does not mean you don't have free will or you don't make a choice to act based on the new information. God will just know what shirt you are going to use even AFTER he told you that shirt X is not a good idea. He can change your future and the outcome that he knew with 100% accuracy that you will do just like the time traveler example before. Knowing what choice will be does not translate into God not having the ability to create ANOTHER future by intervening. Also if you had God's ability to be omniscient the outcome would just changed based on every decision you make and you could decide what outcome to create based on your choice. In essence you could see all possible outcomes based on each individual choice you would make. The only paradox I can see here is knowing what choice YOU will make. Lucky for us this does not apply to God since he is not bound to time and space. He is outside time. Also, you have to understand. When God is involved we have many paradoxes. Like his most well known "ability", omnipotence.
Now God creates souls that end up in mothers. He just gives the spark of life if you wish. The rest is up to the person and family around them to grow. In the end your mother and father had that baby, God just provided the soul. What you choose to do with that life is up to you. All he does is give you the gift of life. If you end up squandering it then you are the only one to blame. People really need to stop blaming God for their choices. More so when you consider that he does not literally punishes you. You just can't be with God and are left with everything God is not, that is what Hell is.
The only paradox I can see here is knowing what choice YOU will make.If you know for a fact what you will do, then you do not have free will. That's still true even if you don't know but it illustrates the point. No choice? No free will. That's what the term means. I'm not interested in your sadistic magical friend and would appreciate it if you'd stop going on about him. share
Knowing your choice does not mean you have no choice. I know my choice when it comes to getting up every morning going to work. I have to. Its sure thing. I can quit work and end up on the streets but I am not going to do that.
Thing is all of this is irrelevant. WE are not omniscient, GOD is. So this does not apply in any form to the question "does free will apply if God is omniscient". God did not give us free will AND omniscience. Just free will.
Moving on let's look at this in a way you can't counter. For this premise we need to hold God as he is, omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent. We are debating the Bible's God and free will after all.
Then let's assume what you say is correct. Free will can't coexist with omniscience.
Now considering God is omnipotent, aka he can do anything he can give us free will in spite of his omniscience OR he is not omnipotent. Its a paradox but it works perfectly fine given what we know about this premise. Omnipotence in itself is a paradox BUT its a given concept about God and considering we are debating GOD, his creation and free will that also holds.
So we have FREE WILL given the concept of God of the Bible. Omniscience or not even if we assume what you hold as true for a fact.
I told you that I'm not interested in your imaginary friend so goodbye.
shareWe were not debating if God exists. We where debating the logic behind free will assuming God exists. You can have this argument between 2 atheists just as well. You where also interested enough in this concept (of free will) that you had multiple replies to me.
So dismissing the argument by saying "not interested in your imaginary friend" is a poor man's strawman at best given the nature of our argument.
Now if you are not interested in having a debate about said concept with me, then fine, if you don't enjoy an argument then obviously you should stop having it. Thing is, don't try to change the nature of the argument to excuse why you stopped having it. That looks like a cowardly tactic.
Have a good day.
I told you several times that I have no interest in your imaginary friend including in my preceding message. I attempted several times to talk about free will but no matter what I tried, you insisted in turning the conversation back to your favorite subject, and your last message contained nothing else, so I hardly see how saying "enough" makes me cowardly. To me you're simply insensitive.
shareWe have debated the concept of free will and if its possible under God. I have debated nothing else. You can be free to explain to me how I turned the argument about anything else but the subject. The subject was "is free will possible if God is omniscient". That is all I debated. You insisting I turned the argument about anything then that is just a lie.
shareNow I'm a liar as well? If your point was really to debate then you have a lot to learn about persuasion and basic civility.
You want to know how you "turned the argument about anything else but the subject"? OK, you peppered your dialog with talk about souls and morality and direct intervention and how your god is just so gosh-darned wonderful. All things that have nothing do do with the topic. But don't take my word for it, allow me to quote you:
Now God creates souls that end up in mothers. He just gives the spark of life if you wish. The rest is up to the person and family around them to grow. In the end your mother and father had that baby, God just provided the soul. What you choose to do with that life is up to you. All he does is give you the gift of life. If you end up squandering it then you are the only one to blame. People really need to stop blaming God for their choices. More so when you consider that he does not literally punishes you. You just can't be with God and are left with everything God is not, that is what Hell is.
That line is perfectly on point. Its about choice and why God creates us knowing what we will do in life.
Read your previous post to that quote. It involves you throwing the blame on him for choices made. Again, its perfectly in point with your previous reply and the overall discussion we were having.
Also I did not meant to be rude but when you claim something like that I can only conclude what I did.
Of course you meant to be rude, otherwise there would be an apology in there somewhere. And of course you blame me for your poor reaction. Victim blaming comes naturally to religious types. You know that your soul is pure. It's just the evil in the world that tests you. Luckily you don't need my forgiveness. You've got a magical friend to absolve your every mistake. Well I'm here to tell you that that voice in your head is just you. Not even God can speak for me.
shareWhy would I provide a apology when what I said was true? I don't blame you for anything. You called God into question for his actions and called him a sadist and a few other things. To that I provided a rebuttal for your argument as to why you hold him as a sadist. You think you can provide an argument about God that in the end has nothing with free will (at least not more then my following post)and that to be considered on topic but when I reply to your own post about that very issue its somehow off topic? Double standards much?
More so you had to dig trough my posts to find something even remotely off topic. The posts you replied to when you said "you are not interested in my imaginary fried":
Knowing your choice does not mean you have no choice. I know my choice when it comes to getting up every morning going to work. I have to. Its sure thing. I can quit work and end up on the streets but I am not going to do that.
Thing is all of this is irrelevant. WE are not omniscient, GOD is. So this does not apply in any form to the question "does free will apply if God is omniscient". God did not give us free will AND omniscience. Just free will.
Moving on let's look at this in a way you can't counter. For this premise we need to hold God as he is, omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent. We are debating the Bible's God and free will after all.
Then let's assume what you say is correct. Free will can't coexist with omniscience.
Now considering God is omnipotent, aka he can do anything he can give us free will in spite of his omniscience OR he is not omnipotent. Its a paradox but it works perfectly fine given what we know about this premise. Omnipotence in itself is a paradox BUT its a given concept about God and considering we are debating GOD, his creation and free will that also holds.
So we have FREE WILL given the concept of God of the Bible. Omniscience or not even if we assume what you hold as true for a fact.
I never expected an apology and you definitely do blame me for being insulting and hypocritical. I tried being very patient but you were simply unable to talk about omniscience without also talking about your particular imaginary friend, even after I told you that that bothered me and asked you to stop. And yes, I actually do feel that your belief is a delusion. Just because you know a lot of other people with the same beliefs doesn't make it true or worthy of respect. Your collective delusion has been responsible for some of the worst atrocities in the world, so it's not a simple matter of respecting different opinions.
If you actually care to know how you talked off-topic about your god in that post you quoted, here are your phrases that do that:
"WE are not omniscient, GOD is"
"God did not give us free will AND omniscience. Just free will."
"For this premise we need to hold God as he is"
"God is omnipotent"
Omnipotence has nothing to do with the topic, and even if it did, you keep talking about what God "is" rather than at least saying "assuming an omnipotent god..." You probably can't even see what's so insulting in your assumptions and that's the problem. What do you say to a Muslim who tells you "Allah does not want you to drink alcohol"? I bet you in some way deny that Allah exists because the assumption that he does will grate on you. Every time someone talks about a different god than yours like it's a fact, you probably think they are deluded and wish they would stop. Well I finally got sick of it after I even asked you to stop. I realize now that you were incapable of doing that because you probably can't even see what you're doing. Try replacing the word "God" in your above quotes with "Allah" or "Earth Mother" or "Zeus" and you should get an idea of what you sound like to someone that does not share your particular belief.
To me the point is more about God creating us while being omniscient and then complaining and punishing. Why not just change us the way he likes us to be? It's the equivalent of making said plow, holding it up over your foot and dropping it. Then smashing it because it hit your indestructible foot. Out of principle.
If you know exactly how gravity works and drop a plow on your foot, how could you think that the plow hat free will?
Similar if god is omniscient and knows what humans will do and he created them that way - he knew it couldn't turn out any other way.
That is a valid question. I can't say I know how he thinks and why he did it but I can provide my own opinion on the matter.
The way I see it he does not creates "who we will be" he provides the spark of life that ends up in the child as the mother and father has it. Then what we do its our own responsibility. He gave us the gift of life. If we squander it then its our own fault.
As you know not everybody is going to behave in a "bad" way. Its not like he created HUMANITY as a hole to fail. He created us and gave us what we need to succeed at this. Some just refuse to take it. Can you really be pissed at God for your own choices? I think this is more about taking responsibility for your own actions instead of blaming this or that for what you did.
You see, compared to the "plow" example we can choose if we hit that "foot". We can choose to follow what God wants from us. If you look at ALL of us as that plow it would be wrong since not all of us are going to hit that foot. If you look at that said plow as individual people then it becomes a plow that hits the foot under its own volition. Some plows decide to hit it and some don't and each of those plows have the same tools they need to avoid it. This does not apply to your example with the plow and gravity. That example is with something not having the ability to choose, we do. God knowing what you will do does not erase the bad we do or our on choices. If someone tells you that he is going to kill your friend would that excuse the fact because you knew that will happen?
Also to define "punishment" is in reality what you choose to do. Imagine its really cold outside, you are going to die by the morning. You end up at a house that is warm inside. The man inside invites you in, you refuse. Then he invites you in a few more times only for you to refuse. Then you die by the morning. Who is at fault? The man in the house for not coming out, knocking you unconscious and then to drag you inside? Its the same with God. He gives you multiple opportunities in life to join him in his house. If you refuse and stay in sin then you chose to stay outside his house, he did not kick you out. What you are left with is your punishment as you wish. Its the absence of God that you choose. That absence is everything God is not, its Hell. Its hate, fear, despair, pain and so on. Evil like cold does not really exist, its the absence of God like the absence of heat for cold.
The way I see it he does not creates "who we will be" he provides the spark of life that ends up in the child as the mother and father has it.
If someone tells you that he is going to kill your friend would that excuse the fact because you knew that will happen?
Also to define "punishment" is in reality what you choose to do.
God is omniscient but that does not mean he made your choices for you. He creates, you decide what to do with your life. Him knowing what you will do does not mean he made your choices.
Moving on someone omniscient can't really be surprised now can he?
Yes, I am saying God is infallible. Yes he knew about the evil WE would CHOSE to do. That is why he also made the plan to save us. Now God created beings with free will. NOT ROBOTS. Of course we could chose evil if we wanted to. Its by the definition of free will to chose how to direct your life. Throwing the blame on him for what we chose makes no sense.
Do you consider yourself evil? How much do you act to protect people? Many people are starving. Do you have a car? How big is your house? How much money do you have? Do you keep as much money to SURVIVE and the rest you give to this poor people? I don't think you are.
Also you want God to just stop all evil in the world instead of us choosing to stop doing that evil? How do you know his decision to not babysit us is the wrong one? Are you infinite? Are you omniscient? Perhaps letting us grow IS the right decision. Who knows, really. In the end we need to man up and accept the consequences of the world WE build, not blame God for what WE do and expect him to fix the mess WE create. Don't you think so?
Yes, people suffer even if its not their choice. This is not a perfect world mate. People are even hurt BY OTHER PEOPLE. Still not their choice but its the world we live in. Jesus was tortured and murdered and he did nothing. Are we to expect less then Jesus? Pick up your cross and follow him. We are tested in this life. The choices here is not about if we suffered or not, its what we chose to do in it. The "punishment" was about the following life, after we die. Not this one. I did not say we chose if we suffer in this life or not. Not even Jesus wanted to suffer. He asked his father if that cup can pass him.
Many people are starving. Do you have a car? How big is your house? How much money do you have? Do you keep as much money to SURVIVE and the rest you give to this poor people? I don't think you are.
In the end we need to man up and accept the consequences of the world WE build, not blame God for what WE do and expect him to fix the mess WE create. Don't you think so?
You think allowing children to starve to death is acceptable? That is after saying God is bad for not intervening? I do agree that a more long term plan IS needed but to let as many children die of hunger(imagine how horrible that is)so they don't multiply is... I just have no words. If you ask me we judging God's ways considering how WE are is not wise.
God did NOT create the world as it is today. He gave us paradise that we lost at the beginning. Then he gave us a perfect world to sustain us and we did what you can see around yourself today. Our choices are what made the world today.
Now I can't really tell you the though process behind God's actions but I can tell you how I see it. First off let's think of a parent "creating" a child, giving him parenting and then that child grows to be a murderer. Only the child is prosecuted by the law, not the parents. If someone creates a gun and someone else uses that gun to murder who is prosecuted? People use guns to kill each day but you don't see people in the weapon industry go to jail. Should we hold God more responsible then we hold our fellow man?
Moving on we all sinners. So its not like anybody is harming people with no sins. The only one with no sins would be Jesus. Also God did sent us his only son to die for our sins so we can be saved. In essence God died for our evil. If that is not taking responsibility I don't know what is.
You think allowing children to starve to death is acceptable?
First off let's think of a parent "creating" a child, giving him parenting and then that child grows to be a murderer.
People use guns to kill each day but you don't see people in the weapon industry go to jail.
Should we hold God more responsible then we hold our fellow man?
In essence God died for our evil. If that is not taking responsibility I don't know what is.
We are responsible for what is happening on this planet. Its up to each of us to make it a better place don't you think so? I can't say I am better then you in this since I don't do the things I asked of you just as well.
Also and yes, God said to reproduce, he never said not to care for your children or be responsible for those children. I would also like to point out that the Bible nowhere forbids birth control(not to be confused with abortion). God did command us to reproduce and said children as a blessing but he also said we should be responsible.
You should also consider that famine is not the only issue this people face. Disease and other problems exist there. They have many children so at least some survive into adulthood. We in the western countries have it good. The odds for our 1-2 children to reach adulthood is great. We have good nutrition (well obviously not all, some eat *beep* all day..) and we have good hygiene and medicine.
If you are to teach them about birth control you also need to provide them with the means to ensure those children grow up.
Moving on you point out that in the long term it would be better if those children die. So you don't have a problem with using long term plan with what its better for humans. Why don't you give God the same credit? He has a plan for his creation just as well. How do you know what his outcome is?
And you are right. Growth through adversity is something God expects from us. Jesus had to do no less. There are many instances in the Bible when different individuals are tested. We are also tested just as well.
God did not tinker with our "DNA" in a way that we will become psychotic and aggressive behavior. You are comparing a normal human, like you and me who choose to do evil for personal gain with someone engineering a child to do evil. It would more like creating a robot programed to be psychotic. Again, God created US as we are not the one in your example who is programed to be one way.
If you look at the majority in this world you will see they try to do good. We are not designed to be evil in any way.
About the gun thing. You can give me a gun and I will never shoot someone unless its in self defense. Those people who go shoot people is because of other facts. Not because someone made a gun. If they did not have a gun they could have used a knife. I would remind you that before we had weapons we used swords to kill one another, before that we used rocks. People kill people, no guns. I do agree on the other hand that if gun control would be better the "casualties" would be less. Thing is I was using human laws as an example of how we handle this as a society. As you would personally its another discussion and its somewhat irrelevant to what I wanted to show by said example. Then again I do agree with you that they do carry a part of that responsibility.
Now we should hold ourselves responsible for fixing our own mess and not sit with our feet up saying "God fix it for us". He can see all ends and he can easily fix it but its not his mess. Its ours. He wants us to grow and not be babies. You, yourself broth up the adversity bit at the start. Its like you, as a grown man making a mess and then running to your mother to fix it for you.
That is why we need to study (education system is a mess) so we can fix our issues. That is why we need to work together and grow.
Your final paragraph. God did nothing wrong. We DID. We choose to do. His only fault is giving us life. That is the difference between your murderer and God. God did nothing wrong, he gave us life, he gave us happiness. He gave us everything we have. To that we did not obey him and we created a huge mess for ourselves. To that he gave his only son to die for us so he we may live. Also I would like to point he took ALL our sins on that cross. It was not just the physical torture. Your last line of what you think it would be better for us is from your own limited view. While the next line I will say it will probably be acceptable only if someone believes in God I will say it anyway. God knows better what its better. Even when Jesus was here performing miracle and people still did not accept him. Also I would like to point out that if everybody knew with 100% certainty God existed would said people turn to God because of love (as he wants) or because they would know that if its not God is Hell and so they would obey out of fear (something he does not want)?
People either have free will or God is omniscient.
I'm sorry the Coen brothers don't direct the porn I watch. They're hard to get ahold of, okay?
I whole heartedly agree with you regarding this.
However, the "God Knows Everything" crowds will argue he does this for OUR benefit.
Like for example, it is like grown adult talking to a 5-6 yrs old for certain situation. Given a choice, you KNOW what he/she would do. For example, given a choice of healthy meal and a meal consists of chocolates (if the child likes chocolates), you KNOW he/she will choose chocolate, but you still give him/her a choice. Even though YOU know the outcome, it gives sense of freedom for the child.
The common Christian/Jewish, etc. definition of the GOD who knows everything is just 1 million times better at this thus he KNOWS all the outcomes.
I have argued this point over with another christian friend of mine. I argued that God already knows whether I am going to heaven or hell, so why should I TRY to go to heaven? IF I am destined to go to hell, then no matter HOW much I TRY, I will do SOMETHING which will cause me to go to hell and vice versa. Also, it makes "Praying to wish for something" a totally moot point. Like, you sometimes see especially christians ask for prayer to get better from illness, etc. IF the person was going to die, what makes you think that your or anyone's prayer going to make a difference? God already knows/decided on the outcome and HE (or she) is CERTAINLY not going to listen to lowly human and change his/her mind..
That child analogy does not fly at all. You KNOW when you do bad things and what its wrong. He gave his commandements in way you can comprehend them with no difficulty and you are a grown man able to make decisions.
Moving on, God knows you choices. I repeat CHOICES. Wherever you go its your own decision, he just knows where you are headed but YOU chose to go there. Nobody else. Its as simple as that. If some machine is invented that can see the future and people are going to know you will rob a bank before you do it, its not going to be any less your choice in doing it then it is.
You guys are thousands of years late jumping into the predestination theological argument. There is literally several thousand years' worth of documented scholarly theological discussion for you to reference.
And going back to God questioning Cain: it is much like a parent asking a child whether the child did something when the parent knows the answer and also knows that the child will lie. The parent is giving the child the choice of telling the truth.
Then what is the connection with Cain? According to the Hebrew scriptures the old patriarch Lamech went hunting under the guidance of his grandson, they mistook Cain for a wild animal, and Lamech shot him with an arrow, killing him (suggested in Genesis 4:23–24).
I like this movie, but I feel that Krawczyk over-complicated matters with his suggestions that Jack is
1. Cain,
2. a fallen angel, possibly Lucifer, and
3. a vampire.
All three? It makes for a confusing and even sloppy ending of the film.
Or even had his head cut off, or burned up. I was thinking about that last night.
share"Or never jumped into a vat of acid, or never went to Binini Atoll for any of the hydrogen bomb tests that where thousands of times more powerful than the ones dropped on Hioshima and Nagasaki. . . ."
I'm sorry the Coen brothers don't direct the porn I watch. They're hard to get ahold of, okay?